[GregTech] How many X do I need to supply an Y? How many X does the creation of Y need? And more. (If I forget to manage things here, then please drop a PM to me about that forgotten Question)

  • I think it would be best to turn those saplings into IC2 biogas, which is an easy process and does give a considerable amount of energy.

    With a gas turbine, biogas is definitely worthwhile (mainly due to the high output ratio - 200 mB biogas per 10 mB IC2 biomass). However, I thought dohvakin96 wanted steam, and it's not clear whether IC2 biogas is usable in a GT large boiler (and if it is, how long a cell of it will last), since it isn't listed with the other fluids in post #4.

  • With a gas turbine, biogas is definitely worthwhile (mainly due to the high output ratio - 200 mB biogas per 10 mB IC2 biomass). However, I thought dohvakin96 wanted steam, and it's not clear whether IC2 biogas is usable in a GT large boiler (and if it is, how long a cell of it will last), since it isn't listed with the other fluids in post #4.

    Biogas isn´t usable in the large boiler ;( . I think I will build some gas turbines and power them with biogas from saplings and methane from apples.

  • For testing purpose I setted up a large bronze boiler and feed him distilled water cells and also 64 creosote cells, it produced 128673 l steam used in a basic steam generator this leads to 42891 EU or 670.2 EU per 1000 l cell, only less than an eights of the 8000 EU a creosote cell has as burn value this seems pretty weak. another test with 128 cells is pending, at least it used only a small amount of the distilled water.


    2010.52 l steam per cell

    At least it should be possible to run the engine is bursts for start, 130000 l are not that hard to store.

    Edit: Test results with 128 cells:

    251615 l steam, 83872 EU, 1965.74 l l steam per cell, 655.25 EU per cell, 12624 l distilled water used 98.63 l per fuel cell, 19.93 l steam per 1 l distilled watter

    Next Test with 192 cells.

    Edit: Test 3 with 192 cells:
    374789 l steam, 124930 EU, 1952.03 l steam per cell, 650.68 EU per cell, 34912 l distilled water, 181.83 l per fuel cell, 10.74 l steam per 1 l distilled water (had to add several cells of extra d. water, nearly blew up my boiler, that is a important point to consider when automating, it used much less water per steam, while heating, didn't expect that, consider that even a bug)

    hm, thats a anonmaly, I expected to get better values over time not worse, testing in singleplayer surival, 5 by 5 by 5 railcraft steel tank 4 000 0000 l get reseted between runs, input hatch distilled water max (up to 80 000 l ) input hatch creosote max (80 000 l), output hatch steam ULV (8 000 l) 2 copper fluid pipes (1 200 l) to connect output to tank.

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Kupferdrache: additional calculation extras (more values) ().

  • The boiler has a pretty long warm up time. Just heat it up with some stacks of charcoal, then test again with creosote while the boiler is still running.

  • have to give it a little time to rest about max 30 sec ingame (to note the values of a run and break and replace the center part of the railcraft tank, the rest of the time the whole game is running, or in Pause menu to prevent heat loss. But that led to strange results, see my third test, with this much differences it would be hard to automate it later.

    Edit: Test 4 - 256 cells:

    502 320 l steam, 167 440 EU, 1962.19 l steam per cell, 654.06 EU per cell, 45200 l distilled water, 176.56 l per cell, 11.12 l steam per 1 l d. water

    Seems, to have temperature now, water to steam- and EU- per cell have stabilized, still less than 10 % efficiency compared to 8 000 EU input per cell. Next another 256 cells test, then, I have to exchange a fire burning box for a input bus to test with charcoal. btw. does it need a output bus for tiny piles of (dark) ashes, or does it burn without byproducts?

    Edit: Test 5 - 256 cells:

    503 578 l steam, 167 859 EU, 1967.10 l steam per cell, 655.70 EU per cell, 45 248 l d. water, 176.75 l per cell, 11.13 l steam per 1 l d. water

    seems, this values are pretty stable now, I will calculate the steam per fuel cell and steam per 1 l d. water for test 1 to 3 as well (Test 1 w/o water to steam, because i derped the water input). Next adjust for solid fuel and test again, beginning with 64 charcoal.


    I took a quick look to the pages of the large and small boilers, the water to steam efficiency is also off by 93 % compared to the small boilers. I consider this a bug.

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Kupferdrache: added compare steam per water to small boillers ().

  • One charcoal burns 40 ticks in a large bronze boiler, the ouptut is still the one on the wiki. You don´t need to test that.... :rolleyes:

  • Test 6 - 32 charcoal:

    82618 l steam, 27539.33 EU, 2581.81 l steam per charcoal, 860.60 EU per charcoal, 5640 l d. water , 176.25 l steam per charcoal, 14.65 l steam per 1 l d. water

    Test 7 64 charcoal:

    169233 l steam, 56411 EU, 2644.27 l steam per charcoal, 881.42 EU per charcoal, 9264 l d. water, 144.75 l d. water per charcoal, 18.27 l steam per 1 l water

    change set up to max output hatch and bronze fluid pipe (2400l/t). I suspect, I lose steam to low pipe throughput (and I am right with this suspicion).

    Test 8 - 64 cells:

    318207 l steam, 106069 EU, 4971.98 l steam per cell, 1657.33 EU per cell, 10336 l d. water, 161.5 l d. water per cell, 30.79 l steam per 1 l d. water

    better, but still, the pipe is too small, output hatch fills up, next test steel (4800l/t).

    Test 9 - 64 cells:

    545120 l steam, 181706.67 EU, 8517.5 l steam per cell, 2839.17 EU per cell, 10336 l d. water , 161.5 l d. water per cell, 52.74 l steam per 1 l d. water

    slowly, but still only one third of steam per water compared to a single block, next large steel (9600l/t).

    Test 10 - 64 cells:

    948934 l steam, 316311.33 EU, 14827.09 l steam per cell, 4942.36 EU per cell, 8384 l d. water, 131 l d. water per cell, 113.18 l steam per 1 l d. water

    even better, still not enough, boiler lost progress and temp half way through, had to use the soft hammer. Next double up the outputs (2 max, 2*9600 l/t).

    Test 10 - 64 cells:

    1098944 l steam ,366314.67 EU ,17171 l steam per cell, 5723.67 EU per cell, 8288 l d. water , 129.5 l d. water per cell, 132.59 l steam per 1 l d. water

    close, boiler stopped half way through as well, next I double up fuel again.

    Test 11 - 128 cells:

    3013472 l steam, 1004490.67 EU, 23542.75 l steam per cell, 7847.58 EU per cell, 22624 l distilled water, 176.75 l d. water per cell, 133.20 l steam per 1 l d. water

    much better, not the 150 l steam, but stable 10 400 l steam per tick, that is enough for 3466.67 EU per tick in 109 basic steam engines, each machine can have their own engine. And now I am close to the 8000 EU per cell theoretical fuel value shown in NEI only 1.91 % loss, that is acceptable.

    Also a unit charcoal is about 10666.67 EU (at full efficiency) worth.

  • ...
    On a different note, I've been playing around with Alternate Terrain Generation after noticing it in FTB. I quite like the new landscape. I haven't noticed too many surface caves, but that might just be me missing things as I fly around in creative or just bad luck. It does concern me, though, as I like to play with harder rock and having to mine a staircase until I find a cave would be a nightmare. Would it be possible to create "very high" veins of ores through the config? I was thinking of having oregen loop after 128, like it goes back to 1 at 129 and create veins accordingly. Then again, changing nothing and having to go to lower elevations for mining bases would also make things interesting. Also, changing the oregen over 70 too, as it could become more common. Maybe just making the spawn range wider without necesarily changing the rarity, size or number too much, could work.

    Anyone else have experience with ATG+Gregtech?

    Hi everyone, have been browsing the forum for a while now as a visitor, but decided to take a part as well.

    To the point.. I am currently trying to build me a modpack based around GT5 with other technical mods such as BC, RC, AE etc. and I am very interested in including the ATG mod which someone already mentioned as I quote him above.

    I would like to know, if the ATG would break the playability of GT in means of ore spawning and if so, how could I prevent this from happening or decreasing the impact of it?

    What I thought of was extending the range of heights ores spawn in but could not really come up with neat solution.

    Maybe some of you might help me out with this and also decide to use ATG in your future builds as well.

    Thank you in advance for any of your support.

  • Sorry if I missed it but, how much HP steam is put out by the LHE on each of the chip settings? I tried to do the math myself but it seems off.

    I included a spreadsheet. It's OpenOffice format.

    If this math is correct, I would need ELEVEN large HSS-E turbines to handle most of it!


    • LHE.zip

      (10.26 kB, downloaded 278 times, last: )

    Quoted from "zorn":
    People can't handle losing. Lots of new games are like this. My son's Lego games? You die and respawn on the spot, just lose a bit of money. It's made so that anyone can win, even the worst players. Like TE, or EU. They say that IC2 is 'keeping them from moving on' but can never say what that is. In reality they just failed, blew up a bunch of stuff, and their fragile egos couldn't take it so they gravitate towards mods designed to guarantee that you succeed.

  • Here are some fusion calculations I did about a year ago. Hopefully no one finds them to ruin the sport of doing the work (or other surprises) on their own. If you do then don't look at them. :P

    I'm not sure if 5.09 has tweaked these recipes but if you're playing in 5.08 these numbers apply.