0
PAPERS: Part Design Methods and Specification Challenges in AM

Topology Optimization, Additive Layer Manufacturing, and Experimental Testing of an Air-Cooled Heat Sink

[+] Author and Article Information
Ercan M. Dede

Electronics Research Department,
Toyota Research Institute of North America,
1555 Woodridge Avenue,
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
e-mail: eric.dede@tema.toyota.com

Shailesh N. Joshi, Feng Zhou

Electronics Research Department,
Toyota Research Institute of North America,
1555 Woodridge Avenue,
Ann Arbor, MI 48105

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design for Manufacturing Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received February 10, 2015; final manuscript received May 22, 2015; published online October 12, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Timothy W. Simpson.

J. Mech. Des 137(11), 111403 (Oct 12, 2015) (9 pages) Paper No: MD-15-1084; doi: 10.1115/1.4030989 History: Received February 10, 2015; Revised May 22, 2015

Topology optimization of an air-cooled heat sink considering heat conduction plus side-surface convection is presented. The optimization formulation is explained along with multiple design examples. A postprocessing procedure is described to synthesize manifold or “water-tight” solid model computer-aided design (CAD) geometry from three-dimensional (3D) point-cloud data extracted from the optimization result. Using this process, a heat sink is optimized for confined jet impingement air cooling. A prototype structure is fabricated out of AlSi12 using additive layer manufacturing (ALM). The heat transfer and fluid flow performance of the optimized heat sink are experimentally evaluated, and the results are compared with benchmark plate and pin-fin heat sink geometries that are conventionally machined out of aluminum and copper. In two separate test cases, the experimental results indicate that the optimized ALM heat sink design has a higher coefficient of performance (COP) relative to the benchmark heat sink designs.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Design domains for 2D steady-state heat conduction with side-surface convection: (top left) rectangular domain; (top right) c-shaped domain. Optimal heat sink designs: (bottom left) rectangular domain with 30% solid material constraint; (bottom right) c-shaped domain with 40% solid material constraint; note that dark regions indicate solid material.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Representative examples of extended fin heat sinks [26]. The two examples highlighted (using dashed lines) are similar to the designed 2D heat sink profiles from Fig. 1.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Example surface convection coefficient assignment at solid–void boundary, per Eq. (3), for rectangular domain example

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Influence of reference heat transfer coefficient, ho, in Eq. (3) on optimal topology for rectangular domain example

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Assumed design domain for 3D heat sink conduction with side-surface convection optimization problem (left); distribution of ho on a x-z cut-plane (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Optimal 3D heat sink design with ∼20% solid material constraint; note that dark gray regions indicate solid material

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Optimal pin-fin profile for bell-shaped (top) and uniform (bottom) heat transfer coefficient. Note that the 2D pin-fin profile is shown on a diagonal cut plane of the 3D model, as illustrated in the top view image of Fig. 6.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

CAD geometry of optimized heat sink

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Heat sink designs fabricated out of AlSi12 by ALM (HS 1), 7075 aluminum (HS 2–HS 5) by conventional machining, and oxygen-free copper (HS 6–HS 8) by conventional machining

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Schematic of experimental facility

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Overview picture of test section including inlet manifold and instrumentation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Zoomed side view of the heat sink with 38.1 mm jet orifice diameter plate (left); illustration of TC hole locations (top right); installed heat sink backside heater detail (lower right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Case 1 experimental results for aluminum alloy heat sinks, HS 1–HS 5, using a 38.1 mm orifice diameter at a 12.7 mm jet-to-target spacing

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Case 2 experimental results for pin-fin heat sinks, HS 1 and HS 5–HS 8, using a 12.7 mm orifice diameter at a 12.7 mm jet-to-target spacing

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In