Thats what i was wondering about, confused at first why you want me to sent the right one lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
Edit: So, should i try to use TIM with the Print and Donors? Apply TIM then Print and Donor?
Printable View
Thats what i was wondering about, confused at first why you want me to sent the right one lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
Edit: So, should i try to use TIM with the Print and Donors? Apply TIM then Print and Donor?
I wouldn't try that. It's a pressure test, remember.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bail_w
Oh well, you might as well test it to see if the TIM spreads the pressure?
Not what we are looking for right now, On a second go around we can target specific points of interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bail_w
On this test we are looking for contact and pressure and will compare that to our thermal result. The Test with the TIM will spread the pressure some but might obscure problem areas.
Also this is kind of a complicated project on my end coordinating 4 different forum groups with 60 different tests so one thing at a time helps me maintain some kind of focus on the whole thing.
I did manage to get the Diamond 7 in another computer today. It replaced AS5. The AS5 had been in there for several months (can't remember how long right now). The fresh application of Diamond 7 dropped the temps of the Q6600 B3 2°C..... Here's the kicker though. Ambient temp was 3° higher with the Diamond 7 than with the AS5. Once the house cools down tonight I'll check it again.
Dang bail that is a nice print. Mine sucks I will have to lap mine one day :)
we will have to give away a prize for the best print
Does not surprise me..... After cutting up 300 1.5 squares I was a little cross eyed. Silly me I thought it was going to be a 10 min job, send out some samples to a few peopleQuote:
Originally Posted by Martijn
Would be interesting to do the pressure film thing with a lapped cpu and lapped cooler.
Very nice thermocouple by the way :D
Fyi, my d-tek waterblock and IHS was not lapped.
Raw image is the first image. second is statistics, next we have histogram, line scan, 2D and 3D models.
I found this info very interesting! seem how my fuzion is only putting about 42lb of pressure! :(
I wanted to tell everyone I am sorry about the big images I didn't have time to sit down and adjust every one! it was a pain as is. Also here it is 10pm and I worked 12 hr today and I have to get up and do it again tomorrow. :(
These were my temps when I started these tests with D7
Test 4
room temp down just a little to 29.4
compound IDC7
Idle:
Core 0:38
Core 1:38
Core 2:35
Core 3:32
Load:
Core 0:47
Core 1:47
Core 2:45
Core 3:43
But after the pressure test and remount I am not getting something a little different. I know it is my fault but my numbers look more like this.
Load:
Core 0: 48
Core 1: 46
Core 2: 38
Core 3: 35
@ littleowl, the image size are fine.
What's interesting to me is that the paper has a threshold of 28 psi.
And on the line scan in the center where the die is it looks to be barely enough over the lower threshold to get a reading.
And on the contour image and pseudocolor shows 35 psi and less where the die would be.
On the histogram you have about 50% of the IHS under 40 psi and above 40 psi most pf the pressure seems to be focused on the edges.
Anybody else have a comment or observation?
Images are fine, that's a nice chuck of data you get from that :)
Got mine in today, will test a while later
Hmm, I just tested the Intel stock cooler, and it only applies pressure on the edges of the core. It is properly red, though :D
I think I'm going to apply some TIM here as well, and then do a pressure test. I'd love to know if pressure is then spread properly.
I would use as thin a paste as you have ICD7 is kind of thick and takes time to spread cold and probably would skew the result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martijn
One of the reasons to do it dry is that it reveals the imperfections. whetted with grease they fill in and in those void bondline areas the paste can be 2X or 3X thicker losing a good portion of performance. you will still have pretty much the overall psi that you had when it was dry but you lose the more important contact info.
Some results from my problem child, Farm-09.... I did two test runs per Tasty's request. (BTW, I have 5 squares to test with. There were six donors but only 5 print sides.)
Farm-09 thermals are in post # 202. It is a Q6600 running on an IP35 Pro, with a stock TRUE. It is currently stock clocked, but will go up tonight. I was waiting to do this test.
Here's the pic.
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...ssuretests.jpg
Pretty self evident that this CPU has a serious hill in the middle. One would think that should be good since it's right over the die, but I don't know. The tests are fairly consistent with each other, with some minor variances. I tried to put the screws in the same way, in the same order both times.
I take this to mean that the TRUE could stand to have more pressure, or the geometry of the CPU hill is preventing this. It makes me wonder how my Zalman 9700, Farm-07 test will come out.....That is even whimpier at pressure than this.
For the three samples I have left, I plan the following. (Tasty, let me know if you want different.) I'll burn two samples on Farm-07 with its 9700. The last sample I will lap Farm-09, then pressure test, and do a final thermal test to see the lapped results. I think that would be interesting.
On a side note, I've taken to DDT's scheme on machines. Here is Farm-09 on a rack mount tray. MUCH easier to work on this way. I doubt I'll be using rack cases anymore. I may as well "go industrial"...:yepp:
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...9traymount.jpg
Thx Victor! :toast:
Regards,
Bob
123 Bob What's interesting to me is that when thermalright came out with it's first heat pipe cooler I tested it on a 1cm synthetic die and performance was good but not great. When I put it on my 1 in die (whichs gives me pretty much what you see in system within about 10%) Temps dropped like 6 C. It had two inner heat pipes and two outer heat pipes I theorized at the time that the heat was just not able to spread to the outside pipes on a small die. This was a sink designed for an IHS.
You have just about 1 cm on center and it looks like the edges are taking the brunt of the pressure. I would think just from a casual look at things that even when these IHS are lapped they are lapped in a relaxed state and the central bubble is intact, in OWL's case the center is concave, but in any event the bends on the edges on both act as a reinforcement or stiffener to the IHS against pressure.
Just a thought, rather than lapping the IHS a solution might be to just file the edges to relieve the high points. Note the 77lb on Owl's edges my guess is your result will show the bulk of the pressure on edge also.
*****added note - Owl's and your number 2 both seem Biased to one side which would increase the gap on the opposite side.
The last mile is the hardest
That is a good thought. I may try it. I'm wondering how much of the edge print is due to mounting the sink though. Do you know how quickly this stuff reacts to pressure? The process of screwing the mount down is rather quick compared to the time I let it sit clamped together. BTW, I left sample #1 clamped for 11 minutes. Sample #2 got 17 minutes. I thought this might prove interesting. Everything is fully noted on the envelope.Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
Anyone else going to test a lapped setup?
Regards,
Bob
Bail_w does not have that edge print (Bail_w is winning the best contact contest so far)Quote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
basically the print is done when you first clamp and you reach max load. the 10 min is to allow the mechanicals to settle in. Probably does not make much difference but am trying to keep things uniform.
Since everyone is posting their pics: this is the first one on the stock Intel sink. As you can all see, contact isn't perfect. I will be testing again with TIM to see if the pressure is then spread more properly.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/4773/img5716ry4.jpg
Shooting from the hip I would say the IHS is concave and the edges have no flex so there is a void in the middle making the paste overly thick with most of the heat conduction through the paste rather than split uniformly between direct contact and paste with a smaller BLT as in Bail_w's pic (Bail_w still in the lead)
Slightly surprised at the range covered so far
Oh wow! I just took off the cooler again and I have never seen contact like this before. This stuff amazes me every single time
Just look at the thin film that's left on the CPU :eek:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/1971/img5717jm8.jpg
The paste left center is pretty thick and would tend to confirm the contact result. The optimum bondline should resolve to around the compounds particle size < 40µm. So good contact should look a little like the faint circular halo on the paste impression matching the pressure film result
Sorry for the double posting. Anyone have one or two extra pressure tests left? I blew a few, but now I don't have enough samples to test on my other heatsink :shakes:
PM me please.
EDIT: No more double post lol.
sorry I don't have any to give you but you can always go to the SPI website and get the free sample. :) That is how I did my first test. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Martijn
What is their web site?Quote:
Originally Posted by littleowl
Owl's 6002 images he asked me to post while he is at work
Oh yeah baby :D
This is the pressure test with TIM. As you can see it isn't properly spread yet, but hey, it looks pretty nice so far :D
And again, does anyone have a sample or two left? I've ran out :(
http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/7062/img5720bz6.jpg
@Martijn , so you applied TIM on the IHS then the two sheets?
Exactly :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bail_w
Martin do not send that sample back right now I am on dry testing only. On a second round I would like to target areas of interest and a wet test will probably be one of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martijn
I have four forums and 60 samples so I kind of have my hands full - one thing at at a time.:) I am getting older and can not juggle too many things in my head as I used to, I gotta do things systematically to keep track of things
If you do try it use the test strips for that to check contact -I can send you some more next weekQuote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
It's a little early yet to draw any conclusions But Bail_w and Littleowl's 6002 with the best contact patterns are the one's that saw the greatest gains with ICD7 over their previously installed grease while the low contacts one saw the least.
Since contact and pressure are closely related here it is hard to pull out which has the most influence here. I know that between the min and max PSI is worth a couple of degrees however I do not know how much or if pressure will increase contact/performance across that range yet.
Thanks Tasty! I went down a good bit but I didn't see it on the spread sheet. :shrug:
so I have one question that maybe you or someone else can answer.
What pressure should we be looking at to say that our block is putting such and such pressure??
I have a Q6600 lapped to 1500 grit if some one wants me in this.Quote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
Quote:
Originally Posted by littleowl
PSI = Force/area
so for the 6002 62.3/1.29 = 48.3 psi
the "tail' on 6002 may have influenced the result one way or another.
The linescan and histogram shows a longer and broader contact pressure with about a minimum of 40psi near where the core would be.
The pseudocolor shows an area of 50 to 77lbs running diagonally near the center much better than the fuzion by a large margin
The fuzion was near the lower threshold of the paper 28psi in the same area
No problem. I'll fetch myself some other pressure film and do a run on my CNPS.Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
Littleowl - Looking at post 411 the core temps have a pretty wide spread. as mentioned earlier I wonder if this could be used as an indicator of contact quality?
That could be some of my fault. :( I had changed chip to a G0Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
I didn't know they were that much different in temps and all when I did it. I just know the G0 was supposed to be a better clocker. I am sorry. :(
When I get the package from you I plan on kind of starting over with my E6600
it is running with D7 right now out in my barn. I plan to date the cure time and do all the pressure stuff all again with that chip. :) right now it is on a stock fan.
i'll also be testing with a lapped heatsink (TR ultima 90) and ihs (x2 4200) when i get my film and have time.
Here are my first set of thermal and pressure results with more before the weekend is out.
This first riund of testing was done my Q6600 G0 at 3600 with 1.43v. Cooling is a Rev. 1 Swiftech Storm with a drilled out ThermalRight bolt-thru kit backplate. The MX2 and the first ICD7 results used the stock springs compressed almost all the way and the second ICD7 test was a "Hard mount" or no springs just wing nuts all the way down. I have tried everything I know to get the temps on the different cores to even out but 3 and 4 just refuse. I have come to the conclusion that the difference is due to poor contact/ spreading of the solder that connects the cores and the IHS.
All ambient temps were measured with a UEI DT200 + K-Type probe
All core temps were measured with RealTemp 2.24 with no Idle calibration with is why most Idle temps are below ambient.
Original MX2 ~2 Months cure time
Ambient: 23.1
Idle: 23, 25, 20, 20
Load: 41, 41, 35, 37
Mount Pictures
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2016/...4638ee.jpg?v=0
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2236/...de76e3.jpg?v=0
ICD7 with springs ~1 day cure time
Ambient: 23.2
Idle: 21, 23, 20, 20
Load:40, 40, 35, 37
Mount Pictures
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2019/...afd71e.jpg?v=0
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2133/...3b39d8.jpg?v=0
Pressure test
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2349/...bbb169.jpg?v=0
ICD7 Hardmount ~1 day cure time
Ambient: 22.8
Idle: 21, 20, 21, 20
Load: 38, 39, 34, 34
Mount Pictures
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3089/...49942d.jpg?v=0
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3029/...c92739.jpg?v=0
Conclusions/ Observations
ICD7 consistently beats MX2 in my tests and from the early numbers on my E6600 it is beating ASC by a good margin also. I did notice a 1-2 degree drop in temps after a few hours with I assume is due to the thickness of the paste and the time it needs to spread. I was rather suprised by the pressure test, I had guessed that it would be relatively even because of the fairly even distribution of paste but apparently the top and bottom of the CPU are higher. Also, I found it interesting that I got the best temps on the mount with the least of the IHS covered. This could be a result of the design of the storm, which concentrates almost all of the cooling area of the block directly over the cores creating little benefit to contact outside of the cooling "patch".
I will add Thermal results from my E6600 and X2 5000+ BE later today or tomorrow.
time to compare my results
AS5 - ambient of 25C
WCG 100% load temps
core 1: 35
core 2: 40
Shin Etsu X23 - ambient of 22C
idle temps:
core 1: 29C
core 2: 34C
WCG 100% load
core 1: 36C
core 2: 41C
IC D7 - 22C ambient
idle
core 1:25-26
core 2:32-34
WCG load
core 1:34-36C
core 2:40-42C
AS5 seems to win by a hair for load but since i forgot to get idle temps for it i'm not sure if the AS5 won on idle. imo, the D7 matched the Shin Etsu for load and the D7 won on idle. I think that my cpu being a 65W model is holding back the D7.
Did this awhile back for OCF.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...-as5_graph.png
Another Fuzion block interesting
Update:
04/27/08
10:54am
Ambient = 22.6c
Cure time would be one week (24x7, no cycling) @ 5:45pm today
Idle:
Core 0: 35
Core 1: 35
Core 2: 33
Core 3: 33
Load:
Core 0: 46
Core 1: 46
Core 2: 47
Core 3: 46
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/7...01largecm0.jpg
http://img329.imageshack.us/img329/8...05largebn3.jpg
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/8...04largett2.jpg
Looking at the contact prints I do not see any startling revelations, you performance guys have been lapping the IHS's for awhile although to me the contact results over pressure was to an large extent a little surprising.
The contact paste Impressions have been talking all along and I have not been listening. The center print on the impression bob123 took will probably come in at the Max press. range of the film.
If you look at the paste the IHS picture on center it looks to be at the best BLT possible, probably probably close to the bulk loaded particle size. the depressions surrounding it are some thousandths of an inch deep, multiples of an optimum BLT which will flatten the numbers a bit and looks to be linked to those showing equal to or marginal improvements having to transfer the heat through Some % of a thicker medium. This enough to knock a couple of degrees off the test result
Looking at a number of paste impressions we have been seeing a good qty have a thick impression of compound. 90% of my testing is on a synthetic die so every application looks like the optimum center circle with just a haze or glaze of compound. Intel's spec on pressure is 43 psi +/- 10lbs. required to flatten the IHS.
The thicker impressions of paste I have been seeing I assumed to be due to insufficient pressure to flatten the IHS and spread the grease. Obviously from the initial prints this is not true. Intel falls way short on this little fact, it is not happening.
So I am probably wrong on the pressure front I think for 75% +/- of the not significantly improved results however Most look tied to contact issues. We will have to look at the final test results to draw a final conclusion but this looks like the way it is trending.I think on the whole we will end up with just a few contact patterns that will cover the range something like concave ( I have one IHS at overclockers with just the edges only) convex, concave/convex and biases one side or the other, ripple with several highs and lows.
From the results it's starting to look to be mostly mechanical for the marginal result group, I see no problems with software or electronics so far.
Anybody else have a opinion or idea on this?
Your bottom diagram is exactly the profile I've seen when I have lapped core 2 quads. An island in the middle surrounded by a "moat". And I agree that the paste pattern has agreed with the pressure film all along. I had noted this in the results from the original post that this CPU seems to have the "usual" profile and might benefit from lapping.
Your hypothesis sounds right. When I've tried really cranking down water blocks, it doesn't seem to squash down the IHS with any amount of pressure. Only lapping improved the overall contact. (This is from observations on my main rig, a QX6700. This machine I put through the ringer to get the best temps I could.)
What I will try on this is the method you suggested of just taking off the edges. I always thought that dead flat was the way to go, but maybe your idea would work better.
I'll try to get to it today. We've had a break in the weather here so yard work has taken temporary priority....:eek: :shrug:
Regards,
Bob
EDIT: Andrew, if you want the high res pictures of anything I've posted, let me know and I can email them. I resize them all to 9 inches wide for posting here. The normal res I shoot at would be 31 inches wide posted here...
my ihs and heatsink had ripples just like that before i lapped them. can't wait to get that pressure film and see what happens.
A high res of the Center Glaze would be great. The BLT there is probably only .001 thick. If you all want to send me your CPU's I run a dial indicator check on them, I promise to send them back :D.Quote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
I wonder if it is possible to to take an impression on a piece of fine metal foil. Then take on indicator reading off of that. compressed state vs relaxed
Yes you did say that from the beginning about the contact and I was not listening. I was looking at the trees, not the forest. Great observation on your part. Thick headed on mine.
This is interesting as heck! I cant wait to get time to play with the E6600 I have been running on D7 since the 4-5-08! that would be 3 weeks come tuesday and from the looks of it I will start my testing/playing that afternoon. :) I will make note of all load temps before I start. I cant remember exactly what temps were before I took the chip and board to the barn but I can tell you I was happy because temps dropped 2 or 3 degree :D
This ought to be interesting...waiting for Riptide. :D :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by littleowl
well I am not going to tell him to come and make fun of me :rofl: :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by SiGfever
We are all learning a lot from this. Your viewpoint has taught me a few things and led to good improvements, particularly my mount performance consistency. The pea glob is my friend....:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
High res of the D7 pic you used above will be in your email shortly.
I also think your suggestion on the center contact not allowing the TRUE heat pipes to be optimum makes sense too. I'll be interested to see what happens when I use your edge lap suggestion.
I've learned a few things from my teammates here too. Good stuff folks! :up:
So, like the best of scientific collaboration, we all win from this. We couldn't ask for more than that...:up:
Regards,
Bob
Another impression from Anandtech. Insidious ran 3 impressions- increased pressure, lapped sink, lapped IHS
http://home.comcast.net/~swright38/lapresult.pdf
Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
hum thats funny. you look at the impressions and he will be using D7 to make a full gap between his heat spreader and heat sink.
Yeah, well I found out from the forum testing that the pea size was best for most users and now from the forum testing I can say pretty much why.Quote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
One the quintessential questions on universally all forums is "how much paste do I use"? and everybody throws out a different method and amount.
I think the question can now be answered as far as amount - It Depends :)
If you have a lapped IHS and sink you can use 1/2 a pea size and it will work fine. because you have fewer valley's and voids to fill.
If you have a sink and IHS with lots of irregularities, depressions, voids, Valley's you need a pea size to fill those gaps. I am being the master of the obvious here which is pretty much what thermal compound is intended for.
The fine tuning is really up to the individual.
Fantastic stuff! being able to put spotlight on this certainly has helped me considerably. Thanks again for the time and effort/ great job all
My films will be in the mail tomorrow.
A different kind of print but kind of the same as 123bob's CPU: Intel Q6600 (B3)
HSF: Kingwin RVT-12025
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=555270&page=4
lol, when I talk to my wife her eyes glaze over and roll back in her headQuote:
Originally Posted by littleowl
that depends on what grit you lap too. i did mine to 800 so it shouldn't be much different from stockQuote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
Good point - I have asked him to do another "before" test with the original compound so we have a full comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by littleowl
lol so we are back to full pea?Quote:
Originally Posted by 64dragon
not necessarily, like you said, it depends, if you lap it to a fine grit like 1200 or 2000 probably a half pea but 600-800 is what i've heard that thermalright laps to so when i lapped my heatsink i just made it flat and didn't change the size of the "valley's" much if any but did change their direction
I think I am back to the full size pea as kind of a cover any contingency to get best results and leave it the cognoscenti to work optimum amounts for themselves.
Tried the carbon paper today and it was a no go, not sensitive enough over a broad area did not leave a mark. Staples has some clear film similar at least in look to the pressure film I might try that this week. Roller and ink? aluminum foil? Play dough? tape? I've got to read up on forensic crime scene stuff . There has got to be a simple way to take impressions.
I think on my next giveaway beta test I'll include the contact paper from the beginning although I won't do the full digital imaging, great stuff
Andrew, when do you want to have your pressure test samples back? I've got one that's done right now, but I'm still waiting for the sample I ordered so that I can do a second test on my other machine.
I have just received the film. I'll have the pressure test done tomorrow, but I wont be able to mail it until next week (1-3rd May are national holidays in Poland).
I got 2 back today so on some kind of bell curve probably take 2-3 weeks to get all of them back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martijn
So I plan to be sending them back out in batches as they come in. just depends how fast you guys want results. first batch goes tomorrow for imaging.
That is definitely possible I think.
i mail out mine couples days ago, i am not sure if you received them yet.
Yours was the first I got back from this groupQuote:
Originally Posted by Bail_w
I am hoping to do some testing tomorrow afternoon and if all goes well then I will send mine out wed. :) Don't hold me to that yet. :p:
well, it might take me a little longer to get the pressure film in the mail. I found out I punctured my radiator on my water cooling loop the day before I got the film in the mail and then I got sick so I couldn't test. I'll get this done ASAP
Sorry for the delay
Wesley
I got only one today in the mail.
Be careful to send only the printed image do not send donor part back, especially in the same envelope as the print
I have edge lapped results on Farm-09 and pics I'll post up tonight. Didn't have time due to the day job getting in the way....:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
I have two films left to press and then I'll send them back. Probably Thursday in the mail, for all the films, at the latest.
Bob
ok guys I have went out and played with my E6600 some today.
It is at stock speed and on stock air for 3 week. My
Load Temps Are:
Core 0: 29c
Core 1: 27c
Room temp was 14.4C
I got it all changed over to a temp Water loop with the 6002 on it.
Load Temps after about 5 min were:
Core 0: 23c
Core 1: 21c
Room Temp up to 17.2c
here are some pics. :)
Nice Macro pics there. :)
No kidding I can see his fingerprint on the bracket cornerQuote:
Originally Posted by [XC] riptide
Here's a lapp and edge job, little disappointed he did not get before numbers
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=557899
Farm-09 Q6600 on an IP35 Pro. "Edge lap" before and after. All with D7 paste.
Refer also to my posts #202 and #417 for more info on this same machine. I'll try to provide the full story here, but who knows......it's been a long week already!
I'll hold my temp data until the end of the post so it's all together.
Here was the original pressure test films from before, out of post #417. It was pretty clear that this quad had the "island, moat, high edge" that most quad IHS's show.
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...ssuretests.jpg
I blued up the CPU with "poor man's" Dykem blue, a blue sharpy marker. (Dykem blue is something gunsmiths use to check contacts. SiG and SS probably know about this...)
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...pCPUbluing.jpg
I took a few flat strokes on the 1/2 solid copper bar I use to lap. (This thing is dead flat as shown by using a high grade machinists rule, and holding it up to bright light.) I did this to see the intial profile better. The same rule on the CPU showed that it indeed had the "island, moat, edge" profile, as shown by one of Tasty's diagrams. Where the blue is gone is where the high spots are.
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...ialprofile.jpg
So, I went about figuring out how best to take down the edges since I had the high spot profile. I re-blued the thing to get another baseline and took the CPU by the edges with a slight tilt to the copper bar. I worked a few strokes at a time and rotated the CPU to the next edge. The tricky part was getting it even. I actually think it's easier to lap flat than to try this technique. But hey, this is science, right? :rolleyes: Here is a pic after the rough edge lap. Note that it has the reverse of blue color left on it than the first profile pic.
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...aproughout.jpg
Of course, no self respecting lap job can go without finer grits and polishing. A good lap job is one where the camera takes a picture of itself, out of it's own vanity...:rofl: I had to try it, so I used D7 as the polish. (What the heck, I already tasted the stuff, it tasted like it would be good polish...:rofl: :ROTF: ) It worked quite well...as you would expect out of diamond compound. :up:
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...fterpolish.jpg
So, the next test was to see the difference in the pressure test. Comments after the pic.
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...ssuretest1.jpg
I thought it was a curious result. I may break it down and try it again. I don't know what's up with the diagonal white line down the left of the middle, or the white spot in the lower center. Does the film perhaps have a dead spot in it? It definitely has a bias to the front of the CPU. I'm also curious now what a flat lap would show.
Looking with the machinist ruler, at a bright light, the TRUE is slightly convex, and this CPU is now a bit convex. I would have expected a solid patch in the middle. I'm doubting now that the TRUE spring screws put consistent pressure all the way around the mount. The order that I've put in the screws has been the same in all testing on this machine. Lower left first, then upper right, then lower right, then upper left. Maybe this result makes sense with that pattern.
OK, now to temps.
Before Lap - D7 paste.
Ambient 20.3
CT idle 24,26,24,24
CT load 40,44,38,40
After Lap - D7 paste.
Ambient 17.5
CT idle 21,22,19,19
CT load 37,40,35,36
Ambient delta of 2.8 degrees C. Picked up some improvement on idle, picked up only a little improvement at load. I'm not sure what to make of this other than to try another film on this setup, then lap flat, film it again and re-run temps. Tasty, let me know your thoughts. I would not be against lapping both sides on this to see what happens....
Another thought. I'm beginning to wonder how linear the CPU temp diodes, and/or Coretemp is performing. I will attempt to better control my ambient variation when I take test points.
Regards,
Bob
very interesting!
Wow Bob, real nice results with that lap. Some people never notice a difference in lapping, but you definitely did.Quote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
Quote:
Another thought. I'm beginning to wonder how linear the CPU temp diodes, and/or Coretemp is performing. I will attempt to better control my ambient variation when I take test points.
Great job you put a lot of effort into this test much appreciated.
The film impressions are great and making me think. The initial print had the loads moat wise center then edge. The second print has the loads redistributed inboard from the edge but less pressure on center so may have a kind of averaging effect.
Sooooo......... If you have good contact at the start on center maybe on this moat kind of a profile you just take a flat bastard file to to the edges to increase pressure in the center region only and leave the center region untouched. Maybe relieving as much to leave the only contact area over the die as the only possible contact area with the sink to even further concentrate pressure on center
Another option is you may be at be at an optimum contact with the die from the start so any changes could be would be merely minimal.
In my experience when I make large changes as you did with the lapping and see no or minimal changes there is usually a third dominant factor somewhere that is masking result.
It's good you ran the test with ICD7 before and after. The Idle vs load readings in coretemp are totally at odds with with physics.
ICD7 contains 92% diamond some carbon black and a couple % synthetic oil. All the materials are stable through the range of heat you guys use with a quadruple margin. It will not change in thermal resistance across the range of temps. The same holds true for any compound I ever tested, C/W is C/W it does not change it is a constant we can now use
So you have a 2C margin improvement@ idle, say your are running 50W in idle (I do not know your idle Watts were just approximating) with a TIM resistance on the Die of .01-.02 C/W At 100W the margin can only increase (C/W is C/W) the spread on temps would now be in the range of 2-4C @ 150W 3-6C @ 200W 4-8C.
Resolution on your test gets better the higher you go. Your original interface resistance before lapping it dropped 1-2C and was probably in the 02-.04 C/W range so on idle you have approx. a 50% improvement on the thermal interface which would hold through the range
Your numbers are actually going in the opposite direction which is contrary to anything in my experience as how a thermal grease performs. I've seen this on a number of those in the marginal improvement category.
I would suspect that it would be more likely subtle variations in the diodes as I have both great and marginal results on all software programs which is a great call on your part.
Overall my bet would be that if you had a thermocouple on the set up you would have seen a 4-5C drop overall. Testing is hard work, thanks
Edit: Compare load and Idle tests on this test before and after. Idle dropped by a significant amount and load remains unchanged The delta temp can only go up with increased watts
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/9...ltsimagwv4.png
What really puzzles me is that I DID leave the center high spot unchanged. I took off only the edge profile. Seeing that the CPU and TRUE are both convex, I would have expected to see a spot in the middle with the film....I will use another film on this, before I do another step. That will leave me with one film left for other testing.
What do you think my next step should be? Should I lap both CPU and TRUE as flat as I can get? (hehe, I still have a shot at winning the "max contact contest" here...:rofl: Right now, it looks like Bail is still in the lead...)
I do find is curious that the temp change compression is greater at the load values than idle. It does make me wonder about the diode/software linearity.
Trying to get a handle on the variables and attempting to control them has proven to be a daunting task in this exercise....
Regards,
Bob
As regards to lapping, It occurs to me that the film only shows where the two parts make contact so the void area could be .0005 or a mile. One idea is that it might be pretty close to the particle size. I will have to talk to the pressure film rep.Quote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
Paste impression may reveal void thickness
The next thought might be removing the excess material now allows for a little "Flex" under pressure. This is sheet metal, put 50 psi on it and and you might get a little ripple across the surface, variation might only be .001 -.002 but still appear as a void on the film. I missed that part about leaving the center intact so maybe the bubble relaxed is a ripple under pressure?
Another point- I have not looked it up but Intel has some tolerance spec somewhere on IHS flatness that probably would correlate with a TIM thickness requirement. You are never going to mate to parts closer together than the particle size of the compound. I could envision having a void that when filled with compound the particle size would be higher then the non compounded contact. That's a thought to chew on :D The contact areas become voids? Maybe we should be sandblasting the IHS Instead?
I am getting to the point I believe the issue is one of tolerances, mechanical and electrical. No matter what you manufacture it requires some kind tolerance spec, a range in which it functions. No manufacturing process is perfect it is always a compromise.
When Intel produces a batch of processors the are not all the same some are 3.2's others are 2.8's etc. and are sorted into separate bins according to performance, none are perfect. Diodes are the same, they function in a engineered range of use, some read higher some read lower and some may or may not be perfectly linear across a range but they perform the intended job. I believe that picturing them as a drop dead temp indicator might be like leaning on a reed and maybe the design intent is just to keep users from burning up their CPU?
123bob, it would be interesting to go for the better contact. You own a Temp meter? I could cut a groove for a thermocouple. It would be interesting to take a no result CPU and compare it to one that has a optimum result vs diode measurement.
So you kind of partial to the little stickers on that camera? :shrug: :ROTF: :DQuote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
I did get one more today from VA so whatever more come in tomorrow will go out tomorrow as the first batch hopefully the batch will be a little larger by the time it goes out.
They will send me the result as pics in an excel file by email which I will then forward off to the test recipient as soon as I get it.
An interesting thought....Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
I would have to agree that Intel's interest is in not burning up the CPU rather than using the diodes for some kind of quantitative analysis. Otherwise they wouldn't go through such pains to tell folks how to measure temps on their products. None of which involves using the internal diodes...Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
I do not own a temp meter. The internal diodes are the best I can do here.
I think I'll tear the thing apart and re-film it to see how consistent the contact is. Then for the last film, perhaps use some TIM on it and see what it looks like? That will burn up the last of my film and then I'll send all 5 samples back to you. Sound like a plan?
Regards,
Bob
Quote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
I would not use the film with paste. It basically shows the pressure spread is uniform and not much else whether the contact is bad or good. Just shows it is doing it's job. Better to save for more comparative stuff. Your farm 7 Had a a good result? better to compare a good to a questionable one to pick up the advantages or disadvantages.
OK, will do. (Just caught up with your PM too.)Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
I'll use film #4 to retest Farm-09, as it is, with no paste. This time, I'll put the screws on in reverse order than I normally do. If we see the film bias to the top, instead of the bottom, we will know it has something to do with the TRUE mounting method. I would also like to see if that wrinkle, or line, comes through again.
The last film #5, I'll throw on Farm-07 tonight. This one had the very favorable result against Shin Etsu. It would be worth seeing where that comes out.
OK, starting work now.
Regards,
Bob
I just KNEW someone would pick that up......:rofl: I bought the camera about 7 years ago, and just never got around to taking the stickers off....The important part is did you notice the Carl Zeiss lens on that thing? Really sweet...:clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by SiGfever
So, how am I doing Doc? I haven't bought a new machine in about 1.5 months now. I'm starting to get the itch....:eek: The X3350 was nice, but I need those Nehalems to start showing up...
Regards,
Bob
Farm-07 Pressure test results
(Sue me, I'm triple posting. I'll quadruple post after the next one. It's the only way I can keep my data straight....;) )
This machine is a Q6600 running on an EVGA 680i. It has a Zalman 9700 for cooling. Refer to post #167 for thermals. It had good results with D7 vs Shin Etsu G751.
Broke down machine for pressure test so I may as well add the D7 spread pics first. Here they are
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...aCPUspread.jpg
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...9700spread.jpg
Not too bad looking. This mount performed very well.
OK, here's the pressure test.....
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...ssuretest1.jpg
I was off a bit on placement and missed the very top edge.
About all i can say is WHAT WHIMPY MOUNT PRESSURE!! But you know, it performed well against the Shin......:shrug:
Regards,
Bob
Farm-09 2nd Post Edge Lap Pressure test.
Farm-09 is all over this thread. It's a Q6600 on an IP35 Pro with a TRUE. It was "edge lapped". Here's pressure test number two.
Note - the important difference in this pressure test is the order I put the screws in on the TRUE. I went Upper Left, Lower Right, Upper Right, Lower Left. This is reverse of the first test. The result proved interesting......
First, edge lapped D7 from breakdown...EDIT: Note that this spread pattern is from the original screw order of Lower Left, Upper Right, Lower Right, Upper Left.
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...aspreadCPU.jpg
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...spreadTRUE.jpg
We can see a bias toward the top, reasonable spread with heavy contact in the middle.
Here's the 2nd pressure test.
http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s...ssuretest2.jpg
Wow, quite different from the first. More in-line with what I would expect based on the lap profile and the TRUE screw mount order. Note the bias is toward the top on this, which makes sense to me given the screw order. This has great contact in the middle, without the puzzling diagonal white line that test #1 had. Might have to run one more on this if I have spare film.
Well, it's late and I'll let the pics speak for themselves.
Regards,
Bob
EDIT: Ah cr*p. I mispelled "LAP" in the last pic. It's permanent sharpy, so it will have to remain.....
You may win the best contact contest with that one
NNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOO I Will win this one :D LOL I never win anyways :rofl: :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
It's all in the name of science, LOL. It was a pretty good print though....Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
I'll be dropping the films in the mail today.
Sorry Littleowl....:p:
Bob
you can lap your IHS and heatsink then do your film test again :DQuote:
Originally Posted by littleowl
10 samples went out for processing today.
Well since we know that you are waiting on Nehalem to arrive and you have been doing such great work with all this testing you are right on track to either a nervous breakdown (quad jonesing) or will discover the true meaning of contact pressure versus the every changing Intel IHS. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
Oh, I just pulled the stickers off my wife's little Nikon (purchased two years ago) and when she finds out that I did not remove the goo she will be pissed. :D
I really like the Carl Zeiss lenses. :up: :up:
It's kinda like ever diminishing concentric circles of Chaos theory. I may be signing up for therapy myself soon. The minutia is getting to meQuote:
Originally Posted by SiGfever
123bob if nothing else you are the most consistent guy I have ever seen. Looking over the farm 9 results you have 9 tests. At load averaging all cores with three different pastes except for the one AS5 which on a remount along with 7 other pastes tested within about 1/2 a degree from each other with the IHS lapped and unlapped. I know you noted the compression issue but first time I had a chance to look close at he numbers. pretty remarkable