using a peltier to cool water?

i have been trying to lower system temps on my watercooled overclocked system and have temps around 46 idle to 54 load. i've been told for watercooled overclocked systems this is fine.

But i'm trying to get lower temps

i was thinking about getting a swifttech MCW50-T graphics card cooler and using it as a cooler. Would wiring it backwards draw heat from the water line? I was thinking of then using a HSF to too the metal (hot) side. Would this work? If it can i think i'll try it out... i mean i can always use it as a GPU cooler if it doesn't...

search around - a hundred people have wanted to try such solutions. They will not work. Or rather, are terribly, terribly inefficient. Search for the thread "$50 chiller for you guys" or something. That device is 100% more likely to help you.

i found the 50 dollar chiller. it's a neat idea, but i like stealth mods. and a hunking piece of metal like that (bigger than my case) seems un-stealthlike. Well thanks for the heads up though.

Do you know why this idea won't work, i can't seem to find any links to explain otherwise.

the water moves to fast to chill. plus you have to devise a method to get the cold into the water. It has been done, but the gains are usually negligable - swithcing to a better pump,raddy or waterblock nets bigger gains. You are much better off putting a pelt directly onto your cpu (cold plate) - and it would have to be 226watt these days. If you have other blocks, that might necessitate dedicated water loops..

oh - I see about getting the cold in. switch the sides. Nah - waste of a good swiftech! I looked at that as a vid card cooler but got the maze gpu 4-1 since you can dissemble it and use it as a regular waterblock if the pelt were to fail or you got tired of tecs. If you are looking to cool your gpu with an 80watter you can successfulyl get near 0c with jsut the tec, cold plate, and a good copper cpu fan mounted to your vid card. no need for a water loop. A 226watt for the cpu would need excellent water cooling - no question. Prolly better than yours.

Your temps do seem too high for me - you have 1/2 id tubing? what pump and rad?

Look here, it CAN be done, I'm getting so tired of people bashing the idea. There are a number of respected people that have chilled their water with tecs. So unless you have documented experiment results that indicate the idea does not work, don't bother saying it won't. So far, I've seen more success than failure.

[Edit] This is probably going to be my next project, so there is at least good documentaion on success and/or failure of the idea. I have 3 different methods I would like to try so far. Just have to wait for my next paycheck.

I did say that it could be done - but the main point is that it is much more efficient, cheaper, colder, and space friendly to tec the cpu directly and not the water. I don't see any advantage to doing it like the diagram or any of the other ways - including swiftech's several hundred dollar pelt water chiller.

I just can't see a reason to do it besides the fact that it is different - or for exparimentation purposes. If there are any arguements for the benefits, I would be glad to hear them.

The idea is to get the liquid to ambient if not slightly bellow ambient temp, this is to provide better cooling without condensation from the liquid loop. Having a tec cool the cpu is a different story, not everyone wants to go that route, at this point, I'm a little paranoid of it. Cooling the water is an indirect way of using the tec to cool the cpu, maybe when I get more comfortable with them, I'll tec the CPU and GPU. Part of the goal is to save space, if using a tubed cold plate with 2 tecs produces better cooling than a 2x120 fan heater core and takes up less space and makes less noise, great!

They will not work. Or rather, are terribly, terribly inefficient.

Click to expand...

I guess that's what set me off
In the department of energy/heat transfer, yes, this method is not efficient, but space wise, it's the best I can think of.

This thread has some useful information.

If you have automatic shut down at high temps, a tec-cooled water setup would be able to give you somewhat of a slow temperature rise if a pelt were to fail, while a pelt directly on the CPU would instantly heat it to melt down.

Also, if you barely have the room for a waterblock, or are building an external chiller (like me :-D), it's MUCH much easier to wire that all into an external box, than squeeze it into a case.

hey thanks for the ideas. The reason i like to keep everything in a case is that i lug my computer around every so often. I like having a lan-rig. Currently it's fine, the water cooling loop is all self contained inside the case and it looks cool. Since i play games a lot, i do stress the computer quite often, like priming. That's why i was wondering if temps were too high, and thinking of alternate ways to cool the system. I was thinking of larger radiators, but they just don't fit, and i don't want to upgrade to a larger case cause it would be more of a hassle to lug around. Alternate power supplies and external boxes would also bake it a hassle... Anyways, thanks for the TEC info, i'll see if it works, and if it does, i'll post pics of my system. =)

It can be done, and partially efficiently, but not with a swifty wb and an 80w tec.


Jon

__TRONIK__ said:

I did say that it could be done - but the main point is that it is much more efficient, cheaper, colder, and space friendly to tec the cpu directly and not the water. I don't see any advantage to doing it like the diagram or any of the other ways - including swiftech's several hundred dollar pelt water chiller.

I just can't see a reason to do it besides the fact that it is different - or for exparimentation purposes. If there are any arguements for the benefits, I would be glad to hear them.

Click to expand...

hmm - i have been tempted to try and devise such a system for occaisional use (benching etc.) while relying on regular water for normal use...... should be a lot cheaper to run than pelts on the blocks (which'd have to be on all the time) would be...