Luminators only Accept 32 EU Packets. The Plasma Generators Output in 2048 EU Packets You have to use Transformers to convert the 2048 EU Packets down to 32 EU Packets.
Posts by MinecraftRedstoner
-
-
It would be SOOO cheaper if you didn't automate it and swap cells manually ...
I've already 82 reactors from my old powerplant. So I would need only 18 reactors, the Component Heat Exchangers, Plutonium, Helium Cells and the Reactor Plating. -
As far as your numbers go, they look right to me. You need 96 cooling towers for your 4 reactors.Yes, you need more sets of Helium cooling cells. You'll want enough cooling cells to fill each and every one of your cooling towers. Because at some point, if you run this long enough, each and every one of your cooling towers will have a cooling cell cooling down in it.
+ the reactor itself would need to have a full set of cells at all times. I'd say safest would be to fill the reactor + all cooling towers with cells + have a few extra for the lag in moving them around.
OK, Thanks for helping me.:) -
sorry, got those numbers reversed. For these, it should be 8/2*(3000/660) = 18.1 (round up to 19) cooling towers. However, you have a MAJOR problem, sir. That reactor planner IS NOT ACCURATE. Do not trust anything it says when you start using GregTech, particularly not when you start using plutonium. The numbers have changed significantly since the last time the planner was updated. Use a Gtech computer to simulate a reactor for a more accurate set of numbers.
OK, GregTech Computer said 526 sec on the plutonium setup. I need
8/2*(3000sec/526sec)=22,8(23) Cooling Towers. For a Matter Fab I need 4 reactors so I would need 92 cooling Towers. Last question: The 4 reactors would have 32 cooling cells. So I could only fill 16 of the cooling Towers. Do I need now more sets of Helium cooling cells, or how should I fill the other ones? -
Display More
Well, This one is a very compact one.
Mind you, there will need to be a *LOT* of cooling towers. I am not familiar with the latest numbers on plutonium cell heat generation, so I can't tell you precisely how many, but I will tell you that once you calculate your Micro-Cycle time divided by your Cooling Cycle Time, you will need to multiply that number by (number of cooling cells / 2).
Since that one-chamber reactor has 8 cooling cells, you'll need 4 cooling towers * (Micro-Cycle/Cooling Cycle).
The cooling cycle on a 360k NaK or He cooling cell for that cooling tower is (360,000/120) or 3,000 seconds. Micro-cycle on that reactor with basic Uranium is going to be 1500 seconds, so if you were just using plain quad-uranium, you would need 8 cooling towers. However, Plutonium will probably significantly increase the amount of heat generated, and thus dramatically reduce your micro-cycle time, increasing the number of cooling towers you will need.
I don't Understand that:
number of cooling cells / 2 *(Micro-Cycle/Cooling Cycle)
= 8/2 *(660sec/3000sec)
=0,88 cooling towers?
660 sec come from the generation time of 11 minutes, that the reactor planner says, when I use Plutonium.
-
Display More
That is not a 'better' design. That is a trap. Here is why:
In my designs, each quad cell has one cooling cell, and each cooling cell has only one quad cell it is adjacent to. This... mess... has several different amounts of heat going to each cooling cell, making it nearly impossible to calculate the rate of degradation of the cells for efficient cycling.
For example, the row on the far left, except for the top and the bottom, runs pretty much close to the ones in my reactors. The next row, however, only has a single coolant cell adjacent to two quad cells. This means it's going to burn out twice as fast. The final row on the right is adjacent to cells that already have an adjacent cooling cell, so their cycle time is far less. This creates a nightmare for you.
If you want a better design, you can look at something like this. It has a higher Efficiency rating, which means overall higher EU output per plutonium, all of the cells have a balanced heat distribution, and you have enough cooling cells inside the actual reactor that they can do some good.
Remember, the whole point of the CRCS design is to decentralize the distribution of heat. Which means the MORE cells you have in the reactor, the easier it will be to distribute that heat.
If you want something more economical, I suggest you look at this. Notice how it is only a single-chamber reactor? That means cost and space savings. Your six-chamber reactor eats up a 3 x 3 x 3 area. In that same area, I can have 13 of this type of reactor, although the internal one won't be able to be hooked up, so best say 12 of these smaller reactors, if you play Tetris good enough. You do the math on how much more EU/t is coming out of the same space.
OK, I see. OK, then I want to build some of the 1 chamber ones. What is a good cooling tower design for this? -
Breeding system changed, this may be your issue. Also, you can get Pu from breeding, but it also needs centrifuging.
He Cells = NaK Cells but for price and EU cost if you use the I Freeze to cool them down (which wastes lots of EUs ^^)
But isn't Plutonium created from Uranium instead from Uranium Cells? And whats the | freeze?
I also have a better Version of the design that produces more EU, but runs only for 4 Minutes: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…min9yqn0u542y7csvjlf7uakg
Should I use this twice, or the first design twice, that runs longer, but produces less EU? -
I would suggest looking up the previous Tower of Power thread, which produces somewhere around 720-800 EU/t per segment and runs as Mk. I reactor.
But is pretty expensive, especially for a good Breeder that produces Uranium fast enough.
-
Hello,
I built a Powerplant which produces 14400 Eu/t with the Tower of Power Design form Sneekythelost, with 80 Reactors and 2 Breeder, some months ago. The problem is, that the Reactors does use way more Uranium then the Breeders can produce. So after some time, i got just 2000 Eu/t instead of 14400 because not every Reactor had enough Uranium. Instead of building 20 new breeders, I want to build a whole new powerplant, but not with compact Reactors that you can spam, I want some big ones. I came up with this: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…i8l7t1bufia0k34nmoihtaadc
I would build 2 of them, then I would have enough Power for a Matter Fab, some Recyclers and the AE Network... But before building it I've some questions, so I don't blow up my world.
-Is NAK or Helium better for cooling?
-I don't have AE for 1.5, because my FTB Ultimate world doesn't work with the 1.5 Versions of FTB. Can I just place an almost dead cooling cell into the Export Bus from the reactor and a fully charged one into export bus of the cooling Tower for the cooling cells? And the same for the Import busses, or wil it pull out, every cell?
-Which is the best version for cooling Towers?(That can cool the coolant cell as fast as possible)
-Do I need a breeder for Plutonium?
-Is a BC Gate fast enough to turn off the Reactor, when the cooling cells get out of the reactor, or are Thermal Monitors better? Or a other solution? Nothing with Timers, please?Should be all, hope you can help me.:)
And yes, I'll build a Fusion Reactor for better EU Output soon, but I need now enough UU-Matter, to make some recourses I need.
-
The design you made sucks, look here. There are some good designs: http://forum.industrial-craft.…page=Thread&threadID=8966
-
No the 128 Packet will be split up in 4 32 EU Packet. So if the Transformer receives 128 Eu it will spit them up to 4 EU packets of 32 EU.
-
Not the best one, I made this just because I was bored.:http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…hc0k18d4wdj56tr7jvkkdb94w
Full Size
Efficiency:7
EU/t:140 -
Guys, maybe you didn't notice but the main advantage of this is space efficiency. This reactor power tower takes up a 5x5 area, giving a space efficiency of 14400/45=576eu/t/block. Thats higher even higher than an ultimate hybrid solar panel (512 eu/t/block since you can't stack them). Its sad that you have to do something this complicated to only just beats solars though.
The only thing I can think of is that your AE network is eating up some of your power. Granted, it'd have to be a huge network to consume 460 eu/t, but if you're running the network all around your base then its not hard to imagine that happening.
No that's not the problem. I power my AE Network with Geothermal Generators not with my Nuclear Energy. But I think I know what the Problem could be: I've 26 Glass fibre Cable. It's a bit more than a half EU loss. And an Eu-Detector Cable which has a los of a half EU, so I lose a bit more than 1 Eu/t. I need the detector Cable to detect whether the AESU is full or not. I know there's a block fo that, but It's not in the GregTech Version of FTB and the newer ones don't work. Some reactors wil output only 179 EU because of the loss, but is there a trick or something like that, to avoid that? A MFSU/MFE/BatBox wont work, because there would get faster filled, than they can output, and it would waste even more Eu. -
Since you aren't showing or explaining what's going on with your AESU, I can only guess as to the cause. The reactor output looks normal, at least.
But it should output 180 Eu/t. And the AESU get only 13940 or so Eu instead of 14400. -
Then get a fusion reactor, much better
But much more expensive than 80 reactors. -
I need the power for gregTech.
-
Hello,
I've a problem with my Nuclear reactor Powerplant. I've 80 Reactors and 2 Breeders. Every Reactor should output 180 Eu/t. So I should get 14400EU/t out of every reactor. That's connected to an AESU from GregTech. But the AESU receives less EU than it should. I've this design:http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…m4nkvkfk3jeaig8nmgke41s00 And some OC Heat vents don't absorb heat, as the planner shows.
Here some measurements with the Eu Reader:
And here the setup in Minecraft:
I play FTB Ultimate with version 1.4.7
And here you can see how I placed every Segment.
nnn
nnn
Stacked up 20 times. -
And those Breeders sucks, they're just waste of Diamonds. Just look in the new pinned Thread, here you can find better Breeders.
-
Full Size Reactor: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…q2pdjsp58elab59wmwlqun18g
Output: 260 Eu/t, 3 Quad Cells
Efficiency: 4,33 of 4,33
Full Cycle, no cooldown time.
Good, or better Cheaper design? -
Did you intend for it to have only one heating cell? Right now, that design is both cooling-positive and very cold. Switching to a full 64-stack of heating cells makes for a significantly better breeder, although it's probably overkill for anyone running only a few reactors at once.
Oh, I didn't now that I can change this in the planner. Thank you, and I know that this design is a bit overkill, but for People like me(I have 80 reactors), need fast breeders like that.
