- Joined
- Dec 30, 2000
- Location
- New Jersey
edit- I put in a different pic that I think better shows what I was thinking
The top and bottom center barbs are the inlets, the barbs on the far left and right are the outlets
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Cathar, what do you think of this?
- Thread starter JML
- Start date
edit- I put in a different pic that I think better shows what I was thinking
The top and bottom center barbs are the inlets, the barbs on the far left and right are the outlets
umm, i'm not cathar, but I'm gonna put in my $0.02 anyway. I like it. It looks a lot like my "double barrel" block cross-bred with Cathar's micro channel block. By putting 2 inlets and 2 exits on there, you've almost ensured that it will utilize all of the fins. I've got a very similar design on the drawing board, so obviously I like the idea. Good luck milling it. It might take a while. make sure you let us know how it works.
OP
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2000
- Location
- New Jersey
- Thread Starter
- #3
Anyone can reply of course! I'm glad you like you the design. 
Yes, it was inspired by Cathar's design. I don't have the necessary tools to mill a block like this, I would need to contact a place to do it for me.
What kind of place would I be looking for to do something like this?
BTW- I would be interested to see the similar design your working on
Yes, it was inspired by Cathar's design. I don't have the necessary tools to mill a block like this, I would need to contact a place to do it for me.
What kind of place would I be looking for to do something like this?
BTW- I would be interested to see the similar design your working on
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2002
- Location
- Winnipeg
By having 2 inlets, the velocity of the water will be too slow. Cathar's block does the exact opposite. He reduces the inlet to increase velocity while using a slot shape to cover all the fins. The high velocity reduces the boundary layer, and so improves heat transfer at the hottest point in the block. At least that's how I see it.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2002
- Location
- St. Paul - Minnesota
I was thinking. Cathers block is expensive because of the 1mm bit milling. BUT, wouldn't using a dremel work for a ghetto cather block. I mean, use the cutting wheel to cut the micro-channels. Just go back and forth, and it will slowly start cutting a grove into the copper. This would be a lot cheaper than having someone mill it for you, and you could probably get the fins more dense.
sure the dremel would cut them, but how would you be able to maintain 1mm base?
heres some food for thought, take a look at how close those are, then take a look at the barbs, would you, first, be able to get the barbs in? second, get the hoses on the barbs?
heres some food for thought
, take a look at how close those are, then take a look at the barbs, would you, first, be able to get the barbs in? second, get the hoses on the barbs?
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2002
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
Freeloader has the most immediate answer.
The other issue I see here is "barb clutter". You want at the very least 20mm from barb centre to barb centre to be able to fit tubing and clamping. While your diagram gives no real indication of dimensions I can't see how one would even be able to screw the barbs into it with a spanner.
Easily fixed by changing the dimensions though.
I still think it would be better to just try to have a wider channel and a wider nozzle, although this seriously cuts into CPU cooling performance.
If you're after cooling a peltier or some such which it looks like that's what you're trying to do here with this design, it's basically better (and far easier) to just go with a side to side format with a single inlet/outlet.
The other issue I see here is "barb clutter". You want at the very least 20mm from barb centre to barb centre to be able to fit tubing and clamping. While your diagram gives no real indication of dimensions I can't see how one would even be able to screw the barbs into it with a spanner.
Easily fixed by changing the dimensions though.
I still think it would be better to just try to have a wider channel and a wider nozzle, although this seriously cuts into CPU cooling performance.
If you're after cooling a peltier or some such which it looks like that's what you're trying to do here with this design, it's basically better (and far easier) to just go with a side to side format with a single inlet/outlet.
