The reason you're seeing that is because buckets don't empty from reactor heat until 4000 heat. All of those components require cooldown, which is where it's pulling the mk2 from. Try dropping some ice in there and you'll see that it reduces the heat down to almost nothing. That's because ice removes heat as soon as it can (i.e. 300 heat)
Still that would mean a flaw in the planner because when it gets to 4000 heat it wont go any higher thus it can run endless cycles
Still that would mean a flaw in the planner because when it gets to 4000 heat it wont go any higher thus it can run endless cycles
Planner actually IS bugged,however not much choice we have
Still,CASUS reactors a waay better,when world is more or less developed
I have a casus and 40filled MFSU,hope some energy-based WMD will come 
Hi there. There is my variation of "spit on the efficiency" reactor:
Currently the design for the highest possible effective eu/t from a single reactor 'core'(the reactor itself plus 0-6 chambers) doesn't exist, i've been working on making it since the beginning of the month though, and it'll be done by the end of the month, probably sooner, so hang in there!
Still that would mean a flaw in the planner because when it gets to 4000 heat it wont go any higher thus it can run endless cycles
I've added an additional heat stable check in an attempt to catch this event, enjoy ;P
Quadrant I Hybrid Breeder http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…3yggr5o7q373pwij4w5gu27eo There. 19.9 out of 20 EU/t at startup, reads 20 out of 20 at operating temp (6700 mean to 6800 mean) and is a stable breeder to boot. That said, it is a bit lacking in power density so you need quite a few. You may want to use EE to harvest iron, carbon, and copper (yes, copper is a trace element) from pumpkins for the containments and spare parts as you will likely blow one as you preheat them and TMI or NEI to keep track of heat distribution. When the new system I will update the four that I am using to Mod 0 and start work on the Quadrant II for mobile applications.
guys, if u don't care about run time, then just fill a neactor with only uran cells, and tada! Max eu/t! ( if it even lasts a tick.. 
)
guys, if u don't care about run time, then just fill a neactor with only uran cells, and tada! Max eu/t! ( if it even lasts a tick..
It lasts for 7 seconds, so you really can run such thing in microcycle mode. Effective EU/t, though, will be low, because of long cool down times.
I know about 7sec,the not lasting a tick was a joke. I have automated one of these with redpower. Anyway, the highest EFFECTIVE eu/t I have ever gotten was with a reactor full of uran except for 7 stacks of ice. I made 2 versions, one used compressors for the ice, so the effective eu/t was not huge. The other, however, used EE condensors (yes, I know, but I was just trying to get the best, even if its kinda cheating.) to pump ice into the reactor. With this, I got 2050 eu/t AND IT COULD RUN FOREVER. So, I got 2050 effective eu/t, but I cheated to get it.
The real answer to this is that quantity has a quality all its own. Build several reactors.
Obviously you can have as much power as you wish by building several. But there's another bonus too. Reactor power levels more or less depend on how much cooling you can provide, and for each new reactor you get an extra 25 or so cooling from surrounding water blocks. (Each of these blocks can be shared between reactors too!). Water is cheaper than cooling cells and the heat spreaders needed to drive them. So the optimal choice is usually a larger number of smaller reactors.
My current main reactor is an array of 4 3 chamber reactors in a 9x3x3 space. I was planning to upgrade this to eight 2 chamber reactors in a 9x5x3 space - I have the design, but will now wait for the new physics, which will probably change everything!
It is not hard to calculate energy output limit. Each eu/t needs extra one cooling. So, for non-casuc, theoretical limit is around 54(inner) + 12(chambers) +20(water blocks)=86 eu/t
CASUCS are more limited with uranium output/ which can't be more than 44 per cell on average. Alternately, one cell can produce up to 300 cooling, compensating for 6.8 uranium cells. So, if we have one ice per 6.8 cells that is 54*6.8/7.8*44.4 which is roughly 2090.
It is not hard to calculate energy output limit. Each eu/t needs extra one cooling. So, for non-casuc, theoretical limit is around 54(inner) + 12(chambers) +20(water blocks)=86 eu/t
There are reactors with a higher effective output than 86 eu/tick. Probably because you forgot the fact that when you put components around uranium cells the uranium cell will produce less heat.
Hah yea, I wonder why there is 140 EU/t Mark I.
There reactors with a higher effective output than 86 eu/tick. Probably because you forgot the fact that when you put components around uranium cells the uranium cell will produce less heat.
Hmm, yes, you are right. Not as much as forgotten as has written off as not effective.
But if you are willing to get best eu/t from ractor just for the sake of it, then this is 139.6 eu/t one
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…5dzamzk0bkhyao7vf0kq4q14w
You still need at least 4 cooling pr 10 eu/t, so top limit is around 200.
I think limit is 140. Higher numbers are purely theoretical. If it is not true, show me non-casuc reactor that produces more than 140EU/t.
Imo just build two of these
If you think about it, those extra 4 chambers on those super-special 140 EU/t reactors are in the end more expensive and less efficient than two of the above. And if you do it right, they only take up slightly more space than the other. Example setup (top-down view) with 4 of those build with a chamber an top and bottom of the reactor:
