• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

F type fitting: Flow Rate Impact?

A

Arcygenical

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
25,066
Just wondering what the rest of the experienced watercoolers think on this. I'm in a debate with a friend of mine.

In your opinion, given the following fitting...
16Test.jpg


Do you think that F1 (flow1) and F0(flow0) will equal eachother, PROVIDED: They both have exactly the same waterblocks.... The restriction is equal for both F0 and F1...

Does the flow orientation, impact flow rates at all... Since F0 is further away from FI (flow input) will it get less flow than F1?

Cheers :D
 
According to my understanding of fluid dynamics, flow is going to move in the path of least resistance.

If you are using 2 of those fittings, F and G. F0 meets G0, and F1 meets G1. Then the distance the water has to travel will be slightly longer across F0 to G0.

But if you have the tubing F0-G1 and G0-F1 the difference may be negligible.

I don't have a second flow meeter, nor this type of fitting, to test this theory with.

That's my thought on the matter.
 
This has been a raging debate in the WC community for many years with regards to restriction. Martin over at Martins Liquid Lab stated that with a pump that has good head pressure and WC blocks with low restriction won't see too much of an impact. In the only case I've read a negative impact seems to be with using any type of 90 degree on the inlet / outlet port of a DDC 3.2.

As far as F1 and F0, the pathways are of equal size, and there is more fluid pushing through than the pathway can sustain. Pressure should equalize between F1 and F0 with very little impact on flow rate. I'd make the assumption that it will be equal parts for both outlet ports.
 
All things being equal, F0 should get a tiny bit more flow. However, you can equalize them.
Code: 
>---(Split)----(Elbow)
       ||          ||
     (foo)       (foo)
       ||          ||
     (Elbow)---(Split)--->

That having been said, F-fittings in general are bad for flow. Y-splits are better. And at the risk of stirring the pot, I've never respected Koolance when it comes to performance.
 
If you take into account the total pressure drop across all components, this fitting will contribute very little at the flow rates a WC rig runs. As was said before, there is a difference in the flow rate that each outlet will get if all other variables are identical, but the difference is negligible. Two identical heat loads on each path of a split loop should not see more than a degree or 2 of difference with this kind of fitting.
 
Interesting. Very interesting.

I'm not allowed to say which side I'm on (My buddy's one of those "I know everything about computers type" - He's laughing as I type this) because of fears of bias :p.

But, nonetheless, my plans for the water loop can go forward now :cool:
 
I was wondering the same thing. In the end i went with a Y-splitter. I don't think ti affected the temps much, maybe 1 degrees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top