486 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMPONENTS, PACKAGING, AND MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY-PART

n and Optimization of
inks for Low Velocity Appli
M. Shaukatullah, Wayne R. Storr, Bernt J. Hansen, and Michael A. Gaynes

Abstract-This study was undertaken to optimize the design I. I

of pin fin heat sinks (PFHS) for use in low velocity applications
where there is plenty of open space around for the air to bypass IRCUIT density and
the heat sink, if it encounters a high pressure drop across it. The circuit ch~psare increa
goal of this study was to maximize the thermal performance and packages are requiring som
keep the design such that it is easily manufacturable and low in adequately cool the chips. One of
cost. A special test fixture using a heat flux meter was designed of improving thermal pe
to test heat sinks for thermal performance. Several aluminum
PFHS having a 25 x 25 mm base size, heights from 5 to 25 mm,
pin arrays of 4 x 4 to 8 x 8, and pin fin cross sections from 1.5 x
1.5 mm to 2.5 x 2.5 mm were fabricated and tested for thermal
performance. Some of the commercial aluminum heat sinks with that are not sensitive to air
various surface finishes (such as black anodized, gold chromated,
clear anodized and untreated) were also evaluated to determine
the effect of surface treatment on thermal performance. Studies
were also done to compare the thermal performance of similarly This paper presents the
sized pin fin and extruded plate fin heat sinks. The heat sink the design of PFHS for U
tester and test data for heat sinks used in this optimization study typically encountered
are reviewed in this paper. Results show that it is possible to workstations. The go
design an optimum PFHS for any flow situation. However, it is
not realistic to have several heat sink designs to cover various thermal performance,
applications. In low velocity (about 1 m/s or less) unshrouded
flow, the best compromise for an aluminum PFHS with about 25
x 25 mm base size and heights up to 15 mm is the 6 x 6 pin fin
configuration with fin cross sections of 1.5 x 1.5 mm.
Index Terms-Pin fin heat sink, thermal performance, design designed from this study are reviewed in
optimization, low velocity, unshrouded flow, electronic cooling performance of surface mount plastic
fin and other types of heat sinks is compared in [4], and
NOMENCLATURE bonding of heat sinks to electronic packages is discussed in
[51 and 161.
A Exposed surface area of heat sink, mm2.
U Fin dimensions, mm.
b Space between fins, mm.
EFHS Extruded fin heat sink.
F Fin height, mm. procedure is presented for
H Height of heat sink, mm.
h Average heat transfer coefficient, W/m . K.
P Power dissipation in the heat sink, W. from flat surfaces and cy
PFHS Pin fin heat sink. effect of pin fin density o
Rext External thermal resistance defined in (2), " C N . was studied experimentally in
r Aspect ratio defiBed in (1). (ratio of channel height to heat
Tal, Air temperature surrounding the heat sink, "C. In this study, experiments were
Tbase Heat sink base temperature, " C .
pin fin configurations in
V Average velocity in the channel, d s . ronment. In such an environment, the open space around the
01 Air flow angle, ". heat sink allows air to bypass the heat sink if the pressure
drop across it is large. Such an environment is encountered
Manuscript received Apnl 29, 1996, ievised September 12, 1996. This in sparsely populated circuit cards or cards having only a few
paper was presented at the 12th IEEE Semiconductor Thermal Measurement high powered components that require a heat sink. Studies
and Management Symposium, Austin, TX, March 5-7, 1996 were also done to investigate the effect of surface treatment on
The authors are with IBM Corporation, Microelectronics Division, Endicott,
NY 13760-5553 USA the thermal performance of commercial aluminum heat sinks
Publisher Item Identifier S 1070-9886(96)08880-4 and to compare the thermal performance of similarly sized
1070-9886/96$05.00 0 1996 IEEE
SHAUKATULLAH et al.. DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION OF PIN FIN HEAT SINKS 487

TABLE I
H NOMINAL OF PIN FIN HEAT
CHARACTERISTICS
M

IP - Heat
Sink
Heat
Sink
Height
SINKSUSEDIN THE OFTIMEATION

Number
of
Fins
Fin
Size
Fin
Space
STUDY

Aspect
Ratio
Exposed
Surface
Area
Estimated
Weight
mrn mmxmm mm mm* gm

1 5 4x4 1.5x1.5 6.333 0.4 1115 4.4

2 5 5x5 1.5x1.5 4.375 0.6 1250 4.6
3 5 6x6 1.5x1.5 3.200 0.8 1415 4.7
4 5 7x7 1.5x1.5 2.417 1.0 1610 4.9
5 5 8x8 1.5x1.5 1.857 1.3 1835 5.2
6 10 4x4 1.5x1.5 6.333 1.2 1595 4.9
7 10 5x5 1.5x1.5 4.375 1.7 2000 5.3
8 10 6x6 1.5x1.5 3.200 2.3 2495 5.8
9 10 7x7 1.5x1.5 2.417 3.1 3080 6.4
10 10 8x8 1.5x1.5 1.875 4.0 3755 7.1
11 15 4x4 1.5x1.5 6.333 2.0 2075 5.4
12 15 5x5 1.5x1.5 4.375 2.9 2750 6.1
13 15 6x6 1.5x1.5 3.200 3.9 3575 6.9
14 15 7x7 1.5x1.5 2.417 5.2 4550 7.9
15 15 8x8 1.5x1.5 1.875 6.7 5675 9.0
16 15 5x5 2.oxz. 0 3.750 3.3 3375 7.6
17 15 5x5 2.5x2.5 3.125 4.0 4000 9.5
Fig. 1. Schematic of the PFHS used in optimization study. Dimensions in
mm. 18
19
20
20
4x4
5x5
1.5x1.5
1.5x1.5
6.333
4.375
2.8
4.0
2555
3500
5.9
6.9
20 20 6x6 1.5x1.5 3.200 5.5 4655 8.0
21 20 7x7 1.5x1.5 2.417 7.2 6020 9.4
22 20 8x8 1.5x1.5 1.875 9.4 7595 11.0
pin fin and EFHS. Finally, the effect of flow direction on the 23 20 5x5 2.ox2.0 3.750 4.7 4375 8.9
thermal performance of EFHS was also investigated. 24 20 5x5 2.5x2.5 3.125 5.6 5250 11.6
25 25 5x5 1.5x1.5 4.375 5.1 4250
26 25 6x6 1.5x1.5 3.200 7.0 5735
27 25 7x7 1.5x1.5 2.417 9.3 7490
11. HEATSINKDESCRIPTION 28 25 8x8 1.5x1.5 1.875 12.1 9515
29 25 5x5 Z.Ox2.0 3.750 6.0 5375 10.3
A commonly used method of manufacturing PFHS on a 30 25 5x5 2.5x2.5 3.125 7.2 6500 13.7
large scale is to first extrude the aluminum alloy 6063-T5 Notas:
1. All had a base sire of 25x25 mm end base thickness of 2.5 mm.
through a die. In tlhis operation, the fins are formed as parallel
plates joined to the base with open channels in between. The
PFHS are made by cross cutting these extrusions. An important
characteristic of these extrusions is the aspect ratio, T , defined process. These had sharp corners at the fin tips and roots, and
as were gold chromated per military specification MIL-C-5541.
The schematics of the commercial extruded fin and PFHS
F
r=- used in this study are shown in Fig. 2, and their nominal
b characteristics are tabulated in Table 11. These were made from
where F is the fin height and b is the space between the aluminum alloy 6063-T5 (thermal conductivity 209 W/m.K).
fins. For the heat sink to be manufacturable at low cost, the Note that the fin tips and roots in commercial heat sinks
aspect ratio should be less than four. Although heat sinks with are generally rounded in the extruded direction. Both of the
aspect ratios greater than four are possible, generally the cost PFHS were gold chromated per MIL-C-5541. The EFHS used
is also higher. For mechanical strength, the fin cross section to study the effect of surface treatment were untreated, gold
dimension, a, should be about 1.5 mm or more for heights up chromated per MIL-C-5541, and clear and black anodized per
to 15 mm high. This prevents fins from getting damaged or MIL-A-8625, Type 11.
bent during cross cutting and subsequent handling. Also, the
base thickness should be 2 mm or more for base sizes of about
25 x 25 mm. In designing PFHS to be made by extrusion and
cross cutting operations, these manufacturing considerations UI. =ST SETUP AND PROCEDURE
must be taken into account. Fig. 3 shows a schematic of the test setup. Air was supplied
A schematic of the PFHS used in this study is shown in by a centrifugal blower to a box with a laminar flow meter. The
Fig. 1. All the heat sinks had a 25 x 25 mm base size (suitable outlet of the flow meter was connected to another box with
for use on 28 mi packages without overhanging the package a flexible hose. This box had the test channel with a cross
body) and a base thickness of 2.5 mm. The heat sink heights section of 152.4 x 101.6 mm (6 x 4 in). The channel was
ranged from 5 to 25 mm, pin fin cross sections were 1.5 x mounted in a vertical position on top of the box such that the
1.5 mm, 2 x 2 rnm and 2.5 x 2.5 mm, and the number of air flow entered from the bottom and exited from the top. The
pin fins ranged from 16 to 64 (arrays of 4 x 4, 5 x 5, 6 heat sink under test was mounted in a rotary fixture near the
x 6, 7 x 7, anti 8 x 8). The nominal characteristics are top of the channel such that the base of the heat sink was flush
tabulated in Table I. The exposed surface area and weight were with the inside (152.4 mm side) surface of the channel. The
estimated using nominal dimensions. The exposed surface area cross section of the channel is almost 25 times larger than the
does not include tlhe base surface area on the bottom of the heat flow cross section of the largest heat sink used in this study.
sink. These experimental heat sinks were made from aluminum Thus, this test channel essentially simulates an unshrouded or
alloy 2024-T6 (thermal conductivity 151 W/m.K), since it was a wide open flow situation with plenty of open space around
readily available, using electro-discharge-machining (EDM) the heat sink.
488 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMPONENTS, PACKAGING, AND MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY-PART A, VOL 19, N

, 2.77 ,

27.94

U U U U Y

- - "

4
" " " "

f the commercial heat sinks, (a) EFHS, (b) 9 x 7 PFHS, and (c) 7 x 7 PFHS Dimensions

' 152.q

TEST CHANNEL

' !;I lo! AIow CTRATMTFNFR

1111111111 I
I-

Fig 3. Schematic of the test setup. Inside dimensions in mm.

An exploded view of the rotary test fixture for holding the block was mounted on
heat sink under test is shown in Fig. 4. The heat sink was
mounted on a copper block with two small tapped holes in fully assembled, the heat sink cop
the base of the heat sink. A thin layer of commercial thermal
grease (Dow Corning Corporation product 340) was applied I T L ~on all sides.
at the interface between the heat sink and copper block. A
film heater was attached to the back side of this copper block.
A thin sheet o f silicone rubber was placed on the back side heat flux sensor. The t
e film heater, and the heat flux sensor copper block unaccounted heat losses
bolted with plastic screws to the heat sink copper block,
thus sandwiching the heater and rubber sheet between them.
A commercial heat flux sensor (Concept Engineering Model easily in a few minutes.
FR-025-4-T) was held in place on the copper block with an The temperature of
aluminum plate using plastic screws. Thermal grease was used ing a 36-gauge (0.13
at the interfaces between the heat flux sensor and the copper thermocouple installed i
block and aluminum plate. This heat sink assembly with the small hole drilled from
heater and heat flux sensor was attached to a polycarbonate The air temperature upstr
sheet which was bolted to a balsa wood block. The balsa wood with a 24-gauge (0.25
SHAUKATULLAH et al.: DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION OF PIN FIN HEAT SINKS 489

TABLE I1
CHARACTERISTICS OF COMMERCIAL HEATSINKS
NOMINAL USED IN THIS STUDY

Heat Heat Bess Base Height Number Fin Exposed Yeight

Sink Sink Size Thick- of Sire Surface
Type ness Fins Area
mm mm mm mm ma om

31 PFHS 28.1x27.9 3.8 15.2 9x7 1.7x1.6 5745 11.4

32 EFHS 28.1x27.9 3.8 15.2 7x1 28.1x1.6 5818 16.7
33 PFHS 28.5x28.5 2.5 15.2 7x7 1.6x1.7 5238 9.0

Notes:
1. For base s i r e , number of f i n s and f i n s i z e , the f i r s t number i s i n
the d i r e c t i o n oli extrusion and the second number i s perpendicular
t o the d i r e c t i o n o f extrusion.
c
L

ALSA WOOD x
w
D
0 1 2 3 4 5
AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCITY, m/s

Fig. 5. Thermal performance of 25 x 25 x 15 mm high 6 x 6 PFHS with

1.5 x 1.5 mm fins (#13) at various powers and velocities.

HEAT SINK sink, P . The average channel velocity, V, was calculated by

measuring the total air flow rate by the laminar flow meter and
COPPER BLOCK
dividing it by the cross-section area of the channel. The heat
sink base temperature, Tbase, and air temperature, T,,,, were
also recorded. The data was then used to calculate the heat
sink thermal resistance (also known as the external thermal
ASTIC SCREW resistance), Rext, as

The average heat transfer coefficient, h, for the exposed area

of the heat sink may be estimated from this by the relation
ATE 1
h=- (3)
Rext A

where, A is the exposed surface area of the heat sink and is

Fig. 4. Exploded view of the heat sink test fixture.
thermocouple installed in the channel. A typical test procedure
was as follows: air flow was set to the desired value by the
blower and monitored by the laminar flow meter; typical air
flow settings wen: within 3% of the desired values. The natural
convection tests were done with the blower tumed off. The
heater was then powered up and allowed to stabilize for about
15 min. The heat loss from the back side was measured with
the heat flux sensor, and the heater power was adjusted to
account for this loss. This procedure was repeated every 15
min until the power dissipation in the heater minus the loss
measured by the heat flux sensor was within 1% of the desired
value. Once the power was set, the thermocouple in the base
of the heat sink was monitored and steady state was assumed
when the thermocouple showed a change of 0.1 "C or less in
1 min. At steady state, the current and voltage drop across the
heater were measured and used to calculate the total power
dissipation in the heater. The output of the heat flux sensor
was measured and used to estimate losses to the back side by
using the heat flux sensor calibration factor. The difference
between these was used as the heat transferred to the heat
tabulated in Tables I and I1 (excludes the base surface area in
contact with the heat sink mounting block). All results reported
in this study are based on tests of one sample of each heat
sink type.
Iv. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Initial testing was done on some of the heat sinks over
a range of powers and air flow rates. Typical data for the
25 x 25 x 15 mm high, 6 x 6 PFHS with 1.5x 1.5 mm fins (heat
sink #13) is shown in Fig. 5. The heat sink thermal resistance
shows a dependence on power at low air flow rates up to about
0.5 m / s . For air flow rates greater than about 0.5 m / s , the
thermal resistance is essentially independent of power. Thus,
the data up to 0.5 m/s in these tests may be considered to be
in mixed convection. Most of the subsequent tests were done
at 2 W power. During this investigation, this heat sink was
tested repeatedly three times each in three series of tests at 2
W power over a range of velocities to check for repeatability
of the test setup and procedure. Between each series, this
heat sink was taken off the fixture while other heat sinks
were tested. The data is shown in Fig. 6 with the solid line
representing the average of all nine tests. This data shows
490 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMPONENTS, PACKAGING, AND MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOG RT A, VOL 19, NO 4, DECEMBE

0 D
I I I I I I I I I I

cm 0 TEST 1, SERIES 1
z*
3
8 A TEST 2, SERIES 1 -
U TEST 3, SERIES 1
TEST 1 , SERIES 2
A TEST 2, SERIES 2
TEST 3 , SERIES 2
I
x TEST 1, SERIES 3
E
+
TEST 2, SERIES 3
1 t TEST 3, SERIES 3
6
2
-AVERAGE OF ALL TESTS
L21
YE
t-
i
1
K
W
t-
X
w
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCITY, m/s

Fig 6 Repeatability tests for 25 x 25 x 15 mm hlgh 6 x 6 PFHS with Fig. 8. Thermal resistance versus number of fi
1 5 x 1 5 mm fins (#13) at 2 W power

.3:
in
I I I I I I

4x4 5x5 6x6 7x7 8x8

FIN ARRAY

Fig 7 Thelma1 resistance versus number of fins for the 5 mm high heat
sinks with 1 5 x 1 5 mm fins at 2 W power sinks with 1.5 x 1 5 mm fins at 2 W power.

excellent repeatability of the tests. The deviations between the

various tests and average data are within 12.5%. identical performance in
The measured thermal resistances of the various 5 mm x 6 is best up to 0.5 d s .
high heat sinks at 2 W power and various air flow rates and beyond this, 8 x 8
are shown in Fig. 7. The 7 x 7 PFHS has the best thermal mm high heat sinks is sho
performance (lowest thermal resistance) up to 0.75 d s air and shows similar trends.
flow, and beyond this the 8 K 8 has the best performance
However, the differences in thermal resistances of these two better performance at low
heat sinks is less than 1 "C/W, and for most practical purposes, possible to design a heat s
the performance of these 5 mm high 7 x 7 and 8 x 8 PFHS
may be considered equivalent. e 7 x 7 will be preferred
because of lower weight. Fig. 8 shows data for the 10 mm
high heat sinks. Here more distinct minimums are seen The 6
x 6 has the best performance up to 0.5 m/s air flow. Beyond 2.5 mm 5 x 5 fin heat s
this, 7 x 7 is better up to about 3 d s , and beyond this, 8 x 8 mm are shown in Figs. 1
e. At higher velocities, the heat sinks
become better because air is able to hence more area does no
tead of bypassing them. The data for the thermal performance
is shown in Fig. 9. Again, the trend
 ~

SHAUKATULLAH et al.: DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION OF PIN FIN HEAT SINKS 49 1

A 0.25 m/s U" - - A -- 2.0x2.0 mm FINS

V 0.5 m/s 2.5x2.5 mm FINS
----a----
0 0.75 m/s

L
E -
+
X

4x4 5x5
I

6x6
I

7x7 8x8
I
W
-O
n I

1
I I

2
I I

3
1 I I

4
I I

5
FIN ARRAY AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCITY, m/s

Fig. 10. Thermal resistance versus number of fins for the 20 mm high heat Fig. 12. Effect of pin fin size on thermal performance of 15 mm high 5 x
sinks with 1.5 x 1.5 imm fins at 2 W power. 5 PFHS; 2 W power.

q0
Y --e- 1.5x1.5 mm FINS
U' - - A - 2.0~2.0 m m FINS
----a----
Y 2.5~2.5 mm FINS

v,
E
CL
-I
a
E
I x 2.5 m/s
W O
f-
$
E
k
X
w
0
4x4 5x!5 6x6 7x7 8x8 O 1 2 3 4 5
FIN ARRAY AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCITY, m/s
Fig. 11. Thermal resistance versus number of fins for the 25 mm high heat Fig. 13. Effect of pin fin size on thermal performance of 20 mm high 5 X
sinks with 1.5 x 1.5 mm fins at 2 W power. 5 PFHS; 2 W power.

1.5 mm fins (#13) is compared. Although the 5 x 5 has about
12% more surface area (4000 mm2 versus 3575 nun2),the 6 x
6 has better performance. Thus, in an open flow environment,
increasing the surface area by increasing the size of the fins
does not in general improve the thermal performance. It can
actually degrade the performance while adding considerable
weight.
To check the effect of flow angle, a , on the thermal
performance, the 15 mm high 6 x 6 fin heat sink (#13)
was tested at various air flow angles, and the data is shown
in Fig. 16. This shows that the performance of this heat
sink is essentialky independent of the air flow direction. The
differences in thermal resistances at various flow angles are of
the order of 6% or less.
To check the effect of surface treatment on thermal per-
formance, untreated, gold chromated, and clear and black
anodized extruded fin commercial heat sinks (#32) were tested
over a range of powers and air flow rates. The emissivities of
these surfaces were measured using an infrared microscope
and found to be less than 0.2 for untreated surface (off scale),
0.28 for gold chrornated, 0.81 for clear anodized and 0.97
for black anodized surface. The data in natural convection is
shown in Fig. 17. Untreated and gold chromated heat sinks
have essentially similar performance (differences within 1%),
and clear and black anodized heat sinks also have similar
performance (differences within 1%). The clear and black
anodized heat sinks have about 18% better performance in
natural convection than the untreated or the gold chromated
ones. The performance in forced convection at 2 W power
is compared in Fig. 18. Beyond about 1 m/s air flow, the
differences in thermal resistances between untreated and gold
chromated, and anodized heat sinks are less than 10%. So for
higher air flows, the effect of anodizing is relatively small.
In these laboratory tests, the heat sinks were radiating to
the surroundings at a temperature of about 25 OC. In actual
applications inside the computers, the surrounding surfaces
may be at about the same temperature as the heat sink itself
and having anodized finishes may not offer any thermal perfor-
492 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMPONENTS, PACKAGING, AND MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY-PART A,

$ 1 0
I I , I ~ , I I I , )
0 1 2 3 4 5
AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCIlY, m/s

Fig. 15. Comparison of thermal performance of 15 mm high 5 x 5 heat sink Fig. 17. Effect o f surface treatment on the
with 2.5 x 2.5 mm fins (#17) versus the 15 mm hlgh 6 x 6 heat SI& with commercial alummum EFHS (#32) in natural c
1.5 x 1.5 mm fins (#13) at 2 W power.

heat sinks is comp

mance advantages over gold chromated or untreated surfaces.
Anodizing is generally more expensive than gold chromating. an open flow envi
Compared to an untreated surface, gold chromating adds some beyond a certain number d
cost but provides a robust surface for bonding. In applications performance. It can actu
where heat sinks are bonded with adhesives to the electronic
components, gold chromated surfaces are preferred C51. thermal performance of
The thermal performance of commercial extruded and PFHS angles up to about 45",
(#31 and 32) is compared in Fig. 19. They have the same performance is small (of
nominal overall dimensions. The PFHS had nine fins in angles, it gets worse.
the extrusion direction and seven fins perpendicular to the
direction of extrusion. At velocities up to about 1 d s , the
performance of the PFHS with seven fins facing air is similar
(within 3%) to that of the EFHS, whereas the PFHS with nine best choice for low air flo
fins facing air has a slightly worse performance. For velocities d s ) in an open envi
t 1 d s , the thermal performance o f the heat sink is 3.9 (less tha
and nine fins facing air is almost identical,
and the EFHS is slightly worse. In Fig. 20, the thermal
ce of the 9 x 7 (#31) and 7 x 7 (#33) commercial
SHAUKATULLAH et al.: DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION OF PIN FIN HEAT SINKS 493

Y -8- UNTREATED --A----7x9PFHS, 9 FINS FACING AIR

W'
-* . GOLD CHROMATE0 7x7 PFHS. FLOW PARALLEL TO EXTRUSION
0 CLEAR ANODIZED
----a----
2%
v,
--e- BLACK ANODIZED

fs
[1:
-I
a
5
[1:
W O
I.-
+
3
El
l-
X
w
0 -
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCITY, m/s AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCITY, m/s

Fig. 18. Effect of surface treatment on the thermal performance of the Fig. 20. Comparison of thermal performance of the commercial 7 x 7 (#33)
commercial aluminum EIFHS (#32) in forced convection at 2 W power. and 9 x 7 (#31) PFHS with approximately same dimensions at 2 W power.

I I I I I I I I I I
E l

ITH 7 FINS FACING AIR

ITH 9 FINS FACING AIR

I I I I I I I I I

0 1 2 3 4 5
0 1 2 3 4 5 AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCITY, m/s
AVERAGE CHANNEL VELOCITY, m/s

Fig. 19. Companson of thermal performance of the commercial extruded fin Fig. 21. Effect off low direction on the thermal performance of thc com-
(#32) and pin fin (#31) heat sinks with same overall dimensions at 2 W power. mercial EFHS (#32) at 2 W power.

may be used on 24 mm packages without overhanging the
package body. The base thickness was also reduced to 2 mm
to reduce weight, and the fin size was kept at 1.5x1.5 mm.
Heat sinks heights of 7.5, 10 and 15 mm were considered
practical for most applications and selected for manufacturing.
They were gold chlromated to provide a robust surface for
bonding with thermidly conductive adhesives. The 15 mm high
heat sink gives an aspect ratio of about 4.3, which is still
considered to be manufacturable. The thermal performance of
flat packs using these and other similar heat sinks is reviewed
in [1]-[3].
The main purpose of these controlled laboratory tests was
to do a comparative thermal evaluation of various PFHS to
determine the optimum design configuration in open, low
velocity applications. Only one heat sink of each type mounted
on the side of a channel was evaluated to obtain data on
relative performance. These conditions are not representative
of any particular application conditions. The thermal resistance
in a given application may be different than in these tests and
must be determined from a more realistic simulation for that
application.
V. CONCLUSION
This study shows that it is possible to design an optimum
PFHS for any flow situation. However, it is not realistic to
have a large number of heat sinks to cover various applications,
and some compromises are needed. For PFHS up to 15 mm
high and base sizes of about 25x25 111111, the 6 x 6 pin fin
configuration with fin cross sections of 1.5 x 1.5 mm appears
to be a good practical choice for use in low velocity, open flow
or unshrouded type conditions. The performance of such a heat
sink is essentially independent of flow direction. Although
laboratory tests show that anodizing improves the thermal
performance, in most actual applications inside boxes the
improvements are expected to be small. Chromated heat sinks
should be adequate for most applications, since this treatment
provides a robust surface for bonding and good protection
from corrosion.
494 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMPONENTS, PACKAGING, AND MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY-PART
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of P.
Patch and P. Wilks in building the test fixture and heat sinks,
B. Colavito for building the automated data acquisition system,
and R. Lyon for data acquisition programming support. The
heat sink emissivity measurements were provided by L. Buller.
REFERENCES
[l] H Shaukatullah, M. A Gaynes, and L H White, “Thermal enhancement
of surface mount electronic packages with heat sinks,” in Proc. 43rd
Electron Comp. Technol. Con$, Orlando, FL,June 1 4 , 1993, pp
256-263.
[2] H Shaukatullah and M A Gaynes, “Effect of pin fin heat sink size on
thermal performance of surface mount plactic quad flat packs,” in Proc.
1994 int Electron Packag Conf, Atlanta, GA, Sept 25-28, 1994, pp
232-241
[3] H Shaukatullah, S J Diffenderfer, and E G. Flynn, “Comparative
thermal evaluatlons of small surface mount flat uacks.” in Proc I995
Int. Electron. Packaging Con{, San Diego, CA, Sept. 24-21, 1995, pp
--- __
107-114
[4] H Shaukatullah and M A Gaynes, “Comparatwe evaluation of various
types of heat sinks for thermal enhancement of surface mount plastic
packages,” Int J Microcircuits Electron. Packag , vol. 18, no 3, pp
252-259, pp 554-560, 1995
[5] M. A Gaynes and H Shaukatullah, “Evaluation of thermally conduchve
adhesives for bonding heat sinks to electronic packages,” in Proc
43rd Electron. Comp. Technol. Cons, Orlando, FL, June 1 4 , 1993, pp
765-771
[6] -, “Adhesives for thermal enhancement of surface mount plashc
electronic packages,” in Proc 1994 National Electron Packag Produc-
tion Conf, NEPCON West ‘94, Anaheim, CA, Feb 27-Mar 4, 1994,
pp 1560-1569
171 A Mertol, “Optimization of extruded type extemal heat sink for
multichip module,” Trans ASME, J Electron Packag, vol 115, no
4, pp 440444, Dec 1993
[8] S Lee, “Optimum design and selection of heat sinks,” in 11th Annual
IEEE Semiconductor Thermal Measurement and Management Symp ,
San Jose, CA, Feb 7-9, 1995, pp 48-54
s, A D Belegundu, and A K Kulkami, “Optimization of
A design tool,” in 1994 Int Mech Eng Congress Expo ,
Chicago, IL, Nov 6-11, 1994, vol EEP-9, CAELAD Application to
Elecfronic Packaging, D Agonafer and R E Fulton, Eds , pp 25-32
A, VOL 1
[lo] K. Azar and C D. Mandrone, “Effect of p
thermal performance of unshrouded pin fin
J. Elecrron Packag., vol 116, no 4, pp. 306-309, Dec. 1994.
H. Shaukatullah received the Ph D degree in mechanical engi
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
He is a Senior Engineer and joined IBM Corporatlon in E
in 1980 and has worked on a variety of projects dealing wi
and thermal management of electronic components Prior to joining
worked at C-E A r Preheater C O , Wellsville, NY, and taught at
University of New York at Buffalo and at Comell
Wayne R. Storr received the
College in La Plume, PA
He joined IBM in 1977 a
primanly designing and document ip carrier packages Pno
joining IBM, he served four year S Navy in ballistic mis
submannes.
Bernt J. Hansen received the B.S.
ing from Clarkson University, Pots
He has held vanous engineering posihons in IBM with emphasis on
packaging of ceramic components and procurement of vendored commoditm.
Currently he is with Product Engineering, workmg on ceramic based chip
camers
Michael A. Gaynes received the B S degre
Brigham Young Umversity, Provo, UT
He has held various eiigineenng a
packaging with emphasis in failure ana
development Currently he is in assembly process design, workmg with
thermally and electncally conductive adhesives