Understanding & Mastering Water Cooling

[neverthar]

Originally Posted by Chai

Not too sure about that, but Cascade blocks will work fine on weaker pumps, still better than, say Swiftech's offering using the same pump.

True in a way. Cascade's were designed as an in between in terms of thermal dissipation and flow restriction. Cascade's now arte considered low tech compared to modern day jet impingement and flow-through based deisgns like the Apogee GT and the Storm G4 and above. However, basis of improvements with accordance to improved head pressure and flow rates are applicable as I've said, it's an in betweens solution. Not so affected by restriction compared to Dangerden RBX but better thermal dissipation rates at that time compared to Maze 4.

[Chai]

I'm not really too keen on the latest Apogee GT. Looks like a higher restriction design on the old Apogee without much performance gain, and much more expensive. I was planning to get Apogee, but it's not available anymore.

I'm still using the trusty old EHEIM 1048...

[neverthar]

Originally Posted by Chai

I'm not really too keen on the latest Apogee GT. Looks like a higher restriction design on the old Apogee without much performance gain, and much more expensive. I was planning to get Apogee, but it's not available anymore.

I'm still using the trusty old EHEIM 1048...

It's not a high restriction design actually, it just looks like one as it uses diamond pin array which known to be an easer of flow. Similiar to the old Swiftech MCW6002.

What makes it interesting is the data FreeCableGuy from The Tech Repository obtained comparing the Apogee to the Storm G4 for Kentsfield. Here's the link to that review which in my opinion is quite indepth

http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=78

But what I'm interested is the outcome of the Swiftech challenge to everyone at CES to outdo the Apogee GT which would be hopefully out soon here

http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=83

[Chai]

Not as highly restrictive as Storm, but I'm not too sure if my 1048 can handle anymore. Hehe.

And now I just read this.

My point is that you stress tube length between pump and block, whereas it's only the total length in the entire system that matters.

Did you remount the waterblock while changing the tubing?

[neverthar]

Originally Posted by Chai

Not as highly restrictive as Storm, but I'm not too sure if my 1048 can handle anymore. Hehe.

And now I just read this.

Did you remount the waterblock while changing the tubing?

read the paragraph after the pics in post #25. It's stated already the parameters

[wiLL*lianG]

Just finish read the part 2..
So, what will covered in next episode? hehehe

BTW, neverthar.. you using distilled water for ur water cooling also?

[neverthar]

Originally Posted by wiLL*lianG

Just finish read the part 2..
So, what will covered in next episode? hehehe

BTW, neverthar.. you using distilled water for ur water cooling also?

Yes I do. Purchase it usually at Watsons. But if too lazy just use filtered water but I shorten the servicing interval to a month if I used that just to be safe

[PsYkHoTiK]

hmm which reminds me I need to top mine up...

[Chai]

I didn't know you can get it in Watsons...

[Olle P]

Originally Posted by neverthar

... we're talking head pressure loss which is proportionate to the distance of water travelled.

You're totally correct, but draw the wrong conclusion.
We're discussing pressure loss in a closed loop. Therefore it's the grand total system restriction that's the only factor (apart from the pump) that decide the flow rate.

It principally doesn't matter whether a piece of tube is positioned before or after the block. The difference it makes is what absolute pressure the water has in the block, it makes no difference to the pressure loss in the block nor does it influence the flow rate. (A reduced pressure loss before the block is countered by an increased pressure loss after the block.)

/Olle