Flowrate...

[parapapa?]

BillA -
I didn't write the stfu comment.

I don't think we disagree - the Serck is indeed "huge" as you put it. My only point this entire time has been that I think your methodology overstated the value of coolant flow. You last wrote you thought the effect was +/- 10%. I argue that the numbers that support that point are an artifact of the 1000 watts you had available. Had the heat been capped at 200 watts, the +/- 10% would have been +/- 1%.

Again, I want to repeat I think that both your article and Hoot's were first rate. Thanks for taking the time to put them together.

Garasaki -

I'm not disputing your point here, but I'm not sure your test really proved too much. Depending on how fast the water was flowing, and when you started timing, the difference could be (nearly) explained by the fact that the water took more time to flow from the bucket to the pitcher, initially.

I dinked around with my experiment until I was getting readings that were within a second of each other. The tubing was full when I started the timing so the bucket-pitcher distance was immaterial other than as a source of friction.

The last 9 readings for the three hose lengths were:

32" - 32,32,33 Seconds
68" - 38,39,40 Seconds
100" - 44,44,43 Seconds

The 68" readings showed more variability because they were the last 3 readings and I wasn't being quite as careful with them as I had been with the initial 6 readings I recorded.

 

[garasaki]

The tubing was full when I started the timing so the bucket-pitcher distance was immaterial other than as a source of friction.

Ok, that was my only question...

 

[Technonut]

This topic has been quite interesting. I have been using a LifeGard Quiet One pump for months now, and have been told a few times that it is overkill. The pump is rated at 1140 GPH at full flow, and 724 GPH at 4 feet of head through a 1" line.

I am switching radiators from the original BI to the BI Extreme, and tested the flow through the Extreme and Maze 2 with this pump. I found the results interesting....

With just the pump drawing / pumping water through 3/8" barbs it filled a gallon jug in 17 seconds. That comes out to about 211.76 GPH.

With the pump going to the BI Extreme (3/8" push-in tube fittings installed) and Maze 2, it filled the gallon jug in 50 seconds. That comes out to about 72 GPH.

I have an enclosed case bottom cooling unit with a built in 1.5 gal. reservoir. It has 3/8" push-in tube bulkhead fittings installed. I did not want to change them, so that is why I modded the BI Extreme with the 3/8" fittings.

So, 72 GPH does not seem like overkill to me now, even though the pump is rated at 1140 GPH. It is a very well built pump. Dead silent, and the wet rotor chamber is isolated from the circulating water. It has hard ceramic bearings that are water lubricated and never need oil. Very dependable pump.

I guess the greatly reduced flow rate is the reason that I have got away with not even using hose clamps on my Maze 2 barbs and original BI. Anyhow.... very interesting thread.

 

[BillA]

This post deleted by its "derogatory and insulting" author so that it will not be (so) necessary
"to defend the little guys against the tyranny of the know-it-alls."

 

[gone_fishin]

This topic has been quite interesting. I have been using a LifeGard Quiet One pump for months now, and have been told a few times that it is overkill. The pump is rated at 1140 GPH at full flow, and 724 GPH at 4 feet of head through a 1" line.

I am switching radiators from the original BI to the BI Extreme, and tested the flow through the Extreme and Maze 2 with this pump. I found the results interesting....

With just the pump drawing / pumping water through 3/8" barbs it filled a gallon jug in 17 seconds. That comes out to about 211.76 GPH.

With the pump going to the BI Extreme (3/8" push-in tube fittings installed) and Maze 2, it filled the gallon jug in 50 seconds. That comes out to about 72 GPH.

I have an enclosed case bottom cooling unit with a built in 1.5 gal. reservoir. It has 3/8" push-in tube bulkhead fittings installed. I did not want to change them, so that is why I modded the BI Extreme with the 3/8" fittings.

So, 72 GPH does not seem like overkill to me now, even though the pump is rated at 1140 GPH. It is a very well built pump. Dead silent, and the wet rotor chamber is isolated from the circulating water. It has hard ceramic bearings that are water lubricated and never need oil. Very dependable pump.

I guess the greatly reduced flow rate is the reason that I have got away with not even using hose clamps on my Maze 2 barbs and original BI. Anyhow.... very interesting thread.

Hi, your the first person I've seen using the same pump as me. If you were to switch to higher diameter barbs for the system, you would get a lot more flow rate. I tested mine with a three foot height and my block hooked up and got 540 gph, 1/2" barbs. I am going to do up another res which will allow 5/8" barbs I.D. I only use a total of a half gallon distilled water in my loop.

 

[Technonut]

Hi, your the first person I've seen using the same pump as me. If you were to switch to higher diameter barbs for the system, you would get a lot more flow rate. I tested mine with a three foot height and my block hooked up and got 540 gph, 1/2" barbs. I am going to do up another res which will allow 5/8" barbs I.D. I only use a total of a half gallon distilled water in my loop.

I have been very happy with the quality of the Quiet One pump.

Which waterblock/radiator do you use? Frankly, I was surprised at the 72 GPH flow of the pump through the Maze 2 and BI Extreme. The push-in tube fittings that I use for the reservoir bulkheads and BIX are not really that restrictive. I can look through the fittings installed over the 1/2" inlet/outlet of the BIX, and see very well straight into the radiator. In fact, I just tested the pump only going through the BIX. It filled the gallon jug in 22 seconds which is about 163.64 GPH.

I replaced the BIX with the pump only going through the Maze 2, and after testing twice, the gallon jug was filled in the same 50 seconds that it took to flow through BOTH the BIX and block. I know that I am using 3/8" fittings, but I really would LTK which waterblock that you use to get 540 GPH with the Quiet One. Also, did you test with the block alone, or both the radiator and block?

 

[GreenmanWD-40]

Re: Re: Re: Answer for Neo86

BillA

I'll reply to your comments in order
1.) I am not a fool.
2.) I'm not "trashing" threads, I'm trying to give a little help to Neo.
3.) the quote "taking a short hose not elevated will produce the same flow rate as a long hose not elevated" is not stupid, it's a fact. I repeat- flowrate equals velocity of the fluid times cross sectional area, which is a fact. Removing water volume will decrease the cooling capacity, which is a fact. Just say Neo went from 12 inches to 6 inches with half inch hose - that's .02 gallons taken away, that's a fact.
4.) I am not "slow"
5.) Last but not least you started the "trashing", now I will end it- I am educated. I lack only 3 semester hours from recieving my BS in Mechanical Engineering. So if you don't have a master's or Ph. D in Mechanical Engineering - STFU and don't reply.

Now,

BillA,
I have already passed the EIT and actually it's called the FE. Do you even have a Degree? You said you have a piece of paper. Have you ever cracked a Heat Transfer or Fluid Mechanics Textbook? Also, we are not talking about pipes. Also the sentence about my technical writing, that's the pot calling the kettle black. Guess what, I agree with garasaki, you are a jerk and a jackass. The ONLY point I was trying to make to Neo was that the decrease in volume of the water increased his temperatures, not the shortening of hoses (that is MY OPINION). Then you spoke up with your nonsense. It doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with me, you SHOULD have said, "I think you are incorrect and I don't agree" on your first reply. Then I wouldn't be writing this now.

Answer me one question, do you not agree with Q=AV?

Oh yeah, the reason I didn't say anything about wall drag is because I couldn't understand your retarded sentence fragments.


parapapa? and killersushi

Of course the water is going to take longer to transport through longer hose. I said the FLOWRATE, that’s gallons per hour, WON'T CHANGE. Get a flow meter and measure the flow rate. Just because you have a longer hose, doesn’t mean that the flow rate will change. You should get the same times if the hose was filled before timing began. As soon as the water gets all the way through the hose the flow rate will be the same for any hose.

Read what gone_fishin had to say 12 threads down.

"Hi, your the first person I've seen using the same pump as me. If you were to switch to higher diameter barbs for the system, you would get a lot more flow rate. I tested mine with a three foot height and my block hooked up and got 540 gph, 1/2" barbs. I am going to do up another res which will allow 5/8" barbs I.D. I only use a total of a half gallon distilled water in my loop."

That kind of sums up what I said was a fact, Q=AV.

 

[gone_fishin]

Technonut, I am using my own custom block. You can see it over in this thread, http://forum.oc-forums.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=83613&perpage=30&pagenumber=6

I only tested the flow with the block and pump with a three foot height. I use a heatercore for my rad. I really should test the whole loop soon because I know it's restricted some by the heatercore.

 

[GreenmanWD-40]

gone_fishin

Hey,

Great looking setup, could you post what pump, res, heat exchanger, and other specs. Very interesting setup.

 

[Technonut]

gone_fishin, Awe inspiring setup! I can see where your flow rate is coming from now. Your block is very nice!

I have an acrylic case with a custom built bottom enclosure to house my cooling gear. It has 3 compartments. The rear 1.5 gal. reservoir, middle pump compartment, and the front radiator compartment. I will post some pics as soon as I finish up my BIX installation. I really would like to move up to 1/2" fittings, but it would be a PITA to replace the bulkheads and fittings since the enclosure was custom built. From my recent findings, I will be looking into a better flowing block. Maybe something with 3/8" barbs that has a wide spiral channel.

Anyway, even at the current flow with the original BI, my temps are acceptable for watercooling. I am certain the BIX will help even more...especially with a better flowing block. EDIT: Perhaps I can talk you into building a custom high flow 3/8" Socket A version for me..

Again... Awe Inspiring work!!

 

[BillA]

This post deleted by its "derogatory and insulting" author so that it will not be (so) necessary
"to defend the little guys against the tyranny of the know-it-alls."

 

[GreenmanWD-40]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Answer for Neo86

Now,

BillA,
I have already passed the EIT and actually it's called the FE. Do you even have a Degree? You said you have a piece of paper. Have you ever cracked a Heat Transfer or Fluid Mechanics Textbook? Also, we are not talking about pipes. Also the sentence about my technical writing, that's the pot calling the kettle black. Guess what, I agree with garasaki, you are a jerk and a jackass. The ONLY point I was trying to make to Neo was that the decrease in volume of the water increased his temperatures, not the shortening of hoses (that is MY OPINION). Then you spoke up with your nonsense. It doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with me, you SHOULD have said, "I think you are incorrect and I don't agree" on your first reply. Then I wouldn't be writing this now.

Answer me one question, do you not agree with Q=AV?

Oh yeah, the reason I didn't say anything about wall drag is because I couldn't understand your retarded sentence fragments.


parapapa? and killersushi

Of course the water is going to take longer to transport through longer hose. I said the FLOWRATE, that’s gallons per hour, WON'T CHANGE. Get a flow meter and measure the flow rate. Just because you have a longer hose, doesn’t mean that the flow rate will change. You should get the same times if the hose was filled before timing began. As soon as the water gets all the way through the hose the flow rate will be the same for any hose.

Read what gone_fishin had to say 12 threads down.

"Hi, your the first person I've seen using the same pump as me. If you were to switch to higher diameter barbs for the system, you would get a lot more flow rate. I tested mine with a three foot height and my block hooked up and got 540 gph, 1/2" barbs. I am going to do up another res which will allow 5/8" barbs I.D. I only use a total of a half gallon distilled water in my loop."

That kind of sums up what I said was a fact, Q=AV.

First, garasaki great post on how much of a jerk Bill is.

BillA

At this point I think you’re a complete idiot. What are you trying to say, other than the obvious that you think I'm wrong? Do you think that the temperature increase is from the "fluid friction factor"? Do you not agree Q=AV? Remember, "The ONLY point I was trying to make to Neo was that the decrease in volume of the water increased his temperatures, not the shortening of hoses (that is MY OPINION)." Do you "think" that was wrong? Or what. State specifically where you think I am wrong.

Anyway, I am wrong in one way for sure. I didn't read all the threads first, if I would have, I wouldn't have posted in the first place. Because, I proved my self right. If you have read all the threads, you will see that Neo said he didn't bleed his system, which will indirectly prove what I have been saying - the volume of water was the cause of the temp increase.

Oh yeah, I've been in the "real world" for a good while now and work for the leading suppler of engine timing components for Chevy, Chrysler, Ford, Toyota, and Audi. So what do you drive BillA? Chances are that you are driving something I help make reliable.

 

[gone_fishin]

Re: gone_fishin

Hey,

Great looking setup, could you post what pump, res, heat exchanger, and other specs. Very interesting setup.

Thanks, here's some specs,
Pump Rainbow Aquatic Quiet One 1140gph max, 80watts
heatercore - chevy g10 van
custom made res 3" X 4" X 5" with 4 1/4" I.D. inlets, one 5/8" I.D. outlet
Custom made waterblock 1/2" ID inlet and four 1/4" ID outlets
100CFM fan suction through heatercore w/fans on custom shroud
Total water volume in loop is half a gallon distilled water

Loop is: pump-1' of 1/2" ID Tygon r1000-rad-16" of 1/2" ID tygon r1000-block-4 16" lengths of 3/8" ID Tygon r1000-res-10" of 5/8" ID vinyl tubing-pump

I have optimized all I can think of by using distilled water, lapping to 1000 grit finnish on my block, fans and shroud on heatercore, and 5/8" ID suction to pump from res. I am recording consistant rise in cpu temp of 3C between idle and load while overclocked.

 

[parapapa?]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Answer for Neo86

Of course the water is going to take longer to transport through longer hose. I said the FLOWRATE, that’s gallons per hour, WON'T CHANGE. Get a flow meter and measure the flow rate. Just because you have a longer hose, doesn’t mean that the flow rate will change. You should get the same times if the hose was filled before timing began.

The hose was full when I started timing. Full hose - different times. The only effect the tube length introduced was due to friction.

What several people on this forum are trying to tell you is your formula is incomplete - it's a first approximation. It ignores the effect of friction over the length of the pipe. No one on this forum will tell you that pressure and cross section don't matter - it's just not the whole story is all.

Contrary to several of your posts, tubing length does affect flow rate.

Gone-Fishin -
Nice looking rig. Perhaps you'd be willing to run a test? I'd be interested in seeing if once you get above 1 gpm, if your temps don't flatten out. You could come at that point from where you are by slowly cutting down the coolant flow until you see a temperature rise. When you see the temp rise, measure how much water is actually flowing through your rig by timing how long it takes to fill a gallon jug.

BTW, where did you find the heater core?

 

[vandersl]

GreenmanWD-40, you are wrong, though after having words with BillA, it may take some convincing to make you believe it.

I think what you are trying to say is that regardless of the hose length the flow rate at any point in the hose is the same. That is, if I measure the flow rate at point A or point B, I will get the same result. This is correct, as long as the hose is not leaking.

What BillA is saying is that if you take two hoses of the same diameter and construction, one 3ft long and one 10ft long, the flow rate through the 3ft hose will be higher than the flow rate through the 10ft hose. The reason for this is that the 10ft hose, due to friction, will have a higher resistance to flow than the 3ft hose. They both have the same resistance [bold]per foot[/bold], just one is longer.

To argue this point is futile - you can be proven wrong both experimentally and theoretically. Of course, it is your decision to continue to argue or not.

As for the claim of a reduction in water volume being responsible for an increase in temps - while I haven't read back the whole way, I can pretty confidently say this is also wrong. A higher water volume will only slow the temperature rise of the coolant. At steady state the coolant temperature is dependent on the efficiency of the cooling system only - not how much water is in it.

If I take both of your points together, I could make a superior cooling system by using 100ft of hose in my system. The increase in fluid volume will keep temps down, and the increase in hose length won't impact flow rate at all. Sadly, neither of thse is true.

I won't go so far as BillA and call you a fool for these opinions. But I will say that you really should investigate these matters further before voicing a strong opinion on them, or you will invite such comments in the future.

Peace.

 

[BillA]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Answer for Neo86

This post deleted by its "derogatory and insulting" author so that it will not be (so) necessary
"to defend the little guys against the tyranny of the know-it-alls."

 

[Thelemac]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Answer for Neo86

Anyway, I am wrong in one way for sure. I didn't read all the threads first, if I would have, I wouldn't have posted in the first place. Because, I proved my self right. If you have read all the threads, you will see that Neo said he didn't bleed his system, which will indirectly prove what I have been saying - the volume of water was the cause of the temp increase.

Having air in your systems does, surely, decrease the amount of water in it. But..that has nothing to do with the increase in temps. Ok, there might possibly be some correlation between the amount of water and the temps, but in the long run it isn't a noticealbe difference. What having air bubbles really does in introduce another medium that is a very large degree less efficient at transfering heat than water is. It gives your cpu cooling more of a water/air hybrid cooling.

This is obviously not nearly as good, otherwise we wouldn't be going from air to water and getting better temps. We would be going from water to air for that effect. Since using water increases the efficiency of heat transfer over that of air, we don't want air.

It was the air that increased the temps, not any kind of effect it had on the water.

 

[gone_fishin]

In the interest of a few here and my curiosity I ran a controlled test on my system. First I must point out that I only have half a gallon of water in my loop and it appears to be very responsive to variable changes. Here is a chart with readings taken at two minute intervals. I am using an acurite probe in the resevoir to take water temps and room temps, winbond hardware doctor which came with my mobo to take cpu temps.
On to the chart. At 9:50 time is the stable idle temp with 50cfm of air going through the rad shroud with three fans. At 10:08 I doubled the air flow through the rad to 100cfm by turning on the 50cfm fan on the shroud. At the end I pinched the line (not very accurate I know) and observed a very slow flow rate and an immediate jump in cpu temps by .5 degrees C which steadily climbed to 44C and stayed there. I did this three times and the results are repeatable. The flow rate measured through my block and pump at 3' height is 540gph (9gpm). I did not measure the whole system flow yet but am confident it is at least 4.5gpm if not more.

 

[garasaki]

The reason for this is that the 10ft hose, due to friction, will have a higher resistance to flow than the 3ft hose.

So, is the increased friction the sole reason for the decrease in flow rate??

It seems to me that such a great reduction in flow rate would be the result of more factors, but as BillA has so gracefully pointed out, I'm a simple minded college student who clearly does not have a full understanding of engineering concepts, or the english language, for that matter. Perhaps Greenman is having a similar hang up...it seems like it would take more then friction to account for a dramatic drop in flow rates. But if our grumpy guru BillA says it is so, it must be!

 

[gone_fishin]

So, is the increased friction the sole reason for the decrease in flow rate??

It seems to me that such a great reduction in flow rate would be the result of more factors, but as BillA has so gracefully pointed out, I'm a simple minded college student who clearly does not have a full understanding of engineering concepts, or the english language, for that matter. Perhaps Greenman is having a similar hang up...it seems like it would take more then friction to account for a dramatic drop in flow rates. But if our grumpy guru BillA says it is so, it must be!

There seems to be another factor here but maybe I'm wrong. The length of tubing introduces more water volume which the pump is pushing/pulling which means the pump is pushing a heavier weight with longer tubes which means more work is being done with extended tube length. More water volume by means of a resevoir does not introduce this extra work load because the entire mass of the water in the res is not being pushed/pulled at once by the pump. If the total rise in a system is one foot and it goes 90 dgrees for a length of one foot will it have less strain on the pump than if it rose the one foot gradually over ten feet of hose? (This is along with the added friction of more hose)