Ice Dragon Update

[Conumdrum]

Testing turn-around will be about 2 days, need 18 hours of pure test time. Finished with all the fluid I have, thats the reason I am pushing to ship. Yup, same address.

For filling, depends on the loop really. The bench running the coolant tests has an EK150 at the highest point, so I did the fill/pump on-off/fill routine and let the loop bleed for 20 minutes, topped the res off (filled to top threads) to where when I put the cap back on I would usually have a drip or two out the sides, pump off of course. Powered the system on and kicked off the test. Come time for draining, the reservoir level would drop by 5-6mm, never really more than that.

I have 4 bottles in total, but the B1 and C1 had the clumping problem real bad and did not remix entirely when shaken. C2 was the latest one sent over way back when, clumping problem resolved though. Yeah, tube staining isn't really the right word for it... slight coating is better. The coating from C2 did clean up after several flushes.

Loop consists of DDC3.2 with XSPC Top, Swiftech GTZ, DangerDen GTX280's in serial (thanks Conundrum), Koolance FM17 flow meter, Drain T, Temp T1, Temp T2, XSPC RX360 (Yate Lows @ 12v), Temp T3, Temp T4 and an EK 150 Res
i7 930 @ 3.8GHz (19x200) w/ 1.375v under the GTZ, 280's are at stock clocks with 1138mV and some UV (little things are bright) provided by the Gigabyte UD7. OCCT loads the CPU and Kombustor on all threads for the GPU's.

I though I got rid of that fingerprint. Curses (in a evil menacing laugh).

[skinnee]

skinnee, is the FluidXP nanofluid stuff included in your tests?

Yup, Banana Yellow color too.

edit: Just filled the loop, definitely less bubbles during the fill and bleed. And the koozie makes a nice hat for the bottle.

[DarthBeavis]

Know I will get crap but I don't care: the only colored coolant I will use and only when the build needs colored coolant is Fluid XP LT (and only that specific formulation). It does not separate and does not clog block fins. Also does not foam much.I don't buy and claims of any coolant having special ninja cooling qualities over DI.

[skinnee]

After this testing is published, you might just be PM'ing me to ship gallons of Minnesota tap water your way.

[Vapor]

coolants should perform within .2% similarity at 25C vs. 50C. - where did .2% come from?

Volumetric specific heat of water varies with temperature....from memory, it's around .2% difference between 25C and 50C? I guess I'm ignoring the impact of viscosity and thermal conductivity with saying that though.

Lower flow rate = high heat load ? What does that mean? Is your heat load not constant? Or do you mean lower flow rate = higher outlet temperature of the fluid - that makes sense based on Q = mdot*Cp*(dT).

Yup, outlet temperatures. If you want to increase delta between inlet and outlet, either increase heat load or decrease flowrate. Increasing heat load is unrealistic in testing, not that decreasing flowrate to artificially create larger deltas isn't either.

Was trying to give a reason why skinnee doesn't need to test a variety of flowrates or heatloads--the data will say the same as his current tests, just more differentiation (via artificial means) between the coolants.

Also, "coolant to air delta is limited by the air and therefore dictated by radiator power (air flow * air saturation) " - what is air saturation?

Air Saturation is a term Martin coined from his first radiator reviews....basically heat transfer between air and coolant as a percentage ( (Tout-air - Tin-air) / (Tcoolant - Tin-air) ). In terms of radiator design, maximizing air saturation and minimizing air flow restriction are opposing forces, but that's off-topic I suppose

A good comment about viscosity. Viscosity definitely comes into play. That is because your Reynold's number is function of that. Then, from a Dittus-Boelter correlation you can get your available heat transfer. BUT, viscosity is also going to have detrimental effects on pumps. It is a trade off.

Are there fluids out there with a noticeably better heat transfer coefficient than water? The market of pumps available to us will adapt to needs, all that's needed is time and reason for change and the change/adaptation will happen, IMO. I know, in terms of just heat capacity, water is incredible for our uses and a 10% gain in volumetric heat capacity just won't mean much for most people (tiny fraction of a degree). But is there much to be gained at the heat transfer level with any accessible fluid (either via vastly different viscosity or via improved thermal conductivity)?

EDIT: hopefully this isn't taken as a slight to Ice Dragon Nanofluid, but it seems to me the gains from 'doping' water are extremely small and I'm just wondering if there's any fluid out there that is a big step ahead of water (because water is such an amazing material)?

[relttem]

there is definitely some serious heat transfer fluids that are better than water, but whether or not they are suitable for use in WC computers or cost effective is another question..dowtherm comes to mind.. Aside from the thermal aspects the nanofluid is a biocide, so you don't have to add anything to take care of the grime. It also doesn't break down. One of our big arguments is that when one decides to upgrade from cooling just a CPU to GPU(s) and currently only have a 120 radiator, you won't need to upgrade to a larger radiator. So, it becomes a cost sort of thing. Also, a noise sort of thing too because you don't have to have your fan on the radiator wide open.

Why is increasing the load unrealistic? What if I was just cooling my CPU, then I add to GPUs and don't want to increase my radiator size. That is definitely a legitimate test. Especially if one fluid's convective coefficient varies to that of water's.. Granted, if you have a car radiator it is not going to be much of a test, but if you are running a small radiator it will be. There are a lot of variables to play with, and all are a legitimate test. If you get outside the realm of a single user WC system and start looking at a wall full of servers, then flow rate and fan speed are going to come into the overall cost of the system. If you can drop that by 20% you are on to something quite big. Imagine a room full of servers and you just cut the fan speed by 20%. So, you have cut the power draw to the fans by 20%, but you have also dropped the heat expelled by the radiator into the room, which is going to drop the heat load on the room's environmental control system (the AC) - so that drops as well. It adds up after a while.

I don't take any offense to anything said about our stuff on here. Sometimes, like above, I don't understand what was posted so I need it clarified. But, it is the internet, so I might be laughing and you might think I am being an ass..I am usually laughing..

[PiLsY]

That doesnt make sense. If a heat source is a fixed output then your fluid may allow better transfer of temperatures, but it cant reduce the heat output of the rad used to cool the system. Unless your nanoparticles open wormholes in reality and send the energy to an alternate dimension?

Dude if you cut fan speeds to reduce heat emitted then you just heat your loop up. Energy does not just disappear, even if you use nanoparticles, m'kay?

[sabe]

That doesnt make sense. If a heat source is a fixed output then your fluid may allow better transfer of temperatures, but it cant reduce the heat output of the rad used to cool the system. Unless your nanoparticles open wormholes in reality and send the energy to an alternate dimension?

Dude if you cut fan speeds to reduce heat emitted then you just heat your loop up. Energy does not just disappear, even if you use nanoparticles, m'kay?

He is referring to the (insignificant) drop in power drawn by the fan which is converted to heat.

[relttem]

That doesnt make sense. If a heat source is a fixed output then your fluid may allow better transfer of temperatures, but it cant reduce the heat output of the rad used to cool the system. Unless your nanoparticles open wormholes in reality and send the energy to an alternate dimension?

Dude if you cut fan speeds to reduce heat emitted then you just heat your loop up. Energy does not just disappear, even if you use nanoparticles, m'kay?

We are going to enter this new alternate dimension called the First Law of Thermodynamics..which is set in stone..or, if you want to invent a perpetual machine and nullify the first law you can go for that.

There are two ways to show what I was talking about above..

here is the first:

Q=h*A*(Tf-Ts)

For heat transfer at the wall, as h->inf, for finite A, (Tf-Ts)->0. That is, the radiator temperature increases to the fluid temperature, ergo, the radiator surface is hotter as h increases.

Similarly, for the heat transfer from the radiator to the ambient,

Q=h*A*(Ts-Tair)

If (Ts-Tair) increases, since air temperature is fixed, and Ts increases per above, then h or A can decrease to keep same Q rejection. h can be reduced by reducing fan speed, for example, or by making surface less tortuous, which can reduce delta_P required for airflow, which can change type or speed of fan required to induce said delta_P.

The second is based on the NTU method for heat exchangers:

I assumed an effectiveness, heat load, convective coefficient, area, and the outlet temperatures of the fluid (that would keep the CPU temperature the same). Knowing those and knowing that the nanofluid basically increases the 'h' by 20% I was able to solve for the Tin for both fluids.

Tin = Tout - Q/(h*A)

I could also solve for Cmin.

Cmin = Q/(e*(Tout-Tinair)

Then, by assuming an area of the radiator and that my radiator wall thickness is negligible I was able to get a value for NTU for each fluid - which basically was NanofluidNTU was 20% more than the water one.

NTU = U*Arad/(Cmin)

with 1/U = 1/hair + 1/hwater

From that, and knowing the effectiveness I could get the ratio of Cmin/Cmax for each fluid. You get this value from NTU charts

That gave me Cmax, which I could get an mass flow rate from - which did show the flow rate of the air side could be decreased with the nanofluid.

[PiLsY]

But your nanofluid is moving the heat to the air exactly the same as water. How could it possibly allow you to both reduce heat output and lower fan speed simulatenously? If it absorbs heat faster than water then you could lower fan speeds and maintain the same temperature and heat output. If it gives off heat better than water then you could also do the above. As far as I know the only liquid that does both at the moment is peroxide (not exactly useable ). Are you saying it both absorbs heat better and radiates heat better than water? Lets forget about the 20% for now and just answer that bit. If you're not saying that then i've mis-understood you, I just want to know if im reading what youre saying correctly .

Thermodynamics of the cooling system itself doesnt apply to my point above that you quoted. You claimed that it reduces the heat output into the air. If im cooling 750w of heat then that's how much heat goes into the cooling system. The rate the heat is dissipated into the air governs the component tempratures within the cooling system. If you transport the heat faster into the air then you can either have lower component temperatures or the same temperatures and lower fan speeds. However the amount of heat leaving the system always remains the same. You can change efficiency but you cant make heat disappear. The amount of heat leaving the system will be the same regardless and the load on the AC in the room will remain the same. The only cost saving is in the fan speed reduction, which tbh is negligible.

Im basing that on einstein saying energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transported.

[relttem]

Well, the nanofluid allows for a few things based on the increase in h. If I want to keep CPU temp's the same I might not have to have the same temperature leaving the radiator, which means that the temperature of the air leaving the air side of the radiator will be lower along with the fan speed. Since h increases my dT can decrease which allows for Einstein's statement to hold - the same q is still be released. And, as stated above, the power for the AC drops since the room doesn't get as hot, as does the fan speed. Also, if I have a room full of servers each with their own fan, or maybe I have a wall sized radiator with just a few giant fans - reducing the power to them by 20% will be noticeable savings in both energy and decibels - noise pollution is a big topic. Also, with the increase in h I can also decrease the pump speed of the pump circulating the fluid - another potential savings. Anyway..hopefully that cleared some stuff up...I wouldn't use peroxide either. Tho, I just cleaned my dog's ears with it.

As for absorbing heat better than water: Yes, it does. If we took a heated copper plate in which we knew the heat input, flowed water over it at a fixed rate and knew the temperature before the plate, and then measure the temperature down the plate and did the same with the nanofluid, the temperatures of the plate while the nanofluid was flowing over it will be cooler. So, using Q=h*A*(T2-T1) and the 20% increase in h for nanofluid
Q=100W
A=1
hwater = 100
hnano = 120
T1 = 50

for water

T2 - 51

for nano

T2 - 50.8333

[Church]

It clearly is seen that nanofluid is better thermal wise coolant. Imho it's weak point is price though.

[relttem]

that is tough to answer that question. We are cheaper than FluidXP. We aren't making that much money at all. The nanofluid is actually sort of expensive. I guess you can look at it like beer..if you drink. I like dark beer (guinness/stout). Sure it costs more than Busch light, which has about the same alcohol content (I think), but I will pay the extra money for a little more kick...and I look cooler..

[Church]

relttem: unfortunately i compare to price of distilled (especially if bought locally/no shipment price)

[relttem]

just out of curiosity, how much does it all cost (anti microbial stuff etc)? and how often do you have to replace it..and, when you replace it do you have to put in more silver?..How much does it cost for one year?

[Church]

You don't have to defend so seriously, i told it as half joke . If people buy those colored premixes, almost for shure there will be market for your product, especially because unlike those premixes (especially ones containing antifreeze additives) that are less thermally effective then distilled yours actually beat it. Those might win look wise though, having much wider color range.

As for pricing of distilled it can be really cheap, if i buy it at nearby petrol station + use biocide bought @petshop. Imho it's most maintenance free coolant if antialgae growth issue is taken care of, so no problems with running it in loop for long periods of time.

[relttem]

no, I was not offended at all...seriously. I am totally curious. I really enjoy all the questions etc.

[skinnee]

I get distilled for $0.67 a gallon, bought a bottle of PT_nuke three years ago for $3.50 and only now do I need to think about getting more. 7 drops of nuke per gallon of distilled.

[relttem]

I get distilled for $0.67 a gallon, bought a bottle of PT_nuke three years ago for $3.50 and only now do I need to think about getting more. 7 drops of nuke per gallon of distilled.

how long before you have to change the fluid?

[PiLsY]

I guess thats just over my head tbh . I just dont get how the amount of heat leaving the rad can ever change if the heatload on the system is constant. Sorry for being dumb .

[PiLsY]

how long before you have to change the fluid?

Been draining mine back into the container and re-using it for quite a while now. As a rule I change the water a month after a new part has gone in the loop incase of any flux/crap from manufacturing. If im using the same parts I know its all clean internally already anyway. No problems with clouding or temps. I have a killcoil in the gallon container and a BP true silver stop plug in the loop. No dye, just distilled.

[relttem]

I guess thats just over my head tbh . I just dont get how the amount of heat leaving the rad can ever change if the heatload on the system is constant. Sorry for being dumb .

I thought your concerns/questions were great, but you have to remember to differentiate between 'q' and 'T'..the heat load is the same. The heat RATE leaving the radiator, q, is the same too. But, the Tout of the radiator is different, and that is what dictates the AC.

[Sadasius]

Wouldn't this coolant be harder on pumps?

[relttem]

Wouldn't this coolant be harder on pumps?

no, The viscosity of the fluid is barely above that of water. That was a concern of ours too, but we had the viscosity measured and there is a graph of it on here somewhere, and I am pretty sure there is one on our webpage.

[relttem]

For all who have been asking, Ive got some UV dye coming from Mayhem Dyes.