OCAdam's Reactor Designs (Mark I, II, III, and Coolant)

  • (Note: I have no clue if someone else designed one of these before. I don't really look at too many reactor designs, so forgive me if there's a replica here!)


    -------------
    Mk I Designs:
    -------------



    --------------
    Mk II Designs:
    --------------



    -----------------
    Mark III Designs:
    -----------------



    -----------------------
    Mark I Coolant Designs:
    -----------------------


  • Interesting... My design was using a specific pattern that generally worked across a wide variety of situations, so I didn't think too much about fully optimizing it like what you seem to have done. However, looking at the pattern some... I have optimized this pattern a bit for the situation and found I can get the same 30h/t and actually free up a slot while using 2 fewer HDs.


    http://test.vendaria.net/index.php?react…CCCHCCCHCCCHCCX


    Now to add this into the modified version of that reactor design...


    Edit: Added another Mark II design.

  • I'm sorry, but I'm not sure exactly where you are referencing to... can you quote the bit? And.... I'd go for a guess, but I don't recall having anything with isotope cells. Unless I'm having a bad time with not being the most awake person again... it is 4 AM after all.

  • http://test.vendaria.net compute output energy wrong when you use isotope cells. it correctly increase pulses of uranium cells which lead to increased heat production but it also add energy production. but as i understand reactor guide from ablaka isotope cells dont increase energy production. only heat production.


    this http://test.vendaria.net/index…XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX should produce 5EU/t not 10.

    I don't believe any of my designs are breeders as shown. However, yeah, that one could be used as a positive Breeder (+7h/t, 1 iso) or a negative Breeder (-16h/t, 2 iso's).

  • If you have a nuclear reactor surrounded on all sides by chambers, then do you just place the output wire into one of the chambers to get the energy our of it?



  • http://test.vendaria.net/index…CCCCUCCHCCHCHCCUUCCCHCCHC



    Here is a reactor with only 5 EU/t less, 2.14 efficiency and only 29 H/t excess, as opposed to 55, effectively making it a Mark II-1c

  • Yeah... my Mark III's are pretty damn crap. I generally made those just to have a few, although a large number of the components in my design would fail quite rapidly. I'm much more tuned towards making the Mark II's and I's. Bit of an interesting setup you have there I say.

  • Yeah... my Mark III's are pretty damn crap. I generally made those just to have a few, although a large number of the components in my design would fail quite rapidly. I'm much more tuned towards making the Mark II's and I's. Bit of an interesting setup you have there I say.

    Thank you, from what I have seen posted here so far, I think this is one of the most efficient mark II's, unfortunately it can only run 1 cycle.


    I have also created a mark 2 that can run 8-9 cycles, but only yields 60 EU/t

  • Update 10/19/2011:


    Added another Mark II reactor. This one's a 9.8C.


    Update 10/20/2011:


    Added a very very simple Mark I-O-C reactor. It's more a showcase of not even using internal cooling and still having a Mark I reactor.

  • I am new to nuclear engineering, so I have a question: Mark II's have absolutely no chance of exploding after one full cycle, correct? Also, do any of the cooling components melt in your Mark I and II designs? Thanks!

    "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
    ~Albert Einstein

  • I am new to nuclear engineering, so I have a question: Mark II's have absolutely no chance of exploding after one full cycle, correct? Also, do any of the cooling components melt in your Mark I and II designs? Thanks!


    By definition, a Mark II must be able to complete a full cycle without overheating. All my Mark II designs have in the classification the number of cycles they can complete (eg, Mark II-11.7C can do 11 full cycles, but an extra 7/10ths a cycle as well before exploding).


    I also go by the definition that if any component melts at all (before reaching the stated cycle of failure), it's an instant Mark IV. So, to answer, none of the cooling components should ever melt down. If they do, please tell me since that means I've gotta recalculate some stuff!