Can anyone who has seen or rated the Primochill Tyhoon III Reservoir system with D5 pump give any advice?
It looks great but as you know, advertisments can be deceiving.
Printable View
Can anyone who has seen or rated the Primochill Tyhoon III Reservoir system with D5 pump give any advice?
It looks great but as you know, advertisments can be deceiving.
Testing results will probably be out soon . . . .let's just say two loops and you will not be sorry. Can't say more but T3 uber alles and nothing will come close at the moment
I am racing to finish the test results, the dual loop configuration involves quite a bit of testing so its taking a bit longer than I expected.
DB has it dead on, the dual loop configuration of the T3 takes the efficiency curve of the D5 and exploits the crap out of it. When I started testing the dual loop, I had a hard time rationalizing the data. So I ran back upstairs and had Vapor be my second set of eyes to verify the early data. The single loop performance is on par with the Koolance COV-PMP450A, but the dual loop takes the Typhoon III into a different category, there is just nothing to compare it to head-to-head due to the unique design and configuration options.
Thanks, that sounds great.
I think I will go ahead and make my purchase.
Geno has more stuff up his sleeve . . . .oh, you guys have NO idea.
If it is two loops sharing the same res, doesn't that mean they share the same fluid and the system will equalize temperature wise, the same as if it was one single loop? Doesn't this fly in the face of 2 seperate loops being better than a single loop? And how is this any different than the XSPC other than the D5 vs. the MCP355? One more thing, looking at the pictures, it appears that the fill/drain port is on the face of the res, is it possible to fill it with it installed in the 5 /14" bay without tipping your system back?
I wouldn't mind having one of these, but those are my concerns, so any insight would be appreciated.
Waiting is not fun....
Two loops are better because each component gets fresh coolant from the radiator. Two loops with a T3 means the same thing but better flow. Way better. None of the other options can touch it. None.Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
i cant wait for the Dual DDC version to come out :)
Ok, so you are saying this is better than having two seperate loops? How does that work?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthBeavis
How much does one D5 cost? That is how much better it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
you guys using mcp655-b ?? if not will it fit in a T3?
I got mine for two reasons.
1. It provides a really neat place to mount my pump. My pump won't be all that easy to see. When I get it finished I think I'll have a clean set up.
2. I'll only have to add a radiator and block to cool my video card.
The Typhoon III is an expensive reservoir. Initial investment, that is. I'll save, in the long run, when I expand.
I saw another reservoir that can hold two D5s but it looks like they go on the bottom. That would take up another bay. (at least)
I do have a question about it though. It comes with 4 acrylic(?) washers. Do they go between the pump hold-down plate and the res body?
The only thing I would like better about it. I wish it had a top fill port that matched my HAFs fill port. I've managed to get it to be the top componant in my loop.
Very interesting can't wait to see some numbers
Ok, so it costs less, you stated better, how is it better than two seperate loops from a COOLING standpoint?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthBeavis
Fillports front and center is putting me off somewhat. I imagine you would have to tilt your case back 90deg to fill and bleed. That said it does look handy and sounds like it has performance to match. Where can I buy one? Seems like it's only available on Primochill's site.
DB can you qualify this please: Nothing will come close at the moment meaning...better than two isolated loops with DDC? Two isolated loops with D5? Two loops with 1 DDC? Two loops with 1 D5? Dual DDC2...? Dual Iwakis.....?Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthBeavis
Thanks.
A little patience it seems:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbler
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnee
I got mine at Moddersmart which I believe is the same company as Primochill.
Tilting the case is the only way I see to fill/bleed mine.
Two separate loops with two D5s will be close from my understanding. I am talking about D5s and the increased performance of a SINGLE D5 with this reservoir compared to ANY D5 top out now when the T3 is used in dual loop configuration. When you see the numbers you will see my point. This is an amazing break though.
Can't wait to see those reviews!
I'm happy with mine :)
only 1 slight thing I don't like about it is the bonding between the 2 halves. And I wish it was tinted gray or something to match my black case.
Thanks for the clarification, very promising.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthBeavis
If I had to guess, he is referring to the fact that the D5 shines in high flow applications... two parallel loops take further advantage of this, parallel making half the flow resistance + a well designed volute = uber flow through both loops and each loop has 1/2 the heat dump they would usually have but with nearly the same flow.
No, I just meant to say it makes a :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:in sound. And if you add gogo juice it glows real purdylikeQuote:
Originally Posted by iandh
It has to do with the efficiency curve of the D5 pump. It's most efficient between 2 and 3.5GPM...in fact, over that range, it's 50+% more efficient than it is at 1GPM. At face value that doesn't mean much, but it's the underlying key to why the Typhoon III ends up being such a step forward in design :)
What does that mean for the end user? Well, let's take a sample loop and play with it :)
Sample loop: a D5, two MCR320s, an HK3.0, and two MCW-60s. With this loop in serial, you get roughly 1.4GPM (at 4.1PSI of pressure drop)....which is good, but maybe a little lower than you want. Because the D5 is only running at 1.4GPM, it's efficiency is under 14%. The overall pumping power the water is being subjected to is 2.5W.
Add in the Typhoon III and you can arrange your loop (by default) in a parallel config....you split the restriction up evenly: an MCR320 and the HK in one portion, and an MCR320 and the two MCW60s in the other. Now you have a few things going on (mathematically) that I may not be describing 100% clearly or accurately, but hopefully I'll get the gist of it across.
1) When you go in parallel, the flowrate through the pump is the sum of the two subloops.
2) When you go in parallel, roughly the average of the pressure drops of the subloops is the pressure drop across the entire loop (or across the pump, depends how you look at it). This means that at any given pumping power, flow increases.
3) Because restriction is down overall (by a lot), flowrate increases. When flowrate increases to the 2.0 to 3.5GPM range (from the <1.5GPM range), efficiency increases noticeably...so you actually have more pumping power at work.
You throw all three of those into an equilibrium (such is fluid dynamics....the three variables have a lot of dependence and codependence) and you actually end up getting higher flowrates in each subloop than you would in one big loop! Back of the napkin math says roughly 1.5GPM through both loops :)
Loops that are naturally more restrictive (say 1.2GPM or lower in serial) benefit even more!
A 'fun' loop to demo this on could actually be something like the HK 3.0 + a pair of GTX rads + a pair of GPU blocks + a motherboard block. Whereas you'd get maybe 1GPM when arranged all in serial....you can put the HK in its own subloop (it's the only thing that cares about flow) and you'll end up getting really high flowrates through the HK and still get moderate flowrates through the everything-else loop.
Because of the nature of what we do (how everything we do tends toward an equilibrium), you'll see no thermal issues from even the wackiest of the loop divisions....if you want a semi-restrictive CPU block on its own subloop and want to put your radiators and GPU/board blocks into the other subloop, you'll get the same water delta performance, but you'll get higher flow where it matters (at the CPU block).
Where this won't work as well is with a VERY restrictive CPU block and a lack of other components in the loop. You have a good chance of actually lowering the flowrate through the block (where it matters most).
Cliffnotes version: running in parallel allows for a reduced pressure drop of the loop overall, because of the nature of the D5, this reduced pressure drop allows the pump to have increased flowrate through the pump. That increase in flowrate actually allows the pump to run more efficiently, leading to the pump actually being more "powerful" (from the liquid's perspective) and increases flowrates in equilibrium even further. The net result is that a well planned and balanced set of subloops will actually allow you to have HIGHER flowrates through each subloop (or a specific subloop) than you would if you arranged it in one serial loop.
Because the efficiency curve of a DDC peaks at lower GPM (and is narrower), I don't see this working with a DDC as effectively. Also note that this parallelization won't be effective on all loops, but there are certainly cases where it'd work well :)
You can not imagine how many times I have tried to explain that and not been nearly so eloquent. I am printing PAPER copies of that to hand out lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
So do you think a setup with this reservoir and pump combo with an overclocked q6600 and MCR320 on one subloop and a 4890 and MCR220 on the other would be effective compared to just one big loop? Because that's the kind of setup I'm looking at, and this reservoir would save me lots of space in my antec 900.
This is easily the hardest concept I've seen in a long long time :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxGods
When skinnee showed me some prelim numbers a couple nights ago, I basically scoffed at the results as being "too good" and tried to find some explanation along the lines of "you did something wrong." :wasntme:
Then I dug around looking at the D5 data and it started to click....but it's pretty damn counterintuitive. Split a loop up and you get higher flowrates? That goes against a lot of what we've ingrained into ourselves....but the numbers work with the D5 with even moderate restriction loops. :)
Really depends on the CPU and GPU blocks....but because of the simplicity of the loop, I'd say the gains from parallelizing your setup are minimal (and if you use a really restrictive CPU block, it'll hurt overall performance). You can just run it in one big loop off the Typhoon III though, if you want to use it as a convenient form factor for the res :)Quote:
Originally Posted by tenormadness
There are actually small acrylic washers that go on the rubber mounting washers just to spread out the load.Quote:
Originally Posted by surfhick
There are also acrylic SPACERS that are included for the 8 poly carbonate compression fittings that come with the T3. The T3 uses a cavity (for want of a better word) to retain the O ring so it doesn't spread out under compression. The poly compression fittings fit that cavity so no spacer needed for T3 mounting (or on any other part with the O ring captivation on the part) but if users want to mount the compression fittings in any parts that don't have the cavity, the spacer slips right on and your good to go.
As for the front fill ports. They are designed that way for several reasons. The goal was for the easiest to install, fill, bleed, and drain system I could come up with. It had to be that for as many different set ups as possible, and for users from novice to uber. With those ports on the front, with the over flow basins to prevent accidents, with two ports so one fills while the other expels trapped air, and the concave inner face you get ease of use no rez with top mounted fill ports can touch.
Post some pictures of your setup man. I honestly get a huge kick out of seeing how people use and mod this stuff.
You should have heard me trying to explain it (the design) to potential buyers. I felt like the guys pitching Juno must have felt. "It's a movie about a semi hot teen who is pregnant, and kinda weird...and it sort of promotes teen pregnancy...but in a good way".Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
I sent it to Brian at PrimoChill and got an email back in like 2 hours. "Add some sort of features to the face so it has more personality and maybe make the inner front face concave and I will get a prototype done. Just like that. No laughing...no snickers.
The day he got the prototype in he called me up and said "Your just not going to BELIEVE how much water this thing pushes in dual loop...it's INSANE...what else do you have?".
The front makes it a DREAM to use...and there IS a lot of potential for modders. When the face frame is painted it looks awesome for example. For those not wanting to paint their own (even though its very easy to do) There will most likely be versions with chrome plated face, brushed aluminum (think lian li) and colored chrome in several colors. There is also a 1/4" thick machined aluminum face in the works--polished to a mirror finish and black and clear anno.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbler
Lastly, I am a modder so part of my deal when I sold the design was that they keep a few of the T3's in stock un-assembled. That means that the performance portion--the back half--can be merged into or onto anything you want to build. Just shoot Brian at PrimCHill an email and he will be happy to sell you one in its component parts.
If you DO want to paint the face, there is also a very inexpensive Gerber masking set (think special stickers to mask off areas that don't get paint) coming out shortly (as soon as my plotter gets back from the repair shop lol).
Sorry for spamming answer posts in like this...for some reason multi quote is not working for me.
Will there be a comparison based on cooling of this versus a dual loop that are completely separate, 2 x res, 2 x pumps and 2 x rads? I like the concept and can deal with the front fillport, like the idea of one pump and one res, but I do not want to take a hit in cooling.
Thanks
Do you have to use the compression fittings or can it take 1/2" barbs?
Seeing it uses G1/4 threading I don't see why different barbs would be a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ_64
Great explanation!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Did you/skinnee compare the res against running two loops in parallel the "normal" way? If I understood you correctly, we're exploiting the shape of the D5's P/Q curve, but it's not clear to me if or how the res increases performance on top of that. :confused:
Anyway, great to have more options!
I take this would not work well with a Koolance AC350 block?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
I am working on the normal PQ Curves and PQ Curves for the dual loop with the second loop set at specific GPM (2.0, 1.5, 1.0, .5GPM). The best way to measure the performance of any pump component is by isolating the component and eliminating variables to the ones you want to test. Just like radiator testing where you set the flow rate at a specific GPM, specific heat loads and specific fan rpms. I'm not sure how adding in other loop components would be a valid test of performance for this product or for other pump tops. The options are endless and the testing would not show much other than the pressure drop of the blocks and radiators in the loop.Quote:
Originally Posted by alacheesu
I'm not trying to avoid the tests, but it would be a lot of testing for very little information that we don't already know.
I'm running mine with 1/2 in DD fatboys currently ... works just fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ_64
the term fatboy is very offensive :p: I prefer 'economy-sized male' or 'horizontally challenged'.Quote:
Originally Posted by shazza
I only need to use one inlet and one outlet.
What do I need to do to the remaining inlet and outlet?
Does the kit come with a plug that fills the 2 holes?
Yeah, it comes with everything you need. IT even comes with leds you can put in the plugs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barso
I have a question for you T3 experts. Can I take advantage of the higher flow by running anything in parallel with my setup. It consists of the following:
1 x Apogee GTZ
1 x D-Tek FuZion GFX 2
1 x MCW30
1 x Feser 360 rad
1 x Typhoon 3 w/ D5 variable
Right now i'm only using 1 inlet and 1 outlet port of the T3. Could I split anything up, that would benefit me, without actually running another rad?
Is there a way to tune the flow of the seperate loops? Thinking of getting one of these and putting a Mora 2 on one loop and HK 3.0 and 295 block on the other loop but with the Mora being so restrictive and the HK's being so free flowing i'm thinking it's not going to work without some way of tuning the flow?
My premise is that the Mora loop could run slower disappating more heat and the CPU/GPU loop could run faster keeping temps down. Being that they are both drawing from the same res the temps should still equalize. Not sure if there is any advantage to this though...
"running slower" doesnt help dissipate any more heat.... these are closed loop systems, you need to think of it in terms of how many times per minute each molecule of water goes through the rad, not how long its in the rad for.
Well cars have thermostats to regulate flow of water through engine seperate from the radiator so it might not be so cut and dry. Has anyone ever actually tried it?Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
there is a reason we dont use lower flow so that the water in our systems can get more heat from the block each pass ;) its because there are no "passes" just circulation - it has been tested, maybe not fully formally, but tested nonetheless.
I don't use lower flow to get more heat from blocks because lower flow = Higher temps with regards to blocks in all my testing. What I am talking about is having high flow accross the blocks and lower flow through the rad while both share the same water pool.Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
I know people have tested lowering flow with a heat source in the same loop but you are now lowering the flow through the heatsource as well as through the rad. What I am wanting to try is independent flow rates in the same loop which if it has been done before I can't seem to find any info on it.
It's close to being a negligible gain....but putting the GTZ in its own subloop will net slightly higher flowrates (from ~1.33GPM to ~1.4GPM). Desipite how much the GTZ loves flow, that small boost won't mean anything for your temps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diverge
Both types of components like flow...though most CPU blocks like flow a lot more than a rad does. In general, a rad is a pretty flow-agnostic component.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
I see, I kind of figured it wasn't worth the time or else there would be alot more info about it. So the only advantage would be essentially removing the restrictive rad from the loop...Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Does the typhoon achieve this running two loops one to rad and one through the blocks seperate flow rates through each loop?
Edit: I wouldn't think it would work but the whole efficiency discussion is whats confusing me.
The Typhoon III is ideal for complex and restrictive loops (CPU, GPU, board, multiple rads all in one). For a simple CPU loop, it's not going to help at all (and such a simple loop usually gets high flowrates anyway).Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
The best way to use a Typhoon III is to take a restrictive loop and splitting it into two less restrictive subloops, with the flow-loving components being in an equally or less restrictive subloop compared to the other subloop.
Yeah, this is a really abstract concept and something that's probably best shown with actual numbers (I'll get to doing that maybe tonight). But let's say you have a loop that runs at 1GPM in a serial config off a D5. At 1GPM with a D5, the pressure drop of the loop will be roughly 4.5psi. That comes out to just under 2W of pumping power.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
If you split the loop perfectly evenly, you'll get roughly half that pressure drop. At that pressure drop, the D5 runs at 3.25GPM, meaning ~1.6GPM per loop. Of course that is too high (it ignores equilibrium), but if you do have it in an equilibrium situation, you'll get roughly 1.3GPM per loop, or 2.6GPM through the pump. At 2.6GPM and 3.25PSI of pressure drop, that's just over 3.5W of pumping power.
The jump from 2W to 3.5W of pumping power is why this works (and that's the efficiency thing....efficiency = pumping power / power consumed). If the pumping power were untouched, you'd get identical flow per subloop, but because the pump runs so much more efficiently between 2.5GPM and 3GPM than it does at 1GPM (meaning it is more powerful from the perspective of the water), it translates into more actual flow through the pump than the 'expected' 2GPM, resulting in an increase in flow through the subloops.
A thermostat is used to help warm the engine up to operating temperature faster to reduce wear, NOT to aide in cooling. Engine tolerances are built around a constant temperature and the thermostat help to achieve that. Thermostats actually detract from an cooling systems ability to cool. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
OK I got it now... I think heh, It's more about increasing the flow due to the efficiency of the pump the flow increases through both loops not so much about tuning each loops flow individually? You still have to have equilibrium amongst the loops for this to work then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
At least I think that's what your saying. If i'm still not getting it i'm sure I will eventually, looking forward to You and Skinnee's testing.
Thanks
Ever take the thermostat out of your engine? We used to take them out back in my race car days thinking it would lower temps, However it actually raised temps. They make restrictor plates to replace the thermostat with so you can "tune" the amount of water flowing through the engine because just removing the thermostat in many cases would cause the engines to overheat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Penguin
It may be different with race engines but I can tell you with non race engines that on 2 separate occasions I have had the opportunity to run a car with no thermostat and in both situations the car failed to ever get to operating temperature.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Penguin
The thermostat is there to keep coolant from getting to the rad from the block. That is the reason why they are set at specific temps. it is all designed around keeping your car at a certain temp.
Race engine is different. They are tuned for the most power you can get. You also tend to run them wide open. This will produce more heat.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
Will all this talk over running seprate loops off of this, could you have a loop that is rad only and a loop with your CPU and GPU blocks only. I wouldn't think it would work, but the T3 isn't your standard res will it allow you to do that?
I know what you are saying and yes the water will stay cold but the real tell is when you check your egt or oil temp and find out that they are skyrocketing. There is such a thing as too much flow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Penguin
No...you can get it a few other places. Moddersmart has it...I got the two I have from them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbler
Can't see this being successful. You would be relying on the warmer wtaer from the CPU loop mixing with the water from the rad loop completely and all getting cooled by the rad equally. I would think that there would be some migration, however, I also think it would not mix completely, and there would be one flow through the res that is mainly the CPU loop water, and another that would be mainly the Rad loop water. I would think it would depend on how much agitation of the water in the res there is. Enough agitation to keep the water mixed would equal a lot of water noise.Quote:
Originally Posted by millertime359
Of course there is, I was just trying to point out the actual function of a thermostat which is to set a minimum temperature and aid in warm up. Since automotive water pumps are mechanical and vary based on RPM there needs to be something to restrict the flow to a level where it is actually being effective. It just happens that they build the restrictor into the thermostat. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by hellcamino
The point was and still is, Thermostats are used to regulate flow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Penguin
Here from the Wiki:
A thermostat is a device for regulating the temperature of a system so that the system's temperature is maintained near a desired setpoint temperature. The thermostat does this by switching heating or cooling devices on or off or regulating the flow of a heat transfer fluid as needed to maintain the correct temperature.
Can we get back on topic now please?
I mounted mine at the top of an MM 1203 front.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxGods
http://i671.photobucket.com/albums/v.../cooler005.jpg
The plan is to use the one on the left for the chipset and CPU and the right for the GPUs. Gotta save some ducats first though.
Oh come now...surely you could be mistaken...Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthBeavis
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j3...w/P1010055.jpg
:D
Yea, I wouldn't think it would work either. You would basically be turning the res into the rad. I would be interesting to hear from BoxGods if he took that into consideration during the design of this thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt Proton
:slobber:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aielman
Exactly right.Quote:
Originally Posted by millertime359
Thank you. I was using the washers in this manner. I just wasn't sure. I didn't even see the ones on the fittings until I read your post. To retain the o-rings in their seats. I'm trying my first case modding and watercooling at the same time. I started out just painting the case. Looking at it, though, I couldn't help but notice how a radiator would fit underneath the top. When researching parts, I liked how I could mount amy pump right to the back of the Typhoon. I think this will make for a cleaner looking loop. You have to look pretty hard to even see the pump. The reservoir with its LEDs will be the only place my water has any color to it. I plan to line the hoses with primochill's yellow anti kink coils. I just need some clamps and elbow fittings to arrive before I finish. My radiator is a swiftech 320 and the top fans will be the Enermax ones with the orange blades. I was afraid of having too many LEDs.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxGods
[http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&pictureid=661 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&pictureid=662 http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&pictureid=663
The temperature of the water everywhere in the loop will be roughly the same (yay for steady state!), so it wouldn't matter if you had the rad and block on different loops.Quote:
Originally Posted by millertime359
The increased efficiency of the pump is a result of the changes to the total system characteristics. The change in efficiency is not "causing" anything to happen. Improved efficiency is a result, not a cause.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
You were right to question the changes in dynamic pressure between the two loops (which you referred to as "flow"), since there is no pressure control valve. I kept looking for one, until i realized why this is such an ingeniously simple design for increasing flow. If this was planned, it is quite a feat of practical engineering. If by accident, then it is still a great design.
Here is what makes it an ingenious design, IMO: the key to the design is having the water from the two loops mix in the reservoir. The Reservoir is not acting like a radiator, it is acting like a pressure control valve. It equalizes the dynamic pressure of each loop before entering the pump. So it really doesn't matter if you load up one loop with 3 blocks and 2 radiators and have only 1 radiator on the other loop. The dynamic pressure (velocity) will be equalized in the reservoir. Now what this does is essentially double the size of the pipe (tubing) you are using. This is how the Typhoon 3 achieves higher flow, by essentially increasing the size of the tubing. To the pump, it still looks like one giant loop, just with a much bigger tube. The change in this pumping constraint shifts the pumping curve outward to the right, which gives you a new equilibrium point with higher flow overall. (I wish my photoshop skillz weren't so poor, so I could show you a pumping curve v. system curve graph, and illustrate what I mean. You will just have to draw one in your mind.) Remember without changing the size or speed of the impeller, the total head pressure of the Laing D5 pump will be the same, all that is changing is the system constraint, i.e., the total pressure drop has been decreased by effectively using a bigger pipe. The same thing would happen if you switched to 1" ID tubing (actually that would be an even bigger improvement). However, if you were to use double or triple the length of tubing in your two loops, as you did in the single loop, you would eventually cancel out the gains from the two parallel loops, by offsetting the gain of splitting the loop with higher pressure loss due to friction in the tubes. So make sure you use to two short loops to replace one long loop, for maximum benefit.
As for temperature, the system temp will eventually come to an equilibrium point since the water is mixing in the reservoir. Will this result in overall better temps for cpu and gpu? I don't know, it depends on the flow rate you get in each loop. Maybe you will, maybe you won't. But you will definitely get higher flow rates THROUGH THE PUMP with dual loops over a single loop, even though you still have the same head pressure. And it is the higher flow rate through the pump that increases the pumps overall efficiency (although it might decrease the pump's volumetric efficiency, since volume flow leakage would increase -- but, I'm not sure.)
Final Point: a car's radiator is designed to keep the car's engine operating in a specific temperature range. It is not supposed to get too hot, and not supposed to get too cold. Hence the use of a thermostat in the car's radiator. But in our computers, we want to get the temps as low as possible and as close to the ambient air temperature as possibe (or below if you use more exotic cooling). We can never be "too cold", so your analogy is inapposite.
I just read my post, and I didn't really explain the gain in efficiency. Efficiency is essentially the gain in work output for the amount of energy input. Here, the Typhoon 3 with dual loops in parallel is more "efficient" than a regular Laing D5 in a single loop, since it pumps more gallons per minute using the same amount of energy. So what does that mean? Are you a hero for the environment? Not really, you are not cutting greenhouse gas emissions, or reducing your "carbon footprint", since you are using the same amount of electricity as before, but you are "wasting" less of it than before. So in a sense you can pat yourself on the back for being a good citizen of the Earth, because you have become a more "efficient" energy hog.
You keep missing the point. Can we agree that a thermostat is designed to raise the temperature and hold it at a desired range? If you can agree to this then you should be able to agree to the fact that a thermostat is NOT maximizing the cooling efficiency of the system, which is what we are after with water cooling out computers. This is the point I have been trying to make to you the whole time.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
And why aren't we on topic? you did bring up thermostats didn't you?
I know lots of companies claim they are real gamers or real modders...I have several hundred mods under my belt though so when I Drew up the T3 it was first and foremost a part for case modders. I could have reversed the pump side with the fitting side for example but that would have made the tubing too far back into the case and the pump (and it's power wire) right in your face. Obviously I didn't ignore performance, but performance is also about how something makes you feel too. Look at the bike above. If you can stare at that and NOT think of a beautiful woman...then you likely ARE a woman lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by surfhick
I am so glad your enjoying your T3's and thank you for the pictures.
Edit: The acrylic fitting spacers are ONLY needed if your using the fittings in a part that does NOT have the recess for the O ring built in. The T3 DOES have the recess so you do NOT need to use the spacer with it.
I'm not missing the point LOL I'm the one that was making the point remember? The point was thermostats are used to regulate flow in the automotive industry and via regulating that flow are able to increase or decrease temperatures. Doesn't matter how or why the thermostat works...the point is altering the flow changes the temperatures as you yourself are admitting by trying to explain it to me ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Penguin
Perhaps the same premise is not noticeable with watercooling a computer because the temps are miniscule by comparison but the point remains the same if regulating flow rate through a car radiator changes temps then same can be said for regulating flow through a computer radiator albeit evidently on a much more miniscule scale. <- And that was the answer to the question I was asking, it's not worth it because adjusting flow rates is not going to make much if any difference be it increasing or decreasing flow.
Thanks
Your correct about the design acting a lot like a regulator. That's why the name says "Typhoon III with PEC Technology". The PEC stands for pump expansion chamber which sums up what the T3 does in a mechanical sense. The goal is to get that equalization across as much of the curve that we use for water cooling as possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by eth0s
I understand how it works now, I was confused due to the efficiency discussion I was thinking that for some reason they were able to achieve seperate flow rates on each loop due to the design of the res but it is actually just due to the efficiency of the pump and the flow is increasing on both the loops.Quote:
Originally Posted by eth0s
The point about the car was as stated above temps change due to being regulated through a thermostat so the same can be said for a computer radiator. Problem is as Sniipe said it's still a closed loop so changing flow through rad means your also changing flow through the blocks. It's not possible to have seperate flow rates best I can tell while still sharing the same res in a closed loop system. So I imagine noone truly knows what effect flow rates would have on a rad alone as it's impossible to have seperate flow rates for rad and blocks.
Hope I explained it now...Vapor understood what I was trying to figure out and he already answered everything up top.
Thanks
Okay, finally did the math with real PQ curves....let's throw out a few fun examples of just what the T3 can do :p:
Let's take a sample loop of the Aqua Computers Double Impact, two MCW-60s, and two HWLabs GTX480s. Two of the most restrictive rads, a very restrictive CPU block, and two standard GPU blocks. Not only that, but I'm quite sure the ACDI is one of the more pump-hungry blocks out there (that doesn't mean most restrictive, that means an increase in flowrate does the most for its performance!).
In a normal serial config, this setup will get .89GPM. With the Typhoon III, splitting the ACDI into its own subloop, Subloop A, and everything else into Subloop B, you get 1.34GPM through A and .98GPM through B!
To put that in perspective, two D5s in serial (with the rest of the setup in serial) only gets 1.30GPM!
Another possible config: Apogee GTZ, 2xMCR320, and a single MCW-60 (yes, an all-Swiftech config). All in serial: 1.39GPM. Split up with just the GTZ in Subloop A: 1.79GPM-A and 1.66GPM-B.
Adding another MCW-60 to Subloop B drops serial flow to 1.30GPM, raises Subloop A to 1.85GPM and lowers (without any drop in performance) Subloop B to 1.49GPM. Again, the GTZ is a block that LOVES flow, so the Typhoon III is helping performance quite a bit here :)
Not only is the CPU block getting a significant boost in flow with these configs, but the secondary components are also getting a slight increase. :D
EDIT: bluehaze, it is possible to have different (controlled) flowrates in different parts of the loop. Just use a shared Reservoir with multiple subloops with their own pump(s).
I would think that it WOULD work actually. Keep in mind that the water in the T3 is exchanged almost 16 times a minute. A larger rad would do better as its more restricted likely.Quote:
Originally Posted by millertime359
It is cool that people are starting to see the potential here. Even I have no idea what the limits are on the T3 because there are all these new variables. Build people cool tools and they will in turn build things you can't even imagine.
Nice results Vapor, thanks for the test! Wish I had a more complex loop so I could give it a try :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
With regards different flowrates is it possible with two pumps on a closed loop or would it have to be open? If it works on a closed loop maybe I will give it a try sometime just to see how it all works out for myself. This is all kind of confusing :D
Ah crap, my math is off by a factor of 2 somewhere buried....those numbers aren't right :(
EDIT: those numbers ARE right. Stare at a calculator long enough and you begin to play mindgames with yourself :nuts: (edit on this edit.....again, not sure if it's right....I think I need sleep, I'll take a look at it again tomorrow)
EDIT2: it works fine with a closed loop.
Your whole theory only works if you believe more flow ≠ better cooling, but doesn't that go against one of the basic equations in the study of Thermodynamics?Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
Q=MC(DELTA T)
Q Being rate of heat transfer
M being Mass flow rate
C being Specific heat of water (constant)
Delta T Being the difference between fluid temp out and fluid temp in
Based on this equation if you increase mass flow you will also increase the rate of heat transfer since C (specific heat) is constant.
But it does matter. Yes a thermostat alters flow (that's common sense and not what i was ever arguing). You, however, are making the argument that thermostats are used to increase the systems ability to cool by decreasing flow. This is simply not the case. The thermostat is simply there to Force the system to operate around a predetermined temperature. This is evident in cases where your thermostat gets stuck open. People who have had this happen to them can probably attest to the fact that their car took forever to get to operating temperature or never got there at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
LOL Get some sleep man! I don't know wether to buy another ddc and try seperate loops now or just get the T3 and try the seperate loops on that. Seems like you have a rather large differential in flow rates between the 2 loops and it still increases flow on both loops. I wasn't expecting that. Have you tested how much differential there can be before the more restrictive loop loses flow? If it is a significant amount it might help as I think flowrates with a mora 2, my gpu + cpu blocks and only one ddc will be borderline being that hesmelaugh only got 1.19gpm out of the mora2 in his tests. Would be nice to run it on a seperate loop and get more flow through the blocks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Nope, I'm saying regulating flow has an effect on temps period and i'm also saying that temps raise when you lower flow because in a closed loop system when you lower flow through the radiator you also lower flow through the blocks. That is all i'm saying because that is all I know for sure. I haven't actually tested flow through radiator seperate from the flow through the blocks and that is what I have been trying to figure out all this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth_Penguin
Anyways I give up, dont feel like arguing anymore...
Cheers
Dont give up! :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
The "argument" started when you stated that a thermostat keeps an engine from overheating by restricting flow. You are contradicting that argument by now saying that lowering flow causes increased temps. This is what I mean about you missing my point from the earlier post.
Ok...trying to get my head around this. :confused:
I originally planned to put chipset and CPU on a single loop with a PA120.3. So if i'm understanding this discussion correctly, my performance would increase if I split the CPU and Chipset into two subloops, rather than the single loop.
The question I have is can I do that with say the CPU on one subloop and the chipset on another with only the single rad on one of the subloops...or does Ben get another $180 from me for a pedestal so I have a place to put the additional two rads I need for my loops? :shrug:
Assuming, off course that I manage to talk my wife into spending what amounts to the equivalent of yet another case for a computer I already have an expensive case for, heh :D
The whole problem is that it either allows flow or stops flow. The thermostat in the car is effectively an on/off switch. Engine gets to hot, switch turns on, water flows. Engine too cold, switches off water doesn't flow. You wiki post said everything that DP has been saying you just focused in on the those 5 words or so.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
It is worth a test, but I don't think you will see a difference. The water in our loops will be in the rad for the same total amount of time. It will just see the rad more often with a higher flow rate.
I understand what you are wanting to do, but I don't think it will be possible without a pretty complex loop. I also think when it is all said and done, any benefits seen will not be worth the time put into it. :up:
QUOTE=Aielman;3894052]Ok...trying to get my head around this. :confused:
I originally planned to put chipset and CPU on a single loop with a PA120.3. So if i'm understanding this discussion correctly, my performance would increase if I split the CPU and Chipset into two subloops, rather than the single loop.
The question I have is can I do that with say the CPU on one subloop and the chipset on another with only the single rad on one of the subloops...or does Ben get another $180 from me for a pedestal so I have a place to put the additional two rads I need for my loops? :shrug:
Assuming, off course that I manage to talk my wife into spending what amounts to the equivalent of yet another case for a computer I already have an expensive case for, heh :D[/QUOTE]
BoxGods seems to think it is possible. I would give it a try. The worst that happens is you are not happy with your temps and get more rads :up:
Hmm, it's not my original thought though, think it was troelsm. I may have to give it a try sometime if i get bored and redo my loop. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxGods
when did this thread denigrate into a n3rd orgy? can you use the calculus to determine the maximum effective bling? I only went as far as soft calculus in college (finite mathematics . . .well, also took a master's level stats class in my MBA stuff, changed majors from MBA to education though)
DB, with you here...its always a nerd orgy!
:rofl:
Wow, this is pretty amazing. If that is true, and I have no doubt it isn't, this changes everything.
EDIT: Not a response to the posts immediately above me.
your eyes say yes but your mouth says noQuote:
Originally Posted by faster3200
BTW: Where in WA are you?
Nah bro, some thermostats have holes in them to keep water circulating while they are closed, they also make these to replace the thermostat http://autoparts.thecarconnection.co...or/replacement , they also have 2 way thermostats: "All LT1 engines utilize a special 2-way acting full bypass thermostat. This means that the thermostat regulates coolant flow both in to as well as out of the engine, while the bypass portion of the thermostat circuit supplies the water pump with a full flow of liquid coolant at all times. This is unlike a conventional engine thermostat, which only regulates coolant flow at the engine outlet, and which does not allow full flow through the water pump when the engine is cold and the thermostat is in bypass mode."Quote:
Originally Posted by millertime359
Anyways it's a whole different subject...and I still have a headache from talking about this all last night so taking a break :ROTF:
You calling me a n3rd????:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthBeavis
Shhh, dont tell the other nerds but I failed every calc course at least once before passing it the 2nd time :cool:
People should keep in mind, this whole discussion only applies to Parallel loops using a T3. If you try to do Parallel loops through a Laing D5 by using y-splitters, you will NOT get these results !
The reason is that you are creating these parallel loops inside the pump top. The only way to achieve similar results is with a custom top that draws its input from a non-restrictive source, and has two parallel outputs, much like the T3.
Got ya, good call. I was more referring to the old school engines where it basically is a switch LOL. Well at least you got what you were trying to figure out figured out in other thread :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehaze
I was going to mention that in my previous post, while the design helps move the pump into its peak efficiency point with high flow loops, a single restrictive loop would actually cause it to move away from its peak efficiency.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
This is a very innovative design for those with large single loops that could be split, but for those with single block restrictive loops, it will do little to nothing, or even make things worse IMO.
A good way to max the capabilities of the pump, but this is no magic bullet... just good engineering.
Took awhile but it all makes sense now :yepp: Glad that is over :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by millertime359
I've neglected to lookup how overvolting the D5 will effect the PQ curve, but if the D5 is receptive to being overdriven then we can eek out some more performance :)
This is going to save some money over dual-loop designs. I'm liking it.
Edit: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=170217 - Martin's D5 (stock) testing reveals that the D5 gains slight performance going from 12v to 13.1 - 24v (no difference after 13.1v), with about an extra 2-5w power consumption at above 3.0 GPM.
Meh...it's at least some difference...nice power regulation circuitry though
Max current draw and flow rate results:
12v = 4.29 GPM, 33.0" Head, 1.99 amps (combined 2 results here, but close enough)
13.1v = 4.58 GPM @ 37.0" Head, 2.16 amps
24v = 4.58 GPM @ 36.9" Head, 1.20 amps
Not sure if it's worth the extra few watts
So after reading this post...I guess its safe to assume the T3 is not worth the money :rofl:
Sucks too I just bought the XSPC Dual DDC BayRes
I'm pretty sure I understand the whole concept of the increase in flow with dual loops.
If i understand all this correctly it basically means that you will see flow increase by running two loops compared to one and you can pretty much mix and match whatever you want to be on each individual loop. Maybe only one radiator for total on the two loops. Maybe one block on loop 1, and 3 blocks on loop 2. With the one "rule" that the overall restriction of both loops have to be pretty similar.
The example with one radiator for two loops only working if the water temps. equalizes well enough in the reservoir, which I guess we'll have wait for tests to see.
Is this a correct statement?
LOL - yeah, I'm in the same boat right now trying to see which may be the better option for me:Quote:
Originally Posted by wondergod
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=229107