A list of good reactor designs (IC² v1.103 and earlier)

I think i've managed to build myself a nice Mark I-O Negative Breeder: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…wlflim3pu31bbpnkynssuuh34
Forgive me if this one is a little crappy, I'm quite new to IC², and especially to it's nuclear physics.

Sorry if it's already in the thread, but it wasn't in the first post.

Found a cheaper version of the efficiency 2 Mk I-O than yours, Rick. Dunno why it works, but it does...
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…i5bdwcbxehtxl4xoarsul8ojk

Ohhhhhhhh!! I see!
I thought I'd been spending long enough fiddling with reactors to feel alright posting that, but you're still the expert, sir. Thanks for that.

If but to save face, I could at least make an argument for it being cheaper on space ;D
I could put two of those in my basic reactor, after all.

XD Well damn! There goes that. Thanks for working with me on that.

I haven't actually worked out the math on these, but it seems rather incongruous that that design can be run indefinitely without generating any heat, but it can't be done twice without massive repercussions. I don't want to take a bunch of your time if you haven't done the math or it'd be a lengthy explanation, but do you know why that is?

Thanks!

are designs with an emphasis on safety welcome?

Also, this:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…z5iiwbyq81hc9qix088iz1hs0

Versus this:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…agp7rlnvyla31dcjn8f3kyngg

I DON'T GET IT.

How can adding a coolant cell make it not able to cool down just as well?

well the first post says nothing about designs that sacrifice performance for safety so here goes
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…g3pnf4puz1mwdqcgudc5bth6o
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…g3pnf4puz1mar4ej4ha2po75s

the design is meant to provide an economical eff 2 reactor with an extra emphasis on safety and as a result is designed to not melt down even if the external water cooling was removed(it turns into a mark2 in a confined space) and blocks were broken off the reactor its self (the uranium is stored on the far right when the inventory shrinks from a chamber being broken off the uranium will drop out)

Quote from Nightmare277

Also, this:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…z5iiwbyq81hc9qix088iz1hs0

Versus this:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…agp7rlnvyla31dcjn8f3kyngg

I DON'T GET IT.

How can adding a coolant cell make it not able to cool down just as well?

Display More

Planner wants to save all components from melting. It counts time until one component reaches critical state, where it cannot gain any more heat, otherwise it will melt. Then, planner counts time to completely cool down each component after one cycle or after some of components reached critical stage. In your design, you have one cell getting bigger amounts of heat than it can handle and soon it reaches critical point. When that happens, you have to turn off your reactor and wait for it to completely cool (that's what planner does), which takes a long time, as one cell can cool only 1 heat per second and is not connected to any HD. In your other design, no cell will melt before 1st cycle and thats why it makes so big difference in planner.

Quote from passinglurker

well the first post says nothing about designs that sacrifice performance for safety so here goes
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…g3pnf4puz1mwdqcgudc5bth6o
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…g3pnf4puz1mar4ej4ha2po75s

the design is meant to provide an economical eff 2 reactor with an extra emphasis on safety and as a result is designed to not melt down even if the external water cooling was removed(it turns into a mark2 in a confined space) and blocks were broken off the reactor its self (the uranium is stored on the far right when the inventory shrinks from a chamber being broken off the uranium will drop out)

Much cheaper can be done - http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…ym8fb8f3ylfqqrjpkphober0g

Quote from raGan

Much cheaper can be done - http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…ym8fb8f3ylfqqrjpkphober0g

that design loses the "can survive a direct hit" safety feature if the chamber gets knocked off mid cycle the reactor could go critical my design wan't for cheapness it was for overkill safety

EDIT: here i dropped 3 heat dispensers and it still can take a direct hit at any time and survive http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…b5lxe1z6mssj66kjbcmxzq3i8

Ahhhhhh! Thank you sir! Or madam!
So basically when it does those massive type changes from the addition or removal of one component, it's because it's factoring in what would melt first, which would be highlighted in red? Thaat would make sense. Huzzah!

This is a good design: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…sgqa9s2kkd912htpdlqak1r28

Quote from passinglurker

that design loses the "can survive a direct hit" safety feature if the chamber gets knocked off mid cycle the reactor could go critical my design wan't for cheapness it was for overkill safety

EDIT: here i dropped 3 heat dispensers and it still can take a direct hit at any time and survive http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…b5lxe1z6mssj66kjbcmxzq3i8

Yea I forgot about it, I always accidentally remove my chambers too.

Quote from Nightmare277

Ahhhhhh! Thank you sir! Or madam!

Sir, please.

Quote

Rick:

Its because each nuclear reactor has some base cooling from the water
outside. Reactor components dont affect this (except adding more
chambers).

Ohhhh. In order to double the uranium, you would have to double the total cooling?

Here is a design that i made with in sight to have the biggest EU/t production for a MARK-I reactor, with four additional chambers. However, it's pretty resource-expensive...
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…ccxkv14j3k38qewtlrbtyt35s

Hope it can be useful!

Quote from raGan

It's inefficient and expensive, but I've seen much worse. Try to avoid using that much Heat Dispensers in your next one.
It is even possible to remove some without any effect on cooling - http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…pi6xgplukr80tvtxftvcy82dc
As always, I was curious how much can I improve it and this came up - http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…etoapu0oyo741nf3r6v1audxc

Edit: Or do you post this because of a strange behavior of the planner ?

I realized that uranium cells adjacent to the hull produced a bit more heat after seeing your second design and upgraded my personal design from
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…2xsugl4iole5dnaqf2w7x36dc

to
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…s53cm5tx3zh5k1t2lm5k440lc

by just re-adjusting 6 items. I was really confused at first because the first design actually produces 2 more cooling than the second, but 4 more heating, as well.
Thanks!
I also saw your design here,
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…etoapu0oyo741nf3r6v1audxc

which uses 10 less heat dispensers, but my design produces an effective .5 eu/t more (probably nothing to note), runs about 18 cycles more, and cuts off about 30 seconds.
I think I'm finally satisfied with the design. Can't get much more energy out of a self-cooling system, as far as I've seen. I didn't realize earlier tonight that I could increase efficiency by putting u-cells next to each other, so that was a big upgrade. I was originally using 12 cells to get 24kk. > . >
I'm gonna look more into breeders tomorrow because I'm lazy and don't want to go out searching for uranium. ; P Thanks for all the great info and the awesome planner program, everybody.
EDIT:

EEEEEEE I modified it a bit more to make it an absolute I-O! : D
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…sluh6tyo7oct9zzhjeus3w0zk

One more coolant cell, two less heat dispersers (could add another coolant cell, but no point). It's only efficiency 1.5, but for a 24kk I-O, it's dang good!

Quote from Cireminer

I also saw your design here,
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…etoapu0oyo741nf3r6v1audxc

which uses 10 less heat dispensers, but my design produces an effective .5 eu/t more (probably nothing to note), runs about 18 cycles more, and cuts off about 30 seconds.
I think I'm finally satisfied with the design. Can't get much more energy out of a self-cooling system, as far as I've seen. I didn't realize earlier tonight that I could increase efficiency by putting u-cells next to each other, so that was a big upgrade. I was originally using 12 cells to get 24kk. > . >
I'm gonna look more into breeders tomorrow because I'm lazy and don't want to go out searching for uranium. ; P Thanks for all the great info and the awesome planner program, everybody.
EDIT:

EEEEEEE I modified it a bit more to make it an absolute I-O! : D
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…sluh6tyo7oct9zzhjeus3w0zk

One more coolant cell, two less heat dispersers (could add another coolant cell, but no point). It's only efficiency 1.5, but for a 24kk I-O, it's dang good!

Display More

Good work there, bro. The thing is, Mark II reactors capable of runnung more than 15 cycles are considered to be Mark I. Reason is simple, You just wont stand there for 15 cycles to refuel your reactor under 3 mins after each cycle, so it will eventually cool down completely. It's not really necessary to have have Mark I.
But if you really want to, you can make Mark I from my on by adding just one HD into one of corners - http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…etoapu0tmdc4wmnn2n7474000