Evaluating 3D-Printed Cooling Blocks at MAX IV
At MAX IV Laboratory, researchers continuously explore new manufacturing techniques to improve efficiency and broaden their technical expertise. As part of an internal opportunity study on 3D metal printing, a test was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of 3D-printed cooling blocks using CuCrZr.
The goal was to compare 3D-printed and traditionally machined cooling blocks, focusing on dimensional tolerances, cooling performance, and suitability for ultra-high vacuum (UHV) applications.
Why Consider 3D Printing for Cooling Blocks?
In synchrotron applications, cooling systems are crucial in managing heat buildup. Traditional cooling blocks typically have straight drilled channels connected by tubing or with sealed exits. However, these methods come with limitations:
🔹 Limited design flexibility – Conventional methods make Complex internal cooling channels difficult or impossible to manufacture.
🔹 Potential leakage risks – Each connection or seal increases the chance of leaks.
🔹 Higher costs for complex geometries – Multi-part assemblies require additional machining and labour.
With 3D printing, cooling channels can be integrated directly into the structure, allowing for more efficient thermal management while reducing assembly complexity.
Material Selection: Why CuCrZr?
CuCrZr (Copper-Chromium-Zirconium) was chosen based on previous vacuum compatibility tests at MAX IV. Compared to pure copper and standard copper, CuCrZr was found to be the best option for UHV applications, offering:
✅ High thermal conductivity – Essential for efficient cooling.
✅ Sufficient mechanical strength – Unlike oxygen-free copper, CuCrZr can create knife-edge seals used in UHV.
✅ Better vacuum compatibility – Performs well in ultra-high vacuum conditions.
Testing the 3D-Printed Cooling Block
Cooling Block Design
The cooling block was designed with curved internal channels, taking advantage of 3D printing’s ability to create complex geometries. Threads for the connectors were machined later and not directly 3D-printed.
Technical Drawings
The technical drawings highlight the internal channel structures and overall design considerations.
Figure 2: Engineering drawings of the cooling block showing channel layout.
Ordering & Printing with MakerVerse
MakerVerse is a platform for sourcing industrial parts. It provides instant access to a vetted supply chain and a full range of manufacturing technologies. With AI-powered quoting, order management, and fulfilment, MakerVerse helps with everything from initial prototypes to full-scale production.
The part was printed using LPBF (Laser Powder Bed Fusion) and arrived within the expected lead time.
Performance & Testing Results
Dimensional Accuracy
After receiving the printed cooling block, it was measured for accuracy. The most significant deviation was 0.2 mm, which was better than expected.
✅ Nominal length: 100 mm
✅ Measured length: 100.16 mm
Figure 3: CMM measurements confirming the high dimensional accuracy of the printed part. Left (Top) and Right (Bottom).
Surface Quality & Powder Removal
- Surface roughness: Ra 8-10 µm, consistent with LPBF prints.
- Some residual powder was found in the channels, but this was acceptable, as MAX IV performs in-house cleaning for UHV components.
Cooling Performance Comparison
The cooling block was tested under modified MAX IV cooling conditions:
🔹 Water Flow:0.4 l/min
🔹 Heat Input: 200W
🔹 Temperature Monitoring: thermocouples on block and water inlets/outlets
Key Findings
✅ The 3D-printed block performed well, though the machined version had slightly better cooling efficiency due to its sharper channel corners, which improved heat transfer.
✅ The 3D-printed block with multiple channels showed the best cooling performance, as expected, due to longer flow paths and proximity to the surface.
Figure 4: Cross-section of the cooling block showing internal channels after cutting.
Future Applications & Next Steps
Based on this evaluation, MAX IV sees potential for 3D-printed cooling components in future applications. While this particular test block was not intended for direct use in equipment, it provided valuable insights for future designs.
Key Takeaways
✔ 3D printing enables more complex cooling channels, which can enhance performance in specific applications.
✔ Dimensional tolerances were better than expected, making LPBF a viable option for precision parts.
✔ Additional tests like pressure drop and particle release would benefit a more complete evaluation.
In future designs, MAX IV may explore alternative cooling geometries, such as lattice structures, to improve heat dissipation.
Simple and Reliable Process
The process of ordering and receiving the 3D-printed part was straightforward and efficient.
Key highlights of the collaboration:
✅ Easy online ordering – Uploading the STL file, getting an instant quote, and placing the order was hassle-free.
✅ Precision manufacturing – The final part’s dimensional accuracy was better than expected, with minimal deviation.
✅ Reliable customer support – The feedback and assistance from the MakerVerse team were helpful throughout the process.
Nils Pistora, Mechanical Engineer at MAX IV, shared his experience:
“Just upload the STL file to MakerVerse and place an order. It could not be more simple. Dimensional tolerances were surprisingly good, exceeding expectations. The ease of use of your web page, combined with instant quoting and helpful feedback from Kaitlin Wong, made the process seamless.”
Valuable Learning Experience
This evaluation of 3D-printed cooling blocks provided MAX IV with valuable data on the feasibility of metal additive manufacturing for cooling applications.
While machined parts still offer slightly better performance, 3D printing’s ability to create complex internal geometries makes it a viable option for specific designs.
🚀 Interested in testing metal 3D printing for your applications?
