Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749

DOI 10.1007/s00170-010-2754-8

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Multi-objective optimization of flat plate heat sink

using Taguchi-based Grey relational analysis
S. Manivannan & S. Prasanna Devi & R. Arumugam &
N. M. Sudharsan

Received: 31 January 2010 / Accepted: 25 May 2010 / Published online: 8 June 2010
# Springer-Verlag London Limited 2010

Abstract This paper presents an approach for the multi- width of the heat sink, fin height, base height, number of
objective optimization of the flat plate heat sink using fins, and fin thickness. The multi-objective optimization
Taguchi design of experiments-based Grey relational problem is then converted into single-objective optimization
analysis. The responses studied were electromagnetic problem using Grey relational analysis and the optimum
emitted radiation, thermal resistance, average heat transfer design settings of the heat sink geometry were obtained. Also,
coefficient, pressure drop, and the mass of the flat plate heat ANOVA test was carried out for finding out the contribution
sink. The heat sink is modeled using Ansoft High and impact of each heat sink design factor towards the
Frequency Structure Simulator (HFSS) software version multiple responses of the heat sink.
12 and the value of the emitted radiation is obtained by
simulation. The same heat sink is modeled using Flotherm Keywords Heat sink . Design optimization . Taguchi design
V7.2 software for finding the thermal resistance, pressure of experiments (DOE) . Grey relational analysis (GRA) .
drop, and average heat transfer coefficient. Experimental HFSS simulation . CFD simulation . Experimentation
investigation was performed to find the thermal resistance
and emitted radiations from the heat sink and thus the Nomenclature
simulation model was validated with the experimental l wavelength, m
results. The simulations were continued for the combina- ρAl density of the extruded aluminum, kg/m3
tions generated by the L27 (6 factors, three levels) a fin height, mm
Taguchi’s design of experiments using Minitab software. b base height of the heat sink, mm
The factors considered for optimization are the length and d fin thickness, mm
f frequency, Hz
k thermal conductivity of fin material, W/mK
S. Manivannan (*)
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, L heat sink length, mm
Anna University, N number of fins
Chennai, India Q heat dissipation, W
e-mail: asmani25@yahoo.co.in
Rsin total thermal resistance, 0K/W
S. P. Devi Ta ambient temperature, 0K
Department of Industrial Engineering, Anna University, Tb temperature of fin base, 0K
Chennai, India Vf fan velocity, m/s
W heat sink width, mm
R. Arumugam
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, SS sum of squares
SSN College of Engineering, DOF degrees of freedom
Chennai, India F, T test statistics
MS mean square
N. M. Sudharsan
Sarvajit–CAE, P value of probability
Chennai, India Pcritical table value of probability
740
1 Introduction
The heat sinks are used in electronic systems to remove
heat from the chip and effectively transfer it to the ambient
[1]. The heat sink geometry is designed by the mechanical
engineers with the primary aim of reducing the thermal
resistance of the heat sink [2, 3] for better cooling in the
electronic systems. Due to the proximity of the heat sink
with the integrated circuits (ICs), the radio frequency (RF)
fields created by RF currents in the ICs/PCBs gets coupled
to heat sinks. The fin of the heat sink effectively behaves as
monoples at high frequency. And hence, the coupled RF
current can cause radiated emission. This radiated noise
from the device can couple and disturb the functioning of
the nearby electronic systems. Also, this radiated emission
from the device poses a problem to the system compliance
with respect to electromagnetic interference (EMI)/electro-
magnetic compatibility (EMC) regulations. The internation-
al EMI/EMC standards require the radiated emission from
the electronic devices to be kept below the specified limits.
Various techniques are practiced by the EMC engineers to
suppress the radiated emission but reducing the emission
from the source point is the most preferred. Hence, EMC
engineers need to understand the factors contributing to
radiated emission from heat sink. It is important to analyze
and optimize these factors, mainly the geometrical param-
eters of heat sink to minimize the radiated emissions at the
design stage itself.
Das and Roy [4] observed that the radiating efficiency
not only depends on the clock frequency of the ASIC
but also on the shape of the heat sink. The radiated
emissions are most severe when the monopole length
becomes quarter of the wavelength and vertical polarized
emissions were found to be higher than the horizontal
polarization.
Brench [5] examined the variations in the radiation
characteristic of heat sink with respect to their geometries
by applying 3D-FDTD technique and found that there
is an additional increase in radiated emissions at the
resonance of the heat sink. John Parry [6] presented
approach for modeling heat sink and studied the effect of
grounded heat sink and examined the common mode RF
coupling between die and heat sink and concluded that heat
sink radiating clock harmonics throughout the frequency
spectrum.
Golkhab and Tavakoli Bina [7] studied the effect of
reduction in space for the want of compactness in geometry
Table 1 Heat sink geometry
used for simulation Length of the Width of the
heat sink (mm) heat sink (mm)
90 70
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749
and specified effect of more EMI problems when the
components become much closer.
Richard Georgerian and Mantrose [8] studied the
concept of wavelength-based heat sink fin length selection
for the minimization of radiated emissions and simultaneously
they presented an approach for the base temperature rise with
the variation in fin length, for maximizing the cooling of
electronic packages.
Bruce Archambeault et al. [9] discussed the effects of
EMI by heat sink and presented a method to suppress its
effects by grounding techniques.
Junwei Lu, Xian Duan [10] presented a approach of
applying finite element frequency domain analysis for
electromagnetic radiation emitted from high power micro-
electronic circuits connected to heat sink and also investi-
gated various grounding options of the heat sink.
Junwei Lu and Dawson [11] studied the EMC
computer modeling techniques for CPU heat sink simula-
tion and presented an approach to model and simulate
a heat sink. Philippe Sochoux et al. [12] modeled heat
sink using Micro stripes (Flomerics) to find radiations
emitted from the heat sink also found the variation in
radiation for the variation in design factors like height and
number of fins.
Visser et al. [13] described the use of mathematical
optimization techniques to minimize the heat sink mass
and thermal resistance using five design variables namely,
heat sink height, thickness, extrusion length, base thick-
ness, and number of fins for the heat sink. Culham and
Muzychka [14] presented a procedure for optimization of
heat sink design parameters based on minimization of the
entropy generation associated with heat transfer and fluid
friction.
Shah et al. [15] examined the effect of the shape
of the heat sink fins, particularly near the center of the
heat sink. An optimum heat sink shape is reported that
results in a lower operating temperature and pressure
gradient.
Khan et al. [16] studied the entropy generation minimiza-
tion procedure and employed it to optimize the overall
performance of micro channel heat sinks using Newton-
Raphson method.
Bar-Cohen and Rohsenow [17] analyzed the thermally
optimum spacing of vertical natural convection cooled
parallel plates. Bar-Cohen, Kraus and Bar-Cohen [18, 19]
has analyzed the state of art and trends in thermal analysis
of electronic packages. Chyi-Tsong Chen et al. [20] has
Fin height Base height (mm) Number Fin thickness
(mm) of fins (mm)
30 6 17 1.2
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749
done the parameter optimization of plate fin heat sink (with
side cooling fan) using genetic algorithm.
Lin [21] has studied the use of the Taguchi method and
Grey relational analysis (GRA) to optimize turning oper-
ations with multiple performance characteristics. Ko-Ta
Ching et al. [22] has studied the optimum design
parameters of pin-fin heat sink using the Grey fuzzy logic
based on the orthogonal arrays. The effects of design
parameters and the optimum design parameters for a pin-fin
heat sink with the multiple thermal performance character-
istics have been investigated by using the Grey fuzzy logic
based on the orthogonal arrays. Chih-Chung-Chou et al.
[23] studied the optimization of a parallel-plain fin heat
sink using the Grey-based fuzzy algorithm with the
orthogonal arrays. The study done by Arularasan and Velraj
[24] presents the modeling and simulation of parallel plate
heat sinks using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and
DOE considers the factors like number of fins (N), fin
length (L), fin height (a), base height (b) of the heat sink to
optimize the thermal resistance of the heat sink.
In the present study, the authors focus in optimizing
heat sink geometry factors such as length (L), width (W) of
the heat sink, height of the fin (a), base height of the heat
sink (b), number of fins (N), and fin thickness (d) to
minimize the total radiations emitted, thermal resistance,
pressure drop, mass, and to maximize the average heat
transfer coefficient of a heat sink. In this paper, the Taguchi
design of experiments is used to generate the various
geometry combinations of the heat sink and the various
performance characteristics for each combination were
found using HFSS and Flotherm simulations and cor-
responding experimental investigations were performed in
order to validate the simulation results. The simulation is
continued for L27 orthogonal array to perform the multi-
objective optimization of the flat plate heat sink using Grey
relational analysis.
In this paper, Section 2 explains the HFSS modeling,
simulation and experimentation of the heat sink for
Fig. 1 Typical flat plate heat sink model
741
Fig. 2 Far-field radiation pattern of heat sink
predicting the radiations emitted using Ansoft software.
Section 3 illustrates the CFD modeling, simulation and
experimentation of heat sink for finding multiple thermal
performance characteristics. Section 4 deals with optimiza-
tion of heat sink geometry using Taguchi L27 design of
experiments based Grey relational analysis. Section 5
presents the results and discussions followed by the
conclusions in Section 6.
2 HFSS modeling, simulation, and experimentation
of heat sink for finding radiated emissions
A typical aluminum heat sink with the geometry specifica-
tions available in Table 1 is modeled using Ansoft HFSS
version 12 [25]. The model essentially consists of three
regions namely the heat sink region, source region and the
ground plane. The aluminum ground plane is modeled with
the dimensions 150×135×1 mm below the heat sink at a
distance of 5 mm. The typical flat plate heat sink with “N”
number of fins is shown in Fig. 1.
Lumped port of impedance 50Ω is defined to represent
the coupling of processor to the heat sink. Also, there is no
any additional grounding point for this processor to
suppress the radiations to avoid additional cost and space
Fig. 3 Schematic diagram of experimental setup
742
Fig. 4 Photograph of experimental setup
restrictions. The radiation boundary is defined to specify an
open boundary condition that allows waves to radiate
infinitely into space. The radiation boundary in the present
problem is defined as box with faces positioned at least a
quarter wave length (l/4) from the objects in the model.
The total emissions from the heat sink are evaluated in the
far-field region by defining an infinite sphere that surrounds
the radiating object. The source power level to excite heat
sink is kept at 1 mW. The simulation was carried for the
frequencies ranging from 1 to 10 GHz with a interval of
500 MHz. The emissions are obtained in terms of dBmV/m
at a distance of 3 m from the source.
The 3D far-field radiation pattern for the E field at
3 GHz of the heat sink and the boundary are shown in
Fig. 2. The same aluminum heat sink with the specifica-
tions given in Table 1 is used for the experimental
investigation. An aluminum ground plane of dimensions
150×135 ×1 mm is placed at 5 mm below the heat sink,
with an N-type male connector fixed at the center for the
excitation. The center pin of the N-type connector is
extended and soldered to the base of the heat sink with a
copper wire. The radiation from a heat sink is experimen-
tally measured in a shielded semi-anechoic chamber. The
set-up for the experimental analysis is shown in Fig. 3. The
Fig. 5 Comparison of simulation vs. experimental results
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749
Fig. 6 CFD modeling of heatsink using flotherm
test setup consist of the components such as (1) log periodic
antenna, (2) signal generator, (3) turn table, (4) insulation
material, (5) heat sink and ground plane, and (6) spectrum
analyzer.
The heat sink is excited using the Agilent-MXG-analog
signal generator and swept for the range of frequencies
between 1 and 10 GHz with a RF output of 1 mW (0 dBm)
at 50 Ω impedance. RF SMA cable was used to connect the
signal generator to the N connector of the base plate via
SMA-N adaptor. A log periodic antenna of SAS make 200/
518 was placed at a distance of 3 m from the heat sink to
receive the radiations emitted. The antenna is vertically
polarized and connected to Agilent spectrum analyzer
which is kept in the control room via N-type RF cable.
Figure 4 shows the photograph of the experimental setup.
Signal generator is set to provide RF signal with a range of
1-10 GHz with a step size of 500 MHz. The radiated
emissions from the heat sink are measured using spectrum
analyzer. The radiated emission from the heat sink obtained
via experimentation and simulation were plotted with
frequency and emitted radiation (dBmV/m) along X and
Y, respectively, and is shown in Fig. 5.
Table 2 Inlet boundary conditions and material properties
Parameter Value
Ambient temperature 301 0K
Thermal conductivity of extruded 209 W/m0K
aluminum heatsink
Density of extruded aluminum 2684.9 kg/m3
Conductivity of air 0.026274 W/m0K
Viscosity of air 0.00001824 kg/ms
Density of air 1.1758 kg/m3
0
Specific heat capacity of air 1005.49967 Ws/kg K
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749
Fig. 7 Temperature distribution plot of original heat sink
The non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-ranks test is con-
ducted to validate the presently available simulation and
experimental results using SPSS software. The null hy-
pothesis assumes that the median of difference between the
experimental and simulation results is zero. The results
indicate that the null hypothesis is accepted with a
confidence interval of 95%. Hence, the simulation results
are validated with experimental results.
3 CFD modeling, simulation, and experimentation
of heat sink for finding multiple thermal performance
characteristics
The thermal performance characteristics of a heat sink such
as the thermal resistance, pressure drop, and average heat
transfer coefficient are found using CFD simulations. A
numerical model was formulated using commercial CFD
package Flotherm Version 7.2 [26] for solving 3D heat
Fig. 8 Pressure distribution plot of original heat sink
743
Fan
Heat sink
J Type
Thermocoupl
Heater
Insulating
base
Fig. 9 Schematic diagram for the experimental arrangement
transfers in the heat sink with a fan of 70 mm opening is
shown in Fig. 6.
The heat sink with specifications in Table 1 is modeled
using Flotherm. A heat source of size 3×3 cm is modeled
and attached to the bottom of heat sink and a layer of
Wakefield [27] thermal compound with a thermal resistivity
of 0.735 W/mK is applied between heat sink and heat
source to provide a proper surface contact between them.
The inlet boundary conditions and material properties are
given to Flotherm software as inputs are given in Table 2.
The program is set to run for 500 iterations. The base
temperature of the heat sink is measured at various six
points at heat sink base. The heater load is varied from 10
to 80 W at an interval of 10 W. For each heat loads, the
base temperatures are recorded and average base tempera-
ture is found. The corresponding thermal resistance values
are obtained using Eq. 1. The inlet and outlet pressures are
recorded to find the pressure drop in the heat sink. Also, the
1. Computer
2. Power Supply for the
6 heater set up.
3. Heat Sink With fan
attached to Heater.
1 4. J Type Thermocouple
2 3 5. Data Logger
5
6. Power Supply for the
4 fan arrangement
Fig. 10 Experimental setup for measuring the base temperature of the
heatsink
744 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749

Table 3 Levels of various factors of the heat sink Where

Design Parameter Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Δ T ¼ T b  Ta ð2Þ
(low) (medium) (high)

Length of the heat 70 80 90 Mass ¼ ½ðbLWÞ þ ðLdaNÞ  109  rAl ð3Þ

sink (L) mm
Width of the heat 70 80 90
sink (W) mm Figures 7 and 8 shows the temperature distribution and
No of fins (N) 10 20 30 pressure distribution plots, respectively, of the CFD
Fin height (a) mm 10 20 30 simulation using Flotherm software, with a heat load of
Base height (b) mm 4 6 8 80 W. From the average values of base temperature, the
Fin thickness (d) mm 0.8 1 1.2 simulated value of thermal resistance of a heat sink is found
as 0.2368 0 K/W.
Full-scale experimentation is performed for the heat sink
value of average heat transfer coefficient is recorded from with geometry specified in Table 1 by mimicking the Watt
the CFD simulations. density, i.e., the heat dissipated by various processors from
10 to 80 W. An experimental setup is arranged with an
electric heater of size 30×30 mm as a heat source to mimic
Rsin ¼ ΔT =Q ð1Þ a processor and it is supplied by DC power supply. The

Table 4 Taguchi L27 heat sink combinations with corresponding response

Heat sink design factors Multiple responses studied

L27 Length Width Fin Base Fin Number h pressure Rsin Mass Radiation
experiments height Height thickness of fins drop

1 70 70 10 4 0.8 10 38.67926 31.61299 0.881965 67.65948 11.303

2 70 70 10 4 1 20 43.87016 41.82888 0.432559 90.21264 11.379
3 70 70 10 4 1.2 30 49.2269 62.23041 0.293341 120.2835 12.93
4 70 80 20 6 0.8 10 26.99681 9.272992 0.702373 120.2835 12.144
5 70 80 20 6 1 20 33.72965 14.49167 0.323024 165.3898 11.94
6 70 80 20 6 1.2 30 30.88444 24.47018 0.212195 225.5316 13.371
7 70 90 30 8 0.8 10 23.11338 3.185494 0.645489 180.4253 14.852
8 70 90 30 8 1 20 23.37154 5.79142 0.299137 248.0848 15.364
9 70 90 30 8 1.2 30 23.01993 11.65755 0.191255 338.2974 15.702
10 80 70 20 8 0.8 20 38.59814 16.74324 0.269675 189.017 14.207
11 80 70 20 8 1 30 46.27413 34.55881 0.179465 249.1587 14.525
12 80 70 20 8 1.2 10 35.74262 13.72804 0.551366 171.8336 14.43
13 80 80 30 4 0.8 20 32.31988 6.708182 0.271091 171.8336 12.626
14 80 80 30 4 1 30 24.78749 12.08745 0.177363 262.0462 13.327
15 80 80 30 4 1.2 10 22.80031 4.340119 0.528742 146.0586 12.122
16 80 90 10 6 0.8 20 34.93076 18.25632 0.448907 150.3544 15.29
17 80 90 10 6 1 30 37.0762 24.11352 0.299522 180.4253 15.65
18 80 90 10 6 1.2 10 35.02478 18.07321 0.818506 141.7627 15.02
19 90 70 30 6 0.8 30 25.1672 14.47585 0.163617 275.4707 16.716
20 90 70 30 6 1 10 24.008 5.435299 0.455578 173.9815 15.738
21 90 70 30 6 1.2 20 27.42544 17.54251 0.202934 275.4707 16.406
22 90 80 10 8 0.8 30 36.81901 40.7776 0.241451 212.6441 15.96
23 90 80 10 8 1 10 30.28531 28.62623 0.650075 178.8143 15.02
24 90 80 10 8 1.2 20 30.28531 28.62623 0.650092 212.6441 15.73
25 90 90 20 4 0.8 30 23.10386 10.0281 0.212911 202.9784 15.746
26 90 90 20 4 1 10 22.89866 5.845856 0.591928 135.319 15.06
27 90 90 20 4 1.2 20 24.3832 9.193638 0.287743 202.9784 15.47
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749 745

heater is fixed with heat sink using Anabond compound
with thermal conductivity of 0.437 W/mK [28] and Wake-
field thermal compound with thermal conductivity of
0.735 W/mK is applied to the contact surface of the sink
to make proper surface contact between heat sink and the
heater. The heat sink rejects the heat into the air which is
enhanced by placing the axial fan above the heat sink. The
axial fan with an opening of 70 mm diameter is placed on
top the heat sink and the fan is charged by 12 V DC supply.
The bottom side of the heater is insulated so as to ensure
that all the heat from the heater is dissipated through the
heat sink only. Six numbers of J-type thermocouples are
suitably placed in the base of the heat sink so as to measure
the base temperature of the heat sink and a separate
thermocouple is placed on the experimental bench to
measure the ambient temperature. These thermocouples
are connected to the data logger and computer setup (data
acquisition system). Figure 9 shows the schematic repre-
sentation of the arrangement for the experimentation.
The photograph of experimental setup is shown in Fig. 10.
The experiment was conducted by varying the heat loads
from 10 to 80 W, in the interval of each 10 W. The
temperatures at various base locations of heat sink are
measured and recorded using data logger and computer.
Also, the values of voltage and current of the heaters power
supply are noted to find the total power applied to the heater.
Anemometer is used to find the fan velocity at 12 V and it is
found to be 5.5 m/s.
From the average values of base temperature, the experi-
mental value of thermal resistance of a heat sink is found as
0.2447 0K/W and the deviation with simulation results are
very minimal (3.22%). Hence, simulation model is found to
be in good agreement with the experimental model.
4 Multi-objective optimization of heat sink geometry
using Taguchi-based Grey relational analysis
To provide efficient optimization, traditional optimization
techniques like design of experiments are generally chosen
as a tool. The heat sink geometry design factors like length
of the heat sink (L), width of the heat sink (W), height of

Table 5 Data processing of each performance characteristic

Normalized h Normalized pressure drop Normalized Rsin Normalized mass Normalized emitted radiation

0.601031897 0.518581 0 1.000000074 1

0.797507983 0.345547 0.625652234 0.916666734 0.98596
1.000261166 −6.9E-06 0.819467841 0.805555615 0.699427
0.158849563 0.896968 0.250024363 0.805555615 0.844633
0.413688545 0.808576 0.778144577 0.638888936 0.88232
0.305997153 0.639563 0.932438396 0.416666697 0.617957
0.0118614 1.000076 0.329216205 0.583333376 0.344356
0.021632906 0.955938 0.811399485 0.333333358 0.249769
0.008324507 0.856579 0.961589865 0 0.187327
0.597961477 0.77044 0.852415773 0.551587342 0.463514
0.888498348 0.468685 0.97800362 0.329365104 0.404766
0.489879648 0.82151 0.460251984 0.615079411 0.422317
0.360328419 0.94041 0.850444452 0.615079411 0.755588
0.075226619 0.849298 0.980930322 0.281746053 0.626085
1.16677E-05 0.98052 0.491748225 0.710317513 0.848698
0.459150557 0.744812 0.60289329 0.694444496 0.26344
0.540355946 0.645604 0.810863149 0.583333376 0.196933
0.462709229 0.747913 0.088346095 0.72619053 0.31332
0.089598961 0.808844 1.000067172 0.232142874 0
0.045722817 0.96197 0.593605736 0.607142902 0.180676
0.175073512 0.756902 0.94533099 0.232142874 0.05727
0.530621103 0.363354 0.891707852 0.464285749 0.139664
0.283320006 0.56917 0.322832382 0.589285758 0.31332
0.283320006 0.56917 0.322808019 0.464285749 0.182154
0.011501273 0.884179 0.931440554 0.500000037 0.179198
0.003734223 0.955016 0.403783238 0.750000055 0.30593
0.059924152 0.898312 0.827261242 0.500000037 0.230187
746 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749

the fin (a), base height of the heat sink (b), number of fins
(N), fin thickness (d) are chosen as the design parameters
(six factors with three levels (low, medium, high)) for the
optimization. The minimum number of experimental
combinations (MNE) for conducting simulations are given
by MNE=kn, where k is the number of levels and n is the
number of factors. Full factorial method gives 729 (36)
experiments. Since it is difficult and tedious to do all the
experiments/simulations, Taguchi orthogonal array method
is used instead of full factorial method to reduce the number
of experiments/simulations which gives similar results as in
full factorial method [29]. Hence, we use the L27
orthogonal array with the six factors at three levels
generated using Minitab software [30] and it is given in
Table 3.
Since it is not feasible to fabricate all the heat sink
geometry combinations for the experimental investigations,
we have opted for the HFSS simulations for the combina-
tions generated using L27 Taguchi method. HFSS simu-
lations are set to run for 3 GHz for all the 27 combinations
generated by design of experiments. The total radiations
from the heat sink are obtained at a distance of 3 m from
the heat sink by simulation and specified in Table 4.
Similarly, CFD simulations is set to run for the 27
combinations at a heat load of 80 W to find the thermal
performance characteristics such as the thermal resistance,
pressure drop, average heat transfer coefficient. The values
of emitted radiation with multiple thermal performance
characteristics are specified along with its mass in Table 4.
In the GRA, the multiple responses obtained are first
normalized in the range between zero and one, which is
also called the Grey relational generation shown in Table 5.
Next, the Grey relational coefficient is calculated from
the normalized experimental data to express the relationship
between the desired and actual experimental data. In our
study, a linear data preprocessing method [31] for the
emitted radiations, thermal resistance, pressure drop and
mass is chosen as lower-the-better and is calculated using
Eq. 4 and for the average heat transfer coefficient, higher-
the-better is chosen and calculated using Eq. 5.
max yi ðkÞ  yi ðkÞ
xi ðkÞ ¼ ð4Þ
max yi ðkÞ  min yi ðkÞ

Table 6 Grey relational

coefficient of each performance h Pressure drop Rsin Mass Radiation
characteristic
0.556193 0.509466 0.333333 1.00E+00 1
0.711752 0.433106 0.571855 8.57E-01 0.972686433
1 0.333333 0.734719 7.20E-01 0.624552902
0.372814 0.829144 0.400008 7.20E-01 0.762931642
0.460273 0.723145 0.692659 5.81E-01 0.809481083
0.418759 0.5811 0.880962 4.62E-01 0.56686564
0.33599 1 0.427064 5.45E-01 0.43265926
0.338211 0.919013 0.72611 4.29E-01 0.399926117
0.335194 0.777097 0.92866 3.33E-01 0.380902118
0.5543 0.685344 0.7721 5.27E-01 0.482399073
0.817659 0.484818 0.957861 4.27E-01 0.456523573
0.494991 0.736931 0.480886 5.65E-01 0.463958173
0.438723 0.893512 0.769757 5.65E-01 0.671671423
0.350933 0.768401 0.963262 4.10E-01 0.572138252
0.333333 0.9625 0.495908 6.33E-01 0.767692526
0.480377 0.662087 0.557347 6.21E-01 0.404347501
0.521027 0.585209 0.725545 5.45E-01 0.383710215
0.482025 0.664817 0.354194 6.46E-01 0.421343504
0.354509 0.723426 1 1.00E+00 0.333333333
0.343813 0.929316 0.551636 5.60E-01 0.378982007
0.377379 0.672859 0.901438 3.94E-01 0.346565081
0.515794 0.439891 0.821973 4.83E-01 0.367556189
0.410954 0.537155 0.424748 5.49E-01 0.421343504
0.410954 0.537155 0.42474 4.83E-01 0.379407023
0.335909 0.811924 0.879416 5.00E-01 0.378557941
0.334165 0.917458 0.456114 6.67E-01 0.418735979
0.347204 0.830996 0.743231 5.00E-01 0.393758638
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749 747

yi ðkÞ  min yi ðkÞ Table 8 Response table for the Grey relational grade (grand
xi ðkÞ ¼ ð5Þ mean=0.585603)
max yi ðkÞ  min yi ðkÞ
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Max - Min average

Where xi (k) is the value after the Grey relational L 0.620592 0.590175 0.546399 0.074193 0.585722
generation, min yi (k) is the smallest value of yi (k) for the W 0.634777 0.579177 0.552814 0.081963 0.588923
kth response, and max yi (k) is the largest value of yi (k) for a 0.569304 0.585285 0.594939 0.025635 0.583176
the kth response. Table 6 gives the sequences for Grey b 0.626403 0.581828 0.5427 0.083703 0.583644
relational coefficient for the performance characteristics d 0.605666 0.588773 0.562728 0.042938 0.585722
which is calculated using Eq. 6. N 0.571631 0.587828 0.599825 0.028195 0.586428

Δmin þ z Δmax


xi ðkÞ ¼ ð6Þ
Δoi ðkÞ þ z Δmax Δmin ¼ 8jmin 2 i8k min
x0 ðkÞ  xj ðkÞ

is the smallest


value of Δoi and Δmax ¼ 8jmax 2 i8k max
x0 ðkÞ  xj ðkÞ
is
the largest value of Δoi.
Where Δoi ¼ kx0 ðkÞ  xi ðkÞk is the difference of the Then, the Grey relational grade is computed by
absolute value between x0 (k) and xi (k). ζ is the averaging the Grey relational coefficient corresponding to
distinguishing coefficient between 0 and 1 (we have chosen each response using Eq. 7.
it to be equal to 0.5).
1X n
gi ¼ x ðkÞ ð7Þ
n k¼1 i
Table 7 Grey relational grades
and its order L27 Grey relational
combinations grade The overall evaluation of the multiple responses is based
on the Grey relational grade. As a result, optimization of
1 0.679798569 the complicated multiple process responses can be con-
2 0.709308359 verted into optimization of a single Grey relational grade. In
3 0.682521087 other words, the Grey relational grade can be treated as the
4 0.61697951 overall evaluation of experimental data for the multi-
5 0.653240833 response process. Table 7 shows the Grey relational grade
6 0.581845105 for the L27 combinations.
7 0.548233675 The mean of the Grey relational grade for each level of
8 0.562366375 the heat sink factors can be calculated by averaging the
9 0.551037141 Grey relational grade for Length of heat sink for experiment
10 0.604268083 number 1-9 as level 1, experiment number 10-18 as level 2,
11 0.62879614 and experiment number 19-27 as level 3. Similarly, it is
12 0.548357527 calculated for the respective levels for the other factors and
13 0.667737099 in addition, the total mean of the Grey relational grade for
14 0.613031453 the 27 experiments is also calculated and is shown in
15 0.63851999 Table 8.
16 0.54496958
17 0.552189112
18 0.513706719
19 0.682253623
20 0.552749553
21 0.538521582
22 0.525594607
23 0.468644128
24 0.447002874
25 0.581161207
26 0.558628041
27 0.563037823
Fig. 11 Graph of Grey relational grade
748 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749

Table 9 Shows the ANOVA

table for the heat sink geometry Factors DOF SS MS F P %Contribution
design parameters
Length 2 0.02505 0.012525 15.56542 0.000276 21.87881
Width 2 0.03153 0.015765 19.5913 0.000088 27.53769
Fin height 2 0.00303 0.001515 1.882763 0.188743 2.646427
Base height 2 0.03158 0.01579 19.62299 0.000087 27.58223
Fin thickness 2 0.00843 0.004215 5.238183 0.02003 7.362831
No of fins 2 0.00361 0.001805 2.24316 0.142877 3.153004
Error 14 0.01127 0.000805 9.839256
Total 26 0.114494 100.0002

5 Results and discussions
The Grey relational grade graph showing the different
factors at different levels contributing to the mean Grey
relational grade is shown in Fig. 11. The larger the value of
the Grey relational grade, the better is the multi-response
characteristics. The optimal combination of parameter
values are: L1W1a3b1d1N3.
Also the conceptual approach from Table 9 is confirmed
by the analysis of variance test shown in Table 9 which
indicates that the factors such as the length (21.87%), base
height (27.58%), and width (27.53%) of the heat sink are
the most influencing factors affecting the responses, as
shown from their percentage contribution. Also, the factors
such as fin height, fin thickness, and number of fins
contribute only to a small extent to the combined
optimization of the performance characteristics of the heat
sink. Table 10 shows the original vs. optimum design
settings of the heat sink parameters obtained from the
Taguchi-based GRA. Also, Table 11 indicates the percent-
age improvement obtained for each performance character-
istics using HFSS and CFD simulations for the optimum
geometry. From the results, it is inferred that combining
Taguchi method and GRA yields better results for the
optimal design of heat sink geometry.
6 Conclusions
Optimization of multiple performance characteristics of the
heat sink such as the average heat transfer coefficient,
pressure drop, thermal resistance, mass and the radiations
emitted has been carried out using Taguchi-based GRA
technique. The factors considered for the L27 orthogonal
array construction are the length, width, height of the fin,
base height, number of fins, and fin thickness of the heat
sink. The contribution of each factor towards the multi-
response optimization has been studied and it is inferred
that combining Taguchi method and GRA are best suitable
for the optimal design of heat sink geometry.

Table 11 Comparison of performance parameters for original vs.

optimum heat sink

Table 10 Comparison of original vs. optimum heat sink geometry Performance Parameters Original Optimum %Improvement
of the heat sink design design
Heat sink geometry factors Original Optimum
design design Average heat 26.82 28.90 7.19
transfer coefficient
Length (L), mm 90 70 (W/m2K)
Pressure drop (Pa) 16.59 16.24 2.10
Width (W), mm 70 70
Thermal resistance 0.2368 0.1903 19.63
Fin height (a), mm 30 30
(0K/W)
Base height (b), mm 6 4 Mass (gm) 249.37 187.943 24.63
Number of fins (N) 17 30 Radiations emitted, 16.12 11.869 26.37
Fin thickness (d), mm 1.2 0.8 dBmV/m
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2011) 52:739–749
References
1. Tummala R (2001) Fundamentals of microelectronic packaging.
McGraw-Hill Professional
2. Shih CJ, Liu GC (2004) Optimal design methodology of plate-fin
heat sinks for electronic cooling using entropy generation strategy,
components and packaging technologies. IEEE Transactions 27
(3):551–559
3. Teertstra P, Yovanovich MM, Culham JR, Lemczyk T (1999)
Analytical forced convection modeling of plate fin heat sinks. in
Proc. 15th IEEE SEMI-THERM Symp
4. Das R (1998) An investigation on radiated emissions from heat
sink. IEEE Int Symp Electromagn Compat 2:784–789
5. Brench (1994) Heat sink radiation as a function of geometry. in
proceedings. IEEE Symp, Electromoagnetic Compatibility 105–
109
6. Parry J (2000) Multiphysics modeling for electronics design.
Therm Thermo Phen Elect Sys, ITTHERM 2:86–93
7. Mohammad G, Mohammad TB (2008) “Multilevel converter
objectives: a critical evaluation and combination of available
natural commuted topologies with restructured iron cores”,
Proceedings of world congress on Engineering and computer
science WCEC 428–433
8. Georgerian R, Mantrose I (2003) Product safety and the heat sink—
dilemma of minimizing radiated emissions and maximizing thermal
cooling. IEEE Int Symp Electromagn Compat 1:134–137
9. Archambeault B, Pratapneni S, Zhang L, Wittwer DC, Chen J
(2001) A proposed set of specific standard EMC problems to help
engineers evaluate EMC modeling tools. IEEE Int Symp Electro-
magn Compat 2:1335–1340
10. Lu J, Xiao D (2007) Comparative analysis of Intel Pentium IV and
IEEE/EMC TC-9/ACEM CPU heat sinks. IEEE International
Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility 1–6
11. Lu J, Dawson F (2006) EMC computer modeling techniques for
CPU heat sink simulation. IEEE Trans Magn 42(10):3171–3173
12. Sochoux P, Yu J, Bhobe A, Centola F (2008) Heat sink design
flow for EMC. Design Con, IEC publications 1–27
13. Visser, JA, de Kock DJ, Conradie FD. Minimisation of heatsink
mass using mathematical optimization. IEEE Semiconductor
Thermal Measurement and Management Symposium 252–259s
14. Culham JR, Muzychka YS (2000) Optimization of plate fin
heatsinks using entropy generation minimization. In Proc. IEEE
Intersociety Conf. Thermal Phenomena
749
15. Shah A, Sammakia B, Srihari H (2002) A numerical study of the
thermal performance of an impingement heatsink fin shape
optimization. ITHERM 298–306
16. Khan WA, Yovanovich MM, Culham JR (2006) Optimization of
microchannel heatsinks using entropy generation minimization
method. IEEE International Conference on Semiconductor Thermal
Measurement and Management Symposium 78–86
17. Bar-Cohen A, Rohsenow WM (1984) Thermally optimum spacing
of vertical, natural convection cooled, parallel plates. J Heat
Transfer 106:116–123
18. Bar-Cohen A (1992) State-of-the-art and trends in the thermal
packaging of electronic equipment. J Electron Package 114:257–
270
19. Kraus AD, Bar-Cohen A (1995) Design and analysis of heatsinks.
Wiley, New York
20. Chen C-T, Wu C-K, Hwang C (2008) Optimal design and control of
CPU heat sink processes, components and packaging technologies.
IEEE Transactions 31(1):184–195
21. Lin CL (2004) Use of the Taguchi method and Grey relational
analysis to optimize turning operations with multiple performance
characteristics. Mater Manuf Process 19(2):209–220
22. Chiang K-T, Chang F-P, Tsai T-C (2006) Optimum design
parameters of pin-fin heat sink using the grey-fuzzy logic based
on the orthogonal arrays. Int Commun Heat Mass Transf 33:744–
752
23. Chou C-C, Liu N-M, Horng J-T, Chiang K-T (2009) Designing
parameter optimization of a parallel-plain fin heat sink using the
grey-based fuzzy algorithm with the orthogonal arrays. Int J
Therm Sci 48:2271–2279
24. Arularasan R, Velraj R (2008) Modeling and simulation of a
parallel plate heat sink using computational fluid dynamics. Int J
Adv Manuf Tech. doi:10.1007/s00170-008-1867-9
25. HFSS V12.0, Ansoft corporation http://www.ansoft.com/products/
hf/hfss/
26. Flotherm - Fluent software tutorial available at www.fluent.com
27. Wakefield thermal compound datasheet available at http://www.
wakefield.com/pdf/accessories.pdf
28. Anabond adhesive data sheet available at http://www.anabond.
com/anabondImages/anabond.pdf
29. Douglas C. Montgomery, Design and analysis of experiments,
Fifth edition. Wiley: New York. ISBN 9971-51-329-3
30. Minitab 15 software tutorial available at: http://www.minitab.com
31. Wang Z, Zhu L, Wu JH (1996) Grey relational analysis of
correlation of errors in measurement. J Grey Syst 8(1):73–78