| Literature DB >> 30227621 |
Yu Pei1,2, Hongmei Zhong3,4, Mengyu Wang5,6, Peng Zhang7,8, Yang Zhao9,10.
Abstract
Vertically aligned carbon nanotube (CNT) arrays are promising candidates for advanced thermal interface materials (TIMs) since they possess high mechanical compliance and high intrinsic thermal conductivity. Some of the previous works indicate that the CNT arrays in direct dry contact with the target surface possess low contact thermal conductance, which is the dominant thermal resistance. Using a phase sensitive transient thermo-reflectance (PSTTR) technique, we measure the thermal conductance between CNT arrays and copper (Cu) surfaces under different pressures. The experiments demonstrated that the contact force is one of the crucial factors for optimizing the thermal performance of CNT array-based TIMs. The experimental results suggest that the Cu-CNT arrays' contact thermal conductance has a strong dependence on the surface deformation and has an order of magnitude rise as the contact pressure increases from 0.05 to 0.15 MPa. However, further increase of the contact pressure beyond 0.15 MPa has little effect on the contact thermal resistance. This work could provide guidelines to determine the minimum requirement of packaging pressure on CNT TIMs.Entities:
Keywords: contact pressure; contact thermal conductance; thermal interface material; vertically aligned carbon nanotube arrays
Year: 2018 PMID: 30227621 PMCID: PMC6163777 DOI: 10.3390/nano8090732
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Figure 1(a) The sketch of the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) process; (b) Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of carbon nanotube (CNT) array top surface.
Figure 2(a) Experimental setup of phase sensitive transient thermo-reflectance measurement for thermal performances; (b) Sample structure with pump and probe beam path.
Figure 3(a) Simplified heat transfer mechanism within the sample illustrated in thermal circuit; (b) Experimentally measured phase responses (various points) of various contact force along with their best-fit solutions (solid lines) versus excitation frequency; (c) Cu-CNT arrays contact thermal conductance versus contact pressure; (d) Experimental uniaxial stress–strain responses of vertically aligned CNT Arrays.
Cu-CNT arrays contact thermal conductance versus contact pressure.
| Height of CNT Array | Parameters | Values | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 500 μm | Pressure | 0.054 | 0.065 | 0.078 | 0.113 | 0.142 | 0.164 | 0.248 |
| (MPa) | ||||||||
|
| 0.007 | 0.008 | 0.024 | 0.084 | 0.654 | 0.694 | 0.704 | |
| (MW/m2·K) | ||||||||
| 200 μm | Pressure | 0.008 | 0.038 | 0.084 | 0.118 | 0.128 | 0.155 | 0.205 |
| (MPa) | ||||||||
|
| 0.046 | 0.064 | 0.076 | 0.559 | 0.698 | 0.700 | 0.708 | |
| (MW/m2·K) | ||||||||
Figure 4(a) The atomic force microscopy (AFM) topography profile of upper surface of CNT arrays before loading. The Ra roughness is 197 nm; (b) The AFM topography profile of upper surface of CNT arrays after loading. The Ra roughness is 136 nm; (c) The AFM topography profile of copper. The Ra roughness is 5.67 nm.
Figure 5(a–d) Schematic diagrams showing the cross section of CNT array in contact with a copper surface under different compression; (e–h) SEM images of CNT arrays after 0, 0.06, 0.12, 0.5MPa pressure compression, respectively.