REV. 4.0 and Micro Channel #3 (pics)

[jaydee]

This is the test I did. Still not highly scientific though.

[JFettig]

the reason that test does not show acurate results is because its taking a temp reading off of the bottom of the waterblock, not the cpu.....


Jon

[hara]

Jaydee, have you got a commercial block to compare your results to.

BTW nice job on the blocks you're doing with an engraver

One suggestion: try combining the maching done with an engraver with the machining done with a CNC. The sky's the limit. Can the engraver mill deep in copper ? ~4mm

[jaydee]

Originally posted by hara
Jaydee, have you got a commercial block to compare your results to.

BTW nice job on the blocks you're doing with an engraver

One suggestion: try combining the maching done with an engraver with the machining done with a CNC. The sky's the limit. Can the engraver mill deep in copper ? ~4mm

Never had a reason to buy a commercial block. Yes it will but with the V shaped bits it wouldn't do any good. there is no need to combine the two I found a 10,000RPM pully for my mill so it will be able to do similar stuff this engaver can. Only advantage the engraver has over a mill is speed.

Also that test had the probe up against the CPU core and insulated from the base of the block, guess the silicone is hard to see under it? Doesn't matter much though. Once I get the final version done it will be sent to BillA. Still have a little tweaking to do. Got the O ring sizeing done today aswell. It will be a few months before anything else is finished.

[LiquidRulez]

Originally posted by jaydee116
I found a 10,000RPM pully for my mill so it will be able to do similar stuff this engaver can.

You sure those spindle bearings can take it?
Better look into it before you have to replace them and possibly the spindle to boot.

Reidtools has some pretty decent prices on bearings if you need to replace em.
Id replace em' to begin with just to be sure, because more than likely ,sherlines are not rated to take such a high RPM in the spindle.

Dont know about you Jaydee, but Id be lost without my mills!!

[hara]

Jaydee, how much deep are you going with the engraver?

[jaydee]

Originally posted by LiquidRulez
You sure those spindle bearings can take it?
Better look into it before you have to replace them and possibly the spindle to boot.

Reidtools has some pretty decent prices on bearings if you need to replace em.
Id replace em' to begin with just to be sure, because more than likely ,sherlines are not rated to take such a high RPM in the spindle.

Dont know about you Jaydee, but Id be lost without my mills!!

Yes, they are rated at 25,000RPM. The pully is from Sherline designed spacifically for my mill.

[jaydee]

Originally posted by hara
Jaydee, how much deep are you going with the engraver?

What?

[hara]

-

[ChrioN]

hara: MAD PAINTSKILLZ!!!

btw, nice blocks jaydee!

[Balinju]

Originally posted by ChrioN
hara: MAD PAINTSKILLZ!!!

btw, nice blocks jaydee!

lol. you cracked my

[jaydee]

I went 1/16" or 1.5875mm into the base.

[hara]

1.5875mm is too little IMO, increasing the depth will certainly increase surface area and will not sacrifice length too much. I think you will loose a couple of degrees with more depth.

Just an opinion

hara: MAD PAINTSKILLZ!!!

[Balinju]

Originally posted by hara
1.5875mm is too little IMO, increasing the depth will certainly increase surface area and will not sacrifice length too much. I think you will loose a couple of degrees with more depth.

Just an opinion

i think so too, ~1.6mm is too little for a good flow inside the block, imo there is too little water in contact (surface area).

this could be one of your tweekings

[jaydee]

Nope. Also note I went 1/16" into the top peice aswell. Those are a bunch of 1/8" passagways in other words. My 170GPH pump handles it fine. The block was designed to be restrictive for the last time. Thats why it works.

[Cova]

Just had an idea pop into my head that shouldn't be too hard for you to mill/engrave out. What if you took the base from R4, but for the top instead of putting a matching pattern into it, just do vertical bars across it (vertical being the short way). Instead of having a criss-cross flow of the top and bottom together, you would have criss-cross flow in the bottom, and in the top you would have water coming up, then pushing back down into the bottom to stir things up again.

[jaydee]

Originally posted by Cova
Just had an idea pop into my head that shouldn't be too hard for you to mill/engrave out. What if you took the base from R4, but for the top instead of putting a matching pattern into it, just do vertical bars across it (vertical being the short way). Instead of having a criss-cross flow of the top and bottom together, you would have criss-cross flow in the bottom, and in the top you would have water coming up, then pushing back down into the bottom to stir things up again.

There isn't enough room for warter to come back up. There is 0" between the top and the bottom. The channels fill up instantly. Thats also why a jet will not work. If I had an 1/8" or so gap between the top and the base then a jet may work and also your concept there.

[hara]

Originally posted by jaydee116
Nope. Also note I went 1/16" into the top peice aswell. Those are a bunch of 1/8" passagways in other words. My 170GPH pump handles it fine. The block was designed to be restrictive for the last time. Thats why it works.

I didn't say that a restrictive block is a bad one. Did you experiment with different pin heights? I'm saying so because I'm afraid heat is being forced to spread laterally and not both uniformely laterally and upwards throughout the pins. Keep in mind that you could also lower your baseplate when making higher fins/pyramids which would further increase performance. The only way to know for sure is to experiment or simulate using a simulation program.

[jaydee]

Originally posted by hara
I didn't say that a restrictive block is a bad one. Did you experiment with different pin heights? I'm saying so because I'm afraid heat is being forced to spread laterally and not both uniformely laterally and upwards throughout the pins. Keep in mind that you could also lower your baseplate when making higher fins/pyramids which would further increase performance. The only way to know for sure is to experiment or simulate using a simulation program.

There really is no other pin height for 2 reasons. One the tooling and 2 the base will be to thin and collapse under mounting pressure. Can't make the base thicker because the heat will spread out to far. It is as perfect as it is going to get. Once again I set my goals of what materials and tooling to be used before I started and they will not be changed. That however, doesn't mean this is the only block I am working on and could very well just be one of a few. Price/Performance is all I will say for now.

[hara]

Originally posted by jaydee116
There really is no other pin height for 2 reasons. One the tooling and 2 the base will be to thin and collapse under mounting pressure. Can't make the base thicker because the heat will spread out to far. It is as perfect as it is going to get. Once again I set my goals of what materials and tooling to be used before I started and they will not be changed. That however, doesn't mean this is the only block I am working on and could very well just be one of a few. Price/Performance is all I will say for now.

The base could be strengthened with a copper/brass top.

I'm no expert on tooling but if the base is first milled and then engraved the result could be this (mad paint skillz):

This design would certainly be much more difficult to manufacture in your case

[jaydee]

Originally posted by hara
The base could be strengthened with a copper/brass top.

I'm no expert on tooling but if the base is first milled and then engraved the result could be this (mad paint skillz):

This design would certainly be much more difficult to manufacture in your case

Yeah I see what your saying. Isn't going to happen though.

Also on the brass/copper tops, to heavy and it would add 40% more to the cost. Base doesn't need to be any thinner and the pins don't need to be any higher, not in the REV. 4.0 soon to be 5.0 anyway. This is the "Low Cost" block, not the performance block BTW.

[GTA]

Whats the plan for REV 5.0 then?

Any plans to send any of these to Bill?

I ask too many questions tbh

[jaydee]

Originally posted by GTA
Whats the plan for REV 5.0 then?

Any plans to send any of these to Bill?

I ask too many questions tbh

REV. 5.0 is pretty much the same as 4.0 except it will have an O ring, lexan instead of acrylic top, and plastic barbs (being some bitch about metal barbs in plastic tops).

Send to BillA? Probably not anytime soon. Don't have $400 for his commercial testing.

[GTA]

Isn't it quite a lot cheaper if you're not selling it?

As far as I can tell, you're not selling this block, so it should only cost $80.

[LiquidRulez]

Hmmmmm.......
Sounds like the cats out of the bag!