Keenly, and patiently, hoping this all turns out well for you, KMPKT! (And for us too! hehe)
Cooling KMPKT Heatsink and Fan Poll
- Thread starter Kmpkt
- Start date
Just spent a bucket load in prototyping fees and should have assembled prototypes (four of them) by mid-February. Here's hoping it's not a wash!
Honestly it's so much more complicated than that, but I'll try to break it down.
Within any given heatsink there are like 10 possible rate limiters to heat dissipation, but overall conductance is king. There are people that say aluminum moves heat to air more effectively than copper despite the fact that it's conductance is literally half that of copper. My guy with a PhD in thermal engineering straightened that one out for me - it's complete bullshit. As far as heatsink design goes, the reason that aluminum is as good as copper for a lot of heatsink designs comes down to the fact that you can't get enough heat to the fin stack through the various heat transfer barriers to take advantage of copper's superiority.
Take a 6mm heat pipe as an example. By numbers, a single 6mm heat pipe can transmit 38W of heat if completely straight. If you put a couple of bends into it to recurve back to the fin stack (like the L9i as an example) you've already reduced that to 33W. That means on an L9i you have 66W of heat that can be dissipated through the pipes with the rest of the capacity coming by way of the fact that Noctua has used a long heatsink base to allow for superior connectivity from base to fin.
Taking this design further, you have to also understand all of the resistance barriers that exist between the IHS and the fins. Again using the L9i as an example:
Within any given heatsink there are like 10 possible rate limiters to heat dissipation, but overall conductance is king. There are people that say aluminum moves heat to air more effectively than copper despite the fact that it's conductance is literally half that of copper. My guy with a PhD in thermal engineering straightened that one out for me - it's complete bullshit. As far as heatsink design goes, the reason that aluminum is as good as copper for a lot of heatsink designs comes down to the fact that you can't get enough heat to the fin stack through the various heat transfer barriers to take advantage of copper's superiority.
Take a 6mm heat pipe as an example. By numbers, a single 6mm heat pipe can transmit 38W of heat if completely straight. If you put a couple of bends into it to recurve back to the fin stack (like the L9i as an example) you've already reduced that to 33W. That means on an L9i you have 66W of heat that can be dissipated through the pipes with the rest of the capacity coming by way of the fact that Noctua has used a long heatsink base to allow for superior connectivity from base to fin.
Taking this design further, you have to also understand all of the resistance barriers that exist between the IHS and the fins. Again using the L9i as an example:
- IHS to Copper heatsink base - this is somewhat aided if using a reasonably good thermal paste but is a large barrier nonetheless
- Copper heatsink base to heat pipes - there will possibly be some thermal paste here, but this is another significant barrier. A heat pipe can't conduct 33W of heat per pipe if the heat cannot effectively enter the pipe
- Copper heatsink to fin - On the rare occasion that the fins actually communicate with the base like in the L9i (this is the only reason it's so far ahead of other two pipe coolers) this is a solder joint. Because the solder used is specifically thermally conductive, this is a relatively low barrier to heat transfer
- Heat pipe to fin - this is another solder joint and therefore transfers heat relatively well
- Fin to air - IF you have enough heat reaching the fins to actually max out your stack (very unlikely given conventional designs) then this is where copper fins can vastly outstrip aluminum. To put this in perspective, when doing early simulation of my heatsink design I was able to put one fin every 2.0mm in copper instead of 1.2mm with aluminum and achieve similar thermals. This reflects a near 2/3 improvement in heat dissipation with effective design.
- Airflow properties - once you're at the point where you're transferring heat from fin to air you have to consider airspeed (CFM), turbulence within the stack, air redirection, stagnation of air if it isn't redirected properly, balancing of air pressure across the fin stack, variability in airspeed between the inside and outside of the fan impeller, etc.
By far one of the best explanations I've seen on this debate. I wish you nothing but the best on your endeavor sir!
Wow. Thanks very much for the detailed answer. It looks like you've got the theory down proper! I am really looking forward to seeing that final result.
Hoping to do a full disclosure in mid to later February. We're just getting to the end of to provisional patent application process. Once I have that filed, then I can let you guys in on all of the goodies. There are at least three features that I believe are completely novel in the space of CPU cooling (probably four) which will hopefully make this thing crush everything out there. I'm planning on making it TR4/X299 compatible if real life performance matches simulations 
Should your initial product be successful I would hope that you consider also producing a variant that is totally fan-less for low TDP CPUs. My most favorite cooler was the Thermalright Ultima 90i which I used with a Prescott CPU - the reduction in noise from 'extremely' loud to nearly nothing was such an emotional relief it is difficult to put in to words. A similar concept seems to have been implemented by Prolimatech with the Samuel 17 but this is sadly not in production anymore.
You have said that you are patenting your product. FWIW I invented a product a few years ago and filed a patent for it. The time period for filing in various countries just ended this year. Though I have no legal training whatsoever I wrote all the legal stuff myself, i.e. the Specifications and Claims after reading a book on how to do it. In so doing I saved a lot of money. If you need any advice regarding the documentation I can point you in a self-learning direction.
However the fact is, after having gone through the process, I now no longer believe it is a good idea to patent. Sadly I find that it is a sort of 'protectionism' and a means by which technology and advancement can be slowed down unfairly. I would bid you reconsider. For one I do not think it is necessary for you. You've got a brand name, respect in this community and intellectual backing - your inventions will have more weight than whatever else is produced by others. Also I doubt it would make much difference in the largest manufacturing country (and soon largest market) in the world - China, where patents are simply ignored and unenforceable whatever their government might say. Lastly, I believe the time and expense are significant and not good value at all.
I did not spend much money, and reading about the negatives changed my heart. So I eventually let my patent lapse and only filed in my home country for bragging rights (which is a tiny market really). My invention is now in the public space and available for anyone to copy and use in nearly all parts of the world.
You have said that you are patenting your product. FWIW I invented a product a few years ago and filed a patent for it. The time period for filing in various countries just ended this year. Though I have no legal training whatsoever I wrote all the legal stuff myself, i.e. the Specifications and Claims after reading a book on how to do it. In so doing I saved a lot of money. If you need any advice regarding the documentation I can point you in a self-learning direction.
However the fact is, after having gone through the process, I now no longer believe it is a good idea to patent. Sadly I find that it is a sort of 'protectionism' and a means by which technology and advancement can be slowed down unfairly. I would bid you reconsider. For one I do not think it is necessary for you. You've got a brand name, respect in this community and intellectual backing - your inventions will have more weight than whatever else is produced by others. Also I doubt it would make much difference in the largest manufacturing country (and soon largest market) in the world - China, where patents are simply ignored and unenforceable whatever their government might say. Lastly, I believe the time and expense are significant and not good value at all.
I did not spend much money, and reading about the negatives changed my heart. So I eventually let my patent lapse and only filed in my home country for bragging rights (which is a tiny market really). My invention is now in the public space and available for anyone to copy and use in nearly all parts of the world.
I am using a patent lawyer I have used in the past for other inventions I have in the field of medicine. I appreciate the offer though
I respectfully disagree with your viewpoint here, but I do appreciate where you are coming from especially considering how patents are typically used by large rent-seeking corporations.
The obvious reason for obtaining a patent is that I have a significant amount of time and money invested in bringing this product to market. I do not think it unreasonable to use a patent to ensure that I have a fair chance to both recover my investment and make a reasonable profit without large corporate interference. I am convinced that not filing patents would simply open the door to a larger entity taking my idea and getting it to market at a volume and price that I could never hope to compete with. Any brand power I may have lives and dies on these message boards and is certainly not enough to leverage a dominant market position from.
To add some perspective and rationale, this exact scenario played out for a close friend of mine not long ago. Unbeknownst to him, a large Taiwanese conglomerate discovered his product development (after he had filed a provisional patent on the invention in question), filed their own patent on the invention (which would have eventually been invalidated due to first to file laws), and then proceeded to serve him with a litany of legal action including cease and desist notices claiming their patent filing. Although the rightful owner of the IP in question, the long, drawn out and cripplingly expensive process of proving that he had patent priority meant he was unable to fund a defence against the legal action. This ultimately led him to completely abandon the manufacture and sale of his passion project. This also left him unable to recoup the development and manufacturing costs on his project resulting in a significant financial loss.
Ultimately my goal in holding intellectual property rights on my inventions is that I can choose to litigate large corporations who are pirating my ideas in an attempt to outcompete me using the scale and efficiencies they alone possess. Also, I am fortunately in the position where I believe I could successfully defend myself in the situation outlined above (but would obviously prefer not to).
With all of that being said, the same power conferred by a patent means that I can consciously choose to leave other small innovators alone which is what I would most likely do. Beyond that, I could even use the profits of my IP combined with free licensure to provide them with the tools to expedite innovation. As a working example of this, Joshua Sniffen of Not From Concentrate holds a utility patent on his Skyslots. He spent a large amount of time getting this panel venting system properly designed by engineers to allow for maximum airflow in small form factor PCs. I believe his intent with his IP is to make large corporations license his technology for fair profit while allowing community members like CustomMod to use his features freely for small scale production by simply asking.
Anyhow, it is my strongly held belief that leaving your IP unprotected is simply an invitation for big players to steal your ideas and leverage them back against you. Allowing this to occur in no way fosters innovation, but instead acts to financially strangle out those who possess true innovative potential due to their inability to compete financially. Furthermore, having attended Computex last year, I can tell you that there is precious little innovation happening in the PC space right now. Anything a large corporation could use to outcompete their contemporaries is fair game to be lifted.
Ultimately, I believe your view on patents centres around non-benevolent use of said patents (ie. greed driven). I can assure you that my desire to obtain patents is driven by a desire to keep less altruistic entities from doing exactly this while allowing me to use my IP to help other small innovators to move forward and be competitive with the protection of my own patents. To take that one step further, it is actually my long term intention to weaponize any innovations I have against large and non-innovative entities allowing more opportunities for the underdogs.
Last edited:
I am using a patent lawyer I have used in the past for other inventions I have in the field of medicine. I appreciate the offer though
I respectfully disagree with your viewpoint here, but I do appreciate where you are coming from especially considering how patents are typically used by large rent-seeking corporations.
The obvious reason for obtaining a patent is that I have a significant amount of time and money invested in bringing this product to market. I do not think it unreasonable to use a patent to ensure that I have a fair chance to both recover my investment and make a reasonable profit without large corporate interference. I am convinced that not filing patents would simply open the door to a larger entity taking my idea and getting it to market at a volume and price that I could never hope to compete with. Any brand power I may have lives and dies on these message boards and is certainly not enough to leverage a dominant market position from.
To add some perspective and rationale, this exact scenario played out for a close friend of mine not long ago. Unbeknownst to him, a large Taiwanese conglomerate discovered his product development (after he had filed a provisional patent on the invention in question), filed their own patent on the invention (which would have eventually been invalidated due to first to file laws), and then proceeded to serve him with a litany of legal action including cease and desist notices claiming their patent filing. Although the rightful owner of the IP in question, the long, drawn out and cripplingly expensive process of proving that he had patent priority meant he was unable to fund a defence against the legal action. This ultimately led him to completely abandon the manufacture and sale of his passion project. This also left him unable to recoup the development and manufacturing costs on his project resulting in a significant financial loss.
Ultimately my goal in holding intellectual property rights on my inventions is that I can choose to litigate large corporations who are pirating my ideas in an attempt to outcompete me using the scale and efficiencies they alone possess. Also, I am fortunately in the position where I believe I could successfully defend myself in the situation outlined above (but would obviously prefer not to).
With all of that being said, the same power conferred by a patent means that I can consciously choose to leave other small innovators alone which is what I would most likely do. Beyond that, I could even use the profits of my IP combined with free licensure to provide them with the tools to expedite innovation. As a working example of this, Joshua Sniffen of Not From Concentrate holds a utility patent on his Skyslots. He spent a large amount of time getting this panel venting system properly designed by engineers to allow for maximum airflow in small form factor PCs. I believe his intent with his IP is to make large corporations license his technology for fair profit while allowing community members like CustomMod to use his features freely for small scale production by simply asking.
Anyhow, it is my strongly held belief that leaving your IP unprotected is simply an invitation for big players to steal your ideas and leverage them back against you. Allowing this to occur in no way fosters innovation, but instead acts to financially strangle out those who possess true innovative potential due to their inability to compete financially. Furthermore, having attended Computex last year, I can tell you that there is precious little innovation happening in the PC space right now. Anything a large corporation could use to outcompete their contemporaries is fair game to be lifted.
Ultimately, I believe your view on patents centres around non-benevolent use of said patents (ie. greed driven). I can assure you that my desire to obtain patents is driven by a desire to keep less altruistic entities from doing exactly this while allowing me to use my IP to help other small innovators to move forward and be competitive with the protection of my own patents. To take that one step further, it is actually my long term intention to weaponize any innovations I have against large and non-innovative entities allowing more opportunities for the underdogs.
I suppose the trouble I have with patents is largely illustrated by the experience of your friend. A big corporation uses patent law as a means of abuse. The law meant to protect against greed but in actual fact acts as a weapon for greed.
This results in a situation whereby smaller inventors must participate in a broken system in order to protect themselves from a broken system, and must invest tremendous sums just to participate. IMO it is also this same broken system that causes corporations to become so large as to monopolize the market - something that I do not believe happens in a natural unregulated economy. A vicious circle I think.
Thank you for highlighting your views. I do respect them! I merely offer my very subjective perspective. But practically speaking, should a copy emerge from Taiwan or China (your primary threats I think) how do you hope to defend against it? As I understand even in Taiwan such legal protection is only in word and not deed! Would not all the investment have been in vain?
Thaaaaaaaaaat's it, I'm committing to a particular Asrock board now
(would it be the same size? or bigger)
Same size or bigger? Read the fookin logo at the top you wanker.
Edit: to clarify, I don't actually think VegetableStu is a wanker, I'm just trying to be humorous by making a joke about his suggestion that something be made larger at smallformfactor. Let this be a warning and a lesson to all you wankers thinking about making things bigger.
Edit: to clarify, I don't actually think VegetableStu is a wanker, I'm just trying to be humorous by making a joke about his suggestion that something be made larger at smallformfactor. Let this be a warning and a lesson to all you wankers thinking about making things bigger.
Last edited:
From what I understand, the value to holding patents in China (which I plan to do) is that if more than one Chinese company starts to rip you off then you can negotiate the sale of your Chinese patent to one of them. Because in China the authorities will allow one Chinese entity to use a patent to leverage a cease and desist on the other, ultimately this allows them to secure the Chinese market they ultimately want through litigation of the competition. In exchange you can negotiate that they butt out of your primary markets or alternatively that you work together in a productive manner that allows you both the coexist. As an example I'd be happy to have someone like Silverstone or Thermaltake make a downmarket variant of my product that allows for better performance than the competition (ie. a largely Aluminum variant) while paying reasonable licensing fees.
As far as initial threats from China, I acknowledge that I have literally no defence against them. The goal is to remain relatively small to start and build some true brand power before they decide to reverse engineer my stuff. If I can do that, then at the very least I have a soapbox to denounce them from. Also companies in China will likely do cheap knockoffs that lose significant performance in order to achieve a much lower price. By going that far downmarket, they're not taking my customers anyways (someone only willing to pay 29.99 for a heatsink is outside my target client base). As a brand my goal is to stay as premium and uncompromising as possible.
Last edited:
oh right there was mention of testing another copper heatsink with coatings (and one with the lack of). Would the heatsink be coated/plated? o_o
I am torn on coating. Ultimately if this actually gets to production and the manufacturer I choose has the capacity to do black nickel coating then I will probably go for it. That being said, I am likely going to have a shroud over the heatsink (think Cryorig C7) and the copper highlights around that might actually be pretty nice.
mmm got it. the area where I live is quite humid, so I kinda worry about bare copper ._. (my C14S already has this... does nickel rust?)
Many people are willing to pay for quality craftsmanship, peace of mind, and expert support. One quick question: will this heatsink perform well if I use a fan in a upward draft/outward pressure configuration? For my RVZ02, I have noticed that my temps are far better (about 5-10 degrees Celsius lower) with the CPU fan facing up and out rather than down and in on any of my AM4 heatsinks (stock Wraith Spire and ID-COOLING IS-60).
Similar threads
