Crazy W/B design
1 Attachment(s)
What do you think about this? Hard to be machined, but colud be a good performer?
|
can't see the inside really well!!!
Any other pic to show us? |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
http://www.geocities.com/king_kong_lala/block.txt
i think the fins in the middle are more restrictive than anything else. and i thkn that (1) you should fill in the gray area, (2) is just going to be a useless part of the block unless you (3) add an aoutput there...my $0.02 |
i think those fins are pretty restictive, but i also think that they can cause a high rate of turbulance is a + inpingement is applied.
my opinion is to drop the other walls and change them to pins, or something else to make turbulance and that are not that restrictive. |
You'd do well to get rid of the inner chamber wall: it's only restrictive.
|
You might be better off having the passages line up in the central "pin" area. Would probably ease restriction in addition to making the design more manufacturable (WOW! 6 syllables:eek: :D ).
Bob |
About the inner chamber....I've put it there for the purpose of flow restriction...I think that I have read somewhere that redicing the flow velocity could actually improve the convection. Doesn't sound too reasonable, though...:(
|
Quote:
|
sorry.. this is off topic. Jaydee, your blocks are on bigben2k's profile http customcooledpc. Do you guys live near each other or work together? I would like to bounce some things off you guys soemtime in person.
|
God Jaydee, why dont you shut up!!!! Damn always negative! Is that a bit of Bill rubbin off on you?
LOL just kidding, Why not give constructive, not destructive critisism? isnt that what we are here for? Come on, you can do it. I know I would hate to be the one to machine that sucker. Would break alot of long fluted endmills. Not to mention, would take forever on our machines. Just jabbin at you jay. |
Quote:
I'm also a moderator of part of the forum (BTW, it's up and down these days: wassup?). Speaking of which, I'll also be moderating the air/water cooling forum over at NordicHardware. Now if I could just convince them that an Alu case doesn't make your PC run cooler...:rolleyes: Otherwise, go ahead and either put up your Q in the Forum, or feel free to e-mail me. |
Quote:
Sorry 'bout "redicing"....happened to be a typo....but you already know that...:) The purpose of the discussion is to say what you REALLY think, so please do. Maybe I'll be brave enough to post some more designs anyway....:) |
Quote:
An IGES file of this W/B was taken to the workshop...they said it could be done, but with a lot of trouble...so I had to make a simpler model. |
Quote:
Hopefully be up soon or a new host will get my business. :rolleyes: |
Quote:
|
flame.
But he is right. now let me ask a question. What thought pattern and what if any calcs have you done when you started drawing? IE. What was your insperation? I can tell you that it is perfectly fine if you just sat down and started drawing. That is how alot of people, even I sometimes do it. Just to see what comes out. |
Quote:
Oh, you're definitely right about this. Actually, I can't be sure if it would perform worse than a $40 commercial block, but it would surely be much harder to make it. Actually, it was a design meant to be machined for free... |
Quote:
No calcs at all, to be honest. The only thing I've had in mind was to keep the cross section area of flow as constant as possible. I have no software for fluid flow and/or conduction/convection calculations. Do you guys use any? The block was meant to be manufactured for free, so I did not care much about the complexity of the design. As I've said, it was abandoned and a much simpler design was used. |
Sorry to be offtopic, but those looks great...
What program did you use for them? |
btw very very nice rendering. you have a good cad skill :drool: :drool:
|
I'm so twiddly with Solidworks... argh.....
|
Quote:
This was designed with CATIA V5. |
Quote:
Actually, these screencaptures are not rendering...this is the default display of the 3D model.....rendering looks better, but it is really not necessary to be used...as obvious..:) |
Actually, I don't think it will do too bad. In order to make it work I would highly recommend going to a dual output design. If you did that and opened up the exits from the central chamber into the sides non-adjacent to the barbs (top and bottom in your picture) a bit more to allow for better load balancing, I think it would work acceptably. This block will not be a WW by any means, but I do feel that it will perform adequately. While everyone else is bashing the positioning of the central pins, I think it will greatly aid the transfer of heat due to the crazy turbulence it will cause. Yeah, it will restrict flow, but I do think that it will also cause the block to be a decent performer under low flow conditions.
I see what you are doing here: you're trying to have a central chamber devoted to containing the fresh slug of coolant and transferring heat as quickly as possible while simultaneously having a low resistance means of removing the used slug to allow for new coolant. I'd say go for it. I would probably compare the design efficiency to something around a Maze 3 or comparable block if it is completely made out of copper. It may even do better. As for the rest of you, give the guy a break. Just because somebody doesn't follow your pet design theory doesn't mean that they're on the path to destruction (gawd I can't get that out of my freakin' head!). The only way we can collectively learn is if people such as Tex try to push us in different directions. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(C) 2005 ProCooling.com If we in some way offend you, insult you or your people, screw your mom, beat up your dad, or poop on your porch... we're sorry... we were probably really drunk... Oh and dont steal our content bitches! Don't give us a reason to pee in your open car window this summer...