kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 10:20:46 -0800, floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd
>L. Davidson) wrote:
>>>
>>>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.

Your statement was only regarding those items that a lack of
cooling will affect, which now you are attempting to limit to
only the items that are "water-cooled", but in fact it is far
more serious than that. *Everything* in the case is "in
jeopardy", not just those parts that are water cooled. The
entire system has to be monitored according to your concept!

Lets just consider one item... the difference between having a
coolant flow meter on the return entry to the surge tank, and
doing it your way. I'll limit it to that because this one item
is more significant than all of what you believe must be done.

Eventually one of the things that happens with liquid cooling
systems is that they leak. Hoses pop off, fittings break,
something slits, whatever... if we have a flow meter where it
should be, the *immediate* effect is to shut the system down.

Or... if the hose exiting the water block has broken and we
wait until the cpu gets hot... the entire surge tank will be
pumped dry, and all of that coolant will be sprayed into the
case before the cpu even begins to get warmer... Then, in about
2 seconds, the cpu is going to go from fully cooled to *no*
cooling, and may or may not actually shutdown before it fries
(depending on the cpu).

It isn't an "enterprise-class" item, it's simply good engineering
and cheap insurance compared to the price of everything else
inside the case. But, you are right that in an el cheapo,
disposable system, it isn't absolutely necessary. (But, is any
system that you've invest enough to put water cooling in still
what could be called "el cheapo, disposable"???)

>>>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

I'm suggesting that if a person wants to engineer their own
system, that is exactly what they need to do. Do you really
think pre-engineered systems were *not* monitored to prove the
design? Once proven, they sell it minus all the metering.

Not metering to prove the design is just simply *piss* *poor*
*engineering*.

>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.

The "ready-to-use" comes *after* the engineering model is
evaluated, not before. These home designed one of a kind
systems are *not* "ready-to-use". (Just *look* at the designs
that have been mentioned here as possible first attempts!)

>>You don't seem to have just a whole lot of experience with this
>>kind of stuff.
>
>That's funny.

Yes, I'll grant that some of your statements have been a bit
hilarious.

>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.

I've been working with liquid cooled electronics equipment for
40 years. You name the problem, I've seen it for real. Most of
the water cooled systems available for PC's are designed (with
light controllers, for example) to appeal to people who have an
ego and are impressed with eye candy.

I'll repeat what I said in another post, which is that anyone
who puts together a water cooling system had *better* have a
backup available or be able to tolerate the time it takes to
replace the entire system. Putting water cooling into something
that you cannot replace within the time range that you can
tolerate being without, is asking for a disaster.

The reason is because people are simply not willing to realize
that they *can't* properly engineer such a system without
significant expense just for monitoring. Look at what *you*
have proposed... spending several hundred dollar on piss poor
engineering that will destroy the whole system with a single
catastrophic failure of any one of many minor components!

....
>which I still contend is inferior to thermal feedback from
>the cooled parts.

What you "still contend" is of no significance. You are
the guy who wants to monitor every heat sensitive component,
who claims the coolant will boil, and says the surge tank
does not store heat in one article and claims it has to in
another.

The rest of this article isn't worth responding to, because
the questions you ask have all been answered previously.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com