Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (
More info?)
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:20:46 -0800, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd
L. Davidson) wrote:
>kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:18:01 -0800, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd
>>L. Davidson) wrote:
>>
>>>"stormrider" <oceanwind42@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>What do you think about the pump stopping, though.
>>>>First it will fry the components.
>>>
>>>If there are components that will fry with no flow, then a flow
>>>meter of some kind that will positively indicate that flow is
>>>below a certain amount, and a mechanism to shutdown the system,
>>>are essential for unattended operation.
>>
>>No, again the best solution is to actively monitor the
>>actual part(s) in jeopardy.
>
>All of them?
How many parts do you expect to be water-cooled? It's
usually not but a handful if more than 2. Plus, once one
has a single one actively monitored, it is not such an issue
using same monitoring technology for another.
>
>>This not being a
>>enterprise-class, nor enterprise budget system (as far as we
>>know) there will typically not be an enterprise class budget
>>for precision flow metering and feedback. It is additional
>>complexity that would be implemented while unproven at great
>>cost and no certain benefit over already proven solutions
>>for a PC.
>
>Monitoring coolant flow in one location is an "enterprise-class"
>item, while monitoring every part that is heat sensitive is a
>low budget option?
Yes. You are proposing a "from scrach" solution that will
require more expensive parts, engineering to construct and
testing to validate. Show us a ready-to-use affordable,
small, suitable, etc, solution. Even a good theory on how
to do something must be weighted against the actual
implementation burden.
>
>>In other words, the same essential mechanism, actual
>>component temp monitoring, is monitoring the only parameter
>>that really matters. Water does not get damaged if IT stops
>>flowing, we only care about the effect and can measure that
>>effect quite a bit less expensively and just as reliably,
>>and at greater precision unless there is an extreme budget
>>and tons of testing and refinements. That's simply not cost
>>or time effective even if it did work as well.
>
>You don't seem to have just a whole lot of experience with this
>kind of stuff.
That's funny.
SHOW US this grand concept you have- on water-cooled PC
class systems in actual commercial PC use. Show us sytems
that only use component thermal feedback control that failed
because of lack of your (implied necessary) water flow
sensor idea.
In short, provide any evidence that what you claim is
necessary, is, OR that it could even be implemented in a
timely or cost-effective manner. Plenty of water-cooled
systems out there are running using reasonable protection
that doesn't include your theoretically necessary control,
which I still contend is inferior to thermal feedback from
the cooled parts.
You still have not provided any reason/theory, let alone
evidence, that the thermal state of the cooling liquid is a
better control for the thermal state of the cooled
component, than consideration of the thermal state of that
component itself. On the contrary, we really DON"T CARE
what temp the water is nor how fast it's flowing so long as
the components stay cool. On the contrary, since the
system needs a mimal level of airflow either way, a system
with utmost noise reduction would turn off the water pump
completely if flow rate wasn't easily adjustable, IF the
thermals allowed it.
I've not suggested that option for one of the several
reasons your theory isn't practical- that requires
engineering of the solution and testing before being
considered reliable. Which year is it considered reliable?
It's being considered for use NOW, not after beta testing
and refinements at additional cost.
Different systems have different requirements. Some
distinctly different (non-PC, even non-computer) system's
use of water does not make that system-specific solution
applicable to water-cooling-at large.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram