Posts by MJEvans

Quote from SpeedDaemon

For breeders, replace the eff letter with cells burned/cells charged:
BWXN-5/40 50 (water + suc neutral, uses 5 cells to charge 40, 50EU/t - although the EU rating can probably be assumed to be 10x cells burned for breeders)

Actually when switching to the X series air/water cooling is ignored; you already have to have fixed external cooling in place; air/water no longer really matters in classifying reactor designation; except what's already covered in the breeder extension for positive/negative.

Efficiency should be calculated as the average number of /reactions/ a uranium cell produces that have a meaningful result (either eU gen, or enrichment). However the fact of 9K+ breeders being more efficient at enriching isn't reflected in the designation system. The power number can be dropped however; it should be deterministic based on the uranium cells.

BXN-5/40-9K

(9000 heat range running temperature)

So that means to make a wind-gen that /never/ breaks...

5 > 31 * (height - obscuredBlockCount) / 750

5 * 750 / 31 > height - obscuredBlockCount

120.9677419354 > height - obscuredBlockCount

-- Oops, I forgot the thunderstorm bonus; divide by 1.5 --

80.64 > height - obscuredBlockCount

For every block above 80 you want to obscure that many blocks if building a perfectly safe windgen system.

In order to build a /perfectly/ safe windgen array up at layer 127 almost the entire layer next to (or beneath) the windgens should be filled in. (47 spaces filled out of 81 spaces on 3 layers)

Quote from Cadde

We already kinda have in inofficial system in place.

I call mine a 1740 8 BPS CASUC (1740 EU/t, 8 buckets per second CASUC)
Mark rating is irrelevant for CASUC designs these days. So is efficiency since most of them have around 4 eff anyways. (Thus they get the EA rating)

For ice CASUCS that would be 2050 7 IPS CASUC (2050 EU/t, 7 ice per second CASUC)

EDIT: Changed that 64 ice per second down to 7 since 64 is just overflow.

Display More

RX-A 8W 1740
RX-A 7C 2050
sounds like a good designations to me.

The number you are proposing conflicts with the existing namespace.

Currently: MK(eff based number)-(Consecutive cycles, rounded down (except 0 means infinite))-random letters.

I suggest instead just rattling off a list of tags in a pre-defined order:

E = Efficiency
P = Power
B = Burst power (assumed to be power if not listed)
R = Ratio (percent redstone can be off if gated)
W = Water buckets per second
C = Ice cubes per second
S = Shutdown time required between runs if running constantly

In that order; with R, W, C and S being optional and assumed to be 1, 0, 0, 0 respectively if not defined.

For example, a hypothetical redstone gated reactor:
E3.833,P28.75,B460,R0.63

Alternately a tighter revision of the 'MK' system could be devised.

RA = Reactor Air-Cooled
RW = Reactor Water-Cooled
RX = Reactor 'externally' cooled (RP2/BC2/other)
R*C = Reactor Controlled/Clocked (Externally limited by a clock)
Breeders would also be possible but would have designations like BAN BAB and BAP (Negative, Balanced, Positive thermal co-efficient)

Then a - and a letter representing uranium efficiency class: A 4.2+, B 4+, C 3.75+, D 3.25+, E 2.5+, F 2+; else Y.

The above reactor would thus be RWC-C

Your problem statement is wrong. It's not that the pump won't pull stuff up, it's that the IC2 pump isn't pulling up BC2 fluids. I don't even know if there are any cell-enclosed BC2 fluids for the pump to produce.

Quote from FnordMan

/\ math FAIL. there's no way one can go that far on copper without "repeaters" given it's loss rate (.2 EU/block)

32eU / 0.2 = 160 blocks before nil-charge.

128 * 0.8 = 25.6 eU lost out of 32 eU/t; this assumes you're using an initial batbox buffer or a transformer to step down local storage at the windfarm level before transmission. (actually a step up/down would probably buffer it sufficiently).

That's actually perfect. The code that swaps the 'off' block for the 'on' block should just add that missing last eU to it's storage buffer (instead of modifying when it's checked modify the value it's checking). If you examine the desired behavior versus time that causes it to match.

Yeah, that's a nice tutorial. You'll need RP2, but the images lay things out fairly well. You may want to modify the design slightly as follows.

Redpower wire out of your timer such that it's 'lit' for 15 seconds and off for only one. Routed up beneath your reactor area and then around on to the /underside/ of the single block sticking up in to the 3x3 'water' area your reactor core will be centered in. (the power wire can come out any other side)

I have /not/ however tested that such a configuration actually disables the reactor as it should. My test was with a torch beneath that block. RedPower2 might or might not be effective, but I suspect it will be. If in doubt use a redstone torch as I did and pick up the inverted signal to feed to the block beneath it (the torch acts as a 1 rs-tick delay inverter for the output).

My observations are limited to what the game provides as feedback. I have two methods of observing. 1) eU meter says 0eU transfer (I'm assuming it all gets consumed on input) (for luminator block). 2) no light resulting.

Short answer: Run for exactly 1 second, cool for the specified ratio of seconds. (1 second on, 15 seconds off; for 16 total, in the case of the 'winning' design (cheapest/most effective balance))
The reactor planner that's linked assumes you run until it will pop and then stop to let it fully cool before trying again. My designs are intended to run at /my/ specified timing intervals. (1 second on, 15 seconds of cooling). Some of the initial designs (the ones marked *revised*) needed adjustment to the layout of the cooling cells to ensure heat was being distributed effectively and not building up. Particularly the old version of the first design with the hull-plating was an ill-advised cost savings attempt.

Quote from twitchpup

Do you mind breaking that down into laymen terms for me? Also, I assume the recycler you mention is reactor?

From what I understand, from your example...
Even though 4 chambers are attached. A.I.P. sees the extra 2x6 (from the missing 2 chambers) and tries to fill them, when in reality there are no spaces left so they get thrown out of the reactor instead of put back into a pipe/tube system?

Recycler == Machine recycler (makes scrap)

The reactor core, for game engine limit reasons; MUST always state that it has MAXCHAMBERSIZE slots of inventory. The 'hidden' slots are empty. What updates in 1.337b are supposed to do is take anything from the extra chambers worth of columns and try to fit it in to OPEN spaces of the main chamber. Anything else, and anything that can't be left in a reactor gets popped back out.

The reason hidden slots aren't filled with anything else, is that all existing items are either useful, even if only to the recycler; thus potential abuse. The only way out of that would be for IC2 to include an item that is specifically intended to be useless and just take space. No recipes need make it, no recipes would use it, and it's most useful aspect would be to toss in to lava pits and watch burn.

If the /displayed/ slots in the reactor are full then there's nothing you can do. From what I've heard the tileEntity for the reactor core must have a singular storage bank sized assigned to it. As there's no way of preventing the removal of stored items (and thus no way of preventing abuse of stored items; actually that's not true, a special 'null value' item object could be made which would have no use and which the recycler would treat as nothing...), the non-displayed slots are left 'empty'. When you fill past the limit of the displayed slots overflow /will/ happen.

Your alternatives are to use a timed/counted system like RP2 offers (that is you can manually inject at an exact rate; RP2 would still have the overflow problem in your case) or to beg for some type of dummy-item solution as I describe above.

I'll give you two good reasons why solars (were) better than windmills.

1) Less intensive area of effect check (now just is it light, but before is there a path to the sky + time)
2) (Was) Absolutely dead simple predictable. You knew /always/ how much you'd get as a minimum. Knowing the worst case scenario is a re-assuring thing.

Quote from Cadde

This makes perfect sense to me. I haven't checked the code but if the luminator is "on" when there is >0 EU stored and the luminator gets 1 EU and consumes it then it will never stay on. Simply making it turn on when it's >1 EU stored and turning it off when it's 0 EU stored and it needs to use stored power, then it won't flicker anymore. Unless of course the time it takes between each EU to arrive is greater than the consumption. Which is once every 4 ticks. (1/5th of a second)

Yes, however that still doesn't fix the bug that the luminator is then /consuming/ that eU without providing any lighting duration for it.

Currently:

0eU (buffer) + 1eU (incoming) - 1eU (for on) = 0 eU ==> Luminator off (power evaporates without performing work)

What it should do:

'on for one more cycle' == buffer value of 1eU

0eU (buffer) + incoming + 1eU if buffer == 0 eU (reflecting 'off' to 'on' transition) -1 eU (for on) = incoming left in buffer (which is incoming - 1 lighting ticks)

Are you positive this isn't a problem with the insertion pipe? I have trouble believing that insertion and removal; which should be forge hooks, are a bug within IC2 (which should be using those very hooks).

Now, to attach an insertion pipe you will have to have removed a chamber; which leaves at least that column of 6 slots as 'empty' spaces. So if your reactor is otherwise full, the ejection is legitimate behavior.

A mining operation with a fully upgraded miner and pump generally runs between 0.5 and 1.5 MeU; depending on the density of ores/valuable stones (the higher number is the upper-average of what I got after telling the miner about RedPower2 block IDs).

As a miner consumes around 28eU/t (let's call it 24 though, as the pump is much less when it's needed)... Solar is probably now more like 0.4% effective given the weather stuff, maybe less. Each miner would need a batbox and around 60 solar panels. Tin is good for up to 39, but you've got to dangle a batbox off of it at some point to buffer storms/the night. Each mining operation you'd also need to move 15 of your solar panels. (This is presuming you make a running bus-bar of tin and have 5 panels above each potential 9x9 grid; there are probably more optimal movement patterns, I'm sure you can think of a few).

Wind is tricky, it scans a /huge/ area and subtracts any non-0 block from effective world-height then multiplies by an RNG result to produce a number. The average of 2-3 eU/t might be enough for your early miner and possibly a small array for a workshop. However the serious business would now solidly be something nuke; likely a timer gated reactor. It's a little expensive to build, but I do have an entirely air-cooled reactor planned for later use with redpower2 frames. The far more efficient (resource and uranium use) base reactor would also work well; except it requires 24 blocks of water around it. Both require a fairly large set of standard redstone stuff (8 clock + 5 clock, toggle-FF, data-FF, a handful of logic gates), or a few redpower2 components (16s clock + 1s pulse expander (RS latch and a 1 second clock)).

Supposedly the rarity of diamonds increased by a noticeable quantity in 1.0. There hasn't been any update yet on the other wiki ( http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Diamond_Ore ) but that does follow the trend.

Your best bet is to have a very small number of generators to burn it, and attempt to turn most of it in to scrap. Add generators one at a time until the mass-fab is unable to keep up with the scrap.

I confirmed that a torch beneath a block supporting the reactor and acting as a plug for water beneath it disables the reactor. This would be a dangerous setup if the reactor were ever allowed to get hot; but all of these (water cooled) designs are only intended to remain active for only a single second before slumbering for a given duration. The 1 out of 16 (1:15 second) reactor will work if turned off from beneath. It also has the bonus of being the cheapest to build (as far as super-rare stuff during startup goes; such as glowstone dust).

Quote from Cadde

That happens to any advanced machine you dismantle. You are not supposed to move machines after they are set up and if you have to do so then you run the risk of breaking something while dismantling them. The same way you run a risk of breaking something while taking an engine out of your 15 year old rusty car.

However, there is an addon in the addons section that gives you 100% wrench rate. Use that if breaking machines is such a big deal.

It /is/ actually a big deal for a nice high-tech wrench to have such a high error rate. At the /very/ most it should be 1 out of 100 chance of failure; probably more like 1 in 1000. The basic stupid wrench? Yeah, steve can have an error rate this high while doing it by hand.