Storm/G7 Prototype + Piccies - Page 6

bobo5195 · 09-29-2005, 05:58 AM

Found this:

http://rswww.com/cgi-bin/bv/rswww/su...o?cacheID=ukie

on rs, and was thinking that it might be good for high end water block pulsing output. Must use piezo electric timing, could be useful, takes 12mm barbs but i imagine it would be very restrictive.

bigben2k · 09-29-2005, 10:14 AM

Link doesn't work. What was it about?

bobo5195 · 09-30-2005, 11:46 AM

piezo electrical water pulser. Ie take an input signal and make it pulse. Could be very useful on a ultra high end block, plus since its almost all solid state it should break. Cant find the link now.

I hate RS.

bigben2k · 09-30-2005, 06:51 PM

I couldn't find it. Maybe you could post a part number, or part name?

Dunno · 09-30-2005, 08:38 PM

Interesting!

bobo5195 · 09-30-2005, 10:55 PM

before i say anything. this will not improve the performance of your system. the idea behind a pulsing output is to break up the boundary layer on he surfice when using jet imingment cooling. However the amount of restriction generaing offsets the extra cooling efficentcy of the jet. A block needs to be deigned to use this.

search for
Liquid Flow Transducer - Standard and Low Flow Rates

or flow £7*.00

or RS Stock no: 256-225

Liquid Flow Transducer - Standard and Low Flow Rates
its callled dual range flow transducer but its useful only for acidemic interest.

bigben2k · 10-02-2005, 01:34 PM

256-225 is a flow meter, not a piezo pulser.

Sounds like there was some confusion on the purpose of the device. It outputs an electrical pulse proportional to the flow rate.

bobo5195 · 10-03-2005, 08:17 AM

i thought it was different, my bad i ll have to have another look.

Cathar · 10-03-2005, 08:29 AM

I've seen a slow trickle of emails head my way asking about buying a Storm/G7. For those who've emailed me and asked, I haven't responded because I don't want to legitimise an order process yet as I'm simply not ready and don't have enough time at the moment.

When, and if, something happens I'll post about it here and update the web-site then. I'm still in the process of finalising the external appearance of the block, although it won't look dramatically different, just the mounting plate.

Les · 10-03-2005, 05:27 PM

Oh woe.
Since 13th Sept 2002 have been overestimating h(eff) for all channel wbs.
For Production WW : Correction Factor= 0.788 * (0.78774617067833698030634573304158)
For Volenti's wb : Correction Factor=0.948
Predicted h(eff) values for MCW6000 are not effected.

Reason for gross error:
Kryotherm uses Total Fin area, which includes top, front&back, and two-sided "wall fins": 2742 mm^2 for WW
For channel wb the Convection area is "channel fins" + one-sided "wall fin" + "channel base" : 2160 mm^2 for WW
Excuse : first looked at Volenti's wb where factor is 0.948,had ignored and then forgotten about.
In the process of correcting recently posted(this and later) graphs.

* Strictly,correction should be less(factor higher than 0.788) for 3.5x17mm area directly under the slot).

Incoherent · 10-04-2005, 02:48 AM

Feel for you Les. Know the feeling.

I am happy MCW6000 is not affected.

BTW, some 100mm^2 die measurements can be expected soon. The die is cut as it were, got a bit of drilling and mounting setup to do and a house move in a month but hopefully I'll be up and running again in a couple of weeks.

Les · 10-04-2005, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Incoherent

BTW, some 100mm^2 die measurements can be expected soon. The die is cut as it were, got a bit of drilling and mounting setup to do and a house move in a month but hopefully I'll be up and running again in a couple of weeks.

The news makes an excellent Birthday present..
First MCW6000 then some modelable block?
Prefer a 3.5mm slit WW to a like 2.5mm slit WW( WWLE) - where plateau h(conv) region may barely extend beyond die area(link).
Looking at the CoolTechnica's MP-05 series, the MP-05-SP(link to RoboTech) looks feasible(link) (even tho not figured whether array of jet gives H, +,or "H&+mixture" orifices.

bobo5195 · 10-04-2005, 07:39 AM

I need to have more of a think about this but surely the characteristic heat transfer area for a water block is the area of the heat spreader/core. Fin design and spacing is a design constraint. Overall performace may (i would not like to say definitly as jet height above the block surface is important) increase but efficentcy will be reduced by using taller fins.

I need to think more but my head hurts. You could well be right.

Jackyl · 10-05-2005, 09:59 AM

Well first off, I have read this whole thread

Now after obtaining what information I could from the rather gractious use of technical terminology on a regular basis "hense the domain name". I'm going to throw a few variables in the mix and see if cathar, bigben or any of the other liquid guru's have another side to this coin?

1st) Liquid cooling is so focused towards using water. Why is this? Why not use liquid metal? It's 65x more condutive than water. Not to mention it can be used in a closed loop without a "typical pump" to move it. Just use magnets on that run off a ic board. This has been done already and the numbers are very impressive. I mean cathar, you made a round about mention to your G7 block costing 300bucks. You did this when talking about the F1 engineering. So the liquid metal costs should be nothing in comparision.

2nd) As far the the pins and jets theories go. I would just like to ask what is the thickness of the silver/copper base "both of them if you don't mind". I see that if you could make the base thinner than where the drilled pockets are in the base then this would also help with pulling the heat from the item being cooled. There would be a thinner thickness of material, and the heat would be able to transfer through it quicker. Another words, take the base of the G5 "storm" block for example. the base is copper, take it appart, mic the base thickness and then figure out how much to mill out to get it very thin, but not "weak" thin. Then possibly make the pockets depper. This would all be in hopes of getting the liquid as close to the item being cooled but yet not actually touching it, and not maching to much off to make the base tweak when it is being applied to the item being cooled.

But now if you guys have figured out a way to calculate a given thickness heat transfer principles for a given heat load. Then what I have just said is useless. If not I would like to know what you think about it because I think that it would add to the method of madness.

Also, liquid metal is the way of the future! It will replace all know liquid cooling solutions that we currently use. It will be expensive but, what I understand about it's chemical properties you will not be able to freeze it unless your using LN2 cooling to chill it :shrug:

one more thing. I thank you guys for all the work that you have done in these areas. Cathar, I do not think that your hitting a wall with your blocks, I think rather your hitting a wall with the liquids that you are trying to use to cool things with your blocks.

Dukemurmur · 10-05-2005, 10:42 AM

Has anyone ever told you guys that u hurt i brain?!?!?!?!?!?! i have read every post in hear and my head is spinning you know how many times i had to refer to the dictionarry wow good job and i am by no means dumb well compaired to some of u here but yeah hey great block Ben

Duke

DryFire · 10-05-2005, 10:46 AM

Well liquid metal cooling utilizes galluim, induim and tin IIRC. The firs two are not cheap, nor are they very light. Filling up a current loop would cost more then a G7 by a long shot i presume and would add a substantial amount of weight to your computer.

I doubt we'd simply substitute metal in for water but the distance from your heat exchanger to your heatsource would have to be very small or else it will cost a lot and be rather heavy.

I have to run to class now.

mwolfman · 10-05-2005, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackyl

Also, liquid metal is the way of the future! It will replace all know liquid cooling solutions that we currently use. It will be expensive but, what I understand about it's chemical properties you will not be able to freeze it unless your using LN2 cooling to chill it :shrug:

do some more reading... merqureys meltingpoint = -38,9°C thats not cold...

Cathar · 10-05-2005, 07:00 PM

Gallium & Indium both cost around US$6000 per litre. I don't see liquids THAT expensive being the "way of the future". The world's total production of Gallium amounts to around 3000 litres per annum, and it is a by-product of aluminium ore mining, and most of the world's Gallium correspondingly comes from Australia, where it is sent to France to be purified into the basic element.

Still, at $6000/litre, and 3000 litres per year, I don't see liquid metal cooling taking off in a "big way".

Mercury is just plain toxic and environmentally dangerous.

Also, when all's said and done, once we factor in the weight of the metals, their viscosity and the corresponding pumping efforts, the realistically achievable flow rates as a result, and plug all that back into various thermal simulators, it works out that for any given pumping power, a liquid metal like a Gallium/Tin/Indium alloy will improve gross waterblock C/W's (C/W including the TIM layer) by around 15%.

i.e. If your CPU is 20C above ambient, then with a corresponding amount of pumping effort and liquid metal equivalent, your CPU temps would then be around 17C above ambient with the Gallium/Tin/Indium alloy instead.

For the price of the metal though, you could've built a cheap TEC water chiller, added a second pump, and knocked 10C off your water temps....

TEC-based water-chillers are the next step for improving water. Liquid metal alloys are just a curiosity.

Dunno · 10-06-2005, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathar

...For the price of the metal though, you could've built a cheap TEC water chiller, added a second pump, and knocked 10C off your water temps....

TEC-based water-chillers are the next step for improving water. Liquid metal alloys are just a curiosity.

Dont forget evaporative cooling.
If you do it right so that scale buildup and algea are avoided (purified), you can go sub ambiant without condensation worries, or the large electricity bill.
A cistern attached to the water mains can take care of topping up the system.

GlassMan · 10-07-2005, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathar

I've seen a slow trickle of emails head my way asking about buying a Storm/G7. For those who've emailed me and asked, I haven't responded because I don't want to legitimise an order process yet as I'm simply not ready and don't have enough time at the moment.
When, and if, something happens I'll post about it here and update the web-site then. I'm still in the process of finalising the external appearance of the block, although it won't look dramatically different, just the mounting plate.

Thanks for the update, it is appreciated. And so you know, I want one really bad!!!

Focal-Plane · 10-07-2005, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathar

I've seen a slow trickle of emails head my way asking about buying a Storm/G7. For those who've emailed me and asked, I haven't responded because I don't want to legitimise an order process yet as I'm simply not ready and don't have enough time at the moment.

When, and if, something happens I'll post about it here and update the web-site then. I'm still in the process of finalising the external appearance of the block, although it won't look dramatically different, just the mounting plate.

Hi there,

I am one of those who emailed you about the Storm G7 block. Sorry for the hassle factor!

I am looking forward to being able to order two Storm G7's once they are ready.

Thank you for the progress update.

Cathar · 10-07-2005, 04:23 PM

Right now I'm presently waiting for my machinists to give me a firm final machining cost for them. Once I know that I can work out what a final cost will be.

giorgioprimo · 10-07-2005, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathar

Right now I'm presently waiting for my machinists to give me a firm final machining cost for them. Once I know that I can work out what a final cost will be.

keep waithing.....

bobo5195 · 10-08-2005, 05:17 AM

liquid metal does have its advantages. Thermal conductivity wise it beats water all over the place so it should be great for a storm block given that i think the main fluid heat transfer property is thermal conductivity, rather than prandlt number. However its viscosity makes jet impingment problematic as it prevents nice high speed jets. Also as it truns out it has roughly the same prandlt number as water so convective proformace is roughly as good although its perfromance level is at a much lower flow rate (before anyone goes ahh its better its performance increase per lpm is off set by its inability to be pumped fast).

For the moment water is a better as its cheap and has quite good heat transfer. Being organic has its problems but less so than having this super heavy toxic electrically conductive fluid.

If the cost problem could be solved to a resonable level by some materials bod with a chemistry set im not sure which is better. Cost can be kept down by using magnetic pumps and less fluid. The solid state nature of the pumps means that variable flow rate ie pulsing is a possibility. Since liquid metal is so dense it could use smaller radiators. Its convective performance is the same as water (same prandlt) but you could use jet impingment onto a plate (turn the side fo the case into a heatsink) to transfer heat to the air. Its a possibility but not for awhile as they still need to get the kinks out.

EDIT: my awful spelling

GlassMan · 10-10-2005, 03:45 PM

Some pecs on the liquid metal. From http://www.dreamstation.cc/news/video_games/id6942
It is an alloy of different elements, primarily gallium and indium with varying levels of other elements to adjust the material properties such as the melting/freezing point. nanoCoolers is currently evaluating several different chemical compositions for varying applications. All are non-toxic, non-flammable and environmentally safe.

What does the alloy look like?

The alloy is a silver grey metal that is liquid at room temperature.

What are the physical properties of the liquid metal alloy?

Property Symbol Units Value Notes

Density p; kg/m3 6540 Note 1, 2
Boiling Point °C 2200
Heat Capacity Cp J/kg;K 364 Note 1, 2
Volumetric Heat Capacity C J/m3;K 2.38 x 106 Note 1, 2
Thermal Conductivity λ W/m;K 39 Note 2, 3
Absolute Viscosity μ Ns/m2 2.31 x 10-3 Note 1, 2
Kinematic Viscosity ν m2/s 3.536 x 10-7 Note 1, 2
Electrical Resistivity ρe Ω⋅m 31.9 x 10-8 Note 1, 2
Prandlt Number Pr 0.02

1. These properties are based on a GaIn alloy (67%Ga, 20% In, 12% Sn). This is not necessarily the exact material composition of the liquid metal that will be used by nanoCoolers. Therefore, these values may change.
2. Specified at room temperature (T = 295K).
3. This property value is based on lab data taken at room temperature (T = 295K). This is not necessarily the exact alloy currently under evaluation at nanoCoolers

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Produc...uctCode=326808 The only listing for Sapphires card ,OOS. US599.99 Don't know how much of that price is for bling and how much is cost of the cooler. It's AFAIK never been reviewed, maybe never actually released.

By the way, water is not organic, but the impurities it is liable to collect could well be.

09-29-2005, 10:14 AM	#127
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	Link doesn't work. What was it about? __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

09-30-2005, 06:51 PM	#129
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	I couldn't find it. Maybe you could post a part number, or part name? __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

10-02-2005, 01:34 PM	#132
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	256-225 is a flow meter, not a piezo pulser. Sounds like there was some confusion on the purpose of the device. It outputs an electrical pulse proportional to the flow rate. __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

09-29-2005, 05:58 AM	#126
bobo5195 Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: uk Posts: 400	Found this: http://rswww.com/cgi-bin/bv/rswww/su...o?cacheID=ukie on rs, and was thinking that it might be good for high end water block pulsing output. Must use piezo electric timing, could be useful, takes 12mm barbs but i imagine it would be very restrictive.

09-30-2005, 11:46 AM	#128
bobo5195 Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: uk Posts: 400	piezo electrical water pulser. Ie take an input signal and make it pulse. Could be very useful on a ultra high end block, plus since its almost all solid state it should break. Cant find the link now. I hate RS.

09-30-2005, 08:38 PM	#130
Dunno Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: South Africa Posts: 82	Interesting!

09-30-2005, 10:55 PM	#131
bobo5195 Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: uk Posts: 400	before i say anything. this will not improve the performance of your system. the idea behind a pulsing output is to break up the boundary layer on he surfice when using jet imingment cooling. However the amount of restriction generaing offsets the extra cooling efficentcy of the jet. A block needs to be deigned to use this. search for Liquid Flow Transducer - Standard and Low Flow Rates or flow £7*.00 or RS Stock no: 256-225 Liquid Flow Transducer - Standard and Low Flow Rates its callled dual range flow transducer but its useful only for acidemic interest.

10-03-2005, 08:17 AM	#133
bobo5195 Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: uk Posts: 400	i thought it was different, my bad i ll have to have another look.

10-03-2005, 08:29 AM	#134
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	I've seen a slow trickle of emails head my way asking about buying a Storm/G7. For those who've emailed me and asked, I haven't responded because I don't want to legitimise an order process yet as I'm simply not ready and don't have enough time at the moment. When, and if, something happens I'll post about it here and update the web-site then. I'm still in the process of finalising the external appearance of the block, although it won't look dramatically different, just the mounting plate.

10-03-2005, 05:27 PM	#135
Les Cooling Savant Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Wigan UK Posts: 929	Oh woe. Since 13th Sept 2002 have been overestimating h(eff) for all channel wbs. For Production WW : Correction Factor= 0.788 * (0.78774617067833698030634573304158) For Volenti's wb : Correction Factor=0.948 Predicted h(eff) values for MCW6000 are not effected. Reason for gross error: Kryotherm uses Total Fin area, which includes top, front&back, and two-sided "wall fins": 2742 mm^2 for WW For channel wb the Convection area is "channel fins" + one-sided "wall fin" + "channel base" : 2160 mm^2 for WW Excuse : first looked at Volenti's wb where factor is 0.948,had ignored and then forgotten about. In the process of correcting recently posted(this and later) graphs. * Strictly,correction should be less(factor higher than 0.788) for 3.5x17mm area directly under the slot).

10-04-2005, 02:48 AM	#136
Incoherent Cooling Savant Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Vallentuna, Sweden Posts: 410	Feel for you Les. Know the feeling. I am happy MCW6000 is not affected. BTW, some 100mm^2 die measurements can be expected soon. The die is cut as it were, got a bit of drilling and mounting setup to do and a house move in a month but hopefully I'll be up and running again in a couple of weeks.

10-04-2005, 07:39 AM	#138
bobo5195 Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: uk Posts: 400	I need to have more of a think about this but surely the characteristic heat transfer area for a water block is the area of the heat spreader/core. Fin design and spacing is a design constraint. Overall performace may (i would not like to say definitly as jet height above the block surface is important) increase but efficentcy will be reduced by using taller fins. I need to think more but my head hurts. You could well be right.

10-05-2005, 09:59 AM	#139
Jackyl Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 21	Well first off, I have read this whole thread Now after obtaining what information I could from the rather gractious use of technical terminology on a regular basis "hense the domain name". I'm going to throw a few variables in the mix and see if cathar, bigben or any of the other liquid guru's have another side to this coin? 1st) Liquid cooling is so focused towards using water. Why is this? Why not use liquid metal? It's 65x more condutive than water. Not to mention it can be used in a closed loop without a "typical pump" to move it. Just use magnets on that run off a ic board. This has been done already and the numbers are very impressive. I mean cathar, you made a round about mention to your G7 block costing 300bucks. You did this when talking about the F1 engineering. So the liquid metal costs should be nothing in comparision. 2nd) As far the the pins and jets theories go. I would just like to ask what is the thickness of the silver/copper base "both of them if you don't mind". I see that if you could make the base thinner than where the drilled pockets are in the base then this would also help with pulling the heat from the item being cooled. There would be a thinner thickness of material, and the heat would be able to transfer through it quicker. Another words, take the base of the G5 "storm" block for example. the base is copper, take it appart, mic the base thickness and then figure out how much to mill out to get it very thin, but not "weak" thin. Then possibly make the pockets depper. This would all be in hopes of getting the liquid as close to the item being cooled but yet not actually touching it, and not maching to much off to make the base tweak when it is being applied to the item being cooled. But now if you guys have figured out a way to calculate a given thickness heat transfer principles for a given heat load. Then what I have just said is useless. If not I would like to know what you think about it because I think that it would add to the method of madness. Also, liquid metal is the way of the future! It will replace all know liquid cooling solutions that we currently use. It will be expensive but, what I understand about it's chemical properties you will not be able to freeze it unless your using LN2 cooling to chill it :shrug: one more thing. I thank you guys for all the work that you have done in these areas. Cathar, I do not think that your hitting a wall with your blocks, I think rather your hitting a wall with the liquids that you are trying to use to cool things with your blocks.

10-05-2005, 10:42 AM	#140
Dukemurmur Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Up in the boon'dox Posts: 18	Has anyone ever told you guys that u hurt i brain?!?!?!?!?!?! i have read every post in hear and my head is spinning you know how many times i had to refer to the dictionarry wow good job and i am by no means dumb well compaired to some of u here but yeah hey great block Ben Duke

10-05-2005, 10:46 AM	#141
DryFire Cooling Savant Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: USA Posts: 148	Well liquid metal cooling utilizes galluim, induim and tin IIRC. The firs two are not cheap, nor are they very light. Filling up a current loop would cost more then a G7 by a long shot i presume and would add a substantial amount of weight to your computer. I doubt we'd simply substitute metal in for water but the distance from your heat exchanger to your heatsource would have to be very small or else it will cost a lot and be rather heavy. I have to run to class now.

10-05-2005, 07:00 PM	#143
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	Gallium & Indium both cost around US$6000 per litre. I don't see liquids THAT expensive being the "way of the future". The world's total production of Gallium amounts to around 3000 litres per annum, and it is a by-product of aluminium ore mining, and most of the world's Gallium correspondingly comes from Australia, where it is sent to France to be purified into the basic element. Still, at $6000/litre, and 3000 litres per year, I don't see liquid metal cooling taking off in a "big way". Mercury is just plain toxic and environmentally dangerous. Also, when all's said and done, once we factor in the weight of the metals, their viscosity and the corresponding pumping efforts, the realistically achievable flow rates as a result, and plug all that back into various thermal simulators, it works out that for any given pumping power, a liquid metal like a Gallium/Tin/Indium alloy will improve gross waterblock C/W's (C/W including the TIM layer) by around 15%. i.e. If your CPU is 20C above ambient, then with a corresponding amount of pumping effort and liquid metal equivalent, your CPU temps would then be around 17C above ambient with the Gallium/Tin/Indium alloy instead. For the price of the metal though, you could've built a cheap TEC water chiller, added a second pump, and knocked 10C off your water temps.... TEC-based water-chillers are the next step for improving water. Liquid metal alloys are just a curiosity.

10-07-2005, 04:23 PM	#147
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	Right now I'm presently waiting for my machinists to give me a firm final machining cost for them. Once I know that I can work out what a final cost will be.

10-08-2005, 05:17 AM	#149
bobo5195 Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: uk Posts: 400	liquid metal does have its advantages. Thermal conductivity wise it beats water all over the place so it should be great for a storm block given that i think the main fluid heat transfer property is thermal conductivity, rather than prandlt number. However its viscosity makes jet impingment problematic as it prevents nice high speed jets. Also as it truns out it has roughly the same prandlt number as water so convective proformace is roughly as good although its perfromance level is at a much lower flow rate (before anyone goes ahh its better its performance increase per lpm is off set by its inability to be pumped fast). For the moment water is a better as its cheap and has quite good heat transfer. Being organic has its problems but less so than having this super heavy toxic electrically conductive fluid. If the cost problem could be solved to a resonable level by some materials bod with a chemistry set im not sure which is better. Cost can be kept down by using magnetic pumps and less fluid. The solid state nature of the pumps means that variable flow rate ie pulsing is a possibility. Since liquid metal is so dense it could use smaller radiators. Its convective performance is the same as water (same prandlt) but you could use jet impingment onto a plate (turn the side fo the case into a heatsink) to transfer heat to the air. Its a possibility but not for awhile as they still need to get the kinks out. EDIT: my awful spelling

10-10-2005, 03:45 PM	#150
GlassMan Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Kentucky USA Posts: 64	Some pecs on the liquid metal. From http://www.dreamstation.cc/news/video_games/id6942 It is an alloy of different elements, primarily gallium and indium with varying levels of other elements to adjust the material properties such as the melting/freezing point. nanoCoolers is currently evaluating several different chemical compositions for varying applications. All are non-toxic, non-flammable and environmentally safe. What does the alloy look like? The alloy is a silver grey metal that is liquid at room temperature. What are the physical properties of the liquid metal alloy? Property Symbol Units Value Notes Density p; kg/m3 6540 Note 1, 2 Boiling Point °C 2200 Heat Capacity Cp J/kg;K 364 Note 1, 2 Volumetric Heat Capacity C J/m3;K 2.38 x 106 Note 1, 2 Thermal Conductivity λ W/m;K 39 Note 2, 3 Absolute Viscosity μ Ns/m2 2.31 x 10-3 Note 1, 2 Kinematic Viscosity ν m2/s 3.536 x 10-7 Note 1, 2 Electrical Resistivity ρe Ω⋅m 31.9 x 10-8 Note 1, 2 Prandlt Number Pr 0.02 1. These properties are based on a GaIn alloy (67%Ga, 20% In, 12% Sn). This is not necessarily the exact material composition of the liquid metal that will be used by nanoCoolers. Therefore, these values may change. 2. Specified at room temperature (T = 295K). 3. This property value is based on lab data taken at room temperature (T = 295K). This is not necessarily the exact alloy currently under evaluation at nanoCoolers http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/Produc...uctCode=326808 The only listing for Sapphires card ,OOS. US599.99 Don't know how much of that price is for bling and how much is cost of the cooler. It's AFAIK never been reviewed, maybe never actually released. By the way, water is not organic, but the impurities it is liable to collect could well be.

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