Some really attractive things are often overlooked or given less attention than they deserve, for various reasons. This is somewhat the case with the technically remarkable fan from PCCooler CPS – the F5 R120. This 120 mm fan with its features is in the company of the most prominent names, although it has its weaknesses as well. These may or may not interest you either. It depends on the use case.
Mounting and vibration measurement
Naturally, each tested fan must first be properly mounted. With all that we want to measure, and with the kind of precision that is required for relevant measurements, even the smallest details matter. The whole mounting system is quite complex and we are happy to have fine-tuned it to maximum satisfaction. Even if it meant hundreds of hours of tinkering. What’s so complicated about it? There’s more.
The fans are installed to the multi-purpose bracket. The substrate is a 2 mm thick metal plate to which the fan is attached, or the fan is attached together with an obstacle (e.g. a filter, hexagonal grille or liquid cooler radiator).
For correct and always equal pressure, the fans are always tightened with the same force with a torque screwdriver. If this were not the case, joints and clearances in the assembly could arise, in short, uneven conditions with undesirable distortion. For example, also for vibration measurement. On top of the fan mount there is also a bracket for the three-axis vibrometer sensor. The latter is magnetically attached via a steel insert, on which the sensor exerts a force of one kilogram and, thanks to the stop, is also always in the same place and in the same contact with the rest of the structure. These are the basics in terms of repeatability of measurements.
In order to capture the intensity at the highest possible resolution, the tray of the holder cannot be too heavy and at the same time it must be strong enough not to twist. This would again cause various distortions. Therefore, we used a hard (H19) aluminium (AL99.5) plate for the construction of the holder, whose weight is just enough so that free movement is not significantly restricted.
To achieve the finest possible resolution for vibration measurement, soft rubber inserts are provided in the mounting holes through which the bracket is installed to the tunnel. And just behind these inserts are silent blocks with a very low hardness of 30 Shore. These are also used so that the vibrations of the fans don’t spread to the tunnel skeleton. If this were to happen, then for fans with more intense vibrations, this secondary noise component, which is not related to the aerodynamic sound of the fan, would also be reflected in the noise measurement results.
This is where it is good to have ideal conditions, even though they are unattainable in practice, because fan vibrations will always be transmitted to the case skeleton to some degree. But each cabinet will react differently to them, or rather the final noise level will depend on a number of factors, starting with the materials used. Therefore, it is a good idea to filter out this extra noise component in tests and in practice take into account the measured vibration intensities. The higher these vibrations are, the higher the noise addition has to be taken into account.
The silent blocks are naturally formatted to offset the bracket a bit from the rest of the tunnel, otherwise they wouldn’t make sense. This creates a gap that is sealed across the entire surface with a soft foam seal with closed cell structure (i.e., it’s airtight).
To properly center the fan impeller in relation to the other elements, the bracket includes a protruding frame that follows the inner contour of the seal. And to make matters even more complicated, the frame with the tested fan is pressed against this seal by a small force of compression springs, which in turn is set with the highest possible resolution for vibration measurement in mind and at the same time so that sufficient pressure is generated to maintain a flawless seal.
Vibration is measured with a Landtek VM-6380 vibration meter. It records the vibration speed (in mm) per second in all axes (X, Y, Z). For quick orientation, we calculate a 3D vector from the measured values and graph the “total” vibration intensity. But you can also find your results if you are only interested in a specific axis.
The most complicated part of the tunnel is behind us, and we’ll move on in the next chapter. But we will still stay at the beginning of the tunnel, we will just turn to the peripheries on the sides.
That’s a very a good fan overall. No noticeable weakness with decent noise profile, at a highly competitive price point. I’m surprised that a PBT only fan without an outer ring can perform this well. I wonder how the Arctic P12 Max compares (maybe it’s comparable to the ARGB version?)
P.S. Frequency plots aren’t accessible in the English version, and most (all?) links in the conclusion page are broken due to lacking -bk.
Thanks! Fixed. 🙂
The motor sound link is still broken. It’s the first plot in the “hexagonal grille” page, right?
So, this sound only appears when speed is very close to the minimum RPM? I don’t think I’ve seen this behaviour before, interesting. It should be easily avoidable by the user, but can be limiting for those who want an extremely quiet build.
Haha, no mistake escapes you. What a great thing that we have such attentive readers. 🙂
And yes, it’s the first spectrogram with the hexagonal grille. This mode has the lowest fan speed at which frequency analysis of sound is measured. Several fans with typically cheaper motors are struggling at the lower speed limit and this behaviour is accompanied by such annoying sounds. I don’t always point it out, but here it was extra interesting especially in the context of high efficiency at very low speeds. When you go from that optimum 700 rpm down to somewhere near 550 rpm, it may not be so great anymore. Because of that annoying motor sound that adds to the well audible spectrum.
The blades of the F5 R120 are relatively short yet thick. Although we did measure some vibration, I don’t think it was due to the blades being “too flexible”. Something else will be behind their occurrence, maybe some manufacturing inaccuracies (around the axle for example) and such. The lower MTBF value would suggest this, but I don’t want to speculate on these things.
What is obvious, however, is that even a cheap fan with shorter PBT blades doesn’t have to be the source of any vibration. We have already been convinced of this by a test of 15 Stratus 1220 PWMs, where the variance of vibration across the samples is very wide. But it is given by the high tolerances. If the vibrations were due to blade undulations, we would never, on any piece, measure 0.000. And in that one case (the gold sample) this happened even at maximum speed with a fairly high (1600) RPM.
Strongly recommand you to add the 9RA1212P4G001, and maybe the 9RA1212P1K001 and 9RA1412P1G001 from Sanyo into the compaing list.
Thank you for the useful tips. We will definitely take a look at the fans and try to add them to the results database. I can’t promise when this might happen, but we will contact Sanyo and see.