Working as intended, but yeah, would be good to have all the facts written down about how the reactor and components react. Like the Uranium Cells distributes evenly between all surrounding components that can store heat, and such. Most people would learn this through experiments though, which is one of the fun parts.
Posts by Shandolum
-
-
Pretty straightforward 3.67 eff no double/quad cell reactor, Mark 1 EB:
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…z41iedoknlfq8e8
165 EU/t, zero heat, no reflectors, some free space, not sure what to do with it.
...
Actually its pretty good with reactors requiring only single cell uranium, at least currently since dual and quads are bugged and run for shorter time. The only question is how big and efficient/powerful you can make it.
Upgraded your design a bit, but could probably do better: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…6k5yn628o6niq68 -
Overall I like how much more powerful reactors are now, but it doesn't feel like there's as much room for variety in designs. Feels like most designs boil down to checkerboarding overclocked fans and component fans, and it's very difficult to hit anything other than MkI or MkV. Looking forward to seeing future development.
Yeah, I think the same. The cooling cells which were the main component in reactors before have become useless in the current system. The overclocked heating vent is also far too powerful and cheap in comparison to most other components, and therefore leading to the checkerboard layout with them everywhere. I'd actually like to see just that 1 component changed, just a slight reduction in cooling to something like 18 (and keep the intake at 36) would make it much more difficult to use, which would also make it more fun to design reactors.
Also the cooling cells I'd like to see changed, because currently they have no use unless you make designs where you replace them, while the reactor is running, with some cooled cells.Came up with this one last night, http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…u9hfb8c6uwza8e8 it takes a little less copper and more iron/tin/gold but the eu/t and EF is also higher.
its the same link as the one you posted earlier. -
[1.106] Reactor Components Summary for info.
NEI mod from LINK for recipes.
and a brain and a lot of testing and experimenting.
and most recently Planner
and for people that can't figure things out from the above... LINKAlso I think they are waiting to upgrade the wiki until it is actually released, since what we have is a prerelease and not final yet.
-
Finally after many attempts I've got it.
300 EU/t (5 eff) - Hybrid Mark I / Mark III reactor.
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…jc0zz24jnjrksg0The design lasts long enough for the thick neutron reflector to burn out (after 83 minutes) and turning it into the Mark I reactor below, where you can choose to keep it running at 260 EU/t (4.33 eff) or let it cool down for a little over 3 minutes and replace the neutron reflector.
(untestet ingame, will test in a while)http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…go8ilmjfg3g8zy8
I've been trying to get to the 720 cooling for continuous running, but it has not been possible for me, but now that it lasts long enough for the reflector to burn out and keeping it safe, I'm quite happy.
Cost: Copper 628, Tin 134, Iron 355, Gold 66, Diamonds 6 ...
EDIT: I don't think my design works =(, the advanced heat exchangers seemed to burn out faster than the neutron reflectors, but it is impossible currently to do a proper full run test, since quad cells are bugged.
But I WILL find a solution (currently making a brute force reactor tester program) to find that magic 720 cooling I've been wanting. -
Planner says cooling is "impossible" on your design. Bug, probably?
I changed it a little bit, now it's 5:19 working, 2:17 cooling.
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…x7e5nzzb16qo2dcYeah, its a bug. Runs and cools quite well. And I can make it better also
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…tq1x0t159c1z4sg
5:21 - 2:16, but it doesn't really change much since its meant to run on a 5 min clock, using pressure plates and dispensers.But max EU/t would be around 239 EU/t average with cooldown, if you watch it and maintain it perfectly, while the 5 min run / 5 min CD I have gives 170 EU/t average.
-
Created this little dangerous design.
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…wa6kg5bx16foni8
Combining a high 340 EU/t output with an efficiency of 5,67.
The cooling however is 664 out of 912 heat generated, meaning its a Mark V EA+ reactor with a generation time of 5 min 19 seconds, which is the perfect generation time for using a wooden pressure plate (tested and working) and in that time will generate 2m EU. The cooldown is kinda fast taking only under 3 minuts.
Cost: Copper 509, Tin 103, Iron 317, Gold 94 ...
So its not a Mark I stable reactor, its not the most efficient reactor, its not the highest output reactor, its something in between, and having 2 of them switching between on and off every 5 minuts using simple dispenser/pressure plate logic is easy, though you need to replace the neutron reflectors from time to time. -
Reactor 4:
- Link: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…3mbkghko5bd69s0
- Eu/tick: 120
- Efficiency: 3
- Cost: Iron 108, Copper 132, Tin 24, Gold 16
- Credits: Rick
Thought my design was pretty effective and semi cheap for a 360 EU/t Mark I EB reactor until I saw that.
Remade my 360 EU/t Mark I EB with that technique and it costs a lot less.LINK: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…p1h1tlp46dt02yo
Cost: Copper 484, Tin 56, Iron 286, Gold 48...vs
LINK: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…b2s67ib7a7krocg
Cost: Copper 561, Tin 101, Iron 350, Gold 44, Diamonds 4...EDIT: And while I'm at it, a Mark I EA 260 EU/t reactor, Eff 4.33
LINK: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplan…dqwux41d7swsn40
Cost: Copper 397, Tin 107, Iron 340, Gold 32...Also I'd have thought that it would be cheaper using a basic heat exchanger/heat vent combo instead of the component heat vent, but apparently its not. =(
-
mm, I made myself a nice Single Celled, MK1, 6 chamber design
Outputs 330EU/t(165EU/t standard), can run indefinitely, and only uses single cells, which means no mass compressing of copper and actual 10,000 second cycles
Currently working on a more compressed/less resource-intensive design.
EDIT: Just replaced the design, as I realized a vent that seemed like it wasn't being used actually WAS, which made it start heating up when I removed it...
you only need 5 surrounded overclocked heat vents to cool those uranium cells =)
EDIT: take back my words. was thinking wrongly. need 9 =)
Also I would recommend if you are trying to keep it cheaper, to make every Component Heat Exchanger that is only touching 1 side of an Overclocked Heat Vent into a Basic Heat Exchanger / Basic Heat Vent combo, since that is way cheaper. -
I made the big reactor better if you were to add the last two chambers
(Yes that is the updated planner, but it's still not complete and is "rough around the edges"
Nice, looking forward to the planner. Currently using a spreadsheet for calculating the heat and flow of heat.
Had a 6 chamber reactor to start with, and used 5-6 quad uranium cells, but the thing blew up my MFSU's, so changed it to 4 quad's and after that minimized it to 4 chambers.
I think 5 quads is the maximum you can have in a stable non-CD reactor though, but want to see if I can make it with 6 when I get my hands on the planner.EDIT: Didn't wait for the planner, created one easily enough, but it only just exactly cools enough. 576 heat - 576 cooling, but stable and working. Outputting 360 EU/t (720 EU/t ingame currently), so don't put it directly to an MFSU without a HV transformer in front.
EDIT: And just for fun created a 7 Efficiency 140 EU/t (280 EU/t ingame) reactor from it, though it has way more cooling than needed.
EDIT: And here is the big reactor in the new planner LINK =) -
I made this very cheap 80EU/t (40 EU/t calculated) stable design. Usefull for a first reactor.
EDIT: And a new design with 2 less components.EDIT: And after testing to see how uranium cells distributed heat, a cheaper one.EDIT: And a bigger reactor I've made. 480 EU/t (240 EU/t calculated) stable.
