You are not logged in.

IC2 Experimental builds (jenkins):
v2.0/2.1/2.2 / 2.3 / 2.5 / 2.6 (For Minecraft 1.6.4/1.7.2/1.7.10 / 1.8.9 / 1.9.4 / 1.10)
IndustrialCraft² recent version: v1.117! (For Minecraft 1.5.2 → topic)

Dear visitor, welcome to IC² Forum. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.


Tree Cutter

  • "koyarno" is male
  • "koyarno" started this thread

Posts: 2

Location: The Netherlands

  • Send private message


Monday, February 6th 2017, 11:36pm

Fluid reactors

Hi all, my first post here so judge me as much as you can.

First of all, I love how IC2 doesn't treat power generation as something grindy necessarily but also providing really fun engineering minigames.
I bet some of you building these fluid reactors would just try to reach the endgame of some other tech mod involving extreme solar panels - only to blow em up later because they just ain't cool enough.

Second, if any of my designs are bad, i blame it on myself for not researching it on the internet where obviously alot of info on fluid reactors is pr...... hmmm....

I am using release 2.2.823, without gregtech.

Fluid reactors generally do not produce as much power compared to MOX EU reactors. Which is kinda a shame. I know efficiency 3 designs but they always get beaten. So point is: Is there an actual fluid reactor that is better than mox in order to justify building them in the first place.

eff 3 calculation:
EU: 4*2 rods * 3 eff * 5 EU * 4.4 heat mult. = 528 EU/t Mark I
Fluid: 4*2 rods * 24 heat * 2 fluid mult. * 2 heat mult * 0.75 EU conv. = 576 EU/t Mark I
But yeh, that fluid reactor is expensive...

With normal EU reactors, higher efficiency meant exponentially more heat. Seems logical since you get diminishing returns the more you want to get that MOX's worth of energy. I guess there is some atomic scale capture of energy going on since heat is only a byproduct. Minecraft once again does not equal real life. The highest efficiency possible is a quad mox fuel rod surrounded by 4 neutron reflectors. On a normal EU reactor, you get around 4 cells * 7 eff * 5 EU * 4.4 hull heat multiplier ~ 616 EU. I won't show you designs. I think you know how to get rid of 448 heat in a maxed out reactor while staying at 84% hull heat.

Fluid reactors want lots of heat, so "exponential more heat" is exponentially better. 448 heat equals 896 Hu/s and 448 EU and with a proper steam generator setup, 672 EU. However, There is that 2 heat multiplier for going above 50% hull heat, so 896 heat - 1344 EU here definately beats a MOX one. Though getting rid of so much heat is not possible as a Mark I reactor as far as i know. But any heat produced and "stored up" is NOT wasted! So a good balance between heat exchangers and heat vents make this possible.
You might add another fuel rod to it, but 896 heat is quite alot already. It cannot dib below 55; the reactor does not respond instantly and the reactor might lose its double efficiency depending on the design. And I have set the max temperature to about 65%

So this is my design: (no planner I found seems to be either fluid based and working)


It is weird that it says some components cannot be cooled in the fluid reacter, yet they can? Or not to full capacity?

I use the monitor control with 5500 / 6500 heat thresholds (nuclear control) in combination with rs latch (projectred) to turn the reactor on/off.
This reactor generates 600 EU with 8 fluid heat exchangers, 4 steam generators, and 2 chains of superheated steam turbines all on full capacity (directly powering steam turbines from steam generators only utilises them by half)
It does not need a coolant buffer; the reactor always produces 800 Hu/s. The reactor isn't on constantly though.

on a cold start it takes about ~3000 seconds to go to 50% hull heat. I can accelerate it, but i do not like manipulating the coolant flow.
Net heat produced below 50% is 48 and above 50 its 496 so about 4:5 on/off.

Math time:
EU reactor: 616 EU output, 123.2 M EU total. Mark I
(4*5* 7 eff* 4.4 hull heat mult.*200.000)

Fluid reactor: 600 EU output, 268.8 M EU total. Mark III
(4*112*2 fluid mult. * 2 hull heat mult.* 0.75 Hu to EU conv. * 200.000 ticks )
Heat is not wasted, so it does not matter for the max amount of EU generated.

- The advanced heat exchangers are overkill, just component heat exchangers do great as well. Advanced heat exchangers took some part of the core heat, so its a bit more jumpy in temperature now.
- The thresholds are 55 to 75% now. I whish i could use iridium reflectors here, this version does not have them.
- It stays on 800 Hu/s for a long time during warm up and cooldown. Dipping below 800 never lasts longer than a minute for the last part.
- Which also means that i need to keep some headroom in my energy buffers so the steam generators don't explode.
- I tried stopping the flow of coolant, but the reactor heats up on it's own, so no problems solved here.

Any thoughts on what to improve? or maybe someone else who tried the same?

This post has been edited 4 times, last edit by "koyarno" (Feb 8th 2017, 8:43pm)


Hits today: 14,454 | Hits yesterday: 1,368 | Hits record: 152,331 | Hits total: 65,310,545