Today we are talking about Parker THERM-A-GAP GEL 60HF, which is also available as Parker THERM-A-GAP GEL 75HF, whereby the name says it all, because the bulk thermal conductivity is specified as 6.2 W/m-K or even 7.5 W/m-K. Since we know that very good pastes are actually around 5 to 6 if they are to be performant, durable AND easy to work with, some people are inclined to either use such products themselves in their PC or to use them for argumentation chains in forums. Today you’ll find out that neither is a good idea without background knowledge. Because you can actually get anything…
It’s not that the THERM-A-GAP GEL 60HF with its 6.2 W/m-K is a bad paste, on the contrary. But you also need to know what it was designed for, developed over a long period of time and is now being successfully produced. However, I would definitely not use it in a computer, whether on the CPU or the GPU, because it is even better at the almost destructive power of sticking than some politicians on the outside. This paste was developed at the time for the special requirements of 5G transmission systems, among other things, and has the best properties for precisely this purpose. However, I know of at least one case where the use of THERM-A-GAP GEL 60HF in the private sector went horribly wrong and I also had to sacrifice a pair of test heads for this experiment, which unfortunately now have to be refurbished. But I’ll get to that later.
Let’s put it this way: the thermal conductivity specification is (as always) not everything. In some respects and if the required layer thickness BLT (Bondline Thickness) matches the paste, this paste is even better than the popular industrial pastes DOWSIL TC-5888 and TC-5550 with their ample 5 W/m-K, but it is not only modest to work with, but under a little pressure it almost becomes a solid thermal adhesive. And as you know: after solid comes off. Even if the system is later dismantled.
However, I would like to protect readers who are keen to experiment from precisely this kind of mischief, because as I have already written, these GEL pastes are often used as an argument in forums, which might even arouse false desires in some readers. And while I usually prefer to test pastes to show what’s best to smear into your PC, today I’m giving you the exact opposite: a recommendation not to use them. Of course, I can’t tell anyone not to do something, but at least you can try. And this is what the fun looked like before testing:
Technical data
It reads really well, nothing will burn and yet you could be warned, because a minimum BLT of 150 µm already has the flair of flowing screed. But such details are often overlooked. But don’t worry, I will of course check that too. And since I don’t want to lose sight of reality, I’m dreaming of my own 5G radio mast, which I can then rent out to the network operators for a lot of money and with the best possible cooling:
Now let’s move on to the test setup, which I will no longer be including as text and images in future articles, but for which I have written special articles on the basics, including a presentation of the equipment and measurement methods, to save me and you a little redundancy. If you would like to read up or refresh your knowledge, please use the following links to the two measurement setups for ASTM D5470-17 with the TIMA5 nanotest and LIBS including microscopy with the Keyence VX-7100 and EA-300:
After so much introduction, we now come to the practical side and the measurements, so please turn the page.
28 Antworten
Kommentar
Lade neue Kommentare
Urgestein
1
Mitglied
Mitglied
Urgestein
1
Urgestein
Veteran
Urgestein
Urgestein
Mitglied
1
Veteran
Veteran
Mitglied
1
Urgestein
1
Urgestein
Alle Kommentare lesen unter igor´sLAB Community →