3.8 Article

Surface chemistry and characteristics based model for the thermal contact resistance of fluidic interstitial thermal interface materials

Journal

JOURNAL OF HEAT TRANSFER-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME
Volume 123, Issue 5, Pages 969-975

Publisher

ASME
DOI: 10.1115/1.1388301

Keywords

contact resistance; heat transfer; materials; packaging; rheology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Microprocessor powers are increasing at a phenomenal rate, which requires very small thermal resistance between the die (chip) and the ambient, if the current economical methods of conduction and convection cooling are to be utilized. A typical thermal solution in flip chip technology utilizes two levels of thermal interface materials: between the die and the heat spreader and between the heat spreader and the heat sink. Phase change materials and thermal greases are among the most prominent interstitial thermal interface materials (TIM) used in electronic packaging. These TIMs are typically, polymeric matrix loaded with highly conducting filler particles. The dwindling thermal budget has necessitated a better understanding of the thermal resistance of each component of the thermal solution. Thermal conductivity of these particle-laden materials is better understood than their contact resistance. A careful review of the literature reveals the lack of analytical models for the prediction of contact resistance of these types of interstitial materials, which possess fluidic properties. This paper introduces an analytical model for the thermal contact resistance of these types of interstitial materials. This model is compared with the experimental data obtained on the contact resistance of these TIMs. The model, which depends on parameters such as, surface tension, contact angle, thermal conductivity, roughness and pressure matches very well with the experimental data at low pressures and is still within the error bars at higher pressures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available