Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46

Thread: PA 120.3 and MCR320 in parallel

  1. #1
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Duluth GA USA
    Posts
    116

    PA 120.3 and MCR320 in parallel

    If I put a PA 120.3 and a MCR320 in parallel, would the water flow through each one about equally? I am thinking of adding another rad to my loop and I have a MCR320 I'm not using. I know I could do 2 loops, but then I'd have to have another pump and more holes in the case (externally mounted rear radiators). So I was thinking of just adding the MCR320 to my existing loop. But then I was thinking, should it go in in series or parallel. After some searching here, it seems like parallel would be better.

    And yes I'm after that elusive .1C

    Any advise is greatly appreciated.

    ]Monty[
    QX9770 GA-EP45-UD3P
    2x2G G.Skill DDR2 800 4-4-4-12 2T 1.9v
    BFG H2OC 260 - 4x250G Seagate RAID 0 - Lian Li G70B
    PSU: Corsair 1000W (MB/video) + Ultra V 500W (drives/fans/pumps)
    2xPetra DDCT-01s~TC PA120.3=MCR-320~D-Tek Fuzion~DD-260

  2. #2
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,026
    Putting them in series is better, in almost all normal circumstances.

    Putting them in parallel halves the flow rate to each (at best) and will result in a far greater performance loss than merely putting them in series and dealing with the extremely minor flow-rate loss of the extra pressure drop of doing so. In general, radiators are very low pressure drop items, so putting them in series has minimal overall impact on flow rates. What's of more importance is keeping the flow rates up through the radiators, or at least above 4LPM.

    When dealing with multiple radiators, the rules are these:

    *) Water-flow series
    *) Air-flow parallel
    Last edited by Cathar; 06-15-2007 at 05:33 PM.

  3. #3
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Duluth GA USA
    Posts
    116
    OK, thanks for that Cathar.

    OT - Nice bike.

    ]Monty[
    QX9770 GA-EP45-UD3P
    2x2G G.Skill DDR2 800 4-4-4-12 2T 1.9v
    BFG H2OC 260 - 4x250G Seagate RAID 0 - Lian Li G70B
    PSU: Corsair 1000W (MB/video) + Ultra V 500W (drives/fans/pumps)
    2xPetra DDCT-01s~TC PA120.3=MCR-320~D-Tek Fuzion~DD-260

  4. #4
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,026
    Quote Originally Posted by montyshaw View Post
    OT - Nice bike.
    Yours too!

    Cheers. Although, it ain't pretty no more. It'll be fixed again.

  5. #5
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    'burb of Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    2,871
    Ouch Cathar.

    Is that the source of your injuries right now? What happened?

  6. #6
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Polizei View Post
    Is that the source of your injuries right now? What happened?
    I was an idiot is what happened. I took a chance on a worn front tyre at one of the world's fastest motorcycle race-tracks, that being Phillip Island.

    Rounded Turn 2 at around 85mph (one of the slower corners actually), and the front wheel started to slide. Did everything "right". I know this 'cos the slide lasted a good 20m (~60'). I did everything I could to give the front tyre a chance to re-grip, and it did re-grip for small fractions of a second, but let-go again, and in the end it wasn't to be.

    Low-sided the bike, but must've dug some part of me into the track, and before I knew it I had somersaulted with my right-ankle as the pivot point (ie. an 80mph one-legged somersault) which micro-fractured the Talus, and 'cos it happened so fast, after the somersault I slammed the right wrist into the track for good measure, chipping the top off the ulna, and causing multiple cross-fractures to the radius where it joins the wrist. The damage to the radius was fairly serious, with risk of the bone collapsing, so they had to plate the radius to hold it together, and did a bone-graft to put the chip off the ulna back into place.

    Am near totally house-bound. Won't be able to walk for 9 more weeks. The Talus is the main weight-bearing bone in the foot, so the usual 6-weeks healing time isn't the case here. 'Cos the bone is such a structurally important bone, the doctors recommend a full 13 weeks (3 months) before it can be considered to be healed completely enough to not risk expanding the fractures through walking/running/whatever.

    Wrist, at the moment, is aching. Am on pain-killers. Only have around 50% full mobility in the wirst, but it's still very inflamed and swollen and it'll get better in time as the swelling settles. Strength in wrist is about 1/50th of normal. For example, picking up a cup of coffee is about the limit of what it can do, and even that hurts. Will probably be another 5 months before the wrist gets back to a semblance of normality.

    Typing is not an issue though, and I telecommute for work, so my work has been unaffected.
    Last edited by Cathar; 06-15-2007 at 07:11 PM.

  7. #7
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    4,150
    Cathar why are you saying series is better? Parallel has much much less pressure drop because the flow is halved between the 2 rads. Also, those "tests" you mentioned are done with a constant 10C coolant/air temp difference, which means at more flow, MORE HEAT IS ADDED TO THE WATER TO ACHIEVE THE 10C air/coolant delta. There have been a few people who tried series vs. parallel, and parallel got better temps :P
    Let me guess, now I'm going to be slaughtered for challenging the god?
    Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - Core i5 2410m, 4gb
    waiting on 28nm video cards...

  8. #8
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,026
    Well, I've tested it myself, but okay.

    I'll be gentle. I don't attack people for asking questions, just those who attack me or others without good reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by serialk11r View Post
    Also, those "tests" you mentioned are done with a constant 10C coolant/air temp difference, which means at more flow, MORE HEAT IS ADDED TO THE WATER TO ACHIEVE THE 10C air/coolant delta.
    Talking about Bill's tests here eh? So if we had to add more heat to maintain a 10C coolant/air temp difference, what would have instead happened if we didn't add more heat (constant heat load)? Did the air-in temp change? If not, what changed?

    Quote Originally Posted by serialk11r View Post
    There have been a few people who tried series vs. parallel, and parallel got better temps :P
    So I'm guessing these people used a known, measured, and fixed constant heat-load across all tests, and monitored their air-in, water-in, and water-out temperatures, and measured the delta's?
    Last edited by Cathar; 06-15-2007 at 07:31 PM.

  9. #9
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    4,150
    Right now for me, I don't think those tests mean ANYTHING...I'm still thinking about it. I still think more flow only slightly increases the performance of the radiator...I don't want to type up the explanation, takes too long. I'll have my mom bring some Y fittings home...I don't have any and the hardware store doesn't sell them for some damn reason, then I'll test it for myself. But definitely, parallel should give the loop overall higher flow.
    Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - Core i5 2410m, 4gb
    waiting on 28nm video cards...

  10. #10
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,026
    Quote Originally Posted by serialk11r View Post
    Right now for me, I don't think those tests mean ANYTHING...I'm still thinking about it. I still think more flow only slightly increases the performance of the radiator...I don't want to type up the explanation, takes too long. I'll have my mom bring some Y fittings home...I don't have any and the hardware store doesn't sell them for some damn reason, then I'll test it for myself. But definitely, parallel should give the loop overall higher flow.
    So what you're basically saying is that you'd prefer to trust your assumptions, over those who have actually tested it.

    Parallel will give the loop more flow, for sure. How much more? How much are you waving your hands and simply assuming here? Here's a calculated plot based upon established pressure drop figures:



    In series, the radiators will have ~5.3LPM flowing through the system and each radiator.

    In parallel, the radiators will have ~2.75LPM flowing through them, and ~5.5LPM flowing through the system.

    There will be an extremely minor benefit at the waterblocks for moving from 5.3 to 5.5LPM, and a definite deficit at the radiators for dropping from 5.3LPM to 2.75LPM.

    The two effects do counter-oppose each other to a certain degree. Which one "wins" depends on a number of factors, but for the general case with modern waterblocks, the performance loss at the radiators outweighs the minor waterblock benefits through the small flow-rate increase.

    The differences are small though, I'll grant you that. They are small enough such that many people with 1C resolution on their CPU's won't notice it, but will typically range in the fractions of a degree, but in almost all circumstances should favor the in-series configuration. If people see differences larger than that, something else has changed.

    The larger the radiators, the higher the initial flow-rates, and the more powerful the fans, then it is more likely that an in-liquid-parallel config will win, but once again, the differences are never large, and certainly NEVER larger than the waterblock performance differences between the disparate system flow-rates.

  11. #11
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    4,150
    Thanks for the little simulation there. No I didn't say I trust my assumptions more than people who actually tested it, I think there isn't really that big of a difference in the first place, and I'm going to test it myself :P And yes, the difference isn't going to be that big but...ah well, I just think tweaking things is cool.
    Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - Core i5 2410m, 4gb
    waiting on 28nm video cards...

  12. #12
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    772
    great explanation!! i am going to run some numbers to back that up, be right back

  13. #13
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, GA
    Posts
    102
    The water is still going through 2 radiators no matter how you do it. So how could running parallel provide less of a drop?
    [ QX6700 | OCZ-9200 | 8800 GTS SLI | 150GB Raptor | Asus Striker Extreme | 2 Water Loops | 1000w PSU ]

    Koolance the undisputed "king of cool"...

  14. #14
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    772
    Quote Originally Posted by SDatl404 View Post
    The water is still going through 2 radiators no matter how you do it. So how could running parallel provide less of a drop?
    less flowrate through the rads because the flowrate is halfed, thus less cooling perforamnce.

  15. #15
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, GA
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by sick_g4m3r View Post
    less flowrate through the rads because the flowrate is halfed, thus less cooling perforamnce.
    I am talking about flow rate drop. Not overall cooling performance. Overall flow rate of the loop should be the same due to the fact you have the same level of restriction in the loop.
    [ QX6700 | OCZ-9200 | 8800 GTS SLI | 150GB Raptor | Asus Striker Extreme | 2 Water Loops | 1000w PSU ]

    Koolance the undisputed "king of cool"...

  16. #16
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,026
    Running through the maths of it.

    Given a 100W CPU heat load, and even when tripling the Swiftech supplied C/W's for the block, the difference between 5.3 and 5.5LPM is just 0.11C at the CPU die (in favor of 5.5LPM).

    The difference in water temps, for 5.3LPM through the rads, and 2.75LPM through the rads, for 108.5W of heat load (CPU + pump heat), is actually 0.11C in favor of the series config. (Use Yate-Loons at 12v).

    LOL. 0.11-0.11 = 0.00C.

    There'd actually be no difference between series/parallel for the proposed config.

    Running the fans faster would favor parallel by 0.01C or so, and vice-verse for slower fans.

    Okay - I'm going to change my stance now and say that there'd be no discernible difference between series/parallel. Go with whatever is easiest.

  17. #17
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,026
    Okay then. Running some more scenarios.

    2 x single fan radiators => In liquid-flow-series is very marginally better (~0.1C)
    2 x dual fan radiators => No preference for either
    2 x triple fan radiators => In liquid-flow-parallel is very marginally better (<0.1C)

    In the past I had only tested 2 x single-fan rads, which explains what I saw in my testing, which indeed was <0.2C differences in favor of flow-series.
    Last edited by Cathar; 06-15-2007 at 08:54 PM.

  18. #18
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    eu/hungary/budapest.tmp
    Posts
    1,591
    Quote Originally Posted by Cathar View Post
    [injuries]
    Ouch...
    Get well soon
    I see you found some use for the extra time, making all these tests - well done
    Usual suspects: i5-750 & H212+ | Biostar T5XE CFX-SLI | 4GB RAndoM | 4850 + AC S1 + 120@5V + modded stock for VRAM/VRM | Seasonic S12-600 | 7200.12 | P180 | U2311H & S2253BW | MX518
    mITX media & to-be-server machine: A330ION | Seasonic SFX | WD600BEVS boot & WD15EARS data
    Laptops: Lifebook T4215 tablet, Vaio TX3XP
    Bike: ZX6R

  19. #19
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    772
    Quote Originally Posted by Cathar View Post
    Okay then. Running some more scenarios.

    2 x single fan radiators => In liquid-flow-series is very marginally better (~0.1C)
    2 x dual fan radiators => No preference for either
    2 x triple fan radiators => In liquid-flow-parallel is very marginally better (<0.1C)

    In the past I had only tested 2 x single-fan rads, which explains what I saw in my testing, which indeed was <0.2C differences in favor of flow-series.
    even with the flow halfed to the rads its only that little difference? i was expecting 2-3C

  20. #20
    Xtreme Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,026
    Quote Originally Posted by sick_g4m3r View Post
    even with the flow halfed to the rads its only that little difference? i was expecting 2-3C
    It's because there's just so much cooling power on offer with two x dual-rads. Yeah, the radiators perform worse with less coolant flow, but because the overall C/W is so low, a 5% performance difference (which is what the difference between 2.75LPM and 5.3LPM is), doesn't equate to much of an actual temperature change because the radiators are holding the water temps to around 2C above ambient anyway. 5% of 2C is 0.1C.

  21. #21
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    4,150
    At half the flow, the pressure drop is much less than 1/2 but then the rads aren't exactly the biggest restriction in a loop so...
    In series the second rad gets cooler water (but only cooler by a tiny bit) which means that it will cool worse (but by a tiny bit). :P doesn't really matter.
    Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - Core i5 2410m, 4gb
    waiting on 28nm video cards...

  22. #22
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    772
    wait, i have a question.

    say i have a D5 and 2 MCR320s, a fuzion, and a mcw60.

    how would one calculate the expected flow of such a system?

    the pressure drops of the parts can only be found at certain flows, and when you cross them with the D5 pq curve, the flow is not the same.

    so i am very confused. how do you find the flowrate given a pump and the parts?

  23. #23
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    Posts
    4,150
    Quote Originally Posted by sick_g4m3r View Post
    wait, i have a question.

    say i have a D5 and 2 MCR320s, a fuzion, and a mcw60.

    how would one calculate the expected flow of such a system?

    the pressure drops of the parts can only be found at certain flows, and when you cross them with the D5 pq curve, the flow is not the same.

    so i am very confused. how do you find the flowrate given a pump and the parts?
    Add up the pressure drop vs. flow curves...sorta hard to do but you could probably get an approximate equation for each and then add. Then as for tubing...there's theoretical pressure drops for tubes, so I'd take however many feet you're using, and add a little more on top of that because of bends. Hope that makes sense...
    Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - Core i5 2410m, 4gb
    waiting on 28nm video cards...

  24. #24
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, GA
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by serialk11r View Post
    At half the flow, the pressure drop is much less than 1/2 but then the rads aren't exactly the biggest restriction in a loop so...
    In series the second rad gets cooler water (but only cooler by a tiny bit) which means that it will cool worse (but by a tiny bit). :P doesn't really matter.

    Are you saying that the greater the flow the higher the resistance gets? I have a hard time choking down that water cooling pumps could push enough water for you to even reach noticable loss in flow due to radiator configuration.

    Saying the other radiator gets cooler water is like saying half of a larger radiator gets cooler water. If you didn't need the water colder after it left the first one why have a second?
    [ QX6700 | OCZ-9200 | 8800 GTS SLI | 150GB Raptor | Asus Striker Extreme | 2 Water Loops | 1000w PSU ]

    Koolance the undisputed "king of cool"...

  25. #25
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    772
    Quote Originally Posted by serialk11r View Post
    Add up the pressure drop vs. flow curves
    how exactly does one add these up? And then after they are added up for all the parts, do you find the intersection with the PQ of the pump?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •