@TallTxnMo

One word answer: "No"

Brief answer: Room temperature, actual system flow, impact of particular block on flow vs remainder of components, radiator selection, inherent imprecision of onboard sensors, etc., etc.

Real answer: The difference in performance among "good" blocks is sufficiently close that the sum of measuring errors introduced by "ghetto" testers dwarfs true performance differences.

Corollary to the real answer: All but the anal can blithely accept that "good" blocks perform close to one another, pick any of the "good" ones, and not worry any further.

Welcome to Procooling, home of the anal cooler. LOL. I wonder if Joe will consider using that in an advertisement for the site. Note, that's "anal cooler" and not "@ss cooler".

Thanks myc65. Always willing to learn.

Even though all the varibles you state in the "Brief answer" will affect the accuracy, do you really need ?‡th degree accuracy to design a w/b? I mean, if someone posted their results compared to a Maze3, wouldn't you be able to tell if it's a "good" w/b? If so, then others may incorporate that design into future designs or modify it furthermore? Isn't that what this forum is all about?

I do realize that in a sense, you'd be comparing apples to oranges with this method, but by comparing to a known baseline I think it would be close enough for most users of this site. Now a few (e.g. Cathar, jaydee among others) this might not be good enough, but their some much more advanced than the rest of us!

After looking at my last post, I realized a major flaw in my thinking. Scenario: Someone designs a w/b, but is using a pump that doesn't push a lot of water. The results woudn't truely reflect the ability of this w/b. Small pump=terrible temps, but a larger pump could make all the difference in the world. I stand corrected and educated. :-) Thanks!

My one input into this project would be that a variable speed pump would be necessary. Some tests at low flow rates and more at a higher flow rate. This should help all to see how a tested w/b would work on "their" system.

LOL... good one... nearly broke my back falling off the chair reading that one...

LMFAO

Now who's in charge of the hats n tees?

LOL

What should the logo be?

hmm watercooling... @nal...

how about an enema shaped waterblock...

Actually Roscal might have that covered. Pop the mounting tabs off and we are good to.....

http://zytracooling.com/articles.php?id=15

If you build it, I will come. I was even wondering if something like this even existed so I could send in blocks.

I would ask that the simulator have 50, 75, 100, and 125 watt settings. If it makes any difference. :shrug:

And a required spec. Like radiator must be XXXX, pump must be XXXX, ect.

:rolleyes:


I think myv65 showed the tip of the iceberg here. This Alliance is going to go into all these details, purpose, reason, etc... and we will set a testing standard! It's both simple, and complicated. Only those who know the difference will be able to appreciate the effort, so yeah, I guess I'll have to add "educate the common ones" to the list of things to do...:rolleyes:


1398342003: pumps are irrelevant. Radiators are irrelevant. We'll be testing blocks, by any means necessary. It then falls upon you to pick your pump, and your "cooling solution".

Hang around here, we'll show you how. ;)

OK, maybe radiators to a degree, but how can you honestly say that "pumps are irrelevent" considering certain waterblocks have differing performance profiles based on pump flow? One of the things I appreciate about the reviews by The Grumpy One is that he shows what the effects of differing pump flows have on the tested blocks. I think that has huge importance on evaluating a block, especially for the end user who needs to find optimum parts for the rest of his system to complement that block. This may mean he can get away with a 150gph pump vs some monster 500gph one.

Perhaps I have gapped, but has there been any determination as to how to do this? Are we talking about uniting behind pH's efforts or determining the outline of some generic "good enough" setup that the average block-hawker can duplicate? If it is the former, count me in.

Much as I hate to admit it, Bill is right on the mark here. Ignore the irrelevant.

Bob

but how do we distinguish between the positive @nal coolers and the negative @nal coolers ?
is that like blowing and sucking ?
is there a velocity component ?

oh, I know . . (duh)
Ben will vote on it

http://forums.procooling.com/vbb/for...?s=&forumid=61

The Testing and Benchmarking Forum. Open for all to post/reply.

Coooool!

And some thought nothing would come out of this thread.:p

Actually, I think that it's going to be somewhere in between, but closer to the first. Nothing has been defined yet.

The idea is to set the bar for a tester. If you look at what anyone has done in this area, there's various degrees of accuracy, in the different components.

So by setting a standard, we'd all know what to shoot for. Also, as I said earlier, I don't care what equipment one uses, as long as it can produce results that meet that "bar".


Joe, a big thank you for opening this Forum!


Bill: as I wrote earlier, the Forum is not going to be the central point of the Alliance: I'm just not going to allow that to happen. So if irrelevant posts come about, it really doesn't affect the effort of the Alliance.

BTW, I haven't heard from you, wether or not you'd like to be in on the e-mail list.

Utabintarbo: send me an e-mail address.

I also just had a chat this morning with Thykingdomcome who, with joemac, is getting ready to market a waterblock. I'm going to extend an invitation to both of them. That way, we'll have a manufacturer's input. Just trying to cover all the bases.

Ben
you have your head WAY up that @nal cooling space
who are you to ALLOW "the Forum is not going to be the central point of the Alliance" ?
-> and you continue to work directly against the procooling forums

Ben
are you not listening ? (of course you are not, rhetorical question)
YOU do not have a SINGLE demonstrated quality to lead ANY technical inquiry

an answer to your invitation:
I have no interest in debating ANYTHING technical with you, as you have demonstrated with 6000 posts that you are incapable of grasping – and applying - the concepts behind the big words
sorry, but that is my assessment of your cabapility

in a public forum I will continue to assist those individuals who are serious,
such does probably not extend to mfgrs making competitive products
- should a serious Standards Group be formed (of the mfgrs, not at all what you are doing now), then I am sure Swiftech will be a major supporter and participant

Ok Bill, I understand.

I'll admit that I'm guilty of posting a lot, and some of my posts may have been hasty/misdirected/irrelevant, etc.

What I was trying to convey, if it wasn't clear, is that although the Forums will always be wide open, to you or anyone else, ultimately, the WTA members will be the ones that are going to be voting on the acceptance of any standard.

If you don't want to be in on the vote, because of your association with Swiftech, or whatever other reasons you may have, that's your choice. Either way, we'll really value your input in this new Forum.


I don't believe that it's difficult to understand that an organization, any kind of organization, cannot survive based solely on a Forum. Is a Forum important? Yes. Useful? Sure! But really, to actually accomplish something, any group of people needs to have some kind of structure to support it, and a Forum just doesn't do that:

-It doesn't make sure that everyone has been notified
-It lends itself to a lot of distractions
-It doesn't allow for an efficient decision-making process
Do I need to go on?


My role in this Alliance is primarily administrative. Yes, I'll comment on the technical issues, for what it's worth, but I am not the "Great Chief" here, or the "Almighty Technical Guru", and I'm not going to dictate anything to anyone. The Alliance is a voluntary effort by all members, as is from anyone else outside of it that makes a contribution.

Because I started this idea, I'm having to make some decisions as to how it's going to take shape, again in how it functions. Maybe we'll elect a "President" or "Chairperson", maybe we won't, I really don't know!

I can also foresee a day when we've got our act together, to where we can actually approach manufacturers, but we're not there yet, and I openly admit that!

Ben does have one absolutely essential quality for leadership: enthusiasm.

I view this situation as analagous to The Manhattan Project: General Leslie Groves was no physicist, he just let the physicists do the physics stuff. He took care of the admin details that allowed them to do their thing. If this is the role Ben wishes to undertake, those not interested in taking on that responsibility should be happy about it!

I think we should model this after an open source software project. As I understand it, the main discussion thread takes place via mailing list, readable by all, often joinable by anyone interested. Forums are also useful, but not "cluttered" with administrative details (assignments of areas of responsibilty/research, etc.), but used for general discussions of purpose, features desired, etc. This way you seem to get the best of both worlds.

Bob

I have to agree with the leadership comment about Ben. It take plenty of enthusiasm and a lot “people skills” to get the right people to work together to accomplish a job. Unfortunately this is not always easy since sometime people can’t stand themselves let alone others. Ben what are going to be the requirements to join your alliance?

No amount of "leadership" will change the fact that it takes a substantial amount of money, the correct type of equiptment, and a huge devotion of ones time to do waterblock testing correctly. No matter how hard one tries, a shortcut simply does not exist.
Now can we end the foolishness of secret societies turning lead into gold?

Actually joemac, I was about to extend an invitation to you and thykingdomecome. E-mail me your addys.


Otherwise, there's no secret talk, of a technical nature anyways, in the form of e-mails.


That sounds awfully pessimistic, but the point has been addressed already. I'm not going to start a membership fee of any kind, at least not for now. There's no need for it, but if the members agree that there is some function that the Alliance needs to perform, and that it needs some funding, then it'll have one.

Right now, I don't foresee any such need, in the short or medium term.

Otherwise, yes testing needs to be done correctly, but I'm sure you'll agree that everyone has a different idea of what "correct" is. So the main purpose here, is to define that "level of correctness". It is a benefit to anyone who wants to get into some test benching, because it eliminates a lot of the guesswork, and it sets a minimum bar.

Thanks for your input. ;)

Wasted space.

edited by g_f

"You want to refinance your house and build a watercooling die simulator..." -BigBen Kenobi

I'm not any good at high-end cooling discussion, I don't know anything about waterblocks, testing, etc.

What I do know is that in order to keep this thing together, you all will need patience and a lot of understanding (severe understatement).

Leadership is not about directing people on what to do or where to go, it is more about getting everyone to connect, unite, and follow after a common purpose. Administrative details are messy and complex, don't concentrate on those at the moment. Anyone who has attempted starting a project involving more than one person can tell you that it is not easy getting everyone to band together, I certainly can attest to that.

You won't always get your way, heck, you may not get your way in any of the decisions that are made. You know what? It really doesn't matter, as long as the original intent is retained (testing waterblocks, right?). The entire purpose of having multiple people on a project is to share opinions, add to each-other's knowledge, and reinforce each-other's strengths/weaknesses. The intent is not have a large group mindlessly following one individual's instructions, am I right?

I don't think that your goal is to start an "exclusive club" of benchmarkers (correct me if I'm wrong, which I often am), but a enormously valuable resource consisting of many united (yet independent) benchmarkers/testers.

While you all will need some sort of guidance, I really don't think that there should be any "leader," but instead someone to deal with administrative details (keeping everyone on the same page, making sure that something is actually done with the results, getting stuff to the correct people for testing, etc.). You don't want a Saddam type dictator declaring what is going to be done, as that tends to chase away people fairly quickly.

If you ever get it off the ground and keep it flying for any period of time, such a resource would be great for the overclocking community, everyone from the extreme overclocker to average person looking to dive in (me).

Anyways, that's my worthless $0.02. Sure hope that you guys can make this happen. Best of luck!

Thanks Yo_Duh!


Since I started/announced the idea, I've already had to make some adjustments: I thought we could form some kind of testing consortium, but it became clear quickly that not all would agree to it, and that some weren't interested in that aspect anyways.

So the WTA is strictly going to be about setting a standard.

As Bill suggested, the discussions are public, and I agree with that 100%. I was hoping to filter out some unecessary conversations, by limiting who can post only to those who have been invited to post, but that turned out to be too messy, so I'll just have to deal with it. No big deal.

I thought I'd lead this effort, but Bill's right (again!), in that I'm not qualified to do that. So I've appointed myself as secretary, keeping the communication going, and there may be a time when we all come to vote on electing a chairperson, if that's what we decide to do.

A lot of these things are out of my hands already, but I still have to get it going. I'm working on a "vision statement", which members will receive shortly.

And I'm still recruiting!

So if anyone out there feels that they're qualified, and wants to become a member, and receive a chance to vote on what is going to be a waterblock testing standard, then PM or e-mail me your e-mail address. There's no money involved, it's all voluntary.

Otherwise, I also welcome anyone who has an interest in building a test bench, or otherwise would like to have a say about it.

Billa's testbench is no longer used? Or it belongs to overclockers.com?

What would make you ask either of those questions?

I think it belongs to Joe at overclockers.com or maybe joe is bulding one based on Bill A design.

WTF? Where do you guys come up with this stuff?

BillA payed for and built his test bench pretty much himself. he had some help from a friend but the thread from [H] covering it all seems to be gone. Figures...

Overclockers has nothing to do with his testing bench. he just used them to post the results. JoeC at OC is trying to build one similar though, that is true.