Comprehensive Optimization for Thermoelectric Refrigeration

Devices

_______________________

A Thesis presented to the

Graduate School Faculty
University of Missouri – Columbia

W
IE
________________________
EV
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for a Master of
Science - Mechanical Engineering
PR

__________________________

By

Robert A. Taylor

Dr. Gary Solbrekken Thesis Supervisor

December 2005
 UMI Number: 1438293

W
IE
EV
PR

UMI Microform 1438293

Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company

300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346
PR
EV
IE
W
 Acknowledgements

This research would never have been completed without help and guidance from

the people who deserve to be mentioned here. I truly appreciate the patience and advice

of Dr. Gary Solbrekken. His knowledge of the topic and his willingness to answer

(many) questions was indispensable. My gratitude is also owed to Kasey Scheel for

building an experimental set-up and doing the ‘grunt’ work of taking thermal resistance

data. The MAE department secretaries were also instrumental in coordinating all the

paperwork and ancillary tasks required in any research project. Thanks are also in order

to family and friends who supported my efforts. They were a major driving force to my

W
progress in these endeavors. Thanks to everyone for all the encouragement…

IE
EV
PR

ii
Comprehensive Optimization for Thermoelectric Refrigeration
Devices
Robert A. Taylor

Dr. Gary Solbrekken Thesis Supervisor

Abstract

R. E. Smalley, 1996 recipient of the Nobel Prize in chemistry, stated that energy is the
number one problem facing humanity for the next 50 years [Smalley, 1996]. If this
projection comes to fruition, as it most probably will, proper implementation of
technologies that generate and convert energy will be of immense importance. A large
market is currently in place for which thermoelectric (TE) technology can provide diverse

W
energy solutions. This market should continue to grow as improvements are made to TE
materials. In the last 10-15 years, researchers have developed TE materials that promise
to double the current performance of currently available materials. The semi-conductor
IE
industry and an enormous amount of study are fueling this improvement. The current
study is directed to develop and analyze system level optimization schemes that make the
EV
best use of those new materials, in addition to currently available materials.

To fully realize the benefits of TE refrigeration, system level optimization is critical. This
PR

study takes an in-depth look at how the electric current and TE geometry can be
optimized. In both cases, it is possible to optimize the overall system to maximize the
coefficient of performance or to minimize the heat source temperature. A comparison
between the two optimization techniques demonstrates conditions under which one
approach would be chosen over the other. An interesting finding from the comparison is
that there is an electric current and TE geometry that will provide the minimum heat
source temperature AND the maximum COP. One may consider this point to be a true
optimum that has not been previously published to the knowledge of the author.

The models used to study the optimization strategies were validated experimentally. The
validation measurements were conducted using a test bed built by an undergraduate
researcher. The measurements reinforced the expected trends from the optimization

iii
study and corroborated the point where the COP is maximized at the same current and
geometry that the heat source temperature is minimized.

Finally, one of the trends observed with the optimization study is that when the heat flow
from the source increases, the TE geometry optimization process suggests that a thinner
TE element is needed. However it is known that micro-scale/interfacial effects will
become dominant as the geometry shrinks. A survey of micro-scale thermal and
electrical effects is briefly reviewed. The survey suggests that micro-scale effects will
need to be accounted for when the TE geometry shrinks below 10 µm.

W
IE
EV
PR

iv
 Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... ii

Abstract............................................................................................................................. iii

List of Tables.................................................................................................................... vii

List of Illustrations......................................................................................................... viii

Nomenclature .................................................................................................................. xii

1. Introduction...............................................................................................................- 1 -

2. Background ...............................................................................................................- 5 -

i. Thermoelectric Cooling/Heating...........................................................................- 5 -

W
ii. Generation of Electricity......................................................................................- 9 -
IE
3. Recent Research ......................................................................................................- 15 -

i. Improving TE Material Performance ..................................................................- 15 -

EV
ii. Using Current Materials.....................................................................................- 22 -

iii. Inexpensive Designs .........................................................................................- 23 -

PR

4. Basic Thermoelectric Phenomena .........................................................................- 23 -

i. Seebeck Effect.....................................................................................................- 24 -

ii. Peltier Effect .....................................................................................................- 26 -

iii. Thomson Effect.................................................................................................- 27 -

5. Thermoelectric Cooling Optimization ..................................................................- 29 -

i. Baseline Model....................................................................................................- 29 -

ii.TE Model ............................................................................................................- 30 -

iii. Maximum Coefficient of Performance .............................................................- 34 -

vi. Operating Current Comparison .........................................................................- 40 -

v
 vii. Module Optimization .......................................................................................- 47 -

viii. Optimization Conclusions...............................................................................- 57 -

6. Experimental Testing ..............................................................................................- 58 -

i. Heat Sink Analysis ..............................................................................................- 60 -

ii. Apparatus Set-Up ...............................................................................................- 60 -

iii. Heat Sink Characterization ...............................................................................- 63 -

iv. TE Experimentation...........................................................................................- 65 -

v. Results ................................................................................................................- 67 -

vi. Error Analysis....................................................................................................- 76 -

W
7. Micro-Scale Effects .................................................................................................- 80 -
IE
i. Range of Applicability ........................................................................................- 81 -

ii. Phonon Radiative Transfer.................................................................................- 82 -

EV
iii. Boundary Resistances .......................................................................................- 86 -

a. Acoustic Mismatch Model………………………………………………....- 86 -

PR

b. Diffuse Mismatch Model………………………………………………..…- 89 -

c. Electrical Contact Resistance……………………………………………...- 93 -

8. Conclusions..............................................................................................................- 95 -

9. Future Work ............................................................................................................- 96 -

10. References..............................................................................................................- 97 -

11. Appendix ..............................................................................................................- 101 -

vi
 List of Tables
Table 5.1. Optimization potential for the various parameters.......................................- 33 -

Table 5.2. Optimization approach comparison ............................................................- 40 -

Table 5.3. Decision process for using figure V.13 ........................................................- 50 -

Table A.1 Type E thermocouple data [Omega, 2005].................................................- 106 -

Table A.2. Uncertainty in measurements ....................................................................- 107 -

Table A.3. Specifications for commercially available modules.................................- 107 -

Table A.4. Experimental test for module 81036 ........................................................- 107 -

Table A.5. Experimental test for module 81460 ........................................................- 108 -

W
Table A.6. Experimental test for module 81085 ........................................................- 108 -
IE
Table A.7. Experimental test for module 81026 ........................................................- 108 -

Table A.8. Polynomials for computing temperature dependent properties [Rowe, 2003].. -
EV
108 -

Table A.9. Reproducability study results, day 1. .......................................................- 109 -

Table A.10. Reproducability study results, day 2. .....................................................- 109 -

PR

Table A.11. Reproducability study results, day 3.......................................................- 109 -

Table A.12. The values of specific heat and phonon velocity used in the EPRT.......- 110 -

vii
 List of Illustrations
Fig. 1.1 . Top: Number of transistors in Intel chips, Bottom: Power density comparison
for the same components (units in W/cm2) [SIA, 2004] ..........................................- 2 -

Fig. 1.2. Components of a TE module: Left: metallized connection bars on a ceramic,

Right: P-N thermoelectric elements ready to be connected in series [Melcor, 2003]- 3
-

Fig. 1.3. Components of a TE module: Left: Ferrotec Single-stage TE module, Right:

Two-stage TE cooling. .............................................................................................- 4 -

Fig. 2.1. TE COP as it varies with ∆T. (Vapor compression [Ellsworth, 2001]) ..........- 7 -

Fig. 2.2. A comparison of TE to conventional electricity generation technology .......- 10 -

Fig. 2.3. The Seebeck coefficient along with thermal and electrical conductivity as

W
functions of free carrier concentration (S is used as the Seebeck coefficient, α, and β
is used for the thermal conductivity, k, in the figure). ...........................................- 11 -
IE
Fig. 2.4. Maximum TE thermal efficiency versus ∆T (Th-Tc) with Z = .0033 (an
approximation of currently available Bismuth Telluride materials) ......................- 13 -
EV
Fig. 2.5. A Hi-Z employee installing thermoelectric modules in a class 8 diesel truck
exhaust system [Hi-Z, 2003] ..................................................................................- 14 -

Fig. 3.1. Left: A sample quantum dot structure, Right: A Si/SiGe superlatice structure
[Shakouri, 2003].....................................................................................................- 18 -
PR

Fig. 3.2. Absolute cooling of a p-BiTe/SbTe superlattice as compared to the bulk material
[Venkatasubramanian, 2001]..................................................................................- 19 -

Fig. 3.3. Top curves: Figure of merit for Bismuth Telluride materials. Bottom points:
approximate measured figure of merit for single-walled carbon nano-tubes [Shi,
2003].......................................................................................................................- 20 -

Fig. 3.4. Improvement in figure of merit over the last few decades [Darpa, 2002].....- 22 -

Fig. 4.1. Cross-section of a TE generator/thermocouple showing the p-n junction .....- 25 -

Fig. 4.2. A simple Peltier cooling/heating design. .......................................................- 26 -

Fig. 4.3. A typical TE module assembly [Melcor, 2003] ..............................................- 27 -

Fig. 4.4. Thomson heat addition to a thermocouple......................................................- 28 -

viii
Fig. 5.1. The baseline model diagram...........................................................................- 30 -

Fig. 5.2. Baseline model thermal resistance network ...................................................- 30 -

Fig. 5.3. Sketch of a TE Refrigeration System. ............................................................- 31 -

Fig. 5.4. Thermal Resistance Network for TE Refrigeration........................................- 31 -

Fig. 5.5. An iteration technique for finding optimizing the COP.................................- 37 -

Fig. 5.6. The iteration scheme for getting a minimum junction temperature. .............- 39 -

Fig. 5.7. COP as a Function on Geometry for Both Methods.......................................- 41 -

Fig. 5.8. COP and junction temperature as a function of current (Tj,min: Q = 21 W, ψha =
0.6 K/W, N*γ = .213 m, ∆T = 0-75 K; COPopt: ∆T = 25 K, Tc = 292.7 K, N*γ = .213
m, Q = 1-43 W) ......................................................................................................- 42 -

W
Fig. 5.9. COP and junction temperature as a function of current for both methods (Tj,min:
Q = 21 W, ψha = 0.6 K/W, N*γ = .213 m, ∆T = 0-75 K; ; COPopt ∆T = 51.157 K, Tc =
IE
292.7 K, N*γ = .213 m, Q = -2-30 W) ...................................................................- 44 -

Fig. 5.10. COP and junction temperature as a function of current for both methods (Tj,min:
EV
Q = 21 W, ψha = 0.6 K/W, N*γ = 0.213 m, ∆T = 0-75; COPopt: ∆T = 75 K, Tc = 292.7
K, N*γ = 0.213 m, Q = -5-21 W) ...........................................................................- 45 -

Fig. 5.11. Junction temperature alignment as a function of current for both methods
(Tj,min: Q = 80,100,120 W, ψha = 0.4 K/W; COPopt: ∆T = 29.84 K, 21.54 K, 13.36 K,
PR

Tc = 328.88 K, 340.1 K, 350.03 K; For both: N*γ = 0.883, 1.369 , 2.417 m – all
respectively) ...........................................................................................................- 46 -

Fig. 5.12. Junction temperature alignment as a function of current for both methods
(Tj,min: Q = 80,100,120 W, ψha = 0.4 K/W; COPopt: ∆T = 29.84 K, 21.54 K, 13.36 K,
Tc = 328.88 K, 340.1 K, 350.03 K; For both: N*γ = 0.883, 1.369 , 2.417 m – all
respectively) ...........................................................................................................- 47 -

Fig. 5.13. Q = 75 W, I = ITjmin, ψha = 0.4 K/W, γ = Independent Variable....................- 48 -

Fig. 5.14. ∆T = 20 K, I = Iopt, Tc = 340 K, γ = independent variable...........................- 49 -

Fig. 5.15. Current optimization for N=71, ψha = 0.4 K/W, ICOPopt=ITj,min, γ = independent
variable ...................................................................................................................- 50 -

Fig. 5.16. Junction temperature plotted against Nγ; Qc = 75 W ψha = 0.2 K/W..........- 51 -

Fig. 5.17. Junction temperature as a function of geometry for both approaches..........- 52 -

ix
Fig. 5.18. Junction Temperature versus Qc. (COP and Nγ, for TE cooling, are also shown
at each point, ψha = 0.2 K/W) .................................................................................- 53 -

Fig. 5.19. Optimization for Q = variable, Tj,min = 85oC, I=ITj,min, and γ= γmin ...............- 54 -

Fig. 5.20. The COP and junction temperature as it varies with geometry (Tj,min: Q = 100
W, ψha =0.4 K/W I= Imin COPopt: Tc = 340 K, ∆T = 21.6 K, I = 21.245 Amps; For
both: N=71 and γ = independent variable) .............................................................- 55 -

Fig. 5.21. Junction temperature alignment as a function of current for both methods
(Tj,min: Q = 80,100,120 W, ψha = 0.4 K/W; COPopt: ∆T = 28.1 K, 21.6 K, 13.4 K, Tc
= 329 K, 340 K, 350.03 K; For both: I = 19.66 Amps, 21.245 Amps, 22.91 Amps;
Optimum N*γ = 0.998, 1.367 , 2.4 m – all respectively).......................................- 56 -

Fig. 5.22. COP alignment as a function of current for both methods (Tj,min: Q =
80,100,120 W, ψha = 0.4 K/W; COPopt: ∆T = 28.1 K, 21.6 K, 13.4 K, Tc = 329 K, 340
K, 350.03 K; For both: I = 19.66 Amps, 21.245 Amps, 22.91 Amps; Optimum N*γ =

W
0.998, 1.367 , 2.4 m – all respectively) ..................................................................- 57 -

Fig.6.1. The airflow test chamber purchased from Airflow Measurement Systems, Inc..... -
IE
61 -

Fig. 6.2. Schematic of the airflow test chamber ...........................................................- 62 -

EV
Fig. 6.3. The plexi-glass wind tunnel set-up................................................................- 63 -

Fig. 6.4. The baseline model diagram...........................................................................- 64 -

PR

Fig. 6.5. Measured thermal resistance as a function of pressure drop ..........................- 65 -

Fig. 6.6. The thermoelectric module test-bed. ..............................................................- 66 -

Fig. 6.7. Plot of the material property variation as a function of temperature [Rowe, 2003]
................................................................................................................................- 68 -

Fig. 6.8. Junction temperature versus current for the 81026 module. ..........................- 69 -

Fig. 6.9. Junction temperature versus current for the 81460 module ...........................- 70 -

Fig. 6.10. The variation in minimum junction temperature for the different modules .- 71 -

Fig. 6.11. Junction temperature versus current for the 81036 module..........................- 72 -

Fig. 6.12. Junction temperature versus current for the 81085 module .........................- 72 -

Fig. 6.13. COP versus current for the 81026 module ...................................................- 73 -

x
Fig. 6.14. COP versus current for the 81460 module. ..................................................- 74 -

Fig. 6.15. The change in the COPopt point as geometry changes ..................................- 75 -

Fig. 6.16. COP versus current for the 81036 module. ..................................................- 75 -

Fig. 6.17. COP versus current for the 81085 module. ..................................................- 76 -

Fig. 6.18. Testing plan for a reproducibility study........................................................- 77 -

Fig. 6.19. Junction temperature reproducibility results for the different days..............- 78 -

Fig. 6.20. Thermal resistance reproducibility study for the different days...................- 78 -

Fig. 6.21. The variation in junction temperature as it changes measurement trials......- 79 -

Fig. 6.22. The variation in thermal resistance as it changes measurement trials ..........- 80 -

W
Fig. 7.1. EPRT prediction of non-dimensional heat flux vs. acoustical thickness.......- 84 -
IE
Fig. 7.2. EPRT prediction of thermal conductivity for BiTe as compared to constant bulk
conductivity............................................................................................................- 85 -
EV
Fig. 7.3. Specular phonon boundary scattering.............................................................- 87 -

Fig. 7.4. Diffusive boundary scattering ........................................................................- 89 -

Fig. 7.5. Boundary resistance ratio between the diffuse mismatch and the acoustic
PR

mismatch models [Swartz and Pohl, 1989]............................................................- 91 -

Fig. 7.6. The ratio of effective thermal conductivity to the bulk thermal conductivity for
Bismuth Telluride. ..................................................................................................- 92 -

Fig. 7.7. Ratio of bulk resistivity to the effective resistivity.........................................- 94 -

Fig. A.1. Reliability data for a selected thermoelectric module [Ferrotec, 2005].......- 101 -

Fig. A.2. Change in electrical resistivity with doping concentration [Heremans, 2003]..... -
102 -

Fig. A.3. Topographical map of a mountainous region...............................................- 103 -

Fig. A.4. Q = 75 W, W = 40 W, = 0.4 K/W, I = Independent Variable........................- 104 -

Fig. A.5. ∆T = 30 K, I = 16.9 A, γ = 0.006 m, ψha = independent variable.................- 105 -

xi
 Nomenclature
COP Coefficient of Performance

I Electrical current (Amps)

K Thermal Conductance (W/°C)

L TE element length (thickness) (m)

L’ Fin length (m)

N Number of TEC thermocouples (#)

Q Heat load (W)

W
Q’ Flow Rate (CFM)

R
IE
Electrical resistance (Ohms)

T Temperature (°C)
EV
W TE Input power (W)

Z TE Figure of Merit (1/K)

Acoustic Impedance (kg/m2-s)

PR

Z’

Greek Letters

α Seebeck coefficient (V/K)

α’ Transmission probability (dimensionless)

∆ Change in value

k Thermal conductivity (W/mK)

kb Boltzmann’s Constant (J/K-molecule)

Ψ Thermal resistance (°C/W)

γ TE element geometry metric (m)

xii
ρ Electrical resistively (Ohm-cm)

Subscripts

c TEC cold side

h TEC hot side

ha TE hot side to ambient

hs TE hot side to heat sink

j Junction

jc Junction to case

max Based on the maximum of given quantity

W
min Based on the minimum of given quantity

n
IE
N-type semi-conducting material

p P-type semi-conducting material

EV
sa Sink to Ambient

TE Thermoelectric
PR

xiii
 1. Introduction

Improvements in manufacturing methods, driven by the electronics industry, have

made TE devices effective in numerous applications [Peltier Device Info Directory,

2005]. Their compact size and light weight make TE modules especially well-suited for

portable and dimensionally constrained applications. Since TE devices are very sensitive

to boundary and operating conditions, proper choice of materials, geometry, and

operating conditions play a critical role in creating the optimum TE technology for a

specific need. Blind application of thermoelectric technology will most likely be more

W
costly and less effective than an optimized approach. Thus, it is important to study these

devices to derive their maximum performance.

IE
Since the bulk of the study is related to finding optimum cooling solutions, it is

worth while to note the need for such designs. Currently the electronics industry is a
EV

large possible market for TE refrigeration applications. Figure 1.1 shows the increasing

trend in the number of transistors and the power density in microprocessors. The
PR

corresponding thermal solution must become more effective since the microprocessor

temperature must be still kept at 85oC or lower in spite of the power density increase

[SIA, 2004]. Although TE performance is limited, new materials and module designs

(discussed in later chapters) have potential to excel under these conditions.

-1-
 1000000000 10000

100000000

10000000
1000

1000000

Heat Flux (W/cm2)

# of Transistors

100000
Transistors
100
Heat Flux
10000

1000

10
100

W
10

1 1
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
IE 2000 2005 2010 2015
Year

Fig. 1.1. Top: Number of transistors in Intel chips, Bottom: Power density comparison for
the same components (units in W/cm2) [SIA, 2004]
EV

Conventionally, cheap air-cooled heat sinks have been used to dissipate CPU heat. It has

been forecast that air cooling may have a bleak future due to the increasing power
PR

densities. The Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) Roadmap indicates that power

density will climb from 0.6 W/mm2 to over 1W/mm2 for cost-performance chips in the

next ten years [SIA, 2004]. To put this in perspective, a 140 mm2 CPU will have an

increase in heat dissipation from 84 W to 140 W, over a 65% increase. The roadmap

states that the cooling solution is unidentified within ten years [SIA, 2004]. This means

that conventional air cooling will eventually become inadequate, or completely

uneconomic. Cold plates, heat pipes, and vapor compression incorporate liquid carrying

components with electronic devices. Liquid cooling systems must be designed with

extreme care and high reliability, making them much more expensive than conventional

-2-
air-cooling solutions. If any one component malfunctions in these active solutions the

heat dissipating device will overheat quickly, possibly in a damaging way. Noise from

and space for the working fluid system can also be limiting factors. Although the

performance of these systems is quite good, in general, they are not very portable or

lightweight.

The modularity of TE technology allows it to meet a wide variety of size

constraints. Modules can be wired in series or parallel, depending on heat dissipation and

power requirements. In this way, each individual module can be optimized according to

specific boundary conditions. Therefore, each module would nominally be used over a

W
favorable temperature range [Angrist, 1982]. (The importance of temperature on material
IE
properties will be discussed in chapter 2). Figure 1.2 shows the elements that make up a

TE module.
EV
PR

Fig. 1.2. Components of a TE module: Left: metallized connection bars on a ceramic,

Right: P-N thermoelectric elements ready to be connected in series [Melcor, 2003]

Modules can also be staged or cascaded to achieve higher efficiency or

performance. Staging also allows for a larger temperature difference, in the case of

cooling. Angrist states that it is possible to gain maximum performance over a large

temperature range by using a number of different materials/modules [Angrist, 1982].

Figure 1.3 shows a comparison between a single-stage module and a two-stage module.

-3-
Fig. 1.3. Components of a TE module: Left: Ferrotec Single-stage TE module, Right:
Two-stage TE cooling.

Another advantage of TE energy conversion is that it is done in the solid state. As

such, the devices have no moving parts that can wear out. One company, Ferrotec, sells

modules that last an average of 68,000 thermal cycles, or about 20,000 hours - a thermal

W
cycle is defined as 2.5 minutes from 30°C to 100°C and back down in 2.5 minutes from

100°C to 30°C, where a 5% change in electrical resistance denotes failure (data is in the
IE
appendix) [Ferrotec, 2003]. Another benefit of TE devices is that they convert thermal
EV
energy directly into electricity, or visa-versa. Direct conversion eliminates losses

associated with multiple energy conversion processes. Direct conversion also means

there is no need for additional equipment or materials, making for a simplified device.
PR

TE technology can be used for electricity generation as well as cooling. This

flexibility results in a huge variety of possible applications. Even though this study will

focus on the cooling side of TE technology, the principles learned during the course of

this research could extend to any application. I believe solid state solutions and TE

solutions, in particular, have the potential to enhance or replace a wide variety of

conventional systems.

During the course of this study some applications for TE technology are

introduced. This is followed by a brief review of the thermoelectric phenomenon: the

Peltier, Seebeck, and Thomson effects. A review of recent research and design of

-4-
thermoelectric technology is presented. The review will include the search for and design

of new materials and devices. The review will also include current methods of TE cooling

optimization. Next, opportunities for optimization of TE modules are systematically

explored in a parametric study. The results from the parametric study are used to guide

the optimization of the applied electric current and the TE element geometry. To validate

the operational optimization techniques, experimental measurements were carried out on

TE modules with different geometric configurations. Small-scale thermal and electric

transport effects are considered to identify the limits of the current modeling. Finally,

some conclusions are offered and possible future work in TE design is identified. The

W
next few sections will give an overview of TE cooling, generation, and some possible

applications for TE technology.

IE
2. Background
EV

TE devices have many possible applications beyond cooling CPU chips. Among

these applications are portable coolers, environmental control for optoelectronic

PR

equipment, and power generation in remote environments. Some consumer applications

include a TE powered watch [Seiko, 2002], a TE temperature controlled vest, a Cannon

digital camer [Peltier Directory, 2005], and a Colemann portable cooler [Colmann,

2002]. The rest of this chapter will provide an in-depth discussion of the various TE

uses.

i. Thermoelectric Cooling/Heating

As mentioned earlier, thermal management of electronic equipment is a

potentially heavy user of TE cooling. The power density trends shown in figure 1.1 are

-5-
driving the need for advanced cooling solutions. Since the SIA roadmap suggests that by

the year 2015 there is currently no known thermal solution to meet industry performance

needs, several researchers, such as Solbrekken, et al, and Phelan, et al, have proposed TE

refrigeration as a possible solution [Solbrekken, 2004; Phelan, 2002].

A drawback of current thermoelectric materials is that they generally have a low

coefficient of performance. The COP is defined as:

Qout
COP = (II.1)
Wnet ,in

Qout refers to the amount or rate of thermal energy removal from the refrigerated

W
component. Wnet,in refers to the amount or rate of electrical energy that must be input to
IE
the TE module to drive the heat removal.

It turns out that for any refrigeration system COP is a strong function of the
EV
extreme temperatures, Th and Tc. The total optimization of TE refrigeration system will

be discussed in more detail in subsequent chapters, but for now let us simply compare the

COP of TE cooling to other forms of refrigeration. It was shown by Bierschenk et al that

PR

COP values greater than one can be achieved for TE cooling if the operating parameters

are selected carefully [Bierschenk, 2004]. For current bismuth-telluride TE materials, the

maximum COP for a given ∆T (Th-Tc) is plotted in figure 2.1. For ∆T’s less than 30oC,

COP values greater than unity can be achieved. In fact, as the temperature difference is

reduced further, the optimum COP increases rapidly. Figure 2.1 also compares TE

cooling with conventional vapor compression refrigeration. The upper curve, in figure

2.1, represents a ‘good’ cooling system. In this case ‘good’ is assumed to be 30% of the

efficiency of a reversible Carnot cycle. That is, 0.3 * COPCarnot is plotted for

-6-
comparison’s sake. This curve can be thought of as Stirling cooling system, a system

which tries to approximate the Carnot cycle.

10

8
Optimum COP

30% Carnot COP

7
TEC COP
6 Vapor Compression

W
1

0
0 10 20 IE 30 40 50 60

TE Element Delta T (Th-Tc)

Fig. 2.1. TE COP as it varies with ∆T. (Vapor compression [Ellsworth, 2001])
EV

The figure also shows that the TE cooling COP is at least the same order of
PR

magnitude as vapor compression. The controllability, portability, modularity, and size

benefits of TE devices allow them to overcome the drawback in the COP in certain

applications. TE technology can also be applied to applications that require heating. A

similar COP metric can be defined for heating efficiency. It is given by:

Q pumped
β= (2.2)
Wnet ,in

In general an electrical resistance heater is limited to a COP of unity. That is, all of the

electrical work input to the device will be converted to heat. A TE heat pump can have

COP values well above unity, making them more effective heaters. The benefit must, of

course, be balanced with the additional cost. For example, a TE cooling system (a

-7-
commercially available TE module, a cheap heat sink, and a 12-volt fan) would cost $40-

$50 [Ferrotec, 2005]. A comparable thermofoil electric heater, capable of providing 100-

120 W, would cost approximately $30 [Minco, 2005].

TE heating is probably best used in concert with TE cooling for temperature

control of small spaces, such as pictures 2 and 4 of Figure 2.1. The relatively small size

of TE elements, and the fact that electricity controls the heating/cooling, gives a nearly

instantaneous temperature response. Cryopreservation and storage of biological tissue

are applications where precise temperature control and high cooling rates are necessary.

A good example of tissue storage is installed on the International Space Station. A device

W
called the Advanced Thermoelectric Refrigerator/Freezer/Incubator or ARCTIC stores
IE
samples before they are returned to Earth for further scientific analysis [PIMA

Handbook, 2003].
EV
In cryopreservation cells can be severely damaged if the cooling rate is not

controlled precisely. For TE refrigeration, even with a current commercially available

module (Ferrotec: 81085), the cooling rate can exceed 7.6oC/s (under no heat load)
PR

[Hanneken, 2005]. Thus, a TE cooling system like this can cool at any rate between

0oC/s and 7.6oC/s, which is an enormous range of cooling rates. Heating can be applied

at an even larger range of rates, if necessary, during the thawing stages.

In an exhibition at the University of Missouri – Columbia, our lab demonstrated

the heating/cooling rate capabilities for an off-the-shelf thermoelectric module. A single

4cm X 4cm Ferrotec TE module (81036 ~ $25, similar to the one in fig. 1.3) was attached

to an air-cooled heat sink (~5cm X 5cm) and connected to a power supply. A drop of

colored water was placed on the TE module surface opposite of the heat sink. Within 8

-8-
seconds of applying power the water completely froze (15-20 seconds for large drops).

The power supply polarity was reversed, and in less than 3 seconds the small drop

completely boiled off the surface (4-6 seconds for large drops).

ii. Generation of Electricity

As mentioned in the introduction TE modules can be utilized to generate

electricity. They are particularly suited to recover electricity from waste heat sources as

they require a relatively small temperature difference to generate electricity. Usable

power can be derived from a temperature difference of just a few degrees or a few

W
hundreds of degrees centigrade. Waste heat can come from any source that is typically
IE
expelled into the atmosphere such as car exhaust [Hi-Z, 2004], electronic components

[Solbrekken, 2004], or even geothermal energy [NREL, 2004].

EV
The TE electricity generation process is only slightly different than TE cooling.

The same features (no moving parts and direct energy conversion) that are attractive for
PR

TE cooling are also advantages for TE electricity generation. Conventional electricity

generation uses fossil fuels to create heat, which is then used to evaporate a working

fluid, which then turns a mechanical turbine, which then uses a generator to create

electricity. The long supply chain also requires a large amount of materials and

equipment. TE generation, on the other hand, converts a temperature gradient directly

into electricity; thus, a heat source (with temperatures above OR below ambient) is the

only input. TE generation is not currently suited to be a primary generator (due to its

lower efficiency), but it can be employed to use waste heat. Figure 2.2 shows a summary

of both situations.

-9-