Optimal Fin Shapes & Profiles

P M V Subbarao
Associate Professor
Mechanical Engineering Department
IIT Delhi

Geometrical Optimization is the Basic Goal of

Optimal Design ….
 CYLINDRICAL SPINE (Pin Fins)
Pin fin with adiabatic tip and corrected height:
T & h 
cosh  mx 
  x   θb d
cosh  mb 
Tb
sinh  mx  b
q x   kAcs m b
cosh  mb 
qb  kAcs m b tan(mb)

 2
qb  kd mb tanh mb
4
 Pin Fins : Profile Optimization
Sonn and Bar-Cohen (1981) developed an optimization method
based on minimization of the spine volume.
The objective function is to maximize T & h 
heat dissipation for a given volume.
d
 2 Tb
qb  kd mb tanh mb b
4
 2 4 V  hP  4h
With V  d b  b  m=   
 kA  kd
4  d 2

So that
  8  h 1/ 2 5 / 2 
qb   b  hk  1/ 2
d 3/ 2 tanh  V   d 
2    k  
 Optimization Pin Fin Profile

We find the point where:

qb
0
d
The results is the transcendental equation
5
tanh    sec h 2 
3
Where
1/ 2
 h
  2  d 1/ 2b  mb
k
 Trial and error method of root finding, gives:

  0.9193 and
2
4.733hb max
d max 
k
Volume of maximum heat dissipating pin fin:

 2  2 
 kd max 

Vmax  d max bmax  d max  
4 4 
 4.733h 

Or
1/ 3 2/3
 1   qb 
d max  0.9165   
 hk   b 
 1/ 3 1/ 3
k   qb 
bmax  0.44  2   
h   b 
1/ 3 2/3
 1   qb 
d max  0.9165   
 hk   b 
 1  2 / 3  q  5 / 3 
Vmax  0.2903 4   b  
 h k   b  

tanh(0.9193)
  0.789
0.9193
 3
For Strip fin: 0.5043  qb 
Ap   
h k  b
2

tanh 1.4192
  0.627
1.4192
For pin fin:
 1  2 / 3  q  5 / 3 
Vmax  0.2903 4   b  
 h k   b  

tanh(0.9193)
  0.789
0.9193
LONGITUDINAL FIN OF TRIANGULAR PROFILE
b

qb 
x
b

b
x=b x=0

b
Acs ( x)  L  x   L 2 x tan   Lx
b
The differential equation for temperature excess :
 dT 
d  kAc 
 dx 
 hP(T  T )  0
dx
The differential equation for temperature excess is a form
of Bessel’s equation:
1/ 2
d 2
d  2h 
x 2   m b  0; m   k 
2
dx dx b

The particular solution for  ( x ) is:

 ( x )  b

I 0 2m bx 
I 0  2mb
The fin heat dissipation is:
 L  I1  2mb 
qb   2h b 
 m  I 0  2mb 

The fin efficiency is:

I1  2mb

 mb I 0  2mb
 Optimum Shapes : Triangular Fin

2hb I1  2mb
qb  L=1
mI 0  2mb

With Ap  bb / 2, let

1/ 2 1/ 2 1/ 2
 2h   2h  Ap  2h 
T  2mb  2  b  2 
 kb   kb  b
 4 Ap  
k
 
b
 3/ 2

This makes 2/3

 4 Ap  2 h / k  1/ 2

b   
 T 
 Optimum Shapes

Iterative solving yields T=2.6188 and

2/3
 4 Ap  2 h / k  1/ 2
  2  2h  
1/ 3

b     13263
.  Ap  k  
 2.6188   
1/ 3
2 Ap  Ap k 
b  10560
.  2h 
b  
 Comparison of Longitudinal Fins

3
0.5043  qb 
Rectangular Profile: Ap  2  
h k  b 
3
0.3471  qb 
Ap  2  
Triangular Profile: h k  b 

For the same material, surrounding conditions and qb / b

which is basically the user’s design requirement.
Triangular profile requires only about 68.8%
as much metal as rectangular profile.
 Capacity Enhancement of Fins

In both (stip and triangular) fins, profile area varies as the cube of
qb / b
To double the heat flow, you use two fins or make one
fin eight times as large.
5/ 3
 qb 
In pin fin, profile volume varies as
 
 b 
To double the heat flow, you use two fins or make one
fin 3.17 times as large.
There is a virtue in using more number of small fins.
 Pentium III

Pentium IV

Pentium II
 Design and Optimization of Fin Arrays

P M V Subbarao
Mechanical Engineering Department
IIT Delhi

Millions of Ants are more Powerful than a Single Cobra……

Geometry of Fin Array

tf

b
Determination of Heat Transfer Coefficient

S
Optimum spacing

b
 Optimum Natural Convection Array

 From Elenbaas (1942):

hopt  1.25 k g S opt

 For an array of optimally spaced fins:


S opt  50 Lv g w Pr
2

14
 2.99 P


P  Lv g w Pr
2
 14

tanh 1.4192
  0.627
1.4192
 Towards an Optimum Array of Optimum Fins

 Heat flow from each optimum fin:

q
 1.258θ b (h 2 A p k) 0.333
L

 With the h for Optimum Spacing:

kg
h opt  1.25
S
 With the Interfin Spacing

Sopt  2.99P
 Industrial Practice

•Define the thermal resistance of the heat sink is given by

Tbase  Tamibient  air

R thermal-sink 
q
Selection Curves
 Forced Convection Heat Sinks

 Analytical modeling
 Maximization of heat dissipation
 Least-material optimization

 Design for manufacture

 Design Calculations for Fin Arrays – Thermal
Resistance
• In order to select the appropriate heat
sink, the thermal designer must
• first determine the maximum allowable
heat sink thermal resistance.
• To do this it is necessary to know the
• maximum allowable module case
temperature, Tcase,
• the module power dissipation, Pmod, and
• the thermal resistance at the module-to-
heat sink interface, Rint.
• The maximum allowable temperature at
the heat sink attachment surface, Tbase, is
given by

Tbase  Tcase  Pmod  Rint

• The maximum allowable heat sink resistance, Rmax, is then given
by

• The thermal resistance of the heat sink is given by

• parameters the gap, b, between the fins may be determined from

Constant air velocity
Constant volumetric flow rate
 Heat Sink Pressure Drop

• To determine the air flow

rate it is necessary to
estimate the heat sink
pressure drop as a function
of flow rate and match it to
a curve of fan pressure
drop versus flow rate.
• A method to do this, using
equations presented here.
• As in the previous article,
the heat sink geometry and
nomenclature used is that
shown Figure 1.
Pressure Drop Curves
Effect of number of fins and fin height
Thermal Resistance
 Closure
• a fan with a different fan curve is employed, the flow rates will change and the
optimum heat sink design point may change as well.
• The important point is that to determine how a heat sink will perform in a given
application both its heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics must be
considered in concert with the pressure-flow characteristics of the fan that will be
used.
• It should also be noted that an underlying assumption is that all the flow
delivered by the fan is forced to go through the channels formed between the
heat sink fins.
• Unfortunately this is often not the case and much of the air flow delivered by the
fan will take the flow path of least resistance bypassing the heat sink.
• Under such circumstances the amount of flow bypass must be estimated in order
to determine the heat sink performance.