Sie sind nicht angemeldet.
Lieber Besucher, herzlich willkommen bei: Aqua Computer Forum. Falls dies Ihr erster Besuch auf dieser Seite ist, lesen Sie sich bitte die Hilfe durch. Dort wird Ihnen die Bedienung dieser Seite näher erläutert. Darüber hinaus sollten Sie sich registrieren, um alle Funktionen dieser Seite nutzen zu können. Benutzen Sie das Registrierungsformular, um sich zu registrieren oder informieren Sie sich ausführlich über den Registrierungsvorgang. Falls Sie sich bereits zu einem früheren Zeitpunkt registriert haben, können Sie sich hier anmelden.
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 3 mal editiert, zuletzt von »mattlach« (20. April 2020, 04:18)
f.) My coolant is somehow more difficult to push through the loop than pure distilled water? (Seems very unlikely)
Of course the EK Cryofuel is more difficult to push than distilled water.
It contains Propylene Glycol, which has a higher viscosity than Water.
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von »mattlach« (21. April 2020, 07:59)
From the Handbook. Maybe this is, or was, the problem. Check if the Aquaero uses the right value.Zitat
Depending on device and software version, the flow sensor input
of the device must either be configured as sensor type “Flow sensor high
flow (5306” or be set to a calibration value of 169 impulses per liter.
Adding to this:Alrighty.
I did some follow up testing with the system assembled and running, and I believe I have confirmed that it is the flowmeter readout that is incorrect, not the actual flow that is diminished.
I loaded up the system with a loop of heaven benchmark at 4k, maximum quality settings, vsync off, on a highly overclocked Pascal Titan X and let it run until the system reached a steady state.
The system was maintaining a temperature delta between the measured coolant temperature at the GPU and the core temperature of the GPU of only between 2 and 4C. If the flow meter readouts were accurate, this should not be possible.
Does anyone have any flowmeter troubleshooting suggestions? Can they be opened up and maintained?
Thanks,
Matt
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von »InfoSeeker« (21. April 2020, 17:30)
Adding to this:Alrighty.
I did some follow up testing with the system assembled and running, and I believe I have confirmed that it is the flowmeter readout that is incorrect, not the actual flow that is diminished.
I loaded up the system with a loop of heaven benchmark at 4k, maximum quality settings, vsync off, on a highly overclocked Pascal Titan X and let it run until the system reached a steady state.
The system was maintaining a temperature delta between the measured coolant temperature at the GPU and the core temperature of the GPU of only between 2 and 4C. If the flow meter readouts were accurate, this should not be possible.
Does anyone have any flowmeter troubleshooting suggestions? Can they be opened up and maintained?
Thanks,
Matt
Yes it can be opened and maintained.
As i said before: Its more than unlikely that the sensor itself has a problem. If there would be a problem normally it wouldn´t show any value at all because there is only one moveable piece in it. If that would be stopped or blocked because some particle in the water it would show nothing.. a partcle that just slows it down (and sticks to it) would be very hard to find.
The Temperature Delta is in no way a source of reading your flow. The difference from 50L/h to 250L/h is maybe 2-3K. Only if your flow is less then 40L/h you will see a real effect by enhancing the flow. Effects above that could be easily bee within the error margin of the temperature sensors.
As to the point of viscosity:
10% could make a huge differance.
I always question people’s flow numbers, I’m running triple D5 pumps in series and using a AQ high flow sensor and with all 3 at max only see 400lph.
Yes it can be opened and maintained.
As i said before: Its more than unlikely that the sensor itself has a problem. If there would be a problem normally it wouldn´t show any value at all because there is only one moveable piece in it. If that would be stopped or blocked because some particle in the water it would show nothing.. a partcle that just slows it down (and sticks to it) would be very hard to find..
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von »mattlach« (21. April 2020, 18:25)
I did the math right now on a piece of paper, i studied it and i scored top of my class in "heat transfer" class. You can trust a german engineer when he tells you: Yes there is a difference with an increased flow, no it does not dramatically change UNLESS you change the form of the flow from laminar to turbulent and thus reducing the boundary layer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_layer). All my calculations (though pretty simplified because there are a huge number of variables) show pretty the same: Unless you are in some real edge cases design wise (which i hardly doubt in watercooling) the flow stays the same wether you have 60L/h or 300L/h.Adding to this:Alrighty.
I did some follow up testing with the system assembled and running, and I believe I have confirmed that it is the flowmeter readout that is incorrect, not the actual flow that is diminished.
I loaded up the system with a loop of heaven benchmark at 4k, maximum quality settings, vsync off, on a highly overclocked Pascal Titan X and let it run until the system reached a steady state.
The system was maintaining a temperature delta between the measured coolant temperature at the GPU and the core temperature of the GPU of only between 2 and 4C. If the flow meter readouts were accurate, this should not be possible.
Does anyone have any flowmeter troubleshooting suggestions? Can they be opened up and maintained?
Thanks,
Matt
Yes it can be opened and maintained.
As i said before: Its more than unlikely that the sensor itself has a problem. If there would be a problem normally it wouldn´t show any value at all because there is only one moveable piece in it. If that would be stopped or blocked because some particle in the water it would show nothing.. a partcle that just slows it down (and sticks to it) would be very hard to find.
The Temperature Delta is in no way a source of reading your flow. The difference from 50L/h to 250L/h is maybe 2-3K. Only if your flow is less then 40L/h you will see a real effect by enhancing the flow. Effects above that could be easily bee within the error margin of the temperature sensors.
As to the point of viscosity:
10% could make a huge differance.
This does not jive with the data I have seen on the subject, or the "rule of thumb" guides on any of the enthusiast water cooling sites out there.
Maybe this is accurate for very low heat systems, but 40 L/H is a laughably inadequate flow rate for an enthusiast system where each block (GPU & CPU) could be dissipating 300W to 350W of heat.
My Pascal Titan X, fully overclocked puts out ~310W at full load. My Threadripper 3960x at full load can get up to 320W at full load.
The rule of thumb in all enthusiast water cooling forums is to target 1 GPM, (~227 L/H), as that is an approximate point where diminishing returns set in to the point where further flow increases may not be worth it. Still, measurable improvements are notable up to about 1.5GPM (340 L/h) after which thermal probe accuracy starts to limit the ability to distinguish probe error and actual temperature improvement.
While the rule of thumb target is ~ 1 GPM (227L/H) generally it is conceded that if you can reach a minimum of 0.8 GPM (~180L/h) you are OK. Not great, but OK.
Usually, unless a loop is large and complex, a single D5 pump running at 100% speed is sufficient to reach ~ 0.8 to 1.1 GPM (180 to 250 L/H)
40 L/H is ~ 0.17 GPM. That might be fine for idle flow rates if you have a PWM pump and can dial it down when temps are low, but for load conditions it is a joke.
For some historical reference.
My old loop ( single D5 pump, EK Fullcover Block for Pascal Titan X, EK Supremacy EVO Block for CPU, 1x 420mm 45mm thick Alphacool Radiator, 1x 280mm "Monsta" 84.5mm thick radiator) achieved about 0.9 GPM (~205 L/H) at full pump speed with EK Cryofuel Coolant
When I upgraded to Threadripper, at first I used the same loop, just replacing the CPU block with a Watercool Heatkiller IV Pro Threadripper block. It was apparently less restrictive than the EK Supremancy EVO, because this change alone increased max flow to 1.1GPM (~250L/h) with EK Cryofuel Coolant
When I embarked on a larger loop for my threadripper with a little bit of an unusual parallel flow radiator routing (see here) I decided to add a second pump to help overcome what I thought would be a more restrictive loop. Initial testing with just distilled water showed a single D5 pump at full speed resulting in 1.1 GPM (~250L/H), and with both pumps up to 1.6 GPM (~360 L/H)
This is why this drop is so puzzling.
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 2 mal editiert, zuletzt von »Diago« (21. April 2020, 19:15)
I did the math right now on a piece of paper, i studied it and i scored top of my class in "heat transfer" class. You can trust a german engineer when he tells you: Yes there is a difference with an increased flow, no it does not dramatically change UNLESS you change the form of the flow from laminar to turbulent and thus reducing the boundary layer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_layer). All my calculations (though pretty simplified because there are a huge number of variables) show pretty the same: Unless you are in some real edge cases design wise (which i hardly doubt in watercooling) the flow stays the same wether you have 60L/h or 300L/h.Adding to this:Alrighty.
I did some follow up testing with the system assembled and running, and I believe I have confirmed that it is the flowmeter readout that is incorrect, not the actual flow that is diminished.
I loaded up the system with a loop of heaven benchmark at 4k, maximum quality settings, vsync off, on a highly overclocked Pascal Titan X and let it run until the system reached a steady state.
The system was maintaining a temperature delta between the measured coolant temperature at the GPU and the core temperature of the GPU of only between 2 and 4C. If the flow meter readouts were accurate, this should not be possible.
Does anyone have any flowmeter troubleshooting suggestions? Can they be opened up and maintained?
Thanks,
Matt
Yes it can be opened and maintained.
As i said before: Its more than unlikely that the sensor itself has a problem. If there would be a problem normally it wouldn´t show any value at all because there is only one moveable piece in it. If that would be stopped or blocked because some particle in the water it would show nothing.. a partcle that just slows it down (and sticks to it) would be very hard to find.
The Temperature Delta is in no way a source of reading your flow. The difference from 50L/h to 250L/h is maybe 2-3K. Only if your flow is less then 40L/h you will see a real effect by enhancing the flow. Effects above that could be easily bee within the error margin of the temperature sensors.
As to the point of viscosity:
10% could make a huge differance.
This does not jive with the data I have seen on the subject, or the "rule of thumb" guides on any of the enthusiast water cooling sites out there.
Maybe this is accurate for very low heat systems, but 40 L/H is a laughably inadequate flow rate for an enthusiast system where each block (GPU & CPU) could be dissipating 300W to 350W of heat.
My Pascal Titan X, fully overclocked puts out ~310W at full load. My Threadripper 3960x at full load can get up to 320W at full load.
The rule of thumb in all enthusiast water cooling forums is to target 1 GPM, (~227 L/H), as that is an approximate point where diminishing returns set in to the point where further flow increases may not be worth it. Still, measurable improvements are notable up to about 1.5GPM (340 L/h) after which thermal probe accuracy starts to limit the ability to distinguish probe error and actual temperature improvement.
While the rule of thumb target is ~ 1 GPM (227L/H) generally it is conceded that if you can reach a minimum of 0.8 GPM (~180L/h) you are OK. Not great, but OK.
Usually, unless a loop is large and complex, a single D5 pump running at 100% speed is sufficient to reach ~ 0.8 to 1.1 GPM (180 to 250 L/H)
40 L/H is ~ 0.17 GPM. That might be fine for idle flow rates if you have a PWM pump and can dial it down when temps are low, but for load conditions it is a joke.
For some historical reference.
My old loop ( single D5 pump, EK Fullcover Block for Pascal Titan X, EK Supremacy EVO Block for CPU, 1x 420mm 45mm thick Alphacool Radiator, 1x 280mm "Monsta" 84.5mm thick radiator) achieved about 0.9 GPM (~205 L/H) at full pump speed with EK Cryofuel Coolant
When I upgraded to Threadripper, at first I used the same loop, just replacing the CPU block with a Watercool Heatkiller IV Pro Threadripper block. It was apparently less restrictive than the EK Supremancy EVO, because this change alone increased max flow to 1.1GPM (~250L/h) with EK Cryofuel Coolant
When I embarked on a larger loop for my threadripper with a little bit of an unusual parallel flow radiator routing (see here) I decided to add a second pump to help overcome what I thought would be a more restrictive loop. Initial testing with just distilled water showed a single D5 pump at full speed resulting in 1.1 GPM (~250L/H), and with both pumps up to 1.6 GPM (~360 L/H)
This is why this drop is so puzzling.
Just try it yourself. Switch one pump off (if your flow stays above 40-50 L/h) you will not see a huge difference (like 10K+) in temperatures. For that you need to wait to the point where the water temperature does not change anymore and your system becomes static.
This is somehow a intercontinental difference - you americans tend to always go for high flow, europeans tend to go for sufficient flow but as silent as possible. At least here on the europe side there is a large community who does really good test nearly scientifically based around all aspects. All found that Flow CAN improve your temperatures but only by a margin that is not big enough to bother. Better get another radiator and lower the watertemp from the start.
Edit:
The above is only true for watercooling PCs - if you are trying to cool down steel beams or rolling mills in steel plants its a whole different story because your delta Temperatur is more like 700K not 10-15K.
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von »mattlach« (21. April 2020, 21:12)
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 2 mal editiert, zuletzt von »mattlach« (21. April 2020, 21:01)
Yea I realize that but when I see people posting up their pictures on Social Media of their Builds showing a Barrow Flow meter on a Single D5 showing 6.5lpm(390lph) I always have to have a nice Chuckle.I always question people’s flow numbers, I’m running triple D5 pumps in series and using a AQ high flow sensor and with all 3 at max only see 400lph.
Added pumps in series increase head pressure linearly, but flow rate does not increase linearly with head pressure.
This helps explain it. Each pump added to a loop results in less of a gain in flow than the pump before it, and how much depends on the system curve of the loop.
The barrow Flow meter is not worth a penny. Its gives you WAY to much values... i posted the link from igors Lab in a previous post (still german).Yea I realize that but when I see people posting up their pictures on Social Media of their Builds showing a Barrow Flow meter on a Single D5 showing 6.5lpm(390lph) I always have to have a nice Chuckle.I always question people’s flow numbers, I’m running triple D5 pumps in series and using a AQ high flow sensor and with all 3 at max only see 400lph.
Added pumps in series increase head pressure linearly, but flow rate does not increase linearly with head pressure.
This helps explain it. Each pump added to a loop results in less of a gain in flow than the pump before it, and how much depends on the system curve of the loop.
Yea I realize that but when I see people posting up their pictures on Social Media of their Builds showing a Barrow Flow meter on a Single D5 showing 6.5lpm(390lph) I always have to have a nice Chuckle.I always question people’s flow numbers, I’m running triple D5 pumps in series and using a AQ high flow sensor and with all 3 at max only see 400lph.
Added pumps in series increase head pressure linearly, but flow rate does not increase linearly with head pressure.
This helps explain it. Each pump added to a loop results in less of a gain in flow than the pump before it, and how much depends on the system curve of the loop.
Yea I realize that but when I see people posting up their pictures on Social Media of their Builds showing a Barrow Flow meter on a Single D5 showing 6.5lpm(390lph) I always have to have a nice Chuckle.I always question people’s flow numbers, I’m running triple D5 pumps in series and using a AQ high flow sensor and with all 3 at max only see 400lph.
Added pumps in series increase head pressure linearly, but flow rate does not increase linearly with head pressure.
This helps explain it. Each pump added to a loop results in less of a gain in flow than the pump before it, and how much depends on the system curve of the loop.
I've never seen this, but yes, that would make me chuckle too. Unless they are just driving a round loop of tubing with nothing in it :p
The value of calibration! :p
Diago,
As an aside, I just realized what may have been a contributing factor in our disagreement earlier.
I don't think we were talking about the same Delta T.
In retrospect I think you were calculating the temperature of the coolant before and after the block. Is that correct?
The Delta T I was talking about was the temperature difference between the coolant temperature, and the actual silicon core temperature as measured on die.
This is much too complex of a relationship (IMHO) to accurately calculate in theory, as it depends on too many unknowns. Some things we know (coefficient of heat conductance of copper, for instance) but then there are other aspects as well. How flat is the block? How flat is the top of the heatspreader of the chip? What thermal paste is being used? How thick is it in its final mount? What does the chip assembly look like underneath the heat spreader? what is the exact heat dissipation, etc. etc. etc.
I tend to think of water cooling loops from the perspective of two distinct Delta T's.
Ambient Air <---- DT1 ----> Coolant Temp <---- DT2 ----> Die temp.
DT1 depends on a combination of heat load, flow rate, radiator capacity/efficiency and fan speed.
DT2 depends almost exclusively on heat load, block efficiency and flow rate. Since I know I was running the same silicon at the same settings and voltages, I knew that the heat load was the same as before, and the block was the same as before, thus the only variable here is the flow rate, and I feel fairly confident that I can tell the difference in flow rate up based on this delta T value.
This is also why I am a proponent of high flow rates. If I can minimize DT2, I can allow my coolant temp to be higher, and thus lower my fan speeds making everything quieter. a difference of 1C can mean the difference between deafening fans and relative quiet, especially since DT1 heat transfer is more efficient as the DT increases.
In my ideal water loop, the flow rate is high enough where you hvae a perfect steady state, and cannot measure a difference in coolant temp between any two points in the loop. The coolant is passing through so fast that you hvae a complete steady state.
Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von »Diago« (23. April 2020, 09:37)
-