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


Suggested Items

Excerpt: The Printed Circuit Designer’s Guide to…Flex and Rigid-Flex Fundamentals

06/25/2018 | Dave Lackey and Anaya Vardya, American Standard Circuits
The design process is arguably the most important part of the flex circuit procurement process. The decisions made in the design process will have a lasting impact, for better or worse, throughout the manufacturing cycle. In advance of providing important details about the actual construction of the flex circuit, it is of value to provide some sort of understanding of the expected use environment for the finished product.

Field Trip: CID Class Sees How Flex is Made at Streamline Circuits

06/06/2018 | Kelly Dack, CID+, EPTAC
While I was teaching my CID class for EPTAC in Santa Clara, I learned that we were only a block away from Streamline Circuits. Streamline does a lot of military and aerospace work, as well as communications and industrial electronics. The company manufactures quite a bit of multilayer flex and rigid-flex circuits, in addition to rigid boards. This would make a great field trip for my CID class!

Show & Tell: IPC APEX EXPO 2018 is on the Books!

05/14/2018 | Happy Holden
I-Connect007's Happy Holden reviewed the recently concluded IPC APEX EXPO 2018. Among the highlights: Less than 10% of all new orders arrive at the PCB fabricator’s facility with complete, accurate design data. Most have missing or incorrect data.



Copyright © 2018 I-Connect007. All rights reserved.