Posts by SSD

Really nice addition. The overall profit in eu/t is based on a scrap fed mass-fab, but are the UU-matter numbers rounded up down or just rounded to the nearest integer?

There are 2 kinds of costs. Building costs and running costs. Running costs can normally be expressed in UU-matter + uranium and could be compared in that way. You could express building costs in how rare the material is. For example gold is about 11.2 times more rare than iron. So you multiply the gold by 11.2 and add this to the iron and compare reactors. You could also use this design. I just told you that gold is more rare, so trying to minimize the amount you use is normally a good idea.

I used this for testing. The nice thing about this one is that all the LZH-condensators are taking damage at the same rate. This means you can detect if they are at 1 second away from being empty so that you never get any heat in you hull. Also it is more efficient at about 5.5. After all the EU/t the recyclers and mass-fabricator use up to make everything work as a Mk.1 without any (ofcourse you need to take components out in put them in, but other then that the system can run 24/7) cooldowns or waiting for heat to be removed from the hull it still produces 1825.5 EU/t (not the 2000+ EU/t we were used to, but still very nice in my opinion).

You could do it like so, but you should post designs here.

Yes, that is true, but the small change I made makes still sense when you take the 7.5 gold vs 84 iron per chunk in consideration. Mine uses 2 more gold but saves 24 iron. As iron is 11.2 (84/7.5) times more common and I trade 2 gold for 24 iron (24/2=12) it still makes sense to use 2 more gold.

EUREKA (Well, it's not that kind of epic, but I just wanted to use that word.) Just to be clear, I changed this design. (-10 gold, -16 copper, +2 iron and +4 tin.)

@above: With that design you choose to use a lot of iron, gold or balence the two. The design in the OP uses a lot of gold and a smaller amount of iron (50 gold and 238 iron). The design you posted uses a lot of iron and little gold, but you could change it a bit like so. Its just a choice you make when building one. Use iron or gold, but whatever you choose, we (the nuclear engineers) made designs for all of those situations.

This one uses about 14 less gold but 38 more iron vs the one in the OP.

Quote from CrafterOfMines57

That's a spambot, the incoherent sentence is its more intelligent side where it mashes sentences together, or just blatantly takes someone else's post and posts it.

EDIT: Sorry for my outburst, I was just a bit confused. But yea, now I understand what you meant with that sentence and who (or rather what, as it is a machine) the spambot is. And again: sorry.

@above: Do you mean something like this? If you are looking for reactors, this is not the place to find them, you should be searching here.

Quote from inwerno

I've just done some math on RC's steam boiler and came out with some pretty interesting numbers...

RC's wiki gave me the formulas I used, haven't tested this yet:

Assuming a maximum efficiency boiler (36 m³ LP) you get 3.96 fuel usage/tick at maximum heat.
These are heat units, right? So charcoal (1600 heat) will last 404 ticks, producing 360 steam per tick (according to the RC wiki).
5 steam equate 1MJ or 2.5 EU via Transformer.

So the boiler will deliver 180 EU/Tick, and about 72700 EU per charcoal. One stack of charcoal should generate about 4.6 million EU.

Using coal coke, which has a heat value of 6400 now, quadruples the result. One coal coke = 290k EU, one stack = 18.6 million EU. Instead of compressing 64 coal into one diamond, you could generate UU even without scrap, craft two diamonds from UU and still have some energy left

And that's using steam engines and transformers, the Turbine has even better efficiency than these. The investments in this infrastructure will surely be massive, but it seems to be highly efficient.
Anyone wants to do some testing?

Bonus: a power plant built this way should look wicked

Display More

Well, it does look wicked, but the math somehow doesn't really work for me, but its still a very nice way to produce power. My setup is a max sized high pressure boiler, good for twice the steam that of the low pressure boiler in your example. Still, it doesn't produce 360 EU/Tick, but 290 EU/Tick. I tried many other setups with steam going through 18 different golden waterproof pipes, just a few and also hooking the engines up to golden conductive pipes, but all of those ways didn't even come close to the 360 EU/Tick (more like 160 at best). Anyway, the coal coke lasts 150 seconds or 3000 ticks, so 870000 EU, which is a lot more then the EU's you need to produce the coal from UU and if you feel fancy scrap can boost this to an even higher level, but I really don't think this is OP. The massive amount of resources you need to build the 4 water tanks, the 4 coke overs, the 18 (23 in my setup) industrial steam engines (about 285 iron?), the 18 (23 again for my test setup) transformer (Those really are expensive with 6 iron, iron gear, generator and circuit. Total about 19 iron times 23 = 437?), boiler (Only 81 iron? Didn't expect the boiler to be light on the iron compared to the engines and the transformers.) and the buildcraft/logistics pipes system (also some gold and diamonds involved with that). So basically, you convert massive amounts of iron and other resources (including time, but that is what it is all about when ) to make a huge and epic machine which doesn't make a lot of sense (really just because of the UU coal recipe) and also isn't really overpowered as can build nuclear reactors with a breeder to feed them for about the some resources (I think, but not totally positive) which probably gives more EU per invested resource. It wouldn't be as epic as this and it wouldn't a steady amount of creosote oil. And you can easily upgrade the production of coal (by changing the gate settings a bit) and coal coke (and therefore creosote oil production) by just adding coke ovens. I really enjoyed spending some time building something with railcraft. If I ever need some creosote oil production, I will probably build something like this.

Edit: And why not, a tank to store the creosote oil.

Not really a big improvement, -4 tin, -7 iron, but +4 gold.
You could also use thick neutron reflectors so you don't need to replace them multiple times, like this.

@above: Better?

@above that: a gate to detect if a charged cell is in the reactor, or if the reactor has an empty spot and with either condition met, shut down the reactor (could do that with another gate, just remember to reverse it, redpipe signal off to redstone signal on). Chassi pipe with an extractor module to extract the charged cells and keep a chest buffered with empty cells which you insert by using the 'has space' signal you already have to activate a redstone engine or the autric(?) gate to pull the empty cells out of the chest and putt them into the reactor.

Edit: Better again , but it still has a lot of free space, there is probably something I could do to improve it more, but for now, this will do.

Oops. Compared to the design above:
-121 copper
+14 tin
-1 bronze (maybe this is already reflected by the tin and copper, don't know).
+24 iron
-10 gold
-18 rubber
-6 redstone

And when your design meets my changes you get this. Compared to your design:
-56 copper
-1 tin
-1 bronze (again, maybe this is already reflected by the tin and copper).
-10 iron

Alternative to Rick's efficient breeder.
Difference: -16 copper, -4 iron, -12 glass, -24 rubber, -12 redstone and -2 diamonds (no diamonds needed for this design). Still breeds 88 cells from 1 uranium. So there are no disadvantages, but a list of advantages.

Zombie's 280 eu/t 4.67 eff design, but 12 gold less.

Voker57 Yours, but a bit cheaper.
And for the post above this one: this might be cheaper is some ways.

Every single one of your cooling towers uses 273 iron and your power reactor 44, so (273*11+44= ) 3047 iron, (8*309=2472) which is 575 iron more. The copper and tin is way higher for your system because you need a lot of 60k cooling cells.

ShneekeyTheLost Maybe your comparison of your DDos system and my 420 eu/t reactor isn't the best. Probably because the efficiency is different and the total eu/t is different. Maybe 11 of these + 1 of this vs 8 of these (with 3 extra thick plates per reactor, because they need to be replaced once during the cycle, this way it is fair when comparing the costs of the reactors). Yours cost 5720 copper, 15165 tin and 3047 iron. 8 of the normal reactors cost 4432 copper, 1512 tin, 2472 iron and 272 gold. That is 1288 copper, 13653 tin and 575 iron less, though 272 gold more. That is more or less a fair comparison: both 1360 eu/t, 5.67 efficiency and are both Mk 1 (sort of). Sure, the 272 gold is sort of a lot, but it is a lot cheaper on the copper, tin and even the iron. But its anyone's own choice.

Also 160 eu/t efficiency 4, but a bit cheaper with only 3 chambers, could still use some improvement, this was just what I could do in a minute.

Alternative to the 140 eu/t reactor I made smaller, cheaper and use less components overall and then failed with linking so the thick reflectors somehow got thin so I never got any credits for.

Dude, relax about the thick neutron reflectors, I just linked to the wrong reactor.
I had 20 tabs with reactors spreading over 3 screens, we all make mistakes.