Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 7 – uploaded by Yoav Peles

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Multi-objective optimization results for Ap = 70 kPa (dimensions in pm). Table 7

Table 7 Multi-objective optimization results for Ap = 70 kPa (dimensions in pm). Table 7

Related Figures (18)

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Provided for non-commercial research and education use. Not for reproduction, distribution or commercial use.
This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Provided for non-commercial research and education use. Not for reproduction, distribution or commercial use.
Fig. 1. (A) Schematic model of micro-channel heat sink. (B) Schematic model of circular pin-fin heat sink. (C) Schematic model of offset strip fin heat sink. (D) Schemat model of jet impingement cooling.
Fig. 1. (A) Schematic model of micro-channel heat sink. (B) Schematic model of circular pin-fin heat sink. (C) Schematic model of offset strip fin heat sink. (D) Schemat model of jet impingement cooling.
Table 2
Table 2
Total thermal resistance models and design variables used in the present study. Table 1
Total thermal resistance models and design variables used in the present study. Table 1
Definition of some common terms used in the present study. Table 3
Definition of some common terms used in the present study. Table 3
Heat sink and coolant properties. Table 5 Table 4
Heat sink and coolant properties. Table 5 Table 4
Comparison of thermal resistances. Table 6
Comparison of thermal resistances. Table 6
Optimization constraints used in the present study. was taken not to over-extrapolate the heat transfer and friction factor models.
Optimization constraints used in the present study. was taken not to over-extrapolate the heat transfer and friction factor models.
Fig. 3. (A) In-line circular pin-fin heat sink Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of in-line circular pin-fin heat sink design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa. S. Ndao et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 4317-4326
Fig. 3. (A) In-line circular pin-fin heat sink Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of in-line circular pin-fin heat sink design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa. S. Ndao et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 4317-4326
Fig. 2. (A) Micro-channel heat sink Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of the micro-channel heat sink design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa.
Fig. 2. (A) Micro-channel heat sink Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of the micro-channel heat sink design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa.
Fig. 4. (A) Staggered circular pin-fin heat sink Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of staggered circular pin-fin heat sink design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa. S. Ndao et al. /International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 4317-4326
Fig. 4. (A) Staggered circular pin-fin heat sink Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of staggered circular pin-fin heat sink design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa. S. Ndao et al. /International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 4317-4326
Fig. 5. (A) Offset strip fin heat sink Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of offset strip fin heat sink design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa.
Fig. 5. (A) Offset strip fin heat sink Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of offset strip fin heat sink design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa.
Fig. 6. (A) Single jet impingement Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of single jet impingement design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa. S. Ndao et al./International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 4317-4326
Fig. 6. (A) Single jet impingement Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of single jet impingement design variables along its Pareto front for water at Ap = 70 kPa. S. Ndao et al./International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 52 (2009) 4317-4326
Fig. 7. (A) Multiple jet impingement Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of multiple jet impingement design variables along its Pareto front for water, Ap = 70 kPa.
Fig. 7. (A) Multiple jet impingement Pareto optimal solutions for water. (B) Distribution of multiple jet impingement design variables along its Pareto front for water, Ap = 70 kPa.
Fig. 10. Pareto optimal solutions at Ap = 30 kPa for HFE-7000. Fig. 8. Pareto optimal solutions at Ap = 30 kPa for water.
Fig. 10. Pareto optimal solutions at Ap = 30 kPa for HFE-7000. Fig. 8. Pareto optimal solutions at Ap = 30 kPa for water.
Fig. 9. Pareto optimal solutions at Ap = 90 kPa for water.
Fig. 9. Pareto optimal solutions at Ap = 90 kPa for water.
Fig. 11. Pareto optimal solutions at Ap = 90 kPa for HFE-7000.
Fig. 11. Pareto optimal solutions at Ap = 90 kPa for HFE-7000.
Related topics:
EngineeringThermal ResistanceThermal design
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved