View Full Version : Water path for stackable Swiftech rads?
Camaroz06
03-11-2009, 10:33 AM
Hello All,
Just wondering what path the water takes while going through a stackable rad. The water enters the front barbs and distributes through the first rad (stackable) and then into the second rad (regular). It doest enter the front barb of the stackable and then split into both rads from there right? I am having areal hard time visualizing this...
evil-98
03-11-2009, 10:39 AM
the rads are stacked so the flow is parallel. the water flows through both the rads at the same time.
Camaroz06
03-11-2009, 10:41 AM
Hi Evil,
Thanks, I was getting really confused. Also missed the 4th or 5th post in the stackable thread a few down...just saw that. Anyways I dunno why I was having such a brain fart. :shakes:
Anyways a set of two regular switech 220's in series would cool better right? Doing something like Petra did:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=211950
Thanks again,
Eddie
SNiiPE_DoGG
03-11-2009, 10:41 AM
1) there is parallel flow where water enters both rads on the left and exits both rads on the right.
2) there is series (the way I use) like so:
http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/8517/mcr320xn8.png
3Z3VH
03-11-2009, 10:44 AM
Evil-98 is correct, it is parallel... it is similar to using y-splitters in your loop before and after the two radiators.
This reduces your flow rate through each radiator, but that is not necessarily a bad thing.
I wonder if anyone has done a benchmark on that... comparing two radiators hooked up in parallel vs serial... see if the reduced flow rate affects the radiator's cooling performance at all...
If Serial does work better, I can't imagine it would be all that tough to run them in a serial configuration, even while still stacked.
Sparky
03-11-2009, 10:48 AM
Reduced flow rate through the parallel radiators isn't going to be too much of an issue here. You have twice as much radiator and you have also effectively cut restriction in half.
pneubmatic
03-11-2009, 11:13 AM
Evil-98 is correct, it is parallel... it is similar to using y-splitters in your loop before and after the two radiators.
This reduces your flow rate through each radiator, but that is not necessarily a bad thing.
I wonder if anyone has done a benchmark on that... comparing two radiators hooked up in parallel vs serial... see if the reduced flow rate affects the radiator's cooling performance at all...
If Serial does work better, I can't imagine it would be all that tough to run them in a serial configuration, even while still stacked.
I'd love to see that comparison, too. I'm not sure that you could manage to plumb it up for stacked series flow. At least, not with 25 mm fans. You would also have to put in a bunch of 90 degree turns to pull it off. Placing the radiators in series would cut flow, then the additional turns would restrict it even more. Edit: the more I think about this, the more I want to give it a try and see if the gains you get from series flow would warrant the loss in flow rate. I might buy another MCR320 and put it in series after the rad sandwich just to see.
Reduced flow rate through the parallel radiators isn't going to be too much of an issue here. You have twice as much radiator and you have also effectively cut restriction in half.
You really nailed it there, SparkyJJO. My flow rate is exactly the same through the two MCR320's stacked (in parallel, of course) as it was through a single MCR320.
iandh
03-11-2009, 12:01 PM
I really would like to see a restriction comparison between dual MCR's and a TC.
These combined with low restriction blocks could be pretty boss.
3Z3VH
03-11-2009, 12:05 PM
I'd love to see that comparison, too. I'm not sure that you could manage to plumb it up for stacked series flow. At least, not with 25 mm fans. You would also have to put in a bunch of 90 degree turns to pull it off. Placing the radiators in series would cut flow, then the additional turns would restrict it even more. Edit: the more I think about this, the more I want to give it a try and see if the gains you get from series flow would warrant the loss in flow rate. I might buy another MCR320 and put it in series after the rad sandwich just to see.
...
Even just talking series vs parallel, regardless of stacking, I would love to see the difference... because effectively, you are slowing down the water through each radiator by half when you use them in parallel... Would that increase, or decrease the cooling potential of the radiator ?:shrug:
I knew I should have gone for that Thermodynamics class... :P
zlojack
03-11-2009, 12:07 PM
I doubt there would be very much difference either way.
pneubmatic
03-11-2009, 12:09 PM
Even just talking series vs parallel, regardless of stacking, I would love to see the difference... because effectively, you are slowing down the water through each radiator by half when you use them in parallel... Would that increase, or decrease the cooling potential of the radiator ?:shrug:
I knew I should have gone for that Thermodynamics class... :P
Dangit, now I might have to take mine apart and re-plumb it for series flow. These questions must be answered! :D
I actually did take a Thermodynamics class, and I had to drop it 'cause I just wasn't smart enough to make it through. It was very interesting material.. at least, the stuff that I could wrap my brain around.
skinnee
03-11-2009, 12:59 PM
stacked MCR testing you say... :wasntme:
pneubmatic
03-11-2009, 01:43 PM
stacked MCR testing you say... :wasntme:
There's the man! That would be great, skinnee!
3Z3VH
03-11-2009, 01:52 PM
Is that a: "I am still waiting on a certain vendor to give me demo parts and I am making a subtle jab in their general direction", or a "Hmmm, good idea for me to queue up in my testing schedule" ?
zlojack
03-11-2009, 02:14 PM
Is that a: "I am still waiting on a certain vendor to give me demo parts and I am making a subtle jab in their general direction", or a "Hmmm, good idea for me to queue up in my testing schedule" ?
Maybe more like a "watch my site soon"
gillbot
03-11-2009, 04:50 PM
Is that a: "I am still waiting on a certain vendor to give me demo parts and I am making a subtle jab in their general direction", or a "Hmmm, good idea for me to queue up in my testing schedule" ?
Or a how about you step off and thank him for his hard work and reviews instead of jabbing at him? :mad:
3Z3VH
03-16-2009, 02:22 PM
Who was I jabbing at ?
I was asking if his post was an attempt to get Swiftech to send him a radiator to test, or if he already had plans to do it and was queueing it up in his test schedule.
I have, and still do appreciate all of Skinnee's reviews. I do not see how my statement was an insult of any kind.
I find it makes neglible difference either way. I see the stack as a device for those with limited options for additional cooling because of space restrictions. .For me, is either stack or be SOL, and the stacks work very well indeed.
SNiiPE_DoGG
03-16-2009, 03:44 PM
I find it makes neglible difference either way. I see the stack as a device for those with limited options for additional cooling because of space restrictions. .For me, is either stack or be SOL, and the stacks work very well indeed.
and anyone who has used a stack know that the temp deltas are small and the heat capacity is high :up: at least thats what mine is like....
NaeKuh
03-16-2009, 03:52 PM
I really would like to see a restriction comparison between dual MCR's and a TC.
These combined with low restriction blocks could be pretty boss.
not a fair competition because TC cheats by having a passthough from the first and second chamber.
Doesnt hurt performance at all, but its what i call cheating.
Also the size difference between the 2 rads is extreme.
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p73/aigomorla/IMG_1313.jpg
The MCR's still looks small stacked compared to PA.
and anyone who has used a stack know that the temp deltas are small and the heat capacity is high :up: at least thats what mine is like....
And anyone with a stack knows that you're not going to get world championship temps, but then you're not going to get that with water cooling anyway :up:
The stack works because its convenient and it just works to remove heat. :clap:
I think these temps aren't too bad. Note that four copies of SP2004 were running, not two.
SNiiPE_DoGG
03-16-2009, 05:17 PM
@NaeKuh: yeah but you have to remember the PA has quite a bit more distance between the shroud and the core...
SNiiPE_DoGG
03-16-2009, 05:19 PM
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/706/tempsqg3.jpg
my stack temps (series) CPU + PWM loop
NaeKuh
03-16-2009, 06:22 PM
I think these temps aren't too bad. Note that four copies of SP2004 were running, not two.
Iany you have a bad mount.
Why is Core 1 way higher then the other cores under load? :shrug:
Either that or Orthos isnt load your cores properly, use Intel Burn Test.
Naekuh,
Orthos doesn't load any cores at 100% and does not load all cores at the same time. It was just a test before I bump up. 4.2 Ghz is ok, but I haven't stress tested that yet. At least 4.0 Ghz is perfectly stable. The mount is ok. Look at the load percentages. 3 cores at that second are relatively idle. Note I am doubling the amount of Orthos.
I am a lot more concerned about my video cards, which are going to be run against the wall 24/7/365. For the cpu, if it works for a 4 hour gaming session, that is good enough for me.