19-11-2012, 09:04pm
(19-11-2012, 05:37pm)bear Wrote: Liquids are normally made up of atoms bonded into molecules. Water being H2O. A water molecule is about 0.2 nanometer. Or about 1/500 th of the so called nanoparticles in this brew. So by all means keep an open mind, but a closed wallet! A cube squashed flat has exactly the same volume. It's surface area is increased, but we're not talking solids, we're talking liquids, ie molecules.Firepower, seems a little harsh Bear, totally agree that if your cooling system is overheating no magic fluid is going to fix it but the idea of augmenting older systems with a more efficient heat conductive fluid makes sence. The claim of a 30% increase in efficiently for more modern systems is based on the ability of the conductive material to translate heat more efficiently but again I agree the details on how this works are not there but waterless cooling fluids have been around a long time so the real question is why 115 would be better than Evans or any other similar product. The volume area example tries to explain, probably badly, how the thermal efficiency of a volume of water is less than the collective conductive material in there product.
In a water heat exchanger, yes there are boundary layers, yes there is micro boiling, but they have been very well known facts for a hundred years or more, as have been water cooled engines. They have actually built water cooling systems that work well, and have margins for scaling and blockages. If they don't work, something is wrong! Either gaskets, pumps, thermostats. If they are wrong, replacing water with something else isn't really fixing the problem. peter is right, water does have limitations, but he avoids telling anyone exactly what his material is, and doesn't give any real physical properties for it.
Firepower springs to mind as a similar product!
Ego vero custos fratris mei sum