Quite wrong. DIY is where progress is done, not theory. Theory is a complete waste of time if it is not put into production. I am quite tired of all the theory and no action around this place letely. Whats the point? it is a freaking water block for a computer not a nuclear reactor.

Discovery of metals was based on abilt of cenceptual lateral thinking. From ready product (accidentaly found shiny bit of molten metal) to recreation of this process (melting and knowing what to heat up) took fair amount of imagination and abstract tinking, don't you think? (no pun intended ;) )

Yeah, I am catching your drift m8, don't get me wrong. You are right, just yappoing away, however clever, is empty without action resultng.
Similarly producing variations on the same theme based on the same old design is equally useless:) I'd rather see no action for a while and then something worthwhile resulting than constsnt stream of tweaked pin/fin designes!

Cold-plate Spreading Resistance revisited.
1) Think* Bill is 90% right indicating h~2w/c.However this should be expressed as h~868w/m2*c for calculation purposes.
The difference is mostly academic :
http://www.jr001b4751.pwp.blueyonder.../TEC%20Sp1.jpg
Have included the Total Resistance of the Coldplate.
This is obtained via:
Coldplate Resistance(c/w)= Total Resistance(Waterloo) - Contact Resistance
Contact Resistance= 1/(Area x h) , where h is expressed in w/m2*c.

The effect on Die Temperatue :
http://www.jr001b4751.pwp.blueyonder.../TEC%20Sp2.jpg
Kryotherm is used.
Rc is the Coldplate Resistance + 0.0833c/w( TIM resistance for a 11x11mm layer)



* Think I am wrong in equating h to the heatsink's Thermal Conductance(w/m2*c).
The Film Coefficient(h) is the Thermal Conductance of the Coldplate's cold surface. This is taken as the [Reciprocal of the sum of Resistances] x Area.
Resistance(to ambient)= PeltierC/W + Heatsink(C/W to ambient) +TIMs(C/W)

Resistance(to ambient) is minimum when Heatsink(C/W to ambient)=0 and TIMs(C/W)=0.
The Film Coefficient(h) is maximum when Resistance(to ambient) is minimum
The Film Coefficient(h) will always be less than the inherent h~868w/m2*c Thermal Conductance of the Peltier.
Kryotherm suggests that
PeltierC/W ~ 0.5(actually 0.420) and hence the Maximum Film Coefficient(h) ~ 868w/m2*c (actually 1033w/m2*c) :
http://www.jr001b4751.pwp.blueyonder.../TEC%20Sp3.jpg

Who are you refering to? Me or Swiftech? Either way your incorrrect. In any event if the numbers continue to get lower there is certainly nothing usless about it. What is useless is taking days to make a calculation on cold plate thickness when you can mill every size of thickness from 5/8" to 1 mm in less than an hour and test each one. Once your special calculations are complete you STILL have to test each size to make sure you theory is correct. Why waste time calculating..... it is a cold plate for christ sake. Flat peice of metal!

And where is all YOUR work posted on the subject? Where is your blocks, your plates, ect... Who are you to judge what is usless?

I am nobody d00de, take a chill pill, will ya?
I wasn't making any personal remarks nor was I attacking anyone. THis is free public forum and freedom of speach is as far as I know one of the foundations of western life style:)
If you feel offended by my general remarks I am sorry :(
Maybe it is my general resources and costs conciousness that drives me through research first to production later. I personally would rather spend time designing things and fine tuning them as far as possible in virtual world and then, when theoretical means are exhausted, only start making working model. In this way I feel I am contributing my little bit towards saving energy and resources (not to mention I do not have time nor means to do countless prototypes as well as calcs take no time for me-theorycising deas take time mind you).
Trial and error development methods are as valid as theoretical research and practiced by countless invemtors worldwide.
Sorry again if I treaded on your toes, I did not mean to.

P.s. Flatness of cold plates is one of the reasons why ther are not performning as well as they could :D

Les, your data is most interesting. I only wish the resolution was finer a bit.
The reason behind it is that it looks like the optimal thickness for all grpahs is the same.
I know it is not but it looks like differences are extremely small and can be disregarded.
It is very good news for costs of production since it'd mean 'one size fits all':)
I jus wonder how this relationship behaves for more powerful elements and more complex cold plate geometry? Are differences going to be equally minuscule?

hmm, "d00de" is one of the most irritating "words" I've seen on the internet in quite a while.

what about HaX0r?
hehe.

bloody hell i think i started a flame war...and no-one has answered my question!!!

Use the smallest drill you can to drill as many 1mm deep 'craters' and make a lid out of sth eith inlet and outlet. Seriously, there's not nuff meet to carve anything out of 3mm copper sheet. Then you enter solder type blocks and .... countless designs are possible here.

I'd rather drill than cut in 3mm since driling is more precise (I hope you got sth like a drill press at least) and will leave you nice flat border to fix your top to (may want to research derlin).

I hope that at least I tried to answer your original quetion here :)

P.S. Why not buy commercila block?

Ummm, never said you you did? :shrug: And no it isn't a public forum, Freedom of Speech doesn't apply here. Remember agreeing to the TOS to become a member? :dome: Keyword "member".

Not offended at all. I have real hands on experience. Not offended by someone that doesn't and has yet to provide anything resembling a product better than what he bashes.

Trial and error is what drives the economy of the world. ;)
Would love to here the reasoning behind that.

jaydee116 - I couldn't be bothered any more to reply to your posts.
Whatever you say...

well, I'll bite since jd no longer has your 'ear'
- an awful lot of blah blah here with no specifics

1) define flatness as it relates to cold plates
2) identify your source of data that reveals sub-potential performance
3) what 'should' the flatness be ? - and why ?
4) and what performance gains will result from using cold plates to your spec ?

no "d00de" is much worse. :p

indeed, "d00de" is a pointed insult when the individual's name or nick is known

I guess Jabo's lofty self-esteem permits him such gratuitous dings

Jabo, I'll give you a handle if you do not wish to use names when responding
think KIA might fit ?

I'll try to deflate my baloon a bit and aspire to keep my written English cleaner, just because I like you lot :) It was not meant as any form of insult.

Forgive me being a tad thick but what KIA stands for?

Jabo
you are not thick, suspect a language thing
a name is far preferable to a label, shows a bit of courtesy

you may skip KIA, too sarcastic by far; withdrawn - sorry

-> and my questions above ?

First of all the whole thing was a misunderstanding caused by lack of precisssion in expressing myself.
1.Contact surface between CPUs die and cold plate should be as flat as possible/feasible.
2.First amendment please :)
3. See point 1, reason as many molecules of each of materials are gonna be in cotact with ever flatter surfaces, flatness 'level' is gonna be governed by costs only.
4. One is quite certian, cold plate will be lighter:) dT and flux spikingg capacity is goning to be increased potentially allowing for higher overclocks (yeah, it is lots of blah, blah, blah without numbers support - so take it as you wish everybody).

Now, theoretically perfect water block of classical pin design resembles a hedgehog. Imagine swiffy's lates but base is a hlaf sphere with pins 'bit' curved. inlet at the top and outlet as a gutter on the perimeter (get a glass ball and run a stream of water down on it)
Reason? Equal distance from each point on the thermal exchange surface from energy source resulting in perfect isotherms layout and superior surface are to any of the current designs.
This is why Bill's new block performs so well compared to Cathars designs. Swiftech's block has much lower energy dissipation per mm^2 (jetted area) compared to Cathars design but makes iit up with MUCH larger surface on which such desnity is present making it extremely good low flow (read universal) design - overall winner.
Trully elegant engineering solution, no fireworks but good solid conceptual work transpiring into extremely low production costs (pleae, do not read any brown nosing into this, it is sincere and I have no business saying one way or the other).

Anyone want to attempt spherical block with 'gutter' return?

I know, it is pretty obvious I was not born speaking English and me being dyslectic shines pretty brightly too I guess :D
and sometimes I too get carried away (I catch fire pretty easily)

what would be the best way to have the water flowing through the system?

I was think of having the water go through the pump then through the heatercore and then onto the CPU waterblock. now at the water block i was planning on splitting the water path in two making one go to the mobo chipset and the other go to the graphics card. then they would both meet up again and go back to the pump

is that ok for the flowpath?

that was the question that i asked

thanks for anyone who answers the question

Go like this : rad->pump->CPU->gp->rad
Radiator does not benefit from high pressure nearly as much as water blocks and unless your pump dumps massive amounts of heat into water there's no point in placing rad between pump and CPU block - we want block to enjoy the highest pressure in the system

Evidence please.
It is a new concept to me.
Think is crap but I am open to elucidation

[quote=Jabo]
I jus wonder how this relationship behaves for more powerful elements ...........?[quote]

http://www.jr001b4751.pwp.blueyonder.../TEC%20Sp4.jpg

But the question is whether the method is right ?
Then whether my implementation is correct.

It's a compromise. Agree to a point but with the added surface area comes a lower water velocity and hence lower turbulence for a given pump. Add the thermal gradient of copper and it can easily end up way inferior.