• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Der8auer Fusion 3.1 CPU Pot - Preliminary Testing and Feedback (raw)

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

I.M.O.G.

Glorious Leader
Joined
Nov 12, 2002
Location
Rootstown, OH
I'm sharing the raw, unparsed data I've collected so far. I'd like to seek your feedback. Feedback can be:

- anything this data makes you think
- any questions it may raise in your mind
- additional situations you'd like to see tested
- suggestions
- criticism

Please note that before this is written up I'll make pretty graphs and present it nicely - this is raw prior to any editing, in the interest of ensuring I cover the right bases and gather whatever data any of you may consider relevant.

Check it out, and reply if you like.

Some of the data in this first post will need to be captured again, due to recalibration of the thermometer.

This is the initial control test, pot mounted, probe mounted to copper hot plate, heat load turned off - this reflects idle temperature and is a relatively consistent 14C across the sample range which was about 30 seconds:


This was my initial test. No heat load still, but going from idle down to -100C. This reflects how temperature responds at the probe, with LN2 applied to the pot. In about 6 minutes and 40 seconds, the probe went from 15C to -100C with consistent pouring to keep it near full:


My next test had a data gathering error - the Tenma 72-7712 software program which creates an excel spreadsheet and a graph, sometimes crashes. It crashed, and no data was gathered. This test was with a heat load applied, bringing the pot from 15C down to full pot, wherever that ended up on the temp gauge. This was abandoned before full pot was reached, due to the software error.

My next test was pulling the pot temperature down to -115C, then beginning to collect data, until full pot was reached:


After full pot was reached, I recalibrated the probe to -195.5C when maintaining full pot with no heat load - this doesn't matter, except all of these tests will be performed again, because I recalibrated the probe again after testing (based on dipping the probe directly into LN2, and setting the probe to read just below -195.5C). The beginning of this graph reflects a full pot with no heat load and temps consistently at ~-195C. When temps begin to rise, that reflects powering the heat load on, with consistent pouring to maintain full pot without overflow. When the graph levels out again, that reflects equilibrium - heat load fully powered, pot maintained at full without overflow. It held the probe to -178C in this state. Then I stopped maintaining the pot - when temps began to rise reflects when all LN2 was boiled off and was no longer audible. Even with barely any LN2 left in the pot, the temp probe remained stable at that -178C equilibrium point until the LN2 was gone.


This test reflects attempting to maintain a temperature of -115C with a heat load applied, with beginning recording when the probe hit -120C from a small splash of LN2 just prior to recording. From 0 minutes to 1.5 minutes, the temp was swinging high and low as I got control of the pot. From minute 2 to minute 6, approximately 4 minutes, I maintained temps to the best of my ability - constant maintenance with absolute concentration - results were no warmer than -113c or colder than -119C during this period. Realistically, to control temps to this degree I would have needed someone else to run the bench while I maintained the pot, and the heat load would have needed to remain constant as it was throughout this entire test. After the 6 minute mark of the test, I slammed the pot to see how it would respond. This test also represents a fully frosted pot under real benching conditions (the pot has been cold, may have warmed up a bit, then frosted again - this tends to affect how the pot responds to LN2):

 
More results will be posted as I gather them. This is it for today though.

Next I will rerun all of the above tests on the Fusion 3.1, re-attempt the test I noted which had a data collection error, and add in anything you guys suggest.

xsuperbgx - if you see this, please let me know the technical information on the tester you provided. It is working great, thank you SO much. All I know, or think I know, is that it plugs in and creates something like a 300W heat load. If you could clarify about how much load it generates, and how it achieves that, I would appreciate it (not sure what you used to generate heat, components, etc)
 
Last edited:
Here's a shortened summary of the tests I'm attempting. What else should I try?


Test number - Timeframe, heatload?, data type

Test 1 - 30 seconds, no heat load, establish room temp

Test 2 - Indefinite, no heat load, time it takes from ambient to reach -100C

Test 3 - Indefinite, full heat load, time it takes from 30C to hit coldest temp possible

Test 4 - Indefinite, no heat to full heat, full pot from start to finish to demonstrate the equilibrium temperature before/cafter load is applied and observe how the pot responds when LN2 runs out

Test 5 - 10-15 minutes, full heat load, maintain -115C to observe ability to maintain temperature, then slam pot with LN2 to observe responsiveness
 
I would say that the F1EE is ideal for holding a given temperature (not full pot, mind you) with low through medium-high heat CPUs.

The Fusion 3.1 looks like it will respond faster to small pours than the F1EE, which on one hand means you see the effects more immediately, but on the other hand will make things more difficult with a low heat load.
The genius of Vince's design is that a small pour into a F1EE has low surface area, only one of the vertical tubes. A larger pour gets more tubes and more surface area.
Thus not only does pour size set how far the pot will go it also sets how fast the pot will go.
A more open pot like the fusion you still gain surface area with a larger pour, but linearly rather than the F1EE style sharp ramp up.

The raptor looks to have less mass and more surface area, it strikes me that it would be better able to cope with extremely high heat CPUs (remember the Gulftowns? They were hitting >400w. That's where the Gemini with its Rocket Base came in, the F1EE lacks the surface area for sustained golftown, you had to pour a ton of LN2 in to maintain temp and when the bench ends it goes cold and CBs), but take more work to maintain a temperature.

I like the graphs, I'm looking forward to seeing more!
 
xsuperbgx - if you see this, please let me know the technical information on the tester you provided. It is working great, thank you SO much. All I know, or think I know, is that it plugs in and creates something like a 300W heat load. If you could clarify about how much load it generates, and how it achieves that, I would appreciate it (not sure what you used to generate heat, components, etc)

I didn't see this thread until now. The heater is a 300W cartridge heater inserted into the copper block (with copious amount of ceramique added for insertion lube). I don't know the exact specs. I don't recall the exact model number. It was an ebay purchase and don't know that I documented the info anywhere about it. http://www.watlow.com/downloads/en/brochures/STL-FR-0311.pdf
 
You might be able to plug it into your kill-a-watt and confirm the wattage or to document that for your write-up.
 
Team info:
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7505942#post7505942

Here's todays tests, everything repeated for Der8auer's Fusion 3.1 CPU pot, probe calibrated to temperature of LN2:

Test 1 - 30 samples room temp:


Test 2 - no heatload, room temp to full pot:


Test 3 - heatload, room temp to -40C:


Test 4 - no heatload to heatload, full pot temp hold test:


Test 5 - heatload, hold -115C then slam pot:


Test 6 - heatload, -25C to full pot frosted:

 
very cool testing methods, I definitely couldn't think of any better way to regulate it.

So it looks like even full pot the pot raises about 20C (test 4) under load?
 
Yup, more or less. The probe is actually reading from a hole in the copper top of the heat loader, so it just isn't the temp of the base of the pot being read - its the temp of the top of the heat loader that raises by about 20C in test 4.

I'm reading temperatures here, because the depth and size of the probe holes in the units being tested are different. This way isn't perfect either, but its consistent for both samples.

All the tests went really well tonight, except I wasn't as satisfied with test 3. That was intended to be a room temp to full pot test under a heatload, however when it took over 10 minutes to get to -40C I decided to use that sample instead of having a full spectrum... I'm aiming to get all testing done in under 150L (A bit over $100 of LN2+fuel to get it), and I was concerned with spending another 20 additional minutes on one test to get to full pot here.

So instead, I'm doing room temp to -40C heatload test, then a -25C frosted to full pot heatload test. That should still give a good comparison between pots, and it might save me some LN2 (and about an hour or two of testing).
 
How different is temperature show by probe on pot vs. probe temp from copper block? That could be an interesting way to check thermal paste too...
 
I don't have 2 identical probes to test with. The probe that came with der8auer's pots is a higher quality one, with a plastic style coating on the wire... The other probes I have are lower quality ones, with a fabric style coating on the wire. My probes bottom out around -170C even when dipped in LN2. Der8auer's reads all the way to -196C.

I've bought new probes in the past in hopes of getting one that reads all the way, however I haven't had any luck and I'm not sure hich brand to buy, so I haven't tried getting more.

I would like to see that number as well though, and its a good suggestion.

My probes look more like this:
http://www.amazon.com/Extech-TP870-...372298761&sr=1-3&keywords=k+type+thermocouple

His probe looks more like this:
http://www.amazon.com/Milwaukee-49-...372298761&sr=1-6&keywords=k+type+thermocouple
 
Is it shown as a k type? I think there are J-type(maybe?) that are supposed to be more accurate at low temps.
 
No, all probes I have are K type, including the one that came from Der8auer. That one has a marking on the back of the plug that says 8200, a +/- on the other side, it has the brown plastic covering on the wire., and the only other identifying quality is the plastic flexible part where the wire connects to the plug to prevent breaks from bending stress.

The only other similar one I could find was the Milwaukee I linked above, however there is a slight difference in the +/- markings I could find in pictures... I went ahead and popped $30 for the Fluke K type and hopefully it will read all the way:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00011Q5PW/
 
Ya, I didn't think of that because of shipping and when I would receive it. The fluke/amazon route will have it here by the weekend - I'm a prime subscriber. But for $17, I think his guarantee that it reads all the way to LN2 temps makes it a really good deal. The other probes I have are from Grainger.
 
I have one probe (the one in my F1EE) which reads down to -200 and below. That one has the plastic wire covering, and I bought it on ebay for like $5 (go figure). The probe I bought on amazon with a cloth covering only reads to -170 or so, like yours. That one is in my Gpu pot.
 
Back