Overclock.net › Forums › Cooling › Water Cooling › Serial VS Parallel 9.6LPM
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# Serial VS Parallel 9.6LPM - Page 15

Quote:
Originally Posted by toolmaker03Â

wow, yea well I am building it, and that takes time, so deal with it.

I am still very concerned with the delta-t numbers smeared all over the OP. I am convinced you did not let the water reach an equilibrium temperature (where your temps stop increasing), and you didn't track the wattage you were putting into the system. All I see in the OP is some bench tests, witch are absolutely not full system constant stress tests. If that is the case, you really can't trust any of the conclusions you came up with.

An example of what might have happened is that your original flow rate might have taken x minutes to reach equilibrium. Now, after you increased the flow rate, it may take your system 2x minutes to reach equilibrium. But, since you didn't verify you were really reaching your systems max temp, you concluded that you reached a lower delta-t in the same time frame. Which is not how delta-t measurements are compared.

If you havent yet, get a couple CPU and GPU stress programs that really put your system under load, not just 3DMark, and run them for 15-30min and then get some decent readings. I use OCCT for stressing my GPUs and Realbench to stress my CPU at the same time. I take a reading at the wall of my Watt consumption and calculate the PSU load.
This is just getting beyond belief.

http://www.brighthubengineering.com/hydraulics-civil-engineering/80946-the-continuity-equation-and-common-fluid-flow-rate-parameters/

Example Calculations
Problem Statement #1: Water flow through a 4 inch diameter pipe approaching a reducing fitting with pipe flow sketch

an average velocity of 5 ft/sec. The fitting reduces to a 3 inch diameter pipe. i) What is the volumetric flow rate through this pipe? and ii) What is the average velocity of the water in the 3 inch diameter pipe? See the sketch at the right.

Solution: i) Conversion of linear velocity to volumetric flow rate:

Q = VA = V(Ï€D2/4) = (5 ft/sec)[Ï€(4/12)2/4)ft], or Q = 0.4363 ft3/sec

ii) The volumetric flow rate through the 3" pipe must be the same, so:

(V3)[Ï€(3/12)2]/4 = 0.436 ft3/sec. Solving for V3 gives: V3 = 8.88 ft/sec

There is no such thing as a "system flow velocity", only system flow rates. Its that simple.

On the F550 meter if the fitting sizes and tube are determining the scale then how can there possibly be 5 fitting sizes and 8 different flow ranges?
Because the internal size of the flow meter changes between the different scales, not just the fitting and tube size.
There are different fitting sizes used simply because any system that uses 1/4 Inch pipe is certainly never going to have a 75LPM flow rate so that wouldn't make practical sense. Likewise a 1 inch system is unlikely to have a 1 or 4LPM flow rate or it wouldn't need 1 inch tube.
Its just logical that larger tube systems have higher flow rates and need higher range meters. Thats' why low range meters have small fittings and very high range meters have large fittings.

If the OP can't logically follow simple ideas like these and yet supposedly "works on million dollar machines" then I fear for the owner of these mythical machines. Unless its a program for the developmentally impaired that is heavily supervised because this guy is a genuine twit.

If flow meters were effected like he thinks how would you demonstrate that? You need to show the flow rate is identical between the test setups. So, you need two flow meters. Do you use the same size tube on both meters? ... That would effect both of them so that wouldn't work.
The only forseeable way is to have one meter always use the same size tube so it isn't corrupted while the tube on the other meter is changed between setups. But, then which size of tube is determining the "system flow velocity" and why doesn't that "system velocity" still effect both meters.
Its just nonsense.

The first post stuff is equally scatterbrained as the rest of this thread. The real differences between parallel and serial loops has been tested and retested and never did any decent testing show anything like the differences being claimed here, let alone the leaps made in the conclusions.
Edited by Jakusonfire - 2/1/16 at 2:17am
 Kusanagi (21 items)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570K Asus Sabertooth Z77 EVGA GTX 780 SC Corsair Vengeance Pro CMY16GX3M2A2133C11 16GB
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB X2 EK Supremacy Aqua Computer Aquaero 6 Pro Aqua Computer D5 USB
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Aquacomputer MPS 400 flow meter EK-CoolStream PE 360 EK-Coolstream PE 240 Noiseblocker Eloop B12-PS
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
EK Vardar F2 EK-FC Titan Acetal & Nickel EK-RAM Monarch X4 Clean CSQ - Acetal+Nickel EK-D5 X-RES 140 CSQ
OSMonitorMonitorPower
Win 8.1 Pro 64 bit Samsung S27A750d LG E2290V-SN Silverstone Strider Plus 850W ST85F-P
Case
Corsair Obsidian 750D
 Kusanagi (21 items)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570K Asus Sabertooth Z77 EVGA GTX 780 SC Corsair Vengeance Pro CMY16GX3M2A2133C11 16GB
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB X2 EK Supremacy Aqua Computer Aquaero 6 Pro Aqua Computer D5 USB
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Aquacomputer MPS 400 flow meter EK-CoolStream PE 360 EK-Coolstream PE 240 Noiseblocker Eloop B12-PS
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
EK Vardar F2 EK-FC Titan Acetal & Nickel EK-RAM Monarch X4 Clean CSQ - Acetal+Nickel EK-D5 X-RES 140 CSQ
OSMonitorMonitorPower
Win 8.1 Pro 64 bit Samsung S27A750d LG E2290V-SN Silverstone Strider Plus 850W ST85F-P
Case
Corsair Obsidian 750D
Quote:
Originally Posted by kl6mk6Â

I am still very concerned with the delta-t numbers smeared all over the OP. I am convinced you did not let the water reach an equilibrium temperature (where your temps stop increasing), and you didn't track the wattage you were putting into the system. All I see in the OP is some bench tests, witch are absolutely not full system constant stress tests. If that is the case, you really can't trust any of the conclusions you came up with.

An example of what might have happened is that your original flow rate might have taken x minutes to reach equilibrium. Now, after you increased the flow rate, it may take your system 2x minutes to reach equilibrium. But, since you didn't verify you were really reaching your systems max temp, you concluded that you reached a lower delta-t in the same time frame. Which is not how delta-t measurements are compared.

If you havent yet, get a couple CPU and GPU stress programs that really put your system under load, not just 3DMark, and run them for 15-30min and then get some decent readings. I use OCCT for stressing my GPUs and Realbench to stress my CPU at the same time. I take a reading at the wall of my Watt consumption and calculate the PSU load.

No man its much worse than that . Not only is what you are saying possible, his tests were done not at different times of the day but DIFFERENT MONTHS!, With different Setups he changed major aspects of the rig and loop between those benches. The entire OP is hogwash, He changed major aspects and then wants the numbers to correlate.
 ~Shadow~ V3.0 (20 items) Night Hawk (12 items)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 6960x Rampage V Extreme Black Edition Undecided x3 Undecided
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Undecided Undecided EK Sumprecey EVO EK Sumprecey EVO
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Undecided Undecided Windows 10 Undecided
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Black Widow Wltimate  EVGA G2 1600w Case Labs STH10 Razer Deathadder (2013)(Modded with Blue LEDs)
Razer Goliath  Razer Electra, Corsair Vengeance 2000, Kingston... EK Vardars 140mm razer nostromos
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5820k Evga Micro 2 X99 EVGA Superclocked + 980ti Gskill Ripjaws V
CoolingCoolingOSPower
Up in the AIR Up in the air still.  Windows 10 XFX 850 W pro.
Case
Hex Gear R40
 ~Shadow~ V3.0 (20 items) Night Hawk (12 items)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 6960x Rampage V Extreme Black Edition Undecided x3 Undecided
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Undecided Undecided EK Sumprecey EVO EK Sumprecey EVO
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Undecided Undecided Windows 10 Undecided
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Black Widow Wltimate  EVGA G2 1600w Case Labs STH10 Razer Deathadder (2013)(Modded with Blue LEDs)
Razer Goliath  Razer Electra, Corsair Vengeance 2000, Kingston... EK Vardars 140mm razer nostromos
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5820k Evga Micro 2 X99 EVGA Superclocked + 980ti Gskill Ripjaws V
CoolingCoolingOSPower
Up in the AIR Up in the air still.  Windows 10 XFX 850 W pro.
Case
Hex Gear R40
Quote:
Originally Posted by kl6mk6Â

I am still very concerned with the delta-t numbers smeared all over the OP. I am convinced you did not let the water reach an equilibrium temperature (where your temps stop increasing), and you didn't track the wattage you were putting into the system. All I see in the OP is some bench tests, witch are absolutely not full system constant stress tests. If that is the case, you really can't trust any of the conclusions you came up with.

An example of what might have happened is that your original flow rate might have taken x minutes to reach equilibrium. Now, after you increased the flow rate, it may take your system 2x minutes to reach equilibrium. But, since you didn't verify you were really reaching your systems max temp, you concluded that you reached a lower delta-t in the same time frame. Which is not how delta-t measurements are compared.

If you havent yet, get a couple CPU and GPU stress programs that really put your system under load, not just 3DMark, and run them for 15-30min and then get some decent readings. I use OCCT for stressing my GPUs and Realbench to stress my CPU at the same time. I take a reading at the wall of my Watt consumption and calculate the PSU load.

no I did not do any of this, all I did was run the 3Dmark test all 4 parts of it, and that takes at least 30min to run through, I did run it several times, at least 3 times for each setup, that is at least 90min of stressing the rig, but not what you are asking for, and I can understand the issue your seeing, the system gets a chance to cool down in between each 3Dmark test, but the conditions where the same for each setup in that respect, but I am sure there are better ways of doing it, with my chilled water system I will use the method you have suggested for stress testing the system, and we can go over the results of those together. to ensure a more precise determination of it's capabilities.
 parallel preformance (13 items) Serial VS Parallel (29 photos) TEC Power (21 items)
 parallel preformance (13 items) Serial VS Parallel (29 photos) TEC Power (21 items)
Quote:
Originally Posted by toolmaker03Â

no I did not do any of this, all I did was run the 3Dmark test all 4 parts of it, and that takes at least 30min to run through, I did run it several times, at least 3 times for each setup, that is at least 90min of stressing the rig, but not what you are asking for, and I can understand the issue your seeing, the system gets a chance to cool down in between each 3Dmark test, but the conditions where the same for each setup in that respect, but I am sure there are better ways of doing it, with my chilled water system I will use the method you have suggested for stress testing the system, and we can go over the results of those together. to ensure a more precise determination of it's capabilities.

Wait WHAT!, As you have not made this confusing enough already now you want to do new tests and throw in a Chilled water system into the Results!

MIND BLOWN!

I really need to unsub this thread but its just pure comedy.

OP I am unsubbing Please tag me when you have some till then I am
Edited by Cyber Locc - 2/1/16 at 8:05am
 ~Shadow~ V3.0 (20 items) Night Hawk (12 items)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 6960x Rampage V Extreme Black Edition Undecided x3 Undecided
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Undecided Undecided EK Sumprecey EVO EK Sumprecey EVO
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Undecided Undecided Windows 10 Undecided
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Black Widow Wltimate  EVGA G2 1600w Case Labs STH10 Razer Deathadder (2013)(Modded with Blue LEDs)
Razer Goliath  Razer Electra, Corsair Vengeance 2000, Kingston... EK Vardars 140mm razer nostromos
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5820k Evga Micro 2 X99 EVGA Superclocked + 980ti Gskill Ripjaws V
CoolingCoolingOSPower
Up in the AIR Up in the air still.  Windows 10 XFX 850 W pro.
Case
Hex Gear R40
 ~Shadow~ V3.0 (20 items) Night Hawk (12 items)
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 6960x Rampage V Extreme Black Edition Undecided x3 Undecided
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Undecided Undecided EK Sumprecey EVO EK Sumprecey EVO
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Undecided Undecided Windows 10 Undecided
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Black Widow Wltimate  EVGA G2 1600w Case Labs STH10 Razer Deathadder (2013)(Modded with Blue LEDs)
Razer Goliath  Razer Electra, Corsair Vengeance 2000, Kingston... EK Vardars 140mm razer nostromos
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 5820k Evga Micro 2 X99 EVGA Superclocked + 980ti Gskill Ripjaws V
CoolingCoolingOSPower
Up in the AIR Up in the air still.  Windows 10 XFX 850 W pro.
Case
Hex Gear R40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyber LoccÂ

Wait WHAT!, As you have not made this confusing enough already now you want to do new tests and throw in a Chilled water system into the Results!

MIND BLOWN!

I really need to unsub this thread but its just pure comedy.

OP I am unsubbing Please tag me when you have some till then I am

http://www.overclock.net/t/1584867/tec-vacuum-chamber-build-log

 parallel preformance (13 items) Serial VS Parallel (29 photos) TEC Power (21 items)
 parallel preformance (13 items) Serial VS Parallel (29 photos) TEC Power (21 items)
Quote:
Originally Posted by toolmaker03Â

no I did not do any of this, all I did was run the 3Dmark test all 4 parts of it, and that takes at least 30min to run through, I did run it several times, at least 3 times for each setup, that is at least 90min of stressing the rig, but not what you are asking for, and I can understand the issue your seeing, the system gets a chance to cool down in between each 3Dmark test, but the conditions where the same for each setup in that respect, but I am sure there are better ways of doing it, with my chilled water system I will use the method you have suggested for stress testing the system, and we can go over the results of those together. to ensure a more precise determination of it's capabilities.

Thank you for responding with your methodology. You are absolutely correct in that the cool down between bench tests will corrupt any delta-t data you collect. This explanation really should be in the OP. It is very misinformative to tell people you decreased the delta-t a specific amount when that number is not a correct representation of standard measuring. Will increased flow rates reduce your delta-t numbers, yes. will they halve them, not likely. The best way to do that is to increase radiator volume or increase the amount of cool air on the rads.

I'm not trying to drag this thread across the fire. I just have some problems with your conclusions. I don't want to see people invest money in reorganizing their loops based on minor misinformation.
well this was a restrictive system as a serial loop, it runs better as a parallel loop, that is fact, and I do have screen shoots of lot of my games that show the system running hotter and getting cooler as I improved the system configuration over the years, so for me it helped the system maintain consistently lower load temps while gaming, and that is what I use it for, as I have stated this was not done to prove anything, it was done to give others the knowledge I gained through 3 years of trying every configuration of the hardware I could think of to improve system performance. this configuration is the end result of that understanding, and we are only talking about \$168 for me convert this system from a serial configuration to a parallel configuration.
 parallel preformance (13 items) Serial VS Parallel (29 photos) TEC Power (21 items)
 parallel preformance (13 items) Serial VS Parallel (29 photos) TEC Power (21 items)
OP, I will not claim you are incorrect. I will however suggest you do an extremely well documented experiment, that is repeatable by the scientific community at large as it will disprove fundamental laws of physics.

We are talking Nobel Prize level stuff here.
Hes my theory with increaced flow rates of water at an extreme.

when waterflow is at an extreme
The computer will be abled to be cooled and have the water kept at room tempertuares even when overclocked hard

More flow rate will give better heat transfer of cpu to waterblock.
At a certain poin't increacing flow rate further will have no affect on heat trasnfer of cpu to waterblock.

At an extreme, to get even better heat trasnsfer a more flat surface is needed and a more coundutive material is reqired
given that we do not increace surface area of cpu and waterblock
Edited by Iwamotto Tetsuz - 2/1/16 at 3:01pm
 Silent Devil 240 3X11X (924 photos)
 Silent Devil 240 3X11X (924 photos)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Return Home
Back to Forum: Water Cooling
• Serial VS Parallel 9.6LPM
Overclock.net › Forums › Cooling › Water Cooling › Serial VS Parallel 9.6LPM