• Dear forum members,

    due to illness of several of our support staff members, we are currently only able to respond to support requests to a limited extent.

    Thank you for your understanding.

    ------------------------------------------------------

    Liebe Forenmitglieder,

    aufgrund von Erkrankungen einiger unserer Supportmitarbeiter können wir zur Zeit leider nur sehr eingeschränkt auf Supportanfragen reagieren.

    Danke für euer Verständnis.

Turn a NexXxoS V.2 into a crossflow using a Y fitting and the drain/fill port?

DirkSwizzler

New member
I was on the fence about whether to buy NexXxoS V.2 radiators with the improved fin design, or X-Flow for better tube routing.

I ended up favoring function over form and went with the V.2 rads.

Now that I have them in hand, I'm noticing that the drain/fill port is on the opposite side of the radiator from the input and output ports. I presume this is a U bend in the radiator.

Well, if I connect both the input and output ports to a Y fitting. I could theoretically use the Y side as an input and the drain port as an output and still get a reasonable approximation of full radiator traversal and flow rate.

I'm not qualified to do any kind of math on what performance impact this would actually have. But my gut is telling me that it'd be minimal since I'm avoiding any stagnant water flow.

Would this adaptation for a V.2 to an X-Flow configuration be a terrible idea for some reason I'm not seeing? It seems like it might be handy for some tube routing.
 

DirkSwizzler

New member
Hmm, now that I think about it a bit more. I guess one of my assumptions was that resistance along the 2 paths would always be even.

However, if they became uneven. Then efficiency would silently be impacted. But, would overall loop efficiency be more or less affected than the increased side of resistance being a required path for all water in the loop?

I still can't reasonably predict those effects.
 

Eddy

Iceman
Staff member
Sorry, i am not really sure if i undersrtand what you are talking about.

The Fill/Drain port is on one side, IN and OUT on the other side, right. But you cant use the FILL/DRAIN port as an IN or OUT. Because you will lose the halfe of the cooling power of the radiator. The water flow is like an U. Its absolutely pointless to use the V.2 radiator as an X-Flow radiator. You will have only a water flow through the half of the radiator and in the rest of the radiator the water will not move.
 

DirkSwizzler

New member
That's why I mentioned using a Y-Splitter to combine both the IN & OUT ports to a single IN. And use the drain as a single OUT.
In theory the fluid would go down both sides at the same time. Meet at the other end. Then exit through the drain.
 

Eddy

Iceman
Staff member
Ah.... ok, now i got it..... 😂 Nice idea and yes, it will work. You will only lose maybe 1-1,5k of performance. Thats similar if you compare a normal U-flow radaitor with an X-flow radiator. So not much, not important.
 

DirkSwizzler

New member
Thank you for your helpful reply.

This poses an interesting scenario where the radiator might be used to join 2 parts of a loop that were previously split. Just to reduce tubing connections.

Although that increases the chance of mismatched pressure across the 2 inputs. Would a significant difference in pressure likely lead to slower flow rate on one side? Leading to an overall reduction in cooling efficiency? My layman understanding of fluid dynamics says that it will.
 

Eddy

Iceman
Staff member
Das ist natürlich möglich und muss man ausprobieren. Allgemein bin ich kein Freund von solchen Verbindungen. Da man nie genau weiß, wie gut es in der Praxis funktionieren wird.
 

Eddy

Iceman
Staff member
🤪 Sorry... i am not sure why i wrote this answere in german... to many to do 😂
 

Hyperstrike

New member
I know this is a bit late. Sorry. Just starting to look into my next loop.

This is a fairly decent solution if you DO need to join components.

Just be aware that you may experience some loss in cooling efficiency.
Normally, you have double the length of the radiator, as it would travel down one side, then back up the other. So a 360 would give you 720mm of travel.

This way, with the same rad, you're getting two streams, but they're only traveling 360mm.

Now, if you have a long enough rad, this may not be a problem. But if you're running a 240 or 280 in an overclock setup...
You'd REALLY want to stay on top system temps.

Also, you are going to have some turbulence at the drain port, as you essentially have both streams hitting head-on. So you may have a noise issue. How GREAT that noise issue is? Dunno. Never ran a setup like that.
 
Top