Slashdot Mirror


New Semiconductor Coolers

An anonymous reader writes: "A new thermoelectric material is 2.4X as efficient as best existing materials. The new solid state heat pumps can provide 700 watts of cooling (nearly one horsepower) with just one square centimeter. These new materials have the potential to replace current heat sinks, thermoelectric generators and mechanical heat pumps. You can also read an article in nature."

161 comments

  1. In one word... by codeButcher · · Score: 4, Funny

    cool!

    --
    Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
  2. Great..... by spagma · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Now it will only take about a square foot of this new material to cool the Pentium 4 processors.

    --
    If it won't boot, Fsck it!
    1. Re:Great..... by kirkb · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      Kudos on whoring for karma using the tried and true "Bash M$ or Intel" technique. The slashbot mods always fall for that one.


      FYI - An Intel P4-1.5ghz puts out 52watts, while an AMD Athlon-1.33ghz emits 73watts. Almost fifty percent more!

      --
      Slashdot: come for the pedantry, stay for the condescension.
    2. Re:Great..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hahaha, and kudos to you for getting screwed by the slashbot moderators for speaking out against their sheep-like behaviour.

    3. Re:Great..... by kirkb · · Score: 1

      I more or less say what I want, karma be damned. And THAT is why slashdot sucks so much - because this place has been ruined by fucking 15-year-old pukes who only care about karma. They nuture it like its some goddam Diablo 2 stat.

      --
      Slashdot: come for the pedantry, stay for the condescension.
    4. Re:Great..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Settle dwn old dude, or I'm driving this bus into the river!

    5. Re:Great..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kudos on not pointing out that intel processors can't output more than 52 watts of power and will provide you with less performance to do so.

      "Look ma, this fridge doesn't even use any power like the big fancy expensive one next door has!"

      "Yeah, but I'm getting tired of filling it with ice."

    6. Re:Great..... by Looge+Over+All! · · Score: 0

      On the other hand a 1.33GHz athlon XP (AXP 1500+) dissipates less than 50 watts whilst outperforming that 1.5GHz P4 by about 50%.

      Did you have a purpose other than an impressive display of your ignorance?

    7. Re:Great..... by spagma · · Score: 1

      What do I care about Karma anyway, it doesn't make me sleep any better at night. If you thought it was funny, fine, great. If you took it personal, then kiss my ass. In fact, I am sure I am sacraficing the everloving Karma now, by telling to to go fück yourself. So take your stats, cram them up your ass, and you can see how may watts that emits!

      --
      If it won't boot, Fsck it!
    8. Re:Great..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Actually, cuntbreath, my post was 100 percent accurate. Sure, newer athlons produce less heat than newer P4s, but the truth is that AMD holds the crown for producing the CPU with the worst heat characteristics.

      FYI - my primary box is an OC'd 1.2ghz tbird, so I ain't exactly an intel fanboy. Just telling it like it is.

    9. Re:Great..... by Looge+Over+All! · · Score: 0

      So you've never heard of the Itanium or Alpha then?

      You really are a bottomless well of ignorance aren't you?

  3. What I am wondering by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Is if it is more efficient in terms of output/input or just more efficient in terms of output/area. Heat pumps are nifty little devices, but I seem to recall that the ones we messed with in physics class weren't terribly enegry efficient. I'd be interested to know if these new ones are a little better.

    All the same, they sounds like fun things for extreme overclocking.

    1. Re:What I am wondering by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The questions in my mind that the articles didn't (and seemingly never) address:

      1) How long until I can go pick one up?
      2) How many patents are going to keep the price of this sky high for the next 20 years?

      --
      m00.
    2. Re:What I am wondering by stilwebm · · Score: 2
      From the article:


      The new materials are almost as efficient as
      mechanical heat pump systems, but for applications such as refrigerators and home heat pumps, the cost must come down.

    3. Re:What I am wondering by atrowe · · Score: 3, Informative

      The problem with these heat pumps (and Peltier coolers) is that the cooler sucks heat away from the processor side and pushes it to the exposed side of the cooler. As an unfortunate side effect, the cooler GENERATES additional heat in the process.

      As an example, if your processor generates 50 watts of heat output, the cooler might generate an additional 50. The processor itself would stay cool, but you're dumping a lot of extra heat into your case, requiring even more case ventilation.

      Not very practical for most users.

      --

      -atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.

    4. Re:What I am wondering by markmoss · · Score: 2

      It's not the patents that will keep the price sky high. Follow the links down to the actual scientific publications and think about what it takes to make such a material...

    5. Re:What I am wondering by kalgen · · Score: 1

      Indeed. And given that it has the "potential"
      to sustain up to 700 W per sq cm, the efficiency
      of the device is questionable.

      Who wants to have a 50 W processor and use an
      additional 50-500 W to cool it? Faster processors, yes, but your case turns into a
      space heater.

    6. Re:What I am wondering by Tingler · · Score: 2, Funny

      Tingler- Dictionary-carrying English speaker. I have no tolerance for poor spelling.

    7. Re:What I am wondering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want to be picky about it, the proper ENGLISH spelling is toleranse. The AMERICAN spelling may be otherwise, but I am unfamiliar with your bastardised version of the Queen's English.

    8. Re:What I am wondering by merchant_x · · Score: 1

      Damn, that's funny. I wonder if that mensa card that he carries around is actually his.

    9. Re:What I am wondering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tingler- The part of my brain that comprehends irony and suttle humor is permanantly an irrevocably broken.

    10. Re:What I am wondering by merchant_x · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but I believe you are mistaken. The Cambridge Dictionary [cambridge.org] has no listing for toleranse.

    11. Re:What I am wondering by HerringFlavoredFowl · · Score: 1

      ---Not very practical for most users.

      Depends, I know several research grade CCD manufactures who would sell a first child for a better Peltier.

      If you need to cool a small device (like a CCD camera) to -100 C you can stack several Peltiers or cool with LN.

      It's all about signal to noise, how much noise can you tolerate.

      TastesLikeHerringFlavoredChicken

      --
      TastesLikeHerringFlavoredChicken
    12. Re:What I am wondering by Old+Wolf · · Score: 2

      The impression I got from reading the article was that this device would generate up to 700W of electricity on its output lines (by converting the heat into electricity), and it would only require electricity input if you wanted to heat the target device

    13. Re:What I am wondering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "most users" aren't research grade CCD manufacturers.

    14. Re:What I am wondering by zio+pera · · Score: 1
      Au Contraire ! Heat pumps works by reversing thermic cycle used in other thermic machines (thermoelectric power plant, for instance). The typical rankine cycle used in power plant has an efficency of 0.25. That's mean that, if we use a reverse cycle, we get an efficency of 1/0.25=4=400%.

      In other words, we move 4 joules from the "warm side" to the "cold side" spending just 1 joule.

      Now, the rankine cycle is just an example. But, for the 2nd principle of thermodinamic, we can't have an efficency greater than 1 (100%) in a direct cycle. And thus, we always get an efficency greater than 100% in the reverse cycle, wich is used in heat pumps. If this sound counter-intuitive, note that we move energy "upstream", with great efficency, but this occours only because we inject energy in the system.

      And no, we can't make perpetual motion machine out of this: the energy injected to reverse the natural flow of thermal energy is wasted !

      --
      In TUX we trust
  4. Water Cooler for Geeks? by webword · · Score: 2

    Are the geeks going to gather around them and gossip?

    1. Re:Water Cooler for Geeks? by webword · · Score: 2

      On reflection, I think this sounds more like Plumbing with Vinnie, given all of the references to "sinks" and "pumps" and "heat transfer".

      Plumbers of the world, unite!

    2. Re:Water Cooler for Geeks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, overclocking a Celery 300A to 2Ghz is far more important for most geeks than standing around a container of uncaffeinated H2O without any net access.

      Besides, we already have a great gossip source: Slashdot.

  5. NPR information by queequeg1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There was a brief bit on NPR about this a few days ago. NPR recording

  6. Can we get rid of the fan though? by hattig · · Score: 4, Insightful
    With a suitably sized heatsink made of this material, can we get rid of the noisy fan, or at least replace it with a slower, quieter fan.

    This would be great for those of us with 1.4GHz Athlons rumbling away in the corner.

    I expect that it will start of as some kind of heat spreader material on CPUs themselves, and possibly in the base plate of the heatsink. It is probably very expensive.

    Itanium will need a tonne of the stuff... :)

    1. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful
      With a suitably sized heatsink made of this material, can we get rid of the noisy fan, or at least replace it with a slower, quieter fan.

      You're missing the point; We don't make heat sinks out of peltier junctions, we put them on top of peltier junctions. In order to keep the heat sink cool, we put a fan on them.

      In other words, we will never make heat sinks out of this material. We'll simply transfer heat to them with it. Current heat sinks work fine.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that our current heat sinks require fans at all is a good indication that they don't "work fine"... The ideal cooler would have no moving parts, would recover some of the lost energy in the form of electricity, and wouldn't be the size of a barn... The "works fine" mentality would have stopped most of the innovations of the 19th and 20th centuries...

    3. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The "works fine" mentality would have stopped most of the innovations of the 19th and 20th centuries...

      Yeah, if everyone had it about everything. If you're dissatisfied with current heat sink technology, go do something about it instead of slashdotting.

      I personally prefer the way the HP Kayaks handle cooling these days; The power supply fan blows out (like a good little fan) and there's another 3 or 4" fan which blows in, and there's a big plastic shroud which ducts the air toward the CPU's heatsink, which doesn't have a fan on it. The bigger fan can turn at lower RPMs to move more air, and thus is quieter, and more reliable.

      There's nothing wrong with fans. They work better than convective cooling in that if you are in a room with very little airflow, a convective system will heat up the air around the system, therefore heating up the whole system. They just need to be quieter, and they all need to be brushless and preferrably magnetically supported, rather than a bushing or bearing.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      The alpha systems (Atleast on my old digital personal workstation) also use this method of cooling, the top few inches of the machine is seperated off, the ram and cpu are there... and a large fan at the front pushes air along the channel and out the back. Would be a pretty quiet machine, apart from the full height ultrawide scsi drive at the bottom

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by addaon · · Score: 1

      HP is great about setups like that. My, um, desktop is currently a 200 lb. HP server... 8 xeon processors chugging along, and not a fan on them. Wow.

      --

      I've had this sig for three days.
    6. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by Topgun1 · · Score: 1

      No, we can't get rid of the fan.

      The reason for this is we still need to be able to keep a reasonable temperature to reject heat TO. That is, the heat sink is worthless if we haven't some lower T source. If we could transfer heat from a cold source to a hot one, we'd have a perpetual motion machine. Hence, we need to run air across the heat sink to matain this temperature gradient.

      As a side note, the temperature gradient is what defines the work done (or dissipated) from the heatsink. So the heatsink becomes more efficient as the gradient increases (n=1-(Qc/Qh) for a Carnot engine).

      This is why, also, car engines become less efficient when temperature increases. Also, if the temperature at the tailpipe of your car was the same as that of the combustion, you wouldn't be able to drive the car; there would be no power. You'd also melt by that point, but that's another story.

    7. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by hattig · · Score: 1
      Thanks for an answer with reason in it.

      The article inferred that you could generate electricity by using the device, but it seems that you can EITHER apply electricity to cool/heat something, or gain electricity by some other means which was never made clear.

      So in the end, you need this material on your die, a heatsink on top that can deal with ~2x the heat that the CPU would be putting out, and a fan to cool the heatsink. The important thing is that the heat is being removed from the CPU damn quickly and efficiently, and being moved a millimeter or two higher... I think.

    8. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1
      This would be great for those of us with 1.4GHz Athlons rumbling away in the corner.

      Athlons don't rumble. If you have the money to buy a heatsink made of this new material you have the money to buy a NoiseControl Silverado. They're 86 bucks with shipping when you get them imported. They're silent and cool. http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q2/010521/coole r-29.html for more info.

    9. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by BurritoJ · · Score: 1

      If you're looking for silverados... check www.plycon.com. They have them for $60, and they are in the US, so no import hassles. I can't speak for their quality, yet... but mine should arrive tomorrow.

    10. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooh! How long does the kernel compile take? Could you imagine a beowulf cluster of those things?

    11. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Well, we'll still need to power the chip and the cooling device (not a passive heatsink). So you better check how many and how loud the fans on your power unit are.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    12. Re:Can we get rid of the fan though? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if any geeks get their hands on this, chances are that they'll just crank the MHz up until the chip stays at an acceptable temperature with their existing cooling arrangement. That said, if we could do without fans while running reasonably fast CPUs, I would definitely support it.

  7. But can it touch Maxwell's Demon? by dave-fu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sure, it's a hoax, but nothing else will suffice.
    Although Peltier cooling is pretty nifty, too.

    --
    Easy does it!
    This comment has been submitted already, 276865 hours , 59 minutes ago. No need to try again.
  8. Quieter heatsinks... ? by mskfisher · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if these could be put into various locations in heatsinks to allow more efficient dispersal of the heat throughout the entire structure (and from there, pure passive dispersal - no fans).

    --
    0x0D 0x0A
    1. Re:Quieter heatsinks... ? by suitti · · Score: 1
      An IMac has no fan. The CRT is hot enough to generate a significant draft. Thus convective cooling is adequate. Last I heard, the IMac motherboard is essentially a laptop motherboard.

      There used to be all-in-one PCs with convective cooling, but someone used FUD advertising to run them out of business.

      I'd like to have my PC's sound card hooked up to my main home stereo, but it's too noisy. I did bring down the noise by replacing the fans.

      --
      -- Stephen.
    2. Re:Quieter heatsinks... ? by mskfisher · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I've been on a quest to quiet down my PC for some time now... I am a bit of an audiophile, and I use high-bitrate MP3s in addition to my CD player, so I would like my PC to be silent. The straw that broke the camel's back on this one was the 40GB Maxtor drive that I bought, which was audible through the telephone.
      So I ordered a power supply, heatsink, and drive enclosure from Quiet PC. That fixed things to about 90% of what I would like... big improvement. But it is still an aftermarket fix for something that is admittedly broken w.r.t. sound emission.
      It's great to see sound finally being considered by the industry... for example, the current trend in hard drives is FDB (Fluid Dynamic Bearings), which allows idle noise from the drive to be in the ~30dB range... and I seem to recall a post here recently about Dell P4 systems being very quiet.

      --
      0x0D 0x0A
  9. One word: by smaughster · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Cool!

    --
    I intend to live forever, so far so good.
  10. More Links by Alien54 · · Score: 5, Informative
    On the nature site, they also have full text with all the gory scientific details, and a PDF.

    a couple of them in fact. (look to the bottom of the page)

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  11. Harrummp by Insipid+Trunculance · · Score: 1

    Humor Yes Good news But kindly dont be too happy...news from the black labs of intel is that they are going full steam to make sure the new pentiums evaporate these johnny come lately heat conductors or whatever those idiot /.ies call them. End Humor PS:these above tags are for those highly honourable moderators who cant distinguish between an attempt at humor and a troll....

    --
    Wanted : A Signature.
    1. Re:Harrummp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The black labs of Intel? Since when has Intel been employing intelligent dogs?

      I'm pretty sure PETA or the ASPCA would have something to say about that. ;)

    2. Re:Harrummp by cyclist1200 · · Score: 1

      Maybe Intel dropped the Blue Man Group in favor of using black labs in their newest ad campaign...

  12. Will this extend the Mhz myth. by jellomizer · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So now with this new device CPUs can run Cooler thus allowing a higher MHZ per chip and allowes more overclocking. So wont this extend the MHZ myth and make lousy chip chip desing going for a while longer atleat untill the chip are used in replacement for heating coils for tosters.
    Me personally I am big fan of RISC arcecture it genereally seem to run cooler and with less power plus smooth performace (on most RISC chips)

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Will this extend the Mhz myth. by MentlFlos · · Score: 2

      oh yeah, all those alpha chips run so cool... don't forget the PA-RISC chips too :)

      (take this light-heartedly, I agree with you. Just pointing out some toasty RISC chips)

      -paul

  13. is this the same as....? by AssFace · · Score: 1

    I haven't had a chance to see the article yet - but I know that there was something a bit back (on /.) on this where they designed small "pumps" that cranked the heat off of stuff and they were very good at it - this sounds very similar.

    I suppose I *should* read the article to see.

    --

    There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
    1. Re:is this the same as....? by AssFace · · Score: 1

      looks like these are not quite the same. what I recalled were carbon rings that, due to their shape, would pipe the heat away up through the tube (very small tube) shape. seemed they moved heated air moreso than conducted the energy directly.
      and I don't recall any application of the energy then being reused, whereas this article seemed to indicate these could do that. very cool.

      --

      There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
  14. Which, of course. by Karen_Frito · · Score: 2, Funny

    A new thermoelectric material is 2.4X as efficient as best existing materials. The new solid state heat pumps can provide 700 watts of cooling (nearly one horsepower) with just one square centimeter. These new materials have the potential to replace current heat sinks, thermoelectric generators and mechanical heat pumps. Just means more overclocking potential. ;) Hrm. One superconductor, plus a heat sink the size of my car, plus that liquid nitrogen pump, and I might just get Win2k to load in under a minute. Wow.

  15. A fix at the wrong end by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While this is neat and all, I should hope that more effort goes into lower power consumption in general. Just because there's a better way to cool high-power chips doesn't mean that such a chips are a good idea in the first place.

    Someone I know who works in embedded systems recently pointed out that most CPU makers have decided to chase performance at all cost without regard to power consumption, and this is leaving embedded systems engineers up a creek.

    1. Re:A fix at the wrong end by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      Someone I know who works in embedded systems recently pointed out that most CPU makers have decided to chase performance at all cost without regard to power consumption, and this is leaving embedded systems engineers up a creek.

      Good thing the P4 and Athlon aren't intended for embedded use, they're intended for use in desktops where power consumption isn't so much of an issue, and in laptops, where it's an issue, but not as big an issue today as it once was, as batteries (while still crappy) have come quite a long way.

      There are plenty of chips/cores which have been optimized for low power use, including SuperH, ARM, TransMeta, and various MIPS cores. There are also many low-power 386 and 486 cores. The fact that the latest and greatest CPUs require a lot of wattage is not unreasonable.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:A fix at the wrong end by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2

      There are plenty of chips/cores which have been optimized for low power use, including SuperH, ARM, TransMeta, and various MIPS cores.

      There are fewer than you think. Transmeta is out of the question, because it is too pricey. And even game consoles are starting to include fans and large heat sinks, which is more than a bit crazy.

    3. Re:A fix at the wrong end by Datafage · · Score: 2

      How is that crazy? It just means they're getting more powerful, like real computers. Desktops had a phase when they required no cooling, as did consoles, why should only one ever change?

      --

      Nicotine free Amish .sig.

    4. Re:A fix at the wrong end by achurch · · Score: 2

      How is that crazy? It just means they're getting more powerful, like real computers. Desktops had a phase when they required no cooling, as did consoles, why should only one ever change?

      Why must more computing power equate to a need for heat sinks? is I think what the parent post is getting at (and I agree).

    5. Re:A fix at the wrong end by Paul+Komarek · · Score: 2

      Reliability is one issue. Moving parts make noise and fail early. I've seen a quite a few cpu fans go bad in under a year, and most seem to go bad in under two years.

      > It just means they're getting more powerful, like real computers.

      More speed and computational power doesn't mean more heat and electrical power consumption. Compare ENIAC to modern wristwatches with calculators. More fairly, compare my K6-233 to the 209MHz Strongarm 1110 in my iPAQ.

      Your comment is amusing. What do you mean by "real computers"? I'm guessing that you mean "whatever crap Dell told me is a real computer". That's an uncharitable suggestion, of similar naivite to your comment.

      -Paul Komarek

    6. Re:A fix at the wrong end by Datafage · · Score: 2

      Excuse me? I meant real computer as in commodity desktop. I'm typing this on an Epox 8k7a+ with a tbird 133, Gainward gf3, lian-li pc70, all the usual things you would expect in a computer like this. I built it by hand, after hand-picking each part. Don't accuse me of being a sheep.

      Also, you compare a K6-233 to a Strongarm @ 209, even though they're wildly different architectures from different eras, for different purposes. We have low power CPUs, look at the C3. It just comes at the price of performance. No matter how efficient your chip is, you can make it faster and hotter, and that's what's being done, since most people want it. Deal.

      (avoiding lame filter)

      --

      Nicotine free Amish .sig.

  16. wow by part!cle · · Score: 0

    im still laughing.

    --
    If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.
  17. Boon for Intel by jason99si · · Score: 2, Funny

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
    Craig Barrett, 61, Pres, CEO of Intel Corporation was quoted today in a fake press release as saying,

    "This is fantastic! With this new thermoelectric material that is 2.4X as efficient as the best existing materials, we can create processors which run 2.4X as hot! Not only that, but we can repackage all those old Celeron 300a's as Pentium 5's and overclock them 2.4X as much! Lookout AMD, here we come!
  18. When cooling fails by jxqvg · · Score: 5, Funny

    These things are going to get so efficient and semiconductors running so hot that when one of them fails the whole thing will go critical mass. Your box won't just fail, it'll burst into flames and melt into a useless bubbling pool of metal and plastic!

    1. Re:When cooling fails by posmon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the china syndome?

      --

      update comments set karma=-1, reason='offtopic' where sid=26315

    2. Re:When cooling fails by cyclist1200 · · Score: 1

      Don't Athlon boxes already do just that?

    3. Re:When cooling fails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, the cola syndrome.

    4. Re:When cooling fails by posmon · · Score: 1

      +1 "INSIGHTFUL"? still, shouldn't winge about handykarma.

      --

      update comments set karma=-1, reason='offtopic' where sid=26315

  19. No Heat sinks?? by tonywestonuk · · Score: 1


    So where does the heat go after it has been 'pumped' away from whatever? - Seams to me that one side of these thermo-electric heat pumps will get quite hot..... I still think there is need for a heat sink to cool the thermocouple so it can keep doing its job.

    1. Re:No Heat sinks?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Inefficient use of electricity created the heat, perhaps the fact that these can generate electricity means that the heat has been transformed back into energy and therefore hasn't gone anywhere, but doesn't exist anymore...

    2. Re:No Heat sinks?? by suitti · · Score: 1
      The current generation of commercially available heat pumps is already in use. They use heat sinks to cool the hot side of the wafer, and CPU fans to transfer heat from the heat sink to the air, and, of course, the box has a fan to replace hoter air with room air.

      I've even seen water cooled PCs.

      --
      -- Stephen.
  20. Panacea. by Mr+Krinkle · · Score: 1

    Wow this author really does have this thing doing everything. Of course here we only think of cooling our new P4 etc etc. In the article they mention everything from only cooling parts of the chip, cool no need for that huge piece of metal, to controling the temp in the production on RNA and other proteins. Basically this guy is saying that this stuff will cool your PC, cure health problems and save the world. Wow. And I would have just been happy with no fan on my proc.

    --
    I am 31337 or something.
  21. A REAL heat sink by UserID+3.14 · · Score: 1

    I say we use these things for some REAL heat dispersion: let's cool the engines of those old VW bugs! They're already air-cooled, so now we could totally overrev the things and make Herbie faster than a Ferrari. Yeeha!

    --
    Things you like to hear from geeks: Thank you You're welcome
  22. Whatta you call that thing? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

    The material, devised by Rama Venkatasubramanian and co-workers...


    I hope they don't name the devices after the inventor. "Give me a Venta..., a Venkatip..., a Venksubrim..., ah dammit! Just give me a heat sink!"

  23. Thermoelectric Cooler = No Fan? by Dios · · Score: 1



    Passing an electric current from one conductor to another can make the interface between them hotter or colder, depending on the direction of the current.


    So.. instead of a fan, can I put a thermoelectric cooler on top of the chip so as to eliminate that noisy, always failing, fan?

    Does this use a huge amount of power as compared to the fan?

    1. Re:Thermoelectric Cooler = No Fan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Generally TECs use a lot more power than fans. There's also the problem of removing all the heat pumped/generated by the hot side. If it's not removed, then the efficiency drops until it's actually insulating your CPU. Usually heatsinks and fans are used for this, or homebuilt watercooling rigs if you're daring.

  24. They invented... the Peltier? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 0, Redundant
    "The material, devised by Rama Venkatasubramanian and co-workers at the Research Triangle Institute in North Carolina, relies on the thermoelectric effect: the generation of an electrical current in two electrically conducting materials that are in contact when one is hotter than the other. Passing an electric current from one conductor to another can make the interface between them hotter or colder, depending on the direction of the current."


    How is it different then a peltier?
    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    1. Re:They invented... the Peltier? by Trinn · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's 2.4x as efficient.
      I've not been through the whole article, but that seems to be what it means. It apparently uses a very similar if not the same effect, just with better, more efficient materials.

      404 - .sig not found

  25. How well can they cool big things? by iforgotmyfirstlogon · · Score: 1

    Considering the design problems inherent in automotive intercooler design with trying to balance flow and cooling efficiency, it would be wonderful to adapt a technology like this to cooling in racing applications. There have been some theories on the best way to approach this in the past, but something like this would be wonderful!

    - Freed

    --
    "Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love." -Turkish Proverb
  26. Huh? by Sean+Johnson · · Score: 1

    Isn't this just a Peltier cooler with improved materials?

    --
    >>>>>> Chewie, take the professor in the back and plug him into the hyperdrive.
  27. misleading headline - this GENERATES power by deander2 · · Score: 5, Insightful


    The body of this news item is misleading. This material can GENERATE 700 watts of electricity from only one square cm. (specifically under a 58 degree F tempature gradient).

    It can also heat and cool things 2.5x more efficiently (then anything else on the market) if you push electrons through it, rather than let them come out.

    Very interesting stuff, IMHO. Generating electricity from waste heat with inexpensive materials is a holy grail of sorts in a LOT of applications.

    BTW, this is what the patent system was SUPPOSED to protect. True innovation.

    1. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by Bistromat · · Score: 3, Funny

      This material can GENERATE 700 watts of electricity from only one square cm. (specifically under a 58 degree F tempature gradient).

      there's not enough energy difference in a 58-degree gradient to account for 700W per cc. if this were true, i could power Boston by replacing my oven's door with this stuff & baking a batch of brownies.*


      i exaggerate, but the energy figure given is still ridiculously large.

    2. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by deander2 · · Score: 1


      that's what the article says. do you have calculations to prove them wrong?

    3. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by markmoss · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not the temperature difference alone that determines the power, but the temperature difference times the heat flow. And I know of no theoretical limits to heat flow, although there are lots of practical problems...

      Nature has the full scientific article. I don't understand most of it, but it does say "Thin-film thermoelements lead to large cooling power densities (PD)... We estimate a value of PD of 700 W cm-2 at 353 K and 585 W cm-2 at 298 K at the measured maximum cooling in superlattice devices compared to a value of 1.9 W cm-2 in the bulk device of Fig. 4a". That is, 700 watts/cm2 cooling at 70C (the max temperature for industrial-spec semiconductors), 585 at 25C (room temperature), and it's about 350 times as fast at pumping heat as the comparison thermoelectric material.

      To actually use that cooling ability, you've got to somehow couple 700W/cm2 heat into one side and remove rather more heat from the other side. (Or to generate 700W power, you've got to couple more than 700W to one side and remove the waste heat from the other.) A TO-220 power transistor has an approximately 1 cm2 metal plate on the back to contact the heatsink; take a really big heatsink and really good thermal paste and really torque down the screw clamping them together, and it will handle almost 20W. 700W would fry the transistor core instantly, before the backplate even got warm. The coupling between a GHz Pentium and heatsink/Peltier refrig/fan must be better than this, but not THAT much better. Lots of luck!

      By the way, anyone notice that the reporter doesn't know the difference between "efficiency" and "effectiveness".

    4. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by mindstrm · · Score: 2

      You can't convert Temperature directly into power. Temperate is not a measure of heat energy. Just as voltage is not a measure of electric energy.

      A differential of 1 degree could theoretically produce thousands of watts of power, if there is a large enough source of heat. The differential is merely a way of transferring the power.

    5. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NONONO

      the material can PUMP 700 WATTS, that means the energyflow (in heat) is 700 joule/sec.

      This has nothing to do with electrical energy flow.

      When cooling it's nearly as efficient as mechanical heat pumps...

      but it's certanly interesing it can generate electricity, how much it generates is not specified.

    6. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most processors only use 50-75 watts. If you could generate 700 watts from their heat, then you could hook up 10 processors to the heat pump output, each with it's own heat pump generating 700 watts, and repeat until you have enough energy to power Boston.

    7. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by p3d0 · · Score: 2
      The body of this news item is misleading. This material can GENERATE 700 watts of electricity from only one square cm.
      I'm not sure why you think this. The quote from the article is:
      A thermoelectric module with just one square centimeter of RTI's new material can provide 700 watts of cooling, or nearly one horsepower, under a temperature gradient of 58 degrees F.
      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    8. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they were not talking specifically about CPUs - they were talking about the max energy it can output. meaning if you hooked it up to an infinite heap pump you can generate that much electricity. A CPU outputing 50-75 watts would not maintain a 58 degree F temp. difference.

    9. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by Cuthalion · · Score: 1

      But then they won't make a 58 kelvin temperature difference, and you won't get all 700 watts.

      --
      Trees can't go dancing
      So do them a big favor
      Pretend dancing stinks!
    10. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      unless of course, there is something maintaining the gradient, then you can suck a great deal of power out of a 58-degree energy gradient.

    11. Re:misleading headline - this GENERATES power by krenskeoz · · Score: 1

      Just some random thoughts here but.

      If we were to place a steel plate out in the sun it will heat up and easily give it's heat up into the thermo electric substance. Now if we were to then put a natural evaporative cooling substance on top of said thermo electric substance we will get a heat gradient across the device. Now if that would then generate a 700w (or even as little as 250w) per centimetre power source (of course each centimetre may need to ride on a 100 by 100 cm sheet of metal) then we have a new form of solar generation.

      Using a basic metal plate, this device and a slow drip water supply on top of the device we have a potential boon for certain areas. If the water is actually gathered together on rainy days from the steel plates and we use a capilliary action natural water pump(a raw cotton fibre wick for example) to raise it onto the Thermo electric material then we could conceivable get a fairly low tech solar power supply (also potentially cheaper than existing panels and probably much less efficient).

      Would the use of these embedded on metal roofs in tropical regions be useable as a potential power source? The heating effect is there and water is plentiful in some areas. The outflow of heat from the metal heat source could also help cool building roof spaces in these areas.

      I am of course assuming that the natural evaporative cooling effect is enough to keep the temperature gradient high. I am also assuming that the power can be easily generated by the material from the temperature gradient, which is what I believe the article states.

  28. One horsepower, eh? by jd · · Score: 2
    So, with a mere 700 of these, my computer can out-race a Ferrari F1, by hot air alone.


    Brings a whole new dimension to those stale Beowulf jokes.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  29. more on this..... by dragonxhero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    some other really cool stuff about this.... first off, the advancements that have taken place haven't made it efficient enough to replace most cooling devices, but if they can double the efficiency they believe they could start making 'solid-state' refrigerators and such.... the other really neat thing about this innovation is that not only does the material cool things down, but if you expose it to heat it generates electricity.... there's supposed to be huge potential there... the example i heard was that the material could be used to regain much of the wasted thermal energy put out by combustion engines, perhaps in a type of hybrid gas/elec car.... -- dragonxhero

  30. Idea by Pyrosz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Due to the problem of fitting larger heatsinks and fans (damn loud things) onto ever smaller motherboards and chips, is it not time to re-think this idea? Would it not be possible to use this new material to pump the heat from the chip to the side of your case? The side of your case could be a very large heatsink. It would require small fins and might even improve the looks somewhat. It would not get hot due to the surface area and heat dispersion. Why use a small (relative) heatsink and excesivily (sp?) loud fan to cool the chip when you already have a large heat release area? Anyway, just a thought.

    --

    An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true.
    1. Re:Idea by markmoss · · Score: 2

      If the case is a thick piece of aluminum, it does make a pretty good heatsink, except that there is a terrible mechanical issue involved in clamping hot electronic parts to the case for good thermal transfer while still keeping them seated in the socket. I once worked on a plotter where the case lid was the heatsink for the motor drive transistors -- worked on it again and again, because the @#$%^& transistors kept pulling out of their sockets. You really don't want to go through this experience with a 400-pin device...

      The thermoelectric device won't help with this issue. It is just this little disk that gets colder on one side and hotter on the other as you put electricity into it. What it does help with is if heat conduction, which is proportional to temperature difference times area, is insufficient to keep the IC temperature within working limits. That is, the interior of the IC is hotter than the outside, which is hotter than the heatsink, which has to be hotter than the air, and all those temperature differences can add up to a cooked CPU. The Peltier refrigerator changes this relationship by maybe 30 degrees. But you still need the heatsink to be clamped very solidly to the IC, just with the Peltier disk in-between.

      What might work (if you really want that heavy metal case) is to use some sort of flexible heat pipe to connect the CPU and other hot spots to the case. Some laptops sort of do this with a flat plastic bag containing heat-conductive liquid or gel -- they lay it on top of the motherboard, then clamp the case over it, and it spreads the heat from the CPU, etc., out to that whole side of the case.

      For higher heat-carrying capacity, you use a tube containing a substance that evaporates at the hot end and condenses at the cold end, with wick material to move the liquid back to the hot end. This sort of heat pump is usually metallic, but some corrugations in the middle would let it bend a few tenths of an inch. So you can attach the narrow hot end of this thing to the CPU, put the lid on the case, then run screws through it into nuts built into the wide cold end of the heat pipe and tighten it down, and that little bit of bend will allow it to tighten down flat to the underside of the lid without pulling the CPU out of the board...

    2. Re:Idea by Pyrosz · · Score: 1


      The thermoelectric device won't help with this issue. It is just this little disk that gets colder on one side and hotter on the other as you put electricity into it.


      I figured the hot end of this could touch my case side (big heat sink!)? Of course the motherboards would have to be changed so that the chip was close to the side (top?) of the case.

      Im just really tired of that damn fan noise!
      I already got rid of my power supply fan. I moved the supply to the bottom of my case and opened it up. And I have no case fans anymore. I just cut a few more holes into it.

      --

      An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true.
    3. Re:Idea by Cuthalion · · Score: 1

      The thermoelectric device won't help with this issue. It is just this little disk that gets colder on one side and hotter on the other as you put electricity into it.

      So put the cold side on the processor and the hot side on the heatsink & fan. The efficiency of the heatsink is now much greater, since its rate of heat exchange with the air depends on how much colder the air is. The only problem is how efficient is the thermoelectric component - does it move more heat than it makes? I seem to recall that earlier peltier coolers tended to also have power supply problems (as they took a lot of current (though at relatively low voltages)).

      --
      Trees can't go dancing
      So do them a big favor
      Pretend dancing stinks!
    4. Re:Idea by markmoss · · Score: 2

      Yeah, Pyrosz it's not that bad an idea, it's just that the mechanical arrangements are quite difficult. For proper heat transfer, surfaces must be flat and touching all over -- thermal grease fills in microscopic valleys, but if you don't clamp things together until only a very thin layer of grease separates the parts, you don't get good heat conduction. So a combined case and heatsink normally means the parts are bolted to the case, and to get it apart they've got to come out of the board. Then there's the problem of tolerance stack-up: nothing is ever exactly the intended size and shape, so when you put it together the pins on the parts miss the sockets...

      Another issue for motherboards is that the CPU is on the same side as the cards, which isn't the side you can put close to the case. This is because bus connectors are soldered by wave solder (shooting a wave of liquid solder onto the bottom side of the board). Small capacitors and resistors can be glued onto the bottom and survive this process, but IC's might not, and you certainly don't want to do it to either a CPU or a socket...

      If you don't have any bus cards or other plug-in parts taller than the CPU, then you could flip the board over and bolt it down with the CPU touching the case. They should be clamped together fairly hard, so you'd have to put holes in the board right around the CPU for bolts, or else put a brace behind it to support that area. And the case has to be unusually thick (at least near the CPU) so it's heat conductivity is enough to spread the heat out.

      Insane as all this sounds, the standard cooling method is a little odd too. We use a good system for cooling a number of warm parts scattered all over (air circulation) and try to make it work to cool one extremely hot part...

      The Peltier refrigerator would make the CPU taller, and allow the thermal interfaces to be not quite so perfect -- it would be a help here, but I'm dubious about it being worth the cost.

      Finally, remember that other parts generate heat too. Not as much as the CPU, but it still has to be removed.

    5. Re:Idea by CaptainTylor · · Score: 1

      How about an envelope containing conductive gel a la the laptops you mentioned above, with a very large surface area TEC beneath that, UNDER the motherboard, or under the core heat-generating components of the motherboard, and touching the opposite side of the case? Obviously you wouldn't get as good performance as you would if the TEC was directly touching the chips, but every little bit helps...send the heat "down" instead of "up."

      Drawbacks that I see to this idea:
      1) TEC material historically has been very, very expensive... deal-breaker for a lot of applications.
      2) Motherboards that weren't specially designed with under-side heat-transfer pipes down through them might melt into toxic goo.
      3) Said heat-transfer pipes push out other circuit traces, making them longer, increasing electrical latency.
      4) Other electrical effects related to circuit-board manufacturing techniques which I don't have the background to do anything more than guess at.
      5) Pins down through the motherboard might puncture the gel-bag, possibly making a leaky, hot, toxic mess. Bag must fit tightly to board to be effective...obviously must not conduct electricity, either. Using different contacts that don't stick out so much makes boards more expensive.

      I am not a semiconductor engineer, or an EE...just a geek who likes to think about stuff, so all this may be completely wrong.

  31. Re:so do peltiers by deander2 · · Score: 1

    yes, this one is just 2.4 times as efficient and works 23,000 times faster. that's why it's a news story.

  32. Shouldn't that be cubic centimeters by vtechpilot · · Score: 1

    The trick is in "stacks of very thin films of two alternating semiconducting materials" Ok, so how thick is this stack. I would imagine that a stack 2CM thick would be capable of collecting twice the energy of a stack 1CM thick. I suppose if we had a stack 7 meters thick it could easily collect 700 watts (assuming the energy was there to collect in the first place.)

    Maybe if we left these out in warm sunlight they would collect energy too? They might be cheaper than photovoltaic cells. (perhaps a layer of photovoltaic with a layer of these behind them might be the ticket?)

    --
    Slashdot is an anagram for Has Dolts, and I am Dolt number 468543
    1. Re:Shouldn't that be cubic centimeters by CaptainTylor · · Score: 1

      Not sure about your math re: thickness vs. efficiency...but I don't think your idea about replacing PV cells would work, because these require a fairly significant temperature GRADIENT between the two sides to do any real work. One side has to be significantly hotter than the other; which I would not expect to be the case for most PV array applications.

      Having said that, PV cells operate more efficiently at cooler temperatures, so maybe your idea of sticking thermoelectric coolers (TECs) on the backs of PV arrays has more merit. Again, it's the gradient that's important for generating power, so you could either pump electricity into the TECs to cool the solar cells and make them more efficient, or use the waste heat off the solar cells to generate additional electricity..for this you have to have some other means of circulating the heated air off the hot side of the TECs.

      Perhaps one panel in the array, or one cell in a panel can feed the TECs, thus making the others more efficient. Math is needed here to figure out if you actually make any net GAIN in efficiency doing this, and I don't have the relevant formulae handy or the necessary physics background. I thought of something like this using the older generation of Peltier-effect TECs, but it didn't seem efficient enough to bother. Seems like cooler climates might have a shot at making it worthwhile (average ambient air temp is lower..) Any Canuck physicists or EEs in the house? :)

  33. Delta T? by CTho9305 · · Score: 0

    What is the max delta T across these devices? If you want to create a fanless system using one of these, the heatsink on the hot side has to disipate LOTS of heat. that means it will get a lot hotter than room temp, so if these devices can only create a 30C difference, you might only get slightly below room temp on the cold side

  34. Public Domain??? by Myrv · · Score: 1


    Well, since the research was funded by the government (DARPA and ONR) and RTI is suppose to be a nonprofit organization, I would think the patents are already in the public domain or at the very least have very affordible licensing.

  35. It can do what now? by BillyGoatThree · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "...can provide 700 watts of cooling (nearly one horsepower) with just one square centimeter..."

    Can someone explain exactly what this means? I haven't reach thermodynamics in my physics studies yet.

    I mean, I understand "700 watts"--that's 700 Joules/second. So presumably a cm^2 of this material can "cool" 700 Joules of heat energy every second. But surely the limiting factor here is how quickly the *air* (or other surrounding medium) can *accept* energy, not how fast the device can pump it out....right?

    I saw this same article over at bottomquark except they had a new release linked as well. The release claimed that just a few dots of this material on a chip would replace (plus some!) a regular heat sink. How on earth could that be? What about the areas where dots aren't located?

    --
    324006
    1. Re:It can do what now? by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 2

      You're exactly right on all the points you raise.

      The only way you'd get 700 W through a 1cm^2
      area is if you placed a highly conductive
      material on one side at a high temperature
      and another highly conductive material at low
      temperature on the other, (like two silver rods)
      and then supplied heat and cooling to the hot
      and cold rods.

      If the hot end were air and the cool end were air,
      you'd have to be blowing hot and cold air with
      hurricane force across the surfaces.

      PM

    2. Re:It can do what now? by p3d0 · · Score: 2
      But surely the limiting factor here is how quickly the *air* (or other surrounding medium) can *accept* energy, not how fast the device can pump it out....right?
      Yes and no. Your reasoning is clearly correct as it stands, but you forgot that they specified a certain temperature differential required to attain a 700-watt power dissipation. If the air temperature gains 1 degree, so does the CPU.

      The heat-conducting ability of a cooler is proportional to the temperature differential. Recall that the CPU is hotter than the air. If the air temperature gains 1 degree, the power dissipation temporarily decreases because of the lower differential, causing the CPU temperature to start rising. The rising CPU temperature tends to restore the differential, and eventually the system reaches a new equilibrium with both the CPU and the air at a higher temperature. Eventually, the air gets so hot that whatever pitiful circulation it has is enough to remove the 700 watts of heat (though if properly insulated, the CPU could melt first).

      If you're familiar with electricity, think of heat as current and temperature as voltage. A cooler, then, provides a thermal resistance (and the lower the better).

      The release claimed that just a few dots of this material on a chip would replace (plus some!) a regular heat sink. How on earth could that be? What about the areas where dots aren't located?
      Presumably the silicon itself would conduct that heat to the areas where the does are located. Or perhaps the heat would be conducted straight into the packaging material. Whatever happens, it doesn't matter much because, by definition, those areas aren't producing much hear.
      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    3. Re:It can do what now? by pclminion · · Score: 1
      I mean, I understand "700 watts"--that's 700 Joules/second. So presumably a cm^2 of this material can "cool" 700 Joules of heat energy every second. But surely the limiting factor here is how quickly the *air* (or other surrounding medium) can *accept* energy, not how fast the device can pump it out....right?

      The two rates (heat in and heat out) are equal. Otherwise the thermoelectric gets hotter, and hotter, and... The way the TE works is by driving a current across a junction of two different materials. This creates a thermal interface where heat can be exchanged very rapidly. This means the side of the TE in contact with the processor cools down, so that heat is transferred faster from the processor.

      Of course, you are putting energy into the TE device in the form of electric current, and this energy must also go somewhere. Therefore the hot side of the TE becomes very hot indeed, hotter than the surface of the processor. This higher temperature gradient allows the heat to be dropped to the surrounding air faster that an ordinary heatsink.

      Some people have been saying this device produces power. This is not correct; the device is a power sink, and that power is ultimately converted to heat. The real question is, when the device is operating at full transfer capacity of 700W, how much power is it drawing itself?

      Ultimately, this scheme requires more power, placing more stress on your power supply and burning more fossil fuel. I'd be much more excited to see a Plain Old Heatsink that could transfer at 700W.

    4. Re:It can do what now? by Paul+the+Bold · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, good, the rate at which energy is carried away from the other side is a limiting factor. The reason you might want to apply it to only specific areas is that this is very strange material, and very expensive to produce.

      The key in these materials is that they conduct electricity very well, but conduct heat poorly. This is weird, as the two are usually linked. The electrons carry heat energy with them as they move through the crystal, and the random motions of the atoms transfer heat through the crystal as well. The electrons and the vibrations (phonons) interact, hence the link between the two kinds of heat conduction. You usually only hear about the atomic vibrations because that effect is many thousands of times stronger than the electronic heat conduction.

      However, we can control the motion of the electrons. We cannot control the flow of the heat transfered by the random motion of atoms. The big idea is to create a material that impedes the flow of heat, but allows us to control the flow of electrons. As bizarre as this sounds, there are some naturally occurring minerals that have this property (skutterudites). These are exremely rare, and harder to synthesize than diamonds. There are strategies involving alternating layers of semiconductor, and that sounds like the plan in this article.

      The point is that these materials are hard to make, and very expensive (high purity, many production steps). It turns out that only some parts of an IC generate huge amounts of heat (this is an issue when we mount optical devices on ICs). The dot idea is a clever trick to save on production costs. Those clever engineers.

    5. Re:It can do what now? by WNight · · Score: 3, Informative

      I agree with your conclusions.

      This seems like a great way to quickly remove heat from a small area and spread it to a large area. You'll still have a lot of waste heat on the hot side of this and I'm sure you'll need a heatsink on there. Large than before in fact because this appears to be a powered thermocouple like a Peltier cooler which means it should generate waste heat as well.

      The benefit though is that heatsinks become more efficient as the temperature gradient goes up, so we should still be able to get the heat into the air and then out of the case. And because this thermocouple maintains a rather large gradient we should be able to keep the CPU that much cooler.

      As for the little dots of it, etc... I think what they mean is that inside the CPU core you'd have little dots of this being used to pump heat away from the main heat generating areas directly into the heat-spreader on top of the chip. The only other way to do it is let the heat diffuse through the whole core and then into the heat spreader.

      So this would be a lot better at putting heat in manageable areas (the heatsink) but it isn't magic, you couldn't put a bit in a sealed package and have heat magically disappear.

    6. Re:It can do what now? by krenskeoz · · Score: 1

      I was under the illusion that if you apply a natural heat gradient acroos a thermo electric material you will actually get power out of it. Obviously no where near as much as the heat energy transferred but could it not be a potential energy source where we already deliberately set up heat gradients. For example a large power station cooling tower could pump the water through the material ( hot on one side ) then allow it to run down the outside cooling with evaporation down the outside (cool on the other side). The towers already do the pumping etc to supply cool water back to the heat exchangers in the turbine house so could it not be used to generate more power from the hot water. If it gained only a few percent of thermal efficiency then that is an unbelievably large $ value in saved fuel costs across an entire nation.

      Of course if the material expence is high it may not be cost effective but with the given increases in efficiency it may be.

    7. Re:It can do what now? by pclminion · · Score: 1
      I was under the illusion that if you apply a natural heat gradient acroos a thermo electric material you will actually get power out of it.

      Right. A gradient produces a current. Because of symmetry, driving a current through the material in the opposite direction produces a temperature gradient, in the opposite direction. One side gets cold, and the other gets hot. Since the cold side is colder than room temperature, thermal energy is transferred faster from the processor than it would be ordinarily.

      <Calculus>

      In essence,

      dQ/dt = -k * dT/dx,

      -- the larger dT/dx is (the higher the temperature gradient), the faster heat (Q) is transferred. k is the coefficient of heat transfer, sort of a measure of the "heat conductivity".

      Analogously, the current in a circuit is proportional to the voltage and inversely with the resistance; in other words,

      dq/dt = 1/R * dE/dx

      In this instance, q represents charge and E is the electric field. Many many many things in physics work this way.

      </Calculus>

      Is it worth it to set these things up at power stations where the "cool" water is actually warmer than the surroundings? Probably not. A thermoelectric material of any appreciable efficiency is very costly to manufacture. I don't think you'd gain very much energy, and you'd certainly lose money. Efficiency goes down with the temperature gradient. I think the double-cycle power plants currently in use extract just about as much energy as possible (and we're not even talking 50% efficiency here -- that's thermodynamics for you).

  36. Power generation.. by camelrider · · Score: 1

    Could this be used to eliminate the steam turbine stage in nuclear (electric) power generators? Might be more efficient and surely safer as long as there is some way to buffer in case of a sudden huge drop in demand for the output.

  37. When? by bigtoy · · Score: 1

    What I want to know is when will we see this technology in chip manufacturing, etc?

    --
    "A sample size of one is really just statistical masturbation."
  38. Thermoelectric + Photovoltaic = Higher Output? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Since photovoltaic cells produce less energy the warmer they become, is it possible to combine the two?

    A thermoelectric photovoltaic power cell. The thermoelectric keeps the cell cool, and provides some power, and the photovoltaic cell operates at a more optimum, efficient temperature.

  39. A 1 BHP cooler? by ldopa1 · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this technology could be used to create a solid state engine. If you think about it, when you burn fuel in your engine, you're turning the heat energy into horsepower, which is what this material is doing.

    My first car had an 81 horsepower engine (at the wheels). I wonder if you can move enough heat energy with this stuff to power a small car?

    Alternatively, last week my Saturn blew up because of a sensor fault in the radiator. I cracked a head, torched a few hoses and quite a few other parts got messed up. The repair was close to $2000 to get it back on the road (I only owe $2600 on it). I wonder if this material could be used to cool an engine. What if you were to coat the engine block with this stuff? Could you just run an electric fan across the engine when it got too warm? That would save coolant, a radiator, hoses, a water pump etc! Maybe Porsche could make a smoking air cooled engine again. Maybe the classic Beetle would make a revival!

    --
    The Dopester
    "Yes, I'm a Karma Whore, but I'm doing it to pay my way through school."
  40. Think of the Athlons... by supabeast! · · Score: 2

    This just gives Kyle more reasons to burn out CPUs pushing them too damned far. The poor little dears, stressed to death trying to find the limits of cooling methodolgies...

  41. Slow Win2k booting by p3d0 · · Score: 1

    Ok, this is off-topic, but my Win2k box boots just as quickly as my Linux box, and they are machines of comparable performance. Both boot in about a minute and a half. The W2K box is a Duron-700, and the Linux box is a dual Celeron-400. Yet I have heard repeatedly that Win2k is slow-booting.

    What's going on? Is my IBM 7200rpm hard disk really that fast?

    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    1. Re:Slow Win2k booting by tMav · · Score: 1

      Consider the source. Win2k is really not terribly slow for most people, but you must take into consideration the attention span of the average Slashdot poster... (not to mention the pedestal that MS products are held on around here)

      :)

    2. Re:Slow Win2k booting by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      The W2K box is a Duron-700, and the Linux box is a dual Celeron-400. Yet I have heard repeatedly that Win2k is slow-booting.

      er...you're joking...right? maybe I'm asking too much for a comparison between two *similar* systems? My linux machine is a p200 and it boots in about one minute, while my (p75) w2k machine takes at least two, yet I have heard repeatedly that linux is slow booting...

      I'm not disputing what you are saying, but please, if you have a benchmark, don't even mention it if it isn't on similar hardware.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    3. Re:Slow Win2k booting by p3d0 · · Score: 2
      maybe I'm asking too much for a comparison between two *similar* systems?
      I don't understand the problem. Even if the Duron is twice as fast, that would only account for a factor of two in the boot time, and I would still have a hard time seeing how that would be so universally derided as being slow.

      If the comparison bothers you, forget the Celeron. On my Duron-700, W2K takes less than 90 seconds to boot, which seems quite resonable to me.

      please, if you have a benchmark, don't even mention it if it isn't on similar hardware
      I'm sorry my data isn't up to your standards, but it's all I have, and it was never intended to be a benchmark: just a data point. In fact, the numbers are from memory, since I don't boot very often, so the error margin is probably larger than that caused by the differing hardware anyway.
      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    4. Re:Slow Win2k booting by jrockway · · Score: 1

      I've never used windows, but my 233MHz iMac boots linux in about thirty seconds. The bottleneck is waiting for eth0 to come up and daeomons to start (I run syslog, gpm, mysql, sendmail, ssh, atd, crond at start). Still though, thirty seconds from on button to login prompt!

      --
      My other car is first.
    5. Re:Slow Win2k booting by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Even if the Duron is twice as fast, that would only account for a factor of two in the boot time, and I would still have a hard time seeing how that would be so universally derided as being slow.
      My post wasn't about the claim that w2k is slow (it's alright in boot time compared to NT4, which I have seen take up to half an hour to boot and login!!!), it was just about mentioning data which isn't really relevant. If you wanted to claim that windows wasn't slow to boot, just mention the windows machine. The moment you brought the Linux machines boot time into account, it became a comparison of (admittedly inaccurate and subjective) benchmarks.

      It doesn't really bother me, but it's a bad habit to get into, and one which people fall into quickly. You were good enough to admit the systems weren't equal, but some people (trolls?) who want to throw bogus benchmarks out wouldn't hesitate to drop that little detail from the equasion. Imagine "My (386) linux box running KDE is so shitty and slow compared to my (athlonXP1800+) W2k box! Programs(Doom III) take so long to load on the linux box that I can take a coffee break waiting for them! Windows 2000 is so smooth and responsive in comparison!". I've seen it.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    6. Re:Slow Win2k booting by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      Look dude, I don't know where you got these rules from, but if you don't find it relevant, disregard it. Now that is a good habit to get into. Ignore it. Even tell me it's not a fair comparison. Just spare me the holier-than-thou "you should learn to write better" routine.

      I included my boot times because I thought someone might say "well I have Linux on a Duron-700 and it boots in 15 seconds, so 90 seconds is slow". Or, they might say "I have Win2k on a Pentium IV-2GHz and it takes 12 minutes to boot, so please tell me how you get it to boot so fast". Or whatever. I didn't realize there were rules about this.

      I promise, when I post to a referreed journal, I'll be more careful.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    7. Re:Slow Win2k booting by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Just spare me the holier-than-thou "you should learn to write better" routine.

      I apologize. It was just a passing comment and I never meant for it to be a be-all end all of Slashdot posting rules or anything like that. I was just posting something off the top of my head(not everything I write is informative or insightful :)). It seems you were doing the same thing with that whole thing. :)
      That's one of the reasons why I post to slashdot so rarely (except when I should be doing work :))...in another discussion board there aren't 300000 different users (not to mention ACs) and twice as many messages in a day...

      ...And as for your last remark, good. I wish that pro writers took that approach when writing anyway. :)

      sorry for being so anal. Reading too much slashdot will do that to a person :)

      --
      It's been a long time.
    8. Re:Slow Win2k booting by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      Well, posts like mine are why I usually wait ten minutes before replying to anything. It was hot-headed, and I appologize for it.

      Thanks for being the bigger person and extending the olive branch. :-)

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  42. I got a use! by ruiner13 · · Score: 1

    I'm going to make underwear out of it to generate electricity for laptops. I'll call them ass-transformers. Or perhaps tighty-lighties. : )

    --

    today is spelling optional day.

  43. Hmmmm... by sirgoran · · Score: 1

    Let me see here.

    A new Heat Sink material.

    Can also be used for generating power.

    Does this mean I can soon bring down my electrical bills by over-clocking my Pentium4 and adding an outlet to my computer case?

    Cool!

    I could stir fry my lunch in my cube!

    Goran

    --
    Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
  44. Correcting some misunderstandings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    1) A lot of people have posted that this material is 2.4X as efficient as existing materials. This is not correct. According to the paper, they have achieved a 'Figure of Merit' (which is calculated in some fairly complex way) 2.4x greater than previous state of the art. Since they also note that there is no absolute theoretical limit to this metric, I think we can assume that it not only is not efficiency, it doesn't map to efficiency in any linear way.
    2) No one seems to have commented yet on the extraordinary thinness of these devices. They achieved a 70K thermal gradient across a 5 micron thickness when running in power conversion mode; this corresponds as they state to 134,000K per cm (!). It's also the root of their extremely fast thermal response (20,000 times faster than previous SoA). And it helps explain their very high watts-per-cm2 figures... in fact I'd say the microthickness, rather than the 2.4x 'efficiency' gain, is the real story here.

    1. Re:Correcting some misunderstandings by Brett_Manners · · Score: 1

      The max co-efficient of performance of a thermoelectric heat pump can be calculated using the formula:

      COP (max) = Tc((1+ZTm)^1/2 - (Th/Tc)) / (Th - Tc)*((1+ZTm)^1/2 +1)

      where Tc = cold side temperature (in Kelvin)
      Th = hot side temperature (in Kelvin)
      Tm = 1/2 * (Th + Tc) (in Kelvin)
      Z = figure of merit of both n and p type thermoelectric material.

      Rama Venkatasubramanian has developed a p type material with a figure of merit of 2.4 (current values are ~1.0) and an n-type material with a figure of merit of ~1.4. I'm not sure what overall figure of merit this will give but it will be better than the current value of ~ 1.0 and hence this material can be used to make a more efficient peltier heat pump.

      Hope this info is of use.

    2. Re:Correcting some misunderstandings by kcelery · · Score: 1

      To my understanding, the thickness issue is important. The material used in the electrothermal heat pump is the silicon waffer, and silicon is not a good conductor of heat.

  45. yeah... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    When I first got my nick on slashdot, I posted a message. It got modded up.

    yep, I got some karma.........well, that's all there is for that feature...

    The written word is far too impresise for moderation to be completely accurate. what the writer considers an editorial(which every message on slashdot is by the way), the reader could misinterpet as a troll, or worse yet, he could make the mistake of considering what you say serious. Without ":)"'s, irony and humor is slow to reach the reader when it is surrounded by dead serious posts about exactly the same sentiment.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  46. Near the theoretical limit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't the theoretical maximum efficiency of a thermocouple on the order of 70%? And that the best created to date were in the 25-30% efficiency range? That would put this new device fairly close to the physical limit, would it not?

  47. Transfer this heat to water . . . by WiseWeasel · · Score: 1

    A good (and silent) solution for this would be to use this material to transfer the heat from a hot component to some circulating water in a condenser type setup. There could be an external container of recycled water that could be replaced when it gets too hot. This could even be automatic, with an electric valve and thermometer. This material could efficiently move the heat from the component to the water, which has a very high heat capacity, so the external container wouldn't have to be flushed very often. This might be a viable cooling method as processors and other components run at rapidly increasing temperatures.

    --
    "I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
  48. 1 HP cooler? How about a horse? by green+pizza · · Score: 2

    Does this mean that if I were to hitch up one of my uncle's clydesdales to my PC, it could provide about 700 watts of cooling power? Neat!

    1. Re:1 HP cooler? How about a horse? by Old+Wolf · · Score: 2

      The heat of the horse dung would make up for any cooling gained

  49. transfer only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These things only TRANSFER the heat.
    The biggest problem is the amount of heat.

    So if it can transfer the heat to a heat
    exchanger OUTSIDE the computer (read heatsink and fan) and not increase the cost of the entire system by $0.001, then you MIGHT see it on a P4, otherwise, no chance in hell on any volume, consumer product.

  50. Use it to power the car's air conditioner? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article that this post points to says that
    this new thermoelectric cooler can be used (in
    reverse) to use the car's waste heat to power
    the air conditioner. Hmmmm why not use the
    damn material AS the air conditioner??

    And why is it too expensive to use in refrigerators and such? I'm wondering how
    much it will cost. They don't mention that
    part.

    Paul

  51. Who cares? You still live with the same problems by SumDeusExMachina · · Score: 1
    As far as I know, there has never been a problem with current technology limiting the cooling your overclocked hardware (current generation thermoelectric coolers take care of that just fine), but rather has been the problem of preventing all the resulting condensation from ruining your expensive hardware.

    Also, you still have to deal with the problem of what to do with all that waste heat that is ultimately being produced by your processor and other hardware. Remember, these thermoelectric coolers aren't getting rid of the heat, they are just moving it to a different spot. I, for one, am more concerned about the ventilation present on my case than with just keeping the processor cool, as I've noticed a difference by as much as 10 degrees F hotter on the processor when I have the case open, which negates the ducting effect.

    Finally, as any experienced overclocker (me included) will tell you, no matter how much cooling you have for a chip, you will only be able to clock it so high before it becomes unbootable. Having a more efficient Peltier will not help you one bit in overclocking.

    So, sure, this is a cool discovery for materials physics, but it really isn't going to help people in the way you suggested in your post.

    --

    Is your company running tools written by ma
  52. my future is coming on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just think of the computers this could make, well with 2 other articles. The one about mother boards with fiber optics, and the one about molecular transistors. i need me one of them!

  53. Condensation will NOT be a problem. by paul-s · · Score: 1

    You know, thermoelectric coolers are not
    designed to JUST cool. The other great thing
    about them is that they are perfect for
    temperature control. The computer will be
    able to regulate its own processors temperature
    but reversing the polarity of the power going
    to the TEC as needed (so it would heat instead
    of cool if the temp gets too low) so that the
    temp will be cool but now below the dew point
    so that there will be NO condensation.

    Pretty cool idea huh?
    Paul

    1. Re:Condensation will NOT be a problem. by paul-s · · Score: 1

      I didn't mean "the temp will be cool but NOW
      below the dew point", I meant to say, "the temp
      will be cool but NOT below the dew point".

      Paul

  54. Large scale power generation? by Tekgno · · Score: 1

    I live in Australia and in the northern part of my state (i live at the bottom of the mainland),
    They are considering building a 1km high tower with a large greenhouse at the bottom, the sun warms air in the greenhouse and hot air rises so air flys up the tower. At the base of the tower is a large fan which is spun by the air going up and it will be used for power generation.

    Just wondering, has anybody figured out if it is possible to use this technology to build a large tower and use it for power generation, also what would the figures be for power generation, cost (a biggy) life-span structural strength etc.

    Also, you could possibly utilize a coastal volcano and build a big one of these with heatsinks either end and stick one heatsink in the water, or pump water up over it and sit the other end above the lava.

  55. overclocking potential here by digitalmonkey2k1 · · Score: 1

    so basically your saying i can take 2gig dual p3 system and make it really really fast instad of just really fast?! NEAT!

    --
    My sausage tree didn't grow, does that make me a bad mommy?
  56. Thats not new... by Viceice · · Score: 1

    My dad used to work for a plastics plant, and they got a contract back during the Bacelona Olympic Games to build these 4 by 3 by 1 tubs for Mars Bars. There were yo build a tub then insert into the bottom what was essentialy a ceremic coin about an inch in diameter with 2 diods sticking out. This coin, made in on a sub-contract in Malaysia and designed by the Japanese had the abality to keep that tub, filled with Mars bars cool so as the Mars bars didn't melt. I don't really know how it worked, but my dad mentioned to me that theyed apply 18 volts of current to it and it'd heat up on one side and freeze on the other. it was so cold taht when one of my dads co-workers touched it, his skin froze over and tore. It needed 2 fans to cool it.

    --
    Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.