[Official] New Reactors design thread.

  • This reactor as linked in the gregtech design post isnt producing as much eu as it should. ( http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…sm9upgcbzzc239mx3b3o7pvr4 )
    I get 165 eu /t while it states that it produces 367 eu /t ? I tested in the computer cube, same thing happened.
    Were there any changes to plutonium / thorium eu/t as of gt 2.90h?

    I guess you haven't read any of this thread...


    There have been several changes, most notably the removal of the 'hybrid' effect/glitch, which caused mixed cell types to produce way more eu than they should - up to 75% more with quad thorium/single plutonium. However, the reactor planner is being mothballed AFAIK, meaning you'll need to rely on the computer cube for testing reactor setups.

  • I started with something like this, Advaneced Heat Vents and Exchangers to get the Overclocked Heat Vents at the edges cooled. But I wanted to get that little bit of excess heat cooled, so I played around with the simulator. It was a bit tricky and I don't claim to understand it entirely, there seems to be a difference between the top and the bottom of the reactor so the components behave differently there, but I got it running and I'am happy with it (for now ^^).

    8)
    I changed out the Advanced Heat Vent in the bottom right with an Overclocked Heat Vent; and the entire design instantly balanced out into a Mark I EA with a 4.29 of 4.29 EU Efficiency. Heat Vents are funny things; They behave differently depending on where and how you use them.....


    Later .... Peace ....


    8)

  • Hello (or how we people in North-Germany say: Moin Moin) guys, I am seaching a working Mark I reactor set-up which runs atleast at 400 EU/t (preferably with Thorium and/or Plutonium, but Uran would be also ok). Thank you for reading and helping.

    Freude, schöner Götterfunken,
    Tochter aus Elysium,
    Wir betreten feuertrunken,
    Himmlische, dein Heiligthum!
    Deine Zauber binden wieder
    Was die Mode streng geteilt;
    Alle Menschen werden Brüder,
    Wo dein sanfter Flügel weilt.

  • Try the list in the first post of this thread. There's a 420 EU/t design using uranium. Since I happen to know that you are running GregTech due to your other thread, the advertised running cost of 280 copper per cycle is actually much lower for you (only 35), and thus the effective efficiency is much closer to 3 than to 2.5.


    If you want better efficiency than that, no deal though. You can have either low heat or high efficiency or high EU/t. As soon as you improve one aspect, the other two get worse. The reactor above can only do over 400 EU/t because it runs very inefficient while dissipating a ton of heat.


    Uranium is generally your go-to fuel for high EU/t operations, while plutonium is for high efficiency designs (though that's not hard and fast, just a general tendency). Thorium is somewhat of a waste product but if you use dedicated thorium sink reactors that burn very large amounts of thorium at once, you can still get average output at decent efficiencies from it. You can also use single thorium cells as cheap reflector stand-ins to boost other fuel types up in efficiency while generating almost no heat for the thorium itself (but the hybrid effect that created crazy numbers for thorium/plutonium pairs in 1.4.7 was a bug that has since been fixed).

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Omicron ().

  • try updating java maybe?

    Change the scheme, alter the mood. Electrify the boys and girls if you'd be so kind.


    [b][i][u][url=' [url='http://forum.industrial-craft.net/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=7745']HAYO CORP: Nuclear Power (FREE: Reactor Blueprints)

  • It's being blocked because it contains old code that is considered insecure and/or bad style by today's standards. Therefore the JVM refuses to run it.


    You can lower your security level in the control panel under java options. However, realize that this will let malware to have an easier time infecting your system.

  • Spreadsheet updated to GregTech 3.07i. As always, check my numbers just in case I messed up.


    Plutonium changed again, completely. Greg says that was the last tweak he's making until completely reworking the entire reactor game mechanic in a future update without ETA.
    What was changed: The multipulse system is gone, instead plutonium is a 1:1 copy of thorium multiplied by 10 (with the exception of runtimes, those are still different).


    Pros:
    - Plutonium now outputs a lot less heat. Like, almost down by half in some cases. Should allow for a lot more EU/t from reactors involving plutonium.
    - Scaling is no longer different in hybrid setups, meaning you can use good old cell value efficiency to compare hybrid reactors again.


    Cons:
    - No more crazy efficient setups.


    In other news, the bug that made thorium reactors behave oddly got fixed. They no longer show any divergent behavior.




    Also, can someone help me confirm a bug, likely IC2 related?


    I tested the following combinations:
    - IC2 #312, GregTech 3.05g
    - IC2 #312, GregTech 3.07i
    - IC2 #349, GregTech 3.07i


    And in all three combinations, depleted isotopes got recharged instantly in a zero-heat reactor. One reactor tick, boom, any depleted isotope neighbouring any kind of fuel cell instantly becomes a fully recharged isotope. This kind of messes with the concept of breeding reactors just a tiny little bit, as you can imagine ;)

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Omicron ().

  • Hello smart people!


    I recently found/threw together a reactor to burn my thorium on my ftb ultimate server.
    now
    my problem is the ingame simulator using the gregtech computer cube
    shows the design running superb. running it however makes weird stuff
    happening..
    basicly as far as I can tell reading the values of each
    component in the live reactor the heat seems to spread more to the top
    than it is in the simulator. its not much but enough to destroy
    components after a few hours.


    anyway here's the design. http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…32hm0v75nruwh1pvid59sv6rk
    tips would be helpful. (also I know the planner is outdated, hence the mention of the in game simulation.)

  • That was a bug in the computercube I also ran into and reported to Greg. I assume it got fixed (though I didn't check recently).


    Basically, no design where a fully active overclocked heat vent is sitting on the edge of the chamber is stable. This is because the overclocked vent will draw up to 36 heat from the reactor, but it can only dissipate 20 heat. That leaves 16 heat per tick to accumulate inside the vent, eventually melting it. If you surround an overclocked vent with four component vents, then each component vent removes 4 additional heat for a total of 4x4=16. Thus the OC vent becomes stable and doesn't melt itself. But at the edges of the chamber, the OC vent cannot be surrounded by 4 component vents for obvious reasons. I do not know what rode the computercube there to claim this as stable, because it never was and never will be, regardless of whether you use thorium or plutonium or just plain IC2 uranium.


    You need to find ways to move the extra heat away from the OC vents on the edges. One possible way is doing this, with heat exchangers moving some heat back into the hull or swapping it to other vents that don't draw from the hull by themselves. This reactor shows another possible approach, where heat is moved towards additional OC vents in places where they would usually not be able to draw any heat themselves. Ultimately, which works best depends on your heat profile and the shape of your fuel cell cluster.

  • I figured as much. what bugged me is that it seemed to be confined to the top of the reactor and never gave me any problem on the bottom. so I tried this design http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…qbwjblsmxjtehlsl934j9m1vk oddly enough it holds together. BUT if you mirror the design (aka this http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…i8pqbimsdwn7uyovm1nmrzsw0 ) the values are not the same (even in the planner)
    Is there something I've missed in how heat is distributed? logicically heat should spread to the top but I didn't think reactors took that into account :p


    and thanks for your quick answer omicron!

  • Heat generation and reduction goes like this:


    The reactor ticks once per second. During each such tick, every slot in the reactor is checked once.


    It starts in the upper left corner, and goes horizontally across, the whole top row. Then it does the second row, again left to right. Then the third row, and so on. That is why the top components are the first to overload, because they act first and thus take the full brunt of the heat.


    When a slot is checked and something is in that slot, that something gets to do its thing. A fuel cell will generate energy and heat depending on its neighbor situation. An OC heat vent will draw all availble hull heat into itself, up to a maximum of 36, and after that, will cool itself for 20. A component heat vent will cool every component it touches and has heat in it by 4, whether they have already acted yet or not. A component heat exchange will make sure that all items touching it plus itself all contain the same percentage of internal heat, whether they have already acted yet or not, up to its maximum transfer limit. A regular heat vent will attempt to do the same and additionally also balance against the reactor hull, again up to its maximum transfer limit. And so on.


    When the final slot is checked, the tick finishes. The reactor ejects all generated EU to the e-net, and any unprocessed heat in the reactor hull will remain there and carry over into the next tick, allowing components that act before the fuel cells to process the stored heat from last tick.

  • Back from Minecraft sabbatical, will go over submissions tomorrow. If there's anything I really really need to see repost it though.

  • Some decent stuff in here, might be tuesday before I actually get time to update main page, but made a list of changes to make.


    For the record, I'm not making anymore changes to 1.4.7 gregtech reactors post. I'll move the whole post somewhere once we come up with non uranium and non CRCS reactors that are actually better than vanilla reactors, so the old stuff will always be available, for the time being though post #3 is static.


    I'm also still not *on* 1.5, so I'm not 100% on how to judge the new ones.


    Are there any outstanding factors in gregtech 1.5.1 I should be aware that might make thorium or plutonium more worthwhile? I think i remember him saying that thorium would be easier to get.


    Also, I remember greg sayign he'd drop the cost of uranium multicells, same way he dropped thorium/plutonium multicells. Did that change go through?

  • Yep, this happened. For 1.5.x, Greg introduced the plate bending machine, which makes plates out of all metal ingots. All multicells now use copper plates (costing 1 copper bar) instead of dense copper plates (costing 8 copper bars). You also have the option of using lead plates (costing 1 lead) in place of the copper plates if you run at least 3.05c. This is convenient because I tend to have way too much lead lying around.


    However no GregTech buff comes without a nerf, and 1.5.2 versions of GregTech now disable the 1 uranium + 8 cells = 8 depleted isotopes recipe by default (can be turned back on in the config).


    The problem with finding new GregTech designs currently lies with the fact that Greg changed something about thorium/plutonium with almost every subversion update since his 1.5.x port. Significant changes, too - he trialed a multipulse system that would make plutonium pulse multiple times per tick and thorium less often than once per tick. But it ended up causing a ton of bugs, which he tried addressing in numerous updates but ultimately ended up reverting to default behavior in 3.07. He's now set thorium/plutonium to a functional standard behavior with the footnote of "I am going to completely replace the whole IC2 nuclear reactor mechanic with something of my own in a future which may or may not be distant" (obviously paraphrased). They're basically the same values as in 1.4.7, except with a 20% reduction in heat output for thorium and a 11% reduction in heat output for plutonium. Also no hybrid effect obviously.


    You can see a selection of the various states of being the fuel cells went through in the spreadsheet I linked in various places, last in post #350.


    Currently I assume there are four distinct groups of people playing GregTech:
    - one group that stays on stable 1.4.7 versions up to 2.8x, for which the existing list of GregTech reactors is relevant
    - one group that plays FTB Ultimate in the latest version, which foolishly incorporated the buggy testing build 2.90h, which has GregTech reactors in so bad a state that they're barely even functional
    - one group that plays either the FTB 1.5.2 beta pack or one of the various semi-public homebrew 1.5.2 packs people built in the absence of FTB updates, for which 3.05 figures with multipulse rules are relevant
    - one group that constantly updates to the latest version, for which the 3.07 values without multipulse rules are relevant


    Something else to note on the "current state of reactors": there appears to be a bug in 1.5.x versions of IC2 that makes breeders in SSP instantly charge depleted isotopes in a single tick. It doesn't happen in SMP, and all signs point to it being a basic IC2 bug, not related GregTech (but I still need to confirm it properly as all my modpacks include GregTech in some form).

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

  • Not only that, he made it more or less mandatory to have a stage 1 reactor to burn through uranium cells in order to get depleted isotopes for breeding towards a stage 2 plutonium/thorium reactor, since you can no longer produce depleted isotopes for breeding and centrifuging on demand...


    In my current world I currently have two of these (from this very thread) running, the breeder and stage 2 reactors are still in planning (mostly because of thorium/plutonium changing so often recently).


    As a side effectof the whole shebang though, I figured out that neat isotope efficiency metric which is really darn useful when comparing all those different fuel types (I need to make a better/shorter how-to guide sometime). And in combination with looking at what the CRCS guys were doing, I also discovered the secret of multi-reactor systems. Basically, it seems so far that having a (mostly) pure plutonium reactor combined with one or more "thorium sink reactors" that simply burn huge groups of quad thorium cells at once will yield far better results than any single plutonium/thorium hybrid reactor can offer.