Thermal performance of low melting temperature alloys at the interface between dissimilar materials

Roy, Chandan Kumar; Bhavnani, Sushil H.; Hamilton, Michael C.; Johnson, Richard W.; Knight, Roy W.; Harris, Daniel K.

doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2016.01.036

Cited by 38 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Accelerated aging tests performed at an elevated temperature of 130°C on Ga–In material showed an increase in resistance from 0.02 to over 0.05 cm 2 KW −1 between 1000 and 1500 h, but did not change thereafter for up to 3000 h. However, for Ga and Field’s alloy no major change was measured though an interfacial crack was observed after heating at 150°C for 400 h [93]. Similarly, thermal cycling tests showed that for the Ga–In alloy, the resistance increased within the first 300 cycles and then remained relatively constant up to 1500 cycles.…”

Section: Different Types Of Thermal Interface Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Present and future thermal interface materials for electronic devices

Razeeb

Dalton

Cross

et al. 2017

International Materials Reviews

270

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Packaging electronic devices is a growing challenge as device performance and power levels escalate. As device feature sizes decrease, ensuring reliable operation becomes a challenge. Ensuring effective heat transfer from an integrated circuit and its heat spreader to a heat sink is a vital step in meeting this challenge. The projected power density and junction-toambient thermal resistance for high-performance chips at the 14 nm generation are >100 Wcm −2 and <0.2 °CW −1 , respectively. The main bottleneck in reducing the net thermal resistance are the thermal resistances of the thermal interface material (TIM). This review evaluates the current state of the art of TIMs. Here, the theory of thermal surface interaction will be addressed and the practicalities of the measurement techniques and the reliability of TIMs will be discussed. Furthermore, the next generation of TIMs will be discussed in terms of potential thermal solutions in the realisation of Internet of Things.

show abstract

Section: Different Types Of Thermal Interface Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Present and future thermal interface materials for electronic devices

Razeeb

Dalton

Cross

et al. 2017

International Materials Reviews

270

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although a TIM made up of an array of mercury microdroplets has been described, the limit of 100 ppm of mercury in any piece of electronic equipment (as dictated by the European Union’s Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive), as well as general toxicity concerns, discourages the use of this metal. These limitations make gallium-based eutectic alloys such as GaIn ( T melt = 15.5 °C, k ≈ 32–39 W m –1 K –1 ) or GaInSn ( T melt = −19 °C, k ≈ 16–39 W m –1 K –1 ) much more practical for use in a TIM. − TIMs consisting of such LMs are commercially available, and several methods have been recently proposed to improve their thermal properties and wettability. , …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Situ Alloying of Thermally Conductive Polymer Composites by Combining Liquid and Solid Metal Microadditives

Ralphs

Kemme

Vartak

et al. 2018

ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces

109

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Room-temperature liquid metals (LMs) are attractive candidates for thermal interface materials (TIMs) because of their moderately high thermal conductivity and liquid nature, which allow them to conform well to mating surfaces with little thermal resistance. However, gallium-based LMs may be of concern due to the gallium-driven degradation of many metal microelectronic components. We present a three-component composite with LM, copper (Cu) microparticles, and a polymer matrix, as a cheaper, noncorrosive solution. The solid copper particles alloy with the gallium in the LM, in situ and at room temperature, immobilizing the LM and eliminating any corrosion issues of nearby components. Investigation of the structure-property-process relationship of the three-component composites reveals that the method and degree of additive blending dramatically alter the resulting thermal transport properties. In particular, microdispersion of any combination of the LM and Cu additives results in a large number of interfaces and a thermal conductivity below 2 W m K. In contrast, a shorter blending procedure of premixed LM and Cu particle colloid into the polymer matrix yields a composite with polydispersed filler and effective intrinsic thermal conductivities of up to 17 W m K (effective thermal conductivity of up to 10 W m K). The LM-Cu colloid alloying into CuGa provides a limited, but practical, time frame to cast the uncured composite into the desired shape, space, or void before the composite stiffens and cures with permanent characteristics.

show abstract

“…Typical TIMs are mainly made up with an organic matrix (including thermal greases, 13,14 gels, 15–18 epoxy, 19 silicone based elastomer composites 20 ) and thermally conductive fillers ( e.g. , metals, oxides, carbon materials, metal nitrides, low melting alloys) 21–23 for their easy processability and low cost.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%