Alright, so: MOX reactor designs.

Quote from Omicron

MOX reactors were initially buggy and got fixed in build #288-#297. Previously you got a lot more additional multipliers out of the reactor's absolute heat value and out of how close the fuel rods were to the upper left corner of the reactor GUI, neither of which was ever intended. Now you only get the one intended multiplier, which is percentage of maximum heat, and it scales up to x5 at 99.9% hull temperature. If you dare go so high, that is.

For the same reason, you can ditch all your heat plating and just stuff your fuel rods into a 0-chamber reactor - it makes no difference anymore in your case.

And no, transformers do not output per side. They will always output a quarter of their rated power in step-down mode, and if you connect to multiple sides, it will simply be split between them. You do not get more than 2048 EU/t out of an EV transformer in step-down mode, no matter what you do.

In other words, high EU output builds are completely worthless because transformers truncate any additional EU's. Gotcha.

So, no builds which can produce more than 8k EU/t are worth bothering with. Good to know. Kinda kicks my plans in the teeth, though. Imagine a Tower of Power with MOX reactors... such a sight shall now never be.

The way I make sure I don't fill up my MFSUs is by using two of them in serial...The first one off the transformer has the condition "Emit if empty" and points into the second one. This MFSU should remain empty/nearly empty, if you balance your power output correctly. The second MFSU is what fills up, and is where I draw my power from. I place these outside my "reactor bunker" I build around any reactor that has a possibility of exploding if something derps (like my CRCS reactor). I use wireless redstone to transmit the signal that an MFSU needs power into the bunker to turn the reactor on.

As for my MOX design...it was completely computer controlled. Every second, the computer would update the current heat, calculate if it was in heatup, operating temperature, or cooldown mode, and react accordingly. It also would detect if the MFSUs needed power, and depending on the mode, turn the reactor on. Finally, it would detect the state of the components (damage value on cooling cells and heat vents, and if the fuel cells were depleted) and swap them out with fresh ones as needed. Anyways, I'm going to try adding more transformers to the build to see if that fixes the exploding transformer problem, then see if I can run the reactor for a cycle or two without it exploding.

Quote from Omicron

How so, Shneekey? Just use more transformers. LezChap is already doing it. All you need to do is ensure that you actually consume the power on the other end - and if you are not, then why are you running a high output reactor in the first place The current situation is no different that classic IC2. Back then you had HV transformers letting through 2048 EU/t, nowadays you have EV transformers letting through 2048 EU/t. The name of the device is different, the function remains identical (and in fact you got a bigger safety margin due to the higher power tolerance of the EV transformer). If you could do it back then, you can do it now. The only thing that really changed is that reactors got significantly more powerful through MOX fuel, and I sure hope you're not complaining about a much-needed buff...?

Worries about MFSUs filling up can be dealt with using for example range triggers from Nuclear Control (which you really should have installed anyway if you're playing with MOX). Might take a fairly large sized AND gate if you have many receiving MFSUs, but I don't see any way it could fail you. Something like Immibis RedLogic can shrink it down a lot too.

LezChap: good point with the safety margin.

I think there is a communication disconnect...

Say I've got a reactor outputting something like 8k EU/t. I've got enough stuff running where I actually need that kind of output. However, I'm only going to be able to get 2048 EU/t through my transformer, and it's going to fry anything else. So basically, I've just throttled my potential 8k output down to a quarter of that. 6k EU/t just got completely wasted just so the energy can interact with my machines.

I was talking about Tower of Power MOX reactor builds with theoretical outputs around 20k. Completely impossible now, due to the revamp. Nothing can handle that much power output in the line, regardless of how many sources provide it, and stepping it down just truncates the power output.

Quote from ShneekeyTheLost

I think there is a communication disconnect...

Say I've got a reactor outputting something like 8k EU/t. I've got enough stuff running where I actually need that kind of output. However, I'm only going to be able to get 2048 EU/t through my transformer, and it's going to fry anything else. So basically, I've just throttled my potential 8k output down to a quarter of that. 6k EU/t just got completely wasted just so the energy can interact with my machines.

I was talking about Tower of Power MOX reactor builds with theoretical outputs around 20k. Completely impossible now, due to the revamp. Nothing can handle that much power output in the line, regardless of how many sources provide it, and stepping it down just truncates the power output.

Instead of running all your machines on one line, like in IC² classic, run 4 separate lines of machines, each with its own EVT.

You can still use the full 20k...picture this...each machine you run on IC2 power (Macerator, Furnace, Thermal Centrifuge, ect) is upgraded with transformer upgrades to accept 2048eu/t...EV power, right? Now picture a dedicated MFSU for each machine. Running this setup, assuming your machines all -consume- the full 2048 eu/t, you could run 10 machines on your theoretical nuke.

Also, you can put in enough transformer upgrades to allow your machines to accept HIGHER than EV power (more than 2048 eu/t). Right now I have my Mass Fabricator running off of 3 MFSUs which are kept topped off by a nuclear reactor that produces 6400eu/t.

I just finished testing a 30,000eu/t MOX CRCS build, and posted the details in another thread. I couldn't have done it without the help and information ya'll gave me over the last few days. Thanks a bunch!

Found a...glitch...when using multi-chamber reactors and Redstone in Motion frames...if your heat level is over what can be handled by your main nuclear reactor chamber and the components inside its slots (the first 3 columns), it'll explode when the frame moves it. This hits hard if you plan to use a lot of reactor plating to increase the max heat to make heat levels easier to manage, or if you plan to operate on the high range straddling the edge of efficiency and danger.

Just figured I'd let anyone know, in case they planned on a build combining RiM and MOX Reactors.

I know, I just couldn't find a better word to describe it, thus it being surrounded by ...'s I just wanted to put the warning out for someone that might expect for reactors to remain intact during and after transit...because if I didn't think about it before it exploded violently in my test world, someone else is bound to do the same thing...only on their legit world.

Quote from Omicron

Another three-chamber design I just made: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…52r1fz97v993yb8qvlfyckcg0

Kinda proud of this one. If anyone can get more output out of three chambers without using hull transfer components or CRCS, let me know! ...Why three? Well, let's say I have a little project in mind.

That's a very good build...at just under 70% max hull heat, it'll produce exactly 2048 eu/t...and being 3 chambers, it's stackable...am I going where you're going?

edit: Also wanted to ask: Why the containment reactor plates over the Heat-Capacity ones?

My experience since installing experimental is that nuclear reactors produce 4x more power than the reactor planner states...I didn't change any configs to get that result either...

So the planner states 135eu/t. x4 that's 540. x((4*.7)+1) = 2,052.

Quote from Omicron

Yes, the multiplier over what the reactor planner states is the heat bonus. It scales from x1 (at 0% heat) to x5 (at 100% heat). Therefore, if I manage to get the heat so high that I get the maximum bonus, I will produce 675 EU/t with one such 3-chamber segment.

If you are getting any more than that, it's a bug and you need to tell Thunderdark that Player broke something again

EDIT: quick confirmation in build #298: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.…0/2013-11-15_19.17.09.png (don't mind the wildfire)

No...even with uranium reactors I get 4x the power stated in the planner. I went to look in my configs and found this:

# Base energy generation values - increase those for higher energy yield
    I:energyGeneratorBase=10
    I:energyGeneratorGeo=20
    I:energyGeneratorNuclear=20
    I:energyGeneratorSemibioethanol=16
    I:energyGeneratorSemibiomass=8
    I:energyGeneratorSemifuel=32
    I:energyGeneratorSemioil=8
    I:energyGeneratorSolar=100
    I:energyGeneratorWater=100
    I:energyGeneratorWind=100

I know I didn't change any of those values (and I created the pack I'm playing on), they had to have generated that way. Looks like I'm getting a base value for nuclear fuel of 20...whereas the planner and IC2 before experimental you got a base of 5 per rod...thus the 4x multiplier I'm getting BEFORE the MOX modifier.

Quote from Omicron

Yes, that would explain it. Which build generated that config, out of interest? That would be one heck of an undocumented reactor buff.

I can't find a backup of the first version of the pack, but I went as far back as I could to build 264 of IC2, and testing I couldn't replicate the config.

I was looking to upgrade the power supply to my main assembly/processing line...right now I have a uranium reactor producing 100eu/t. I was looking for a Mark I design (as this is running out in the open and I don't want a CRCS system that will blow if something doesn't exchange at the right moment). As I find single-chamber reactors really easy to automate, I decided to go with that. I want the most power I can produce for the space I have available, as resources are not an issue but power generation is. The best I've been able to come up with is this design: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…52r1fz97v993yb8qvlfyckcg0

It produces a base of 120 eu/t. Can anyone do better? Then again, I can upgrade to a 3-chamber design, it'd be just as easy to automate, and I could use Omicron's design to get 135 eu/t...at a MUCH higher efficiency. Decisions decisions.