[GregTech-5][1.7.10-FORGE-1355+][Unofficial but approved Port][Stable] Even GT5 Experimental is slowly getting stable.

  • Oh, my bad. I thought they were exactly the same configs with different values.


    EDIT : He does not seem to either believe me or want to fix it.


    GalacticGreg just has the same defaults GT6 has so it overlaps. But the last Version is using purely GT spawn code, besides the asteroids.



    Is there any documentation of this "governor"? I though it might be related to the fact that crushed-ore to dust recipes only take 1 second per operation with a steam forge hammer (20 ticks, since at LV they take 10 ticks).

    The steam machines need to be at last 1/3 or 1/4? filled with steam before processing starts. For most machines this is not enough to finish. For the forge Hammer likely it is enough.

  • Well me and Kosyak have exposed a problem much larger he might be interested in fixing now. Will post to his thread.

    [1.7.10][Kirara] New administrator of Kirara servers. A serie of well-made hardmode GregTech server. Come join the fun. ;]

  • The steam machines need to be at last 1/3 or 1/4? filled with steam before processing starts. For most machines this is not enough to finish. For the forge Hammer likely it is enough.


    Looks like it's actually something lower than 1/4 (but at least 1/50, because of the crushed ore to dust recipes). By my calculations, a 2000 EU LV recipe would use 1/4 of the internal buffer of a steam forge hammer, but when I tried in creative mode, making long palladium rods (1696 EU at LV), starting with a full internal buffer of steam but no further input of steam, still choked after making 4. I don't feel like tracking down the exact threshold right now, though.

  • Blood Asp, since Greg was still not interested, we found for him what was wrong. ;P


    I think you should check what it's all about in Greg thread because I suspect you might have the same problem. And it'd be nice to have it fixed with GT5x as well, if that's the case. ;P

    [1.7.10][Kirara] New administrator of Kirara servers. A serie of well-made hardmode GregTech server. Come join the fun. ;]

  • So, quick question about Fusion: Is it possible to run continually a helium plasma fusion?
    I mean, if my math is right, It would need about 94 electrolyzers + 133 centrifugues. Does anyone (sane) do that?
    Or you guys run it at intervals?


    Edit: Randall is great!

  • EDIT : Disregard that, I'm too old school. Last fusion was 1.6.4. ;P

    [1.7.10][Kirara] New administrator of Kirara servers. A serie of well-made hardmode GregTech server. Come join the fun. ;]

  • So, quick question about Fusion: Is it possible to run continually a helium plasma fusion?
    I mean, if my math is right, It would need about 94 electrolyzers + 133 centrifugues. Does anyone (sane) do that?
    Or you guys run it at intervals?


    Edit: Randall is great!


    Unless the recipes have changed costs since July, I think your math is a little off. I calculated things on July 8th (relevant post), and presuming you intend to electrolyze water for the hydrogen (not the cheapest in terms of EU, but easiest to get an abundant supply of, especially if not using the CodeChickenCore finite water setting), what I came up with was a total of 118 LV electrolyzers (which can be put into 8 processing arrays), 157 LV centrifuges (10 arrays), and 32 MV centrifuges (2 arrays).

  • Oh, I see, thanks.


    About my math, well, I was at work, so I have missed something.
    So, if isn't to ask too much, how much Deuterium and Tririum I should have before starting the fusion, to have a positive EU gain, (using plasma generators mark I, and considering only the fusion start and running process)?
    I calculated about 20.000l each, but, as Mauve said, my math is a little off...

  • I hadn't calculated that part before, but now I come up with a figure of 26252 L of each to break even with the startup cost, so over that would give positive EU gain. 37975 L each if you want to recover the processing costs of making the deuterium and tritium as well (though that's still ignoring cable losses, the costs of making empty cells to fill with oxygen when electrolyzing the water, and any costs of pumping the water)


  • I hadn't calculated that part before, but now I come up with a figure of 26252 L of each to break even with the startup cost, so over that would give positive EU gain. 37975 L each if you want to recover the processing costs of making the deuterium and tritium as well (though that's still ignoring cable losses, the costs of making empty cells to fill with oxygen when electrolyzing the water, and any costs of pumping the water)


    Wow, way more than I though. Thanks again!

  • Hello.
    I running non-stop process of helium plasma fusion, then plasma goes into large plasma generator with large tungstensteel turbine.
    tungstensteel turbine has turbine efficency 140 and optimal plasma flow 30000 eu/t -- i don't know how exactly this numbers (should) work, but since i've updated greg from 5.08.26 to 5.08.27 version
    large plasma generator consumes MUCH more plasma, and now it consume more plasma than fuion reactor produces, so i run out of plasma very fast. In previous version reactor was producing slightly more plasma than LPG was consuming.


    i measured how much energy i get from stack of helium plasma cells in LPG with tungstensteel turbine in different versions
    v5.08.26 ~366,7mil ~42k EU/t
    v5.08.27 ~234,7mil ~63k EU/t

    So, i think something is broken in .27 version...

  • I can only say for sure that the large Turbine in .26 was broken.
    366mio is too much. 64 cells * 4mio EU * 140% efficiency = 358mio.
    Then there is loss due to spin up time and transfer loss. The large plasma gen also has a relatively huge internal rounding loss. Finally, did you limit the plasma flow somehow? Not that the overflow takes away most of your efficiency bonus. I'm currently not at home, so i can't see how much the turbine should produce.

  • I did not limit plasma flow and energy output. I use ZPM dynamo hatch (LuV is not enough) and quantum tank with plasma next to the input hatch + pump cover.
    Never thought there can be overflow... as i always saw expected numbers 30000*140%=42k EU/t in v .26 and before (optimal=maximum)
    I'll try to limit flow with fluid regulators.
    30k/4096k*1000=7.32
    so in that case i have to inject 7 or 8 mB/t into LPG to get optimal flow?

    The post was edited 2 times, last by zer0id ().

  • Its also worth noting that if the LPG wants 8 mb/t (optimal), then it will consume up to 10 mb/t if that's available in the hatch(es). The large turbines can always eat up to 25% above their optimal flow, although it does so very inefficiently. Its always best to run at optimal rate.

  • I did not limit plasma flow and energy output. I use ZPM dynamo hatch (LuV is not enough) and quantum tank with plasma next to the input hatch + pump cover.
    Never thought there can be overflow... as i always saw expected numbers 30000*140%=42k EU/t in v .26 and before (optimal=maximum)
    I'll try to limit flow with fluid regulators.
    30k/4096k*1000=7.32
    so in that case i have to inject 7 or 8 mB/t into LPG to get optimal flow?


    You can fine tune the fluid regulators more in the fluid per second mode. 7.32 mB/t is close to 146 mB/s: a much closer approximation for free.

  • I can only say for sure that the large Turbine in .26 was broken.
    366mio is too much. 64 cells * 4mio EU * 140% efficiency = 358mio.
    Then there is loss due to spin up time and transfer loss. The large plasma gen also has a relatively huge internal rounding loss. Finally, did you limit the plasma flow somehow? Not that the overflow takes away most of your efficiency bonus. I'm currently not at home, so i can't see how much the turbine should produce.



    You can fine tune the fluid regulators more in the fluid per second mode. 7.32 mB/t is close to 146 mB/s: a much closer approximation for free.


    jesus, I never even thought of this. This is brilliant.