Alright, so: MOX reactor designs.

  • But if the swapping of fuel cells takes *any* time whatsoever, the core temperature will drop. The hard part is automating temperature management so that the reactor never cools down. Otherwise you would have to manually heat up the reactor every once in a while, which is not horrible I suppose, but I'd personally prefer not to.

  • Snahsnah, if you run your second design at a 4.75 multiplier, that essentially turns it into an efficiency 20, 1000 EU/t reactor with a running cost of 4 copper, 2 iron per cycle. This is not very far away from Voltara's six-chamber, efficiency 19, 950 EU/t design with 2 copper, 1 iron running cost per cycle... except that Voltara's design is heat stable for all eternity. Admittedly, yours can be built without diamonds, but given the tricky operation I'm still debating if that alone is reason enough to put it on the list.


    I do like the design principle with the reactor exchangers, though. As a pure uranium reactor, this is definitely among the better ones I've seen. I don't think Requia has an efficiency 4,2 quad-chamber in the official list.


    The first one... well, at 4.75 multiplier you get 33.25 efficiency and 665 EU/t versus a combined running cost of 64 coal, 64 tin, 38 copper and 1 iron per cycle. Considering what IC2 lets you do with coal, you're basically paying a running cost of 1 diamond per cycle, plus the full stack of tin and more than half a stack of copper. The efficiency is nice, but the running cost is really painful. With a single MFSU now costing 40 diamonds, your coal is definitely better invested in that direction, because when in doubt, reactor fuel is much easier to get in bulk. An extremely high efficiency design such as this only makes sense in an environment where you really only have a tiny amount of reactor fuel to work with.

  • I never understood the complaints about resource costs. With a few miners, or, better, an advanced miner, I usually end up with more resources than I know what to do with. Add in GregTech and all the ways it adds to process ores and alternate recipes for Energy Crystals, and suddenly I can't think of a better use for Coal dust.

  • The resource cost is much more noticeable in vanilla IC2 due to lack of proper tesseracted item transportation and the fact that you actually have to mine tin and copper and can't just cent lava.


    Non-renewable reflectors do cost quite a lot per EU, though. That's something you should keep in mind.

  • I came up with a new 6 chamber design that gets 1000 EU/t with an efficiency of 20.


    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…4omvohd7vzwm4zbxzhyajd9hw


    I haven't gotten a chance to test it in game yet, but it's the highest output yet for a heat stable MOX reactor. Plus, no reflectors.


    Edit: Also came up with a 4 chamber design that gets 875 EU/t with an efficiency of 19.45.


    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…zr7nhx4ro4r7utcgzb56jjv9c

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

  • What? Diamonds grow on sticks!


    They are very expensive in terms of iron and copper as well, moreso than most other parts.


    I came up with a new 6 chamber design that gets 1000 EU/t with an efficiency of 20.


    Edit: Also came up with a 4 chamber design that gets 875 EU/t with an efficiency of 19.45.


    Will evaluate once I get home, unless Stuff Happens(tm) again.

  • Ok, finally got a chance to test the builds in-game.


    I let each of the run for at least 5 minutes to make sure the heat levels would stabilize and everything looks good.


    Here's the 4 chamber currently running at 873 EU/t




    And here's the 6 chamber currently running at 998 EU/t


  • Finally got around to updating. SpwnX's 4-chamber and KCMcG's 6-chamber are on the list.


    EDIT: Oh, and I dropped the cost spreadsheet into my dropbox, maybe it'll be of use to someone. Usage should be self-explanatory.

  • I was hesitant to post this because after browsing the entire thread it looked a lot like c4commando's reactor
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…pvzeyobg6ykbf4v9mjnigqzuo


    But... I was able to create a zero heat transfer 4 chamber reactor from a six chamber design that I had come across called the "wave generator" ( I regret that I do not remember the original creator )
    It's not particularly powerful, or cheap, or expensive. It's is a safe mediocre reactor with no heat transfer. So all you do is slowly heat it up by taking out the center six advance heat vents and put two dual uranium cells in the middle. After it warms up, turn it off and put the advanced heat vents back with quad mox in the center. Profit.


    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…4vrx0fnc1nj6pwhhro7v91gsm


    -edit- After Omicron's Reply (Because I didn't think it was important enough to post an additional reply)


    I finally realized where I messed up. I didn't realize that C4Commando's design was 0 heat transfer. And I thought that it would pull reactor heat. After just staring at it I realized my reasoning was flawed. So I present a "Wave" reactor. It dumps all the heat from the nuclear material into the hull, and pulls an equal amount holding the system in equilibrium when producing, and cools when shut off.


    Wave Reactor 14.04


    Reactor is 68.15%* the cost of C4Commanodo's design
    Useless additional Info in Spoiler







    *not counting additional support blocks/wiring/etc


  • I haven't got into IC2 reactors for 1.6.4 yet can you tell me if this is correct from what I have worked out.


    1. I need to have a normal reactor with regular uranium fuel rods.
    2. Then the depleted Uranium is used to make MOX fuel rods.
    3. MOX fuel reactors needs to be ran at 90% - 95% heat.

  • We'll see if that persists, SpwnX. Thunderdark originally stated that it was intentional for MOX reactors to run at up to x5 multiplier. If the melting was reinstated, they would only be able to run at x4.4 at most. Of course, things change during development, but I'll give it a few more dev builds for them to settle on something that looks long-term. Then I'll adjust the figures in the reactor list appropriately, if required.

  • I recently started looking into nuclear and since i happen to be a bit of a efficiancy freak ive been mostly looking into the most efficient reactors. I am by all means a rookie when it comes to reactor design however when i looked into the 4 chamber design made by SpwnX i really wanted the efficiency however i wasn't that keen on the running cost.


    The design i came upp with is entirely based on SpwnX design however i changed it in a few parts to decrease the running cost while maintaining the 500 eu/tick, 25 efficiency. Material cost is probably slighly more expensive (haven't actully checked), however i think needing only 2 reflectors instead of 4 more than makes up for that.


    Mark 1 EA+
    EU/tick 500
    Efficiancy: 25
    Building cost: Should be similar to SpwnX build
    Running cost: 24 uu 238, 9 copper, 16 tin, 16 coal per cycle


    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…jt16b7mqqxo7fwy6qu2phvu9s


    Since im very new to this it is entirely possible that you could probably improve on this design quite a bit however i do think this setup has great potential. There is currently one unused slot in the reactor which i dont know what to do with however im unsure if it matters. if not, feel free to point out why.

    A question that sometimes drives me hazy; am i or are the other crazy

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

  • Not bad an idea, but unfortunately reflectors don't work like that... their "consumption" scales with the cells they're next to. A dual cell costs 2 durability per reactor tick, a quad cell four.


    So your design has 2 reflectors taking 4 damage per tick, while the other variant has 4 reflectors taking 2 damage per tick. The end result is the same.