Concept Modultra flat reservoir with active pump cooling pre order open!

[Alloy Craft]

HI guys, I am looking to gauge interest in a flat style reservoir like the EK FLT120 that has active pump cooling capabilities. I believe this would be the first flat pump res on the market with this capability. Just like the Modultra LOBO CPU pump block, it would use an integral brass pump body, and one of our conductor series heatsinks in order to actively cool the DDC pump via conduction into the loop coolant. As discussed in the LOBO thread, during testing I saw a 50 degree temperature reduction in pump circuit board and coil temperatures with this configuration. In addition our pump cavity would have optimized flow paths for higher pumping efficiencies vs the EK FLT. Cost on this product would be similar to the LOBO.

Essentially the design would be a flat acrylic reservoir with a integrated brass pump housing. It would have 3 exit ports and 2 entry ports. The design could either mount directly on a 120mm fan pattern or possibly on a bracket, depending on which side you would want to display. Size would be similar to the EK FLT120 and have a similar coolant capacity.

The reservoir could be mounted in three orientations. With pump down, left and right. Also the fill ports would be G1/8 and located in a fashion that would allow proper filling, and draining regardless or orientation, something the Ek flt series lacks.

 

[XNine]

I think it's a good idea, more competition is always good, though I dunno how many people could utilize this in the SFF community since most builds are about the size of a rubix cube.... I myself bought an FLT80 for an upcoming Protolyth Slate build and that's going to be a stretch to get it in the build, so I dunno if you want to try to scale it down or if you're trying to target larger builds where this could really be utilized...

 

[Alloy Craft]

I think it's a good idea, more competition is always good, though I dunno how many people could utilize this in the SFF community since most builds are about the size of a rubix cube.... I myself bought an FLT80 for an upcoming Protolyth Slate build and that's going to be a stretch to get it in the build, so I dunno if you want to try to scale it down or if you're trying to target larger builds where this could really be utilized...

Most likely I would offer the reservoir in sizes of 80, 120 and 240mm sizes to be a direct match to the EK lineup. The pump housing would be the same between all of the sizes and would function the same. I just made a model of the 120 since it seems to be the most popular size.

 

[NRG]

Love the idea! Based on the people I chat with smaller is best. The Lobo works because we can't fit a pump res into our SFF builds. If you want to move the pump from the block then it will need to be equally small.

Something along these lines, but smaller again. That would be the bee's knees!

 

[XNine]

Most likely I would offer the reservoir in sizes of 80, 120 and 240mm sizes to be a direct match to the EK lineup. The pump housing would be the same between all of the sizes and would function the same. I just made a model of the 120 since it seems to be the most popular size.

Oh, that's pretty awesome, then! Especially if the quality is there, which I have no doubt.

 

[Alloy Craft]

Thought I would post up some photos our LORO pump reservoir prototype. So far things are looking good. I will be posting up flow and thermal test results on these units in the coming weeks. After that we will be doing a beta run. For anyone interested in being a beta tester please let me know asap, as I am only going to be looking six or seven beta testers. The beta units would be $100 with 50% of that being refunded when you post back in the thread with your completed builds utilizing our pump res. Beta users would need to cover shipping charges. Units available for the beta would be the LORO 80 and LORO 120 shown in the photos below. Please message me for further details regarding the beta.


The LORO reservoirs are designed to work with any of the Modultra heatsinks. Fill and drain ports are G1/8 with all other ports G1/4. Because the block is solid brass there is very little risk of cracking due to fitting overtightening. And of course the pump housing will actively cool your DDC pump.

LORO 120

LORO 80

 

[JDuval]

Sign me up!

 

[L91]

Thought I would post up some photos our LORO pump reservoir prototype. So far things are looking good. I will be posting up flow and thermal test results on these units in the coming weeks. After that we will be doing a beta run. For anyone interested in being a beta tester please let me know asap, as I am only going to be looking six or seven beta testers. The beta units would be $100 with 50% of that being refunded when you post back in the thread with your completed builds utilizing our pump res. Beta users would need to cover shipping charges. Units available for the beta would be the LORO 80 and LORO 120 shown in the photos below. Please message me for further details regarding the beta.





The LORO reservoirs are designed to work with any of the Modultra heatsinks. Fill and drain ports are G1/8 with all other ports G1/4. Because the block is solid brass there is very little risk of cracking due to fitting overtightening. And of course the pump housing will actively cool your DDC pump.



LORO 120

























LORO 80 What's the cobined depth with the pump and res



















 

[L91]

Whats the combined thickness/depths of each unit and how are payments made and terms set out for testers.

 

[XNine]

I like how you have a couple of ports on the reservoir as well as on the pump/manifold. Now the only question is: how much?

 

[Alloy Craft]

Whats the combined thickness/depths of each unit and how are payments made and terms set out for testers.

Payment would be done through paypal. Dimensions are shown below for the LORO 80, the 120 is of course 120mm square instead of 80mm.

 

[Alloy Craft]

Update: As always I am doing testing on the prototype LORO series pump reservoirs and testing has led to more questions. Initial test results were a little disappointing so I have redesigned the fluid path and this has helped fluid dynamic performance greatly. I have noticed during testing, that pump inducer configuration can affect pumping performance significantly. I have tested quite a few different inducer designs and some of these are shown on the graph below along with test data for the EK FLT120. The graph shows the pumping performance curves for a non PWM Laing DDC 3.1 pump @12 volts. Overall the results are good and the performance is better than the EK FLT.

The problem with the different inducer designs is that only one could be hard machined into the reservoir. This led me to the idea of selling interchangeable pump inducers. However this route has some positives and negatives. So first the good: Interchangeable pump inducers would let the user tailor their pump performance to their system better. Also I could provide the different inducers as 3d models for people to 3d print for themselves or even experiment with different designs on their own. Now the Bad: This would increase the overall cost of the unit by a little, maybe $20-25. This also increases the complexity of the system and unfortunately it would even be possible to damage the pump if used incorrectly. The problem is that the higher pressure configurations tend to develop cavitation when used at the higher flow rates. For example on inducer D, pressure at low flow rates is great, however after 1.5 GPM light cavitation starts and by max flow rate it fairly bad. Cavitation is not great for your pump, and it also very noisy. It is difficult to estimate the effect of mild cavitation on the pumps lifespan at this time. If I were to use this configuration I would recommend staying out of the danger zone in terms of flow. However I don’t know if it is possible to put a hard cap on pump RPM.

If the interchangeable inducers idea is abandoned, I think Inducer C would be the clear choice as it only experiences only very light cavitation at it max flow rate of 2.75 GPM. And this is still an upgrade compared to the performance of the EK unit. Most likely users would never be running their pump at max anyway.

Let me know you thoughts.

 

[L91]

Update: As always I am doing testing on the prototype LORO series pump reservoirs and testing has led to more questions. Initial test results were a little disappointing so I have redesigned the fluid path and this has helped fluid dynamic performance greatly. I have noticed during testing, that pump inducer configuration can affect pumping performance significantly. I have tested quite a few different inducer designs and some of these are shown on the graph below along with test data for the EK FLT120. The graph shows the pumping performance curves for a non PWM Laing DDC 3.1 pump @12 volts. Overall the results are good and the performance is better than the EK FLT.







The problem with the different inducer designs is that only one could be hard machined into the reservoir. This led me to the idea of selling interchangeable pump inducers. However this route has some positives and negatives. So first the good: Interchangeable pump inducers would let the user tailor their pump performance to their system better. Also I could provide the different inducers as 3d models for people to 3d print for themselves or even experiment with different designs on their own. Now the Bad: This would increase the overall cost of the unit by a little, maybe $20-25. This also increases the complexity of the system and unfortunately it would even be possible to damage the pump if used incorrectly. The problem is that the higher pressure configurations tend to develop cavitation when used at the higher flow rates. For example on inducer D, pressure at low flow rates is great, however after 1.5 GPM light cavitation starts and by max flow rate it fairly bad. Cavitation is not great for your pump, and it also very noisy. It is difficult to estimate the effect of mild cavitation on the pumps lifespan at this time. If I were to use this configuration I would recommend staying out of the danger zone in terms of flow. However I don’t know if it is possible to put a hard cap on pump RPM.







If the interchangeable inducers idea is abandoned, I think Inducer C would be the clear choice as it only experiences only very light cavitation at it max flow rate of 2.75 GPM. And this is still an upgrade compared to the performance of the EK unit. Most likely users would never be running their pump at max anyway.







Let me know yououghts.













I'd say stick to non-modular approach, but what do I know.



























 

[XNine]

I mean, as someone who doesn't own a 3D printer and probably never will, would these extra inducers also be made available to purchase? And, um, what the hell is an inducer? Lol

 

[DrHudacris]

I think you're right that most people won't be running the pump at max anyway. Do I think inducer A is the best choice. It amplifies the benefits and the right side of the curve won't be explored in real world use cases anyway.

 

[Alloy Craft]

I mean, as someone who doesn't own a 3D printer and probably never will, would these extra inducers also be made available to purchase? And, um, what the hell is an inducer? Lol

In inducer is a transition between the reservoir and the pump rotor of sorts. Here are 2 of the designs that I tested. I would offer some of them as options from the store.

 

[Antioch]

How's this project proceeding?

 

[Alloy Craft]

HI guys just wanted to let you all know that the LORO 80 and 120 are now available for preorder. We hope to start shipping these in late October. Please check our webstore if you are interested.

All Products (modultra.com)