TY - JOUR
T1 - Validating numerical predictions of component thermal interaction on electronic printed circuit boards in forced convection airflows by experimental analysis
AU - Rodgers, Peter
AU - Lohan, John
AU - Eveloy, Valérie
AU - Fager, Carl Magnus
AU - Rantala, Jukka
PY - 1999
Y1 - 1999
N2 - Increasing demand for compact and reliable electronic systems has heightened the need for accurate numerical modelling during product design. As a result, greater emphasis is being placed on the use of computation fluid dynamic (CFD) tools that allow different design options to be quickly assessed at the design stage. However, relying solely on numerical predictions without supporting experimental analysis still remains an unreliable design strategy, as both the modelling methodology and CFD solver capability need to be carefully evaluated. This can only be achieved by comparing CFD predictions to accurate experimental benchmark data, rarely available at the early design phase. Therefore, a need exists to define suitable benchmark test cases to help establish confidence in both modelling methodology and numerical tools. This paper presents such information for three package types (SO16, TSOP48, and PQFP208) which are evaluated on the same multi-component printed circuit board (PCB), for two flow directions. Benchmark criteria was based on the prediction of steady state junction temperature and associated component-PCB surface temperature gradients. Component junction temperature was predicted to accuracies ranging from 1°C to 17°C depending upon CFD flow model employed, flow direction, and component location both from the PCB's leading edge and relative to neighbouring components. Having previously benchmarked the numerical model of the test PCB in both natural and forced convection environments, this study extends the analysis to include a discussion of the flow phenomena and their impact on component heat transfer. This allowed predicted discrepancies to be discussed in the light of measured streamwise and spanwise surface temperature profiles and visualised flow fields.
AB - Increasing demand for compact and reliable electronic systems has heightened the need for accurate numerical modelling during product design. As a result, greater emphasis is being placed on the use of computation fluid dynamic (CFD) tools that allow different design options to be quickly assessed at the design stage. However, relying solely on numerical predictions without supporting experimental analysis still remains an unreliable design strategy, as both the modelling methodology and CFD solver capability need to be carefully evaluated. This can only be achieved by comparing CFD predictions to accurate experimental benchmark data, rarely available at the early design phase. Therefore, a need exists to define suitable benchmark test cases to help establish confidence in both modelling methodology and numerical tools. This paper presents such information for three package types (SO16, TSOP48, and PQFP208) which are evaluated on the same multi-component printed circuit board (PCB), for two flow directions. Benchmark criteria was based on the prediction of steady state junction temperature and associated component-PCB surface temperature gradients. Component junction temperature was predicted to accuracies ranging from 1°C to 17°C depending upon CFD flow model employed, flow direction, and component location both from the PCB's leading edge and relative to neighbouring components. Having previously benchmarked the numerical model of the test PCB in both natural and forced convection environments, this study extends the analysis to include a discussion of the flow phenomena and their impact on component heat transfer. This allowed predicted discrepancies to be discussed in the light of measured streamwise and spanwise surface temperature profiles and visualised flow fields.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0347663484&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0347663484
VL - 26 3
SP - 999
EP - 1009
JO - American Society of Mechanical Engineers, EEP
JF - American Society of Mechanical Engineers, EEP
ER -