Ask a simple question, get a simple answer

[sgbros1]

I'm 90% sure I've used this design before. Can you copy/paste the code so I can see it in other simulators?
That's a pretty efficient reactor and it is producing excess cooling, so you should be fine. I'd drop in some reactor plating into the empty slots to facilitate automation: since all fuel rods are the same type, you can easily automate this by piping in the fuel rods and they'll go to all available slots.

Here is the code:

0300030C0A120A0C0300030C0D0C0D120D0C030C0D0C0D0C0D120A000D0C0D0C0D0C00120B140D0C0D0C0D000B0B0A120A120A120B0B

Also I based my design from this:
http://forum.industrial-craft.net/i...80&h=33886d77c293240a8f298415dcc4a21d2e4b7503
Just added another fuel rod

 

[Pyure]

Here is the code:

0300030C0A120A0C0300030C0D0C0D120D0C030C0D0C0D0C0D120A000D0C0D0C0D0C00120B140D0C0D0C0D000B0B0A120A120A120B0B

Also I based my design from this:
http://forum.industrial-craft.net/i...80&h=33886d77c293240a8f298415dcc4a21d2e4b7503
Just added another fuel rod

I threw it into an older planner (which I find more reliable sometimes) and it thinks its unsafe. I may have botched it: had to recreate your plan manually.

Hypothetically its probably stable if you switch your new quad fuel rod with a dual fuel rod instead, which I've done here.
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyo...ixitaatg9gtz0zdzofv5szs2lkmy3zp6ybv2ayrq1q6hg

Its worth noting that in either case, you're not improving the efficiency of the reactor. The original one you used was also a 3.0 reactor (you may not care about this if you have tons of uranium kicking around)

edit: I forgot to mention, most people have a really hard time getting this planner to work in their browsers. Chrome just flat-out refuses to play nice with plugins these days without more aggravation than its worth. Firefox is more reliable: it will ask you if you want to take horrible, horrible risks, and you say yes, and you're good to go.

 

[sgbros1]

I threw it into an older planner (which I find more reliable sometimes) and it thinks its unsafe. I may have botched it: had to recreate your plan manually.

Hypothetically its probably stable if you switch your new quad fuel rod with a dual fuel rod instead, which I've done here.
http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyo...ixitaatg9gtz0zdzofv5szs2lkmy3zp6ybv2ayrq1q6hg

Its worth noting that in either case, you're not improving the efficiency of the reactor. The original one you used was also a 3.0 reactor (you may not care about this if you have tons of uranium kicking around)

edit: I forgot to mention, most people have a really hard time getting this planner to work in their browsers. Chrome just flat-out refuses to play nice with plugins these days without more aggravation than its worth. Firefox is more reliable: it will ask you if you want to take horrible, horrible risks, and you say yes, and you're good to go.

I'm looking for a reactor that is stable and produces as much eu/t as possible. Resources should not be an issue.

I've dug through Dire's videos and found the setup Soaryn made.

030C0D140D0D0C0D15150C0D0D0C0D0D030D0C0D030D0D030D0D0C0C0D0D0C0D0D0C0D150D030D0D030D0D030D150D0C150D0C150D0C

It makes 420EU/t, which produces more than my previous one.

 

[Pyure]

I'm looking for a reactor that is stable and produces as much eu/t as possible. Resources should not be an issue.

I've dug through Dire's videos and found the setup Soaryn made.

030C0D140D0D0C0D15150C0D0D0C0D0D030D0C0D030D0D030D0D0C0C0D0D0C0D0D0C0D150D030D0D030D0D030D150D0C150D0C150D0C

It makes 420EU/t, which produces more than my previous one.

If resources aren't an issue, and you don't want to make a fluid reactor (which are a bit fiddly btw), screw U235.

Make a MOX reactor, let it heat up by removing some cooling components, then throw the components back in once its at 75% heat or so. MOX destroys regular Uranium reactors for power output, and they also breed excess plutonium at the end of every cycle as a bonus.

http://forum.industrial-craft.net/index.php?page=Thread&postID=143343#post143343

The only downside is that you suffer a bit of "cactus" damage if you walk too close to the reactor when its that hot. Ok that and flammable things nearby will light up if you let it go above 80% (or so). But MOX is the big winner for power output.

 

[sgbros1]

If resources aren't an issue, and you don't want to make a fluid reactor (which are a bit fiddly btw), screw U235.

Make a MOX reactor, let it heat up by removing some cooling components, then throw the components back in once its at 75% heat or so. MOX destroys regular Uranium reactors for power output, and they also breed excess plutonium at the end of every cycle as a bonus.

http://forum.industrial-craft.net/index.php?page=Thread&postID=143343#post143343

The only downside is that you suffer a bit of "cactus" damage if you walk too close to the reactor when its that hot. Ok that and flammable things nearby will light up if you let it go above 80% (or so). But MOX is the big winner for power output.

Well I need some plutonium to get MOX...

Also I kinda want to keep the MOX around, cause Infinity Evolved is harsh like that.

Unless MOX gives way more plutonium than it uses, I might keep to U235.

It's not like the reactor is gonna be my main power source anyways, probably keeping my lasers alive but that's about it.

 

[Pyure]

Well I need some plutonium to get MOX...

Also I kinda want to keep the MOX around, cause Infinity Evolved is harsh like that.

I don't know what you mean by wanting to keep the MOX around.

But if you don't have plutonium, then yeah, that's not an option.

I'm not familiar with that design from Soaryn and I can't plonk it into the old simulator atm. fwiw, if its stable, it'll generate twice as much power as a fluid reactor.

 

[sgbros1]

I don't know what you mean by wanting to keep the MOX around.

Iridium...

Also Soaryn says it's 100% stable, and I've checked, it doesn't produce excess heat. Also Soaryn just leaves it out in the open, and it hasn't exploded yet.

 

[Someone Else 37]

Well I need some plutonium to get MOX...

Also I kinda want to keep the MOX around, cause Infinity Evolved is harsh like that.

Unless MOX gives way more plutonium than it uses, I might keep to U235.

It's not like the reactor is gonna be my main power source anyways, probably keeping my lasers alive but that's about it.

As far as I know, U235 and MOX fuel give the same amount of plutonium in excess of what was used to make the fuel every cycle. However, MOX fuel burns up in half the time, so during one cycle of a U-235 reactor, you could run two cycles of a MOX reactor and therefore generate twice as much plutonium.

There's also the thing where MOX reactors produce more EU (but not more heat... at least if your reactor is set up to produce EU directly) the hotter they are. If you care about the power generated by the reactor, you can use a cooling system based entirely on components that do not interact with the reactor hull (component vents, component exchangers, and the diamond vents), so that you can heat it up almost to the point of meltdown (by shoving in some other kind of heat exchanger as it heats- the reactor heat exchanger should work well) and then it simply won't cool down or heat up further. Just... don't go anywhere near it without a hazmat suit on.

 

[Pyure]

There's also the thing where MOX reactors produce more EU (but not more heat... at least if your reactor is set up to produce EU directly) the hotter they are. If you care about the power generated by the reactor, you can use a cooling system based entirely on components that do not interact with the reactor hull (component vents, component exchangers, and the diamond vents), so that you can heat it up almost to the point of meltdown (by shoving in some other kind of heat exchanger as it heats- the reactor heat exchanger should work well) and then it simply won't cool down or heat up further. Just... don't go anywhere near it without a hazmat suit on.

Yeah the whole MOX thing is a bit silly. You can get the heat to 75% or whatever, and then it just....stays there perpetually, even if you turn off the reactor. But damn they crank out a ton of power.

 

[Hambeau]

And so they skip Unstable entirely?

Edit: completely unrelated - to get Unity modded, is the Github the only place to get it?

They aren't skipping Unstable entirely... They're finishing up on the new 1.7.10 pack they've been working on and the next pack is supposed to be Unstable 1.9.

This comes from the May newsletter thread in the "Feed the Beast News" top level thread.

[Edit] The new pack, "Inventions" is now posted to Curse and also I assume to FtB as of today {6/1).

 

[rhn]

I'm looking for a reactor that is stable and produces as much eu/t as possible. Resources should not be an issue.

I've dug through Dire's videos and found the setup Soaryn made.

030C0D140D0D0C0D15150C0D0D0C0D0D030D0C0D030D0D030D0D0C0C0D0D0C0D0D0C0D150D030D0D030D0D030D150D0C150D0C150D0C

It makes 420EU/t, which produces more than my previous one.

I have yet to see anything that outperforms this one when it comes to a combined judging of power output, efficiency etc.:

code: 0D140D0000000000000C0D0C0000000000000D140D0000000000000D0C0D000000000000010101000000000000010101000000000000

Since it is a single chamber reactor, safe and easy to automate, you can simply pack a great number of them together. I liked to automate whole banks of them with the Router. If you don't have as similar option then you can do it very simply with some EIO conduits(if you use the colour channels you don't shouldn't need to filter every connection on the reactors, just the output destination of empty fuel cells)(great for running redstone conduits in the same space) or similar as well.

You also save materials/processing steps on not having to make upgraded fuel cells, since this one makes proper use of breeding.

 

[Pyure]

I have yet to see anything that outperforms this one when it comes to a combined judging of power output, efficiency etc.:

code: 0D140D0000000000000C0D0C0000000000000D140D0000000000000D0C0D000000000000010101000000000000010101000000000000

Since it is a single chamber reactor, safe and easy to automate, you can simply pack a great number of them together. I liked to automate whole banks of them with the Router. If you don't have as similar option then you can do it very simply with some EIO conduits(if you use the colour channels you don't shouldn't need to filter every connection on the reactors, just the output destination of empty fuel cells)(great for running redstone conduits in the same space) or similar as well.

You also save materials/processing steps on not having to make upgraded fuel cells, since this one makes proper use of breeding.

I've seen plenty of designs that are better for power and efficiency, but I do really like how simple this one is. The single-reactor thing is great. 3.3 efficiency is pretty decent. It supports a single fuel type which makes it easy to automate. Doing them in multiples of 4 makes it a decent fluid-reactor design (which really benefits from multiples of 200 hu/s). I don't care about the weaksauce output (100 eu/t) since I'd obviously just spam it. I'd consider using this.

 

[Gabriel8a]

I believe the Inscribers have been removed and Processors are made through the AE1 route(crafting uncooked processors and then smelting them). At least that is what I gathered, not played the pack.

Yeah you're right, I had to update the mod pack in order for this to work. Thanks for the help!

 

[Pyure]

Doing them in multiples of 4 makes it a decent fluid-reactor design (which really benefits from multiples of 200 hu/s).

Possibly correcting myself here. I don't think you can do fluid reactors without a 6-chamber reactor. People can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[rhn]

Didnt Extra Cells used to have a Storage Cell that could be customized to store more than 63 items? Has that been removed in the AE1->AE2?

 

[asb3pe]

So FTB Inventions doesn't show any biome mods in the selection pull-down when creating a new world... but the modpack listing shows "ExtrabiomesXL" is in the pack. Do these extra biomes get loaded automatically even if we choose "Default" for our worldgen?

 

[sgbros1]

So FTB Inventions doesn't show any biome mods in the selection pull-down when creating a new world... but the modpack listing shows "ExtrabiomesXL" is in the pack. Do these extra biomes get loaded automatically even if we choose "Default" for our worldgen?

Yes.

 

[Renton Terrace]

So FTB Inventions doesn't show any biome mods in the selection pull-down when creating a new world... but the modpack listing shows "ExtrabiomesXL" is in the pack. Do these extra biomes get loaded automatically even if we choose "Default" for our worldgen?

yes

 

[rhn]

So FTB Inventions doesn't show any biome mods in the selection pull-down when creating a new world... but the modpack listing shows "ExtrabiomesXL" is in the pack. Do these extra biomes get loaded automatically even if we choose "Default" for our worldgen?

Lol, doesn't Inventions have any world gen mod options?

The more I hear about this pack, the more confused I get about what the heck its purpose is...

 

[asb3pe]

Lol, doesn't Inventions have any world gen mod options?

The more I hear about this pack, the more confused I get about what the heck its purpose is...

I guess it's for "creative builders" as opposed to those of us who like "progression". But I agree with your assessment of it, I'm really not very excited about the pack except for the fact it's the newest one and thus, just maybe, there might be something "new and unique" about the pack. But usually I'm disappointed once I realize it's just more of the same thing, albeit in a shiny new wrapper. I think I need a new game, not just a new modpack. But it's hard to find good games these days. Don't get me wrong, Minecraft is one of the best games ever made IMO... but even the best games ever can get boring after a few years of play.