Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Thermal Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apthermeng

Effect of shape and arrangement of micro-structures in a microchannel heat

sink on the thermo-hydraulic performance
Rajalingam A , Shubhankar Chakraborty *
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and Manufacturing Kancheepuram, Chennai 600127, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In the present article, micro-pillars and micro-blind holes has been introduced inside the microchannel heat sink
Microchannel heat sink (MCHS) to enhance the heat transfer coefficient and reduce the interface temperature as well as pumping power.
Heat transfer enhancement Optimization of these micro-structures (shape and arrangements) has been performed by three computational
Micro-pillar
analyses in Ansys 19.3. A microchannel of dimension 0.4 mm × 0.4 mm × 50 mm has been considered in this
Micro-blind holes
study with water as a working fluid. The three analyses are as follows- (i) selection of blind hole, (ii) selection of
optimized position using selected blind hole from the first analysis, and (iii) selection of optimized pillar cross
section using selected arrangement. The heat transfer coefficient, pressure drop, interface temperature, tem­
perature gradient, and overall thermal performance of all the nineteen cases has been compared with same
parameters of a plain channel for a range of Reynolds number 500 to 1000. The overall performance of the MCHS
with circular blind hole has been found to be 5% higher than the plain channel the best among the selected cross
sections. The optimized positions of pillars and blind holes are suggested from the second analyses. The heat
transfer coefficient of the MCHS with suggested arrangement has been estimated 1.61 to 1.7 times of the same of
a plain microchannel for the same range of Reynolds number. Whereas, the thermo-hydraulic performance of the
same is increased by 12.4% to 16.5%. From the third analysis, the best thermo-hydraulic performance (14.8% to
19.4% higher than the plain channel) has been identified for the MCHS with elliptical pillars. A detail thermo-
hydraulic analysis has been performed to support these facts.

In 1981, Tuckerman and Pease established the concept of single layer

1. Introduction
The development in electronic devices is rapidly moving to achieve
high speed, high performances and miniaturization. This development
causes higher heat generation. In order to avoid the failure of these
devices, the generated heat needed to be dissipated efficiently and the
temperature should also be maintained below the critical limit. The heat
dissipation from miniaturized devices became a vital goal for re­
searchers in the twenty first century. Previously, the heat removal issue
was sorted out by the naturally circulated air cooling method. Nowa­
days, a miniaturized electronics device generates more amount of heat
which cannot dissipated by air cooling method. There was a need for
introducing some special devices with high heat removal capacity. The
microchannel heat sink (MCHS) with liquid as coolant proved to be an
efficient method to remove the heat from miniaturized electronic de­
vices due to its high effectual heat dissipating ability, compact size, low
weight, etc. Therefore, the optimization of MCHS became an important
topic of research to meet high heat dissipation rate. [1–4].
MCHS. The heat transfer rate and the hydraulic diameter of the flow
passage are inversely proportional to each other. This was the reason to
introduce MCHS as a heat dissipation device. Generally, the smaller
hydraulic diameters in MCHS are responsible for the laminar flow in the
MCHS [5,6]. However, the MCHS also experiences high pressure drop
and thermal stress. The high pressure drop occurs due to the small hy­
draulic diameter. The uneven heat transfer of the micro channel leads to
the temperature gradient from upstream to downstream. The tempera­
ture gradient is mainly responsible for the thermal stress. Some major
attempts were required to overcome those short comings [7,8].
A study of MCHS with parallel longitudinal and transverse channels
was carried out by Xu et al. [9] in 2005. The transverse microchannels
were used to enhance the heat transfer rate by the redevelopment of
thermal boundary layer and it also helped to decrease the pressure drop.
Xu et al. [10] investigated the effect of separated zones on heat transfer
and pressure drop of MCHS. The length of the microchannels was
reduced by the separated zone to redevelop the thermal boundary layer
and enhanced the heat transfer performance. The sudden expansion,

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mdm19d005@iiitdm.ac.in (R. A), shubhankar@iiitdm.ac.in (S. Chakraborty).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.116755
Received 1 October 2020; Received in revised form 4 January 2021; Accepted 14 February 2021
Available online 4 March 2021
1359-4311/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
R. A and S. Chakraborty
Nomenclature
Abbreviation
MCHS microchannel heat sink
OTP overall thermal performance
Symbols
δP Normalized pressure drop
δT Normalized Temperature difference
h Normalized heat transfer coefficient
T Normalized Temperature
δT Temperature difference, (K)
Cp specific heat, (J/kg K)
T Temperature, (K)
δP Pressure drop, (Pa)
A Flow area (m2)
k thermal conductivity, (W/m K)
Lx width of heat sink, (m)
Ly hight of heat sink, (m)
Lz length of heat sink, (m)
Nu Nusselt number
P Pressure, (Pa)
contraction and pressure recovery effect affected the pressure drop of
microchannel. More work on thermohydraulic performance of plain
MCHS also can be found in the literatures [11–13]. The effect of wavy
wall in MCHS was studied by different researchers [14–16]. The wavy
channel performed better than straight plain channel by increasing heat
transfer rate and reducing pumping power. These studies also optimized
the amplitude of the wave. Chai et al. [17] studied the heat transfer
performance of MCHS with sudden enlargement in the channel cross
section numerically as well as experimentally. The sudden expansion in
the cross section increased the Nusselt number and decreased the
pumping power. Kuppusamy et al. [18] investigated the performance of
MCHS with various cross sectional groove. The investigation showed
that the groove with triangular cross section can dissipate more heat
than groove with rectangular cross section in MCHS. Alfaryjat et al. [19]
also studied the various cross section of channel geometry such as cir­
cular, rhombus and hexagonal. The study suggested that the hexagonal
cross section generated higher heat transfer coefficient as well as higher
pressure drop than a circular cross section. Vinoth and Kumar [20]
conducted an experimental analysis of thermo-hydraulic performance
for various cross sections of microchannels (square, semi-circle and
trapezoidal) and found that the heat transfer rate in trapezoidal cross
sectional channel was more than that of other cross sectional channels.
The hydro-thermal performance of a double layer sinusoidal MCHS was
investigated by Mashayekhi et al. [21]. The heat dissipation of the si­
nusoidal shaped channel was higher due to efficient mixing of fluid
stream. Duangthongsuk and Wongwises [22] showed that a zig-zag flow
path can increase the heat transfer performance of MCHS. Dehghan et al.
[23] achieved enhancement in heat transfer rate when the cross
sectional area of microchannel reduces gradually towards downstream.
The convergence of microchannel accelerated the fluid flow near the
downstream. This increased fluid velocity was responsible for higher
heat transfer rate. The effect of channel aspect ratio and hydraulic
diameter has also been studied by some researchers [24–26]. The efforts
were also made to enhance the heat transfer performance by using
paraffin wax PCM material [27] and nanofluid [28].
Tao et al. [29] suggested three mechanisms to enhance the rate of
heat transfer in MCHS with single phase liquid - by reducing the thermal
boundary layer, disrupting the flow and raising the velocity gradient
near to the wall. These three mechanism can be achieved by introducing
extended surfaces in the flow passage to enhance the heat transfer rate
2
Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755
Re Reynolds Number
u velocity component in x direction, (m/s)
U velocity, (m/s)
V velocity vector
v velocity component in y direction, (m/s)
w velocity component z direction, (m/s)
z distance of heat sink along the direction of fluid flow, (m)
Greek Symbols
μ dynamic viscosity (Pa. s)
ρ density, (kg/m3))
Subscript
int, avg average interface temperature
s solid
0 plain channel
f fluid
in inlet
max maximum
min minimum
out outlet
and reduce the thermal stress. Liu et al. [30] and Khoshvaght-Aliabadi
et al. [31] experimentally evaluated the performances of heat transfer
and flow resistances of MCHS with various cross sectional pin fins- cir­
cular, elliptical and diamond. The better performance was observed for
elliptical cross sectional pin fin. For low Reynolds number flow, the flow
resistance is only due to the wall effect. Whereas for higher Re, the
formation of vortex also offered resistance to the flow. The heat transfer
enhancement was observed mainly due to two mechanisms- flow
disturbance and fluid flow transition from laminar to turbulent. Wang
et al. [32] experimentally investigated the effect of micro-rips and
grooves on walls of MCHS and reported the enhancement of thermal
performance up to 1.55 times of plain channel. Al-Neama et al. [33]
experimentally analyzed the effect of chevron fin on serpentine mini-
channel. The chevron fin reduced the total resistance and pressure
drop across the channel. These fins also improved the heat transfer rate
by developing the secondary flow to disturb velocity and thermal
boundary layer. Esmaili et al. [34] experimentally investigated the effect
of inclined rips on walls of MCHS and found that both the Nusselt
number and pressure drop were affected in the presence of rips. The
Nusselt number increased up to 3.5 times than that of plain channel. The
flow resistance reduced by 80% when the rips were placed at 45◦ . There
are several research works to investigate the performance of MCHS with
cavities and rips [35–37].
The performance analysis of MCHS with pin fin was performed
theoretically by various researchers [38,39]. The height of pin fins were
uniformly varied along the fluid flow direction. Mohammadian and
Zhang [38] carried out a unsteady state analysis of heat sink tempera­
ture distribution for various process parameters (velocity, inlet tem­
perature and fin arrangement). The standard deviation of sink
temperature reduced for high inlet temperature of coolant and gradually
increasing fin height towards downstream. However, the high inlet
temperature also increased the maximum temperature. The higher inlet
velocity of coolant reduced the maximum temperature and increased
standard deviation of temperature distribution of the heat sink. Qidwai
and Hasan [39] reported that the gradual decrease in fin height along
the flow direction can produce a better heat transfer performance due to
higher temperature difference near the upstream of mirochannel. Yadav
et al. [40] varied the pin fin arrangements in the MCHS and found that
the fins located near upstream can dissipate heat effectively compared to
the fins located near downstream. At lower Re, the thermal performance
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

of MCHS with pin fins populated near the upstream was better than that Table 1
of MCHS with the pin fins distributed uniformly along the length. They Existing channel dimensions from literature.
also reported that an enhancement of thermal performance up to 160 % Authors Name Channel Fluid Model Re/δP
can be achieved by optimizing the parameters like height, diameter and dimensions (w,
pitch of the fins. Adewumi et al. [41] optimized the number of rows and H and L) in mm
axial distance of pin fins with various cross sections. The optimized Qidwai and Hasan 0.231, 0.713 Water Laminar 150–300
performance was obtained with four rows of fins of hexagonal and [39], Qu and and 44.764
square cross sections. Whereas, the optimized number of rows were six Mudawar [50]
and Yadav et al.
for circular cross section. Reddy et al. [42] invested the performance of [40]
MCHS with micro pins with various cross sections (symmetric convex, Jia et al. [43] 0.2, 0.2 and 10 Water Laminar 147–637
symmetric aerofoil and circle) arranged in different array. Jia et al. [43] Adewumi et al. 0.075, 0.832 Water Laminar 10–60 kPa
carried out an analysis to optimize the overall thermal performance of [41] and 3
[47] 0.1, 0.2 and 10 Water Laminar 100–1200
MCHS with cone shaped pin fins with various distribution along the
Kuppusamy et al. 0.1, 0.2 and 10 Water, Laminar 266.12,
length of the channel. The optimized performance was achieved when [18] ethylene 532.24 and
the pin fins were distributed uniformly from upstream to downstream. glycol and 798.36
They also conducted the study to investigate the effect of fin height, engine oil
diameter and spacing. The increase in fin height and diameter caused Ho et al. [13] 0.283, 0.8 and Water and Laminar 226–1676
50 Al2 O3
the enhancement of thermal performance due to the increase in area for nanofluids
heat transfer and reduction in flow passage. However, a drop in thermal
Mashayekhi et al. 0.1, 0.1 and 20 Al2 O3 –Cu/ Laminar 50–1200
performance was found with the increase in gap between the fins. [21] water
Ahmed et al. [44] performed a theoretical analysis and found that pin nanofluid
number ratio and aspect ratio of elliptical pin fin affected the heat Dehghan et al. 0.2, 1 and 1.2 Water and Laminar 1500 Pa &
transfer and thermo-hydraulic performance of a MCHS significantly. [23] Al2 O3 2000 Pa
nanofluids
Saravanan and Umesh [45] reported that a vortex formed by a square
Present study 0.4, 0.4 and 50 Water Laminar 500–1000
pin fin helped to increase rate of heat dissipation in their theoretical
study. The theoretical investigation of Heydari et al. [46] found that
triangular rips can only enhance the heat transfer at high Reynolds 2. Theoretical modeling
number as because of its ability to mix the fluid flow and disturb the
boundary layer. Alfellag et al. [47] performed a theoretical analysis to For the present theoretical study, a single microchannel has been
optimize the geometry of slots, aspect ratio and position of the of pins considered in a copper substrate heat sink. The dimensions of the
inside the trapezoidal cavity. They also used the same mechanism of mocrochannel has been selected after comparing existing literature
enhancing heat transfer by disturbing the boundary layer. The study (Table 1). The microchannel with square cross Section (400 × 400 μm)
reported a higher heat transfer rate for the aspect ratio of 1.25 and the and a length of 5 cm is located in a copper heat sink. In the heat sink,
pins are placed near the inlet of the cavity. Prajapati [48] observed an such microchannels are placed in parallel (Fig. 1(a)). Only a single
increase in pressure drop due to the increase in fin height. For a fin channel has been considered for the present computational analysis
having height 80% of channel height, the higher heat transfer coefficient (Fig. 1(b)). The cross sectional view of the microchannel and the shape
was obtained. Rajalingam and Chakraborty [49] suggested a novel of pillars and blind holes are shown in Fig. 1(c). Fig. 2 shows the sample
arrangement of pillars and blind holes. In order to get higher heat computation domain, in which the blue indicates the solid domain and
transfer rate, the pillars should to be distributed throughout the channel the red indicates the fluid domain. The bottom wall of solid domain
and near the upstream the density of the pillar should be more than the experiences the constant heat flux as denoted. The symmetry boundary
downstream. condition has been taken for both side surfaces. The adiabatic insulated
From the above literatures, it can be derived that the heat dissipation wall is used to close the upper surface of solid and fluid domains. Water
from miniaturized electronic devices with a help of MCHS still has a has been selected as the working fluid (properties can be seen from
scope for improvement. Efforts have been made to enhance the heat Table 2).
transfer rate by the introduction of extended surfaces in the channels. The following assumptions have made for the theoretical study
However, such extended surfaces can lead to higher pumping power.
Therefore, the optimization of MCHS with extended surface is warranted 1. The flow is three dimensional, laminar, steady, Newtonian, single
to enhance heat transfer without sacrificing pumping power. phase and incompressible.
In this present article, efforts have been made to improve the heat 2. At the interface of solid–fluid, there is no penetration and no slip.
transfer performance of MCHS by introducing blind holes and pillars of 3. Both, the viscous dissipation and radiation heat transfer have been
different cross section inside the channel. The blind hole increases the neglected.
heat transfer rate as well as reduces the pumping power. The trapped 4. Velocity is uniform at the inlet.
fluid inside the blind hole can helps to reduce the pressure drop. The 5. The thermo-physical properties of both solid and fluid are considered
effect of different cross section of pillar and blind holes on the thermo- as constant.
hydraulic performance of the microchannel has thoroughly been stud­ 6. The symmetry condition is considered on the side surfaces of solid
ied by numerical simulation using Ansys 19.3. First, the cross section of domain.
the blind hole is optimized. Next, the arrangement of the blind hole and 7. The upper surfaces of fluid and solid domains are considered as
pillar is optimized using the selected cross section of hole from the first adiabatic.
study. Finally, the pillar shape was optimized for the selected arrange­
ment of pillars and blind holes from the first two analyses. Different The following governing equations was derived for above
process parameters such as convective heat transfer coefficient, pressure assumptions.
drop, sink temperature and overall thermal performance are estimated Continuity Equation,
for the optimization study. The best possible configuration has been
identified based on the comparison analysis. ∇.V = 0 (1)

Momentum Equation,

3
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

Fig. 1. Schematic of the MCHS.

Table 2
Properties of working fluid.
Density (kg/m3) 998.2

Specific heat capacity (J/kg K) 4182

Thermal conductivity (W/m K) 0.6
Viscosity (kg/m s) 0.001003

DV
ρf = − ∇P + μf ∇2 V (2)
Dt

Energy Equation,
DT
ρf Cp,f = kf ∇2 Tf for fluid (3)
Dt

ks ∇2 Ts = 0 for solid (4)

Fig. 2. The considered sample computational domain and the boundary con­
ditions Rajalingam and Chakraborty [49].
2.1. Boundary conditions
ANSYS 19.3 software package has been used to solve the above
mentioned governing equations with the following boundary condi­
tions.

4
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

Table 3
Estimated parameters for different element size.
Number of elements Nu Difference % Interface Temperature Difference % Tmax − Tmin Difference %

103180 6.414 0.83 355.540 0.14 94.925 1.33

196000 6.468 0.46 356.050 0.32 96.207 1.81
405000 6.498 0.08 357.188 0.23 97.983 1.00
660198 6.492 – 358.025 98.981 –

60 30
Numerical [39]
25 Numerical (Re 890) [50]
50 Prsent work
Prsent work (Re 890)
Experimental [50]
40 20

15
30
10
20
5
10
0
500 600 700 800 900 1000 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

(a) Pressure drop (b) Local Nusselt Number

140
Experimental (Re 890) [50]
120 Numerical (Re 890) [50]
Prsent work (Re 890)
Experimental (Re 226) [50]
100
Numerical (Re 226) [50]
Prsent work (Re 226)
80

60

40

20
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04

(c) Temperature of sink

Fig. 3. Comparison between the parameter predicted by present scheme and the existing experimental [50] and numerical work [39] for plane channel.

1. At inlet(z = 0), the uniform velocity (u = Uf ,in and v = w = 0) and help to identify the optimized grid without compromising the physics of
the constant temperature (T = Tf,in = 288 K) boundary conditions the problem. In the present study, the fine hex dominant mesh is used.
have been considered. The four different numbers of elements have been taken for grid inde­
2. At Outlet (z = Lz = 5; cm), the pressure outlet (Pf,out = Patm ) pendence study. Three parameters are calculated for the four various
boundary condition is considered with an atmospheric pressure. numbers of elements to know the influence of number of elements in the
( )
results. The parameters are Nusselt number, interface temperature and
3. No penetration, no slip (u = v = w = 0) and coupled ( − ks ∂∂Tn =
s
temperature difference. The obtained values are shown in Table 3. The
( )
table helps to identify the optimized grid with 405000 numbers of ele­
− kf ∂∂Tn , n- coordinate normal to the wall) wall boundary condi­ ments. For the further increase in numbers of elements a negligible
f
tions have been considered at the solid–fluid interface. deviation in the values of calculated parameters is observed. Therefore,
4. The both side surfaces (x = 0 and x = Lx ) has been taken as sym­ agreed configuration with 405000 elements is selected for further
analysis for optimum computational time without sacrificing physics of
metry, ∂∂x = 0
the problem.
5. The top surfaces (y = Ly ) of both fluid and solid domains are
( ) ( )
considered as an adiabatic ( − ks ∂∂Ty = − kf ∂∂Ty = 0). No slip 2.3. Validation
s f
(u = v = w = 0) and no penetration conditions have been applied at
No experimental and numerical study with the channel configuration
the top surface of fluid.
adopted in the present study is available to the best of the knowledge of
6. Uniform heat flux (100 W/cm2) is applied at the bottom surface of
the authors. Therefore, it has been decided to validate the methodology
the sink (y = 0).
adopted in the present study by comparing with existing experimental
and numerical work with plain microchannel. Fig. 3 shows the com­
2.2. Selection of grid element size parison of pressure drop, Nusselt number and temperature of the sink of
the plain channel estimated by current methodology with existing
For a numerical study, the computational time needs to be optimized experimental [50] and numerical study [39]. Both the existing work was
by the selection of an appropriate grid. The grid independence study can performed on a microchannel of 0.231 mm × 0.713 mm × 44.764 mm.

5
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

Shape of pillars

No Pillars 200 200 200 200

200 275 350 350 350

Flow direction

Elliptical
Elliptical Aerofoil (in reverse
Circular (aspect ratio: Aerofoil
(aspect ratio: 1.75) direction)
1.375)
Case 11 to
Case 1 to case 15 Case 17 and Case
Circular Case 16 Case 18 Case 19
200 case 3 and case 20
20

275 Oval (across

Shape of holes

Case 4 to
the flow - - - -
case 6 -
125 direction)

125 Oval (along

Case 7 to
the flow - - - - -
275 case 9
direction)

No blind holes Case 10 - - - - -

Fig. 4. Different cross sections of blind holes and pillars (All dimensions are in μm).

**** S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6
Case 1 C C C C C C
Case 4 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1
Case 7 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2
*In case 1, case 4 and case 7, 6 stations have been selected with the equal distance 7142.857 μm.
**** S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12
Case 2 C C C C C C C C C C C C
Case 5 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1
Case 8 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2
*In case 2, case 5 and case 8, 12 stations have been selected with the equal distance 3846.154 μm.
**** S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S24
Case 3 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
Case 6 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1 O1
Case 9 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2 O2
Case 10 Plain Channel
Case 11 C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP
Case 12 CP CP CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C CP C C CP C C CP C C CP
Case13 CP CP CP CP CP CP C C CP C C CP C C CP C C CP C C CP C C CP
Case 14 CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP C C C C CP C C C C CP C C C C CP
Case 15 CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP CP C C C C C C C C C C C C
Case 16 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 E1 C C E1 C C E1 C C E1 C C E1 C C E1 C C E1
Case 17 E2 E2 E2 E2 E2 E2 C C E2 C C E2 C C E2 C C E2 C C E2 C C E2
Case 18 A A A A A A C C A C C A C C A C C A C C A C C A
Case 19 AR AR AR AR AR AR C C AR C C AR C C AR C C AR C C AR C C AR
Case 20 CP CP CP CP E2 E2 C C E2 C C E2 C C E2 C C E2 C C E2 C C E2
*In case 3, case 5, case 9 and from case 11 to case 20, , 24 stations have been selected with the equal distance 2000 μm.
S – Station C – Circular blind hole E1 – Elliptical pillar with an aspect ratio 1.375
O1 – Oval blind hole across the direction of fluid flow CP – Circular pillar E2 – Elliptical pillar with an aspect ratio 1.75
O2 – Oval blind hole along the direction of fluid flow A – Aerofoil pillar AR – Aerofoil pillar in reverse direction

Fig. 5. Description of all the cases.

From the Fig. 3(a), it can be seen that the pressure drop predicted with
the present methodology matches with the numerical work. However, a
significant difference between experimental and numerical work is
visible. In the experimental study, the thermo-physical properties of
fluid are depended the temperature. Therefore, the pressure drop shows
the non-linearity with the Re [40]. This is responsible for the mismatch
of the pressure drop between present study and the experimental data of
Qu and Mudawar [50].The Nusselt number calculated by the present
scheme perfectly matches with the Nusselt number numerically
predicted by Qu and Mudawar [50] (Fig. 3(b)). The temperature along
the channel length and 3.175 mm from the base of the channel is
compared in Fig. 3(c). From this figure, it can be ascertain that the
present scheme predicts the temperature field same as experimental and
numerical work.
3. Results
The present study concentrates on the enhancement of the rate of

6
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

1.05 1.001 1

1
1.04

0.999 0.995
1.03
0.998
1.02 0.99
0.997

1.01
0.996
0.985
1 0.995
500 600 700 800 900 1000 500 600 700 800 900 1000 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Re Re Re

(a) (b) (c)

1 1.06

0.98 1.05

0.96 1.04

0.94 1.03

0.92 1.02

0.9 1.01

0.88 1
500 600 700 800 900 1000 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Re Re

(d) (e)

Fig. 6. Variation of different normalized parameters ((a) Heat transfer coefficient normalized, (b) Pressure drop, (c) Average interface temperature, (d) Temperature
difference, (e) Overall thermal performance) as a function of Re for Case 1 to 9.

heat transfer with an optimal pumping power. The objectives are ach­
ieved by optimizing the cross sections of pillars and blind holes and their
appropriate arrangement. The investigation has been performed
through the following three analyses – (i) effect of various cross section
of blind holes (ii) effect of different positions of pillars and blind holes
(cross section with the best performance from the first analysis), and (iii)
effect of various cross section of pillars with an optimized arrangement
obtained from the second analysis. There are twenty different cases
considered for the these three analyses. The dimensions of all the cross
sections are shown in Fig. 4. The dimensions have been selected in such a
way that the flow area at each stations with pillar (minimum flow area)
remain constant. The Fig. 5 is used to describe the arrangements of the
pillars and the blind holes for all the twenty cases. The height of the
pillars and the depth of the blind holes have been taken as 90% and 10%
of the channel height respectively.
The above mentioned investigations are discussed in detail with the
help of various thermo-hydraulic performance parameters such as heat
transfer coefficient, pressure drop, over all thermal performances,
temperature distribution, temperature difference, etc. in the following
sections. All these parameters are normalized by same of the plain
channel (case 10).
3.1. Optimization of blind hole cross section
In this section, nine different cases (case 1 to case 9) have been
studied for three different cross sections of blind holes and three
different arrangements. The results of these nine cases has been
compared with a general case (case 10) where the channel considered is
a plain one (without any pillar and blind holes). To understand the
performance of the micro channel the following parameters have been
estimated and discussed.
3.1.1. Variation of heat transfer co-efficient
The Fig. 6(a) depicts the variations of normalized heat transfer co­
efficient (normalized by the heat transfer coefficient of case 10 as given
by Eq. 5) for case 1 to case 9 as a function of Re.
h
h= (5)
h0
The normalized heat transfer coefficient values of all the nine cases
are more than that of 1. It suggests that blind holes are capable of
enhancing heat transfer. Increase in heat transfer coefficient have also
been observed with increase in number of blind holes. For the case 3
(equally distributed 24 circular blind hole), maximum value of heat
transfer coefficient has been estimated for all the Re. When the circular
blind holes in case 3 is replaced by oval (Major axis across the direction
of fluid flow, case 6) blind holes, the heat transfer coefficient of the
microchannel deteriorates as compared to case 3. However, the heat
transfer coefficient of case 6 is better than remaining seven cases. The
heat transfer coefficient of case 2 (12 circular blind holes) is observed to
be better than case 5 (12 oval blind holes the major across the flow) and
case 8 (12 oval blind holes the major axis along the flow). The same
trend can also be observed for the micro channel heat sink with six blind
holes (case 1, case 4 and case 7) and 24 bind holes(case 3, case 6 and
case 9) of three different cross section. It can also be seen that the per­
formance of oval blind holes with axis with across the direction of flow
(case 5 and case 6) is better compared to oval blind holes with the major
axis along the direction of flow (case 8 and case 9) for all Re. By looking
at the heat transfer coefficient of all the 9 cases it can be concluded that
the performances of the circular blind holes is better than the two types
of oval blind holes.
3.1.2. Variation of pressure Drop
The variation of normalized pressure drop of all these nine cases can
be found in Fig. 6(b).
δP
δp = (6)
δp0
Most of the cases, there is a minute reduction of pressure drop
(calculated using Eq. 6) due to the presence of the blind hole. The higher

7
R. A and S. Chakraborty
Fig. 7. Variation of velocity across the blind holes.
pressure drop occurs for the case 2 (12 circular blind holes) at all Re
except 500 which is marginally higher than the plain channel. The
pressure drop of microchannel with 6 circular blind holes (case 1) is
higher than the microchannel with 24 circular blind hole (case 3) and
lower than case 2. The normalized pressure drop for microchannel with
oval blind holes (O1) is lower than 1. This suggests that the oval blind
hole with major axis across the flow direction can contribute to reduce
the pressure drop. From the figure, it can also be found that the
normalized pressure drop decreases with increase in Re for the micro­
channal with oval blind hole O2 (number of blind holes 12 and above).
For case 8 and 9, the change in pressure drop with increase in Re is lower
than that of plain channel (case 10). From the figure, it can be concluded
that case 3 performs better in terms of optimizing pumping pressure up
to Re 900, Whereas, case 8 and case 9 performs better for Re > 900 and
Re > 1000 respectively.
3.1.3. Variation of temperature
The variations of normalized interface temperature has been esti­
mated using Eq. 7 and presented in Fig. 6(c).
Tint
T int = (7)
Tint,0
The interface temperature is one of the important criteria needs to be
discussed as it should be maintained below a critical limit. The
normalized interface temperature of all the cases (case 1 to case 9) are
lower than 1. It suggests that the blind holes can reduce the interface
temperature of heat sink. The normalized interface temperature of case
3 (24 circular blind holes) is lower than all the other cases. It can also be
noted that the interface temperature depends srongly on number of
blind holes. All the microchannel with 24 blind holes (case 3, 6 and 9)
performs better than other six cases (6 and 12 blind holes) to achieve
lower interface temperature than plain channel. The shape of the blind
hole also affects the interface temperature. By looking at all the cases, it
can also be ascertained that at lower number of blind holes micro­
channel with oval blind holes (O1) performs better than the micro­
channel with circular and oval (O2) blind holes. However, as the number
of blind hole increases, the performance of circular blind holes improved
(case 2 and case 3). For all these cases, the microchannel with O1
maintaines lower temperature than the microchannel with O2.
The temperature gradient of the heat sink is also an important
parameter to understand the performance of the heat sink. If the
8
Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755
magnitude of the difference between the maximum and minimum
temperature of the heat sink (δT) is high, the thermal stress can be
generated in the heat sink. The thermal stress may cause the failure of
heat sink. Therefore, one of the important function of an efficient heat
sink is to maintain uniform temperature distribution across the sink or
lower δT. Usually, the heat transfer of upstream region is higher than the
downstream region because of the temperature difference between the
sink and the working fluid. Due to this, the temperature gradient is
created. To analyze the effect of blind holes on the temperature gradient
of the heat sink, the difference between maximum and minimum tem­
perature of the heat sink is normalized by the same of the plain channel
(Eq. 8) and and represented in Fig. 6(d).
δT
δT = (8)
δT0
Like the previous case, as the number of blind holes increases from 6
to 24, the value of δT is reduced significantly for different Re. The
microchannel with 24 circular blind holes (case 3) performs better than
all other cases for Re > 800. However, the performance of the micro­
channel with 24 oval (O1) blind holes is best for Re < 800. The micro­
channel with 6 blind holes (case 1, 4 and 7) could not lower the δT
significantly. Like interface temperature, microchannel with oval (O1)
blind holes (case 4) performs better to maintain lower temperature
difference as compared to other blind holes (C,O2) for 6 number of blind
holes. The analysis helps to understand that due to the presence of blind
holes the heat transfer near the downstream improves to lower the δT.
3.1.4. Variation of OTP
The combined thermo-hydraulic performance can be identified with
the help of the overall thermal performance (OTP). The OTP depends on
the heat transfer coefficient and pressure drop. The heat transfer per­
formance of the MCHS may be high as well as it can also induce high
pressure drop across it. This may affect the thermo-hydraulic perfor­
mance of heat sink. Therefore, the OTP is very important criteria to
assess the performance microchannel heat sink. The following formula is
used to calculate the OTP[39].
Nu
(9)
Nu0
OTP = ( )(1/3)
δP
δP0
R. A and S. Chakraborty
Fig. 8. Variation of Nusselt number, velocity profile and pressure across the blind hole.
where Nu, δP are the Nusselt number and pressure drop for all the cases
(except case 10), and Nu0 , δP0 are the Nusselt number and pressure drop
for plain channel (case 10).
The Fig. 6(e) depicts the variation of OTP from case 1 to case 9 for
different Re. The OTP of case 3 varies from 1.03 to 1.05, it suggests that
the thermo-hydraulic performance of a microchannel with 24 circular
blind holes is 3 to 5 percent better than that of a plain channel. Both the
heat transfer and pressure drop performance of case 3 is better than all
other cases (Figs. 6(a) and (b)). The thermo-hydraulic performance of
case 3 is followed by the same of case 6. The OTP of heat sink with 6
blind holes (case 1, 4 and 7) is lower than other cases. The performance
of 12 blind holes (all the cross sections) is in between the performance of
MCHS with 6 blind holes and 24 blind holes. However, it is interesting to
note that the OTP of case 9 (MCHS with 24 O2) is lower than case 2
(MCHS with 12 circular blind holes) for Re < 900.
3.1.5. Thermo-hydraulic effect of a single blind hole
The blind holes help to increase the rate of heat transfer and decrease
the pressure drop in MCHS [49]. The heat transfer enhancement has
been obtained due to induced disturbance (by the blind hole) of fluid
flow. Three different horizontal lines (line on a plane passing through
the axis of the channel) at three different elevation are selected to
visualize the effect of blind holes in the fluid flow. The three lines are
marked as position 1, position 2 and position 3. The elevations of these
lines from the base of the channel are 100 μm, 200 μm and 300 μm
respectively. The Fig. 7 depicts the variation of velocity when the fluid
passes over the blind holes (station twelve of case 3, case 6 and case 9).
The fluctuation of velocities can be seen across the blind holes. The
9
Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755
pattern and the magnitude of fluctuation is unique for all the cross
sections of blind holes. Therefore, the thermal and hydrodynamic per­
formance is expected to vary for different cross sections. It is important
to note that the effect of blind holes can be felt through the height of the
channel over the blind hole. The magnitude of velocity for the position 1
and position 3 is lower as they are near to bottom and top wall of the
channel respectively. The same trend of the fluctuations of the velocity
has been observed for all the Reynolds number considered for the study.
However, we have reported only for minimum (Re 500) and the
maximum (Re 1000) Reynolds number. It is evident that the influence of
the Reynolds number on the pattern of fluctuation is not significant.
The Fig. 8 shows the variation of Nusselt number and pressure across
the blind holes. The pressure reduces along length of the channel.
However, the sudden oscillation in pressure is observed near the blind
holes. The velocity profiles at two different axial location (one at the
center of the blind hole and other 1 mm downstream) can be found in
Fig. 8. The velocity profile at the center of the blind hole can be divided
into three regions. The first region is a thin layer near the bottom surface
of the blind hole. In this region, the velocity is almost zero, suggesting
trapped stagnated water. The second layer is above the stagnation layer
where the velocity gradient is very small. The layer above the second
layer is the third region where the magnitude of the velocity and its
gradient is almost similar to those downstream. Such velocity profile
helps to reduce the flow resistance and in turn reduce the pressure drop.
The variation on local Nusselt number across the blind holes is also
depicted in Fig. 8. A similar tend of the Nu can be ascertained for all
three different cross sections of blind holes. Due to the stagnation layer
and low velocity gradient layer, the Nu at the centre of the blind hole is
smaller. As the fluid enters the region of the blind hole (at A) and leaves
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

1.7 3.6 0.93

3.4
0.92
1.65 3.2

3 0.91

1.6 2.8
0.9
2.6

1.55 2.4 0.89

500 600 700 800 900 1000 500 600 700 800 900 1000 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Re Re Re

(a) (b) (c)

0.9 1.18

0.8 1.16

0.7 1.14

0.6 1.12

0.5 1.1

0.4 1.08
500 600 700 800 900 1000 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Re Re
(d) (e)

Fig. 9. Variation of different normalized parameters ((a) Heat transfer coefficient normalized, (b) Pressure drop, (c) Average interface temperature, (d) Temperature
difference, (e) Overall thermal performance) as a function of Re for Case 11 to 15.

the blind hole (at B), a sudden jump in Nu is observed. It can be inter­
preted from the fact that the boundary layer at these two pints A and B is
disturbed by the presence of the bind hole. The variation of the
magnitude of the Nu is different for different shapes of blind hole.
From the above analysis, it is clear that the blind hole contributes in
increasing the rate of heat transfer without sacrificing the pumping
power. The circular blind hole performed better than oval blind holes
(O1 and O2) in both the heat transfer and OTP which is up to 5% higher
than the plain channel. Therefore, the circular blind hole has been
considered for the rest of the cases.
3.2. Optimization of pillars and blind holes arrangement
In this section, the effects of the various arrangements of the circular
pillar and the circular blind holes are investigated. Twelve circular blind
holes and 12 circular pillars have been arranged in five different way at
24 equally distributed stations along the length of the channel (case 11
to case 15). The distance between two consecutive station have been
selected as 2000 μm. One hole and one pillar are placed alternatively for
case 11. From case 12 to case 15, the density of circular pillars is
gradually increased near the upstream and decreased near the down­
stream. All the 12 pillars are located near upstream for case 15. The
detail arrangements are available in Fig. 5. The heat transfer coefficient,
pressure drop across the channel, interface temperature, etc. of all these
five cases normalized by the same of case 10 and presented in Fig. 9.
3.2.1. Variation of heat transfer co-efficient
The variation of normalized heat transfer coefficient as a function of
Re for case 11 to case 15 is shown in Fig. 9(a). The heat transfer coef­
ficient estimated for the MCHS with the 12 pillars located at upstream
(case 15) is the lowest of all the five cases for the Re > 600. The tem­
perature difference near the downstream of the channel is lower than
that of the upstream and there are no pillars at the downstream to
enhance the heat transfer. These two facts are responsible for the lower
heat transfer rate of case 15. In case 11, the density of pillars are same
throughout the channel, this enhances the heat transfer near down­
stream. However, such density of pillars cannot take the advantage of
high temperature difference near upstream. This is responsible for case
11 to perform better than case 15 but worse than case 12 and 13. In case
12, 13 and 14, there are 3, 6 and 9 pillars respectively placed consec­
utively at upstream. For case 14, the density of pillars near downstream
(lower temperature difference between surface and fluid) is lower than
that of case 12 and 13. This is responsible for lower heat transfer rate
near downstream. For case 12, the density of pillars from upstream to
downstream gradually decreases. This improves the heat transfer rate at
the downstream. However for case 13, the density of pillars after 6
consecutive pillars remain constant throughout the rest of the length of
the channel. The heat transfer performance of case 12 and 13 almost
similar. However due to higher density of pillars near the upstream helps
case 13 to dissipate more heat than case 12.
3.2.2. Variation of pressure Drop
The variation of normalized pressure drop has been depicted in the
Fig. 9(b). From the figure, it can be seen that the pressure drop gradually
decreases from case 11 to 15. The highest and lowest pressure drop is
observed from case 11 and 15 respectively. This fact helps to understand
that the pressure drop depends on the distribution of pillars along the
length of the channel. The minimum value is observed when all the
pillars are located at upstream. As all the pillars located upstream the
flow is interrupted only near upstream. Besides, the holes located near
downstream also help to recover the pressure marginally. As case 11 has
equal distribution of pillars throughout the channel, the flow gets
interrupted with regular interval and pressure cannot be recovered. Case
12 to case 14, the number of pillars near upstream increases and near
downstream decreases gradually. This is the reason the pressure drop
decreases from case 12 to 14.
3.2.3. Variation of temperature
The normalized average interface temperature for all the five cases
has been plotted in Fig. 9(c) as a function of Re. As expected from the

10
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

1.7 3.6 0.91

3.4
0.905
1.65 3.2

3 0.9

1.6 2.8
0.895
2.6

1.55 2.4 0.89

500 600 700 800 900 1000 500 600 700 800 900 1000 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Re Re Re

(a) (b) (c)

0.6 1.2

1.18
0.55

1.16

0.5
1.14

1.12
500 600 700 800 900 1000 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Re Re

(d) (e)

Fig. 10. Variation of different normalized parameters ((a) Heat transfer coefficient normalized, (b) Pressure drop, (c) Average interface temperature, (d) Tem­
perature difference, (e) Overall thermal performance) as a function of Re for Case 13 and 16 to 20.

heat transfer performance, the average interface temperature of case 15
is the highest. The interface temperature not only depends on the heat
transfer rate but it also depends on the arrangements of the pillars. For
equally distributed pillars (case 11) the average interface temperature is
lowest. The average interface temperature of case 14 is higher than case
11 to 13 due to the lack of pillars near downstream. However, the
density of pillars near downstream for case 12 and 13 is higher than case
14. This is the reason the interface temperature of case 12 and 13 is
marginally different from lowest case (case 11). At this juncture, it is
interesting to note that the normalized average interface temperature is
increasing with increase in Re. This is due to the fact that the rate at
which the average interface temperature drop with increase in Re for
case 10 is higher than these five cases. This will increase the ratio with
increase in Re. However, if we plot the actual average interface tem­
perature (without normalization), the value of the interface temperature
will decrease with increase in Re, which satisfies the physics of the
problem.
The similar trend also be found in the case of the difference of
minimum and maximum surface temperature normalized (δT) by that of
case 10 (Fig. 9(d)). The microchannel with homogeneously distributed
pillars (case 11) successfully maintain lower temperature difference,
whereas, the microchannel with no pillars at downstream (case 15)
experiences the maximum temperature difference. The value of δT for
case 12 and 13 is almost similar to case 11 as more number of pillars
placed near downstream for these two cases than case 14 and 15. It is
interesting to note that the value of δT decreases with increase in Re.
This fact indicates that with increase in Re the rate of change of differ­
ence between maximum and minimum temperature is more than that of
the plain channel.
3.2.4. Variation of OTP
The over all thermal performance, calculated using Eq. (9), for these
five cases has been shown in Fig. 9(e). The maximum and minimum
overall thermal performance has been observed for case 13 and case 11
respectively. The case 11 performs better in maintaining lower sink
temperature and lower δT. However, the uniformly distributed pillars
caused higher pressure drop and lower heat transfer rate compared to
case 13. The case 13 maintains lower average interface temperature as
well as lower δT (marginal difference from case 11). However, the novel
of arrangement of the pillars (densely packed at upstream and less
densed near downstream) increases the heat transfer rate for case 13 and
decreases the pressure drop. This is the reason that the OTP of case 13 is
higher than all the four cases. Similarly, case 15 performs satisfactorily
to maintain low pumping pressure. The absence of pillar near down­
stream reduces the heat transfer rate for case 15. The OTP of case 12 also
achieves higher magnitude as compared to case 11, 14 and 15.
From the above analysis, it can be concluded that the arrangement of
case 13 achieves higher heat transfer rate and maintains lower pumping
pressure and average interface temperature, δT. With this arrangement,
the heat transfer coefficient can be improved by 61 to 70% with respect
to the plain channel. Though the pressure drop is 2.64 to 3.46 times of
that of the plain channel, the overall thermal performance is better
(12.4% to 16.5% higher than the plain channel) than all other ar­
rangements. Therefore, such arrangement has been considered for
optimizing the cross section of pillars.
3.3. Optimization of pillar cross section
From the discussion of Sections 3.1 and 3.2, it has been decided to
optimize the cross section of pillar for a microchannel with 12 circular
blind holes and the arrangement as in case 13. In case 16 and 17, pillars
with elliptical cross section (major axis length of 275 μm and 350 μm
respectively) has been considered. In case 18 and 19, aerofoil cross
section has been considered for the pillar. The orientation of the aerofoil
shape for these two cases is exactly opposite. The case 20 is modified
version of case 13 where 4 circular and eight elliptical pillars are used.
The circular pillars are placed at the first four constitutive stations fol­
lowed by elliptical pillars at next 2 consecutive stations. Other 6 circular

11
R. A and S. Chakraborty
31
30
29
Pressure (kPa)
28
27
26
Re 500
25
0.0017 0.00185 0.002 0.00215
Axial distance (m)
Fig. 11. Variations of local pressure across various cross sections of the pillar.
pillars of case 13 is replaced by elliptical pillars. For detail configuration
Fig. 5 may be referred. Like previous 2 sections, the performance pa­
rameters of these six cases have been normalized by case 10.
3.3.1. Variation of heat transfer co-efficient
The Fig. 10(a) depicts the variation in normalized heat transfer co­
efficient for pillars with different cross sections for Re 500 to 1000. The
total heat transfer area for the microchannel with circular, elliptical
(E1), elliptical (E2), aerofoil (A and AR) cross sections are 0.63012 mm2,
0.6354 mm2, 0.64098 mm2 and 0.64038 mm2 respectively. From the
figure, it can be seen that the heat transfer coefficient for case 13
(minimum heat transfer area) and case 16 are higher than all the cases.
There are marginal difference between normalized heat transfer coeffi­
cient between case 13, 16, 17 and 20 for Re < 700. The heat transfer
coefficient for case 17 (highest heat transfer surface area) is always
lower than case 13 and 16 for Re > 700. The deviation increases with
increase in Re. The MCHS with pillars of aerofoil cross sections (case 18
and 19) experiences the lower heat transfer coefficient for the range of
Re 500 to 1000. However, the deviation decreases with increase in Re.
The heat transfer coefficient for case 19 (heat transfer area 1.5 times of
case 13) is minimum for the range of the Re where the tail of the aerofoil
faces the flow. It can be concluded that the heat transfer coefficient not
only depends on the arrangement of the pillars and the total heat
transfer surface area, the cross section of pillars strongly influence the
performance of MCHS.
3.3.2. Variation of pressure Drop
The variation of normalized pressure drop for these six cases has
been shown in Fig. 10(b). The case 13 (circular pillars) and case 19 (tail
of the aerofoil shapped pillar faces the flow) experiences the maximum
and minimum pressure drop respectively for the whole range of Re.
Other cases are coming in between them. The pressure drop of case 16
and case 20 are almost similar. For the case 19 and case 17, there is a
gradual reduction of cross sectional area along the flow direction. The
hydraulic diameter changes from 400 μm to 152 μm over a length of 250
μm and 175 μm respectively. However, the expansion of cross section
(hydraulic diameter 152 μm to 400 μm) is faster for case 19 (100 μm)
than case 17 (175 μm). The rate of contraction of flow area of other cases
is higher than case 19 and case 17. This slow contraction of flow area is
responsible for less pressure drop (case 19) and rapid contraction of the
same is responsible for higher pressure drop (case 13 and 18). That can
be ascertain from Fig. 11. The slope of the pressure curve (Fig. 11) after
the pillar center (flow area expands) is same for all the cross sections.
Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755
90
85
Pressure (kPa)
80
Case 13 (CP)
75 Case 16 (E1)
Case 17 (E2)
70 Case 18 (A)
Re 1000 Case 19 (AR)
65
0.0023 0.0017 0.00185 0.002 0.00215 0.0023
Axial distance (m)
3.3.3. Variation of temperature
The Fig. 10(c) shows the variations of normalized interface tem­
perature. For the case 19, the highest interface temperature is observed
due to the lower heat transfer performance of the aerofoil pillar with tail
facing the flow (Fig. 10(a)). For lower Re, the difference of average
interface temperature is significant. However, the difference is almost
negligible for all the cross sections (except case 19) at higher Re. The
MCHS with elliptical pillars has the maximum surface area for the heat
transfer. This helps in higher heat transfer from surface and lower
average surface temperature. Though the heat transfer coefficient for
microchannel with circular pillar is the highest, the total heat transfer is
affected due to its lower heat transfer surface area. Upto Re 700, the case
17 has the lowest interface temperature and the case 20 is next to it. The
average interface temperature of case 16 is always greater than the case
20 up to Re 800 and is minimum of all the other cases for Re > 800.
The variation of normalized temperature difference (δT) in Fig. 10(d)
suggests that case 18 (microchannel with aerofoil cross sections) suc­
cessfully maintains the maximum sink temperature lower than all other
cases. For the case 16, the δT is highest for the whole range of Re. Higher
value of δT is also observed for case 17 for higher Re. From this, it can be
said that both the elliptical cross section failed to maintain low
maximum temperature. The maximum sink temperature for the channel
with circular pillar (case 13) and aerofoil pillars (case 18) are lower than
all other cases. Interestingly, the shape of the upstream half of the cir­
cular pillar (case 13) and aerofoil pillar (case 18) are same. From the
above analysis, it can be said that the shape of the pillar and total heat
transfer area are combinedly affecting the heat transfer performance of
the heat sink.
3.3.4. Variation of OTP
The Fig. 10(e) depicts the deviation in OTP as a function of Re. The
microchannel heat Sinks with pillars of elliptical cross section delivers
higher OTP value than all other cases. This happens as the elliptical cross
section provides higher heat transfer and lower pressure drop. The OTP
of case 17 is marginally higher than case 16 up to Re 700 and marginally
lower for Re > 700. Though the MCHS with aerofoil pillars (case 18)
develops less pressure drop, the OTP values are lower due to its poor
heat transfer performance. The over all performance of case 20 where
upstream pillars are circular and downstream pillars are elliptical, is
exactly in between case 13 and case 17. It indicates that the replacement
of circular pillars by the elliptical pillars at downstream helps to improve
the overall thermal performance of the heat sink by reducing the pres­
sure drop with circular pillars (case 13). However, due to the presence of
12
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

Fig. 12. Side view of the heat sink and the position of plane 1 and plane 2).
circular pillars at upstream the OTP of case 20 is lower than case 17. The
heat transfer performance of case 19 is the worst and the pressure drop
across the microchannel is the minimum. Due this, the OTP of case 19 is
higher than case 13 and case 18 for higher Re.
3.3.5. Thermo-hyraulic performance
The pillar interrupts the fluid flow which causes the variation in
velocity profile. This change in velocity profile can be one of the
important factors for the thermo-hydraulic performance of heat sink.
Therefore, the velocity profile has to be discussed to understand the
holistic effect of different pillars. To analyze that, two mutually
perpendicular planes (plane 1 and plane 2) have been selected as shown
in Fig. 12. The plane 1 is parallel to xz plane and it is 200 μm above the
bottom surface of the channel. The plane 2 is located at the center of the
channel and parallel to yz plane. The Fig. 13 shows the variation of
velocity profile in between pillars on plane 1. Similar trend of velocity
variation in between pillars is observed for all five different cross sec­
tions of pillars. The pillar shrinks the cross sectional area of the flow
path. Therefore, the fluid accelerates while the fluid passes through the
narrow gap between the pillar and side wall of the channel. The velocity
profile is not similar for all the pillars. For the first pillar, the velocity
profile for the approaching stream is different from the velocity of the
stream approaching the other pillars. This happens because of the effect
of previous pillar which is absent for pillar at station 1. The detailed
effect of the pillar can be ascertain from Fig. 14 where an enlarge view of
velocity profile along the pillar length has been depicted. The velocity
variation and stream lines across the pillar has been shown in Fig. 15.
From the stream line, the formation of eddies or vortices can be seen.
The vortices size varies for the different cross section of pillars. The
vortices are responsible for the drop in pressure. As the flow passes
across the pillar, the cross section decreases up to the center of the pillar
then increases. This is responsible for increase in flow velocity near the
upstream half of each pillar and decrease in its value could be observed
as the flow passes the center of the pillar. The static pressure decreases
with increase in flow velocity (upstream half of the pillar) and the
reverse phenomena can be observed at the downstream half of the pillar.
However, the pressure cannot achieve its original value (where pillar
starts) due to the formation of vortex at the end of the pillar (Fig. 11). It
is also important to note that the upstream half of the pillar surfaces
ensures better contact with the fluid stream than the downstream of the
pillar surface. Therefore, the higher heat transfer coefficient has been
obtained at the upstream surface of the pillar (especially, near the
stagnation zone) than the downstream half (Fig. 16).The rate of change
of cross section (dA/dz) is different for different cross section of pillar.
For circular pillar, the rate is maximum as the flow area changes from
maximum to minimum (upstream half of the pillar) in 100 μm and the
rate is minimum for case 19 as the same happens in 250 μm. Though the
rate of change of area from minimum to maximum (downstream half of
the pillar) is highest for circular pillar, the lowest value is observed for
case 18. The fluid achieves maximum velocity at the minimum cross
sectional position of the channel. From Fig. 15, it can clearly be seen that
the acceleration of the fluid is higher than the deceleration. Therefore,
the downstream half of the pillar interacts with fluid stream of higher
velocity. The pillar with higher cross section at the downstream half will
efficiently exchange heat with the flowing stream. This is the reason the
average interface temperature of the case 17 is lowest, though the
convective heat transfer coefficient is not maximum. The maximum
interference temperature occurs in case 19 for which the convective heat
transfer coefficient and area at the downstream is minimum. The ve­
locity profile on plane 2 can be found in Fig. 17. The velocity profile
suggest that there is a significant effect of pillar shape on the velocity

velocity (m/s)
0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

0
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re
Channel width ( m)

0
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

0
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

0
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

0
1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 3200 3600 4000 4400 4800 5200 5600 6000
Channel Length ( m)

Fig. 13. Variations of velocity profile between pillars(in xz plane).

13
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

400 400 400

Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

Channel width ( m)
0 0 0
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560
Channel Length ( m) Channel Length ( m) Channel Length ( m)
400 400

Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

0 0
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560
Channel Length ( m) Channel Length ( m)

Fig. 14. Variations of velocity profile across the pillars.

Fig. 15. Variations of velocity (m/s) across various cross sections of the pillar.

2
Fig. 16. Variations of local heat transfer co-efficient (W m− K− 1) over various cross sections of the pillar.

14
R. A and S. Chakraborty Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755

velocity (m/s)
0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

0
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re
Channel width ( m)

0
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

0
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

0
400 Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re Re

0
1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 3200 3600 4000 4400 4800 5200 5600 6000
Channel Length ( m)

Fig. 17. Variations of velocity profile between pillars (in yz plane).

profile as well as on the boundary layer. CRediT authorship contribution statement

The analysis shows that the convective heat transfer coefficient for
the MCHS with circular cross section is the highest among all the cases
and 0–2% higher than that of MCHS with elliptical cross sectional pillars
(case 16 and 17). However, the pressure drop in case 13 is also higher
than these cases case 16 and case 17. These facts are responsible for
higher OTP for case 16 and 17 (14.8% to 19.4% higher than the plain
channel).
4. Conclusion
The present study optimizes the arrangement and the shape of micro-
structure (pillars and blind holes) to improve thermo-hyraulic perfor­
mance of MCHS. This has been achieved through three different steps. In
the first step, the effect of cross sections of blind holes has been inves­
tigated and the circular blind hole has been identifies as the optimized
one. The arrangement of circular pillar and blind hole is optimized in the
next step by selecting the hole shape as circular. In the final step, the
effect of various cross section is optimized selecting the best arrange­
ment from the second step. Though the higher heat transfer coefficient is
observed for the circular pillar, the high pumping power makes its hy­
draulic performance poorer than some other cases. The minimum
pumping pressure as well as lower heat transfer coefficient is observed
for MCHS with aerofoil pillar (tail end of the pillar faces the flow).
Therefore, it can be concluded that the performance of the MCHS
significantly depends on cross section of pillars and blind holes. The over
all thermal performance of MCHS with elliptical pillar is found to be the
best and it successfully maintained the lower average interface
temperature.
Due to the unavailability of experimental research work on the
microchannel configurations used in the present study, the validation is
performed by comparing the results available for plain channels. The
thermo-hydraulic performance of the plain channel estimated using
present computational model is compared with existing experimental
and numerical work. A detail experimental analyses of the best per­
forming microchannel configuration is warranted for further
optimization.
A. Rajalingam: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Valida­
tion, Investigation, Writing - original draft. Shubhankar Chakraborty:
Supervision, Conceptualization, Writing - review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] S.-C. Lin, F.-S. Chuang, C.-A. Chou, Experimental study of the heat sink assembly
with oblique straight fins, Exp. Thermal Fluid Sci. 29 (2005) 591–600.
[2] J. Wu, J. Zhao, K. Tseng, Parametric study on the performance of double-layered
microchannels heat sink, Energy Convers. Manage. 80 (2014) 550–560.
[3] W.-B. Ye, D.-S. Zhu, N. Wang, Effect of the inclination angles on thermal energy
storage in a quadrantal cavity, J. Therm. Anal. Calorimetry (2011).
[4] W.-B. Ye, C. Li, S.-M. Huang, Y. Hong, Validation of thermal modeling of unsteady
heat source generated in a rectangular lithium-ion power battery, Heat Transf. Res.
50 (2019).
[5] R.J. Phillips, Microchannel heat sinks, Lincoln Lab. J. 1 (1988) 31–48.
[6] H.E. Ahmed, B. Salman, A.S. Kherbeet, M. Ahmed, Optimization of thermal design
of heat sinks: A review, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 118 (2018) 129–153.
[7] T.-C. Hung, W.-M. Yan, Enhancement of thermal performance in double-layered
microchannel heat sink with nanofluids, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 55 (2012)
3225–3238.
[8] T.-C. Hung, W.-M. Yan, W.-P. Li, Analysis of heat transfer characteristics of double-
layered microchannel heat sink, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 55 (2012) 3090–3099.
[9] J. Xu, Y. Gan, D. Zhang, X. Li, Microscale heat transfer enhancement using thermal
boundary layer redeveloping concept, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 48 (2005)
1662–1674.
[10] J. Xu, Y. Song, W. Zhang, H. Zhang, Y. Gan, Numerical simulations of interrupted
and conventional microchannel heat sinks, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 51 (2008)
5906–5917.
[11] T.M. Harms, Heat transfer and fluid flow in deep rectangular liquid-cooled
microchannels etched in a (110) silicon substrate. (1998).
[12] T.M. Harms, M.J. Kazmierczak, F.M. Gerner, Developing convective heat transfer
in deep rectangular microchannels, Int. J. Heat Fluid Flow 20 (1999) 149–157.
[13] C.-J. Ho, L. Wei, Z. Li, An experimental investigation of forced convective cooling
performance of a microchannel heat sink with al2o3/water nanofluid, Appl.
Therm. Eng. 30 (2010) 96–103.

15
R. A and S. Chakraborty
[14] H. Mohammed, P. Gunnasegaran, N. Shuaib, Numerical simulation of heat transfer
enhancement in wavy microchannel heat sink, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 38
(2011) 63–68.
[15] A.A. Al-Rashed, A. Shahsavar, S. Entezari, M. Moghimi, S. Adio, T.K. Nguyen,
Numerical investigation of non-newtonian water-cmc/cuo nanofluid flow in an
offset strip-fin microchannel heat sink: thermal performance and thermodynamic
considerations, Appl. Therm. Eng. 155 (2019) 247–258.
[16] S. Kumar, M. Sarkar, P.K. Singh, P.S. Lee, Study of thermal and hydraulic
performance of air cooled minichannel heatsink with novel geometries, Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Transfer 103 (2019) 31–42.
[17] L. Chai, G. Xia, L. Wang, M. Zhou, Z. Cui, Heat transfer enhancement in
microchannel heat sinks with periodic expansion–constriction cross-sections, Int. J.
Heat Mass Transf. 62 (2013) 741–751.
[18] N.R. Kuppusamy, H. Mohammed, C.W. Lim, Numerical investigation of trapezoidal
grooved microchannel heat sink using nanofluids, Thermochim. Acta 573 (2013)
39–56.
[19] A. Alfaryjat, H. Mohammed, N.M. Adam, M. Ariffin, M. Najafabadi, Influence of
geometrical parameters of hexagonal, circular, and rhombus microchannel heat
sinks on the thermohydraulic characteristics, Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 52
(2014) 121–131.
[20] R. Vinoth, D.S. Kumar, Experimental investigation on heat transfer characteristics
of an oblique finned microchannel heat sink with different channel cross sections,
Heat Mass Transf. 54 (2018) 3809–3817.
[21] R. Mashayekhi, E. Khodabandeh, O.A. Akbari, D. Toghraie, M. Bahiraei,
M. Gholami, Cfd analysis of thermal and hydrodynamic characteristics of hybrid
nanofluid in a new designed sinusoidal double-layered microchannel heat sink,
J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 134 (2018) 2305–2315.
[22] W. Duangthongsuk, S. Wongwises, A comparison of the thermal and hydraulic
performances between miniature pin fin heat sink and microchannel heat sink with
zigzag flow channel together with using nanofluids, Heat Mass Transf. 54 (2018)
3265–3274.
[23] M. Dehghan, M. Daneshipour, M.S. Valipour, Nanofluids and converging flow
passages: A synergetic conjugate-heat-transfer enhancement of micro heat sinks,
Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 97 (2018) 72–77.
[24] C. Li, W.-B. Ye, S. Gong, S.-M. Huang, Y. Hong, S. Xu, Laminar thermo-hydraulic
characteristics in fractal tree-like microchannel networks, Int. J. Fluid Mech. Res.
46 (2019).
[25] W.-T. Yan, W.-B. Ye, C. Li, Effect of aspect ratio on saturated boiling flow in
microchannels with nonuniform heat flux, Heat Transf.-Asian Res. 48 (2019)
3312–3327.
[26] W.-T. Yan, C. Li, W.-B. Ye, Y. Hong, S.-M. Huang, The effect of aspect ratio on
hydraulic and heat transfer characteristics in a fractal microchannel, Int. J. Fluid
Mech. Res. 47 (2020).
[27] Y. Hong, W.-B. Ye, J. Du, S.-M. Huang, Solid-liquid phase-change thermal storage
and release behaviors in a rectangular cavity under the impacts of mushy region
and low gravity, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 130 (2019) 1120–1132.
[28] W.-T. Yan, C. Li, W.-B. Ye, Numerical investigation of hydrodynamic and heat
transfer performances of nanofluids in a fractal microchannel heat sink, Heat
Transf.-Asian Res. 48 (2019) 2329–2349.
[29] W. Tao, Y. He, Q. Wang, Z. Qu, F. Song, A unified analysis on enhancing single
phase convective heat transfer with field synergy principle, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transf. 45 (2002) 4871–4879.
[30] Z. Liu, N. Guan, C. Zhang, G. Jiang, The flow resistance and heat transfer
characteristics of micro pin-fins with different cross-sectional shapes, Nanoscale
Microscale Thermophys. Eng. 19 (2015) 221–243.
[31] M. Khoshvaght-Aliabadi, S. Deldar, S. Hassani, Effects of pin-fins geometry and
nanofluid on the performance of a pin-fin miniature heat sink (pfmhs), Int. J. Mech.
Sci. 148 (2018) 442–458.
16
Applied Thermal Engineering 190 (2021) 116755
[32] G. Wang, D. Niu, F. Xie, Y. Wang, X. Zhao, G. Ding, Experimental and numerical
investigation of a microchannel heat sink (mchs) with micro-scale ribs and grooves
for chip cooling, Appl. Therm. Eng. 85 (2015) 61–70.
[33] A.F. Al-Neama, Z. Khatir, N. Kapur, J. Summers, H.M. Thompson, An experimental
and numerical investigation of chevron fin structures in serpentine minichannel
heat sinks, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 120 (2018) 1213–1228.
[34] Q. Esmaili, A.A. Ranjbar, S. Porkhial, Experimental analysis of heat transfer in
ribbed microchannel, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 130 (2018) 140–147.
[35] H.-J. Guo, W.-B. Ye, Y. Hong, S.-Y. Wu, D.-Q. Peng, Entropy-based thermal
hydraulic performances for microchannel heat sinks combined with ribs and
cavities, Comput. Therm. Sci.: Int. J. 10 (2018).
[36] H.-J. Guo, W.-B. Ye, S.-M. Huang, S.-Y. Wu, D.-Q. Peng, Laminar flow and heat-
transfer characteristics of microchannel heat sinks combined with ribs and cavities
for electronic cooling, Comput. Therm. Sci.: Int. J. 10 (2018).
[37] C. Li, H.-J. Guo, W.-B. Ye, Y. Hong, S.-M. Huang, Thermohydraulic characteristics
of microchannel heat sinks combined with ribs and cavities: Effects of geometric
parameters and heat flux, Heat Transf. Res. 50 (2019).
[38] S.K. Mohammadian, Y. Zhang, Thermal management optimization of an air-cooled
li-ion battery module using pin-fin heat sinks for hybrid electric vehicles, J. Power
Sources 273 (2015) 431–439.
[39] M.O. Qidwai, M.M. Hasan, Effect of variation of cylindrical pin fins height on the
overall performance of microchannel heat sink, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part E: J.
Process Mech. Eng. (2019), 0954408918821777.
[40] V. Yadav, K. Baghel, R. Kumar, S. Kadam, Numerical investigation of heat transfer
in extended surface microchannels, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 93 (2016) 612–622.
[41] O.O. Adewumi, T. Bello-Ochende, J.P. Meyer, Numerical investigation into the
thermal performance of single microchannels with varying axial length and
different shapes of micro pin-fin inserts, Heat Transf. Eng. 38 (2017) 1157–1170.
[42] S.R. Reddy, A. Abdoli, G.S. Dulikravich, C.C. Pacheco, G. Vasquez, R. Jha, M.
J. Colaco, H.R. Orlande, Multi-objective optimization of micro pin-fin arrays for
cooling of high heat flux electronics with a hot spot, Heat Transf. Eng. 38 (2017)
1235–1246.
[43] Y. Jia, G. Xia, Y. Li, D. Ma, B. Cai, Heat transfer and fluid flow characteristics of
combined microchannel with cone-shaped micro pin fins, Int. Commun. Heat Mass
Transf. 92 (2018) 78–89.
[44] H.E. Ahmed, O.T. Fadhil, W.M. Salah, Numerical investigation of hydrothermal
performance of pinned plate-fin microchannel heat sink, Anbar J. Eng. Sci. 7
(2018) 210–232.
[45] V. Saravanan, C. Umesh, Numerical comparison for thermo-hydraulic performance
of pin fin heat sink with micro channel pin fin heat sink, Sadhana 43 (2018) 100.
[46] A. Heydari, O.A. Akbari, M.R. Safaei, M. Derakhshani, A.A. Alrashed,
R. Mashayekhi, G.A.S. Shabani, M. Zarringhalam, T.K. Nguyen, The effect of attack
angle of triangular ribs on heat transfer of nanofluids in a microchannel, J. Therm.
Anal. Calorim. 131 (2018) 2893–2912.
[47] M.A. Alfellag, H.E. Ahmed, O.T. Fadhil, A.S. Kherbeet, Optimal hydrothermal
design of microchannel heat sink using trapezoidal cavities and solid/slotted oval
pins, Appl. Therm. Eng. 158 (2019) 113765.
[48] Y.K. Prajapati, Influence of fin height on heat transfer and fluid flow characteristics
of rectangular microchannel heat sink, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 137 (2019)
1041–1052.
[49] A. Rajalingam, S. Chakraborty, Effect of micro-structures in a microchannel heat
sink–a comprehensive study, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 154 (2020) 119617.
[50] W. Qu, I. Mudawar, Experimental and numerical study of pressure drop and heat
transfer in a single-phase micro-channel heat sink, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 45
(2002) 2549–2565.