A close second might be liquid cooled air tight cabinets with the
air/water
heat exchangers (redundant pair) at the bottom where leaks are less of an
issue (drip tray, anyone? :) )...
Something like what you suggest has been around for a year or two now,
though using liquid CO2 as the
Sorry to resurrect a slightly old thread, but I did want to touch on
something I noticed while catching up.
On Mar 25, 2008, at 6:12 PM, Michael Brown wrote:
Naturally, that's redundant, so theoretical maximum usage per rack is
half that, 23200W. Plus, the blades available today don't draw
At 03:50 PM 4/3/2008, Derek J. Balling wrote:
So your theoretical maximum draw is NOT 1/2 the total... in a nicely
populated chassis it will draw more than 1/2 the total and complain
the whole time about it.
That should probably have read in a well designed and fully populated
chassis... I
Do not forget physical security (including, but not limited to, access control
surveillance -- different logs, videos, and people to control),
local/municipal/state laws and regulations (e.g. fire control standards),
personnel to manage all that sites (even third-party)... IMHO too much
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 2:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given that power and HVAC are such key issues in building
big datacenters, and that fiber to the office is now a reality
virtually everywhere, one wonders why someone doesn't start
building out distributed data centers. Essentially,
Paul Vixie wrote:
aside from the corrosive nature of the salt and other minerals, there is an
unbelievable maze of permits from various layers of government since there's
a protected marshland as well as habitat restoration within a few miles. i
think it's safe to say that Sun Quentin could
I believe some of the calculations for hole/trench sizing per ton used for
geothermal exchange heating/cooling applications rely on the seasonal nature
of heating/cooling.
I have heard that if you either heat or cool on a continuous permanent
basis, year-round, then you need to allow for more
Dorn Hetzel wrote:
I believe some of the calculations for hole/trench sizing per ton used
for geothermal exchange heating/cooling applications rely on the
seasonal nature of heating/cooling.
I have heard that if you either heat or cool on a continuous permanent
basis, year-round, then you
On Monday 24 March 2008, Deepak Jain wrote:
While I enjoy hand waving as much as the next guy... reading over this
thread, there are several definitions of sq ft (ft^2) here and folks are
interchanging their uses whether aware of it or not.
[snip]
A 30KW cabinet while one sounds lovely, a
At 10:15 AM 3/26/2008, Lamar Owen wrote:
One thing I haven't seen discussed, though, is the other big issue with
high-density equipment, and that is weight.
Those raised floors have a weight limit. In our case, our floors, built out
in the early 90's, have a 1500 lb per square inch point load
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
A close second might be liquid cooled air tight cabinets with the air/water
heat exchangers (redundant pair) at the bottom where leaks are less of an
issue (drip tray, anyone? :) )...
Something like what you suggest has been around for a year or two
this has been, to me, one of the most fascinating nanog threads in years.
at the moment my own datacenter problem is filtration. isc lives in a place
where outside air is quite cool enough for server inlet seven or more months
out of the year. we've also got quite high ceilings. a 2HP roof
what kind of automation can i deploy that will
precipitate the particulates so that air can move (for
cooling) and so that air won't bring grit (which is conductive)?
Have you considered a two-step process using water in the first
step to remove particulates (water spray perhaps?) and then
This thread begs a question - how much do you think it'd be worth to do
things more efficiently?
Adrian
$5
Adrian Chadd wrote:
This thread begs a question - how much do you think it'd be worth to do
things more efficiently?
Adrian
I still think the industry needs to standardise water cooling to popularise
it; if there were two water ports on all the pizzaboxes next to the RJ45s,
and a standard set of flexible pipes, how many people would start using it?
There's probably a medical, automotive or aerospace standard out there.
That would be pretty good. But seeing some of the disastrous cabling
situations it'd have to be made pretty idiot proof.
Nice double sealed idiot proof piping with self-sealing ends..
--
Leigh
--
Leigh
Alexander Harrowell wrote:
I still think the industry needs to standardise water cooling
A valve in the connector; has to be pushed in by the other connector to let
the water flow. Water pressure pushes it shut otherwise so it fails-safe.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Leigh Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
That would be pretty good. But seeing some of the disastrous cabling
It would sure be nice if along with choosing to order servers with DC or AC
power inputs one could choose air or water cooling.
Or perhaps some non-conductive working fluid instead of water. That might
not carry quite as much heat as water, but it would surely carry more than
air and if chosen
Once upon a time, Dorn Hetzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Of course, my chemistry is a little rusty, so I'm not sure about the
prospects for a non-toxic, non-flammable, non-conductive substance with
workable fluid flow and heat transfer properties :)
Fluorinert - it worked (more or less) for the
] on behalf of Paul Vixie
Sent: Tue 3/25/2008 2:17 AM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: rack power question
this has been, to me, one of the most fascinating nanog threads in years.
at the moment my own datacenter problem is filtration. isc lives in a place
where outside air is quite cool enough
Matthew Crocker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seal off the room so you can control your replacement air source. Put a
series of cyclone dust collectors (think huge Dyson Vacuum) on your inbound
air.
http://www.proventilation.com/products/ProductsView.asp?page=1gclid=CKyD04SRqJICFQUilgod-isIRg
On 25 Mar 2008, at 09:11 , Dorn Hetzel wrote:
It would sure be nice if along with choosing to order servers with
DC or AC power inputs one could choose air or water cooling.
Or perhaps some non-conductive working fluid instead of water. That
might not carry quite as much heat as water,
Dorn Hetzel wrote:
Of course, my chemistry is a little rusty, so I'm not sure about the
prospects for a non-toxic, non-flammable, non-conductive substance with
workable fluid flow and heat transfer properties :)
Mineral oil? I'm not sure about the non-flammable part though. Not all
oils
While it has the potential to catch fire - it does however work fine in my
car engine.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Justin Shore
Sent: 25 March 2008 14:20
To: Dorn Hetzel
Cc: nanog list
Subject: Re: rack power question
Dorn Hetzel
Joe Abley wrote:
On 25 Mar 2008, at 09:11 , Dorn Hetzel wrote:
It would sure be nice if along with choosing to order servers with DC
or AC power inputs one could choose air or water cooling.
Or perhaps some non-conductive working fluid instead of water. That
might not carry quite as
] On Behalf
Of
Justin Shore
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 10:20 AM
To: Dorn Hetzel
Cc: nanog list
Subject: Re: rack power question
Dorn Hetzel wrote:
Of course, my chemistry is a little rusty, so I'm not sure about the
prospects for a non-toxic, non-flammable, non-conductive substance
Russia (or the USSR at that time) used to use liquid graphite to cool their
nuclear reactors, even thought it was flammable of course that was what
they were using in Chernobyl.
--
Brian Raaen
Network Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tuesday 25 March 2008, you wrote:
Dorn Hetzel wrote:
Of
Justin Shore
Sent: 25 March 2008 14:20
To: Dorn Hetzel
Cc: nanog list
Subject: Re: rack power question
Dorn Hetzel wrote:
Of course, my chemistry is a little rusty, so I'm not sure about the
prospects for a non-toxic, non-flammable, non-conductive substance
with workable fluid flow
. (-100degC to 130degC)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Chris Adams
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 6:38 AM
To: nanog list
Subject: Re: rack power question
Once upon a time, Dorn Hetzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Of course, my chemistry is a little
On Mar 25, 2008, at 11:15 AM, Brian Raaen wrote:
Russia (or the USSR at that time) used to use liquid graphite to
cool their
nuclear reactors, even thought it was flammable of course that
was what
they were using in Chernobyl.
The RBMK-1000 used graphite for moderation and water
Dorn Hetzel wrote:
Of course, my chemistry is a little rusty, so I'm not sure about the
prospects for a non-toxic, non-flammable, non-conductive substance
with workable fluid flow and heat transfer properties :)
For some of us over-the-edge pc enthusiasts, we use a non-conductive heat
transfer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adrian Chadd) writes:
This thread begs a question - how much do you think it'd be worth to do
things more efficiently?
this is a strict business decision involving sustainability and TCO. if it
takes one watt of mechanical to transfer heat away from every watt delivered,
Or perhaps some non-conductive working fluid instead of water.
That might not carry quite as much heat as water, but it would surely
carry more than air and if chosen correctly would have more benign
results
when the inevitable leaks and spills occur.
HCFC-123 is likely what
Brian Raaen wrote:
Russia (or the USSR at that time) used to use liquid graphite to cool their
nuclear reactors, even thought it was flammable of course that was what
they were using in Chernobyl.
This has diverged far enough that it's now off the topic of cooling. The
melting point
forwarded with permission.
From: Bob Bradlee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:16:17 -0400
X-Mailer: PMMail 2000 Professional (2.20.2717) For Windows 2000 (5.1.2600;2)
Subject: Re: rack power question
On 25 Mar 2008 06:17:15 +, Paul Vixie
Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Brian Raaen wrote:
Russia (or the USSR at that time) used to use liquid graphite to cool
their nuclear reactors, even thought it was flammable of course
that was what they were using in Chernobyl.
This has diverged far enough that it's now off the topic of cooling.
i am vexed at the moment by the filtration costs.
What is it that is clogging your filters? Dust? Pollen? Small animals??
We're in a similar situation to you, though even
better as we're blessed by even cooler ambients
and never see 100°F, or even close to it. So
we're using make-up air
We'll need non-returns in there as well, to limit the maximum possible
spillage. More seriously, the energy-efficiency community has a whole design
approach for industrial facilities called Factor 10 Engineering which is
about saving heat or cooling by using the shortest, straightest, fattest
There are vendors working on this, but the point here is that unlike the
medical, automotive or aerospace industries Computing (in general)
platforms aren't regulated the same way... you won't see random gear
hanging off the inside of an MRI (in general), or in an airplane, etc.
Mineral oil? I'm not sure about the non-flammable part though. Not
all oils burn but I'm not sure if mineral oil is one of them. It is
used for immersion cooling though.
It burns quite well ..
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/transformer-explosion/1599831229
Cheers,
Michael Holstein
Paul Vixie wrote:
this is a strict business decision involving sustainability and TCO. if it
takes one watt of mechanical to transfer heat away from every watt delivered,
whereas ambient air with good-enough filtration will let one watt of roof fan
transfer the heat away from five delivered
Have you made any calculations if geo-cooling makes sense in your region to
fill in the hottest summer months or is drilling just too expensive for the
return?
i'm too close to san francisco bay.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you made any calculations if geo-cooling makes sense in your region to
fill in the hottest summer months or is drilling just too expensive for the
return?
i'm too close to san francisco bay.
Paul,
Why is that
i'm too close to san francisco bay.
Why is that bad? I thought ground-source HVAC systems worked better if
the ground was saturated with water. Better thermal conductivity than
dry soil.
aside from the corrosive nature of the salt and other minerals, there is an
unbelievable maze of
Here's another project which has dubbed themselves teraflops from
milliwatts which I believe is shipping iron. I have no first-hand
experience with their products:
http://www.sicortex.com/
--
-Barry Shein
The World | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Butler
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 12:11 PM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: RE: rack power question
There comes a point where you cant physically transfer the energy using air
any more - not less you wana break the laws a physics captin (couldn't
resist sorry) - to your DX system, gas, then water
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008, Frank Bulk - iNAME wrote:
So perhaps the question isn't so much how many kW's I can pack into a 42U
rack, but for the data center designer, what's the best price point if real
estate is not a significant issue. Or to say it another way, what kW
density per rack will give
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Justin M. Streiner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
While there are certainly customers out there who think along these lines,
most of the enterprise customers I've run across in the past who would be
in the market for data center colo would just as soon play the
While I enjoy hand waving as much as the next guy... reading over this
thread, there are several definitions of sq ft (ft^2) here and folks are
interchanging their uses whether aware of it or not.
1) sq ft = the amount of sq ft your cabinet/cage sits on.
2) sq ft = the amount of sq ft
: Re: rack power question
While I enjoy hand waving as much as the next guy... reading over this
thread, there are several definitions of sq ft (ft^2) here and folks are
interchanging their uses whether aware of it or not.
1) sq ft = the amount of sq ft your cabinet/cage sits on.
2) sq ft
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 March 2008 02:34
To: Patrick Giagnocavo
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: rack power question
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Curran) writes:
Also, you're still going to want to size the power drop so that
the measured load won't exceed 80% capacity due to code.
that's true of output breakers, panel busbars, and wire. on the other
hand, transformers (e.g., 480-208 or 12K-480) are rated at
Surly we should be asking exactly is driving the demand for
high density computing and in which market sectors and is
this actually the best technical solution to solve them
problem. I don't care if IBM, HP etc etc want to keep
selling new shiny boxes each year because they are telling
: 23 March 2008 02:34
To: Patrick Giagnocavo
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: rack power question
Surly we should be asking exactly is driving the demand for
high density computing and in which market sectors and is
this actually the best technical solution to solve them
problem. I don't care if IBM, HP etc etc want to keep
selling new shiny boxes each year because they are telling
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 March 2008 02:34
To: Patrick Giagnocavo
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: rack power question
57 matches
Mail list logo
