Thermal conductivity (W/mK) is the primary metric when evaluating a Gap Pad. However, engineers often find discrepancies in data between manufacturers or even within the same product line. This usually stems from the methodology: are we measuring the “Bulk Material” or simulating the “Actual Assembly”?
Chemical Principles: Thermal Resistance vs. Thermal Diffusivity The thermal behavior of Silicone interface materials is governed by the filler network and the matrix’s viscoelasticity:
Steady-State Heat Flow (ASTM D5470): The industry gold standard for real-world simulation. By applying specific pressure, it measures the temperature gradient across the Gap Pad. This method accounts for Contact Thermal Resistance, reflecting how the Gap Pad performs under compression.
Laser Flash Analysis (LFA): Uses a laser pulse to heat the rear of a sample while monitoring front-side temperature rise to calculate diffusivity. While high in precision, it often ignores interfacial effects, yielding “theoretical bulk” values.
Industrial Application: Selecting Reliable Data for Design Lixing Composite Material recommends different benchmarks based on design phases:
Structural Engineering: For high-pressure assemblies like power modules, ASTM D5470 is preferred as it captures the compensation effect of pressure on thermal performance.
Material Selection: LFA provides excellent reference data for filler distribution during early-stage material benchmarking.
Lixing Standard: Our thermal Gap Pad are validated through multi-method cross-referencing to ensure real-world thermal resistance outperforms datasheet nominals.
