Pro/Forums - View Single Post - The "Cascade" - mini-cup directed jet-impingement block design (56K warn)

Cathar · 07-03-2003, 08:52 AM

Well I hooked up this little bitty pump, which costs $9.95 AUD at Bunnings (NB: that's about $6.50 US). It's rated for 200LPH, and 53cm of pressure head, and draws 2.5W of power.

FYI, the Australian 20¢ piece is 28mm, or 1⅛", in diameter.

My test system consists of two Camry heater-cores in series, a sponge-type water filter, the Cascade block, two 1/2" sweeped copper elbows, and about 3m of tubing.

Due to the height differences in my test system, I had to use the Eheim 1250 to prime and bleed the system, and then swapped the pump intake over to the baby pump.

The resultant flow rate through the system was measured at 1.25lpm, which I actually thought was fairly impressive given the tiny size of the pump and the number of restrictions present that would not normally be in a tight water-cooling system. I'd estimate that the little pump would push maybe 1.5lpm in a less restrictive setup.

So how'd the Cascade go? Again, using the 2400MHz/1.85v test setting running BurnK7, the CPU rise over the water temperatures was an extra 4.0°C±0.5C°C over the Cascade system running at 10.5LPM.

Now the real margin of error might be more like ±1.5°C, so bear that in mind.

Still, running with the measured 4°C increase in CPU temperatures, these values are remarkably close to what the White Water sees as well but the Cascade is still cooling better than the White Water given these super-low flow rates, perhaps even handling the lower flow rates more gracefully than the White Water. I'd dearly love to get this independently verified because it throws a spanner into my assumptions of the performance of the block at lower flow rates. The Cascade really does perform quite well at low flow rates, but within my testing margins of error, I can't really be sure of what the full picture is, except to say that it's pretty close, but with the lead still being held by the Cascade.

Needless to say, the water also is significantly cooler than with the monster MD-30RZ adding heat to the system, so the actual CPU temperature increase over the MD-30RZ in relation to the ambient temperature is more like 3.0°C, which just goes to show again that bigger and stronger pumps aren't necessarily needed to yield decent results.

07-03-2003, 08:52 AM	#264
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	Low-flow performance mini-report Well I hooked up this little bitty pump, which costs $9.95 AUD at Bunnings (NB: that's about $6.50 US). It's rated for 200LPH, and 53cm of pressure head, and draws 2.5W of power. FYI, the Australian 20¢ piece is 28mm, or 1⅛", in diameter. My test system consists of two Camry heater-cores in series, a sponge-type water filter, the Cascade block, two 1/2" sweeped copper elbows, and about 3m of tubing. Due to the height differences in my test system, I had to use the Eheim 1250 to prime and bleed the system, and then swapped the pump intake over to the baby pump. The resultant flow rate through the system was measured at 1.25lpm, which I actually thought was fairly impressive given the tiny size of the pump and the number of restrictions present that would not normally be in a tight water-cooling system. I'd estimate that the little pump would push maybe 1.5lpm in a less restrictive setup. So how'd the Cascade go? Again, using the 2400MHz/1.85v test setting running BurnK7, the CPU rise over the water temperatures was an extra 4.0°C±0.5C°C over the Cascade system running at 10.5LPM. Now the real margin of error might be more like ±1.5°C, so bear that in mind. Still, running with the measured 4°C increase in CPU temperatures, these values are remarkably close to what the White Water sees as well but the Cascade is still cooling better than the White Water given these super-low flow rates, perhaps even handling the lower flow rates more gracefully than the White Water. I'd dearly love to get this independently verified because it throws a spanner into my assumptions of the performance of the block at lower flow rates. The Cascade really does perform quite well at low flow rates, but within my testing margins of error, I can't really be sure of what the full picture is, except to say that it's pretty close, but with the lead still being held by the Cascade. Needless to say, the water also is significantly cooler than with the monster MD-30RZ adding heat to the system, so the actual CPU temperature increase over the MD-30RZ in relation to the ambient temperature is more like 3.0°C, which just goes to show again that bigger and stronger pumps aren't necessarily needed to yield decent results. Last edited by Cathar; 07-03-2003 at 04:41 PM.