Further reflections on watercooling: Difference between revisions
Created page with "I got some good feedback regarding my earlier "reflections on watercooling" piece, and I thought of a few things I'd missed, so here's some more dankwisdom. Take it for whatever it's worth. Please feel encouraged to send in further data for these tables, ''assuming you got the info directly from the manufacturer, or rigorously acquired it yourself.'' * Knowing the volume of your components is useful for working the heat equations, for kno..." |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
|} | |} | ||
The non-linearity of the r² term is obvious here: the Quantum Torque inner diameter is 80.3% of the EK-AH's, but the total volume is only 64.4%. Either way, 10mm of the tubing is 1.267mL, so you're talking ¾ or ½ of that in the fitting. Assuming half-inch tubing, you can thus subtract 0.666mL for every Quantum Torque compression fitting, or 0.334 for every EK-AH. A 200mL reservoir would represent almost 600 times this latter value. | The non-linearity of the r² term is obvious here: the Quantum Torque inner diameter is 80.3% of the EK-AH's, but the total volume is only 64.4%. Either way, 10mm of the tubing is 1.267mL, so you're talking ¾ or ½ of that in the fitting. Assuming half-inch tubing, you can thus subtract 0.666mL for every Quantum Torque compression fitting, or 0.334 for every EK-AH. A 200mL reservoir would represent almost 600 times this latter value. You can use this same reasoning to calculate the (very small) volume loss at each fitting juncture—just use the inner diameter of the threading. | ||