[HN Gopher] The Sandia Cooler (2016)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Sandia Cooler (2016)
        
       Author : RichardHeart
       Score  : 70 points
       Date   : 2021-06-27 14:10 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (ip.sandia.gov)
 (TXT) w3m dump (ip.sandia.gov)
        
       | dogma1138 wrote:
       | Because it doesn't work https://youtu.be/oCghRn2Zae4
        
         | AussieWog93 wrote:
         | The conclusion of the video is that it does work, but the
         | performance is not as good as the larger, traditional designs.
        
           | dogma1138 wrote:
           | The performance is below low profile traditional coolers like
           | the noctua too, it doesn't work as in live up to it's
           | promise.
        
         | caconym_ wrote:
         | It looks like that design has diverged significantly from the
         | Sandia one, probably because they couldn't manage the
         | tolerances the Sandia design needs. Given that it's a first
         | attempt to bring the concept to market, and that it appears to
         | be significantly compromised, I don't think "it doesn't work"
         | is a fair characterization of the actual Sandia design.
         | 
         | It might well be completely impractical for the commercial CPU
         | cooler market, but it also might be the case that a bit more
         | R&D and tooling up could get us a really effective new cooler
         | design. Improvements could include [perceived] noise reduction
         | as well as better efficacy.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | tzs wrote:
         | It would be interesting to see how that would work if you made
         | bigger versions. It was a lot smaller than the others, and I'm
         | curious if it would have to be as big as them to match them or
         | if it would match them somewhere between its current size and
         | their size.
         | 
         | Also, I wonder how much details matter? That certainly looks
         | quite a bit different from the Sandia unit. Sandia was claiming
         | a large increase in efficiency over other units, and usually
         | you only get that kind of increase with either a fundamental
         | breakthrough or by using known methods but getting it all
         | tweaked and tuned just right. I think Sandia's is the second
         | kind.
        
       | knolan wrote:
       | I was working on a so called finless cooler around the time this
       | first rose to prominence. The idea was that a toroidal vortex
       | would give better heat transfer than a lot of fins subject to
       | viscous shear.
       | 
       | Our cooler was simply a folded aluminium sheet with a fan placed
       | into a hole in the top. We had a somewhat similar couette type
       | flow under our motor hub directly over the heat source. We had a
       | modest 15% gain over a reference GPU cooler which was almost
       | entirely due to the better thermal conductivity of the aluminium
       | sheet over the cast heat sink in the reference design.
       | 
       | It turned out that all that matters is cost, nothing else.
        
       | hddherman wrote:
       | There was this review done a while ago on a product similar to
       | that design, but with some changes made:
       | https://youtu.be/oCghRn2Zae4
        
       | lou1306 wrote:
       | Since we're talking about CPU coolers, I hope my comment is not
       | OT: what's with the recent popularity of tower coolers? They seem
       | to pop up a lot in PC build discussions, lately. Am I in some
       | echo chamber? Do they provide any obvious advantages over
       | "traditional" coolers?
        
         | formerly_proven wrote:
         | Top-blowers have been relegated to the low-cost / bundled
         | category for ~15 years or so. Tower coolers are much better and
         | fit better into the overall airflow of almost all cases.
         | 
         | There are no high-performance top-blowers.
        
         | Zancarius wrote:
         | I don't think it's recent. The first tower form factor cooler I
         | bought was in 2011 or thereabouts.
         | 
         | Part of the reason I bought that one when I did was because the
         | stock cooler wasn't effective and the fan was incredibly loud
         | (poor heat dissipation, small fan, high RPM). The tower coolers
         | have a larger surface area and ship with larger/slower fans,
         | reducing noise. They're probably still popular because they
         | work, and they're the only air coolers I buy now.
        
         | RamRodification wrote:
         | Without really knowing what I'm talking about: It seems logical
         | to me that a tower cooler can be more efficient because of less
         | restriction in air flow (air blows straight through + can have
         | one fan on each side) and possibly more efficient heat
         | transportation through several heat pipes into a generally
         | larger surface area.
        
           | Scoundreller wrote:
           | This, in theory. A heat pipe is much more effective at moving
           | heat than conduction. It's also what laptops use.
           | 
           | Big issue is that heat pipes usually work best upright and
           | effectiveness (efficiency?) suffers in other orientations.
        
       | orliesaurus wrote:
       | Pretty happy with my Noctua CPU cooler - I don't think it gets
       | better than that with performance/noise for the price point (sub
       | $100!) - has anyone found better coolers than those? Interested
       | because I wanna build another PC soon!
        
         | RamRodification wrote:
         | I went with an AIO (all-in-one) water cooler for the first time
         | in my latest PC build. Many PC cases today have an area in the
         | front or at the top for a radiator and its fans. Mine is in the
         | front and has 2x120mm fans that suck air in. I have the same
         | amount of fans blowing air out (back+top). All four fans are
         | running on very low RPM so it's very quiet.
         | 
         | I really recommend this setup. I think 2x120mm is a sweet-spot
         | for price/performance when it comes to radiator size. Smaller
         | will require a louder fan. Bigger is obviously better but more
         | expensive and might not fit your case.
         | 
         | I used to have a big air cooler. One benefit that I didn't plan
         | for is that I'm no longer worried about the stress on the
         | motherboard mount from the heavy piece of metal hanging from
         | it. Another is less stuff in the way since the bulk of the
         | cooler is the radiator and fans off to the side.
        
           | bestham wrote:
           | I never understood why one would like to place the radiator
           | at the inlet, thus heating the air inside the case. The
           | hottest part is still the GPU (even if Intel tries their
           | hardest to change that), and by placing the radiator at the
           | inlet you are heating the air to cool the gpu with an
           | additional 50-150 watt.
        
             | RamRodification wrote:
             | I actually placed it up top first, blowing out. But then I
             | looked up some tests and recommendations and apparently
             | front blowing inward is better. Can't remember the exact
             | reasoning but I remember being convinced enough to move the
             | whole thing. Temps are great now but I never did a
             | comparison.
             | 
             | I assume my way results in better cooling for the CPU
             | because the radiator gets fresh air instead of GPU-heated
             | air. Maybe it's just about prioritizing CPU over GPU (or
             | having more headroom for a few extra degrees on the GPU).
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | formerly_proven wrote:
           | AIOs don't seem to me like they're worth it, because most
           | CPUs can be cooled by a good tower cooler just fine, and
           | those that don't really only thrive on a custom loop instead
           | of a 240 mm rad. For gaming - well CPU thermal load tends to
           | be modest, so it doesn't matter.
           | 
           | AIOs for GPUs largely don't exist, and that's the component
           | I'd watercool first, not the CPU. So we're back to custom
           | loop there.
        
             | RamRodification wrote:
             | > most CPUs can be cooled by a good tower cooler just fine
             | 
             | Water coolers are definitely still an enthusiast part in my
             | opinion. If you're satisfied with "just fine" then no, it's
             | probably not worth it. It will give you better cooling per
             | decibel but probably worse per dollar, at least on stock
             | clocks.
             | 
             | If you want to mess around with overclocking the advantage
             | seems to become a bit bigger for AIOs as you crank up fan
             | speeds.
        
             | jrockway wrote:
             | Every AIO I've ever owned has stopped working not too far
             | into its life. I remember being shocked and dismayed the
             | first time I had one fail, and simply upset when the second
             | one failed. After the second failure, I bought a Noctua
             | NH-D15S and that heatsink has happily survived 4 builds.
             | (Only getting replaced after I switched to Threadripper,
             | which required a different Noctua heatsink. But don't
             | worry, the NH-D15S still lives on in a friend's PC.)
             | 
             | In my opinion, there are two viable cooling solutions: a
             | high-quality heatsink and fan, or a custom water loop. AIOs
             | just don't have the performance to make the failure rate
             | acceptable.
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | But they don't fit into the space requirements this cooler is
         | designed against.
        
       | zinekeller wrote:
       | ThermalTake has actually released one based on the Sandia design
       | (and Cooler Master flirted with this one), but it's not really
       | living on its promises. It works, but there's a lot of non-Sandia
       | designs with comparable size that works as good or even better
       | than ThermalTake's Sandia-like design.
       | 
       | Reviews:
       | 
       | Gamers Nexus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2tCnjb6lp8
       | (video), https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2806-thermaltake-
       | engin... (text)
       | 
       | Quote from Steve: "Ultimately, the Engine 27 isn't a bad cooler -
       | it performs about the same as similarly sized products, so it's
       | not some crime against humanity. That said, it's priced
       | significantly out of its performance bracket, and the high-
       | pitched whine at max RPM can get a bit irritating. You'd want to
       | run this at a lower RPM to account for that."
       | 
       | Linus Tech Tips: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCghRn2Zae4
       | 
       | Quote from Linus: "The Thermaltake Engine 27 gets my "Better than
       | Nothing" award for working better than I expected given its size,
       | making it a great option if you don't have anything else that
       | will fit."
        
         | Nursie wrote:
         | I have one of those I used in an SFF build, and I like it -
         | it's pretty as well as low-profile.
         | 
         | But it's no revolution, and only rated up to 70W.
         | 
         | (UK Product page - https://uk.thermaltake.com/engine-27.html)
        
       | Causality1 wrote:
       | I'm not clear on how high speed is supposed to eliminate fouling.
       | Sure, particles are less likely to adhere but you're also
       | increasing the number of particles.
        
         | bestham wrote:
         | As the speed increases, the percentage of particles that stick
         | declines quicker than the percentage increase in volume of air
         | (and thus particles that may stick). How can you remove dust
         | from a fan? One way is to increase the flow of air to "blow"
         | away the dust. Same principle here.
        
           | Causality1 wrote:
           | Just from observing dusty PC fans being turned up to higher
           | speeds, I think the effectiveness would be limited. Most of
           | the cleaning is accomplished from having air flow impact the
           | surface at a different angle than usual, and at a much higher
           | static pressure.
        
       | h2odragon wrote:
       | The rotating mass of the heat sink would need an enclosure for
       | safety reasons, negating most of the airflow advantages.
       | "Transfer heat through an axle" sounds like one of those "draw
       | the rest of the owl" steps too; no idea how that's supposed to
       | work.
       | 
       | *edit: Maybe a hydraulic motor where the fluid is turning a big
       | impeller? Torque converter with an open side, kinda thing...
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Perhaps the CPU is rotating too? Wait, perhaps I should patent
         | this idea first.
        
           | Y_Y wrote:
           | The amazing part of this is that each individual core makes
           | contact with each region of the (obviously stationary) memory
           | drum once per revolution, providing dynamic cache adjacency.
        
         | KMag wrote:
         | Right. High thermal gradients through ball bearings or roller
         | bearings are tricky, and you don't get much contact area for
         | thermal conduction in the bearing (meaning most bearing
         | applications need to be mindful of cooling). (Pro tip from MIT
         | 2.72: make sure to position bearings such that thermal stress
         | from the shaft undergoing more thermal expansion than the rest
         | of the machine doesn't jam the bearings.)
         | 
         | I guess you'd want a bearing with sodium-potassium alloy
         | (hazmat!) or mercury (hazmat!) or something. Or... make the
         | casing for the shaft into a heat pipe with ammonia or alcohol
         | vapor.
        
         | icegreentea2 wrote:
         | As described by the lab, the Sandia cooler predominantly
         | transfers heat across an air-gap (maintained via self-generated
         | fluid bearing) between the base plate and rotating impeller.
         | 
         | As described, they claim that if they can maintain the air-gap
         | to 10um, then they get a net win since the specific (per
         | surface area) thermal resistance is sufficiently low (due to
         | only being 10um), and the transfer surface area is
         | comparatively enormous. Nevertheless, the air-gap still forms
         | the dominant component of their overall thermal resistance.
         | 
         | Reading through their posted development report [0], it's
         | apparent that they were having trouble hitting that 10um target
         | with their designs.
         | 
         | Not exactly a surprise that this is the most difficult part.
         | Not surprising that the "commercialized versions" (see other
         | posts) don't use this mechanism.
         | 
         | [0]
         | https://ip.sandia.gov/techpdfs/Development%20of%20Sandia%20C...
        
         | drudu wrote:
         | A linked video claims that the commercial version attempts to
         | transfer heat from one rotating metal surface to another (the
         | the part that connects to the CPU and the bottom of the
         | spinning thingy) separated by an extremely thin layer of air.
         | This is "supposed to" transfer heat as if the metal is touching
         | but "doesn't see to work very well in practice"
        
       | salawat wrote:
       | Immediately popping into my mind: what rotates it to facilitate
       | pumping, and also, if the top rotates, how is the thermal
       | transmission between the baseplate and the rotating element being
       | facilitated? It's either have to be through the axle, or you'd
       | need some sort of lubricious, yet thermally conductive compound
       | for the rotating element to flow through, which, not gonna lie,
       | sounds pretty magic to me.
       | 
       | Also, I'd need to look into the mechanics of this cylindrical
       | impeller bit more. Boundary layers don't go away magically in
       | laminar flow conditions. They might shrink, but they don't
       | disappear. I also look at the center of their prototype, and all
       | I see is a debris accumulation point that will become more and
       | more obstructed over time in high debris concentration air. There
       | isn't that much preventing dust build up on the top too, which I
       | think may contribute to further build up.
       | 
       | Noise, no comment, except I know that if you've got spinning
       | parts you've got harmonics and vibration, audible or not.
       | 
       | The burning question for me though, is how does it pan out in
       | test designs. If it keeps stuff cooler under operating
       | conditions, with better MTBF than what we're traditionally using,
       | screw it, it's better.
       | 
       | Especially since in a sense you're combining two distinct parts
       | into a single one, which would in theory simplify fabrication.
       | However, that looks to be all metal, so it may not be cheaper
       | than a fan static heat sink combo.
       | 
       | Be a fun thing to test and put through it's paces to be sure.
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | > what rotates it to facilitate pumping
         | 
         | A motor.
         | 
         | > how is the thermal transmission between the baseplate and the
         | rotating element being facilitated
         | 
         | Through the micro-meter thick air bearing.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-27 23:00 UTC)