4.8 Article

Heat Transfer across the Interface between Nanoscale Solids and Gas

期刊

ACS NANO
卷 5, 期 12, 页码 10102-10107

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/nn204072n

关键词

heat transfer; solid - gas (vapor) interface; nanowire; vanadium dioxide; phase transition; conduction and convection

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-FG02-11ER46796]
  2. National Science Foundation (NSF) [CMMI-1000176]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

When solid materials and devices scale down In size, heat transfer from the active region to the gas environment becomes increasingly significant. We show that the heat transfer coefficient across the solid-gas interface behaves very differently when the size of the solid Is reduced to the nanoscale, such as that of a single nanowire. Unlike for macroscopic solids, the coefficient is strongly pressure dependent above similar to 10 Torr, and at lower pressures it is much higher than predictions of the kinetic gas theory. The heat transfer coefficient was measured between a single, free-standing VO2 nanowire and surrounding air using laser thermography, where the temperature distribution along the VO2 nanowire was determined by imaging its domain structure of metal-insulator phase transition. The one-dimensional domain structure along the nanowire results from the balance between heat generation by the focused laser and heat dissipation to the substrate as well as to the surrounding gas, and thus serves as a nanoscale power-meter and thermometer. We quantified the heat loss rate across the nanowire-air interface, and found that it dominates over all other heat dissipation channels for small-diameter nanowires near ambient pressure. As the heat transfer across the solid-gas interface is nearly independent of the chemical identity of the solid, the results reveal a general scaling relationship for gaseous heat dissipation from nanostructures of all solid materials, which is applicable to nanoscale electronic and thermal devices exposed to gaseous environments.

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

4.8
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