__________________________
Response to BillA:

No one expected you to be mature about critisim Bill. If anything you are predictable.

Just because something can be calculated to the 1000ths doesn't mean the 10ths can't be an adequate delimiter to separate performance. Frankly I see genious in finding ways to keep is simple, thats the hard part, not taking everything to exteeme and loosing understanding of when numbers become to finite to be relevant.
___________________________

Funding for a testbed would be very benifical. Perhaps if we can find someone who can make an accurate die simulator, they could assist in the construction and donate or give specs on one that is appropriate.

Perhaps we could publicly list the components of a good system that could be built ~$1000 then argue those. Once we find a consensus, start on contributions moving toward those components. What person would control testing for this and make the unit avaliable to others? I fee should be charged per block just for maintenance and improvement imo.

Edit: srry for the late post, my kid was jumping on me as I started typing. You guys are a challenge to keep up with!

Ben
why are you working to set up a 'secret' forum ?
all 'standards' are created publicly
what you got to hide ?

so one of your first actions as a mod is to divert some of the posters to a different forum ?
and also to remove a technical discussion quite related to cooling ?

JoeK must be real happy with having anointed you a mod for his forums

Those are the kind of details that we'll have to iron out.

Personally, I don't really want to get into fees, but we'll have to vote on that, if there's a need.

Funding is probably going to be out. It's really going to be up to each of us to to buy and build our test rigs. There's a benefit in the variations, so I don't think we'll push for a standard, other than an acceptable error margin, and that's still an iffy. The Alliance is about setting testing parameters, not dictating how a testbench should be built. The test bench should meet some kind of testing requirement, that's it.

There's definitely going to be a lot of block swapping, among members. It'll be part of our calibration procedures.

The thing is, the first thing to do is to set some testing requirements, that are reasonable. Then we have to validate the test benches, the procedure (including the self calibration), and the stated error margins.

Then we can start cross-calibrating, preliminary, to validate the stated test procedures, tweak our test benches, and redo the whole exercise, over and over.

Then we can cross-calibrate each other, so that we can each take our actual results, and adjust them for what the alliance finds is a "truer" value.

It could take years just to get everyone up to that point!

I really can't see the point of a proliferation of mediocre test benches.

I'd much rather see the development of one outstanding one.

From my POV, it looks like the best hope of developing one outstanding one, is for people to contribute to pHaestus' efforts.

He already has a start. He has access to the resources of a university. He has the scientific analysis background needed to qualify his own test bench as accurate.

I don't see any benefit to dividing the 'available resources' between a lot of different test benches.

As for me contributing; I'm happy to contribute what I can to the development of a quality testbench as long as I am having fun. As soon as it starts looking like a big chore, I'll drop it. I'm not interested in a secret society of testers either.

And, WouldWhine STFU. You are contributing nothing but an angry buzzing noise. Your reaction to Bill, is nothing more than your reaction. The fact that Bill has a tendency to stir up hornet's nests, does not make a hornet's nest something other than a hornet's nest. Think about it.

I don't think Ben is talking about a "Secrete Society of Testers" but more of a place testers can go to keep all the other dribble out of the conversation. I much more strictly modderated forum where anyone can see whats going on but only the "approved" members can make a thread. And I can add a section where anyone a member or not can add their thoughts aswell.

Years? And I agree that if you want to try to set some as yet unknown "standard" that doing it in private will make it all the harder for the public to understand or accept. What are the credentials here to warrant secrecy and a credible standard, only a few well known handles in the current public cooling forums. No manufacturers, thermodynamic engineers, or college dropouts for that matter will apply your standards going this route. I think the real standard that your results will be measured against are the public test results (and publicly discussed procedures) that BillA provided through his long hard journey. But then if the procedures are not made public, how can they be scrutinized - is that the goal here BB?

and what is wrong with this forum ?

:shrug: It's open to anyone to make a reply. You seen what has already happened just in this thread.

Just because everyone is not walking hand in hand does not mean a thread (or a forum) is problematic.

Or maybe I'm just one of them assclowns:D

Nothing is getting resloved here. Maybe that will shead some light to the subject.

I think that it's in every tester's interest to show their testing procedures, but it may not be in everyone's interest to know how he got to it. Some members may feel that the development of the procedure should remain private to members.

I don't know. It just makes sense to me. It's something we'll have to vote on.


Since87: I see your point, but I don't think that anyone is going to voluntarily contribute thousands of dollars for a super duper testing facility. I'm just being realistic here. If we all agree that our testbenches should have a margin of error of +/- 5%, which may be feasible, then we can get the rest of the accuracy from cross-testing, IMO.

Either way, you're welcome, even if it's for a short stint.

Bill: I think that JD made the point. I really don't want to get a bunch of people that are going to drop in randomly and posting irrelevant stuff. Maybe it's just for convenience, I don't know. Then there's the privacy aspect I mentionned. It'd be nice if we could have a private board right here on ProCooling, just like OverClockers has.

First I want to hear from the members, so I'm going to start gathering e-mail addys. Then we'll figure out what we want to do.

Seconded. I was going to suggest something like this before I found this thread. Great minds and all that....:D


Bob

Nice :) sounds like a superfriends team waiting to happen. But I do think Bill you could get in there under the

BillA - Cooling Evangelism

Def:
e·van·gel·ism n. - Militant zeal for a cause.

Now that I read to this point in the thread I have to ask the same question.

To Ben and JD: as you have seen every time I have been asked to make a specific cooling forum ( the simulator forum for example.. oh and the whole WB design and construction forum) I have done it for no issue.

There can be security set on forums to limit postings, etc... If you want to do your thing in obscurity I do believe that you are asking for this lil project to fail. Doing it in a public spotlight will force a legitimacy on it that the "secret" forum will lack.

Do whatcha want but I do think you are shooting yourself in the foot.

Umm this is a pretty constructive thread... who are you doing this for? people who buy blocks, people who build blocks, or just you and Ben?


I dunno, what did you want to resolve? is there an issue to resolve? what was the original problem? From what I read this is a thread to DISCUSS a cooling testing alliance... Guess all this discussion is getting in the way of discussion.

Gone_Fishing hit it right on the head.

Thaks for the offer Joe. I'll PM you with the details, when I have them.

All members will have to vote on wether we want to keep this secret or not. Like I wrote earlier, it's in every tester's interest in making the testing procedure public, but not necessarily how it got there.

Personally, I don't have a problem with making the forum publicly "view-able", as long as only the WTA members can post in it. That's just my opinion... it'll be voted on.

So is this in the realms of the feasible, Joe?


To all: I'm still gathering e-mail addresses. If I don't have yours already, e-mail it to me!

a fitting label Joe, and one to which I do not object at all
but I did not apply to join the club
though I have now been invited !!!

my response:
do it ALL in public fellas, its called 'peer review'
real-time, anyone can post

did any of you follow the simulator discussions ? ('till we lost gmat)
few teeners butted in, and a lot of good work was done by a number of contributors
and it was QUICKLY apparent who knew what they were talking about, and who just needed to make a post

the real problem here is that this has been discussed MANY times
now Ben wants to forget/ignore all that has gone before - as if a novel solution can be voted in
- this is merely applied science and engn, only new to those w/o experience or education in the field

good results will come to those willing to invest the time, effort, and expense
no free lunch
keep it public

It is? We have made no progress on anything excpet that some of you think there is no way this project will work. Thats getting nothing accomplished as those are the one's needed to make something like this work. Also BTW I am just giving support ot Ben's ideas. I will build a forum and give him webspace if he wants it. I am not going to play a major role in this as I already told Ben by e-mail.



I wasn't just refering to just this thread but the other threads about testing here. So far nothing has got accompished on any of them. We are still at the same point as if these threads never started. The people not technically advanced want a way to do decent testing, the more technically advanced say don't bother and don't help as they think it isn't worth the effort.

We always end up in the same spot and nothing gets resolved. Would a private forum help this? I doubt it. The people that would be needed in those forums are the same one's that have all these cross issues in which keeps anything form happening.

Anyway, this is Ben's project, not mine and Ben's so don't associate me like you have there. ;) I already told him in e-mail I am not up to making a test bench of this caliper to cross calibrate but I am up to helping him however I can with this project.

I'd send an email but it would make me feel like a kid sending out for the top secret decoder ring from a box of crackerjacks.

Maybe it should be open, and I mean wide open, but just like the simulator forum, I'm afraid that it's not going to go anywhere, because it would lack leadership. Forums don't tend themselves well without some form of leadership, or some kind of ownership IMO.

If we leave it open, then I can moderate it, and just delete the irrelevant, newb posts that we don't want.

What seems important to me though, is that the e-mail correspondence between members needs to be regular, and have some kind of consistency. The Forums make a very poor focusing point, IMO, for an effort like this.

So with JayDee's help, we can have a dedicated webspace, that WOULD be the focusing point, and the Forums can take second place to it.

These are just some thoughts. I'd rather have all members vote on it though. Maybe it just makes sense to me?!?

ROFL!!! I believe thats a rip on a few levels (for those not following along)

That's your choice, GF.

Warning, severely blunt comments to follow. . .



Bah, it doesn't go anywhere because:

"A" Anyone with brains enough to do it right is smart enough to realize that financially it is a fool's venture.

"B" Anyone without enough brains either gets frustrated and gives up or educates themself and then falls under category "A".



Whether intentional or not, this is hilarious. "I" can moderate and delete posts that "we" don't want. You're nearing 6k posts, Ben, and reign supreme as leader of the "newb" post count.

On a serious note, this only "goes somewhere" when the right someone takes it to heart. Look around folks. The only way someone does something like this is with a company bankrolling the expenses or if they've got money burning a hole in their pocket. Oh, and then there's Bill, who through his dedication has proven to have at least one or two screws loose. People that make that sort of investment of their time, money, and talent are very rare indeed, and judging by Bill's demeanor that's probably a good thing.

Lest I be accused of being nothing but a nay-sayer, let me offer some constructive suggestions.

1) Figure out what the true goal is.
2) Ask yourself what/whose talents are required to reach the goal.
3) Ask yourself the cost (time, money, education, etc.) of reaching that goal.
4) Ask yourself what the return is.
5) Decide if the return is worth the investment.

While lots of people around here clamor for "good testing data", those that demand good data are a drop in the bucket of world-wide computer users. It's a thankless task. It's a task with no immediate (and potentially never reaching a) monetary payback. Then there's the simple fact that picking an acceptable block is a lot easier than properly selecting/designing the whole system. ie, the range of "good" block performance pales next to the variations from available tubing size, pump performance, radiator/fan selection, etc.

I would submit these are the reasons this has never gone anywhere, not because of any "discussion" that's gone on in the forums.

Very well said.

clarity of thought
how refreshing

but Dave, I trained myself into the best job in the WCing industry
lol

Well said myv65.

I feel I fall into A (maybe optomistic) more so than B, but will not deny I am ignorant either.

It really is a fool's venture. Your not going to get your money back you put into it unless your a manufacture and the numbers are essential to sell your product which obviously isn't the case for PC water blocks. What would we really be trying to prove here? Block A is better than block B? Do we really need to be that anal about it to acomplish this? Is the (from Bens earlier post) the $1,000 minumum really needed to say the DD maze 4 is better than the DD maze 3?

I am pretty certain I can do this without spending to much money after the research I have done to come to the conclusion not to bother with the advanced test bench.

But what else are we trying to do? Come up with the capability to pre-build a system and know how it is going to work before hand? If so, for what? It is only going to be a matter of time before the oriental's kick everyone's ass in pre-built ready to install kits that perform well and are cheaper than we can make a block let alone a complete kit. Only a matter of time untill demand is high enough they put their already designed water cooling products into mass production.

By the time all this gets ironed out the cause will have been lost to other circumstances.

Non the less I am still with your Ben. Anything I can do let me know. Would it not be better to go down in flames trying than not try at all?

I believe folks get confused about Bill, after all it is just his style. When I used to train dogs, I followed the Koehler method. (And no, I don't think of you as dogs, this is just an anology). For those of you who are not familiar with that method, it involved pleasure and pain. My wife was apalled at that as she believed in the positive reaffirmation method. Both work, it is just that one is viewed as being more humane. Guess it depends on ones perspective...;)..

My thoughts from a financial and long term viability thing.

In my "real job" we make a product that sells fairly well (i.e. makes hundreds of millions of dollars). Most of you are all probably accessing the internet in some way or form through a product's software that I co-designed and co-wrote.

Now this product/software has a measurable performance, not terribly unlike the TPC database benchmarking that goes on.

For a while, there was a benchmarking company for the types of products that we and other companies in the industry made. Every 6 months to 1 year they would put out requests for all major industry players to participate, and then we'd all get together in a big hall somewhere with our boxes (some with many hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of equipment) and have a big "bake-off" to see who came out on top.

The entry fee for this bake-off was fairly large, mostly due to the administration costs of the independent group of people who ran it. We're talking many thousands of dollars. There were maybe 10-15 major players. We'd run the tests and everyone would go home and around 3 months later the results were published, typically around about the same time as most players were about to release a new update/speed refresh.

Over time various players dropped out of the bakeoffs over disagreements with the testing methodology, over anger at the delays in posting results that essentially compared an older product instead of their newer product, and generally getting pissed off with their products maybe not matching up to the higher performance players, but the market-place didn't really care as long as seemed to be "okay", until competitors could now use the testing information in their own marketing against the lower performing players, and suddenly these players found their market share shrinking dramatically when they were happy before (and generally their customers were too).

i.e. the idea of a high-quality test-bed is a noble one, but over time people won't want to use it if the results are to be made public and those results can be used against them. It doesn't matter how fair or unfair that sounds, that's just what will happen, at least from my experience.

I think there's a few lessons to be learned from this poorly written little anecdote, and a few more lessons to be learned again when one considers just how small the water-cooling market is, in comparison to a market that buys many tens of thousands of very expensive items.

Well, I thought it was pretty clear that anyone that joins, isn't quite right in the head to start off with. ;) Otherwise, this is about getting together those people that want to get into it.

Bill left a big void when he left for Swiftech. We've complained about many, many block reviews all over the web.

I think that we can try to put something together that's going to help fill the void.

I'd rather leave the financial aspect up to each member, because I know that getting any kind of "membership" or "support" fee is just a recipe for trouble. This whole effort is strictly voluntary, and given the unreasonable cost of setting up a semi-accurate test bench on one's own, this Alliance really isn't going to require a heck of a lot more, for what it's going to provide, IMO.

myv65: I'm going to use your comments, in our discussions. BTW, you're welcome to join, even if it's just for an occasional contribution! (just pm or e-mail me an e-mail address)

Ok, excuse this noob and my lack of knowledge. I've never had any schooling in engineering or such, but can't testing be done without super/semi accurate (high dollar) test benches. Seems to me that if you start with a known starting point (baseline) and compare the results to that, that should be accurate enough. Let me try to explain further. Say you start with a test bench (your own computer) and hook-up a Maze3. You test with say 10 remounts and average your test temps together. This would be the baseline. You then hook-up, remount and test your w/b to be tested in the same fashion and then compare the results to the Maze3. Do actual numbers really matter? Or the numbers of how much lower/higher your w/b is compared to the Maze3. Surely most w/bs will run in an average range and wouldn't the m/b temps (either under cpu or diode) be close enough in that range to make comparitive readings? And even though other testers may have different pumps, rads, hose size, etc., still wouldn't the results be fairly accurate enough? The only variable that would be a snag in this methology is different users using different pumps and rads. But can't even this be overcome by a formula of some sort? Surely some of these young mad scientists to be could come up with this.