09-04-2003, 11:08 PM
|
#35
|
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 221
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Cathar
My post copied from #Rotor's thread:
Well a few questions naturally.
1) What's the power draw to move the 200ml/min
2) Can it be scaled up? Say using a CD sized disk and pushing 1l/min
3) What about clogging issues? 1 micron tubes make for a pretty effective solids filter
3gpm is 3.3ml/sec, or about 14W/C for the water.
i.e. every 14W pushed into the water will cause it to heat up by 1C. So even a 140W CPU will only cause the water to rise by 10C as the water flows through the block, so 3gpm is still "enough" flow.
The waterblock design to take advantage of this would have a fairly thick base-plate. I would imagine around 5mm would do it. Using a 1mm wide channelled maze design would make for a pretty effective water block. Just have 1mm wide channels zig-zagging back and forth across the block. 1mm wide fins by 4-5mm high. This would keep coolant velocity in the realm of "decent", and due to the super-low flow rates, would be far less restrictive than one would think.
Sure, it'd get warm, but if the block is designed properly I think the performance would probably surprise quite a few people. It won't be a high-performance monster, but it could cool a very hot CPU far more effectively and with far less noise and bulk than a HSF arrangement.
For laptops you could probably use the back of the display as a large passive heatsink.
|
problem: Its not 3 gallons per minute, its three gallons per HOUR.
|
|
|