turbulent flow not bad for cooling

  • Thread starter Timothy Daniels
  • Start date
T

Timothy Daniels

Al Dykes said:
but boundry layer aerodynamics *is* a small scale ("micro") effect.


Boundary layers are small in depth, but their *effects* are not small.
They keep a protective, almost stagnant, layer of air in contact
with objects that hinders direct contact with flowing fluids. It's
like having a layer of Saran Wrap on the object - the Saran Wrap
is thin, but it hinders heat flow between the fluid and the object.
The more turbulent the air impinging on this "Saran Wrap", the
thinner the Saran Wrap becomes, thus causing less resistance
to heat flow between the fluid and the object. There is nothing that
requires the boundary layer to have physical dimensions similar to
the size of the turbulent vortices or the extent of the turbulent region
in order for the turbulence to affect the boundary layer.

*TimDaniels*.
 
K

kony

"Turbulence will make your cooling system more efficient"
is a better summary.

Of your theory, yes.

Of truth as applicable to cooling a reasonably normal PC,
server, etc, no.

Once again I remind you that you only have vague notions,
versus the entire world who has built, tested, and sold
products.

No oversimplifed idea about turbulence allows ignorance of
the other varables. To resolve these variables into a
working model, you'll have to start (get ready for it....)
Testing
 
T

Timothy Daniels

"kornball"wrote:
:



Of your theory, yes.

Of truth as applicable to cooling a reasonably normal PC,
server, etc, no.

Once again I remind you that you only have vague notions,
versus the entire world who has built, tested, and sold
products.

No oversimplifed idea about turbulence allows ignorance of
the other varables. To resolve these variables into a
working model, you'll have to start (get ready for it....)
Testing


Don't make me laugh, kornball. You've never tested for
the effect of turbulence because you just assumed that it was
bad. On the other hand, turbulence has been the subject
of scientific and engineering investigation for a century.
As you would have it, everyone would have to test for the
effects of gravity before YOU would believe it.

*TimDaniels*
 
A

Al Dykes

"Turbulence will make your cooling system more efficient"

The phrase "more efficient" is meaningless marketing crap.

More than one millimeter away from a air-solid interface there is no
longer a boundery layer.
 
T

Timothy Daniels

Al Dykes said:
The phrase "more efficient" is meaningless marketing crap.


Then how about "cause more calories of heat removed per
second with the same bulk air flow"?

More than one millimeter away from a air-solid interface there
is no longer a boundery layer.


So? One millimeter away from a solid is "not in contact" with
that solid. Gaseous boundary layers thinner than that keep the
pistons in your car's engine from melting, too. That's why
"pinging" is so damaging to your engine - the turbulence
scrubs away the boundary layer to expose the metal to the
full heat and oxidation of the burning gases. Normally, the
persistant boundary layer protects the walls of the cylinder
and the crowns of the pistons enough to allow them to survive
the hundreds of ignitions and combustions per second -
which can be pretty amazing if you view a microscopically thin
sheath of burned gases to be "non-protective". Somehow you
have been led to believe that a fluidic boundary layer has to
be on the order of an inch to have any effect, which is very far
from the truth.

*TimDaniels*
 
K

kony

You've never tested for
the effect of turbulence because you just assumed that it was
bad.

Funny coming from someone who turned down an offer from me
to custom fab a panel you think would help.

At this point the thread is dead Tim, you just don't realize
it.
 
K

kony

So? One millimeter away from a solid is "not in contact" with
that solid. Gaseous boundary layers thinner than that keep the
pistons in your car's engine from melting, too. That's why
"pinging" is so damaging to your engine - the turbulence
scrubs away the boundary layer to expose the metal to the
full heat and oxidation of the burning gases. Normally, the
persistant boundary layer protects the walls of the cylinder
and the crowns of the pistons enough to allow them to survive
the hundreds of ignitions and combustions per second -
which can be pretty amazing if you view a microscopically thin
sheath of burned gases to be "non-protective". Somehow you
have been led to believe that a fluidic boundary layer has to
be on the order of an inch to have any effect, which is very far
from the truth.



Seldom does someone go so wrong in a single paragraph.
 
A

Al Dykes

Then how about "cause more calories of heat removed per
second with the same bulk air flow"?




So? One millimeter away from a solid is "not in contact" with
that solid. Gaseous boundary layers thinner than that keep the
pistons in your car's engine from melting, too. That's why
"pinging" is so damaging to your engine - the turbulence
scrubs away the boundary layer to expose the metal to the
full heat and oxidation of the burning gases. Normally, the
persistant boundary layer protects the walls of the cylinder
and the crowns of the pistons enough to allow them to survive
the hundreds of ignitions and combustions per second -
which can be pretty amazing if you view a microscopically thin
sheath of burned gases to be "non-protective". Somehow you
have been led to believe that a fluidic boundary layer has to
be on the order of an inch to have any effect, which is very far
from the truth.

*TimDaniels*


*If* true, how does the design of an IC engine relate to the removal
of heat from a CPU die or a beige box?

sheath of burned gases to be "non-protective". Somehow you
have been led to believe that a fluidic boundary layer has to
be on the order of an inch to have any effect, which is very far

Drivel and ignorance. I don't think you have a clue what a "boundary
layer" is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_layer
 
T

Timothy Daniels

"Al Dykes" asked:
*If* true, how does the design of an IC engine relate to the removal
of heat from a CPU die or a beige box?


It has nothing to do specifically with the *design* of an internal
combustion engine, it has *all* to do with the persistance and
isolating effect of a boundary layer. It contradicts your assumption
that a boundary layer of one millimeter or less in depth is insigni-
ficant.

From http://www.motorcycle.com/mo/mcrob/rt-fuel2.html ,
here is pretty thorough explanation of how "pinging" affects
engine overheating due to its effects on the boundary layer:

"The pinging sound of detonation is just these pressure waves
pounding against the insides of the combustion chamber and
piston top. Piston tops, ring lands and rod bearings are especially
exposed to damage from detonation. In addition, these pressure
fronts (or shock waves) can sweep away the unburned boundary
layer (see figure 2 above) of air-fuel mix near the metal surfaces
in the combustion chamber.

"The boundary layer is a thin layer of fuel-air mix just above the
metal surfaces of the combustion chamber (see figure 2, above).
Physical principles (aptly called boundary conditions) require that
under normal circumstances (i.e. equilibrium combustion, which
means "nice, slow and thermally well transmitted") this boundary
layer stays close to the metal surfaces. It usually is quite thin, maybe
a fraction of a millimeter to a millimeter thick. This boundary layer
will not burn even when reached by the flame front because it is in
thermal contact with the cool metal, whose temperature is always
well below the ignition temperature of the fuel-air mix.

"Only under the extreme conditions of detonation can this boundary
layer be "swept away" by the high-pressure shock front that occurs
during detonation. In that case, during these "far from equilibrium"
process of the pressure-induced shock wave entering the boundary
layer, the physical principles allured to above (the boundary conditions)
will be effectively violated. The degree of violation will depend on
(a) the pressure fluctuation caused by the shock front and (b) the
adhesive and cohesive strength of the boundary layer. These
boundary layers of air-fuel mix remain unburned during the normal
combustion process due to their close proximity to the cool metal
surfaces and act as an insulating layer and prevent a direct exposure
of metal to the flame. Since pressure waves created during detonation
can sweep away these unburned boundary layers of air-fuel mix, they
leave parts of the piston top and combustion chamber exposed to
the flame front. This, in turn, causes an immediate rise in the
temperature of these parts, often leading to direct failure or at least
to engine overheating."

Drivel and ignorance. I don't think you have a clue what a "boundary
layer" is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_layer


How does Wikipedia contradict anything that I've stated?

As for the importance of boundary layers inside internal combutsion
engines, it has been studie extensively. Here are just a couple
examples of the many very academic investigations:

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17554037

Here's one that investigates the effect of turbulence to
enhance the flow of heat through the cylinder wall:

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insig...=1455057#search="boundary layer piston crown"


*TimDaniels*
 
T

Timothy Daniels

"kornball" could only come up with:
:





Seldom does someone go so wrong in a single paragraph.


Oh? Here's more "wrong" stuff:

From http://www.motorcycle.com/mo/mcrob/rt-fuel2.html ,
here is pretty thorough explanation of how "pinging" affects
engine overheating due to its effects on the boundary layer:

"The pinging sound of detonation is just these pressure waves
pounding against the insides of the combustion chamber and
piston top. Piston tops, ring lands and rod bearings are especially
exposed to damage from detonation. In addition, these pressure
fronts (or shock waves) can sweep away the unburned boundary
layer (see figure 2 above) of air-fuel mix near the metal surfaces
in the combustion chamber.

"The boundary layer is a thin layer of fuel-air mix just above the
metal surfaces of the combustion chamber (see figure 2, above).
Physical principles (aptly called boundary conditions) require that
under normal circumstances (i.e. equilibrium combustion, which
means "nice, slow and thermally well transmitted") this boundary
layer stays close to the metal surfaces. It usually is quite thin, maybe
a fraction of a millimeter to a millimeter thick. This boundary layer
will not burn even when reached by the flame front because it is in
thermal contact with the cool metal, whose temperature is always
well below the ignition temperature of the fuel-air mix.

"Only under the extreme conditions of detonation can this boundary
layer be "swept away" by the high-pressure shock front that occurs
during detonation. In that case, during these "far from equilibrium"
process of the pressure-induced shock wave entering the boundary
layer, the physical principles allured to above (the boundary conditions)
will be effectively violated. The degree of violation will depend on
(a) the pressure fluctuation caused by the shock front and (b) the
adhesive and cohesive strength of the boundary layer. These
boundary layers of air-fuel mix remain unburned during the normal
combustion process due to their close proximity to the cool metal
surfaces and act as an insulating layer and prevent a direct exposure
of metal to the flame. Since pressure waves created during detonation
can sweep away these unburned boundary layers of air-fuel mix, they
leave parts of the piston top and combustion chamber exposed to
the flame front. This, in turn, causes an immediate rise in the
temperature of these parts, often leading to direct failure or at least
to engine overheating."


*TimDaniels*
 
A

Al Dykes

"Al Dykes" asked:


It has nothing to do specifically with the *design* of an internal
combustion engine, it has *all* to do with the persistance and
isolating effect of a boundary layer. It contradicts your assumption
that a boundary layer of one millimeter or less in depth is insigni-
ficant.

I never said or assumed that *any* boundary layer was insignificant.
It's but one of several factors in the cooling of a computer.
You can't seperate them.
 
T

Timothy Daniels

:
Timothy Daniels said:
Funny coming from someone who turned down an offer from me
to custom fab a panel you think would help.


YOU?! Run an experiment? With one variable isolated?
And we're supposed to take your word for having done it
right? <LOL>

*TimDaniels*
 
T

Timothy Daniels

Al Dykes said:
I never said or assumed that *any* boundary layer was insignificant.
It's but one of several factors in the cooling of a computer.
You can't seperate them.


I see. So which factors have I tried to "seperate" [sic] and please
tell us why separating them is bad.

*TimDaniels*
 
A

Al Dykes

"Al Dykes" asked:
....



How does Wikipedia contradict anything that I've stated?

As for the importance of boundary layers inside internal combutsion
engines, it has been studie extensively. Here are just a couple
examples of the many very academic investigations:

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17554037

Here's one that investigates the effect of turbulence to
enhance the flow of heat through the cylinder wall:

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insig...=1455057#search="boundary layer piston crown"


*TimDaniels*


How did we get from talking about air at near-normal STP to talking
about the conditions inside a firing engine cylinder? There is lots
of math in common, but the parameters and coefficients used in each
case make all the difference in the world.

It's like comparing a R/C flyer to a supersonic fighter. An
aerodynamicist may see some things in common but the hard aspects of
the problem are completely different, in practice.

We should take Tim's Google driving license away.
 
A

Al Dykes

Al Dykes said:
I never said or assumed that *any* boundary layer was insignificant.
It's but one of several factors in the cooling of a computer.
You can't seperate them.


I see. So which factors have I tried to "seperate" [sic] and please
tell us why separating them is bad.



You're fixated on turbulence.
 
T

Timothy Daniels

Al Dykes said:
You're fixated on turbulence.


Not at all. I merely point out that turbulence, contrary to
those effete nabobs of negativism, is not bad for cooling.
As a matter of fact, it's GOOD for cooling. That's not
"fixation". Steadfastly denying 100 years of scientific
investigation into fluid flow is fixation.

*TimDaniels*
 
T

Timothy Daniels

"Al Dykes" put forth:
How did we get from talking about air at near-normal STP to talking
about the conditions inside a firing engine cylinder?


By your statement (see above) that "More than one millimeter away
from a air-solid interface there is no longer a boundery layer."

I pointed out that less than that thickness of a boundary layer
protects the insides of a combutsion chamber from meltdown.

There is lots of math in common, but the parameters and coefficients
used in each case make all the difference in the world.


If you want room temperature boundary layers, consider this:

http://www.thermaflo.com/crosscut.shtml

"Turbulent air breaks the stagnant air boundary layers
around the pins and, as a result, enhances the heat sink's
thermal performance."

http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=2001

"To induce turbulence within the fins and improve thermal
transmission between the air and metal, Thermalright have
modified the aluminum fins by adding 'proprietary bent winglets'."

http://sound.westhost.com/heatsinks.htm

"Simple convection is not as effective (even for the same rate
of flow of air), because of the "laminar" flow of air (where the
air at the surface of the heatsink moves slower than that further
away). This effect can be easily seen on a windy day. If you stay
close to a wall or other large area (lying on the ground works too),
it will be noticed that it is less windy than out in the open. Exactly
the same thing happens with heatsinks (but on a somewhat
reduced scale). Creating turbulence is an excellent way to defeat
this process, but this requires fans, and fans are noisy."

http://www.fischerelektronik.de/fischer2002/fischer/Fachb-Act_Rep/kuehlkonzepte/KKoneng_e.htm

"The heat transfer towards the flowing air that can be achieved
with plain fins is relatively restricted. The laminar air flow that
emerges is not sufficient to carry off the heat. Therefore, attempts
are being made to improve heat transfer (fins to air) by producing
more turbulent flow using an appropriate fin geometry."

http://www.hilltech.com/products/uv_components/UV_irradiators.html

"Optimizing cooling efficiency in an LIA is achieved by using
a heatsink-based aluminum reflector, where the material has
a high thermal conductivity and the design maximizes the effects
of surface area and turbulence. Within reason, the more surface
area the better the lamp cooling. Also important is turbulence,
because of the skin effect in cooling. A thin layer of air surrounding
a cooling surface acts as a thermal insulator impeding the effect
of forced air-cooling. This layer needs to be disrupted by turbulent
airflow, which can be created by providing irregular fins and fin
geometries."

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6729383.html

"at least some said protrusions affect said streaming of said
fluid so as to enhance the turbulence of said streaming of said
fluid, thereby enhancing convective heat transfer from said
object to said fluid."

http://www.overclockers.com/tips90/ -

"Turbulent air cools better. Say, for sake of argument,
you have a simple tube with a fan in the middle. The fan pulls
air from one side of the tube, and blows into the other. If you
have a hot component on the exhaust side of the fan, it will
be more efficiently cooled than on the intake side.

"This is because the air on the exhaust side of the fan
is more turbulent. For lack of a better explanation, the loops
and whorls of turbulent air moving across the surface pick
up more heat. The effective surface area of the object is
increased. (Actually, it was explained to me by saying the
effective surface area of the air is increased.) The total
volume of airflow remains the same, but turbulent air just
cools better."

http://www.begellhouse.com/books/497d60632054f587,6ddfe1a32b58c789.html -

"Turbulent flow is the most common form of motion of liquids
and gases playing the role of the heat-transfer medium in thermal
systems. The complexity of turbulent flow and the importance of
hydrodynamics and heat transfer in practice inspired continuing
research for methods of efficient heat augmentation by the
Lithuanian Energy Institute. The solution of this problem was directly
linked with the determination of the reaction of flow in the boundary
layer to the effect of various factors and heat transfer rate under
given conditions. The investigated factors included elevated degree
of turbulence of the external flow as well as strong acceleration and
turbulization of flow near the wall by surface roughness. The material
in this volume shows that it is possible to control the efficiency of
turbulent transfer when the vortical structure of the turbulent flow is
known."

http://www.cougarlabs.com/cool2.html -

"For convective heat transfer to work well, we need to get the
heat energy out into the flowing coolant. Turbulence will do this
for us."

http://www.ceere.org/beep/docs/FY2002/Turbulent_Flow_in_Enclosure.pdf -

"Comparatively speaking, turbulent flows often lead to higher
transport rate of momentum, energy and mass than laminar flows.
These features are widely made use of in energy systems in industry.
For example, turbulence enhancers such as ribs are added to
cooling systems of turbine blades and microelectronic devices
to create more turbulent motions so that the overall heat transfer
efficiency can be improved."

*TimDaniels*
 
K

kony

:



YOU?! Run an experiment? With one variable isolated?
And we're supposed to take your word for having done it
right? <LOL>


Hmm, let's see what we should do to ...

- Pretend Tim is right when he actively argues against
testing, or

- Actually test the hypothesis

While the former aligns well with Tim's neverending ego, the
latter is the only way to get any validation.

Here's a little hint Tim- I've made plenty of case parts
including intakes out of sheet aluminum. You're still in
the reading is fundamental stage of learning. Sooner or
later you will have to get up, take a case, and actually DO
IT. Otherwise, even _IF_ you /were/ right, you were still
foolish to put so much time into an idea without any
fruitful outcome.

How is this not obvious? Do you really think you can
selectively ignore real testing? Really? C'mon Tim, this
is not a trick question, nor a trick test, it's up to you to
actually DO what you think will help, propose a specific
reproducible example of it helping.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top