Research Papers

Experimental Investigation and Theoretical Model for Subcooled Flow Boiling Pressure Drop in Microchannel Heat Sinks

[+] Author and Article Information
Jaeseon Lee

 United Technologies Research Center, East Hartford, CT 06108leejs@utrc.utc.com

Issam Mudawar1

Boiling and Two-Phase Flow Laboratory (BTPFL), Purdue University International Electronic Cooling Alliance (PUIECA), Mechanical Engineering Building, 585 Purdue Mall, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2088mudawar@ecn.purdue.edu


Corresponding author.

J. Electron. Packag 131(3), 031008 (Jul 02, 2009) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3144146 History: Received December 17, 2007; Revised March 05, 2009; Published July 02, 2009

This study examines the pressure drop characteristics of subcooled two-phase microchannel heat sinks. A new model is proposed, which depicts the subcooled flow as consisting of a homogeneous two-phase flow layer near the heated walls of the microchannel and a second subcooled bulk liquid layer. This model is intended for conditions where subcooled flow boiling persists along the entire microchannel and the outlet fluid never reaches bulk saturation temperature. Mass, momentum, and energy control volume conservation equations are combined to predict flow characteristics for thermodynamic equilibrium qualities below zero. By incorporating a relation for apparent quality across the two-phase layer and a new criterion for bubble departure, this model enables the determination of axial variations in two-phase layer thickness and velocity as well as pressure drop. The model predictions are compared with HFE 7100 pressure drop data for four different microchannel sizes with hydraulic diameters of 176416μm, mass velocities of 6705550kg/m2s, and inlet temperatures of 0°C and 30°C. The pressure drop database is predicted with a mean absolute error of 14.9%.

Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Flow diagram for indirect refrigeration cooling system

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

(a) Moments and (b) forces for liquid and homogeneous layer control volumes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Solution procedure for DHLM

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

DHLM predictions for Tin=−30°C and ṁ=5 g/s for (a) TS No. 1 (Dh=176 μm) at q″=561 W/cm2, (b) TS No. 2 (Dh=200 μm) at q″=586 W/cm2, (c) TS No. 3 (Dh=334 μm) at q″=560 W/cm2, and (d) TS No. 4 (Dh=416 μm) at q″=627 W/cm2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of model predictions and measured variation in pressure drop with heat flux for (a) Tin=0°C and ṁ=2 g/s, (b) Tin=0°C and ṁ=5 g/s, (c) Tin=−30°C and ṁ=2 g/s, and (d) Tin=−30°C and ṁ=5 g/s

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

(a) Isometric view of microchannel test section, (b) cross-sectional view (A-A), and (c) side sectional view (B-B)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

(a) Side view and (b) cross-sectional view representation of DHLM. (c) Cross-sectional view of the actual interface between homogeneous two-phase layer and liquid layer in the presence of sidewall heating effects.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

(a) Mass conservation for liquid and homogeneous layer control volumes and (b) energy conservation for homogenous layer control volume

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of pressure drop predictions of DHLM and experimental data




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