Posts by Peppe

    Efficiency per uranium ingot is how I often make my final analysis of a system of reactors. Which is just your per isotope efficiency * 8. I like to think of it this way to account for how much energy my fuel supply can create.

    IC2 average around 26m EU per ingot. Ignoring running costs or with say GT reflectors, you should hit maybe 50m.

    Old gregtech was 90-140m per ingot.

    I havn't looked at the new gregtech reactor stuff for a couple weeks.

    Sounds like the new gregtech is maybe top end uranium numbers without the high running costs. Something in the 50 million per ingot range, but with some fuel usage scenarios not actually being much better than uranium.

    Ignoring cost to build for a moment would you get more out of each ingot running plutonium+thorium or eff 7 iridium reflector quad uranium?

    To be relevant plutonium+thorium should beat that usage scenario, but i don't think it does, which is why i left it off my personal 1.5.1 pack.

    I consider resource waste as bad only if there's a much better option that sustains the same level of safety.

    You might want to check the reactors in the first post:
    New [Official] Reactors design thread.

    Your designs are wasteful on several levels:
    Waste fuel -- most of your reactors were ~2 efficiency or worse. This is a waste of fuel when there are several IC2 reactors that get 3.33 efficiency or more in the first post of this thread.

    Waste of resources -- most of your reactors used diamond or gold exchangers or diamond vents. You can get more cooling cheaper with overclocked heat vents, component heat vents, and basic heat exchangers. Again, see all the IC2 reactors in the first post of this thread.

    Your reactors are not any more safe than all the type I's that are in the first post of this thread.

    Can somebody explain me the interface of the advanced regulator ? i couldn´t find any explanation on the gregtech wiki and also not on youtube :/

    Left 3x3 grid is a basic inventory. Items piped into the machine go to this grid.

    Middle 3x3 grid is what items you want to be moved from inventory (left grid) to the inventory on the red output side.

    Right grid is the slot the items you want moved go to -- they line up with what is in the middle grid. So if you put an apple in the upper left slot of the middle inventory and then make upper left slot of the right grid = 10. Apples in the left inventory will be placed in slot 10 of the inventory on the output side of the regulator.

    Example in this album for the 1.4.7 hybrid reactors in the first post:

    How exactly are the gt reactors changing in 1.5.1, if you don't mind me asking. Since that's the version I plan to be using when I construct my reactors.
    Also I didn't realize it was 8 re-inriched cells in order to centrifuge for the plutonium and thorium and near depleted, that makes a lot more sense. I thought it was one re-inriched. Thanks for all the links and information, it has been really helpful.

    One last other question:
    What advantages do the crsc reactors have over the breeder+production reactors setup?

    1.5.1 GT changes currently are 50% cut in thorium life and plutonium outputs EU and heat twice a tick. Thorium affect on other fuels has also been changed, so you don't get much running even quad thorium next to uranium/plutonium. These probably are not final, but the life change makes the ratios you would run thorium+plutonium much different to stay in balance. Most reactors for 1.4.7 will not work in 1.5.1. Some of us have started tinkering with designs, but the online simulator isn't updated for it, so you have to do it in-game using real reactors or the GT computercube.

    For the CRCS/DDOS style reactors. You still need a breeder(s). You might need multiple since most of them load up on quad cells. Their advantage is you can run a lot of quad cells -- instant higher efficiency than single cells and high output. Downside is heat, but that is managed through moving items into/out of the reactor. So instead of being limited to cooling within the single reactor you have the production reactor and several cooling towers that just cool off the components. These reactors depend heavily on inventory automation systems and timing. Where you can run vent cooled type 1 reactors without really any safety controls or timing circuit you would not want to run CRCS without some teamperature sensors or at least inventory full checks with buildcraft gate.

    Quote looks bonkers

    On the reactor thread the cheap breeder is a good start. Then make one or more production reactors. Then work on upgrading the breeder. All or nearly all the components in the breeder upgrade for use in the hotter versions, so no loss there.

    The hottest breeders take tons of copper, so start with this 'cheap' one:
    you can add chambers and heating cells to this as you get the materials and steadily improve the breeding rate or save up and jump to the hot one.

    Eventually end up here:

    Seems to be a little confusion on the fuel life cycle.

    The breeding process is:
    Craft the uranium ingot with 8 empty cells around it to get 8 depleted cells.
    Craft the depleted cells with coal to get 8 isotopes
    Place isotopes in an active breeder reactor next to a fuel cell (uranium usually)
    Isotopes convert in the reactor inventory to enriched cells

    Finally you make a decision on what fuel to use:
    Add coal dust to enriched cell to get uranium cell -- later versions of gregtech make this require a canning machine
    If you want thorium/plutonium instead of making uranium here you would centrifuge 8 enriched cells.

    The centrifuge recipe is 8 enriched cells = 4 thorium cells, 1 plutonium cell, 3 depleted cells. Some later versions of gregtech give you dust and require you to use the automated canning machine to get them back in the cells. So for your 8 enriched cells you use the 4 thorium and 1 plutonium in a reactor and re-enrich the depleted cells.

    When cells are consumed int he reactor they have a 25% chance to leave a depleted cell as well. To keep the reactors running you should always have depleted cells coming from ingots and the 25% from finished cycles to keep running.

    To use up thorium and plutonium in the quantities you get centrifuging enriched cells check the reactor thread for the gregtech reactors section. There is a 367 EU/t reactor that uses them in balance. Then a couple others that run slightly imbalanced -- where you would run two 420 EU/t reactors and one 484 EU/t reactor and have the fuel consumption balance across the 3 reactors. I personally like the 367 reactor sqeezed down to 4 chambers, so you can stack them in like zombie's 100 EU/t uranium reactor.

    Don't think the 4 chamber revision is in the first post, but is in the thread or here is a link:

    Last thing to consider is all the GT reactors are changing in 1.5.1, so most of this will not work as well if you update.

    What do you think? Do the figures make sense for you, and I'm just failing to see it? Is my math off somewhere, maybe? Or do you also think something is fishy with the way thorium behaves here?

    This seems to be right with in-game reactors and sims. Having negative hybrid affect seems wrong -- think your math is right, so something may still be off with how the fuels interact.

    Thorium still does not seem right -- it may be fixed from where it was, but it still does not seem worth it and like you said the fuel now is barely better than running it as uranium. If it stays like this there really isn't much incentive to make the fuel.

    I would not recommend someone new to reactors use any of the advanced multi-reactor designs using coolant cells, condensers, cooling towers + damaged components, etc.

    Start with vent cooled type 1 reactors and if you want to try something more complicated then you might dig into the higher risk higher output reactors.

    Useful Vent cooled Reactors:
    New [Official] Reactors design thread.

    The most important reactor is a breeder. For some coal and some time, 1 uranium ingot becomes 8 enriched cells. Without radioactive bees Uranium fuel is finite, so this 8x gain should rarely be bypassed. You can start with the cheap breeder to supply a handful of reactors and scale to the full heat breeder to supply 20+ reactors or more.

    Your first reactor really should be your first two reactors. A breeder and a production reactor.

    Now with enriched cells it sounds like you want to get the most total power out of them?

    In IC2, you should get like 30-40 million EU per ingot running bred uranium in production reactors from the thread. One of the best bang for your buck reactors is the beginner reactor 3 (100 EU/t, no running cost, 3.33 efficiency). It scales well and would only lose to reactors with higher total efficiency. If you are just starting making 10 of the 100 EU/t reactors is not a bad way to get to 1000 EU/t. I like it a lot because it is 0 chamber, so you can pack several of them in a tight spot.

    In Gregtech for minecraft 1.4.7 you should centrifuge enriched cells for plutonium and thorium. There is no competition. Each ingot then is worth at least 80-100m EU. See the gregtech reactors in the thread above. They take about 4 ingots worth of enriched cells to startup and a little less to maintain. Once you are running you should average 120-140m EU per ingot.

    with only a single chamber you can't possible cool 6 uranium rods in the bottom rows, unless you use lapis/ redstone...

    Do you even lift?

    Zombie's reactor:


    If it is the one i linked to above, then all the components have to be in the right spot. You can't flip the fuel to the top or anything like that. On my monitor it is sometimes hard to pick out the gold exchangers vs the basic ones, so keep an eye on that.

    Also did you come back to a crater or just some damage? Maybe something else blew up in the area?

    They don't bleed heat to each other at all. I've made stacks of them so I could use routers to manage them all at once.

    Most likely you had a wrong component or misplaced component in one of your reactors. If you used any of the designs from the New [Official] Reactors design thread, then they are almost all optimized down to the lowest cost, so there is little to no margin for error on cooling. If you misplace something or use the wrong exchanger a component will melt and then that will snowball into more components melting until you get a crater.

    A simple safety measure is to fill any gaps in a design (cheapest component is reactor plating) and then use build craft iron gate to help monitor the reactor. The iron and gate should be set to emit redstone signal if it has a full inventory and if it is getting a redstone signal. To make sure the redstone signal is not from itself use a repeater into the gate with on/off coming from your control room/energy storage units.

    Post a screenshot of your design or a link to it in the simulator.

    Breeders in the damage range or higher do have some affect on their surroundings, but I don't think they can affect any reactor blocks. Even near meltdown temperature it should only destroy water blocks and maybe anything flammable.

    Peppe, the planner is showing 234 copper cost for that design, not 186?

    Just copied from the front page of the thread. Whatever the cost it is a solid reactor. Really depends if 1-2 could run the quarry to bedrock fast enough or on one fuel cycle then it us probably a good fit for the poster. If you have to go refill the reactor then probably not good. Then a plutonium cycle might be a better fit.

    I was think cost wise uranium would keep it simple, but if the poster doesn't mind centrifuging plutonium/thorium will get the most out of a fuel supply.

    Question for you gents: Which reactor setup (or multiple parallel reactor setups) produce the most EU/t per resources needed to build?

    There are obviously quite a few very nice setups, but most tend to focus on maximum efficiency with cost being a secondary factor. I am more interested in setups that have a quick return on investment to power quarries, where I will likely be mining more uranium then I use. The components themselves are reusable of course so eventually they would mine enough to pay off the investment, but this takes many shafts and means I am that much more slow to scale up to more and more quarries.

    If you plan to dismantle and move I would go with a zero chamber.

    Hard to beat Zombie's design:
    Beginner Reactor 3:

    Eu/tick: 100
    Efficiency: 3.33
    Overall Efficiency 3.33
    Cost: Iron 98, Copper 186, Tin 25, Gold 22
    Running costs: 0 UU
    Credits: Zombie

    Well, we basically ended up with the single LZH or cooling cell design. None of us could manage to make it fully coolable on just internal vents... I even got it down to 0 excess heat but still couldn't keep the components from melting over time. It's just not happening with the fuel cells consuming so much room, sadly. :(

    Well, we basically ended up with the single LZH or cooling cell design. None of us could manage to make it fully coolable on just internal vents... I even got it down to 0 excess heat but still couldn't keep the components from melting over time. It's just not happening with the fuel cells consuming so much room, sadly. :(

    I didn't make a signifigant improvement to LZH version, but did find it interesting if you change the exchangers around a bit you can shift how much heat makes it to the LZH.

    Go from 1290 seconds per lapis to 1481.

    Cool to see all the experiments. Hope reactors can fill a role in 1.5.

    Because that does absolutely nothing to solve the problem? A damage sensitive filter (such as an emerald pipe) can be left on 100% of the time without changing its operation in this case, as it would remove the cell if and only if the damage value matches.

    AE in 1.5 has fuzzy ports, which should be an option to pull out any damaged cells while ignoring full cells. Very easy to redstone control AE buses, so you could set your cycle time in whatever redstone system you like and then run the fuzzy import bus for a few seconds and have the export bus set for fully charged coolant cells, which you can set to red-stone controlled, but the inverse of the fuzzy import bus. Should work well with all the empty slots in the reactor filled.

    Ok, pretty sure at this point its a 190 second microcycle and 1600 EU/t I really need to get around to getting a 1.5 instance setup to test these things.

    Here is that reactor simmed out in computer cube:

    AE should be able to automated that, but probably have to fill in the empty spaces.

    That's pretty sweet. The row of 4 chamber reactors will look awesome too.

    The reports on gregtech changes are pretty awful :/

    Check what pure plutonium and pure thorium reactors put out?

    Reactor tower and row.

    Automated with routers and AE storage network.

    Not a bad way to do it with so many reactors.

    Simulating just plutonium and just thorium. Plutonium EU is buffed. 4 single cells in a square is 200 EU instead of 120. Can't really tell what the heat is, but it is higher. A 3x2 of arrangement of plutonium blows up the cooling arrangement for the 484 EU/t reactor. Operates at 340 EU/t instead of 200 EU/t in current version.

    Thorium is either bugged or nerfed badly. Quad 3x2 which is 128 EU/t in the current version is 86 EU/t in 1.5.1. Using it in hybrid designs provides little benefit to the main fuel. In 1.4.7 thorium acts as a cheap reflector to amplify what the plutonium outputs. Now it is not even worth the space. You need a 3x3 grid of quad cells to get 130 EU/t. A reflector around plutonium adds more EU/t than a quad thorium cell.

    I believe the plutonium cells are not being changed and the thorium cells are having their life cut in half.

    Seems quite a bit worse than that. The 367 EU/t thorium neutral reactor shows as 150 EU/t in the GT computer cube and blows up in ~320 seconds.

    Confirmed in a reactor... EU and the blowing up :P

    Hope this changes or something is not implemented yet cause 150 EU/t for 2 plutonium and 5 quad thorium is a joke.