There is a 48 page long PDF file, thats full of math and physics calculations that shows why it works.
Physicists with math > your beliefs.
There is a WORKING prototype, that SHOWS that the design works.
Working prototype design > your beliefs.
The prototype is ~10cm in diameter, and has a cooling efficiency of ~0.2 degrees Celcius pr Watt (0.2C/W).
The thing works, and it works better than current designs.
The thing works, and it works better than current designs.
What happens when a dirt particle gets stuck in the gap. Screeeeeeeeeeeeeech... Sizzlesizzlesizzle...
So how do you get the heat off the cpu and onto the spinning cooler? Right now we have a large base pressed down hard onto the cpu and the best gunk we can find to transfer heat from one to the other. Would this not require some sort of lubricating grease between the cpu and the spinning cooler that was also an amazing heat transfer material and had zero friction (or the friction would grind down cooler and get turned into heat), oh and didn't wear out/burn up/etc over time (or our cooler would need a little oil reservoir).
To be honest I have the same concern.. even that point someone made about
"The greater the relative mass, the lesser of an imbalance it takes to destroy it".
Still Im surprised someone found a differnt way to do things, Im eager to see what the finished product looks like, and how much they would end up costing.
Also some peoples concern about these "eating" fingers... seems valid enough as well. That wouldnt stop me from buying one though, if its less noisy and cools better than conventual air coolers.
The prototype is ~10cm in diameter, and has a cooling efficiency of ~0.2 degrees Celcius pr Watt (0.2C/W).
The thing works, and it works better than current designs.
Questions are answered in the PDF.
Physicists with math > your beliefs.
There is a WORKING prototype, that SHOWS that the design works.
Working prototype design > your beliefs.
All I can see is the bit in the diagram about the 0.001 inch thick self regulating air bearing that "presents negligible thermal resistance". I know for a fact that if you clamp the heatsink too the cpu without any thermal grease it fries. I know this because I once knew someone who decided to clean his pc and cleaned all the mess off the top of the cpu and heatsink then put it back together - it fried and died lol. I bet there was less then a 0.001 inch thick gap when he killed is poor P4.
That cracked me up. Couldn't have said it better if I wanted (I didn't want to though).
The design itself is thinking outside the norm.
There is a 48 page long PDF file, thats full of math and physics calculations that shows why it works.
Physicists with math > your beliefs.
There is a WORKING prototype, that SHOWS that the design works.
Working prototype design > your beliefs.
The prototype is ~10cm in diameter, and has a cooling efficiency of ~0.2 degrees Celcius pr Watt (0.2C/W).
The thing works, and it works better than current designs.
this thing is retarded. that's a hell of a lot of metal. Going to cost a lot.
The "Immune to dust fouling" cracks me up.
All I can see is the bit in the diagram about the 0.001 inch thick self regulating air bearing that "presents negligible thermal resistance". I know for a fact that if you clamp the heatsink too the cpu without any thermal grease it fries. I know this because I once knew someone who decided to clean his pc and cleaned all the mess off the top of the cpu and heatsink then put it back together - it fried and died lol. I bet there was less then a 0.001 inch thick gap when he killed is poor P4.
So you can take your 48 page marketing snowjob and shovel it.
What exactly is so complicated?Physiscists with math dont mean jack. Might I remind you that "appeal to authority" is a logical fallacy that has cost america billions of dollars and probably millions of jobs by now. In my career I've read through hundreds of pages of engineering documents searching for any data that would indicate knowledge of fatal design flaws. That sort of information does not tend to makes its way into engineering documentation, especially stuff that has been fluffed up by marketing. So you can take your 48 page marketing snowjob and shovel it.
It is only simple common sense that you attach as few moving parts as possible to any air cooling system, and that those moving parts should be as simple as possible. MANY MANY attempts have been made to do otherwise, and they have ALL failed. There is no market for a device this complex because it doubles the cost and at best even if it works correctly it will only save a few watts. And it will never work correctly because they claim it will never get covered in dust and grime. That right there is proof that they are full of it. Once it does get grimy, it will fall out of balance and lose whatever efficiency advantage it may have had. This is basic engineering 101 stuff.
All I can see is the bit in the diagram about the 0.001 inch thick self regulating air bearing that "presents negligible thermal resistance". I know for a fact that if you clamp the heatsink too the cpu without any thermal grease it fries. I know this because I once knew someone who decided to clean his pc and cleaned all the mess off the top of the cpu and heatsink then put it back together - it fried and died lol. I bet there was less then a 0.001 inch thick gap when he killed is poor P4.
What exactly is so complicated?
Because they have to thermally couple a spinning impeller to a stationary base. They are going to need some kind of liquid lubricated thermally conductive bearing between the two thermal masses. If such a device were feasible they would be ubiquitous by now. Yet out of a billion air cooling systems around the world, precisely 0.000% of them use non-stationary thermal masses coupled by bearings. Probably because it is cheaper to do liquid cooling at that point. The thermal mass is always decoupled from the moving parts.