possible wb idea

Tens0r · 10-01-2003, 01:49 AM

thinking abit about using the radius style outlet for each individual tube in the cascade , i know it would be a damn pain in the butt to machine but i have a simple way to do it , if this is worth it that is.

the cascade shoots water by jets into cups in the copper base and the water then leaves the cups and heres where i was thinking about radius. because the water leaves the cups would it disturb the flow rate of the block as it falls into other cups or hits other turbulant water above the cups.

if you place an exhaust tube around each cup it turns each jet into its own circuit which keeps flow quicker on the bottom layer of the block?

anyhow

, tell me if ive been dreaming or is this anything to look into

MMZ_TimeLord · 10-01-2003, 08:42 AM

Maybe it's just me, but this looks like it would just reduce the surface area in contact with the water. Turbulent or otherwise, the more surface area contact you have copper to water, the better your thermal transfer.

Also, this would only succeed in creating more restriction for the water to escape the cups at the bottom. Maybe even reducing the impingement effect and turbulence.

That's my first take on it anyway... How about it Cathar? Ben2k? Jaydee? anyone? :shrug:

:shrug:

bigben2k · 10-01-2003, 10:15 AM

MMZ's got it right: it's unecessarily restrictive.

As I described it recently on OC, Radius has a "flow balancer", in the form of the top plate. It's purpose is to balance the flow radially, because the design needs it: Cascade doesn't. Cathar tested one outlet versus two outlet and saw no difference.

So the only purpose for doing that here, is strictly aesthetic. Cathar won't do it, because it's not worth the time and effort, as it would only add to the price.

You have to remember one thing only: once the coolant has done its double inpingement at the bottom of the "cup", it really doesn't matter what happens to it, or what state it's in: it just needs to leave the block.

Don't let the above stop you from trying it though!

Tens0r · 10-01-2003, 05:02 PM

thanks for the replys

i may still do it , but first i have a radiator project im working on that im sure will be a big winner providing the fan is powerful enough.

perhaps this design could work better with better jets and cups and maybe get the exhaust tube to cover areas out of the cups then all the copper would be used.

anyhow i enjoy thinking this kinda stuff up

, back to the drawing board!

Cathar · 10-01-2003, 10:33 PM

Hmmm, I may be dreaming this, but what you just described is what the Cascade does already.

The water exiting the cups doesn't interfere with other cups/jets, because the jet tubes are submersed into the cups. In your picture where you have plastic, is actually metal on the Cascade, and the jet tubes don't go quite as far in, but that's because they don't need to.

Tens0r · 10-02-2003, 03:14 AM

yea i see what you mean , except i was thinking the water that has exited the cups can flow and collide with other water exiting other cups and so on , and maybe create abit of back pressure on the water exiting cups and deform the jet. thats the main thing i was thinking about when i thought of this .

how to ensure ther was no water trying to flow back down into the cup and deform the water jet at the bottom by hindering the flow.

Althornin · 10-02-2003, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tens0r
yea i see what you mean , except i was thinking the water that has exited the cups can flow and collide with other water exiting other cups and so on , and maybe create abit of back pressure on the water exiting cups and deform the jet. thats the main thing i was thinking about when i thought of this .

how to ensure ther was no water trying to flow back down into the cup and deform the water jet at the bottom by hindering the flow.

wait, it sounds like you dont understand what he means yet.
What you have is a diagram of how the cascade works, except that your "exhaust tubes" are just part of the copper block in the Cascade block. Take your pic, and fill in the area between the "exhaust tubes" with copper, and you have a cascade.

Tens0r · 10-02-2003, 05:55 PM

heh i see it now. thanks for clearing that up

10-01-2003, 08:42 AM	#2
MMZ_TimeLord Cooling Savant Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Mateo, CA, USA, Earth Posts: 433	Maybe it's just me, but this looks like it would just reduce the surface area in contact with the water. Turbulent or otherwise, the more surface area contact you have copper to water, the better your thermal transfer. Also, this would only succeed in creating more restriction for the water to escape the cups at the bottom. Maybe even reducing the impingement effect and turbulence. That's my first take on it anyway... How about it Cathar? Ben2k? Jaydee? anyone? :shrug: :shrug: __________________ MMZ>TimeLord "Oooooooooh... that's gonna leave a mark!"

10-01-2003, 10:15 AM	#3
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	MMZ's got it right: it's unecessarily restrictive. As I described it recently on OC, Radius has a "flow balancer", in the form of the top plate. It's purpose is to balance the flow radially, because the design needs it: Cascade doesn't. Cathar tested one outlet versus two outlet and saw no difference. So the only purpose for doing that here, is strictly aesthetic. Cathar won't do it, because it's not worth the time and effort, as it would only add to the price. You have to remember one thing only: once the coolant has done its double inpingement at the bottom of the "cup", it really doesn't matter what happens to it, or what state it's in: it just needs to leave the block. Don't let the above stop you from trying it though! __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

10-01-2003, 05:02 PM	#4
Tens0r Cooling Neophyte Join Date: May 2003 Location: Auckland , NZ Posts: 14	thanks for the replys i may still do it , but first i have a radiator project im working on that im sure will be a big winner providing the fan is powerful enough. perhaps this design could work better with better jets and cups and maybe get the exhaust tube to cover areas out of the cups then all the copper would be used. anyhow i enjoy thinking this kinda stuff up , back to the drawing board!

10-01-2003, 10:33 PM	#5
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	Hmmm, I may be dreaming this, but what you just described is what the Cascade does already. The water exiting the cups doesn't interfere with other cups/jets, because the jet tubes are submersed into the cups. In your picture where you have plastic, is actually metal on the Cascade, and the jet tubes don't go quite as far in, but that's because they don't need to.

10-02-2003, 03:14 AM	#6
Tens0r Cooling Neophyte Join Date: May 2003 Location: Auckland , NZ Posts: 14	yea i see what you mean , except i was thinking the water that has exited the cups can flow and collide with other water exiting other cups and so on , and maybe create abit of back pressure on the water exiting cups and deform the jet. thats the main thing i was thinking about when i thought of this . how to ensure ther was no water trying to flow back down into the cup and deform the water jet at the bottom by hindering the flow.

10-02-2003, 05:55 PM	#8
Tens0r Cooling Neophyte Join Date: May 2003 Location: Auckland , NZ Posts: 14	heh i see it now. thanks for clearing that up

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)