Posts by AkhkharuXul

Quote from Irontygre

Dunno if there's a route with EE, but I know for a fact that it's highly impractical and extremely resource intensive to make an ice factory with any combination of IC2, BC2 and RP2.

Of course there is, EE is just silly, it's like cobble -> dirt -> sand -> glass (though that might take a furnace) -> ice
Or you can go Obsidian -> lapis -> ice
1 Obsidian = 8 ice so... you'd need 163 stacks of obsidian to make the ~1300 stacks of ice / cycle required.
You can figure out how many obsidian aggregators that would need

Or it would be 2 cobble -> 1 ice (but it requires cooking 8 sand into glass) so 2600 stacks of cobble and 10400 furnace operations for 1300 stacks of ice.
[Ed: then again it was a while ago that I even looked at EE stuff, so it might have changed, never actually used the mod myself]

Quote from awolf

SCHEMATIC, Y U NO INCLUDE REDPOWER MACHINES? Can I have a fix for this?

The schematic does include redpower machines (or the last version of it I tried did). My guess is you have different block IDs for machines then he did (cos I know the redpower light blocks were all screwed up for me). Idk how to fix this problem.

Quote from MJEvans

I was initially planning a master clock for 4 reactors, so toggling the clock there was not a design consideration. Each reactor has (was planned, only one was built) individual controls for all the options (force reaction every tick, water on/off, warmup clock, and master off+cool).

I honestly don't see how a toggle latch would have any fewer issues than the RS latch. I'm leaning towards every so-often the reactor evaporating the block coming down from the source block and causing a void to flush across it just long enough for at least one cooling to be absent. The redpower2 waveform issue (is it off by one/two on length, delay/sync etc) I could probably spend a whole evening wiring up a crap-load of latches delays and redpower2 light blocks to capture a snapshot of; but I don't really want to expend that level of effort when there's a more promising design that has better specs anyway.

It also has two major advantages I've learned since last build.
#1 redpower2 logic can live on walls.
#2 I seriously just cannot rely on exterior water-cooling (except maybe as an emergency shutdown thing) if I want any modicum of reliability. I haven't seen it happen but that makes the most sense.

Sorry, I thought the toggle latch changed state faster then a RS latch, doesn't appear to. Cos I had an XOR gate that was right on the edge of swapping states in 1 circuit I made, like the torches would start switching, but the output would remain off... Also, I wondered about the evaporating water as well, but didn't think it would be the problem since the reactor will only evaporate water on the power generation pulse (so 1 / second)... unless the water cascades down when a void is created...

Quote from MJEvans

I'm likely abandoning the idea I was working with here in favor of the more resource and more promising to stabilize effort here: http://forum.industrial-craft.…page=Thread&threadID=2760

The issues I suspect I was running in to may have been:
* synchronizing the redstone pulses to the reactor (doubt it),
* evaporating water (seems plausible),
* or accurately forming a redstone clock of exactly 3 seconds to 2 seconds high/low (or inverse) using an RS latch and two timers (might be the case, but I tried a large number of off by a few mS adjustments).

This is how I clock reactors:


Just two timers hooked up to a toggle latch. I figure any "changing time" between the latch switching and the timer starting would be mimicked when the other timer is triggered, causing it to keep perfect time. I haven't fully tested it though so I could be wrong. As you can see, the reactor will be on "running" for the duration set by the run clock then be off (powered w/ redstone) for the duration set by the cooldown clock.
[And sorry, probably should have taken the screenshots during the day (just noticed), but I think you can see them alright?]

Quote from BrickedKeyboard

If a water bucket cooled Mark V is like sleeping in a house made of TNT, running the same reactor at 9000 heat with the bucket feed system set to deliver JUST enough cooling water...is like...Sleeping in a burning house with TNT and nukes under your bed. With a creeper cuddling you.

Yeah but theoretically it's 3x as safe since you're running a lot less heat/tick and using less uranium? Nice analogy though.

Quote from SpeedDaemon

Prototype is built, and currently running rock steady at 9770 or 10020 heat every time I check with the thermometer...

I put in a timer to cut the reactor at exactly 5000 seconds, so hopefully I can get exactly two runs out of one set of u-cells...

We'll find out in another hour or so...

I had a clever idea on how to stop the reactor perfectly without resorting to crazy timers [cos I was going to use an ~5000s clock as well].
The new buildcraft 3.0.0 has gates... if there's a re-enriched isotope cell in the chamber, send redstone signal
Should work flawlessly for 9k+ reactors... not so much so for < 9k And buildcraft pipes hook up with redpower tubes decently which will work fine for the input side.

Was about to test it when I had an unexpected explosion which caused massive lag (I thought Buildcraft had a severe leak).
Though, 3.0.0 is in alpha so, probably a lot of people won't use it til it gets more finalized.

Is it possible for a Nuclear Reactor that's powered with redstone to decide to start up and run, then explode?

I just had a reactor explode on my test world and I had to rack my brain to figure out which reactor it was... I figured out which one it was, but I'm "pretty sure" it was off (powered by redstone). I think I've experienced this behavior once before with another un-explained nuclear explosion... Or I'm just losing my mind...

Quote from Irontygre

Bingo.

Personally, I plan on running a 4k breeder because it's simple, easy to set up (if you already have a CASUC reactor working), and requires no attention once running. But if you're willing to expend the effort for the micro, the returns are quite sizeable.

Right, but at 4k heat, you'd have to have 2 uranium cells touching just to breed 1 isotope cell per cycle (and it might not even do that, I know I ran a dry-run like that and only ~1/2 the cells re-enriched, I think the RNG gets involved... though the other cells were fairly close to done) .... Will be interesting to see what you come up with.

Edit: And before anyone asks why I have reactor plating in mine... http://forum.industrial-craft.…ad&postID=20017#post20017

Quote

70% maximum heat: Entities within a 7x7x7 cube will get hurt.

Lets my reactor run over 10k heat without damaging anything, and if I get hurt by my reactor I know it's too hot and I could manually add a water bucket or two until it drops below the "damage threshold". [Since I don't run the thermometer add-on] Wasn't sure if the evaporating water would cause the reactor to gradually gain heat.

Quote from Irontygre

Ahkharu, is there a reason you don't configure to have every U cell pulse into four DU cells? It seems to me that you're losing out on quite a few potential breeder pulses for a (relatively) small gain in power output. Not criticizing, just curious.

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.

Display More

In this design: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…=1a10101001201521s1r11r19
You have isotope cells surrounded by 1, 2, and 3 uranium...
Meaning you'd have to swap out re-enriched cells at 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, 2/3 and 3/4 of a cycle (or drastically lose heat in the reactor). so ... 5 swaps, vs 1. [Erg didn't notice the ones surrounded by 4, so add in 1/8, 3/8, 5/8, and 7/8 of a cycle as well, 9 swaps? :P]
Also, I don't think that the "relatively small" amount of power gain is that small. If you look at the actual uranium cells, it's 1.0 efficiency vs 2.6.

Like I mentioned, it was laziness factor, since the reactor takes a maximum of 20 seconds to heat my reactor up from 0 heat... I can handle that every what... hour and a half?

Though vs the one from the OP, well, had I thought about that I might have done it. I actually wanted to stuff as many depleted cells into the reactor as I could, and I also wanted 1 bucket/second as the time, given those factors lead me to the design I implemented [# of cell swaps / cycle was also a factor].

It was also meant to be run in tandem with a 640 EU/t [30 uranium cell] reactor, it produces more then enough for that [48 cells - 10 to breed with gives 8 left-over for any "inefficiency" caused by poor cell-swapping / heat-up times]. Using 1/3 of the uranium cells to produce 1/5 of the energy (of the main reactor) whilst breeding enough cells for both reactors, from 4-6 uranium ore... seemed good enough to me, if I were trying to feed more reactors, I'd worry about having a higher # of bred cells.

Quote from CreepingTornac

Hey,
got a question:
On SMP my friend and me are trying to set up a reactor, but after ~10min the redpower mashines stop working and then "boom".
Timer is running on 400, 450,500, p to 700 already tried.

Please help

Pretty sure this is a RedPower issue, I know Eloraam said she'd found the problem that was causing it... so it will probably be fixed in the next version of redpower.

Similar concept to my breeder. Theoretically you would actually be able to charge 2 sets of isotopes with this configuration during one cycle (as long as the heat remains above 9k).
Which is really good, 40 cells charged with only using 5 uranium cells.
Watch out, Rick will probably say that this is his design *chuckles*.

Here's mine: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…=1f10101001501521s1r11r19

Though I'm lazy so the heat-up process is halting the filter that sucks out the empty buckets for 12 seconds after it has heated up to 4k.
(So I lose a little bit of charging time)

I like the idea for pistons to adjust the flow of water around the reactor (cos that's the most finicky part of the system) ... though you'd probably need to be running the thermometer add-on for that.

... I'm not sure why the planner is saying yours is a positive breeder ...

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.

I really should post my theoretical breeder (or just build it and test it then post it) cos it'll (or well it should) produce 38 usable uranium / cycle [using 4-6 uranium ore turned into isotope cells]
... though with it I guess you'd have a harder time finding all the coal dust you'd need (aka LOTS)

Quote from SSD

I installed the files on my Bukkit server and it gives an error and disconnects clients when placing a nuclear reactor.
Ofcourse this could be because these files are not made for SMP.
If so, could you please make a SMP version?
I will ask someone else to port it for bukkit.

*makes SMP version* Idk if it'll be bukkit compatible or not... if industrialcraft is, then it is.
Note: I didn't test the smp version at all, I had to download all the server stuff just to make the version.

Theoretically everything should be fine as it's only a couple small tweaks I made to the files to begin with (so as long as they recompiled properly, they will function exactly as the SSP fix)

Additional Note: I'm pretty sure that like with every other smp mod, that your clients would need to be running the fix as well. Though in this case I'm not sure, it might just make reactors act a little funny for them. Or tbh, I don't really know (I'm not supposed to be dealing with SMP stuff in the first place. Killerbeez gave me a hard time for trying to help when he was getting Industrial Rage going :P)

[hurts my brain trying to figure out exactly what would happen with different client/server versions, might work, might not.]
Feel free to try out the server version and let me know what errors, if any, are caused.

Quote from TylerHD

also i wouldnt be surpised if the fix is really easy because i'm not very good with minecraft stuff

Simple ID conflict, block 170 is being used twice. If BucketFiller add-on has a config to change the value, you could do it there.
[I have no clue what Block Nova is though, so dunno which mod it's conflicting with.]

Quote from streetstar5

Im not using torches - just have the rp2 wires touching the actual chambers from underneat i have 6 chamber reactor and my switch does nothing. it stays on unless i take the components - how is it running with no power no redstone signal? it should be auto off and run untill i activate via switch - im gonna play around with it see if i can get it to work or if its my install - everything else works fine.

Its making noise, is it suppose to make noise even when its off?

I tested and it seems that the reactior has to touch redstone - not the chamber...which makes it impossible to have a 6 chamber reactor with a switch? Basically from your pic i did the same setup and its not working. the block next to the reactor(not chamber) has to be powered meaning i have to lose one of my chambers?

//RESOLVED - was using redpower 2 wires has to be orginal redstone dust - is there a way to use redpower2 (via cfg maybe)wires to power chambers/reactors? like redstone dust does?

heres my 6 chamber reactor by the way. im gonna have to wire it from underneath

Display More

I've powered reactor chambers with redpower 2 wires (but I always did it from the top/sides of the blocks, not the bottoms, but it really shouldn't matter). [Ed: Just tested, if you place the redpower wire on the chamber itself (using shift+right-click, it works. -- Jacketed wires may work as well... but I haven't used those much. (They do work as well, but you need to connect a red wire to the chamber first...)]

Also, reactors only need a redstone signal to shut them off. [And the sound does stop playing when the reactor is off.] (In my previous screenshot the reactor was off.)
Alternatively you could place a torch on the block beneath the lowest chamber, then wire your switch to that block, then it'd probably work the way you want it to.

... However, I don't think your issues are at all related to this add-on / fix.

Quote from Irontygre

Untrue. Only RP2 machine powered reactors have this fault. I'm yet to crater my BuildCraft based CASUC on logout/login.

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... [Not sure if it'd actually work like that, but seems highly possible... though highly unlikely/unlucky of you :P]

Quote from Irontygre

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.

Ya, 10 mil sounded a bit low to me too, but I had no clue what he was breeding in. I've got a theoretical breeder design that will get at least 25.6666 mil EU per ore [more like 38.5 when you count the free depleted cells], when run in tandem with a 640 EU/t CASUC reactor... which will also produce enough uranium cells to run both reactors, and then some... [Though does have 1 swap as it's a 9k heat CASUC breeder]

Though I have no clue what the -AQ stands for in your notation

Quote from streetstar5

How do i control my nuclear reactor via switch - like how can i turn it off and on at will...whenever i put components in my 6 chamber reactor it auto starts heating up

Connect redstone to a chamber? Sometimes it can be a bit fussy with where/how you try to power it with redstone (like placing a torch next to the chamber block won't work).
Something as simple as this would work though:

Quote from HeadHunter67

Thank you for the answers and suggestions. The reason I had asked is because I was using a safe 2-chamber design from MJEvans (similar to one posted in this thread but just a different layout) and decided to try one of his 3-chamber designs.

Sadly, it seems that the reactor planner doesn't take evaporation of the surrounding cooling water into effect when projecting maximum temperature or run time, because it got hotter than expected and I had to cool it off early. Fortunately, no harm was done.

But honestly, the 2-chamber, 3-cell designs with 2.33 efficiency are more than adequate for my needs, so I'm going to go back to that. It's good to know that the extra chamber won't hurt, and may give me a little more safety.

Now, if only there was a UU-Matter recipe for uranium! Alblaka should add it as one of the 7 remaining 8-slot possibilites...

Display More

Evaporating of water can be corrected by placing the water source block at least 2-3 blocks above the reactor, so the water will flow down over it, and replenish any flowing blocks that get evaporated.

Quote from Rick

in terms of eu output/cost this reactor beats all others except the CASUC reactors:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…c0=1p10101001501521s1r11r

So far
I prefer http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.b…=1o10101001501521s1r11r10it's very close to that design in terms of cost/EU but with the added benefit of 2.33 efficiency.