4.7 Article

High heat flux phase change on porous carbon nanotube structures

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER
卷 55, 期 21-22, 页码 5544-5551

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2012.05.027

关键词

Carbon nanotube; Thin-film evaporation; Heat pipe

资金

  1. DARPA/MTO [N66001-08-C-2009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Carbon nanotube (CNT) forests are investigated as porous wick structures for chip-scale heat pipe cooling systems. An analytical model is developed to demonstrate the merits of phase change heat transfer on nanoscale porous structures, compared to that on microscale porous wick. Results indicate that nanoscale porous structures increase the thin-film evaporation surface area by one order of magnitude, which can significantly increase phase change heat transfer efficiency. The pertinent wick structure properties of the CNT forest are experimentally measured. Results show that the CNT forest is highly porous (similar to 95% porosity), and possesses large variations in effective thermal conductivity ranging from 0.8 to 180 W/m K. Effective pore size of the CNT wick structure varies between 50 and 180 nm, which can generate capillary pressure up to two orders of magnitude higher than the microscale wick structure. However, its low permeability, about three to four orders of magnitude lower than the traditional wicks, underscores the necessity of bi-porous CNT wick structures. The bi-porous CNT wick structures are composed of nanoscale porous CNT clusters, separated by microscale (similar to 50 mu m wide) passages. Experimental results show a maximum heat flux of 770 W/cm(2) over a 2 mm x 2 mm heating area. With enhanced thin-film evaporation, heat transfer coefficients are improved by up to 100%, compared to the microscale wick. In contrast, the low CHF similar to 140 W/cm(2) over a 10 x 10 mm(2) heating area is caused by vapor occupation of the microscale pores and the reduction of wick permeability. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据