Jump to content

I’ve been water cooling wrong for YEARS - $H!T Manufacturers Say

ColinLTT
1 hour ago, Nystemy said:

I don't make "guestimates", I make calculations of what can reasonable be expected in real life, give or take a few percent. You will have larger variations due to fan quality at that point. (and yes, I can add that to the calculations as well.)

sure you do.

 

1 hour ago, Nystemy said:

Are you sure? Each turn the air needs to make require an increase in air pressure for a given flow rate. (Yes, a duct with a turn has a larger pressure drop than the same length of duct without a turn. (And I am not going to go into the whole science of turning air more efficiently in a duct, that is literally a whole field in itself.)) And an increase in needed air pressure for a given flow rate, is what we call higher air resistance.

 

Sure, you might have a poorly put together thing that on the "surface" might look "similar".

funny that you mention turns and their resulting pressure drop, when your proposed solution has a whooping SIX turns, each of them near 90 degrees. my build has one.

 

and no, i don't have any blocked off radiators. i may not claim to be a professional engineer, but i'm quite capable of telling whether something is blocked or not.

1 hour ago, Nystemy said:

Sounds like the perfect explanation of recirculating airflow to be fair....

i made a baffle which largely separates the two.

 

it's not perfect, but it should be sufficient in preventing a lot of recirculating airflow

 

1 hour ago, Nystemy said:

You might have the opinion that one can't calculate expected performance before hand.
And you might have anecdotal evidence supporting your opinion.
I am likely not going to change that opinion of yours.

you can change my opinion by building this thing and proving it definitively.

 

i do not think that one cannot calculate expected performance beforehand, but i also believe in testing to verify whether something is overlooked or not.

 

build it and prove it, if you can.

 

or not. i don't really care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/15/2020 at 9:55 AM, moriz1 said:

Linus basically tested the wrong metric. what he should've done, is test the coolant temperature of a stacked radiator setup against that of a serial setup, both in 1-intake-1-exhaust and 2-intakes configurations. keep the same radiators and the same fans, at the same RPMs. the best solution is the one with the lowest coolant temperature after reaching steady state. test at multiple RPMs as well.

 

the test shown in the video is pretty meaningless.

YUP.

I wrote a way too long youtube comment after watching the video, cos I was so mad:

Quote

The problem is you didn't actually stack radiators here. The minecraft server was clearly stacked, but on your experimental setup, there was tons of room to introduce new cool air in to the radiators. Secondly, the test was a steady for the CPU and GPU temperatures, but I'm certain that if you were monitoring the inlets and outlets of the radiators, you'd see that the temperatures were nowhere near steady state. You'd have to run the tests uninterrupted for multiple hours to get to steady thermal state on the radiator outlets in your "experimental" setup. And since no one runs adobe or whatever for 30 minutes and finishes up for the day, a longer test makes sense. Given that you used 240mm rads, with a very open setup, its understandable that your test differed from the theory.

It does surprise me that you got these results using a serial configuration, where the heated outlet of one rad, goes into the "cool" inlet of the second radiator.

My proposed setup:
Control setup: Air cooling. just pick something
Experimental setup #1: start with one 60mm rad. Add 60mm rads, with fans pointing at each other, and piping in serial. Log inlet and outlet temp of rads, and water blocks. Tests end when the outlet temperature on the rads stop rising. Continue adding another rad until it gives negligible changes.
Experimental setup #2: Same as before, but use piping splits to make the flow go in parallel(you will need higher pump flow for this) to rad gives negligible changes. End the test when you've done the same number as experimental setup #1.

Do this, and you will understand something new about thermodynamics.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×