Passive evaporative cooling has been used for centuries to reduce temperatures. Heat is drawn off as water evaporates, which in turn reduces temperature. The more efficiently this process happens the greater the temperature differential, and that’s exactly what the 3D-printed structure pictured above aims for. Created at the Graz University of Technology in Austria, the cubes noticeably reduce surrounding air temperature thanks to their careful construction. As long as they’re kept wet, anyway.

The key is exposing the maximum amount of water to the maximum amount of airflow, and there are two ways the prototype cooling wall — which is 3D printed from a special clay mixture — does this.

First, the macro design of the 3D-printed blocks maximizes surface area. If the cube in the image above looks familiar, that’s because it’s the gyroid infill pattern. Gyroid is a porous pattern with no “dead ends” or closed sections, and the fact that it 3D prints cleanly with no supports also makes it an ideal structural candidate.

The second advantage is the clay used for the blocks themselves. Firing clay at a low temperature keeps it porous, but this particular mixture goes even further. It’s a bio-inspired formulation of clay, fungal mycelium, and wood chips. After printing, the cubes are fired and the fungus and wood chips burn away, leaving a network of thread-like capillaries with occasional larger pockets throughout.

The result is a porous ceramic cube with a massive evaporative surface area relative to its size. A practical test in a hot attic showed the air near a water-laden cube was nearly 7º C lower, a noticeable difference.

A home experimenter might not have access to fancy mycelium-laced clay mixtures, but it still strikes us as something that could be tried out at home. After all, clever hackers have successfully made DIY versions of passive cooling paint.

The idea of painting a roof or wall white in order to reflect sunshine and keep the building’s insides cool is hardly a new one, and even in the loosest interpretation of the word ‘white’ it generally works pretty well. This is also what [NightHawkInLight] found after using an off-the-shelf silicone-based coating for his shed’s tin roof, though with a few caveats.

One might say that this is mostly a problem for people who live in non-desert climates — like Michigan in this case — yet it’s undeniable that having a cooler indoors in a high-humidity climate will inevitably lead to a higher indoor humidity level. This was the first issue that was encountered, though it mostly meant that instead of running an air conditioner eight hours a day, a weekly dehumidifier session was required, which was at least less expensive in terms of kWh.

While the current silicone-based paint on the roof stays above ambient, in a subsequent test both [NightHawkInLight]’s DIY sub-ambient cooling paint and a commercial option get a sample panel down to around ambient temperature, which could cool down the roof even more. Of course, in this case the humidity issues would get worse, with likely condensation forming that would have to be dealt with.

Overall, a cooling paint on the roof is a pretty thing even if you’re not living in the desert, but you have to be able to tame the resulting humidity and condensation issues.

“Protect our water,” “Water for people not AI,” “Don’t mess with our water,” declare protest signs from Texas to New Mexico to Arizona. Angered by water use, energy consumption, and pollution, locals are increasingly protesting the rapid expansion of data centers in the United States as tech companies work to rapidly expand capacity for AI.

Many data centers rely at least partly on water to absorb heat from air or surfaces, and then cause cooling as it evaporates, just like sweating keeps our bodies cool. The processors inside data centers can reach internal temperatures of up to 176° Fahrenheit, for the same reasons that an overtaxed laptop heats up.

But while there’s little doubt that data centers are consuming significant amounts of energy, water consumption is more complicated. Claims circulating online bring scant clarity, ranging from articles claiming that chatbots can consume 500 ml of water per query to some online commentators declaring AI's water issue to be nonexistent. And the consumption data from large tech companies themselves are often incomplete and inconsistent.

Read full article

Comments