USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Finite element analysis of thermoelectric systems with applications in self assembly and haptics

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Finite element analysis of thermoelectric systems with applications in self assembly and haptics
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
McKnight, Patrick
Publisher:
University of South Florida
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Ansys
Three-dimensional FEA
Peltier effect
Energy conversion
Thermal grill illusion
Dissertations, Academic -- Mechanical Engineering -- Masters -- USF   ( lcsh )
Genre:
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Abstract:
ABSTRACT: Micro-scale self assembly is an attractive method for manufacturing sub-millimeter sized thermoelectric device parts. Challenges controlling assembly yield rates, however, have caused research to find novel ways to implement the process while still resulting in a working device. While a typical system uses single n-type and p-type material elements in series, one method used to increase the probability of a working device involves adding redundant parallel elements in clusters. The drawback to this technique is that thermal performance is affected in clusters which have missing elements. While one-dimensional modeling sufficiently describes overall performance in terms of average junction temperatures and net heat flux, it fails when a detailed thermal profile is needed for a non-homogeneous system. For this reason, a three-dimensional model was created to describe thermal performance using Ansys v12.1. From the results, local and net performance can be described to help in designing an acceptable self-assembled device. In addition, a haptic thermal display was designed using thermoelectric elements with the intention of testing the thermal grill illusion. The display consists of 5 electrically independent rows of thermoelectric elements which are controlled using pulse width modulating direct current motor controllers.
Thesis:
Thesis (MSME)--University of South Florida, 2010.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
System Details:
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
System Details:
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Patrick McKnight.
General Note:
Title from PDF of title page.
General Note:
Document formatted into pages; contains X pages.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
usfldc doi - E14-SFE0004813
usfldc handle - e14.4813
System ID:
SFS0028089:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

Finite Element Analysis of Thermoelectric Systems with Applications in Self Assembly and Haptics by Patrick T. McKnight A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering College of Engineering University of South Florida Major Professor: Nathan Crane, Ph.D. Frank Pyrtle, Ph.D. Kyle Reed, Ph.D. Date of Approval: October 29, 2010 Keywords: ansys, threed imensional FEA peltier effect, energy conversion, thermal grill illusion Copyright 2010, Patrick T. McKnight

PAGE 2

Acknowledgements U tmost gratitude goes to my major professor, Dr. Nathan Crane for supporting my academic career and going beyond the call of duty to support my time at USF. Dr. Crane is a true an d gifted educator, and I a m fortunate to have been given the opportunity to work under him. Dr. Kyle Reed d eserves many thanks, for his patience and alw ays being available for help while designing the haptic display. I am also grateful for having parents who have supported my life as well as academics for as long as I can remember. Without an analytical, engineering mind state being instilled from an ea rly age, this may not have been possible. I would finally like to thank my friends in the mechanical engineering department, Ardit Agastra and Caroline Liberti for always being available for discussion about topics we sometimes k new li ttle about. A willin gness to learn no matter what the subject, was not only beneficial, but also entertaining. Also appreciated are my lab mates, J ose Caraballo, Gary Hendrick, Corey Lynch and James Tuckerman for keeping things interesting during the long hours spent in the Kopp basement.

PAGE 3

i Table of Contents List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures .................................................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ v Chapter 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Thesis Statement ................................................................................................1 1.2 Background ........................................................................................................1 1.2.1 The Thermoelectric Effect ................................................................. 1 1.2.2 Self assembly ..................................................................................... 4 1.2.3 Thermal Haptics and the Thermal Grill Effect .................................. 5 1.3 Literature Review Theory of the Thermoelectric Effect .................................8 1.3.1 Materials .......................................................................................... 12 1.4 Thesis Outli ne ..................................................................................................13 Chapter 2 Three dimensional FEA Analysis ................................................................. 14 2.1 Three dimensional Thermoelectric Modeling in Ansys v12.1 ........................14 2.2 Verification of the Ansys Model against Generalized Thermoelectric System Theory .................................................................................................20 Chapter 3 Analysis of Threedimensional Self assembled Devices ............................... 26 3.1 Description of the Three dimensional Finite Element System ........................26 3.2 Self assembled Configurations of Missing, Centrally Located Elements .......30 3.3 Review of Results from Three dimensional Ansys Analyses ..........................31 3.4 Discussion of Results .......................................................................................33 Chapter 4 Haptic Thermal Display ................................................................................ 37 4.1 Design Requirements .......................................................................................37 4.2 Design and Components Used .........................................................................38 4.3 Simulated Performance ....................................................................................42 4.4 Next Steps in Device Development .................................................................47 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Recommendations for Advancement ................................. 49 List of References ............................................................................................................. 52 Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 55 Appendix A Ansys Batch Code ..........................................................................56 Ap pendix B Matlab Analytical Solutions Code ..................................................67

PAGE 4

ii List of Tables Table 1 Characteristic dimensions for a 6x6 array with a fill factor of 0.9 ....................17 Table 2 ....................................................19 Table 3 Key system properties and parameters used in the analysis of a three dimensional thermoelectric device .....................................................................28 Table 4 Results extracted from the Ansys solution for traditional performance an alysis. ..............................................................................................................33 Table 5 Performance and efficiency comparison between closely packed elements verses less closely packed elements under equal boundary conditions. ...........................................................................................................35

PAGE 5

iii List of Figures Figure 1 ..............................................................................8 Figure 2 A closed thermoelectric circuit ..........................................................................9 Figure 3 ..............................................................................10 Figure 4 Diagram of occupied electron states in a semiconductor with impurities ........................................................................................................13 Figure 5 ay with a redundancy of 4. ..................................17 Figure 6 ...................18 Figure 7 ......................................................21 Figure 8 conductivity that includes thermal contact resistance. .....................................22 Figure 9 with constant boundaries temperatures TS and TA and varied current input.. ...............................................................................................................22 Figure 10 Temperature plots for varying boundary temperatures where (a) TS is held constant and TA varies from 315 K to 375 K, and (b) TA is held constant and TS varies from 250 K to 310 K. ...............................................24 Figure 11 Comparison of heat flux at the coldside junction under conditions of varying TA and TS. ........................................................................................25 Figure 12 array and redundancy of 4.............................................................................27 Figure 13 ..................................29 Figure 14 Temperature profiles plotted along (a) Path A and Path B, and (b) Path C at the hot and cold sides. ...................................................................29

PAGE 6

iv Figure 15 (a) Control case with full assembly (b) Case 1 with one center element missing, (c) Case 2 with two center elements missing, (d) Case 3 with three center elements m issing. ..................................................31 Figure 16 Path A and Path B temperature profiles for (a) the fully assembled control case, (b) one central missing element, (c) two central missing elements, and (d) three central missing elements. ........................................32 Figure 17 Path C temperature profiles along th e hot side junction surface (a) for a fully assembled case, (b) with one central element missing, (c) two central elements missing, and (d) three central elements missing. ........32 Figure 18 side junction surface (a) for a fully assembled case, (b) with one central element missing, (c) two central elements missing, and (d) three central elements missing. ........33 Figure 19 (a) Schematic of thermoelectric array with discretely controlled element rows, (b) Top view of the display, (c) Side view of the thermal display ..............................................................................................39 Figure 20 Design section for a proposed thermal display. ............................................40 Figure 21 Control flowchart for a thermal display with f ive independent thermoelectric rows. ......................................................................................41 Figure 22 Transient temperature control of five independent rows of thermoelectric elements ...............................................................................42 Figure 23 Comparison of temperature profiles in the direction of heat flow for a coarse mesh and fine mesh size. ................................................................44 Figure 24 Components and design of the FEA model simulating a haptic device on skin tissue. ....................................................................................44 Figure 25 (a) Temperature profile at the epidermis dermis interface when the third thermoelectric row is at a maximum value, (b) Plot of the profile at the cent er of an element in Row 3. ................................................45 Figure 26 Description of the orientation of discretely controlled thermoelectric rows. ..............................................................................................................46 Figure 27 (a) Plot of temperature profile along the interface between the epidermis and dermis. ...................................................................................47

PAGE 7

v ABSTRACT Micro scale self assembly is an attractive method for manufacturing sub millimeter sized thermoelectric device parts. Challenges controlling assembly yield rates however, have caused research to find novel ways to implement the process while still resulting in a working device. While a typical system uses single n type and p type material elements in series, one method used to increase the probability of a working device in volves adding redundant parallel elements in clusters The drawback to this technique is that thermal performance is affected in clusters which have missing elements. While one dimensional modeling sufficiently describes overall performance in terms of ave rage junction temperatures and net heat flux, it fails when a detailed thermal profile is needed for a nonhomogeneous system. For this reason, a three dimensional model was created to describe thermal performance using Ansys v12.1. From the results, local and net performance can be described to help in designing an acceptable self assembled device. In addition, a haptic thermal display was designed using thermoelectric elements with the intention of testing the thermal grill illusion. The display consists of 5 electrically independent rows of thermoelectric elements which are controlled using pulse width modulating direct current motor controllers.

PAGE 8

1 Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Thesis Statement This thesis is presented to show the use of finite element analysis (FEA) for the thermoelectric performance of micro scale, self assembled devices. Previous research has demonstrated an optimal performance at scales inaccessible to pick and place manufacturing and thin film deposition methods. While self assembly shows promise, 100% assembly of components is not expected and thus, the final configuration of a device could take on many forms. This paper hopes to capture the subsequent performance character istics due to the nonhomogeneities. An additional project was undertaken to design a haptic thermal display using macro thermoelectric elements which are controlled by a DC motor contro ller with a pulse width modulated (PWM) voltage output. Analysis of the design was done using FEA to study the expected thermal gradient the test subject would observe. Various other details related to the design are also described as well. 1.2 Background 1.2.1 The Thermoelectric E ffect In 1821, the thermoelectric effect was discovered by German physicist Thomas Seebeck. He noticed an electromotive force, causing a small voltage potential, when a junction of two dissimilar metals was heated. More importantly, it was realized that the

PAGE 9

2 chan ge in potential was a function of the change in temperature [1] and unlike pyroelectrics, the voltage produced is maintained as long as a temperat ure difference exists. About a decade later, a French watchmaker, Jean Carlos Peltier discovered that if the experiment is run in reverse, a small change in temperature could be produced when a current was applied to the junction. He also noticed that when the current direction was inverted the heating and cooling of the dissimilar metals was reversed. It should be noted that because purely metallic materials were all that were available at the time, t his effect was very small, and J oule heating easily dis guised the thermoelectric eff ects. Furthermore, William Thomson contributed to the development by realizing the two effects found by Seebeck and Peltier were related to one another. By applying thermodynamic princip les to the two situations, Thom son found that the two dissimilar materials were not a requirement to observe thermoelectricity, and that in a third case, a homogeneous conductor could be heated and cooled with the application of a current source, or develop a voltage potential with the application of a temperature gradient [2] These discoveries paved the way for inventions like the thermocouple, thermoelectric power generator (TEG), and t hermoelectric refrigerator/cooler (TEC). Thomsons success in quantifying the effect yielded a set of equations, which will be outlined later in the text, which related the three thermoelectric effects. Coefficients were defined for Seebeck, Peltier and Thom son. The important thing to realize about the three coefficients is that the Seebeck and Peltier refer to a junction between two differ ent materials, whereas the Thom son coefficient refers to a single, bulk conductor. Considering thermoelectricity is o ne of multiple thermodynamic effects occurring simultaneously when current is passed through a material, a method had to be devised to

PAGE 10

3 measure the properties without effects like Joule heating present. The answer was to use a superconductor as one of the t wo materials. Since superconductors possess zero electrical resistance, they theoretically also have a Seebeck and Peltier coefficient of zero. Where before a differential coefficient had to be defined between two materials, now absolute coefficients could be used based on the zeroreference. This is justified by applying the third law of thermodynamics, which shows that the differential Seebeck coefficient between two conductors must be zero at 0 K. Furthermore, Borelius et al. [3] experimentally determined the absolute Seebeck coefficient of lead from 0 K up to 18 K, then determined the Thom son coefficient from 18 K to room temperature. By doing this, the absolute Seebeck coefficient of lead was found over the entire range of temperatures, thus allowing future experiments to use lead as a reference material, and negating th e need of a superconductor in the experiment. In the early 1900s, metals were still considered to exhibit the best thermoelectric properties. It had been shown mathematically that a good thermoelectric mate rial should have a high Seebeck coefficient, high electrical conductivity, and low thermal conductivity [4] These characteristics minimize the thermal e ffects of Joule heating and dampen the effects of the parasitic heat path which is opposite the dire ction of heat pumping In quantitative terms, it was shown that practical refrigeration and power generation would be possible with materials, which hadnt be en invented yet, possessing optimal properties. With the invention of the transistor, in 1949, cam e a new type of material called the semiconductor. It was found that semiconductors could meet the parametric needs far better than metals, and a new material, bismuth telluride (Bi2Te3) was developed and

PAGE 11

4 found to have advantageous properties near room tem perature. Also, because we typically operate a thermoelectric device thermally in parallel, and electronically in series, there is a necessity to have materials that transport heat in opposite directions with respect to current direction. Bi2Te3 is given t he ability to be used for the two inversely related branches by doping it into extrinsic semiconductors. The electronic result of this process will be explained in a later section dedicated to material characteristics. During the early research, great opti mism was held for solidstate, environmentally friendly applications of the effect. Due to the state of materials sciences at the time, thermoelectric refrigeration and power generation efficiencies were significantly worse than their vapor compression counterparts. Thermocouples, on the other hand, do not require efficient thermal to electric energy transformation. For this reason, they have been used and developed for much longer than TEGs and TECs. As materials sciences advanced, increased efficiencies translated to using thermoelectric devices (TEDs) in commercial and industrial applications requiring small dimensions, gravity independence, and a solid state/maintenance free design. 1.2.2 Self a ssembly The term self assembly can be found referenced in many fields such as chemistry, physics, biology, mathematics and multiple disciplines of engineering. The definition used to describe the term varies widely between each field and has yet to be clearly and concretely stated to encompass all aspects of self assembly The definition, as described by Pelesko [14] caters well to engineering applications and is actually a conglomeration of various other definitions given in the past. It states that

PAGE 12

5 S elf assembly refers to the spontaneous formation of organized structures through stochastic process that invol ves preexisting components is reversible and can be controlled by proper design of the components, the environment, and the driving force. Typical forces harnessed for self assembly include surface tension, capillary, magnetic, electrostatic, Van der Waals bond and gravitational [5] Possibly driving the differences in the definition between fields, the reasons for studying self assembly are also diverse. A s imple reas on is to understand the mechanisms that drive nature and life itself. Many biological processes are driven by chemical reactions that resemble microscopic manufacturing. From this, it is easy to see why the concept requires the attention of the chemist, bi ologist, physicist, engineer and more By studying these basic interactions, the researcher strives to understand the systemic approach nature uses to efficiently and accurately build and maintain systems. Pertaining to engineering, self assembly research finds use in building microand nanostructures. Also, smart materials, such as self healing materials, are being researched which utilize self assembly concepts [6] 1.2.3 Thermal Haptics and the Thermal Grill Effect The field of haptics is generally regarded as a study of how humans perceive the sense of touch. More specifically, this refers to kinesthetic, tactile and thermal feedback interaction which allows us to sense force, position, texture and temperature. Without haptic feedback, some of the most trivial tasks would be made nearly impossible and possibly dangerous to accomplish.

PAGE 13

6 Human skin tissue has a variety of different types of sensors integrated within it, and with a combination of inputs, the brain is able to make judgments about object properties and structure. Temperature is sensed using two different types of nerve endings (receptors) which are found in the dermis [15] Cold receptors are 30 times more abundant than their counterpart and also possess a quicker response due a difference in fiber material [16] Furthermore, the sensory processing characteristics of these receptors should be understood to increase the effectiveness of the haptic device. (1) Range Each receptor is dedicated to sensing cold or hot temperatures. The general range of neutrality for each type is from 30 C to 36 C where no sensation is realized. This region is also known as the indifference zone. [17] Again in general, painful sensations tend to dominate below 15 C and above 48 C. Haptic devices should perform within these ranges to provide safe, effective display of thermal information. (2) Rate of change It has b een realized that the thermal receptors in the skin largely detect changes in temperature (more specifically heat flux) versus absolute temperature of an environment. This is largely unique from the other modalities of sensation, i.e. vision, and within the indifference range, a person is even less apt to perceive slow changes in temperature. (3) Resolution This property is very dependent on stimuli location, local skin temperature, and more, but the threshold of perception lies somewhere near 0.01 C and is considered a relatively poor quality compared to other sensation types i.e. sight and hearing

PAGE 14

7 (4) Spatial summation This refers to thermal receptors being more capable of determining intensity and interval of stimulation rather than spatially acute sensati on. This drives some unique secondary characteristics, namely, the ability for a thermal threshold to be maintained while simultaneously decreasing the stimulus intensity and increasing the application area. From these characteristics, it is determined human thermal receptors seem to act analogous to piezo (impulse) devices, versus having a sustained type of output like a thermometer. This realization is essential to designing a successful thermal display. A r elated phenomenon known as the thermal grill and thermal illusion effect is also a consequence of the thermal receptors. This effect is defined as the perception of intense constant heating just under the threshold of pain that results from modulating heat ing and cooling on an area of skin. This effect was first discovered by Thunberg in 1896 [18] There are various versions of the thermal illusion [19] and the terms synthetic heating and thermal grill illusion are often times used interchangeably. While the definitions of the two terms are no t concrete, it has been generally accepted that thermal grill involves using hot and cold temperatures simultaneously, and synthetic heating uses only warm temperatures in a sequential manner. Experimentation in haptics related to the thermal modality ofte n employs use of a thermal display. A thermal display is defined as a device th at is capable of conveying information to a human subject by means of applied heat [21] Novelty in these devices comes in the form of the application of temperature or heat flux at the skindevice interface. TEDs have been a popular choice in the design of thermal displ ays. Th e

PAGE 15

8 advantages of using TED s include range of temperature, temperature control, size, solid state design and orientation independence. 1.3 Literature Review Theory of the Thermoelectric Effect There are three thermoelectric coefficients that have been defined for use with the thermoelectric effect. The differential Seebeck coefficient ( ) also termed thermoelectric power, is defined as = ( 1 ) where V is voltage potential and is the temperature difference between each junction. The Seebeck effect makes temperature measurement with a thermocouple possible. If two dissimilar metals are electrically connected and placed in environments with different temperatures, a measurable voltage potential wil l result, typically 1 to 100 V/C [7] [8] Figure 1 Simple thermocouple design = ( 2 ) where q is the ratio of the rate of heating or cooling at each junction to the electric current ( I ) It is demonstrated that the differential Seebeck coefficient is much easier to measure, and can be related to the Peltier coefficient by utilizing a Kelvin relation = ( 3 )

PAGE 16

9 Figure 2 A closed thermoelectric circuit. If materials A and B are different, a current will flow. The final coefficient associated with the thermoelectric effect is the Thomson coefficient ( ), and is defined as = ( 4 ) It is important to note again that the Seebeck and Peltier coefficients can only be defined as a reference between two materials and are considered surface properties, and the Thomson coefficient is a bulk property of a single material [9] Absolute Seebeck and Peltier coefficients can only be defined when a superconductor is used for one of the two materials. As stated before i t is acceptable to assume superconductors possess a Seebeck and Peltier coefficient of zero allowing an absolute value to be assigned to the second material. From this assumption it is also acceptable to relate the Thomson coefficient directly to an absolute Seebeck coefficien t (S ) by Equation ( 5). = ( 5 ) While these basic equations work well as material properties, a better way to describe actual thermoelectric performance has been determined. A dimensionless figure of merit relates multiple material properties known to influence the magnitude of the effec t and is defined as = ( 6 )

PAGE 17

10 where ( ) is defined as the materials thermal conductivity, and ( ) is the electrical resistivity Based on the figure of merit, it is traditionally accepted that a material with a high Seebeck coefficient, low electrical resistivity, and low thermal conductivity is a good thermoelectric performer Also, t hese properties are all sensitive to the envir onments they are used in, so a high figure of merit at room temperature may degrade quickly as the temperatures stray in either direction. For this reason, specific types of thermocouples are to be used in very specific applications. Shown in Figure 3, different types of elements are electrically connected in a configuration that cools at one side, and heats at the other. Typically, this pair of elements is repeated many times in a d evice to provide different physical dimensions and magnitudes of cooling power Creating materials whose thermoelectric are inversely related to each other is discussed in the materials section of this chapter. In shor t though, semiconductors can be doped with other, property altering, materials to achieve this configuration. Figure 3 Basic thermoelectric circuit

PAGE 18

11 Assuming the material properties are temperature independent, there is no e lectrical contact resistance and heat flow is onedimensional the maximum achievable temperature difference between the hot and cold junction ( TH and TC, respectively) is, = 1 2 ( 7 ) Because two different materials, possessing different properties, are now in use, a new effective figure of merit is defined to account for the inconsistenc ies between the two elements in Equation ( 8) = + ( 8 ) Basic conservation of energy equations have been derived for the hot and cold junctions using averaged material properties = 1 2 ( 9 ) = 1 2 ( 10) W here Q is the heat flux J represents the current density R e is the electrical resistance, K is the thermal conductance of the thermoelectric element and is the temperature difference bet ween the hot and cold junctions. In Equation ( 9) & ( 10) represents the heat conduction term, 1/2J2R represents the effects of Joule heating, and SJ TH represents the thermoelectric effect. Because the current density term is squared, it is realized that the energ y balance is very sensitive to changes in electric current. To maximize use of the effect the electric current should be chosen in such a way that Joule heating does not dominate the energy equations The use of this optimization can be seen

PAGE 19

12 in Chapter 2 Figure 9, where the heat flux increases to a maximum value, then starts to degrade as Joule heating begins to dominate. The coefficient amount of heat removed from the cold junction divided by the electric power input (P). = ( 11) = ( 12) 1.3.1 Materials There are relativity few materials known to date that can be considered thermoelectric materials. Extrinsic semiconductor alloys have been shown to exhibit the best figures of merit since the mid 1900s with combi nations of bismuth, a ntinomy tellurium and selenium being popular for low temperature use. B ismuth telluride (Bi2Te3) is the most common combination and w as used as the simulation material in this pap er. In practice, this alloy would be doped, where impurity atoms would be diffused into interstitial sites, as well as interlayer sites. This was done with Ag and Cu, for example, to form n type bismuth telluride [10] The use of the n type and p type is necessary for the following reasons. Materials that exhibit n type behavior have impurities that donate electrons to the conduction band ( Figure 4 ) hence the y are called donors. The donors conduct electricity via quasi free elect r ons. Conversely, p type impurities act as acceptors of electrons and conduct through positively charged holes in the valance band [12] With this ntype and p type materials can successfully be alternated in a device to provide heat pumping in the same direction.

PAGE 20

13 Figure 4 Diagram of occupied electron states in a se miconductor with impurities. The conduction electrons (a) have been thermally excited from the donor impurity state (b) over the energy gap. 1.4 Thesis Outline In the following chapter, FEA technique, application and results will be presented as they relate to the applications of self assembly and haptics. Chapter 2 reviews the background and general technique of modeling coupled thermal electric systems in the traditional Ansys FEA application. It also presents data to verify the accuracy of results a gainst an accepted onedimensional model. Using a model similar to that of the verification, Chapter 3 focuses on the performance of a microscale self assembled device with assembly yields below 100%. The resulting performance characteristics are then dis cussed. Chapter 4 is a section written to demonstrate the design of a thermal haptic display utilizing thermoelectric macro elements. FEA is used to predict the thermal characteristics of the device against skin. Finally, Chapter 5 is dedicated to recommen dations for future research and final conclusions.

PAGE 21

14 Chapter 2 Three dimensional FEA Analysis Chapter 2 introduces a three dimensional model for use in thermoelectric analysis at small size scales. Various Ansys mesh element types are explored for this application in addition to some newly introduced characteristics relevant to small size scales and typical system designs. A batch program is also described which automates the creation, solution, and display of results for the model. From this data, a comparison is made to a published one dimensional model to determine accuracy and applicability to future analyses. 2.1 Threedimensional Thermoelectric M odeling in Ansys v12.1 Ansys v12.1 (Traditional) was used to model a thermoelectric device in three dimensions. Because devices are typically powered electrically in series, onedimensional analysis is sufficie nt to predict basic performance characteristics such as TC, TH and QC. When analyzing a self assembly process, however, multiple sametype elements are often designed to be assembled in parallel groups to increase the probability that a cl osed circuit is created during the self assembly process. Adding parallel groups is termed adding a redundancy factor ( R ). Because assembly yield rates are expected to be less than 100%, each cluster of n and ptype elements could be composed of a different number of elements. For this case, three dimensional FEA should be used to model the various thermal and electrical inconsistencies of the system. Consider a system with a

PAGE 22

15 redundancy of 4. If the number of successful assemblies in a particular group is less than 4, the current density throug h that group will increase by 33%, 100%, and 300% for a group with 3, 2, 1 elements successfully assembled, respectively. With current densities varying so much, performance characteristics of the device will also vary accordingly. T his is the major reason for analyzing devices in more than one or two dimensions. Ansys v12.1 [27] has included three element types to handle ther mal electric systems. PLANE223 is a 2D 8node quadrilateral which can be degenerated to a 6 node triangle as well as made to have unit thickness associated. SOLID2 26 is a 3D 20node hexahedron (brick) element. SOLID226 was chosen to represent thermoelectric material in this works model. SOLID227 is a 3D element that has configurations including a 10 node tetrahedron, 13node pyramid and 15node prism SOLID227 was applied to the copper contact volumes as a 10 node tetrahedron which made the mesh interface between thermoelectric element and electrical contact couple nodes better. This is important because the thermal and/or electrical information at the unmatched nodes will hit a dead end and be lost which introduces inaccuracies into the solution. In the calculation of a solution, the thermal load vector depends on the result of a separate electric solution at each node. This causes the s olution to be nonlinear for steady state and transient systems, and requires at least two iterations to achieve converge nce. For each unconstrained node, the solution produces a temperature and electric potential. Reactions, such as heat flow rates, and electric currents also occur in correctly constrained node s as a result of the solution. From each nodal solution, element al Joule heating, current density and heat flux are determined [27]

PAGE 23

16 The model presented uses the SOLID226 element type for the thermoelectric n a nd ptype material, and SOLID227 for the electrical contact strips. The SOLID226 brick elements are set to be onesixth the height of the thermoelectric element. Smaller mesh sizes were attempted; however the maximum number of nodes supported by Ansys v12.1 was exceeded. This element size was tested and shown to be sufficient in the following section. Furthermore, heat transfer from the side walls of the elements is neglected. This side wall assump tion could easily be adjusted by adding a conducting medium between the side walls as seen in research by Ziolkoski [36] but it is not accounted for in the analytical model and is not thought to have a significant impact on the final solution in this analysis. The properties assigned to the two thermoelectric materials were averaged values of the Seebeck coefficient, thermal conductivity and electrical resistivity and are seen in Table 2. In the analysis of a true three dimensional system, these values should not be averaged, but as this model was compared with a one dimensional model which does use averaged values, the same properties were used. Similarly sized SOLID227 tetrahedral elements are used for the contact straps. These are given properties typical of a copper conductor. The two properties assigned to this material were thermal conductivity and electrical resistivity. Specifi cally, this model is based on a generalized system described in detail in Miner [35] The basic system is described by including entry and exit substrates with corresponding thermal conductances ( KCE/KHE) Also, source and sink temperatures ( TS and TA, respectively) are applied to better simulate the true application of a thermo electric device. The original use of this technique was to predict the performance of devices as size scales were reduced and contributions from components like contact

PAGE 24

17 resistance were magnified. This method also accounts for how heat is delivered and sent to and from each junction, which better predicts actual junction temperatures (TH and TC) A fill factor (f) is also introduced, which serves to illustrate the effects of a given ratio of thermoelectrically active area to the entire cooler area. In this model, the fill factor is used to control geometry, but its usefulness can be extended if sidewall conduction through a fill medium is to be added to the model. Used at micro and nano scales, this factor can have a significant effect on the degradation of the figure of merit by adding to thermal interface resistances. Seen in Figure 5, dimension Lf is a function of the fill factor the total n umber of elements (N) and element length ( Le) and can be calculated by, = 1 1 1 ( 13) Figure 5 Design schematic of 6x6 array with a redundancy of 4. Table 1 Characteristic dimensions for a 6x6 array with a fill factor of 0.9 Model Dimensions L sub L e L cont L f (*10 4 m) (*10 4 m) (*10 4 m) (*10 4 m) 1.7500 2.0000 0.2500 0.1298

PAGE 25

18 T he substrates used to model entry and exit thermal conductance paths are considered to be electrical insulators but are assigned a thermal conductivity. Considering the scale of model, the thermal contact resistance was included in the conductivity of the substrate. Using Equations (17 ) and ( 18 ) KCE and KHE were determined and used to find the corresponding equivalent thermal conductivities ( ksub) for use in Ansys. ( ) = ( 14) ( ) = ( 15) Figure 6 3D Mesh of a 6x6 thermoelectric cooler with a redundancy of 4. The boundary conditions for the system include thermal and electrical components. There is a defined beginning and end for the current path. Based on the desired direction of heat pumping for the thermoelectric elements, a current vector is applied to one end of the simulated device. The magnitude of the current vector is calculated from a given current density and is a function of the cross sectional area of a

PAGE 26

19 fully assembled group of elements. The optimal current density for a s et of given boundary condi tions is determined analytically in the one dimensional model and manually input into the Ansys batch code. The thermal boundary conditions applied are a source temperature, TS, on the side of the cold junction, and a sink (or ambient) temperature, TA, on the side of the hot junction (see Figure 5). These two temperatures are applied by coupling the nodes of the entire surface on the respective sides of the substrate Table 2 System properties for Bi2Te3 based analysis S (*106) 5) Element type Element features (V/K) (W/mK) m) n type Bi 2 Te 3 240 2 1 SOLID226 Thermal electric p type Bi 2 Te 3 240 2 1 SOLID226 Thermal electric Copper contacts 400 0.0017 SOLID227 Thermal electric Substrate 2.21 SOLID87 Thermal A batch program was written for use in Ansys (Appendix A.1) which all ows quick and automated creation and solving of the thermoelect ric system described. The code was written to give the user control of various system parameters. One of the main goals of this project was to make the code flexible enough for use in the fu ture study of self assembled TEC s. Some of the import ant easily modifiable parameters include rate thickness, current density and boundary temperatures. Also, seen in the following section is a methodology used to include thermal conta ct resistances in the substrate conductivity. This scheme was integrated into the calculation of equivalent substrate conductivities

PAGE 27

20 Also, Equation ( 13) was develope d to be used in the code to automatically calculate elemen t spacing based o n the assigned fill factor. 2.2 Verification of the Ansys Model against Generalized Thermoelectric System Theory Recent work has produced a more accurate depiction of small scale TECs by introduc ing nonideal conditions of thermal contact resistance, substrate conductance and parasitic heat paths [35] As element length is scaled down to a range of 50 m to 500 m [29] [32] it is expected the therm oelectric performance will be near its best and is where methods of micro manufacturing techniques are currently being researched [34] In his one dimensional model Miner [35] defines a number of updated equations to include these e ffects. An equivalent thermal substrate conductance is define d which account s for element densi ty, contact resistance, and the ratio of thermoelectric element conductivity to contact conductivity ( g ). It is note d that there is limited data to define a value for g and this study uses a value of 0.1 mm based on its use in other work [29] The new entry and exit substrate conductance (KCE and KHE, respectively) can then be added to the energy balance as seen in Equations ( 19) and ( 20 ) These equations describe the generalized thermoelectric system seen in Figure 7. = ( 16) = + ( 17) = + ( 18)

PAGE 28

21 Figure 7 Simple generalized thermoelectric s ystem In this system, the two boundaries, TS and TA are constrained to a constant value. The entry conductance region lies between the source temperature and cold junction, and the exi t conductance region lies between the hot junction and the ambient environment. ( ) + + ( ) + 1 2 = 0 ( 19) ( ) + 1 2 + ( ) = 0 ( 20) This one dimensional general system model was run for a variety of conditions and compared to an equivalent three dimensional Ansys model to compare the calculated cold side temperature, hot side temperature and cold side heat flux. Using the modeling technique s in Chapter 2.1, the three dimensional model was designed to be equivalent to the one dimensional case. The thermal contact resistance of the one dimensional model was found to have a large impact on the solution. For this reason it was necessary to also include the effect in the threedimensional case. This was successfully accomplished by deriving equivalent substrate conductivities by using the following scheme:

PAGE 29

22 Figure 8 Methodology for equating entry substrate conductance to an equivalent conductivity that includes thermal contact resistance. Figure 9 shows the case where TS and TA are held constant, and the current den sity ( J ) is varied from 0 A/m2 to 2.5x107 A/m2. I t can be seen that while there is near perfect agreement with TC and TH, there is a small deviation in the calculated heat flux The maximum error of QC was found to be 7% or 0.76 W/cm2, at 1 .25x107 A/m2. Figure 9 Plot of analytical and FEA solutions of thermoelectric performance with constant boundaries temperatures TS and TA and varied current input. Ansys results are shown with discrete points and the analytical solution is shown as a smooth curve.

PAGE 30

23 The model was also tested using fluctuating boundary temperatures. In this test, the optimized current for a particular combination of TS and TA was extracted from the analytical one dimensional model and manually input into the Ansys code. For the first set of boundary conditions, TS was held at 300 K, while TA varied from 315 to 375 K. In the second set of boundary conditions, TA was held at 325 K and TS varied from 250 to 310 K Shown in Figure 10, the temperatures compared well and deviations between the two models were of the orde r of 0.2 K for the entire range of boundary conditions. These values were accepted and considered to be in agreement. In addition, as QC wa s compared while using the optimized current condition, better correlation was seen between the analytical and numerical models This agreement indicates models run with optimized parameters will result in more accurate solutions. The maximum error observed in this analysis was 0.47 W/cm2 when TA is equal to 325 K and TS is equal to 310 K.

PAGE 31

24 Figure 10 Temperature plots for varying boundary temperatures where (a) TS is held constant and TA varies from 315 K to 375 K, and (b) TA is held constant and TS varies from 250 K to 310 K.

PAGE 32

25 Figure 11 Comparison of heat flux at the co ld side junction under conditions of varying TA and TS. It was concluded that the three dimensional Ansys model compared sufficiently well with the one dimensional analytical simulation. With this acknowledgment, three dimensional systems of self assembled elements will be analyzed in confidence using the same modeling approaches used in the verification.

PAGE 33

26 Chapter 3 Analysis of Threedimensional Self assembled Devices Chapter 3 is meant to employ the three dimensional model described and verified in Chapter 2. The application of self assembled thermoelectric devices is introduced in this chapter where the concept of redundant electric paths is described and modeled using parallel n type or p type elements in clusters. Multiple cases of less than ideal yield configurations are presented and simulated in Ansys v12.1. Thermal performance of the subsequent system is then analyzed and discussed to determine the impact of havi ng vacant element sites within a device. 3.1 Description of the Threedimensional Finite Element System In the analysis of a TEC in three dimensions, a section of a full y assembled device is modeled to show the local affects of missing or nonfunctional elements. This is done to decrease the simulation time and allow for a higher node density in the academic version of Ansys v12.1. In these analyses, a 6x6 array of thermoelectric elements with redundant same type element cluste rs of 4 are modeled under various nonhomogeneous configurations. In Ansys, discrete volumes are defined by assigning values ranging from 1 to 36. Figure 12 shows the location of each volume, and is referenced to describe which elements are thermally and electrically active. Element 9 12 are defined as the center cluster, and the group of clusters surrounding this are defined as edge clusters.

PAGE 34

27 Like the verification model, a one dimensional Matlab model was used to determine the optimal current density for a given system of properties and boundary conditions. This system configuration, given in Table 3, was considered the basis for each of the Ansys analyses for comparison. Figure 12 Assigned thermoelectric volume numbers and locations for a 6x6 array and redundancy of 4 Figure orien tation is based on the default workplane directions and entrance and exit current paths.

PAGE 35

28 Table 3 Key system properties and parameters used in the analysis of a three dimensional thermoelectric d evice Element Parameters Thermal Seebeck Thickness Resistivity Conductivity Coefficient ( m ) ( m ) ( W/mK ) ( ) Fill Factor Redundancy 2.00E 04 1.00E 05 2.0 240 0.9 4 Substrate Parameters Contact Parameters Thermal Thermal Thickness Conductivity Thickness Resistivity Conductivity ( m ) ( W/mK ) (m) m) (W/mK) 1.25E 04 2.2125 2.50E 05 1.70E 08 400 Boundary Conditions Source Sink/Ambient Current Temperature Temperature Density ( K ) ( K ) ( A/m2) 300 325 1.3485E+07 The impact of missing elements was assessed by comparing the heat flux and temperature profiles with different number of elements Figure 13 shows the paths on whic h the temperature profiles are measured. Figure 14 shows the temperature p r ofile through Path B and Path C for the fully assembled system. Path A is assumed to be equal to Path B in the fully assembled system

PAGE 36

29 Figure 13 Description of the paths for temperature profile plots Figure 14 Temperature profiles plotted along (a) Path A and Path B, and (b) Path C at the hot and cold sides. The temperature profiles in Figure 14 describe a system where each cluster is performing equally This is expected considering the current magnitude is the equal throughout the model, and geometric symmetry exists in multiple directions.

PAGE 37

30 3.2 Self a ssembled Configurations of Missing, Centrally Located Elements Three cases of functional systems containing less than ideal assembly yields were simulated under the same conditions stated in Section 3.1. The purpose of the analysis was to determine how vacant assembly sites would affect the overall performance of a TEC as well as look at the local thermal effects on the remaining elements in the cluster. The solutions of these cases are used to determine whether or not a particular configuration would remain useful and acceptable. While there are many characteristics t hat could be chosen to determine acceptability of a device, it is believed that two good indicators of system performance are TC and QC. As current is increased, TC will decrease until Joule heating causes a parasitic heat flow in the direction opposite of heat pumping. This will also cause a reduction of the net heat flux at the cold side junction which is undesirable. With access to the nodal temperatures at any point in the threedimensional model, new methods are presented to describe system performance and acceptability, specifically how the temperature profiles differ within a single model, as well as how the edge cluster s performances are affected compared to the 100% assembly yield case. Below, in Figure 15, the three cases are presented in two dimensions to show the locations of vacant assembly sites. Center elements were chosen to simulate the case where elements were missing in the interior of a much larger ar ray. Local thermal effects were not expected to spread past the edge clusters.

PAGE 38

31 Figure 15 (a) Control c ase with full assembly (b ) Case 1 wit h one center element missing, (c) Case 2 with two center elements missing, (d ) Case 3 with three center elements missing. 3.3 Review of Results from Three dimensional Ansys Analyses Results of the three previously described cases were obtained and analyzed to determine total and local thermoelectric per formance. Nodal data extracted from A ns ys included total heat flux from the cold reservoir ( QC) local values of TH, local values of TC, and the temperature profiles along the previously defined paths. This data provided a detailed representation of thermoelectric performance.

PAGE 39

32 Figure 16 Path A and Path B temperature profiles for (a) the fully assembled control case, ( b ) one central missing element (c ) two central missing elements, and (d) three central missing elements. Figure 17 Path C temperat ure profiles along the hot side junction surfa ce (a) for a fully assembled case (b ) with one central element missing, (c) two central elements missing, and (d) three central elements missing.

PAGE 40

33 Figure 18 Path C temperature profiles along the cold side junction surface (a) for a fully assembled case (b) with one central element missing, (c) two central elements missing, and (d) three central elements missing. Table 4 Results ext racted from the Ansys solution for traditional performance analysis. The listed junction temperatures are seen in the center cluster. FEA Results from Ansys Vacant T C T H q C Q C sites (K) (K) (W) (W/cm 2 ) 0 294.67 360.53 0.1508 10.47222 1 293.50 363.96 0.15311 10.93643 2 293.14 370.68 0.14796 10.87941 3 295.43 417.72 0.1079 8.174242 3.4 Discussion of Results Two things can happen as elements become nonfunctional in a cluster and the current magnitude increases through the remaining elements: In some cases, the local thermal performance will actually increase or remain relatively unchanged from a

PAGE 41

34 completely assembled cluster. That is, TC will decrease, TH increases, and QC inc reases which corresponds to an increase thermal of performance Second, the thermal performance can degrade as current magnitude increases and Joule heating dominates causing a parasitic heat flow. This causes an increase in TC, TH, and QC and ultimately, a decrease in overall performance The plot of Path A in Figure 16 represents the internal temperature gradient present within the remaining center elements With the removal of each element, the temperature profile of the center elements become less linear as the magnitude of Joule heating increases From a design standpoint, any energy loss due to Joule heating is undesirable because it is a nonreversible process and does not improve heat transport, but it is an effect that is unavoidable. In the extreme case where only one of four elements is successf ully assembled, the current is 3 00% greater than the edge clusters and the internal temperature of the element rises drastically to a maximum value of 41 7.7 K. The other cases shown in plot (b) and (c) of Figure 16, show maximum temperatures at the hot junction of 363.9 K and 269.2 K, respectively. Also, the total system heat flux with one element missing rose 0.46 W/cm2 and with two elements missing rose 0.40 W/cm2 compared to the fully assembled case. Although the temperature curves of (b) and (c) become less linear, the thermal performance at these two conditions is shown to actually increase. This is thought to be the result of a more optimal fill factor condition being found as empty space increases in the center cluster. This was further proven by removing one element from each cluster, thus making it an R=3 system with a fill factor equivalent to 0.675, and solving t he system with the same boundary conditions used prior. The results shown in Table 5 show that, although the thermal performance

PAGE 42

35 increases for systems with R=3 and R=2, the coefficient of performance decreases in each case. This means that the input current is not ideal for the conditions but if the efficient use of power is not of concern, this can be overlooked. In future models, accounting for optimal fill facto r could have a significant impact on increasing device performance. Table 5 Performance and efficiency comparison between closely packed elements verses less closely packed elements under equal boundary conditions. FEA Results fro m Ansys T C T H q C Q C I V P (K) (K) (W) (W/cm2) (A) (V) (W) R=4 294.7 360.5 0.1508 10.47 2.1576 0.396 0.85 0.177 R=3 293.3 371.4 0.1815 16.81 2.1576 0.500 1.08 0.168 R=2 292.5 386.0 0.1762 16.31 2.1576 0.694 1.50 0.118 R=1 303.4 451.1 0.083 7.70 2.1576 1.245 2.69 0.03 Further analysis was done on Figure 17 and Figure 18. Here, the difference in temperature between the center elements and edge elements is clearly seen. The average difference for the hot/cold sides was found to be 2.4/1.1 K, 6.9/1.7 K and 10.9/ 1.1 K, for (b), (c) and (d), respectively. This shows that the hot si de junction is much more sensitive to changes in current magnitude. On plot (b) for both figures, a slight variation in temperature can be seen across element volume 10. This is thought to be a result of the vacant site located next to it not providing the conducting heat energy needed to maintain the elevated temperature. Also, for plot (d), an elevated temperature is seen where there should be an element missing. This happens because the measurement path lies directly in between the element top surface and the copper contact bottom surface. With this realization it was concluded that the temperatures plotted are from the bottom side

PAGE 43

36 contact surface. The slope of the temperature gradient in this area is due to conducting heat from surrounding elements. Fro m the given data it was concluded the case with three missing elements does not display characteristics of an acceptable TEC. The performance of the cases with one and two missing elements, however, only deviated from a fully assembled system marginally. F or applications where the main control parameter is net heat flux, case (b) and (c) would be considered acceptable considering this performance increased. In an application where temperature uniformity of the hot or cold junction was the main concern, case by case analysis would have to be done to justify acceptability.

PAGE 44

37 Chapter 4 Haptic Thermal Display Chapter 4 presents a project related to the field of haptics focused on the design of a thermal display built to test the thermal grill illusion. Design requirements for the display are described and lay out a framework for a prototype design. The prototype design uses five independently controlled rows of thermoelectric elements and is built to be affixed to the forearm of a test subject. Finally, static FEA is done to characterize the thermal performance of the device against human skin tissue at multiple time steps during simulated application of the thermal grill illusion. 4.1 Design R equirements When designing a thermal display, certain key features must be included. Possibly the most fundamental and important is control. In order to quantify an experimental response, the tester must be able to control the inputs given to the subject during an experiment. In this project, it is important to control the skin side temperature of the device accurately and quickly Based on literature [37] the applied temperature combinations for use displayin g the thermal grill illusion vary from different sources. Non painful display of the effect was observed with various mild temperature combinations of cold (31 26 C) and warm (3540 C) [38] Secondly, critical temperatures need to be established to prevent injury to the test subject. It has been established in previous studies [16] that the average thermal pain thresholds are near 45

PAGE 45

38 C for warm temperatures, and near 15 C for cool temperatures. With this in mind, the control device should be capable of performing an emergency cutoff if s kin side temperatures approach the pain threshold limits. How the temperature gradients are presented to the skin is also of importance The designated ar ea of experimentation will be on the outside (dorsal) or inside (ventral) of the forearm, where surfa ce geometry, specifically rate of curvature, can vary widely between individuals. For this reason, the device should be made flexible to conform to different curved surfaces. Also, a means of comfortably attaching the device to the forearm is necessary. Th e device and components should be hel d securely to the arm while not obscuring the ability to sense changes in temperature with kinesthetic interaction. 4.2 Design and Components U sed The thermal feedback display presented in this paper consists of five discretely controlled rows of thermoelectric elements. Each independent row is made up of 4 elements connected electrically in series, and thermally in parallel by using n type and ptype Bi2Te3 based material The distance between each row is 0.4 inches

PAGE 46

39 Figure 19 (a) Schematic of thermoelectric array with dis cretely controlled element rows, (b) Top view of the display (c) Side view of the thermal display The thermoelectric elements have dimensions of 3.8 X 3.8 X 4.8 mm, where 4.8 mm is considered the element height. For each independent row, copper tape was used as the electrical contact material between elements The copper tape has an adhesive backing that attaches to the substrate, and is soldered to each element on the cop per side as seen in Figure 20. The spacing between each element is thought to have an impact on how thermal information is perceived. For this reason, each row was kept a distance of 0.4 apart. This should allow each row to be perceived separately while still exhibiting the spatial summation needed to experience the thermal grill illusion.

PAGE 47

40 Figure 20 Design section for a proposed thermal dis play. Flexibility was accomplished by using a thin vinyl film (2.5 x 2.1 x 0.004) as a substrate on the display side. The substrate acts to retain geometric dimensions of each row, as well as provide protection from electric shock as currents up to 4 Am peres could be used during an experiment. A prototype with two substrates was tested, but was found to have much greater rigidity than the single sided substrate version. As this leaves electrical contacts exposed at one side, a layer of insulation was add ed as individual pieces to the adhesive on the copper tape which minimizes risk of short circuit across multiple elements and allows flexibility. The display is capable of a wide range of curvature sufficient to be used on forearms of all sizes. Temperatur e control of the device at the skin interface was a main priority. Thin film resistive temperature detectors (RTDs) were placed at the end of each row for this measurement The sensors used were TFD series flat element detectors from Omega, Inc. The sensor uses a platinum resistance detector created specifically for rapid, flat surface measurement. Rapid response is achieved by possessing a large surfacearea to volume ratio along with a high conductivity ceramic substrate [39] The RTD works by experiencing linear changes in resistance as temperature fluctuates. When a voltage is appl ied to the sensor, the change in voltage potential across each RTD is monitor ed via

PAGE 48

41 an input device and used to safely and effectively operate the thermal display. Figure 21 s hows the overall control logic of the system. Phidgets, Inc, produces a variety of control boards commercially available that were used to perf orm the electrical tasks required. A 6port USB hub i s used to interface the sensor inputs to the control program. High current output was needed for the device (Up to 4.4 A) and i s provided by a PWM motor controller which can continuously output up to 14 A. This device was also interfaced with the control program. Figure 21 Contr ol flowchart for a thermal display with five independent thermoelectric rows. To test the thermal grill effect with this device, the PWM controller will bring each row up to a maximum temperature in timed succession Once the maximum temperature is reached in a particular row, it is slowly cooled at rate less perceivable than the heating. Figure 22 shows the principle graphically. As this process is repeated in a

PAGE 49

42 loop, the thermal grill effect should caus e the subjects to sense continual summation of temperature in close proximity thus perceiving a sensation of c onstant heating under the pain threshold [18] Figure 22 Transient temperature control of five independent rows of thermoelectric elements. By applying the transient temperature to a subject, the thermal grill effect will be tested. 4.3 Simulated P erformance Static performance analysis of the device at different time steps was done, not only to visualize the control of the device, but also to determine if heat would be leaked into adjacent tissue areas where another row was interacting. One of the main deficiencies in current thermal displa y research is in the modeling of a system designed to predict the thermal performance at the receptor location. Yamamoto [40] developed a model, but only character izes the cooler surface temperature based on thermal contact resistance between a finger tip and the device substrate. T he model presented in this paper differs in the fact that is able to describe the temperature gradient at a particular

PAGE 50

43 depth within the skin. Three tissue layers were modeled as epidermis, dermis and muscle tissue. Published values for thermal conductivity were found to be 0.209 W/mK, 0.322 W/mK, 0.419 W/mK for epidermis, dermis and muscle tissue respectively [41] The Vinyl substrate located between the copper contact and epidermis layer was assigned conductivity as 0.311 W/mK based on a commercial used polymer tested in research [42] The top side of the m uscle layer was held constrained to mimic an internal body temperature (TB) of 310 K and the substrate was held at room temperature at 298 K ELEMENT226 brick elements were again used to model the therm oelectric elements. ELEMENT227 t etrahedral elements were applied to the copper contact material again as well. The Seebeck Coefficient for this model was decreased to 170 ith typical bulk material properties [43] The designated tissue volumes were meshed with SOLID87 tetrahedral elements. Because the tissue volumes contained a much larger number of nodes compared to the previous analyses, the mesh size had to be reduced to one third the element width, or 1.2 mm. While this is not the most optimal size, it was seen in previous verifications that temperature gradients were not affected nearly as much as the heat flux results with mesh sizes of this order. This was verified by modeling only one row of the device which, with a mesh size equal to one sixth the element height, was under the maximum node count. Figure 23 shows the agreement between temperatures in the direction of heat pumping between the coarse mesh size used in the analysis and a fine mesh.

PAGE 51

44 Figure 23 Comp arison of temperature profiles in th e direction of heat flow for a coarse mesh and fine mesh size. Since temperature is the important parameter in this analysis, the larger mesh size is used with confidence. Referring back to Figure 22, when any row is at its peak value, the rows in succession should be at 75%, 50%, 25% and 0% of the max value. By translating this to the model, current inputs for each time step were div ided based on this. Figure 24 Components and design of the FEA model simulating a haptic device on skin tissue.

PAGE 52

45 Skin receptors are located at a shallow depth within t he dermis layer of tissue. From the model, the epidermis dermis interface temper ature gradient will show how the thermal information is presented to the receptors. Figure 25 is a time step representation where the third row is at its maximum temperature. The maximum temperature shown for this condition at this interface is about 40 C The model shows hot junction temperature s near what was crudely tested experimentally under the same current input along the third row. The physical experiment consisted of placing the prototype device seen in Figure 19 on a desk at 23 C applying a current via an adjustable current limiting pow er supply, and using a surface temperature probe to measure the topside surface while a finger was placed on top to act as a heat exit path at an element site. At a current of 3. 0 A, a temperature of 42 C was measured at the top surface. Considering exact material properties were not known for the macroelements being used, this was considered satisfactory. Figure 25 (a) Temperature profile at the epidermis dermis interface when the third thermoelectric row is at a maximu m value (b) Plot of the profile at the center of an element in Row 3.

PAGE 53

46 At each time step in Figure 27, it is seen how the most active row s penetrate best into the de rmis. This is desirable since the temperature receptor is most sensitive to changes in he at flux. As the ti me step transitions, this zone of higher energy is shown shifting from one row to the next, which describes the application of the thermal grill effe ct. Figure 26 Description of the orientation of discretely controlled thermoelectric rows.

PAGE 54

47 Figure 27 (a) Plot of temperature profile along the interface between the epidermis and dermis. The path travels across each of the five thermoelectric rows, (b) Time step nodal contour map of the thermal display while testing the thermal grill effect. 4.4 Next S teps in Device Development With the current simulation showing good performance characteristi cs under the given conditions, c ompletion of the functional prototype will be the central focus. As progress is ongoing in the development of a functional prototype, various modifications are plan ned to improve the device. A constant temperature of the topside (nonskinside) will be maintained by use of a channeled pathway which will have a temperature controlled fluid flowing through it. Current de velopment of this system is underway, where device flexibility retention is the main issue being worked. The second device improvement is in controlling the spatial dimensions of the individual elements. Because the first prototype devices have been built by hand, certain sacrifices to achieve initial testing were made. While soldering, elements tended to shift out of alignment. By creating a fixture to keep each element within the array from shifting linearly or radially,

PAGE 55

48 a much better prototype can be bui lt while still working in the convenience of our own lab.

PAGE 56

49 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Recommendations for Advancement In this work, a review of the thermoelectric effect its history and fundamental theory has been applied to analyzing modern systems of self assembly and haptics. The effect, typically described using one dimensional, thermodynamic conservation equations, was found to be insufficient in providing detailed information about local thermal effects caused by n onhomogeneities introduced in a s elf assembled system. A threedimensional FEA model was created by writing an Ansys batch program which automated most of the steps required to perform an analysis for a 6x6 array of elements with a redundancy of 4. In the modern one dimensional models, nonideal system characteristics are introduced by quantifying thermal contact resistance, entry and exit conduction regions and fill factor which have been shown to increase model accuracy at small size scales. Considering the submillimeter part sizes pro posed for self assembly processes, these nontraditional characteristics were deemed necessary to be included in the threedimensional model Methods for equating the two models were presented and verified through the comparison of simulation results. The first method varied current density over a range including the calculated optimal condition. Very good agreement was seen between junction temperature, and a basic correlation was seen between the cold junction heat flux values. As the mesh size was decreased during testing, better agreement was seen. Further refinement could not be made, unfortunately, due to a maximum node count

PAGE 57

50 of 256,000 being reached with element size equal to one sixth the length of a thermoelectric element. A further increase in agr eement could be tested by submitting the batch code to CIRCE, a university computer more equipped to handle super fine, highnode count models. The second model run at optimal conditions showed better agreement. An error of 0.47 W/cm2 was seen between the two models, and was fairly consistent for each case. Further investigation could be done to find what drives this difference of consistent magnitude Analysis of the self assembled case was done using a model similar to that of th e verification. An ideal configuration was first simulated to provide a baseline for performance comparison. Unexpectedly, local performance within the center cluster tended to increase with a reduction of assembled elements as well as total heat flux at the cold junction. This oc curred for the cases with two and three assembled elements. It was found, however, that the coefficient of performance decreased in the cases missing elements which describes a less efficient use of input power For the case of only one assembled element, thermal performance degraded severely by displaying the domination of Joule heating within the single center element. Finally, a project integrating haptics with thermoelectric devices was undertaken with the intention of designing, simulating, and building a thermal display with the capability to test the thermal grill effect. This was accomplished by assembling a device with five independently controlled rows, each containing four thermoelectric macro scale elements. Temperature control was added by attac hing thin dimension RTDs to the skinside of an element. A commercially available signal input board will be used to receive temperature data and interface to a control program. Also, 5 channels of PWM DC motor

PAGE 58

51 control will be interfaced to the control pr ogram and used to modulate the input current for each thermoelectric row of the display. FEA was done to describe and model various discrete points in time within the inherently transient situation. As temperature receptors are, on average, 1 mm below the skin surface, the temperature gradient due to an applied surface temperature was analyzed to see how e ffective a thermal display can be at delivering the thermal information to a receptor. While static analysis showed good agreement and was powerful in describing how the temperature is presented to receptors within the dermis layer of tissue, improvement could be made here by performing a transient analysis of the various independent rows heating and cooling in the sequence described.

PAGE 59

52 List of References [1] Seebeck, S. (1823). Magbetische Plarisation der Matalle und Erze durch Temperatur Differenz. Abhandlungen der Preussischen, Wissenshaften, 265373. [2] Goldsmid, H. Julian. (1964). Thermoelectric Refrigeration. Wembley, England: Plenum Press NY. [3] Borelius, G., Keesom, W.H., Johansson, C.H., Linde, J.O (1932). Proc. Acad. Sci. Amsterdam 35, 10. [4] Altenkirch, E. (1911). Phys. Z 12, 920. [5] Boncheva, M., Bruzewicz, D.A., Whitesides, G.M. (2003). Millimeter scale self assembly and its applications. Pure Applied Chemistry 75, 5, 621 630. [6] Wu, D.Y., Meure, S., Solomon, D. ( 2008). Self healing polymeric materials: A review of recent developments. Progress in Polymer Science 33, 5 479 522. [7] Bentley, R.E. (1998). The use of elemental thermocouples in high temperature precision thermometry. Measurement 23 35 46. [8] McGuire, M.A., Schmidt, A.M., Gascoin, F., Snyder, G.J., DiSalvo, F.J. (2006). Thermoelectric and structural properties of a new Chevrel phase: Ti0.3Mo5RuSe8. Journal of Solid State Chemistry 179 2158 2163. [9] MacDonald, D.K.C. (1962). Thermoelectricity: and introduction to the principles. Ottawa, Canada: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, NY. [10] Hou, P. Y., Bask aran, R., and Bhringer, K. F.,( 2009 ). "Optimization of Microscale Thermoelectric Cooling (TEC) Element Dimensions for Hotspot Cooling Applications. Journal of Electronic Materials, 38 ,7, 950 953. [11] Fujimoto, S. (2007). Protections of the again of ntype Bi Te thermoelectric cooling systems. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 443, 182190. [12] Harman, T.C., Honig, J.M. (1967). Thermoelectric and Thermomagnetic Effects and Applications. New York, New York: McgrawHill Book Company. [13] Ho, H. (2007). Development and Evaluation of a Thermal Model for Haptic interfaces. Ph.D. Dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology

PAGE 60

53 [14] Pelesko, J.A. (2007). Self Assembly: The Science of Things That Put Themselves Together. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC 4176. [15] Nomoto, S. et al. (2004). Role of body afferent pathways of heat and cold in body temperature regulation. International Journal of Biometeorology 49, 67 85. [16] Jones, L.A. (2008). Warm or Cool, Large or Small? The challenge of Thermal Displ ays. IEEE Transactions of Haptics 1, 53 70. [17] Deml B. et al. (2006). Development and Experimental Evaluation of a Thermal Display. Proc. EuroHaptics Conf, 257262. [18] Yang, G. (2009). Spatial Acuity and Summation on the Hand: The Role of Thermal Cues in Material Discrimination. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 71 156163. [19] Yamamoto, A. et al. (2004). Control of Thermal Tactile Display Based on Predictions of Conta ct Temperature. Proceedings from IEEE International Conference of Robotics and Automation, 15361541. [20] Green, B.G. (2004). Temperature Perception and Nociception. Journal of Neurobiology 61, 13 29. [21] MacLean, K.E., Roderick, J.B. (1999). Smart Tangible Dis plays in the Everyday World: A haptic Door Knob. Proceeding from the Intl Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics 203 208. [22] Bolanowski, S. J. et al. (1988). Four Channels Mediate the Mechanical Aspects of Touch. Journal of Accustical Soc. of Am. 84, 16801694. [23] Bolanowski, S. J. et al. (1982). Temperature and Criterion Effects in a Somatosensory Subsystem: A Neurophysiological and Psychophysical Study. Journal of Neurophysiology 48, 836855. [24] Johnson, K.O. et al. (1973). Peripheral Neural Determina nts of Temperature Discrimination in Man: A Correlative Study of Responses to Cooling Skin. Journal of Neurophysiology 36, 347370. [25] Duclaux, R. et al. (1972). The Temperature Sensitivity of the Type I Slowly Adapting Mechanoreceptors in Cats and Monkeys. J ournal of Physiology 224, 647664. [26] Darian Smith, I. et al. (1977). Thermal Sensibility and Thermal Receptors. Journal of Investigative Dermatology 69, 146153. [27] Ansys, Inc. (2009). Ansys Academic Research release v12.1 product documentation. Help System, Thermal Electric Analysis, Chapter 2.2. [28] Antonova, E. E. (2005). Finite Elements for Thermoelectric Device Analysis in Ansys. International Conference on Thermoelectrics 200203.

PAGE 61

54 [29] Gin, G. (1999). Cooling performance of integrated thermoelectric microcooler. SolidState Electronics 43, 5, 923 929. [30] Yim, W.M., Fitzke, E., Rosi, F.D. (1966). Thermoelectric Properties of Bi2Te3Sb2Se3 PseudoTernary Alloys in the Temperature Range 77 to 300 K. Journal of Material Science 1 52 65. [31] Bottner, H., Nurnus, J., Gavrikov, A., Kuhner, G., Jagle, M., Kunzel, C., Eberhard, D. Plescher, G., Shubert, A., Schlerch, K. (2004). New Thermoelectric Components Using Microsystem Technologies. Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems 13, 1, 414 420. [32] Venkatasubramanian, R. (2004). Supperlattice Thermoelectric Technology. DOE/EPRI high Efficiency Thermoelectrics Workshop. San Diego, CA. [33] Marlow. (2006). Marlow Inductries, product specifications. http://www.marlow.com [34] Crane, N., Mishra, P., Murray J r., J.L., Nolas, G.L. (2009) Self Assembly for Integration of Microscale Thermoelectric Coolers. Journal of Electronic Materials, 38, 7, 1252 1256. [35] Miner, A. (2007). The Compatibility of Thin Films and Nanostructures in Thermoelectric Cooling Systems. Journal of Heat Transfer 129, 805812. [36] Ziolkowski, P. (2010). Estimation of Thermoelectric Generator Performance by Finite Element Modeling. Journal of Electronic Materials [37] Defrin, R., BensteinSheraizin, A., Bezalel, A., Mantzur, O., Arendt Nielsen, L. ( 2008). The spatial characterization of the painful thermal grill illusion. Pain 138 577 586. [38] Green, B.G. (2002). Synthetic heat at mild temperatures. Somatosens Mot Res, 19, 130 138. [39] Omega, Inc. (2010). Thin Film Detector Flat RTD Element Product S pecification Documentation. http://www.omega.com/ppt/pptsc.asp?ref=TFD_RTD&bt=cart [40] Yamamoto, A., Hashimoto, H., Higuchi, T. (2003). Tactile Display for presenting thermal characteristics of materials based on prediction of contact temperature. Proceedings from the 8th Annual Conference of the Virtual Reality Society of Japan, 233236. [41] Cohen, M.L. (1977). Measurement of the Thermal Properties of Human Skin. A Review. The Journal of Investi gative Dermatology, 69, 333 338. [42] Ghose, S., Watson, K.A., Working, D.C., Connell, J.W., Smith, J.G., Sun, Y.P. (2008). Thermal conductivity of ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer/nanofiller blends. Composites Science and Technology 68 1843 1853. [43] Kou, C.H ., Hwang, C.S., Jeng, M.S., Su, W.S., Chou, Y.W., Ku, J.R. (2010). Thermoelectric transport properties of bismuth telluride bulk materials fabricated by ball milling and spark plasma sintering. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 496, 687 690.

PAGE 62

55 Appendi ces

PAGE 63

56 Appendix A Ansys Batch Code A.1 Micro thermoelectric Cooler /title, Thermoelectric Cooler 6X6 R=4 /VUP,1,z /VIEW,1,1,1,1 /TRIAD,OFF /NUMBER,1 /PNUM,MAT,1 /nopr /PREP7 Element size/number N =36 S =sqrt(N) le =2e 4 h =2e 4 ch =2.5e 5 sub =5.0e 5 sink =7.5e 5 !Array Characteristics R =4 f =0.9 !Electric Conditions J =1.3485e7 !Current density (A/m^2) I =J*R*le*le !Current to be applied !Source and Sink Temps Ts = 300 Ta = 325 spc =(S*le/sqrt(f) S*le) / (S 1) !toffst ,273 Material Properties K = 2 n type mp,rsvx,1,1.0e 5 !Resistivity mp,kxx,1,K !Th.Conductivity mp,sbkx,1, 240e 6 !Seebeck p type mp,rsvx,2,1.0e 5 !Resistivity mp,kxx,2,K !Th.Conductivity mp,sbkx,2,240e 6 !Seebeck Contacts mp,rsvx,3,1.7e 8 !Resistivity mp,kxx,3,400 !Th.Conductivity Substrate mp,rsvx,4,1e6 Kch = 1e6 !Conductance (W/m^2K) g = 0.0001 K_star = K/g !Thermal contact conductance (W/m^2K) Kche = (Kch*K_star*f)/(Kch+K_star*F)

PAGE 64

57 Appendix A (continued) khce = Kche*(sub+sink) mp,kxx,4,khce !Th.Conductivity Element types et,1,226,110 et,2,227,110 et,3,solid87 !Block model element block, (5*spc/2+2*le), (5*spc/2+3*le),,le,,h !1N block, (3*spc/2+le), (3*spc/2+2*le), ,le,,h !2N block, (5*spc/2+2*le), (5*spc/2+3*le),spc+le,spc+2*le,,h !3N block, (3*spc/2+le), (3*spc/2+2*le),spc+le,spc+2*le,,h !4N block,3*spc/2+le,3*spc/2+2*le,,le,,h !5N block,5*spc/2+2*le,5*s pc/2+3*le,,le,,h !6N block,3*spc/2+le,3*spc/2+2*le,spc+le,spc+2*le,,h !7N block,5*spc/2+2*le,5*spc/2+3*le,spc+le,spc+2*le,,h !8N block, (spc/2), (spc/2+le),2*spc+2*le,2*spc+3*le,,h !9N block,spc /2,spc/2+le,2*spc+2*le,2*spc+3*le,,h !10N block, (spc/2), (spc/2+le),3*spc+3*le,3*spc+4*le,,h !11N block,spc/2,spc/2+le,3*spc+3*le,3*spc+4*le,,h !12N block, (5*spc/2+2*le), (5*spc/2+3*le),4*spc+4*le,4*spc+5* le,,h !13N block, (3*spc/2+le), (3*spc/2+2*le),4*spc+4*le,4*spc+5*le,,h !14N block, (5*spc/2+2*le), (5*spc/2+3*le),5*spc+5*le,5*spc+6*le,,h !15N block, (3*spc/2+le), (3*spc/2+2*le),5*spc+5*le,5*spc+6*le,,h !16N block,3*spc/2+le,3*spc/2+2*le,4*spc+4*le ,4*spc+5*le,,h !17N block,5*spc/2+2*le,5*spc/2+3*le,4*spc+4*le,4*spc+5*le,,h !18N block,3*spc/2+le,3*spc/2+2*le,5*spc+5*le,5*spc+6*le,,h !19N block,5*spc/2+2*le,5*spc/2+3*le,5*spc+5*le,5*spc+6*le,,h !20N block, (spc/2), (spc/2+ le),,le,,h !21P block,spc/2,spc/2+le,,le,,h !22P block, (spc/2), (spc/2+le),spc+le,spc+2*le,,h !23P block,spc/2,spc/2+le,spc+le,spc+2*le,,h !24P block, (5*spc/2+2*le), (5*spc/2+3*le),2*spc+2*le,2*spc+3*le,,h !25P block, (3*spc/2+le), (3*spc/2+2*le),2*spc+2*le,2*spc+3*le,,h !26P block, (5*spc/2+2*le), (5*spc/2+3*le),3*spc+3*le,3*spc+4*le,,h !27P block, (3*spc/2+le), (3*spc/2+2*le),3*spc+3*le,3*spc+4*le, ,h !28P block,3*spc/2+le,3*spc/2+2*le,2*spc+2*le,2*spc+3*le,,h !29P block,5*spc/2+2*le,5*spc/2+3*le,2*spc+2*le,2*spc+3*le,,h !30P block,3*spc/2+le,3*spc/2+2*le,3*spc+3*le,3*spc+4*le,,h !31P block,5*spc/2+2*le,5*spc/2+3*le,3*spc+3*l e,3*spc+4*le,,h !32P block, (spc/2), (spc/2+le),4*spc+4*le,4*spc+5*le,,h !33P block,spc/2,spc/2+le,4*spc+4*le,4*spc+5*le,,h !34P block, (spc/2), (spc/2+le),5*spc+5*le,5*spc+6*le,,h !35P block,spc /2,spc/2+le,5*spc+5*le,5*spc+6*le,,h !36P !Block model contacts block, (5*spc/2+4*le), (3*spc/2+le),,spc+2*le,h,h+ch block, (5*spc/2+3*le),(spc/2+le),,spc+2*le,, ch block, (spc/2+le),5*spc/2+3*le,,spc+2*le,h,h+ch

PAGE 65

58 Appendix A (continued) block,3*spc/2+le,5*spc/2+3*le,,3*spc+4*le,, ch block, (spc/2+le),5*spc/2+3*le,2*spc+2*le,3*spc+4*le,h,h+ch block,spc/2+le, (5*spc/2+3*le),2*spc+2*le,3*spc+4*le,, ch block, (5*spc/2+3*le), (3*spc/2+le),2*spc+2*le,5*spc+6*le,h,h+ch block, (5*spc/2+3*le),spc /2+le,4*spc+4*le,5*spc+6*le,, ch block, (spc/2+le),5*spc/2+3*le,4*spc+4*le,5*spc+6*le,h,h+ch block,3*spc/2+le,5*spc/2+4*le,4*spc+4*le,5*spc+6*le,, ch !Block model substrate block, (5*spc/2+3*le),(5*spc/2+3*le),,5*spc+6*le,h+ch,h+ch+sub block, (5*spc/2+3* le),(5*spc/2+3*le),,5*spc+6*le, ch, (ch+sub) !Block model sink and source mass block, (5*spc/2+3*le),(5*spc/2+3*le),,5*spc+6*le, (ch+sub), (ch+sub+sink) block, (5*spc/2+3*le),(5*spc/2+3*le),,5*spc+6*le,h+ch+sub, h+ch+sub+sink vglue,all !Mesh Control !TE elements esize,le/6 type,1 mat,1 vmesh,1 vmesh,2 vmesh,3 vmesh,4 vmesh,5 vmesh,6 vmesh,7 vmesh,8 !vmesh,9 vmesh,10 vmesh,11 vmesh,12 vmesh,13 vmesh,14 vmesh,15 vmesh,16 vmesh,17 vmesh,18 vmesh,19 vmesh,20 mat,2 vmesh,21 vmesh,22 vmesh,23 vmesh,24 vmesh, 25 vmesh,26 vmesh,27 vmesh,28 vmesh,29 vmesh,30 vmesh,31

PAGE 66

59 Appendix A (continued) vmesh,32 vmesh,33 vmesh,34 vmesh,35 vmesh,36 !Contacts !esize,le/4 type,2 mat,3 vmesh,53,54 vmesh,57,64 !Substrate !esize,le/3 type,3 mat,4 vmesh,55,56 !Sink/Source Mass vmesh,51,52 !Boundary Contitions !Sink Mass nsel,s,loc,z, (ch+sub+sink) d,all,temp,Ts !Source Mass nsel,s,loc,z,h+ch+sub+sink d,all,temp,Ta nsel,s,loc,z, ch nr=ndnext(0) !Apply Electric !Terminal ground !A276 is lead surface nsel,s,loc,x,(5*spc/2+4*le) d,all,volt,0 !Terminal apply current !A221 is lead surface nsel,s,loc,x, (5*spc/2+4*le) cp,1,volt,all ni=ndnext(0) f,ni,amps,I nsel,all fini !SOLUTIONS /SOLU antype,static solve fini !POST PROCESSING /POST1 plnsol,temp

PAGE 67

60 Appendix A (continued) !Top surface temperature profile PATH,path1,2,30,50 PPATH,1,0,(le+spc)/2,0,le,0, PPATH,2,0,(le+spc)/2,(6*le+5*spc),le,0, Appendix A (Continued) PDEF,,TEMP,,AVG PLPATH,TEMP !Bottom surface temperature profile PATH,path2,2,30,50 PPATH,1,0,(le+spc)/2,0,0,0, PPATH,2,0,(le+spc)/2,(6*le+5*spc),0,0, PDEF,,TEMP,,AVG PLPATH,TEMP !Full side temperature profile at edge PATH,path3,2,30,20 PPATH,1,0,(le+spc)/2,le/2, (ch+sub+sink),0, PPATH,2,0,(le+spc)/2,le/2,(h+ch+sub+sink),0, PDEF,,TEMP,,AVG PLPATH,TEMP !Center elem ent temperature profile PATH,path4,2,30,20 PPATH,1,0, (le+spc)/2,7*le/2,0,0, PPATH,2,0, (le+spc)/2,7*le/2,le,0, PDEF,,TEMP,,AVG PLPATH,TEMP !Edge element temperature profile PATH,path5,2,30,20 PPATH,1,0,(le+spc)/2,le/2,0,0, PPATH,2,0,(le+spc)/2,le/2,le,0, PDEF,,TEMP,,AVG PLPATH,TEMP !========List Heat Rates at Ts Boundary========! nsel,s,loc,z, (ch+sub+sink) nplot prrsol,HEAT fini A.2 Haptic Display /title, Thermoelectric Haptic Display /VUP,1,z /VIEW,1,1,1,1 /TRIAD,OFF /NUMBER,1 /PNUM,MAT,1 /nopr /PREP7 Element size/number rs =0.0100

PAGE 68

61 Appendix A (Continued) es =0.0125 le =0.0038 h =0.0048 ch =1.0e 4 sub =1.0e 4 epid=5.0e 4 derm=1.5e 3 musc=3.0e 3 toffst,273 Ts =23 Tb =37 Ii = 0 Iii = 0 Iiii= 3 Iiv = 0 Iv = 0 Material Properties K = 2 n type mp,rsvx,1,1.0e 5 !Resistivity mp,kxx,1,K !Th.Conductivity mp,sbkx,1, 170e 6 !Seebeck p type mp,rsvx,2,1.0e 5 !Resistivity mp,kxx,2,K !Th.Conductivity mp,sbkx,2,170e 6 !Seebeck Contacts mp,rsvx,3,1.7e 8 !Resisti vity mp,kxx,3,400 !Th.Conductivity Substrate mp,kxx,4,0.25 !Epidermis mp,kxx,5,0.209 !Dermis mp,kxx,6,0.322 !muscle mp,kxx,7,0.419 Element types et,1,226,110 et,2,227,110 et,3,solid87 !Block model elements !Row 1 n type block, (2*le+3*es /2), (le+3*es/2),,le,,h block,es/2,le+es/2,,le,,h !Row 2 n type

PAGE 69

62 Appendix A (continued) block, (2*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),le+rs,2*le+rs,,h block,es/2,le+es/2,le+rs,2*le+rs,,h !Row 3 n type block, (2*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs,,h block,es/ 2,le+es/2,2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs,,h !Row 4 n type block, (2*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs,,h block,es/2,le+es/2,3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs,,h !Row 5 n type block, (2*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs,,h block,es/2,le+es/2,4*le+4*rs,5*le+4* rs,,h !Row 1 p type block, (le+es/2), (es/2),,le,,h block,le+3*es/2,2*le+3*es/2,,le,,h !Row 2 p type block, (le+es/2), (es/2),le+rs,2*le+rs,,h block,le+3*es/2,2*le+3*es/2,le+rs,2*le+rs,,h !Row 3 p type block, (le+es/2), (es/2),2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs,,h blo ck,le+3*es/2,2*le+3*es/2,2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs,,h !Row 4 p type block, (le+es/2), (es/2),3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs,,h block,le+3*es/2,2*le+3*es/2,3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs,,h !Row 5 p type block, (le+es/2), (es/2),4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs,,h block,le+3*es/2,2*le+3*es/2,4*l e+4*rs,5*le+4*rs,,h !Block Contacts block, (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),,le,, ch block, (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),le+rs,2*le+rs,, ch block, (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs,, ch block, (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs,, ch block (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs,, ch block, (2*le+3*es/2), (es/2),,le,h,h+ch block, (2*le+3*es/2), (es/2),le+rs,2*le+rs,h,h+ch block, (2*le+3*es/2), (es/2),2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs,h,(h+ch) Appendix A (continued) block, (2*le+3*es/2), (es /2),3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs,h,h+ch block, (2*le+3*es/2), (es/2),4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs,h,h+ch block, (le+es/2),(le+es/2),,le,, ch block, (le+es/2),(le+es/2),le+rs,2*le+rs,, ch block, (le+es/2),(le+es/2),2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs,, ch block, (le+es/2),(le+es/2),3*le+3* rs,4*le+3*rs,, ch block, (le+es/2),(le+es/2),4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs,, ch block,es/2,2*le+3*es/2,,le,h,h+ch block,es/2,2*le+3*es/2,le+rs,2*le+rs,h,h+ch block,es/2,2*le+3*es/2,2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs,h,h+ch

PAGE 70

63 Appendix A (continued) block,es/2,2*le+3*es/2,3*le+3*rs,4 *le+3*rs,h,h+ch block,es/2,2*le+3*es/2,4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs,h,h+ch block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2,,le,, ch block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2,le+rs,2*le+rs,, ch block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2,2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs,, ch block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2,3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs,, ch block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2,4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs,, ch !Substrate block, (5*le/2+3*es/2),(5*le/2+3*es/2), le,6*le+4*rs,h+ch,h+ch+sub block, (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),,le, ch, (ch+sub) block, (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),le+rs,2*le+rs, ch, (ch+sub) block (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs, ch, (ch+sub) block, (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs, ch, (ch+sub) block, (3*le+3*es/2), (le+3*es/2),4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs, ch, (ch+sub) block, (le+es/2),(le+es/2),,le, ch, (ch+sub) block, (le+ es/2),(le+es/2),le+rs,2*le+rs, ch, (ch+sub) block, (le+es/2),(le+es/2),2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs, ch, (ch+sub) block, (le+es/2),(le+es/2),3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs, ch, (ch+sub) block, (le+es/2),(le+es/2),4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs, ch, (ch+sub) block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2, ,le, ch, (ch+sub) block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2,le+rs,2*le+rs, ch, (ch+sub) block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2,2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs, ch, (ch+sub) block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2,3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs, ch, (ch+sub) block,le+3*es/2,3*le+3*es/2,4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs, ch, (ch+s ub) !Tissue block, (5*le/2+3*es/2),(5*le/2+3*es/2), le,6*le+4*rs,h+ch+sub,h+ch+sub+epid block, (5*le/2+3*es/2),(5*le/2+3*es/2), le,6*le+4*rs,h+ch+sub+epid,h+ch+sub+epid+derm block, (5*le/2+3*es/2),(5*le/2+3*es/2), le,6*le+4*rs,h+ch+sub+epid+derm,h+ch+sub+ epid+derm+musc vglue,all !Mesh Control !Elements esize,le/3 type,1 mat,1 vmesh,1,10 mat,2 vmesh,11,20 !Contacts esize,le/4 type,2 mat,3 vmesh,83,92 vmesh,94,106,3 vmesh,93,105,3 vmesh,95,107,3 !Substrate type,3 mat,4

PAGE 71

64 Appendix A (continued) vmesh,108 !Epidermis mat,5 vmesh,80 !Dermis mat,6 vmesh,81 !Muscle esize,le/3 mat,7 vmesh,82 !=====Boundary Conditions======! !Source Temp nsel,s,loc,z, ch d,all,temp,Ts !Body Temp nsel,s,loc,z,h+ch+sub+epid+derm+musc d,all,temp,Tb !====Terminal Ground====! !Row 1 !nsel,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,,le nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,,le d,all,volt,0 !Row 2 !nsel,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,le+rs,2*le+rs nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,le+rs,2*le+rs d,all,volt,0 !Row 3 !nsel ,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs d,all,volt,0 !Row 4 !nsel,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,3*le+3*rs,4*le +3*rs d,all,volt,0 !Row 5 !nsel,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs d,all,volt,0

PAGE 72

65 Appendix A (continued) !====Terminal Current Input====! !Row 1 nsel,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,,le !nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,,le ni=ndnext(0) cp,1,volt,all f,ni,amps,Ii !Row 2 nsel,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,le+rs,2*le+rs !nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,le+rs,2*le+rs nii=ndnext(0) cp,2,volt,all f,nii, amps,Iii !Row 3 nsel,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs !nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,2*le+2*rs,3*le+2*rs niii=ndnext(0) cp,3,volt,all f,niii,amps,Iiii !Row 4 nsel,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,3*le+3*rs,4*le+3*rs niv=ndnext(0) cp,4,volt,all f,niv,amps,Iiv !Row 5 nsel,s,loc,x, (3*le+3*es/2) nsel,r,loc,y,4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs !nsel,s,loc,x,(3*le+3*es/2) !nsel,r,loc,y,4*le+4*rs,5*le+4*rs nv=ndnext(0) cp,5,vol t,all f,nv,amps,Iv nsel,all fini !Solution /SOLU antype,static solve fini !Post Processing /POST1 plnsol,temp

PAGE 73

66 Appendix A (continued) !Full side temperature profile at edge PATH,path1,2,30,20 PPATH,1,0,3*le/2+3*es/2,(5*le/2+2*rs), (ch),0, PPATH,2,0,3 *le/2+3*es/2,(5*le/2+2*rs),(h+ch+sub+epid),0, PDEF,,TEMP,,AVG PLPATH,TEMP !Top surface profile PATH,path2,2,30,50 PPATH,1,0,(le+es)/2,0,h+ch+sub+epid,0, PPATH,2,0,(le+es)/2,5*le+4*rs,h+ch+sub+epid,0, PDEF,,TEMP,,AVG PLPATH,TEMP fini

PAGE 74

67 Appendix B Mat lab Analytical Solutions Code B.1 Plotting TC, TH, and Q versus Current Density %System Properties Ta = 325; %T ambient (K) Ts = 300; %T heat sink (K) Kh = 10^6; %Exit conductance (W/m^2K) Kc = 10^6; %Entrance conductance (W/m^2K) k = 2.0; %Element conductivity (W/mK) S = 240e 6; %Seeback coef (V/K) I = [0:.1:4]; %Input current (A) r = 1e 5; %Element resistivity (Ohm m) f = 0.9; %Fill factor n = 0.01; R = 4; %Redundency %Element dimensions Le = 2e 4; %Element thickness (m) %RE %RE = 1e 8; %Electrical contact resistance (ohm m^2) RE = r*Le*(1+2*n); %K, Khe and Kce g = 1e 4; %Ratio of TE conductivity and contact conuctivity (Thermal)(m) Kstar = k/g; %Thermal contact conducta nce (W/m^2K) Khe = Kh*Kstar*f/(Kh+Kstar*f); %Exit thermal conductance (W/m^2K) Kce = Kc*Kstar*f/(Kc+Kstar*f); %Entry thermal conductance (W/m^2K) K = k/Le; %Equivalent element conductance (W/m^2K) for i=1:1:length(I) %Current %Current Density (A/m^2) J(i) = I(i)/R/Le^2; %Simultaneous energy equations A = [J(i)*S+K+Kce/f K ; K J(i)*S K Khe/f]; C = [Kce/f*Ts+0.5.*J(i).*J(i)*RE ; Khe/f*Ta 0.5*J(i).*J(i).*RE]; X = A \ C; Tc(i) = X(1); %Cold J n temperature ( K) Th(i) = X(2); %Hot J n temperature (K) Qp(i) = J(i).*S*Tc(i) J(i).*J(i).*RE/2 K*(Th(i) Tc(i)); %Heat flux (W/m^2) Qp2(i) = f*Qp(i)/10000; %Heat flux (Total area units) (W/cm^2K) Qcrane(i) = Kce*(Ts Tc(i))/10000; P(i) = RE* J(i)^2+J(i)*S*(Th(i) Tc(i)); end

PAGE 75

68 Appendix B (continued) J = J' Tc = Tc' Th = Th' Qp2 = Qp2' Qcrane = Qcrane' P' %Qcrane = Kce*(Ts Tc)/10000


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim
leader nam 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 007 cr-bnu---uuuuu
008 s2010 flu s 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E14-SFE0004813
035
(OCoLC)
040
FHM
c FHM
049
FHMM
090
XX9999 (Online)
1 100
McKnight, Patrick.
0 245
Finite element analysis of thermoelectric systems with applications in self assembly and haptics
h [electronic resource] /
by Patrick McKnight.
260
[Tampa, Fla] :
b University of South Florida,
2010.
500
Title from PDF of title page.
Document formatted into pages; contains X pages.
502
Thesis (MSME)--University of South Florida, 2010.
504
Includes bibliographical references.
516
Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format.
538
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
3 520
ABSTRACT: Micro-scale self assembly is an attractive method for manufacturing sub-millimeter sized thermoelectric device parts. Challenges controlling assembly yield rates, however, have caused research to find novel ways to implement the process while still resulting in a working device. While a typical system uses single n-type and p-type material elements in series, one method used to increase the probability of a working device involves adding redundant parallel elements in clusters. The drawback to this technique is that thermal performance is affected in clusters which have missing elements. While one-dimensional modeling sufficiently describes overall performance in terms of average junction temperatures and net heat flux, it fails when a detailed thermal profile is needed for a non-homogeneous system. For this reason, a three-dimensional model was created to describe thermal performance using Ansys v12.1. From the results, local and net performance can be described to help in designing an acceptable self-assembled device. In addition, a haptic thermal display was designed using thermoelectric elements with the intention of testing the thermal grill illusion. The display consists of 5 electrically independent rows of thermoelectric elements which are controlled using pulse width modulating direct current motor controllers.
590
Advisor: Nathan Crane, Ph.D.
653
Ansys
Three-dimensional FEA
Peltier effect
Energy conversion
Thermal grill illusion
690
Dissertations, Academic
z USF
x Mechanical Engineering
Masters.
773
t USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?e14.4813