High output fluid reactors

This thread is about fluid reactors that have high outputs. If you are looking for beginner reactors or EU reactors, please refer to the Official New Reactors design thread. The designs here have a high build cost but their output is above 1200 HU/t. They are meant to be used for late game power generation. Thus, material costs will not be judged here.

Since that the original thread contains only a few fluid reactors that was submerged by other peoples' posts (because fluid reactors weren't added yet when that thread is created) and posting designs there will just be submerged by pages after pages of replies, I would like to share some here.

..............................

The currently highest output stable fluid reactor

-Author: ???

This might be an improved version of Omicron's design, since his can output 1408 HU/t. The author of the current one is unknown, but it was recently posted by vlad[54rus]. If you know the author of this design, please reply so that I can put it here.

-Pros: highest output that can currently be obtained from a fluid reactor without any external automation

-Cons: need an extra heat exchanger for just 7.74 HU/t

1407.74 HU/t, no reflector, efficiency 12.57

03000A120D0C0D120A03030C0D0C0D0C0D12020C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D110A110D0C0D110A11

..............................

The second highest output one

-Author: KrisBigK (improved albijoe's 1376 design)

-Pros: high output without the need of an extra heat exchanger

-Cons: hybrid fuel rods makes it difficult to automate

1383.78 HU/t, no reflector, efficiency 14.42

0302130C09110D0C0A03010C0D0C0D0C0D12010C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D110D120D120D120D11

..............................

The reflector reactor

-Author: Korlus

-Pros: a reasonable efficiency and good output

-Cons: need re-designing if you want to use MOX

1343.83 HU/t, 4 reflectors, efficiency 21

2303230C09110D0C0903230C0D0C0D0C0D11230C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D110D140D140D110D11

..............................

The third highest output one

-Author: KrisBigK (improved albijoe's 1376 design)

-Pros: Only use 2 types of fuel rods, easier to automate than the second highest output one

-Cons: Comparatively low efficiency and a 8 HU/t lower output

1375.83 HU/t, no reflectors, efficiency 12.28

0302130C09110D0C0A03000C0D0C0D0C0D12030C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D110D120D120D120D11

..............................

The following reactors need precise redstone timings in order to run safely, but offers a higher output than the stable ones.

Warning: If you really really won't risk having a potential nuke in your backyard (although all reactors are potential nukes, blowing up one of these will also destroy your heat-related machines), then the following designs are not for you.

If you made up your mind that you are willing to use these designs, be notified that if these reactors are left unattended and turned on, they will create a huge crater.

..............................

First design

-Author: KrisBigK

-Pros: has a higher output than previous ones

-Cons: somewhat risky

Operating pulse: 8 sec on and 1 sec off

Explosion time (left unattended): 289 secs

1451.79 HU/t, 1 reflector, efficiency 12.96

2302130C0D0C0D0C1303030C0D0C0D0C0D0C030C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C

..............................

The highest output fluid reactor by now

This design is focused on having high outputs, not stability.

-Author: KrisBigK

-Pros: seriously high output

-Cons: low efficiency, really explosive

Operating pulse: 5 sec on and 4 sec off

Explosion time: 69 secs

1777.69 HU/t, 3 reflectors, efficiency 11.11

0303230D0D0D0D0D0D0303230D0D0D0D0D0D03230D0D0D0D0D0D0D160D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D0D

The heat capacity reactor plating can be changed into any other passive component. It is just a place holder for easier automation.

..............................

The highest efficiency reactor by now (maybe)

This design focuses on high efficiency, and then high output.

-Author: KrisBigK & Blackpalt

-Pros: really high efficiency

-Cons: relatively low output, the most dangerous design

Operating pulse: 5 sec on and 2 sec off

Explosion time: 13 sec (starting temperature 6000)

Starting temperature: >=5055, <=7219

1277.3 HU/t, 4 reflectors, efficiency 39.92

0B230B0A140D0C0A122306230C0D0C0D0C0D0B230C0D0C0D0C0D0C0B0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D140A140D0C0A140D0C0A

The reason why I mentioned Blackpalt as the author of this is because on July 2020 (more than a whole year after I came up with this design independently) I came across a post by Blackpalt about a design with the same fuel rod arrangement (thus the same efficiency) but he couldn't get it to work.

Picture of the design

Some notes: I made it to vent 640 heat on purpose. The MOX rod outputs 896 heat/s, which has a factor of 128. 640 also has a factor of 128. This makes it easy to manipulate the on/off cycle. Unfortunately I can't sqeeze in the rod and the reflectors to the current 704heat/s design. Also, the 704 one uses unbalanced OC vents, which is impractical for MOX reactors.

..............................

yet more to come

..............................

If you have any questions about these designs or managed to made a better one, feel free to share it!

Quote from albijoe

Ok, this one should work and be slightly better than the previous. Previous fluid reactor cools (54-9)*20 = 900(*2) = 1800 heat max, per tick; this one cools 912*2 = 1824. There is room for improvement, but MOX is tricky

This is a MOX reactor; you need to get it above 5000 to make this work. I simulated 6K Start. Also, this is my first successful simulated MOX fluid reactor, I think! Yay!

I'm afraid to point out that your design has almost no difference if you start it with 0 heat. Although the max output is 1824 HU/t, the average is just ~912 HU/t. It is a successful simulated MOX fluid reactor, but it isn't a successful working-as-intended reactor.

Also, I don't think that MOX will even work with this concept. Turning the reactor off won't stop the overclockers pulling the reactor core heat (the same thing that I forgot), and letting the OC vents cool down is essential for it to run stably.

Quote from albijoe

Given you cannot vent more than x heat per tick, the next step is to minimize chance of explosion. I designed my reactor to produce double the heat needed to vent 912/tick and then adjusted the pulse to allow it to vent twice as long and the vents to vent 912.

All OC vents should pull 36 heat from the reactor as long as there is excess heat, and adding a few component vents just makes a few vents cool down faster. As long as there is an OC vent that has no component vent next to it, you need to wait for that vent to cool down. I've already explained why I'm not using component vents above.

Quote from albijoe

I don't see a problem with the mox setup, you just pull most of the vents out until it gets to the desired temp, then put them in REALLY FAST. :). My design should work for any start temp from 5001 to 6001, for sure.

Shift-clicking a stack of OC vents should do the trick.

Your reactor can produce that heat, but it can't maintain that heat. The point is that once you heat up the reactor, the OC vents will keep pulling heat until either the reactor is cooled down or the vents are destroyed. Once you turn it off, the reactor will cool down, and unlike the stable ones, that is necessary for this reactor.

Also, if you look at the average heat output in the planner, it shows only ~912 HU/t. (line 11 in your picture) I don't think the planner can't deal with the double heat. It should be correct.

Actually I realized there might be room for improvement - since the reactor runs 5-4, the total heat produced in 9 seconds is 1600*5=8000, but the vents can vent 900*9=8100. That means the current design can withstand a maximum heat of 1620 heat/s, whereas the current vents vent an average of 888.88 heat/s. However, I can't manage to increase 20 heat without removing vents.

To design a fluid reactor with a higher output (on average), here are some restrictions that I can think of:

1.Not a single vent can be removed to guarantee overall output unless there is a way to vent more heat per component

2.The reactor must run 5 sec on and 4 sec off for the OC vents to cool properly.

3.No fuel rods can be placed next to the vents, or the vents cannot be cooled down in time to produce more heat

4.MOX can't be used. They are not friendly to the OC vents.

Note: the "heat" mentioned above is the same as component damage, not HU.

---------

Now I want to raise a question: can a stable fluid reactor output more than

If it is possible, how?

Quote from vlad[54rus]

There is a design which outputs 1408 HU/t.

Display Spoiler

03000A120D0C0D120A03030C0D0C0D0C0D11020C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D110A110D0C0D110A11rh00rid01

WOW! Who designed that? Is it you? Or did you improved Omicron's design?

High efficiency fluid reactor

1277.5 HU/t, 4 reflectors, efficiency 39.92, runs 5 sec on and 2 sec off, starting temp >=6,000

0B230B0A140D0C0A122306230C0D0C0D0C0D0B230C0D0C0D0C0D0C0B0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D0C0D140A140D0C0A140D0C0A

This one can maintain below 8500 heat if started up correctly.

Some notes: I made it to vent 640 heat in purpose. The highest efficiency MOX rod outputs 896 heat/s, and 896 has a factor of 128. 640 also has a factor of 128. This makes it easy to calculate the on/off cycle. The current 704 design can't sqeeze in the rod and the reflectors.

Is it possible for a fluid reactor to have a higher output and a efficiency the same/better as this one? I'm not very good at MOX fluid reactors, and I'd like to hear if I messed up something.

Quote from albijoe

Is this about "highest bet energy output", or "highest output in any second", or something else? For example, I like "highest efficiency" and "least consumed materials", which means no quad fuels.

For this design, I consider efficiency first, then output.

In my SSP world that I have played for ~600 in-game days, I have ~400 copper blocks and I won't care about a plate or two.

Think about "least consumed materials". Do you mean using the least uranium/plutonium or using the least metal (copper)? Either way, it is more efficient to use quad rods since using quad rods can generate more EU even with copper plates produced by UUM.

Quote from Yourname942

1) What should the layout of the reactor's shell be?

a) How many fluid ports do I need/should I use?

b) What other parts would I need? (ie. steam generators/ liquid heat exchangers, etc)

Thank you.

It has been a long time since I last played Minecraft (or at least the IC2 part of it, I'm a big fan of technical minecraft), so I might not remember things correctly. Anyway, I'll try my best to answer your questions.

1. Depending on your needs. You can put the access hatch, redstone port, fluid ports wherever you like as long as you can get all the (hot) coolant in/out.

a) If you just put 1 ejector upgrade inside a single port, 15 is needed.

b) This is highly flexible. You can use the heat to generate biogas, steam, superheated steam, or directly into EU via the stirling generator. There might be more options that I can't remember but more info is available on the wiki and here. Each one has its own pros and cons, which is up to you to decide.