Did not think of this, but even so, dew point aggregator i believe only requires HSLA. I do wonder if it nets positive with a steam engine in a normal biome, though?I disagree. Try playing on a finite water world for a real challenge.
Did not think of this, but even so, dew point aggregator i believe only requires HSLA. I do wonder if it nets positive with a steam engine in a normal biome, though?I disagree. Try playing on a finite water world for a real challenge.
Did not think of this, but even so, dew point aggregator i believe only requires HSLA. I do wonder if it nets positive with a steam engine in a normal biome, though?
Huh...I am unfamiliar with this sandstone pipe, but I'll take a look tomorrow. Honestly, I'm happy with the Ender IO conduit, though, because I can connect it underneath gear boxes, which lubricant hose wouldn't last I tried. I was surprised it worked, honestly, because many moons ago when I (briefly) used Monster the Ender IO conduits didn't want to connect to gearboxes.Did you try the bottom? Haven't tested it myself, but that'd be my next guess.
If that doesn't work, I'd try the pipe made for sucking fluids out of other mods' machines- sandstone, I think?
More accurately, it consumes it at a rate proportional to the torque or speed, whichever is larger.It uses it up, a bucket every few seconds.
A lot.Hrm...so, if I were to put two hydros thru it, set the gearbox to speed, how much lube would it eat?
=46206]Looks like no.Has anyone already proposed a lubricant filtration/recycling machine?
I do not see this to be implementable.Has anyone already proposed a lubricant filtration/recycling machine?
From a programming perspective I don't see the problem, but you're right regardless; you'd need to be able to export "dirty lubricant" from machines, and even if you were willing, you're essentially out of machine sides to play with. Nevermind.I do not see this to be implementable.
The problem comes with fluid I/O logic. Do I allow lubricant to be extracted as long as it is in the tank? How to tell if lubricant is "used"? Having two tanks is not a solution, because then what happens when the "used" tank is full?From a programming perspective I don't see the problem, but you're right regardless; you'd need to be able to export "dirty lubricant" from machines, and even if you were willing, you're essentially out of machine sides to play with. Nevermind.
Right, the issue is one of design rather than implementation. You could implement it if you could find a reasonable answer to those questions. In the end I'm inclined to agree that its not worth the effort.The problem comes with fluid I/O logic. Do I allow lubricant to be extracted as long as it is in the tank? How to tell if lubricant is "used"? Having two tanks is not a solution, because then what happens when the "used" tank is full?
v4c is newer. Use that.hey, Quick question. what exactly would i put in the [mod name] section of the checker disable command? i tried what it says needs updating, (DragonAPI, RotaryCraft, ect)or is this just bugged in v4b?
just wondering, and i don't see any thread better than this to ask this on in the forums, so...
If there are 2 tanks, with two different liquids, when the dirty tank is full, either the machine could turn off, or it could leak some of the fluid onto the ground. Maybe not as a fluid block but changing the dirt below it into "contaminated dirt" or something of that nature. Pyure's idea of the tank slowly becoming dirty, like a percentage of the tank would be an interesting way to ratify the 2 tank issue, but doesn't solve the overflow problem.The problem comes with fluid I/O logic. Do I allow lubricant to be extracted as long as it is in the tank? How to tell if lubricant is "used"? Having two tanks is not a solution, because then what happens when the "used" tank is full?
Shutting the machine down is no different than making it seize immediately upon running out of lubricant, and spilling excess is no different from the current system.If there are 2 tanks, with two different liquids, when the dirty tank is full, either the machine could turn off, or it could leak some of the fluid onto the ground. Maybe not as a fluid block but changing the dirt below it into "contaminated dirt" or something of that nature. Pyure's idea of the tank slowly becoming dirty, like a percentage of the tank would be an interesting way to ratify the 2 tank issue, but doesn't solve the overflow problem.
I wouldn't bother with spilling excess; if no more clean lubricant can get in, that's that. I *would* have considered making a machine run at 1% efficiency (or seize just like you mentioned). But, more for the realism and interest of creating such. I've said it already: I can't really see any easy way to make this happen, unless you could do two pipes in and out of the same side (a la ender IO). Obviously such a proposal would be ludicrous.Shutting the machine down is no different than making it seize immediately upon running out of lubricant, and spilling excess is no different from the current system.