All right ya'll... take it down a notch or two!
Cathar: That pic was just a baseplate prototype, not a complete block. If couse it would have to have fins (of one type or the other).
Quote:
|
The problem here bigben is that the statement is first made that we need thin base-plates to decrease the thermal resistance of the copper perpendicular to the CPU die, and then it's now stated that we need to increase the copper thickness to decrease the thermal resistance laterally.
|
I missed that completely. GeminiCool said:
Quote:
|
I'm working on a base design that will vary the thickness of the base in the channel as a function of the radial distance from the core. The end result should be a better transfer of heat at the center do to a thin base and better transfer of heat in a radial direction do to the decreased thermal resistance.
|
I took that to be talking about a baseplate design, as I illustrated. Techno babble aside, the point was about the design, and although Peter might not have described it technically correctly, the design stands.
I don't see what all the huffing is all about. From my perspective, I see a block designer that's trying to use technical language to describe a design. Obviously he's struggling with the words (as the spelling alone suggests), so why can't we just help him along?
GeminiCool: I'm really glad that you stopped by. For the pump heat issue, I'm going to refer you to
this thread where you can see me going through the process of figuring out exactly what the heat is, where it comes from, and so on.
For the BP design, I would hope that I was close, with the pic I put up. I do foresee a few problems with it though:
1-very hard to lap a recessed area
2-block becomes "core specific"
3-it must have enough clearance to make sure that it doesn't contact the surface of the CPU (shorting the bridges).
4-A mounting scheme would have to be redesigned.