Alright, so: MOX reactor designs.

    Hello! I`ve been playing with HDTV reactors, like listed on Page 6 of this thread.
    I like that type of MOX reactors because it's easy to operate, especially if don't automate them.
    I decided to share my designs:
    1. Reactors without reflectors:
    1.1. 4-Chamber Reactor, 2 Quad MOX Cells:
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…cofsuocha0rfw3kncrpvix0t0
    1.2. 5-Chamber Reactor, 4 Double MOX Cells (a bit cheaper than Blackpalt`s on Page 6 of this thread):
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…5ro29sokotpu5mx5n5ia0sehg
    1.3. 6-Chamber Reactor, 5 Quad MOX Cells (cheaper than Zombie`s design on Page 6 of this thread):
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…b5mcqh29oxdi8cxafjz51n1hw
    Looking at 0-Chamber Reactor at Page 6, thought “why can’t we do this?”:
    1.4. 6-Chamber Reactor, 4 Double MOX Cells + 10 Single MOX Cells:
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…jh0ikl24rbzh6au61lrermvkk
    1.5. 6-Chamber Reactor, 10 Double MOX Cells (posted by Peter Li in comments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cog6Ugo7XXc):
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…woecyi7omeqoi2yb7a2j4rwb8
    1.6. 6-Chamber Reactor, 2 Quad MOX Cells + Double MOX Cell:
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…vce5zqiu11eip5q2an0rbigr8


    2. Reactors with reflectors:
    2.1. 3-Chamber Reactor, 4 Single MOX Cells + 4 Reflectors (diamond free):
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…8tp47qbf0qhjubxj9s2d5r978
    2.2. 3-Chamber Reactor, 1 Quad MOX Cell + 2 Reflectors:
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…v7uys5b17gno3gnxcpel0d8ic
    Same as previous one, but bigger and cheaper:
    2.3. 4-Chamber Reactor, 1 Quad MOX Cell + 2 Reflectors:
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…thlo7ebpwlpadbv285c74qous
    2.4. 5-Chamber Reactor, Quad MOX Cell + Double MOX Cell + 2 Reflectors:
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…to2y1hk1gp2qsd24jpelnz238
    Same as previous one, but bigger and cheaper (I feel like it can be even better):
    2.5. 6-Chamber Reactor, Quad MOX Cell + Double MOX Cell + 2 Reflectors:
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…3gthm4qiq0lhoku9qnnwj6a8k


    Tried to make last five compatible with simple "hopper automation" for loading reflectors.
    (WARNING: Hot MOX reactors will burn wooden chests!)


    I hear somebody saying that reflectors are expensive, but I am thinking about this:
    burning copper and tin for power, and a lot of power... why not? And with MOX it is even better!
    P.S.: I'm sorry if my bad English is hurting your ears...

    I've been playing around with IC2's reactors for quite some time, even before the rework, and I find that the best designs- the ones that "just work" never get posted. After all, if it isn't broke, why search for more? So that's why I want to share my tried and true setup that I frequently use.



    "Bread and Butter"



    This design is my number one for a few reasons. It has the exact amount of cooling it needs to maintain temperature whether it's on or off, meaning it's perfect for mox designs, and heating it up is laughably simple. There's no need to worry about swapping out components other than the uranium or mox cells, and there is virtually 0 downtime.


    Heating up for mox is as simple as taking out the 6 surrounding heat exchangers and running the reactor for 24 seconds. Bam, instant 8k heat.
    Double Quad mox generates 672 eu/t
    Double quad uranium only generates 160


    One of my favorite reactors for making plutonium


    This one was posted on this thread. Its similar to yours in that it easily stabilizes. At 80% heat it generates 840 eu/t. Its the only IC2 nuke design I use, ever.


    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…zkp9ynvk4yranpdd9x31o2t4w

    It's a decent design, however you are using waaaaay to much heat exchangers. They only move around heat and removes none so try to keep them to a minimum.


    My personal favourite mostly due to automation purposes is actually the 5 chamber version of the one you posted pyure. (both are my designs)
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…5qvym46y7aduzb5665bp965ts


    Since it only uses dual fuel rods its easily automated by filtering input and output of regular rods and spent fuel rods. So when the rods are spend they are automatically pulled out and then replaced with 4 new ones. wen using a combination of fuel rods you have to insert the fuel rods into specific slots which can only be done with a few very specific mods. Factorizations router comes to mind.


    It's a shame they haven't added any more component or fuel rods. Would love getting into building more reactor designs. However the design list found at page 6 can't really be optimized much more than they already are :(

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

    • Official Post
    Quote from Blackpalt

    It's a shame they haven't added any more component or fuel rods. Would love getting into building more reactor designs. However the design list found at page 6 can't really be optimized much more than they already are :(


    It was always a problem that people would rather just use the best solution rather than inventing their own that is most likely not as good. MOX was designed to be more flexible, getting a 5x5 MOX reactor sure is interesting, but the power to resource ratio is often too high for people to feel it worth it. Maybe when the lithium and tritium fuel rods actually do something they'll be something new and exciting with reactors.

    145 Mods isn't too many. 9 types of copper and 8 types of tin aren't too many. 3 types of coffee though?

    I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realise that what you read was not what I meant.


    ---- Minecraft Crash Report ----
    // I just don't know what went wrong :(


    I see this too much.

    Quote from Blackpalt

    It's a decent design, however you are using waaaaay to much heat exchangers. They only move around heat and removes none so try to keep them to a minimum.


    My personal favourite mostly due to automation purposes is actually the 5 chamber version of the one you posted pyure. (both are my designs)
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…5qvym46y7aduzb5665bp965ts


    Since it only uses dual fuel rods its easily automated by filtering input and output of regular rods and spent fuel rods. So when the rods are spend they are automatically pulled out and then replaced with 4 new ones. wen using a combination of fuel rods you have to insert the fuel rods into specific slots which can only be done with a few very specific mods. Factorizations router comes to mind.


    This might be a bit long of a post, but bear with me.


    I used alot of heat exchangers in this because I was testing the fluid reactors, and I saw the heat jumping around alot, so I wanted to make sure to keep the heat less than a 1k difference. I've learned since then that the heat in the components will hover at about ~800 heat for most of the time regardless. Anyway, onto your design:
    This.. isn't very viable for automation without those few specific mods that can insert into a specific slot. There are only a handful of different combinations of fuel rods that are viable until more possibilities come out for specific insertion. IC2 could possibly lead the way in specified slot insertion, especially considering that not many common mods offer it, and the reactors are a prime candidate for exact location in inventories. I feel that the item sorter is far too underused, so maybe someday, that can be taken into consideration?


    Anyway, I've been compounding materials in survival, and I've hatched up an idea for more diversity. First, I've found a perfect design that I'm now using in EVERY one of my uranium 5x5 reactors from now on. And I have to say, once you find something great, if there's nothing better, then you just have to make more of them...


    [url = http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…15bxi33pdu1g7lgz7binwensw] "Dual Sardines" [/url]


    This one is probably the most efficient I can make given the current mechanics. This is as much power, efficiency, reliability, and convenience that I can manage to create. Yes, It's kinda expensive... Considering that to make it, you need 16 fluid ports, 16 heat exchangers, 16 stirling generators, 32 fluid ejectors, 128 heat conductors.... The list goes on and on. Upside is that I've found a way to design it without any diamonds - with the downside that it can't be used for MOX... BUT, you wouldn't be able to vent out enough heat with HALF the amount of rods anyway. Fact is, with only a few combinations, there's a limit to what's viable long-term.


    Onto my idea, why not add a new type of fuel rod?


    I've formulated an interesting mechanic for late game that would benefit fluid reactors, offer incentives to running MOX, open up a higher tier of power, and give more variety to nuclear.


    Benefit: Outputs higher heat than uranium, on par (or better) than MOX at 75% heat {4x heat}
    This makes it a great candidate for fluid reactors, as it will take up less slots, and provide plenty of heat
    Benefit: Lasts much longer than Uranium, due to a higher concentration of U^(235)
    Benefit: outputs much more power in a fluid reactor because of the first two
    Benefit: Doesn't use up U^(238), can be used in conjunction with MOX for best use of Uranium
    Benefit: Can be centrifuged to get (Insert extra-valuable nuclear material) exclusive only as a by-product of this fuel


    Disadvantage: BURNS HOT!
    Disadvantage: Because it give off much more heat, electrical generators can't extract pure energy as efficiently (1/4 EU output of Uranium)
    Disadvantage: Uses up precious early-game U^(235)
    Disadvantage: Uses up ALOT of U^(235), recommended only for nuclear physicists (But only self-proclaimed ones)
    Disadvantage: Did I mention it burns hot?


    Now I know that this is getting a bit long, so I'll try to condense this.
    The purpose for this fuel would be to introduce more diverse mechanics into nuclear design, and expand on the new reactor mode. It also gives new challenges for people to find new and interesting solutions to. plus, it's an entirely viable solution to late-game power, with the need for high levels of infrastructure. Oh, and one more thing, when i say that this new fuel uses U^(235), it's going to use 1 whole piece. Not just one tiny pile. Entire pellets. Not sure in what pattern or amount. But in Uranium, 3 tiny piles get used up. In MOX, 6 U^(238). So this new type of fuel would have to be balanced around this factor.


    Let me hear some of your opinions on this, and where you think it should fit in.


    Personally, I think that Plutonium should be taken out of depleted MOX. I feel that it could fill a larger role later on
    Also, found this: http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/webp…/types%20of%20uranium.htm

    • Official Post
    Quote from Natesky9

    Personally, I think that Plutonium should be taken out of depleted MOX. I feel that it could fill a larger role later on

    MOX uses plutonium, so getting it back at the end makes sense. MOX converts your U-238 to plutonium essentially.


    You've also yet to provide a name for your new fuel ;)

    145 Mods isn't too many. 9 types of copper and 8 types of tin aren't too many. 3 types of coffee though?

    I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realise that what you read was not what I meant.


    ---- Minecraft Crash Report ----
    // I just don't know what went wrong :(


    I see this too much.

    Quote from Chocohead

    MOX uses plutonium, so getting it back at the end makes sense. MOX converts your U-238 to plutonium essentially.


    You've also yet to provide a name for your new fuel ;)

    I'm talking about the +1 tiny pile from depleted MOX. Basically, the byproduct of centrifuging depleted rods.
    Since MOX has half a lifetime of regular uranium, it's essentially a faster way to get more plutonium quicker. Which is fine, but if Plutonium is to be a late-game resource, it should be shifted to the lower tier fuel so that it isn't ridiculously abundant when you have 12 reactors and 96k plutonium


    Each type should have a unique role, I feel


    And as for a name, the names of the two most common nuclear fuels are just "Low enriched Uranium" and "High enriched Uranium"
    So I guess it would just follow that pattern, and the name would be "Highly enriched Uranium", for lach of a better name.


    I mean, you ARE using at least 3 times more U^(235) than regular uranium fuel...


    Despite the name, what do you think? It should be balanced, but a definite advantage over regular fuel

    Quote from Natesky9

    Anyway, onto your design:
    This.. isn't very viable for automation without those few specific mods that can insert into a specific slot. There are only a handful of different combinations of fuel rods that are viable until more possibilities come out for specific insertion

    This is true for the 6 chamber reactor. But as i mentioned you dont need this for the 5 chamber version since i uses only dual rods and all the slots in the reactor are used. Any mod with item transport and filters can automate that.


    I love the thought of a new tier of fuel rods that consumes plutonium that would be specifically tailored for 5x5 reactors. So you would get a natural progression of first regular reactors, then mox and finally 5x5 reactors. I also agree that IC2 would benifit a lot in having some kind of router for inserting into specific slot as it is necesarry for automating most nuclear reactors.


    This is a bit off topic as this thread is about mox, not 5x5 reactors but anyways:
    Concerning the 5x5 reactors you can basically use any of the regular reactors found in this thread.
    [Official] New Reactors design thread.


    They work exactly the same. However with 5x5 reactors you make energy from the heat the reactor outputs which basically scales with the efficiency so its preferable to have a 4+ efficiency design when making 5x5 reactors. so i would say your reactor design is a bit on the low side with regards to efficiency.


    Of the old design this is my favourite
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…adh05nlzbpykw84kwczan05q8


    As it gives the most heat per fuel rod. Only downside is that it does not give the heat in multiples of 100 which makes it a bit more difficult with superheated steam.


    My favourite reactor type is the ones i tested in this thread: The new 5x5 IC² Reactor.


    The fact that the 5x5 reactor continues to produce power even while you have turned off the reactor means it works extremly good with fixed cycle reactors where it is on for a while and then you turn it of an let it cool down.


    The best one i came up with was this one
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…fofzp975xkw8nn00g0e61um0w


    It runs 10 seconds on and then 17 seconds off with a total cycling time of 27 seconds which can easily be done with regular vanilla redstone (you can find more info in the specific thread). It blows any of the other 5x5 designs out of the water both in terms of efficiency and power output and it is suprisingly easy to operate. Only downside is that you need to insert into specific slots to automate it. It is less of a concern thought as it takes 54000 seconds to run through one set of fuel rods as it is only on some of the time.


    You can do mox in a 5x5 reactor however i wouldnt recomend it. It requires the nuclear control addon so you can controle the reactor based on temperature but even then the reactor itself is not very impressive. Extremly high efficiency but pretty low output and almost impossible to use with superheated steam as the heat output varies constantly.

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

    Edited once, last by Blackpalt ().

    Quote from Blackpalt

    My personal favourite mostly due to automation purposes is actually the 5 chamber version of the one you posted pyure. (both are my designs)
    http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.…duzb5665bp965ts


    Man...that is tempting. It looks like you take a considerable efficiency hit however, no?


    Automating rod insertion is definitely something I'd like to do and this would make it easy-peasy.

    The efficiency is actually identical, the output is 80% of the 6 chamber versions. There are more perks to the 5 chamber version as well. First of all it is A LOT cheaper. The design itself is actually a lot more efficient than the 6 chamber version as it used only 8 heat exchangers compared to 12. Also it uses only 8 advanced heat vents compared to 22 and instead uses 16 really cheap regular heat vents. Of all the mox designs ive done this is the one i'm most happy with.


    What i usually do is make two of these that share the side missing a chamber to make one combined large reactor with 12 blocks. Then i can easily blast proof and automate the reactors in the same reactor room with the same cabling for a sweet 1280 eu/tick which is usually enough for my needs.


    But the biggest point is that it requires less plutonium (24 instead of 30) and is a lot cheaper to build. Don't know if these numbers are still relevant but if you compare them in the list at page 6 the difference is:
    5 chamber

    • Building cost: 293 copper, 119 tin, 491 iron, 32 lead, 32 gold, 8 diamond, 24 redstone, 2 glowstone, 2 lapis, 55 rubber


    6 chamber

    • Building cost: 396 copper, 153 tin, 657 iron, 36 lead, 48 gold, 22 diamond, 32 redstone, 2 glowstone, 2 lapis, 79 rubber

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


    Dang, that's a revelation. Good to know.


    Next you just need to design an uber-efficient thorium reactor with GT 5U and you'll be good to go.

    Sad to see this subforum slowing down, I've always looked here for reactor designs.


    I'm assuming the tried and true Uranium designs that have been around since 1.5 still work, and these recent MOX posts seem promising, but does anyone have Thorium designs for GT5 Unofficial? Or is it identical to the old Thorium and those old plans will work?

    Quote from Hammurabi

    Oh my... that is certainly some Iridium usage.

    In my experience the difficulty is only finding a vein with iridium, not the amount. Once you have it, you have all the iridium you want. So in practice there is no difference between using 1 iridium reflector and 8. Either you have no iridium or you have all you want.

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

    O

    Quote from Blackpalt

    In my experience the difficulty is only finding a vein with iridium, not the amount. Once you have it, you have all the iridium you want. So in practice there is no difference between using 1 iridium reflector and 8. Either you have no iridium or you have all you want.

    Oh, has it gotten more common with oregen? I haven't played GT since like 1.5


    I'll look into it, but I might try to make a cheaper materials Thorium reactor just for the kicks.

    Honestly the iridium is the smallest obstacle in that recipe. Its also hundreds and hundreds of tin and copper and other stuff.