Quote:
Originally posted by unregistered
as to the 'real convincing',
apparently you are not aware of the very long history that TEC chillers have in the overclocking world
- with uniformly poor results
my humor, eh ?
this course is called: How Things Work
|
The uniformly por results are, imo, a result of poor efficiency waterblock usage.
Plenty of people have made the "water spends as long as possible int he block" approach, because it seems so logical if you dont know about heat transfer efficiencies.
Look, it may be that you can achieve, WITH YOUR WATERBLOCK (designed for low flow) better temps with low flow through the chiller, but you havent even come close to addressing the idea that low flow is the "key" to chiller performance. I may be wrong, and am of course thinking aobut this in my spare time here at work, but right now, i cant see why a system designed with waterblocks that work more efficiently at high flows might not easily be able to offset the resultant higher coolant temps. And the temps will be less higher than simple logic would dictate due to increased efficiency in heat transfer. You are right, i am sure, for your waterblock - but i still remain convinced that the solution is sub-optimal anyways, and that a higer flow, higher efficiency setup could be created that would "win".
cristoff:
"IN all actuallity, for me at least and my theories, is that the faster the flow and the least impingement, but the most contact with copper"
how do you think you get mroe contact with copper? Let me tell you, impingment is one way.....