Thermochill PA120.3 Pressure Drop Test Results

Finally got my hands on this famous radiator. A special thanks goes out to Danger Den for providing me the radiator to test with.:clap:

With all the talk I've heard about reducers around the G3/8" threading, I took this one a step further and tested with two configurations. One was with EK's G3/8" barbs that the good folks at watercoolingshop.com provided to me. They also sent me a set of G3/8" to G1/4" reducers so I could hook up my favorite Danger Den Fatboy barbs on the radiator and test that as well.:up:

Here is the full scoop on my site with more details and pictures:
http://www.martinsliquidlab.com/Ther..._3-Review.html

And the executive summary below:

http://www.martinsliquidlab.com/img/...lPA120_3-1.jpg

And the two tests compared to the Thermochill published results as well as the MCR320 and prototype Feser 120.3.

http://www.martinsliquidlab.com/img/...-PDcompare.png

My results fall inline with the published, actually thermochills published results only went out to 2.0 GPM, so anything beyond that is interpolated from a trendline. The EK barbs were very very slightly more restrictive, and the adapters with Danger Den's Fatboy barbs was slightly less restrictive. The large ID and chamfered edges of the Fatboy barbs as well as the reducers gave it a little edge here.

In the end, my test results are very similar to those that are published

To put this to some sort of scale just one D-Tek Fuzion with 4.5mm nozzle has about 21X the restriction as one PA120.3. I would highly recommend running two or three or more of these in series if heat dissipation becomes an issue as they will have very very little effect on flow rate.

Now we just need to get some good thermal testing done..:)

Cheers!:spill:
Martin

More good testing as always Martin! :up:

I'm glad to see TC supplied us with reliable information; definitely builds my trust in a company that doesn't throw out numbers just to make themselves look good. Then again, with the PA series, any numbers would still put them on top! :p:

Good work as always Martin, glad I have a couple sets of the EK barbs as well.

Thanks very much for the testing, and especially that last comparison chart in your report; it really puts things into perspective, I don't understand why the reducer outperforms the native g 3/8 barbs.

edit: I just goggled "chamfered" and i guess that explains it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by togaman5000

More good testing as always Martin! :up:

I'm glad to see TC supplied us with reliable information; definitely builds my trust in a company that doesn't throw out numbers just to make themselves look good. Then again, with the PA series, any numbers would still put them on top! :p:

---

I hoped to get the same results, after all thermochill's testing was done by Bill Adams.

I would have been running some calibration checks on my own stuff if they were very different, it was a relief to see them the same.:clap:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by afX

Thanks very much for the testing, and especially that last comparison chart in your report; it really puts things into perspective, I don't understand why the reducer outperforms the native g 3/8 barbs.

---

I think it's because of two things

Transition - The native G3/8 barb has a very sharp 90 degree edge between an open chamber to 10.1mm ID. The reducer actually has a nice chamfer, plus the DD fatboy barbs have a little chamfer at the leading end.

Inside Diameter - EK G3/8 barb = 10.1mm ID throughout. The Reducer has a much larger 11.8mm ID, then the DD barb has an 11.0mm ID at the leading end, 10.0mm at the threaded end.


This is what you end up with looking at transitions:

Reducer+DD Fatboy = Radiator > Chamfer > 11.8mm ID > 10.0mm ID > Taper > 11.0mm ID > Chamfer > 11.11mm tubing (7/16")

EK G3/8" = Radiator > 10.1mm ID > 11.11mm tubing (7/16")

So the reducer plus DD fatboy setup provide smoother transitions. Entrance and exit losses like that are enough make a difference. Since the EK G3/8" barbs are 1/2" sized and only 10.1mm ID, there really is no benefit to the larger G3/8" threading. Had the barbs been oversized to something like a 13-14mm ID and chamfered, that's when you'd really take advantage of the larger threading.

But we're talking really small restrictions here though (tenths of 1 PSI at 1.5 GPM), that's why the barbs even show any difference.

For perspecitve at 1.5 GPM,

Twenty One PA120.3's with DD Fatboy barbs and reducers = Only One D-Tek Fuzion with 5.5mm nozzle

That's alot of PA's...:D Also why I always wonder why people worry about putting more than one radiator in a loop, they are generally very very low restriction compared to most blocks especially when you start talking about nozzles.

thanks for explaining in a way that a lowly business student understands :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

For perspecitve at 1.5 GPM,

One PA120.3 with DD Fatboy barbs and reducers = Twenty One D-Tek Fuzions with 5.5mm nozzle

That's alot of PA's...:D Also why I always wonder why people worry about putting more than one radiator in a loop, they are generally very very low restriction compared to most blocks.

---

I am confused, did you mean to say the opposite?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meatpuppet

I am confused, did you mean to say the opposite?

---

Oops, you're right..I'll fix that.

Thank you Martin.
Another example of great testing.
Sitting here with two radiators in my loop. PA 120.3 and PA 120.2.

martin where you get the reducers?
EDIT: NM i found them on your website. Wait martin you ordered them from england???

Dayam if i knew u were going to do this i would of sent you my spare alphacool barbs i have.

FYI, im really starting to like koolance fittings. Expecially there 13mm Compression fitting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NaeKuh

martin where you get the reducers?
EDIT: NM i found them on your website. Wait martin you ordered them from england???

Dayam if i knew u were going to do this i would of sent you my spare alphacool barbs i have.

FYI, im really starting to like koolance fittings. Expecially there 13mm Compression fitting.

---

The good folks at www.watercoolingshop.com contacted me over on overclock.net and offered up the barbs when they noticed I still needed some to complete my testing. I accepted the offer and asked for the reduces since I saw they also carried them. Shipping was actually very fast..

I guess alot of vendors like to see the testing and just want to help out in some way, I always appreciate that very much.:clap:

So no, I didn't make an order, but I will in the future.:D

Just wanted to say thanks for all the work you're doing.

Great work. It's nice to know that the reducers will help more than using G3/8" barbs and this make sense due to the smoother transition.

I know what barbs are going on my Tr block :D They're getting ordered today! I also need to look into tearing my entire pump back apart as I think the barbs are only 3/8" ID on it. Maybe I can just bore them. They're 1/2" NPT fittings so the barb is actually the restrictive side for a change...

thanks for the review ;)

cheers for the review mate....

Like you said all we need is thermal testing...

if we had a chart for that aswell for the blocks,rads etc we would be set!

Hi Martin,

Did the G3/8 to G1/4 reducers have orings, or did you use PTFE tape to prevent them from leaking?

Thanks!

Those DD Fatboy fittings look to be pretty slick. I'm going to have to change out all my fittings now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dana_2

Hi Martin,

Did the G3/8 to G1/4 reducers have orings, or did you use PTFE tape to prevent them from leaking?

Thanks!

---

They do come with an o-ring, but there is not any sort of o-ring retainer so it's not too hard to overtighten and displace the o-ring. I'd probably use a little liquid gasket if I was permanetly installing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skinnee

Those DD Fatboy fittings look to be pretty slick. I'm going to have to change out all my fittings now.

---

Yeah, the DD fatboy barbs are by far my favorite. The EK and D-Tek barbs are also favorites with their o-ring retaining grooves, but the Fatboy barbs are the only ones with an 11.0mm inlet ID. It tapers down to 10.0mm at the threaded end, but it does seem to help with pressure drop. I did a quick test with a delrin T and found the Fatboy barbs with less pressure drop than a D-Tek barb. The barbs are really sharp too, so there's even less change tubing will come off.:up:

Thanks once again for all of your hard work! However I do have a somewhat off topic question regarding:

Quote:

---

Yeah, the DD fatboy barbs are by far my favorite. The EK and D-Tek barbs are also favorites with their o-ring retaining grooves, but the Fatboy barbs are the only ones with an 11.0mm inlet ID. It tapers down to 10.0mm at the threaded end, but it does seem to help with pressure drop. I did a quick test with a delrin T and found the Fatboy barbs with less pressure drop than a D-Tek barb. The barbs are really sharp too, so there's even less change tubing will come off.

---

How much affect does the FatBoy barbs have on overall flow? Is it enough to make people switch out their current barb whatever they may be? I couldn't see that it would make that much of an affect. However for those that do not have barbs already would they may be worth purchasing?



-yonton228/timmy

martin, can you test some of the bitspower compression fittings?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yonton228

Thanks once again for all of your hard work! However I do have a somewhat off topic question regarding:

How much affect does the FatBoy barbs have on overall flow? Is it enough to make people switch out their current barb whatever they may be? I couldn't see that it would make that much of an affect. However for those that do not have barbs already would they may be worth purchasing?



-yonton228/timmy

---

No, not so much to make any sort of real temperature difference, but I'm always happy with anything. I like them well enough than any new barbs I order will be the Fatboy barbs though. I used to only order D-Tek barbs, and EK makes a nice one too. Now I'll go with these instead.:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boogerlad

martin, can you test some of the bitspower compression fittings?

---

I had some samples, but I never got around to testing them. From what I can remember the ID was less than 10.0mm so I lost interest. Alot of people seem to like them, but I'm more of a barb guy myself.:shrug:

It seems that watercoolingshop does not ship internationally. So unless there is another source for the reducers, non UK PA120.x owners will have to stick with the EK barb I guess. Interesting test though. I would definitely go with those danger den barbs for any new barb purchases. That Feser radiator looks interesting.

mcmaster.com 4860k657

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArtosDracon

mcmaster.com 4860k657

---

Yes, it's great... It come with a kind of rubber gasket to seal. Mine never leaked till now ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xilikon

Yes, it's great... It come with a kind of rubber gasket to seal. Mine never leaked till now ;)

---

*sigh* what did you do now? *sigh*:shakes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterlogged

*sigh* what did you do now? *sigh*:shakes:

---

Sould I say "Never leaked so far" ??

Rereading what I wrote, it didn't make sense :rolleyes:

Ah, got ya. :up: ;)

Should have said "sealed first time, every time...still leak free", corny I know, but it works.

Hate it when the french bite me in the back...

Thanks for taking the time to do this Martin! There are awfully few Watercooling reviews on the net :(

But I don't understand why you plot flow rate against pressure drop and how you even get the data. Or how to make sense of it (well I know that less pressure drop at a given flow rate is better, but what does that mean for actual performance?). Do use a variable voltage on the pump to obtain the different flow rates and then note down the pressure drop? I guess the pressure drop refers to the pressure of the loop without the rad versus the loop with the rad & fittings, right?

Sorry for all the questions, but I can't make any sense of that graph. The way I would test this is hook up the loop with the different barbs which would give me one flow rate and one pressure drop value for each barb. Then I'd check how that affects CPU temperature. But I must be missing something...

No, the varying thing is the flowrate that Martin is adjusting with a valve till the flowmeter indicate the right flow. By then, he mark the pressure drop indicated on the manometer then increase the flow in steps till you get enough data for a pressure drop curve.

Yes, I just adjust the flow rate in .5GPM increments.

Oh, interesting observation... Too bad my radiator is too busy cooling my loop :p:

:p. maybe we'll get marci involved for this question!! the secret is revealed now thermochill!! :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nickel020

Thanks for taking the time to do this Martin! There are awfully few Watercooling reviews on the net :(

But I don't understand why you plot flow rate against pressure drop and how you even get the data. Or how to make sense of it (well I know that less pressure drop at a given flow rate is better, but what does that mean for actual performance?). Do use a variable voltage on the pump to obtain the different flow rates and then note down the pressure drop? I guess the pressure drop refers to the pressure of the loop without the rad versus the loop with the rad & fittings, right?

Sorry for all the questions, but I can't make any sense of that graph. The way I would test this is hook up the loop with the different barbs which would give me one flow rate and one pressure drop value for each barb. Then I'd check how that affects CPU temperature. But I must be missing something...

---

I plot flow rate vs. pressure drop because with that equation you can estimate the flow rate for any system. It's sort of the ultimate tool that you can use. I could simply test a whole bunch of actual radiators on a test loop and give you the flow rate that was produced, but that's only good for that one loop. If you figure out the whole curve, I can then use it to estimate flow rates on any system.

I vary the flow rates in my pressure drop testing with household water on a facet and I control flow rates using a standard sink facet valve. I wouldn't recommend that with a bucket flow rate test because if pressure varies during the filling of the bucket, you're flow rate accuracy isn't very good. But in the case of using a flow rate meter, I get instant readings so I can read flow rates and pressure drops at the same time. The other advantages to using household water is that there is not air in the lines, so bleeding of reciculated loop with a pump is not necessary. Also my water pressure in my house is extremely high, so it provides the ability to test clear out to very high pressures and flow rates without running out of pumping power. My first few trys in pressure drop testing witha D5 made that very apparent when I couldn't get results beyond 2 GPM for alot of blocks....not a problem with the household water.

Regardless, I think it would probably be helpfull to at least estimate some flow rate differences between some systems in addition to the curves. This would at least put better scale to the result differences.

The actual flow rate differences between these radiators will be very small because they are all very very low in restriction.:up:

I also just use household water for my source.

Thanks for explaining, makes sense now! But I still don't know how I these values translate into real-wold performance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

I plot flow rate vs. pressure drop because with that equation you can estimate the flow rate for any system. It's sort of the ultimate tool that you can use. I could simply test a whole bunch of actual radiators on a test loop and give you the flow rate that was produced, but that's only good for that one loop. If you figure out the whole curve, I can then use it to estimate flow rates on any system.

---

How do you go about estimating this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

Looks like my sample has a bit of a leak in the dividing plate corners. This would allow some water to bypass the radiator entirely. Can anyone else see the same thing?

---

This is very common! The German distributor states on it's website that this does not affect performance. Though I don't know if this is true...

aww, i wanted some sort of conspiracy theory or something. although i geuss i can just wait and find out if it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nickel020

Thanks for explaining, makes sense now! But I still don't know how I these values translate into real-wold performance.



How do you go about estimating this?

---

You can estimate the real world flow rates with my estimator. What that means in terms of temperature is more difficult, generally there isn't much more than about .5C gain from 1GPM to 1.5GPM on something like the D-Tek Fuzion and then it's about .2C from 1.5 to 2.0 GPM, so we're talking pretty small here. That's why I try to just recommend keeping your flow rate above 1 GPM and don't worry about it much, shoot for 1.5GPM to leave some reserves for more restriction later.:up:

Thermal testing rads is something I havn't done yet, but I'm working on it...hope to give it a try soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

It could just be this sample, there's alot of hand work in these things, so it would be easy enough to miss a little solder.

I think when I was making the copper elbows, there wasn't a single one exactly the same....soldering is an art..:D

---

Just looked at 2 pieces of PA120.3 with a torchlight and both had light peeping through the corner of the divider plate (the corner further away from the fins)...one even had a tiny bit of light coming from the middle of other side of the divider nearer to the fins (ie. both sides of the divider had a leak) :(

same goes for the PA120.2 i got...2 leaks in the divider as per the 2nd PA120.3

I cannot see the top of the divider thats closer to the barb threads...i sure hope there are no more shortcuts there! :(

what gives?! does this means the rad is slightly less restrictive due to this (somewhat similar to how the Dtek fusion was before the additional washer from the nozzle kit was added)?
Does this also means that we would be losing a few watts of thermal dissipation performance?

I would agree with you that this is a flaw instead of a deliberate disign feature since 2 my rads differ in having an extra gap on the side proximal to the fins. Since these gaps are only about half the size of one of the tubes running along the rad, does that mean the leak is negligable (ie, no measurable performance difference)?

I wouldn't worry about it....

HA, so my conspiracy theory created off of martins hard work an close looking at the actual rad and navanod's confirmation will live to see another day!! woo. wait thill HW labs hears this secret.

Regarding barbs; ive drilled all my ek barbs to 10.3mm and removed all the sharp edges. On the pa tho, i could drill out the barbs to about 12.5mm because they are limited by the neck not the threads. i beet that beats the G1/4 adapter. Tho i want to use 5/8 G3/8 barb if i only can get my hands on 2. And i will shine a torch down my pa when i get home from work...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedalmonkey

HA, so my conspiracy theory created off of martins hard work an close looking at the actual rad and navanod's confirmation will live to see another day!! woo. wait thill HW labs hears this secret.

---

Maybe we should all start shining a light down whatever rads we happened to find...including HWLab's ;)

I think it's not too much of a issue since water will always take the path of least resistance. Logically, it's thru the fins and back but the leaking might account for some lost dissipation power.

However, since water in a loop will reach a equilibrium, even if some water bypass the fins, it will be cooled by the surrounding water or flowing thru the fins on the next pass ( in 10-15 seconds).

I can also confirm that "I have seen the light". It was a little bit worse on my 120.1 than my 120.2 but both had this defect(?). Also checked a P.O.S. GTS and could not see any light, checked my BIP and then realized I was wasting my time with that one. :ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waterlogged

I can also confirm that "I have seen the light". It was a little bit worse on my 120.1 than my 120.2 but both had this defect(?). Also checked a P.O.S. GTS and could not see any light, checked my BIP and then realized I was wasting my time with that one. :ROTF:

---

:lol: @ the BIP

hmmm...we may be on to something here? haha

I just had a strange thought...

Maybe that little leak ain't too bad after all...
if we KNOW EXACTLY where our leaks are between the 2 compartments, we can avoid the pains of trying to make air bubbles do a U-turn along the entire length of the rad, esp if we're not mounting the rad with the bleed screw side up...

just some of my random thoughts...

Hehe.

I've never really had a problem bleed a radiator, they always seem to flush themselves out after long enough....at least my old MCR320's seemed to flush well enough.

hey martin,
would you be kind enough to measure the length of the 3/8" to 1/4" BSPP Reducer and the Fatboy fitting? i am trying to measure how much space my PA 120.3 will take if i use those fittings. However i have not been able to find any measurements of them besides the inner diameter.

not sure if im asking a stupid question now but how would the fatboy-reducer combo fittings compare to EK high flow fittings on the PA?

thanx..gotta love your testing results btw:D

Martin, mine is down right now, been waiting on a part, I can check out my PA and see if its similar.

Okay I am reading through the thread because I am a TC owner as well, so this caught my attention.

What I am getting from this is that with a specific type of barb there is flow rate increase?

If it matters, I am using an RD-30, that I run between 18-20v with upwards of 4 blocks in the loop.

EK Supreme, 2X MCW60s and a MCW30.

i can also claim i saw light in my PA b4 i threw it on.

i think its just the way the radiator is made. It doesnt effect its performance any, and it still is a king performer.

Hi Martin and hi everyone!

The review looks good as always but... i was surfing on the internet and i found this picture of PA120.3:

http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/5913/pa120wz7.jpg

Well, with this huge hole, water easily goes from the entrance to the exit of the radiator without even being cooled.Obviously this influences the obtained temperatures ... But the improvement in the flow rate test is quite significant.

Can you refute this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco André

Hi Martin and hi everyone!

The review looks good as always but... i was surfing on the internet and i found this picture of PA120.3:

http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/5913/pa120wz7.jpg

Well, with this huge hole, water easily goes from the entrance to the exit of the radiator without even being cooled.Obviously this influences the obtained temperatures ... But the improvement in the flow rate test is quite significant.

Can you refute this?

---

It's a very interesting picture ... thanks, Marco!

HA, conspiracy confirmed. Thermochill just cheating all of us for its flow. hell who knows, maybe if we plug that baby we'd get a few more watts of heat disipation.

Yikes!

My stomach hurts, I feel sorry for that poor radiator!

I saw something similar in the sample I tested using a light, but I didn't worry about it too much. Flow rates don't seem to influence the c/w curves which thermochill has posted, even down to .5GPM doesn't seem to matter very much.

If the curves were much more sensetive to flow, I'd consider this a bigger issue, but since my results more or less matched that of thermochill's posted results and there has been a long running history of good performance...I wouldn't worry about it.

The Fuzion has a similar issue between the middle and top block, but it still performs exceptionally well even in stock form. I guess that just fits in with how resiliant blocks and rads are to lower flow rates these days.:shrug:

Anyhow, thermal performance is the more important performance measurement, and I've been working on gathering those tools together.:up:

Hi,

Martin, may you test the thermal efficiency?

Once more, the leakage doesn't matter since water take the path of least resistance and this is across the fins and back. Even if some water leak, it will get recirculated back in under 1 second and take the normal path.

We are talking about a loss of under 0.00001 c/w at most ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xilikon

Once more, the leakage doesn't matter since water take the path of least resistance and this is across the fins and back. Even if some water leak, it will get recirculated back in under 1 second and take the normal path.

We are talking about a loss of under 0.00001 c/w at most ;)

---

I'm starting to see your point and I have to agree on that :up:

Yes, Xilicon has a good point there :clap:

My PA has thoose open corners as well.

To add to my point, if the baffle have a big hole, then it's a different issue. This is not really the case and this is similar to the Fuzion without washer but the difference is that the fuzion need all the pressure on the center and not the radiator.