Thermal Management Update with Doug Brooks


Reading time ( words)

I had the opportunity to talk with our contributor Doug Brooks recently. He has been doing some research on temperature effects on PCB traces over the last few years, and I wanted to check the status of his latest thermal efforts. He discussed his work with Dr. Johannes Adam, why temperature charts based on a trace in isolation are inaccurate, and how the industry remained so wrong about PCB temperatures for so long.   

Andy Shaughnessy: You have done some work on thermal management lately. How did that project start?

Doug Brooks: I wrote an article in the mid-‘90s on trace current/temperature effects, and I used two data sources: the then-current IPC data and some data I found in a 1968 Design News (DN) article. The DN temperatures were about 30% to 40% higher than the IPC temperatures and I wondered why. I began to suspect that it was because of the differences in the way the temperatures were measured or calculated. In looking for a way to confirm that hypothesis, I ran across an article about three years ago written by Dr. Johannes Adam in Germany, and I contacted Johannes.

It turns out that Johannes had written a computer simulation program called TRM (Thermal Risk Management) that was well suited for me to use to look at the data I had used in the article. He offered me a license for the software and we used TRM to simulate the IPC trace data in IPC-2152 and also the earlier data from DN. The simulations were very successful.

Shaughnessy: What did you find out?

Brooks: It turns out the DN data were unreliable!

Shaughnessy: And all of this took place over several years?

Brooks: No. That was just the beginning. It was so easy to simulate the IPC trace data that we began to simulate more realistic scenarios. The IPC data apply to a 6-inch trace in isolation. We began to look at what happens when we change things: change the length, change the pad sizes, add additional adjacent traces, add planes below the trace or on the other side of the board, more common layout conditions like those.

To read this entire article, which appeared in the December 2017 issue of The PCB Design Magazine, click here.

Share

Print


Suggested Items

Bert Simonovich on Modeling Copper Roughness

03/24/2019 | Andy Shaughnessy, Design007 Magazine
I met with one of our contributors, Bert Simonovich of Lamsim Enterprises, at DesignCon 2019. Bert’s paper on interconnect modeling was nominated as a Best Paper finalist, so I asked him to discuss his paper and some of the challenges that engineers and their customers are facing right now.

RTW IPC APEX EXPO 2019: For Elmatica, the Future is All About Data

01/30/2019 | Real Time with...IPC
At this year's IPC APEX EXPO, guest editor Judy Warner sits down with Elmatica CEO Didrik Bech to discuss the company's business model and CircuitData, their award-winning open-source PCB design data language.

Happy Anniversary, Gerber Format: Looking Ahead to Digital Innovation

01/25/2019 | Patrick McGoff, Mentor, a Siemens business
This year, we celebrate the 55th anniversary of the introduction of the Gerber machine language format. We can thank H. Joseph Gerber, the man who took manual PCB design to the next level with the automated photoplotter, for giving us this format in 1964. Gerber immigrated to the United States in 1940 with his mother following the death of his father during the Holocaust. Gerber started Gerber Scientific Instrument Company in 1948 to commercialize his first patented invention—the variable scale.



Copyright © 2019 I-Connect007. All rights reserved.