Modded Blocks In Hand!

[pak]

Not entirely, the purpose of His design (So I think! Correct me if I'm wrong) is to focus all of the pressure directly over the Die/Dies. Bowing achieved this, Lapped or not lapped, And his design eliminates the more solid and raised edge of the IHS from protruding in the path of the block.

What I meant, is by lapping a significant amount off of the IHS, There would be less metal between the block and the cores, And therefore, Less pressure would be dissipated laterally throughout the IHS.

A good example would be playing Jenga with fish sticks Versus wood blocks.

Go ahead and call me a dumb ass, but I am missing your point.

As far as taking a mm off the IHS, wouldn't that already improve temps for two reasons?

1. if your going to take 1 mm off, it might as well be nice and shiny.
2. Less metal=better heat transfer?

3. Your point which I am missing, probably cuz you mentioned fish sticks and I have no tartar sauce.

--pak

[SiGfever]

yup

this is just what i thought you were going to do

but i don't think you will see a noticeable difference to bowed blocks

Please correct me if I am wrong but would not the bow cause the heaviest pressure at the apex of the bow and the areas radiating out from the bow have less contact pressure?

[pak]

Please correct me if I am wrong but would not the bow cause the heaviest pressure at the apex of the bow and the areas radiating out from the bow have less contact pressure?

Which is why this should yield better results, the question is how much?

--pak

[LinusTech]

I would be very surprised if this affects temps in a measurable way....

The only thing I can see coming from this is better consistency between mounts compared to bowing...

[Waterlogged]

I would be very surprised if this affects temps in a measurable way....

The only thing I can see coming from this is better consistency between mounts compared to bowing...

Hate to be a damp dishrag on everyones hopes but, I have to agree.

[kevinbo03]

I'm also not very enthusiastic, However it is the first time a waterblock with a surface the size of the DIE is being mounted, So all bets are off.

Holding an IHS in my hand right now is making me think too much.

[qdemn7]

thank you nikhsub1.. this is the first time I actually seen an explanation about bowed blocks that actually makes perfect sense in my noob brain

that's some damn nice looking work on those blocks...can't wait for results

Me too! Thank god, someone finally posted some pictures so I can understand this. I have sort of scratching my head all along trying to figure out this bowing business.

[Vapor]

I always thought the bow was to compensate for the concave bending of a mounted block....just like how long flatbed semi's have a bowed stucture that flattens under the weight.

Doesn't the concave bending still take place with this design? Granted, it won't negatively effect the mount as much since the edges are still within IHS limits, but it'll still be there.

I'd imagine a very shallow bow + small contact patch would be the best combo....

[.Logic]

I'd imagine a very shallow bow + small contact patch would be the best combo....

Took the words right out of my mouth

Looking forward to seeing some results Nik (can't wait actually), are you going to do any testing with the 24mm^2 base or are you sending them straight back to the machinist?

[Vapor]

Here's what I'm thinking in pictures....

Here's what we've had for years, not so great...


Then the bow came, and it was pretty darn good (almost too good in this pic, oh well, these were done quickly):


Now nikhsub's great idea to increase pressure by reducing contact area, but I imagine it will still have a concave tendency (as depicted):


Now just a slight bow with Nikhsub's reduced contact patch would be 100% ideal, IMO (but damn hard to machine I'd bet ):



This assuming the bow is created because mounting pressure is along the top edges, and will happen to the entire base uniformly (or nearly). Nikh's idea to put the pressure back in the middle is awesome, but until we can mount with pressure down the middle, there will always be a bow (theory).

[nikhsub1]

Actually the blocks are all FLAT, not concave or convex at all. I would imagine that this sort of base would work best with a lapped CPU.

[Vapor]

My pictures are what happens when mounting pressure (on the edges) is applied....there should still be a concave nature to those three blocks (since mounting pressure is along the edges, and not in the center). Granted, the increased local pressure will negate a lot of it in the end (since it's a huge theoretical advantage on its own right), but it'd be interesting to see if you could have a slight bow added and compare.

[nikhsub1]

My thought is that a bow with my mod or a bow with an unmodded base will yield the exact same thing... I don't see how it would be different?

[Vapor]

A bow with an unmodded base still has a large (full-size) contact patch, no?

A bow on your base would not have to be as drastic for 'perfect' mounted-flatness.

EDIT: even doing the larger O-ring style bow would be less drastic considering the thinned part of the base would take more of the torque.

[CyberDruid]

I follow you Vapor--but I do not think the blocks go convex when tightening...the edge force is too low to affect the massive crossection. Theory. The mount bends--not the block.
@Nikhsub1 Gutfeeling: the slight oversize you have now will be just as effective as a slight undersize.

[Bail_w]

Bow base might be affecting for dual core, but not so good for quad.

[Jedda]

Four passes with a file on your fuzion and you could find out.
If they'd sell the bottom piece alone I'd try it.

I tend to Vapour's line of thought, as my earlier thoughts indicated.
We're forgetting the corner points. They may need radiusing.

[septim]

reduced block/die area, and bowing some...

[Tj*]

....
We're forgetting the corner points. They may need radiusing.

Good thinking there... plus chamfering the corners slightly as well, so the corners don't dig into (bite) the IHS.

[nealh]

I would be very surprised if this affects temps in a measurable way....

The only thing I can see coming from this is better consistency between mounts compared to bowing...

Maybe so..but most heer are fighting for 1-2C improvement

Making a more consistent mount can seem to "yield huge temps improvements"... improper/porr mounts are a pain...if this seemly fixed it is a huge benefit IMHO

I think there will some benefit and the idea of a small bow with it seems real good...but how to create the "exact bowing amount" seems the biggest issue

[AndyM]

Interesting ideas. I'm kinda thinking of radiusing the edges of my lapped IHS now so that the block mounting forces are no longer transmitted into the vertical surfaces of the IHS resulting in more of this pressure going into the other loading area...the CPU cores. I'm using Coolaboratory LM which has a rather low C/W in comparison to typical TIM, so TIM layer thickness on my setup isnt too much of a concern, but very interesting possibilities nonetheless if better thermal transmission can be accomplished with more pressure over the CPU cores with the goal of an ideal 0 C/W for the interface.

That said, I'm wondering about the posts I've read a couple months ago about Intel switching from a solder based TIM below the IHS to a paste based TIM. Anyone been popping IHS' off lately to see what the latest CPU manufacturing spec is shipping? Might be another can of worms to work around if the paste interface is being used below the IHS.

[EnJoY]

Now that it's been explained to me (dee dee dee ) I'm eager to see the improvements.

[Pete]

Is there an ETA on results Nick? I can see this possibly affecting evaps as well

[LinusTech]

As a representative of a retailer, and not just an anonymous member of a forum, I don't want to get too far into this debate, but IMO there are far better ways to improve mounting consistency than filing down the bases on all of your blocks.

2/3 times with a bowed APOGEE GT/GTX and 3/3 times with a FuZion I can get the exact same temps with my plastic backplate, bolts, and springs. That means at most I'd have to do a couple mounts to get the best temps. To me that's worth not voiding the warranty on my blocks, and not replacing them every time a different sized die comes out.

Maybe so..but most here are fighting for 1-2C improvement

Making a more consistent mount can seem to "yield huge temps improvements"... improper/poor mounts are a pain...if this seemly fixed it is a huge benefit IMHO

I think there will some benefit and the idea of a small bow with it seems real good...but how to create the "exact bowing amount" seems the biggest issue

[_G_]

what about just putting a support in the center of the block(gt/gtx) to keep it flat under mounting pressure?