Posts by Irontygre

  • CASUC perfect breeder (5 in, 40 out, 5.00 eff)

    Ok, so at 9,000 heat, your original design will output 40 cells off of the five inserted (as Akhkharu noted), so you'll have to "babysit" it at the 1/2 cycle point to do a cell-swap to get the most out of it (on top of regulating a 9,000 heat reactor, which is no trivial task).


    The design I suggested will net you 80 cells per run if you do the swaps at the right times. (BTW, I didn't come up with it, I've seen it tossed around in some of the other CASUC breeder posts).


    Basically, you get most breeding efficiency if you have every U cell touching 4 DU cells. Which leads me to the question why Akhkharu didn't set up his reactor with that in mind.

  • Low on budget? Try this one

    Quote from HeadHunter67

    As I said, all Rick's reactor (and MJEvans' 3-cell, 2-chamber design) require is a 3x3x3 pit. You could cover the top and sides with wool, if you wanted. You could put it anywhere, work near it and there's never a risk of radiation damage or fire.


    Continuing to apply source water to a reactor that's at 7500 heat doesn't change its environmental effects - it only keeps it from overheating further.


    Rick's reactor will explode if not submerged in water. So, both reactors have environmental installation restrictions. One will survive in a 3x3x3 pit, the other in a 5x5x5 pit. Since the discussion at hand is all about efficiency on the cheap, I would think that someone truly concerned about efficiency would take the time to install a more efficient reactor into a slightly larger pit. Honestly, I don't think clearing a 5x5x5 hole is really that big a deal ... but who knows.


    EDIT: In the end I really believe both these reactors are really nothing more than academic curiosities. By the time someone in an IC2 game has the resources to build either of these reactors, they've in all likelihood already got an operational 32 EU/t or bigger solar flower installed, making the tiny nuclear reactor pointless. Personally, I've never found a use for Mk-I reactors of any size. Far easier to go straight from solar flowers to a Mk-V CASUC or a Mk-IV redstone timed pure IC2 reactor.

  • Mk-V CASUC 755 EU/t 4.31 eff (Rev. B)

    Quote from Xyresik

    qft


    It is allright. Criticism drives innovation. I have updated the reactor to Rev. B, which now boasts more power AND more efficiency than previously, and should provide a straight up higher power, higher efficiency reactor than the RedPower 2 pre3 alternative ... with the added bonus of not having to worry about chunk lines.

  • Low on budget? Try this one

    Quote from HeadHunter67

    This other reactor is more efficient, of course, but Rick's design is basically "set it and forget it" and as such, is well suited for a first reactor.


    Highlighted the important part.


    If we're talking about that, then both reactors are on equal footing. Elevating a water source block by 1 level is very easy to do ... I'm pretty sure anyone capable of installing IC2 can also figure out how to place a source block of water anywhere they want to. Once the reactor configuration in space is set, you don't have to fiddle with it.


    Sounds like set it and forget it to me. I'm not sure why you're thinking this is a MkIII design or something. It is capable of a full cycle run without any observation.

  • Mk-V CASUC 755 EU/t 4.31 eff (Rev. B)

    Quote from Rick

    try get 35 uranium before cycle ends. It will eat your uranium so fast you cant keep up with it.


    Also the 20 heat extra is nothing compared to what its already producing (1450 heat) unless your reactor runs with a very very small margin it should be no problem.


    Your point on uranium consumption? All CASUC reactors use uranium at similar rates. And yes, I tuned my reactor to run with a margin under 20 heat per second...because I can.

  • Low on budget? Try this one

    Quote from HeadHunter67

    That's a very nice output for a 0-chamber reactor, and no doubt an incredible output relative to the resource cost. But DAMN, it runs hotter than I like for my own purposes.


    The one in the OP needs no shielding, just a 3x3x3 pit pull of water to put it in. You could literally build it right under the floor of your house. There's something to be said for that.


    Both the OP reactor and the one I linked require to be water submerged. Complexity of both are identical. The only difference is you need to let the more efficienct one cool off for about an hour after use. Then, even still, it has higher total output than the reactor in the OP.

  • Chambers (and other related Questions)

    Quote from AkhkharuXul

    Actually, MJ has a point, I'm pretty sure if you were actually unlucky enough to place your reactor on the edge of a chunk, one (or two if it's a corner) of the reactor chambers could be in another chunk(s)... If you were then to approach the unloaded reactor chunk from the opposite direction of the "additional chunk(s)" you may find part of the reactors inventory on the ground... not to mention what that would do to the operation of the reactor... :P [Not sure if it'd actually work like that, but seems highly possible... though highly unlikely/unlucky of you :P]


    Pretty sure that wouldn't happen. If you look closely, during chunk loading errors in SSP or SMP, you'll note that water never flows into the error chunk unless it's already supposed to be flowing. From what I've seen, there is still a concept of "something on the other side".

  • Mk-V CASUC 755 EU/t 4.31 eff (Rev. B)

    Empty bucket extraction in Rev. A is not fast enough to cool the reactor in your proposed configuration. Since the four redstone engines working the Adv. Wooden Pipe must actively be kept desynchronzed, they are a bit slower than 1 pulse / second.

  • Low on budget? Try this one


    I have a Mk II-1 Class C (2.33) 0-chamber that averages 0.25 EU/iron/t and is 0.33 EU/iron/t during operation. The one in the OP is hardly the best, most efficient, or most powerful budget reactor out there.

  • Making nuclear viable : increase fuel burn time

    Quote from Slizyboy

    640 EU/t is only achievable if you have, I dunno, BuildCraft or something. Considering nuclear just with IC2 and nothing else, I agree with the OP, it is more feasible for me to just make a bunch of solar panels. Lot less fun to be sure, but still...


    BrickedKeyboard is one of the people here who have designed RP2 based CASUC reactors from scratch. I have a hunch his server has the mods required to make it feasible.

  • Mk-V CASUC 755 EU/t 4.31 eff (Rev. B)

    AQ is "Aquatic". There's a small note of it near the bottom of the breeder designation section. 4000 heat water-moderated breeders are referred to as Aquatic, and since mine generates enough power to require bucket circulation, I decided to refer to it as a CASUC-AQ Breeder.

  • Mk-V CASUC 755 EU/t 4.31 eff (Rev. B)

    Speaking of breeders ... why are you only getting 10 million EU per ore? If I run this reactor in a CASUC-AQ Breeder configuration between full CASUC power burns (which, btw, requires 0 modification of the system itself, just the internal cell configuration) I should be getting 20.8 million EU per ore, not counting depleted cell returns from each burn. And that's with enjoying the fact that a CASUC-AQ Breeder requires exactly zero babysitting.