Improve a WB design

grassi3000 · 01-01-2004, 09:46 AM

Well, my block is now finished, and I'm now thinking of doing the same "needle" mod, like shown here
http://forums.procooling.com/vbb/showthread.php?t=8604

At the moment the situation is this: 49 holes an cups, with the same diameter of 1.2mm

the height difference between the holes and cups is 3mm.
After reading some posts i found out, that
1: jets should go into the cups
2: the ID of the jets should be smaller than the ID of the cups.

Should I do the mod, or should I test the block before doing the mod? What do you think?

Dieter@be · 01-01-2004, 10:29 AM

Offcourse do the "mod" first (mod=inserting the needles?) otherwise it won't work. The whole principle is based on the jets going into the cups.

WAJ_UK · 01-01-2004, 11:08 AM

I definitely think it is worth testing as it will give you a base line to compare future revisions to

grassi3000 · 01-01-2004, 12:21 PM

Ok that's one vote against another

Well do you consider it worth comparing?

Dieter@be · 01-01-2004, 01:44 PM

grassi3000 you made a jet inmpingement block without jets and you think that's gonna work?

You will be able to remove some heat away from the cpu, but the whole concept is based of the jets in the cups.

lolito_fr · 01-02-2004, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Well do you consider it worth comparing?

Yes, definately

Incoherent · 01-02-2004, 04:10 AM

I would not bother, you'd just be adding to the general noise and confusion that surrounds the impingement concept. Although I would be very curious to see the result if you could maintain control of the experiment.

Cheers

Incoherent

grassi3000 · 01-02-2004, 11:58 AM

Well I think I'm going to test both versions and post it here. Maybe somebody can figure out, what I or somebody else can improve in later versions

grassi3000 · 03-03-2004, 01:35 PM

update:
I've now tested my waterblock, without the needles. I'm very satisfied with it.

The CPU temperature (P4 2.53 @ 3.02) measured with a Chaintech Apogee 9ejl2 is constantly (idle(windows, no programm running) or load(prime95 torture test)) 4°c above the watertemp ... there is max 0.2°C deviation, but I think this is due to: room temperature (the radiator is passive) and the sensors.

I won't put the needles into it.

Are such temperatures normal for wb's like that?

-J- · 03-03-2004, 06:50 PM

test both, no harm on doing so. if you have some free time, its fun

01-01-2004, 12:21 PM	#4
grassi3000 Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Austria Posts: 46	Ok that's one vote against another Well do you consider it worth comparing? __________________ P4 2,53 @ 3,02 \| 1 GB Infineon DDR 333 \| Chaintech Apogee 9ejl2 \| Radeon 9500 Pro @ 370 / 330 46xx 3dmarks2k3

01-02-2004, 11:58 AM	#8
grassi3000 Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Austria Posts: 46	Well I think I'm going to test both versions and post it here. Maybe somebody can figure out, what I or somebody else can improve in later versions __________________ P4 2,53 @ 3,02 \| 1 GB Infineon DDR 333 \| Chaintech Apogee 9ejl2 \| Radeon 9500 Pro @ 370 / 330 46xx 3dmarks2k3

03-03-2004, 01:35 PM	#9
grassi3000 Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Austria Posts: 46	update: I've now tested my waterblock, without the needles. I'm very satisfied with it. The CPU temperature (P4 2.53 @ 3.02) measured with a Chaintech Apogee 9ejl2 is constantly (idle(windows, no programm running) or load(prime95 torture test)) 4°c above the watertemp ... there is max 0.2°C deviation, but I think this is due to: room temperature (the radiator is passive) and the sensors. I won't put the needles into it. Are such temperatures normal for wb's like that? __________________ P4 2,53 @ 3,02 \| 1 GB Infineon DDR 333 \| Chaintech Apogee 9ejl2 \| Radeon 9500 Pro @ 370 / 330 46xx 3dmarks2k3

01-01-2004, 10:29 AM	#2
Dieter@be Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Belgium\Wetteren Posts: 94	Offcourse do the "mod" first (mod=inserting the needles?) otherwise it won't work. The whole principle is based on the jets going into the cups.

01-01-2004, 11:08 AM	#3
WAJ_UK Cooling Savant Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Sussex Posts: 109	I definitely think it is worth testing as it will give you a base line to compare future revisions to

01-01-2004, 01:44 PM	#5
Dieter@be Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Belgium\Wetteren Posts: 94	grassi3000 you made a jet inmpingement block without jets and you think that's gonna work? You will be able to remove some heat away from the cpu, but the whole concept is based of the jets in the cups.

01-02-2004, 04:10 AM	#7
Incoherent Cooling Savant Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Vallentuna, Sweden Posts: 410	I would not bother, you'd just be adding to the general noise and confusion that surrounds the impingement concept. Although I would be very curious to see the result if you could maintain control of the experiment. Cheers Incoherent

03-03-2004, 06:50 PM	#10
-J- Registered User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina Posts: 217	test both, no harm on doing so. if you have some free time, its fun

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)