Results: Airflow through a nylon filter
It’s heating up. We have added the first triple-A fan to the tests, which has been viewed “some way” for years, and now it will turn out how it is exactly – what are its weaknesses and what are its strengths. Some have also debated whether the Silent Wings 3 happens to be the most efficient fan ever. But as it happens, it’s a bit more complicated than a one-word answer like yes or no.
Results: Airflow through a nylon filter
Why is there a missing value sometimes? There may be more reasons. Usually it is because the fan could not be adjusted to the target noise level. Some have a higher minimum speed (or the speed is low, but the motor is too noisy) or it is a slower fan that will not reach the higher decibels. But the results in the graphs are also missing if the rotor is brushing against the nylon filter mesh. In that case, we evaluate this combination as incompatible. And zero in the graphs is naturally also in situations where we measure 0.00. This is a common occurrence at extremely low speeds with obstructions or within vibration measurements.
- Contents
- BeQuiet! Silent Wings 3 (BL066) in detail
- The basis of the methodology, the wind tunnel
- Mounting and vibration measurement
- Initial warm-up and speed recording
- Base 7 equal noise levels…
- .. and sound color (frequency characteristic)
- Static pressure measurement…
- … and airflow
- Everything changes with obstacles
- How we measure power draw and motor power
- Measuring the intensity (and power draw) of lighting
- Results: Speed
- Results: Airlow w/o obstacles
- Results: Airflow through a nylon filter
- Results: Airflow through a plastic filter
- Results: Airflow through a hexagonal grille
- Results: Airflow through a thinner radiator
- Results: Airflow through a thicker radiator
- Results: Static pressure w/o obstacles
- Results: Static pressure through a nylon filter
- Results: Static pressure through a plastic filter
- Results: Static pressure through a hexagonal grille
- Results: Static pressure through a thinner radiator
- Results: Static pressure through a thicker radiator
- Results: Static pressure, efficiency by orientation
- Reality vs. specifications
- Results: Frequency response of sound w/o obstacles
- Results: Frequency response of sound with a dust filter
- Results: Frequency response of sound with a hexagonal grille
- Results: Frequency response of sound with a radiator
- Results: Vibration, in total (3D vector length)
- Results: Vibration, X-axis
- Results: Vibration, Y-axis
- Results: Vibration, Z-axis
- Results: Power draw (and motor power)
- Results: Cooling performance per watt, airflow
- Results: Cooling performance per watt, static pressure
- Airflow per euro
- Static pressure per euro
- Results: Lighting – LED luminance and power draw
- Results: LED to motor power draw ratio
- Evaluation
I have this fan as a part of the Dark Rock Pro 4 cooler – the front one. The inner fan is disabled for now. Unfortunately, I am thinking about replacing it. What’s driving me completely nuts is the fan start that gives a sound resembling powerful rubbing against a rough surface. It’s okay for folks who want to have the fan running constantly and encounter it only during boot but I want to have a fanless idle – 0 noise, no vibrations, extended fan life, and lower power draw. I wish such behavior was stressed in this and other reviews so that one can find safe alternatives for such requirements.
It’s a pity to encounter such an unexpected drawback, as this fan is much quieter than Arctic P12. At 700 RPM, it’s barely audible in my Nanoxia Deep Silence 8 in the night, and below 500 RPM basically inaudible.
What you are describing is happening with several fans. To an excessive degree with the Strix XF120 as well, where we also mentioned it. I have thought about how to measurably grasp those starts in the context of the interpretation of the results so that a simple comparison across fans is possible, but I don’t know yet.. anyway, it will probably be an initial phase with rotor centering, which is accompanied by higher vibrations in addition to the acoustic expression.
Perhaps the evaluation page can be divided into several labelled subsections, one being dedicated to observations like this for example.
My P14 Slim rev.1 does this initially too, but it’s gone now after I have mounted it tight. Perhaps quality control and tolerance also play a role here?
Maybe we are each talking about a slightly different phenomenon. The initial, let’s say start-up sound of Strix XF120 will certainly not be influenced by the strength of the mounting. With this fan, it’s just that it takes some time (be it very short, in the lower units of seconds) to get centered, and the operational sound is probably a bit different after, let’s say, warming up. I would attribute this purely to the influence of the motor and the bearings. In this case, I would not talk about an issue of a single unit in serial production. Sure, within lower manufacturing tolerances some minor differences in behaviour can be present, but if that feature disappeared completely, I assume it would be due to larger, targeted changes in the design, which for example are solved by various revisions. Unfortunately, most manufacturers don’t talk about them, with a few exceptions (Arctic, for example). So sure, a Silent Wings 3 from the early batches may behave differently than the latest pieces from the current sales. And while we’re on the subject of fan differences from piece to piece, we’ll release one unconventional test in September that will be of interest to you. 🙂
I would rather attribute the different sound after tightening the P14 rev. 2 to vibrations and the fact that with a different mounting there may not be such significant resonance frequencies of the case.