mini test: some flowrates

[coolfris]

Made a single mini loop for flow testing only.

pomp > block > reservoir > flowmeter >

I used two pumps:
Liang D5 vario at setting 5 with a DetroitAC top
DCC 3.1 with XSPC top

GMR AFS1-T Flow Meter
(here is a review of this flowmeter)

mCubed T-Balancer bigNG + mCubed T-Balancer Sensorhub with mCubed T-Balancer Navigator software for read out

fittings: 4x custom iandh brass fittings & 4x BP 1/2" Push-over, 2x BP 45 rotary

and masterkleer 1/2" tubing



Koolance 30AC, Watercool Heatkiller Rev.3 , Phobya, XSPC Delta V3, EK Supreme and a round with no blocks.



edit: corrected the data here after cleaning the Supreme and rerunned the test on that block. Thanks to Hondacity for bringing that cleaning thing to my attention [/edit]

So in this results the K350 has a higher flowrate as the Supreme. In Hondacity his flowtesting recently the K350 was the block with less flow.

So is it the flowmeter I used that is responsible for this difference in result or the completely different set-ups? Hondacity his flowmeter looks a lot more pro than the thing I'v got. I know mine is not a pro thing

Another thing that I found a little bit suprising was the flow from the Heatkiller. I did't expect this block to have such a high flow. I pre-guessed it more to be in the range of the Supreme because of its simular internal design.

[Chruschef]

these heatkiller blocks are pretty interesting to me, i really liked the looks of there fullcover GPU designs.

just to double check on the K350 and EK supreme you could rerun the tests? or hondacity too. conflicting test results aren't fun..

regardless thanks for the testing, any test data is really appreciated.

[theseeker]

Very interesting and thanks for sharing.

[Vapor]

Thanks indeed for sharing!

Probably different nozzles explain the difference in flow?

[Hondacity]

supreme had less flow....more restriction...well thats what your numbers say...thanks for testing. i'll probably redo my flow testing once the ek supreme lt and hk3 arrive... keep up the good work. nice looking graphs..mine are ty...

my supreme is rather old...but the injector plate is rather clean...can you get a picture of your injector plate? i appreciate the effort

[redgabber]

Which HK 3.0 did you use ? CU ? LT ? LC ?
because the LC is less restrictive, with larger micro-channel
http://www.forumdeluxx.de/forum/showthread.php?t=549569

Well, about your HK result, it seems equal to the german test, then ok.

But there is an "Alien" between the K-350 and EK supreme.

Thanks for your mini-test.

[coolfris]

Thanks for the responses!

The Supreme is in use at the moment, but it has a acrilic top so mayby I can get a nice shot of the injector plate. I think it looks clean though, but I wil give it a better look this afternoon. If there is anything in it what so ever I will rerun the test with the Supreme. The K350 is in the mini loop at this moment, so I think there's nothing to rerun with that one.

The Heatkiller rev3. I used is the CU.

[coolfris]

...

my supreme is rather old...but the injector plate is rather clean...can you get a picture of your injector plate? i appreciate the effort

You were on the right track with that thought. There was some junk or whatever behind the jet plate I did not see before.
I think I need some glasses, because with my bare eyes I never noticed it from the outside of the block. But on the pictures below ...

After cleaning I did rerun the flow test with the D5 vario in the loop. Flow rate was improved by 0.5 LPM from 4.2 to 4.7 LPM. Only a 0.4 LPM distance to the K350. So according to this results now they are very close in being restrictive.


From both blocks some pics below. The K350 looks very clean clean so I guess there's no need to place that one once more in the mini loop.








especially this pic it looks ugly




Nice and clean


In the mini loop...


And a direct result on the screen. This went up to 4.7



Two pics of my 350AC:

[Hondacity]

i had the same "stuff" on my ek supreme..i thinks its just dust...my reservoir was open..lol

i might need to clean my k350..

excellent results..nice pictures too

we both have acrylic tops..

[coolfris]

'oeps'

After cleaning I did rerun the flow test with the D5 vario in the loop. Flow rate was improved by 0.5 LPM from 4.2 to 4.7 LPM. Only a 0.4 LPM distance to the K350. So according to this results now they are very close in being restrictive.

Me sleapy head. I will never do stuff like this in the morning shift. I didn't even notice the DCC was running. D5 was only running in my mind I guess.

Here is the adjusted graph with the D5 and the DCC 10W with a clean Supreme.




Supreme gets a higher flow with ervery post of me



btw Sorry for the mistake

[Oli4v]

we love coolfris' work here in benelux ^^

And I'm having the same sh*t every 4 months in my supreme, dirty radflux ... from my PA120.3, cleaned it 2-3 times but didn't help ..., oh well, it'll come out in the years :P:

[NaeKuh]

thats the only difference between a D5 and a 10W DDC? which is the DDC-1?

OMG, the D5 is that crappy on a block?

Thanks for your tests tho.

[Sadasius]

thats the only difference between a D5 and a 10W DDC? which is the DDC-1?

OMG, the D5 is that crappy on a block?

Thanks for your tests tho.

Read the top...

I used two pumps:
Liang D5 vario at setting 5 with a DetroitAC top
DCC 3.1 with XSPC top

[Webby]

Quick question if you are using the GMR AFS1-T why in the image you posted of the screen showing the flow rate set to a pulse rate of 509 pulses per litre? surely it should be 492 or 1200 depending on which nozzle you are using?

Obviously this will have zero impact on the order of the blocks in terms of flow but will mean the flows are actually off a bit (in the case of the larger nozzle only a small bit)

[coolfris]

I think those 509 pulses per litre are standard settings. I installed the software and did not change anything. I do not expect to be the flowrates to be the real thing, in terms being calibrated and accurate. I just used this flowmeter to see the differences in that setup (mini loop)

[Webby]

If you are actually not measuring flow rate perhaps you should present the data in terms of percentage flow rather than in LPM then, so have the least restrictive block (or no block) as 100% and relate each block to that. If you have not calibrated the flow meter or at the very least set the pulses per litre to be the right value for the device quoting LPM values is a little deceptive as some people will take them as definitive numbers when in fact they are not.

Hopefully that doesn't sound to harsh it's not my intention to bash you in any way but if you are going to report results it is important to do so in an accurate manner.

Thanks for the testing its interesting to see the results and will hopefully help people in choosing the right block and pump combinations.

[coolfris]

To me you din't sound hars. Critisism is always welcome.

Would indeed be better to present the data in percentages. Not that it would change the differences between the blocks, but as you said people could misunderstand the numbers given this way.

Thanks for your input.

[NaeKuh]

Read the top...

what do you think a DDC 3.1 is?

Dude the D5 is crap.

[Sadasius]

what do you think a DDC 3.1 is?

Dude the D5 is crap.

You asked a question and I gave you the answer. Pretty simple stuff.

[NaeKuh]

You asked a question and I gave you the answer. Pretty simple stuff.

yeah..

its absolute crap..

Glad i gave away all my D5's. At one point i had about 4 of them sitting unused.