Mod Feedback [By Request] RotaryCraft Suggestions

[Nezraddin]

Thank you for the hints.

Though in case of of the comparator and extractor it's the same as for the grinder: It has a signal'strength of 0 while the machine works and gives out a signal'strength 15 when it has nothing more to do.

In the case of the grinder it works perfectly. When the grinder is empty it emits a signal and stops the engine, as soon as you put new items to grind into it the signal stops immediatly and the engine starts again.

In case of the extractor the behaviour is a bit weird. It does emit the signal in different cases, like when the chunk got unloaded and reloaded, when the server starts and of course when it's work is done.
However the machine fails to stop it's signal when you put in new items to process into it. (no matter the slot you use for the current processing). At least as long as the extractor has no power.
Once the extractor has power (like breaking a piece of redstone by hand and directly placing it down again) the signal works normally again.

Shown in these two screenshots:
There was no change in the extractor itself between these two screenshots (it had the same item in it's last slot to process), I just broke one redstone dust and placed it down again so the engine started and with it's power the redstone signal behaves again.

Spoiler

Of course I'm still very earlygame when it comes to rotarycraft (as seen, I still have a very test-like setup not even a building for it) so later I guess it will change alot with flywheels and everything.
I just asked mainly cause it confused me. The grinder works perfectly with it's redstone-signal update (even when the engine stands still), but the extractor needs power to update the redstone signal.

breaking the redstone and replacing it is of course no problem at this point. So it's not a big deal, but good to know for future planning when it comes to fuel-saving.

 

[Pyure]

Nezraddin, fwiw, I had the exact same problems with the comparator on these machines and eventually gave up.

 

[Nezraddin]

Nezraddin, fwiw, I had the exact same problems with the comparator on these machines and eventually gave up.

Happy to hear that more people still play around with vanilla-stuff in these things
(when looking around for solutions I mainly found stuff for computercraft and such things)

Thanks for the information. Guess for my real rotarycraft-base I need to test a few more things to keep the fuel-waste in line

 

[rigWorm85]

Hi. New to forums completely. Rotarycraft broke me out. I've worked drilling rigs for 6 years, so I've dealt with this mods concepts in the the real world. So far, awesome mod, and I have to remember that Minecraft has it's limits. One thing I don't agree with is "split mode" one done of these things. Particularly the chain and belt hubs. We have tons of those things all over the rig. They don't split power because you say to. They output what they got to what's taking it. As in what's behind the clutches. When you disengage one clutch and engage another, the power goes there in its entirety. If both clutches are engaged then power is split, granted it's enough to drive both loads. Another point I'd like to make is hubs don't really have an input/output mode. We have chain drives inline taking input from their motors and outputting to the same chain. It then runs to another hub(usually a double, one in from the motors the other out to the hub on the machine) with a usual of the hubs inline. We often run one motor at a time, but putting both inline because a necessity in cases of extreme weight or hole problems. I know there are beveled gears, shaft junctions, and the multidirectional clutch. However that design behind to sprawl and get messy. You can really stick a chain on three it more hubs, so why not here? Please note I'm speaking from actual application of rotational force, but would like to know if it's undoable because Minecraft don't get it.

 

[Pyure]

Hi. New to forums completely. Rotarycraft broke me out. I've worked drilling rigs for 6 years, so I've dealt with this mods concepts in the the real world. So far, awesome mod, and I have to remember that Minecraft has it's limits. One thing I don't agree with is "split mode" one done of these things. Particularly the chain and belt hubs. We have tons of those things all over the rig. They don't split power because you say to. They output what they got to what's taking it. As in what's behind the clutches. When you disengage one clutch and engage another, the power goes there in its entirety. If both clutches are engaged then power is split, granted it's enough to drive both loads. Another point I'd like to make is hubs don't really have an input/output mode. We have chain drives inline taking input from their motors and outputting to the same chain. It then runs to another hub(usually a double, one in from the motors the other out to the hub on the machine) with a usual of the hubs inline. We often run one motor at a time, but putting both inline because a necessity in cases of extreme weight or hole problems. I know there are beveled gears, shaft junctions, and the multidirectional clutch. However that design behind to sprawl and get messy. You can really stick a chain on three it more hubs, so why not here? Please note I'm speaking from actual application of rotational force, but would like to know if it's undoable because Minecraft don't get it.

Hey rigworm. Minecraft limitations are a factor. A bigger factor is game balance. When designing something like rotarycraft, there's two things Reika's mindful of: designing for simulation/reality, and designing for fun/balance.

For a lot of people, those two probably meet in a perfect place, but for an awful lot of Minecrafters if a device is "realistic" but "inaccessible" or "overly complex", then it becomes such a niche mod that virtually nobody uses it except, well, rigworms. Make any sense?

Fwiw, Reika leans towards the "realistic" end of that spectrum more than most other modders.

 

[rigWorm85]

On these land rigs, they hire mostly strong backs over strong minds. If Minecraftians grasp what's going on in this mod they'd get the mechanics of the machine's here. Yeah, my suggestion would cheapen costs of putting two or more motors in line, but removing the need for one hub to be set to output is not only closer to real but simpler. Splitting power with no load to take it off as well. There is no power loss if the clutch on that side isn't biting. In other words, I can't set up motor swap (to keep power to a machine while I cool, add lube/fuel) without either taking a material penalty with extra parts(to make a complicated design), power penalty driving a non-existent load. I believe allowing multiple hubs inline would simplify things. Let it cause problems when like junctions not taking the same.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

 

[rigWorm85]

Don't get me wrong! I love the mod. When I found the electricity add-on, I ditched Greg and ic2. I miss some of the machines, but I don't get feel of overwhelming superiority complex. So I think I traded up


Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

 

[Nezraddin]

So, looking into electricraft along with rotarycraft now and wondering if I understand things correctly:

- Pretty much the "Induction generator -> cables -> induction motor" is a way to take away long ways you would build from shafts?
(so you can decide - with a little powerlos in electricraft - if you want cables or shafts lines, is that right?)

With the transformation from Nm to A and rad/s to V, and seeing the cables only have a Limit concerning A:
- You can push as much V through the cables as you want and the only limit you need to watch out for is the Nm->A concerning cables when changing from rotarycraft to electricraft. Is that right so?
(just that you loose, depending on the cable you use, an amount of rad/s per block of cable... if I understand the resistance right)

Sorry if these are questions that are pretty much "It's standing in the Electricraft Book" answer-able, but I just want to make sure I really understand the book right and there is a little part in my head which is not sure about this.

 

[rigWorm85]

From what I can tell, electricraft primarily compliments reactorcraft. It's a storage and buffer system to make use of the massive output of a reactor. The uninsulated wires can also be used as an electric fence or a source of lava.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

 

[Nezraddin]

Ah, havn't started to read myself into reactorcraft yet (still in quiet the beginnings of rotarycraft, this performance engine crafting sure puts me in front of a few problems, hehe), but I thought reactorcraft is alot about torque and rad/s, too. So I thought electricraft is good for both, reactorcraft and rotarycraft.
In the end I wondered if, in my base planning, I already can plan electricraft energy-transport or if I really should first begin it with reactorcraft and use shafts for rotarycraft. ^^"


And of course if I understand that about "Too much V won't kill the cables" is right or I will see my whole line smelting cause I only looked at the A-limit.



[edit]
Ugh, getting to the 900° for making aluminium-alloy sure is difficult. Tried so many setup with two gasoline engines and different gearboxes now... but slowly I think two engines are not enough, or I simply follow the wrong way of doing this. (highest I got so far is 894°, just 6° away... and putting it into desert with it's +15° doesn't change this temperature it seems)


[edit 2]
*cheers* And broke the 900°!
The one word that slipped totally out of my head while reading about the friction heater a few times was "matching". With understanding that part - finally *cough* - the friction heater is alot easier to control

 

[Braidedheadman]

It sounds to me like Rigworm is suggesting that it be possible to take an inline array of belt/chain hubs arranged so that they accept and merge power input on one end and output (or split) power on the other as an alternative to the shaft junction. Say, for example, merging the power from four gasoline engines through four attached input hub/drive duos, and outputing all that merged shaft power at the other end into a black box of your choice.

In testing this, there does appear to be the intent for this to happen, although I can't get get it to work. Specifically, right clicking on a hub/drive with a screw driver toggles through it's shaft in/output modes and directions. But unless you shift-right-click on the output hub/drive to change it's transmission mode, it won't accept the chain. The problem with that is that it turns both of the hub/drive's shaft sides into output (red) faces. That is, a chain cannot be attached to a hub/drive that has a green shaft input and a red shaft output face. Although it will accept shaft power through the (green) input side, it appears to be splitting shaft power (the outputs being the other shaft and belt/chain faces) while in this mode rather than combining it.

Spoiler: Screenshot

So, while it's possible to split shaft power through a hub/drive, it doesn't appear possible to merge power (on the shaft, with power being delivered through chains) without first running their outputs through a shaft junction. At a guess, I'd wager that might have something to do with enforcing the 4-engine limit when merging power.

@Reika, could you verify any of this? Bug or feature? Oversight perhaps? What is your position with regards to merging power through an array of belt/chain hubs?

I also discovered something else while testing this: using the screwdriver on the input hub/drive to rotate it or change its mode while it has a belt or chain attached consumes the belt/chain items. Breaking the hubs/drives with a pickaxe does not return the belt/chain items. I'll submit a formal report to your tracker for the latter but would like your opinion on the former first; I'd like to avoid creating a (separate) bug report if it's your intention that people not merge shaft power through an array of belt hubs / chain drives.

[Edit]Actually, there's some additional weirdness going on with those disappearing belts/chains, probably best demonstrated in video clip format. I'll have something put together by tomorrow, perhaps.

 

[rigWorm85]

I really don't think it's a bug. The handbook says one needs to be to be in output, and the 2 can have no obstructions. Two taking input fail to connect due to the first rule. If you try to connect the outside input with the output, that fails due to the second. But on the topic of bugs, can you not feed a junction with a cross? Move the junction one block away and stick any transfer between, it works. But a shaft cross will not power a shaft junction.

[Edit:] I found something similar to the disappearing chains/belts not returning items. When turn them in an illogical manner, the belt vanishes. Break the one turned funny and nothing drops. But if you break the other out will drop the links. However if you replace the one you broke and install new links it will cost another set of links. So that sucks. You'll have to break both of them to get the original set back

 

[Reika]

Hey rigworm. Minecraft limitations are a factor. A bigger factor is game balance. When designing something like rotarycraft, there's two things Reika's mindful of: designing for simulation/reality, and designing for fun/balance.

For a lot of people, those two probably meet in a perfect place, but for an awful lot of Minecrafters if a device is "realistic" but "inaccessible" or "overly complex", then it becomes such a niche mod that virtually nobody uses it except, well, rigworms. Make any sense?

Fwiw, Reika leans towards the "realistic" end of that spectrum more than most other modders.

Also important here are the factors of implementing a given control scheme and power transmission logic - which is highly nontrivial for belts - and conveying that state to the player in some way (i.e. how to visually distinguish belt hubs based on state). That former issue in particular makes me loathe to try anything belt-related again.

 

[rigWorm85]

I get that computers are dumb. You gotta hold their lil plastic hands through every thought. It's virtual reality, and physics only exists because the programmer made them exists. If I could have jumped twice and flew, that 90 ft ladder wouldn't have been do long. But on another note...
Are you not supposed to feed junction with a cross? And how do you do the formal bug report. I'd rather fill that with a lengthy description on breaking a hub after it's turned and it eats your links

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

 

[Reika]

I get that computers are dumb. You gotta hold their lil plastic hands through every thought. It's virtual reality, and physics only exists because the programmer made them exists. If I could have jumped twice and flew, that 90 ft ladder wouldn't have been do long. But on another note...
Are you not supposed to feed junction with a cross? And how do you do the formal bug report. I'd rather fill that with a lengthy description on breaking a hub after it's turned and it eats your links

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

On the Github issue tracker. Preferably with images.

 

[lucariomaster2]

I crash whenever I try to move one of your blocks (I've tested RotaryCraft and Expanded Redstone) using Funky Locomotion. It's a NoClassDefFoundError, even though I'm using the latest version of all of your mods and Funky Locomotion.

Log: http://pastebin.com/r3zExHfJ

 

[RavynousHunter]

Moving Reika's blocks with things like that is, as far as I know, a Bad Thing (TM). The blocks have a good bit of metadata that doesn't do well with automated transport and placement like that.

 

[keybounce]

Ok, can you please add in a config option for the Hydro Engine to ignore the water meta value when testing for validity?

I know that this makes supplying water to a hydro stupidly easy in vanilla (note that the real difficulty is making and lubricating one in the first place). It also permits Dam-style builds in vanilla, and, I have come up with no way to get Realistic Fluids to make a "source" block on top of a column of flowing water (right now, there is no way to power a hydro with this mod.)

 

[Rubyheart]

(Since reactorcraft and eletricraft questions seem to get dumped in here as well)

In a world with thermal expansion and ender io, is there a reason to use eletricraft over other ways of energy transport?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Nezraddin]

(Since reactorcraft and eletricraft questions seem to get dumped in here as well)

In a world with thermal expansion and ender io, is there a reason to use eletricraft over other ways of energy transport?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I would say pretty much the same reason as in using IC2 ways of energy-transport even if you have other mods (like 1.7.10 Immersive engineering or mekanism) which cables can translate the energy-systems directly:
- Deciding to stay in the same mod-line as much as possible, even it's not as easy/safe to use as other means.

Besides that, I don't think anything really forces you to use electricraft's way.