Nanofluid tested with three different temperatures on a Q6600

[relttem]

This is plausible because if you ever did house painting, you get milky water when you clean your rollers. The white color come from titanium dioxide and the same effect could be done with aluminium oxide which is a white powder.

In theory it is barely plausible, but in reality it would never work. First, and critically, there is no surfactant in the paint. Therefore, you wouldn't be able to keep the particles separated, and they would adhere to the walls of the tubes etc...it would be a big mess to be honest. BUT, you are all free to try it and let us all know what happens..

[pwolfe]

OP, any updates?

[relttem]

it will be soon. We are still trying to nail down a surfactant. But, we have shown that there is no biological growth, which is a good thing. Also, we have made a second iteration of the mixture. We are trying to get that mailed out to some testers in the next week. Also, we should have a website up soon. Finally, we are hoping to be running some tests of our own. The surfactant is the biggest challenge we have right now. We want to make sure that the nanoparticles stay suspended. I will post on here when we have a website up. The website will probably link to here for results, and will also have the results from our lab tests. The nice thing about running tests at a University is that you have access to all kinds of equipment/software - one of which being LabView. We will be able to chart everything out nicely.

[pwolfe]

thanks for the update. this stuff looks really interesting

[relttem]

of course we want to put out the best possible thing, so we are being careful about some of the things that we think would be a problem..settling of the particles, agglomeration, bacterial growth, pump power.. we are really close.

[faster3200]

I am very interested in this stuff, especially since the milky color of it will fit nicely with my build. Do you guys have any thoughts on the pricing of it and how it will be distributed yet?

[NaeKuh]

We have sent stuff out to Tom's Hardware and Anandtech, but they seemed to have changed their minds about testing it. We were really waiting for tests results. I am hoping to run some rudimentary tests tonite with the second iteration. I will let you know.

okey excuse me im a legend on anandtech for h2o also the cases and cooling mod.

just who are you giving nano fluid to on anandtech thats loving it? (if its chris you will never see a review on it)

Infact i can only think of 5 people on AT who would be able to test a LC system, and none of them have nano fluid.

Also im very skeptical about this stuff.

Why? cuz any answer you've given us was with a shaddy wrong backwards answer.

Volumne not being important in any system is really funny. Volumne holds delta, more volumne the more work the system needs to do bring coolant temps up.

Your coolant would be at best for LOW FLOW systems which is NOT LOW VOLUMNE systems. And if your saying we can use a smaller radiator, then no, smaller radiators still dictate to faster fans regardless of any coolant used. So no, your statement is completely wrong.

Sorry we arent like TOMS hardware who accept blind truths. A lot of us here are probably WAY more experienced then you, and have been cringing at your comments. If you want to promote this product, lets speak to the guy who developed it. Because from the sounds of things, your the guy who is marketing(PR), and not in RnD.

So i want to know who your source testing is at anandtech, because i dont like people using my forum name without proper backing up.

[relttem]

okey excuse me im a legend on anandtech for h2o also the cases and cooling mod.

just who are you giving nano fluid to on anandtech? (if its chris you will never see a review on it)

Also im very skeptical about this stuff.

Why? cuz any answer you've given us was with a shaddy wrong backwards answer.

Volumne not being important in any system is really funny. Volumne holds delta, more volumne the more work the system needs to do bring coolant temps up.

Your coolant would be at best for LOW FLOW systems which is NOT LOW VOLUMNE systems.

So i want to know who your source testing is at anandtech, because i dont like people using my forum name without proper backing up.

Chris was the one we sent it to. We sent the stuff to Chris quite a while ago. I don't know what you are referring to with the volume stuff.

[fart_plume]

He's refering to the quantity of the coolant in the loop. the more quanitity(volume) of coolant the longer it takes to heat the coolant. Simple basic physics and thermodynamics.

[NaeKuh]

He's refering to the quantity of the coolant in the loop. the more quanitity(volume) of coolant the longer it takes to heat the coolant. Simple basic physics and thermodynamics.

exactly...
sorry Relttem...

you dont seem to know your thermo. Which is best you have your guy who developed it talk from now on.

We have very important issues like abrasions, and other stuff that nano particles cause.

The most danger we see is when using high pressure systems with nano particles..

You'll etch your block in a matter of months if your particles are too course.
So yes, we would like full data on the project, or at the very least, have the guy who RnD'd it come out

Post counts dont count for me, if you have the knowledge backing up, i'll admit your experienced with a 2 post count. But if you post wrong data on this forum, by god help me, i'll be one to point out everything you say wrong.

And trust me i do it to major vendors whenever i can.

[relttem]

Our volume % of nanoparticles is too low to cause any abrasive effects. Like I have mentioned, our density is barely different from water. If you want me to clarify anything else I will be happy to do it.

[NaeKuh]

Our volume % of nanoparticles is too low to cause any abrasive effects. Like I have mentioned, our density is barely different from water. If you want me to clarify anything else I will be happy to do it.

it has nothing to do with density.

i wish you udnerstand that.

it has to do with particle size.

if you have a large particle speed though an injector, it creates kentic impact. This kentic impact is both good and BAD. If your impact is on a solid subtance such as a large particle, then what happens to metal on impact?

Do you understand now?

Think waterjet, but requires less water pressure because we have particles to impact and cut the metal.

Did you make this coolant? or did a friend? Honest answer.. If your friend made the coolant, have him come out now. I would really love to talk to him and understand your coolant.

All that i got from your tech sheet was, its more optimized for lower flow system. This is TRUE.
But the guy who wrote the paper and you sound completely different.

Which is why i want to talk to its creator.

[relttem]

it is a nanoparticle..it is not a large particle. Who is using impinging jets to cool their computer chips? So, you are thinking that due to Kinetic energy a nanoparticle is going to have enough force to cut metal? That is not going to happen. You can see this by just looking at the equation for kinetic energy. And, if you have a water pump on a WC system that can create enough pressure needed to obtain the velocity necessary to cut metal with a nanoparticle you should get that patented.


We worked on that project together 100%. Deathly honest.

[warriorpoet]

...Who is using impinging jets to cool their computer chips?...

*looks for facepalm emoticon*

[NaeKuh]

Who is using impinging jets to cool their computer chips? So, you are thinking that due to Kinetic energy a nanoparticle is going to have enough force to cut metal? That

can i get a facepalm here?

*looks for facepalm emoticon*

Doe you beat me to it.

Relttem, b4 you mess up anymore PR, bring the creator out. Seriously.

[fart_plume]

Everyone on this forum, except for me, as I'm the only one using a modded Thermal Take block................

[warriorpoet]

can i get a facepalm here?

Here ya' go

[relttem]

what is your velocity for the impinging jet stream? After you tell me that we can figure out the force due to a nanoparticle, which, incredibly enough, will almost be the same as that from the water because it is a function of mass - which density is...amazing.

[modzona]

The thing is that the smaler and sharper a blade is. The less power/force you need to cut in the item.

That is way you can use waterjets to cut metal. If you have something that can take a smaler cut, the less force it needs to get through.

I think.

[faster3200]

Still no answer to my cost question. I seem to be ignored on these forums .

[NaeKuh]

Still no answer to my cost question. I seem to be ignored on these forums .

no one is gonna tell you the price until the vendors list them.

Wholesale price and vendor price is completely different.



oh i run my system at 8-10psi also.

The thing is that the smaler and sharper a blade is. The less power/force you need to cut in the item.

That is way you can use waterjets to cut metal. If you have something that can take a smaler cut, the less force it needs to get through.

I think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_jet_cutter

so tell me how is nanofliud different from that waterjet path when used with an accelerator?



This is why we need to see particle size and what the particle is for that matter.

[relttem]

nano = 10^-9 meters..our nanoparticles were 40-80nanometes in size. Did you happen to read what kind of pressure is needed for the water jet? It is WAY more than 10psi. A water jet is limited to what kind of cut it can make, because it depends on the diameter of the water stream coming out of the jet. If you want to make precise cuts with a water jet you can forget about it. Also, the particles used as the abrasive particles have a high brinell hardness much more than the material it is cutting. But, you can calculate the velocity needed to cut copper by looking up its shear strength and then multiplying it by the surface area of the copper that is being hit by your water jet, multiplying it by 2 and dividing it by the mass of the particle...taking the square root of that will give you the velocity.

particle size comes into play, as stated earlier, by the kinetic energy = .5*mass*V^2, but there is a balance. You can't put too large a particle thru the tiny jets used in water cutter, and it can't be too small of the velocity needed will be too large.

[fart_plume]

being I have experience running abrasive water jet cutting machines, the ones I ran would cut through 6 inches of amour plate, using 50,000psi water pressure and garnet abrasive. it Left a .062 inch kerf.

[relttem]

being I have experience running abrasive water jet cutting machines, the ones I ran would cut through 6 inches of amour plate, using 50,000psi water pressure and garnet abrasive. it Left a .062 inch kerf.

I have experience too, but I can't recall the garnet particle size. Do you know off hand? Do you know what orifice size your jet used as well?

thanks

[NaeKuh]

Don't know about this particular fluid, but most have a concetration of 3% by volume. Even with the largest nanoparticla size, at that volume abrasion wouldn't be an issue. You can't compare nanofluids comprised of nanoparticles to hydro blasting with abrasive materials. The grit making up most water jet processes are 1000's of times bigger than the largest nanoparticle.

So if I were applying some critical thinking to the use nanofluids for cooling a LC loop, I wouldn't be focusing on the abrasive aspects. Just not an issue. I don't even know where you'd come up with such a conclusion if you know the stuff or technology..

andyc

*sigh*

Andy, its not instantanous cut like a water jet. (i was using it as an example)

Its gradual, have particles, create impact, over time you will have abrasions. (this is phsysics dude)

You think the grand canyon was cut out using a waterjet?

Your using simple concepts like errosion.

i gave approximate timelines on things that should happen using accelerators. Dude these are from friends who work with this stuff.

i seriously was considering super fine dust diamond particle powder.
Basically a friend sat me down for a few hours and told me why it was a nono.

ultimate he said this that made sense... if nanofluid is so good, why isnt it like flournet which is used in other applications.
Price per liter would definitely be cheaper.

3M also has way more resources then any of us combined to make a perfect nano fluid.
They dont why?