Do you have any idea when you'll have a finalized design? Also how much would you sell each case for?
Topic: Custom Case Design for Bitfury Hboard/Mboard Miners - page 6. (Read 22132 times)
Didnt you miss the heatsinks?
chip surface temp from Bitcentury test was 80C and rising, to have heatsink would be not bad idea. It may happen that we will have to run it on risers and fix heat sinks ourselves. Maybe for Russia and Ukraine with its cold climate, no heat sinks is OK, but not for India or other countries with hot climate. Here in India room temperature can easy be 30C all year around.
The original idea was to position the RasPI like this: http://imgur.com/TegDpOQ but we have problems to get connectors that are high enough above the board. To operate the board we rotated the connector and connected RasPI in an awkward way (http://imgur.com/jV1iis9). We will fix this later but even if You decide to use cables it would be better to reserve more space in front of the M-board for the RasPI.
=> put the fans on the opposite side.
=> put the fans on the opposite side.
It looks pretty nice. Is the rPI fastened down somehow? How about clips for the fan wiring? Is h-board plug 0 on the rPI side? What’s the reason for the lip on the top facing outward? If that lip faced inwards then it looks like the cases could be stacked on top of another. Why do you have an RJ45 plug on the top rather than just routing the Ethernet cable to the rPI directly? I figure that would be one of the advantages of having an open case.
And most important… Any estimate on how much a case like that would cost?
/cet
And most important… Any estimate on how much a case like that would cost?
/cet
Yes, rack unit is standardized. Im thinking you would probably build a case for regular users and a bracket for users who want to rack mount it pretty easily.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_unit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_unit
Yep. When designing it, please remember that any good datacenter is designed with COLD air coming into the front of the rack, and then your EXHAUST goes out the back (not the side or top/bottom).
Yes, rack unit is standardized. Im thinking you would probably build a case for regular users and a bracket for users who want to rack mount it pretty easily.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_unit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_unit
Something mountable in a standard 19-inch server rack would be preferred.
With standard airflow principle (front=INTAKE , rear=EXHAUST).
Based upon the height of the H-boards, this should be doable in a 3U height chassis design.
With standard airflow principle (front=INTAKE , rear=EXHAUST).
Based upon the height of the H-boards, this should be doable in a 3U height chassis design.
k, have to look into that, have no experience so far with server housings but i think the dimensions are standardized?
################################################################################################################################################
################################################################################################################################################
################################################################################################################################################
Overview Frontside
Overview Backside
Topview:
Overview Bottom:
PSU, Raspi and RJ45 connector placement:
secured cards:
Would probably make sense to make them stackable vertically. Also im sure you'd get some interest if you make it rack mountable, just move the tabs to the sides.
yeah, but the current master board defines doesnt allow another alignment.
What do you mean with the tabs to the sides? please explain more in detail
i wasn't referring to the hash boards, i meant make your case stackable if you have multiple cases.
i dont see the point in this proposal, why would you stack these housing, just use a storage rack, i think this would be pretty much unlikly to happen. Have seen many pictures of mining farms and all miners were side by side in storage racks.
Space considerations, if you were putting them in a datacenter, density is key.
Something mountable in a standard 19-inch server rack would be preferred.
With standard airflow principle (front=INTAKE , rear=EXHAUST).
Based upon the height of the H-boards, this should be doable in a 3U height chassis design.
With standard airflow principle (front=INTAKE , rear=EXHAUST).
Based upon the height of the H-boards, this should be doable in a 3U height chassis design.
... looks great ... good work ...
BTW case looks very nice 
Didnt you miss the heatsinks?
there are no heatsinks, as far as i knowHow can this be? If they dont get hot they arent clocked high enough for sure. All other chips need heatsinks too, why not this one? Would safe space for sure but it sounds strange to me.
not quite sure, just what one of the alpha testers told me, havend reached punin in this matter to get an official statement.
But yes they are running on very low clock, just doing 1,55GH per chip if i remind it right.
It would be really interesting how much overclocking potential they have then. I mean the space for a heatsink wouldnt matter when you could get a reasonable higher hashrate for nearly the same price.
Yes Foofighter you write final right clock value, and I posted tested value and temp for it...
There was mentioned that for higher hashrate they will need some higher cost on board hardware, all is in that thread
Didnt you miss the heatsinks?
there are no heatsinks, as far as i knowHow can this be? If they dont get hot they arent clocked high enough for sure. All other chips need heatsinks too, why not this one? Would safe space for sure but it sounds strange to me.
not quite sure, just what one of the alpha testers told me, havend reached punin in this matter to get an official statement.
But yes they are running on very low clock, just doing 1,55GH per chip if i remind it right.
It would be really interesting how much overclocking potential they have then. I mean the space for a heatsink wouldnt matter when you could get a reasonable higher hashrate for nearly the same price.
I recall that someone mentioned that Ocing capabilities will be limited because the power related parts have not so much free space for higher clocks or somthing, and only if you solder the right parts out and change them you are free to OC the chips as you like. But not sure here too, just red it somewhere(limited ocing should be possible)
Didnt you miss the heatsinks?
there are no heatsinks, as far as i knowHow can this be? If they dont get hot they arent clocked high enough for sure. All other chips need heatsinks too, why not this one? Would safe space for sure but it sounds strange to me.
According to https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-bitfury-is-looking-for-alpha-testers-of-first-chips-free-money-here-228677 [Test threat]
~ 2.7 GH/sec @ 0.8W/GH temp below 50 C degree
the clock i mentioned is right, they are using 16 chips each board and make 25gh.
This was just a test value, but higher clock means also more heat and more power usage.
Didnt you miss the heatsinks?
there are no heatsinks, as far as i knowHow can this be? If they dont get hot they arent clocked high enough for sure. All other chips need heatsinks too, why not this one? Would safe space for sure but it sounds strange to me.
According to https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-bitfury-is-looking-for-alpha-testers-of-first-chips-free-money-here-228677 [Test threat]
~ 2.7 GH/sec @ 0.8W/GH temp below 50 C degree
Didnt you miss the heatsinks?
there are no heatsinks, as far as i knowHow can this be? If they dont get hot they arent clocked high enough for sure. All other chips need heatsinks too, why not this one? Would safe space for sure but it sounds strange to me.
not quite sure, just what one of the alpha testers told me, havend reached punin in this matter to get an official statement.
But yes they are running on very low clock, just doing 1,55GH per chip if i remind it right.
It would be really interesting how much overclocking potential they have then. I mean the space for a heatsink wouldnt matter when you could get a reasonable higher hashrate for nearly the same price.
Didnt you miss the heatsinks?
there are no heatsinks, as far as i knowHow can this be? If they dont get hot they arent clocked high enough for sure. All other chips need heatsinks too, why not this one? Would safe space for sure but it sounds strange to me.
not quite sure, just what one of the alpha testers told me, havend reached punin in this matter to get an official statement.
But yes they are running on very low clock, just doing 1,55GH per chip if i remind it right.
Didnt you miss the heatsinks?
there are no heatsinks, as far as i knowHow can this be? If they dont get hot they arent clocked high enough for sure. All other chips need heatsinks too, why not this one? Would safe space for sure but it sounds strange to me.
Would probably make sense to make them stackable vertically. Also im sure you'd get some interest if you make it rack mountable, just move the tabs to the sides.
yeah, but the current master board defines doesnt allow another alignment.
What do you mean with the tabs to the sides? please explain more in detail
i wasn't referring to the hash boards, i meant make your case stackable if you have multiple cases.
i dont see the point in this proposal, why would you stack these housing, just use a storage rack, i think this would be pretty much unlikly to happen. Have seen many pictures of mining farms and all miners were side by side in storage racks.
I think he was pretty clear. He calls it open case design, the top and back are wide open.
Yes, as stated this will be an open design, have to check the costs with manufacturers but this could probly be a low budget version of housing.
When making a closed design i would have to add another 3 fans on the opposide and make the housing slithly more wide. Have already thought about it, if i make a closed housing also the open housing will get wider because i wouldnt wanna use too many different parts, as the lot size hardly changes the pricing of manufacture. The 3 additional fans could be placed inside of the housing cover.
Jump to: