![]() | ||
|
|
Cooling News From Around The Web You can post links, or comments about cooling related articles and reviews from around the web. |
![]() |
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location:
Posts: 264
|
![]()
http://www.3dnet.hr/dr-ice11-en-01.html
This guy is claiming some pretty good numbers, but as usual his testing methods are rather primitive. Is it possible that some form of direct-die cooling could match the performance of some of the top blocks out there now? I know it has been tried a couple times here, but I don't think we've ever seen definitive testing (due to the fact nobody can really test direct-die setups yet). |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
![]()
no, no real 'testing' problem, more like a stupid application
the package is organic, and permeable which means that the sum total of the application is a 'time to failure' test read around, they ALL fail dumb, big time |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location:
Posts: 264
|
![]()
Hmm, never thought of the permeability issue. But sealing it up shouldn't be a big difficulty...?
Wouldn't there be problems testing direct-die blocks on a die simulator since the blocks must be made specific to the shape of the CPU? Another thought: Is it possible to erode the die at high flow rates? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
![]() Quote:
organic = permeable erosion is a concern at high velocity |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location:
Posts: 264
|
![]()
Sealing it up = coating package in epoxy
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Responsible for 2%
of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,302
|
![]()
I think that the best point made is on page three: if the flow stops for any reason, it'll fry.
I think everyone should drop the direct die cooling idea: the only purpose of doing it is for some thermal numbers and properties of different CPUs. It is not meant to be an alternative to a waterblock. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location:
Posts: 264
|
![]()
OK, I am still confused. Are you saying the die itself is permeable? Or the organic substrate? If it was only the substrate that was permeable, then one could put a small layer of epoxy over the exposed substrate, right?
With some good jet impingement, why wouldn't it yield good results? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
![]()
epoxy is permeable, this is the problem
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location:
Posts: 264
|
![]()
I am quite tempted to bring out my Duron 700 and experiment with direct-die. It seems there has to be *some* way to do it safely and reliably, perhaps using a nonconductive coolant.
But unless the DIE itself is truly permeable, it shouldn't even matter. If not epoxy, then plumber's goop to seal the organic substrate. You all say it is so unfeasible, yet Intel and Stanford engineers have done some serious research on it: http://www.mit.edu/afs/athena/org/m/...ms/paper12.pdf . Their results were quite impressive. Maybe I am just stubborn, but it seems foolish to ignore the possibilities of direct-die jet impingement without solid empirical data to support its impracticability. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
![]()
"solid empirical data to support its impracticability"
HUH ??? suggest searching the various forums, LOTS of failures - and NO long term successes and the goop has been tried too the die is silicon, quite impermeable; but the underfill too is organic don't bandy words about with someone who has not done it (me); go ahead and do it, keep us posted be cool |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Da UP
Posts: 517
|
![]()
The die can be as impermiable as possible but if the real estate where the traces are eventually get soppin wet, what's the point?
The horse is black and blue, let's beat it some more ![]() Edit, More thoughts. It has been shown to work short term, but so has LN2. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location:
Posts: 264
|
![]()
I will try it, but I don't have the chemical / technical know-how to do it alone. So if you help me by answering my questions, and it fails, there will be rock-solid proof that despite anyone's best efforts, direct-die always fails.
Why do I think I am the only one who can make it work? Simple: I can run a nonconductive coolant in my loop: deionized water. My stainless steel radiator was *designed* for it, and my pump has a noryl housing and stainless steel bearings (designed for saltwater aquariums). One concern however: coolant purity. This pump has previously been used in an aquarium setup, so there is some gunk inside. Can I treat it to remove this? Will running it with deionized water for awhile get rid of the impurities? Will the ceramic (Duron 700, remember) substrate or CPU die ionize with the water? And I will check those other threads. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Put up or Shut Up
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Spokane WA
Posts: 6,506
|
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() Direct die is certainly not reliable, hell plain water cooling with a water block is not even all that reliable yet. Still see quite a few failures in the forums. Mostly due to the user, but with direct die there is a lot less room for error. If the pump shut off the thermal protection may not act fast enough. Also the pump MUST be running BEFORE the power switch is hit on the computer. I do not think it would be wise to have a relay that turns the pump on at the same time. I fried a CPU in about a second once. ![]() Tuff challenge. I think more work from the CPU manufactuer would be needed to make it work reliably. Which I doubt is in their best intrest right now. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Responsible for 2%
of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,302
|
![]()
This won't help a dead pump scenario, but you could add a thin copper foil over the core: that should solve the permeable and wear issues. Of course you'd need a TIM joint... and so you're back to the equivalence of a waterblock...:shrug:
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Been /.'d... have you?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Moscow, ID
Posts: 1,986
|
![]()
It can be done if someone can manufacture a direct die block that is almost exactly the size of the die and then seals the sides well enough. The problem is finding that material to use to seal the sides so there is NO leakage to the packaging. The potential is there to do this, it is just a matter of finding a way to overcome that one hurdle. There has to be SOME material that will keep a watertight seal under high pressure and mid-range temperatures ... but I'm not going to be the one to find out what it is because I'm not crazy enough.
__________________
#!/bin/sh {who;} {last;} {pause;} {grep;} {touch;} {unzip;} mount /dev/girl -t {wet;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} {fsck;} echo yes yes yes {yes;} umount {/dev/girl;zip;} rm -rf {wet.spot;} {sleep;} finger: permission denied |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: portugal
Posts: 635
|
![]()
ok so no one tested it.
but with all the problems, i still have this question: teoricaly, is direct die cooling better then a water cooling block? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Thermophile
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The deserts of Tucson, Az
Posts: 1,264
|
![]()
If you can seal it well enough that its just water permating slowly throught the seal, it might be ok. People use silicone tube all the time even though its permiable.
Still its a stupid idea. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location:
Posts: 264
|
![]()
The deionized water is a stupid idea, I don't know what I was thinking... too hard to maintain purity if there is any metal at all in the cooling loop.
If one COULD manage to keep deionized water pure in a WC setup, sealing the die would not be an issue. Otherwise, any metal particles would corrode the traces connecting the die to the substrate. I know next to nothing about sealants and adhesives, but I would suppose the problem is maintaining the seal between the die and substrate under heat and pressure. Sealing the package itself should be no problem; since it is organic (porous), almost any sealant is likely to adhere. But (I am assuming) the silicon die is not porous, making it hard for a sealant to adhere. What about a mechanical sealant? An O-ring, shaped to fit around the die? A precisely made top could fit flush over the die, and not leak if the gap between the die and top was small enough. Here's another one: Machine out a hole in a baseplate just barely smaller then the CPU die, to be positioned over the die. (A small?) clamping pressure would keep any water from flowing between the die and baseplate, yet water could still be impinged in most of the die's surface. I can make a diagram if there are any questions as to what I am describing. I am still determined to test this concept myself, I just need advice on the appropriate course of actions to take. As demonstrated, there are many possible ways to accomplish direct die cooling (theoretically), but which is most feasible? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
|
![]()
what about if it was a p4 or similar with a heatspreader, you could use the heatspreader as what gets cooled (since intel do a good job at mateing it with the die). That would stop the problems with makeing a tight seal around a small die, and it would not matter if the water impingment wore thru - it would wear thru to the die (but i highly doubt it would get thru all that copper).
And yes, I realise this would not be 'true' direct die cooling. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Malta, Mediterranean
Posts: 662
|
![]()
Direct die cooling has hit the wall. This is because water has a too low SHC to keep up with that small area and high heat output. It may regain acceptance if another coolant is used.
__________________
- Every great HD crash day is the day before back-up day. - My Past System - "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven." - Milton, Paradise Lost. - FMZ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location:
Posts: 264
|
![]() Quote:
Look at the pdf I linked to earlier: http://www.mit.edu/afs/athena/org/m/...ms/paper12.pdf You will notice they even compared direct-die microjets to microchannels (REAL microchannels) and found microjets to be "more effective because they can remove larger heat fluxes at lower surface chip temperatures." And their results are using flow rates measured in single digit milliliters per minute. "Higher flow rates... will facilitate even higher heat flux removal and heat transfer coefficients." If even 1 LPM can be attained using these microjets, you can decrease their measured C/W by at least one order of magnitude. I think there should be no doubt that direct-die microjets can have much lower thermal resistance than any heatsinks or conventional waterblocks. The question now is how to engineer one that will work. edit: presented -> linked to. Ben: "present" as in "To offer for observation, examination, or consideration." Do they use a different dictionary in Texas? Last edited by koslov; 03-31-2003 at 06:40 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Responsible for 2%
of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,302
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |
Thermophile
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The deserts of Tucson, Az
Posts: 1,264
|
![]() Quote:
Its here that copper has the advantage at almost 400w/m*k; you can have a huge surface area to meet the coolant. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location:
Posts: 264
|
![]()
Parylene-C
This is the ideal conformal coating I have been searching for. It is already being used in micro-spray cooling experiments. In fact, I heard of it in an article on micro-spray experiments being done at UCLA. It has outstanding dielectric properties, and can be deposited so thinly it is thermally transparent. Also, it is extremely wear- and impact-resistant, so high-velocity microjets won't damage the coating. The only price I have seen for Parylene deposition is $500 for a batch of four 100mm wafers. The deposition machines are made by Specialty Coating System. Here is a description of the process. cached version on google, other link appears broken Unless there are more affordable deposition services, I guess it is up to AMD and Intel to start producing Parylene-coated chips before direct-die cooling is a real possibility. Last edited by koslov; 05-14-2003 at 06:59 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: in a nice cool spot
Posts: 427
|
![]() Quote:
__________________
feel free to icq/msn me, I'm always willing to toss around ideas. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|