New Big Reactors simulator

[immibis]

Download. Requires Java 8.

Here's another Big Reactors simulator, because the online one is very laggy, at least for me. It also supports more block types.

Here's a screenshot.

Currently missing features:

• A control rod slider
• Mod pack selection (for non-default configs)

 

[Skyqula]

I quickly tried this using my iconic 15x15x7 actively cooled reactor. Its supposed to create 40B/t, your sim only shows 37B/t, its way of even for medium reactors :\

I have no experience looking trough the BR code so I cant realy help actually debug it. However I can compare some reactors from my spreadsheet. Under the tab checker vs dotted, the 32x32x7 size abuse reactor. I will also assume you know everything talked about in my thread for the spreadsheet. It may or may not all be accurate compared with the actual code.

Ingame stats:
Casing Temperature: 320
Steam: 40.65 B/t
Fuel usage: 0.502 mB/t

Online sim:
Casing Temperature: 320
Steam: 40.66 B/t
Fuel usage: 0.5 mB/t

Your sim:
Casing Temperature: 201
Steam: 37.55 B/t
Fuel usage: 0.51 mB/t

So my gues is you are missing some calculations. Are you taking conductivity into account? Casing and fuel temp should be equal in this design yet it isnt. Or perhaps you are not properly counting the number of coolants?

Additionally, even fuel temperature is to low. Are you adding heat (should increase temperature and RF/steam generated) for the absorbed radiation?


I can also give you some feedback:

• Make the buttons fixed size so there is more room for the reactor.
• Use exterior size or clearly state you are using interior size.
• Show Reactivity.
• Show total RF/steam generated per ingot
  
• Dont use "pack settings", instead use fuel and power multiplier sliders (allows anny and all "modpacks").
• Correct use of m (mili or *10^-3) vs M (mega or *10^6) IE: 37 000MB/t = 37 000 000 000B/t = 37 000 000 000 000mB/t

 

[GreenZombie]

I dont think a Control Rod slider is really useful.
What *would* be useful would be a graph with X=control rod insertion%, and Y=[RF/ingot,RF/t,ingot/t]

 

[Pyure]

For players like me who only care about ultimate efficiency, I'll wait till I see control rod settings before I have a look.

 

[Pyure]

Immibis, I did end up checking it out after all, wanted to provide some feedback.

• I had no idea all these blocks were valid in the reactor (and I don't typically play with thermal expansion, so blocks besides cryo/enderium/redstone are critical)
• I like that you choose a single average result instead of allowing the RNG. (The online version typically has bouncing numbers when you refresh the same configuration)
• When you select a block, can you show its modifiers on screen? (Very nice to have)
• Can you add an undo button? (sorta nice to have)
• Control rod slider, or chris becke's idea (must-have for optimization)

I just read the REST of chris becke's post (I stopped reading when he said the slider wasn't important) and I have to say that's a damn good idea.

 

[RedBoss]

Thanks good Sir. I'll be monitoring for updates. That site has always been buggy for me as well.

 

[Yusunoha]

here's a crazy idea... would it be possible to actually make this into a minecraft mod?

 

[rhn]

Very cool, love the amount of materials available.

But have to join the band wagon and proclaim that without a control rod setting I kinda find it somewhat useless. No reactor I would ever design would run 0% control rod, as that would be HORRIBLE efficiency and/or badly designed.

 

[mattp_12]

here's a crazy idea... would it be possible to actually make this into a minecraft mod?

And maybe have an outline kind of like the schematica mod... That would be really helpful : )

 

[Pyure]

Curiously, immibis abandoned the thread a week after he started it.

 

[mattp_12]

Curiously, immibis abandoned the thread a week after he started it.

Interesting... Wonder why.

 

[lenscas]

the following day....

Immibis: SUPER BIG MEGA UPDATE OF AWESOMENESS!

 

[immibis]

the following day....

Immibis: SUPER BIG MEGA UPDATE OF AWESOMENESS!

Or how about a regular update?

I added a control rod slider, and fixed the bug that caused the calculations to be way off for big reactors. Same download link, just re-download it.

 

[lenscas]

Or how about a regular update?

I added a control rod slider, and fixed the bug that caused the calculations to be way off for big reactors.

weren't that the 2 major complains people had? Because if that is the case then I think it fits my description perfectly

 

[Pyure]

weren't that the 2 major complains people had? Because if that is the case then I think it fits my description perfectly

Yessir, although @Chris Becke had an amazing idea, to show the output at all control rod levels as a graph.

 

[rhn]

Yessir, although @Chris Becke had an amazing idea, to show the output at all control rod levels as a graph.

Yeah this would be amazing for the optimizing process, where you need to try and design the reactor to have the optimum efficiency at approx 1000C.

 

[Pyure]

Yeah this would be amazing for the optimizing process, where you need to try and design the reactor to have the optimum efficiency at approx 1000C.

I've personally never seen a reactor that was optimal at 1000. 750 was the most popular one I could see, although that's based on a small sample (a few dozen shapes of reactors) and very small sample of different moderators.

 

[rhn]

I've personally never seen a reactor that was optimal at 1000. 750 was the most popular one I could see, although that's based on a small sample (a few dozen shapes of reactors) and very small sample of different moderators.

What I meant is that the best compromise between fuel efficiency penalty due to temperature(goes down with temperature) versus fuel rod reactivity due to radiation(goes up with temperature) is around 1000C. For the best possible result you need to design your reactors to have their optimal highpoint(every reactor design have this at a different temperature) as close to 1000C.

The way I normally do this is by moving the slider in the simulators back and forth in small increments until I find the optimum(efficiency highpoint). If this optimum is above 1000C then I know the reactor design needs more cooling. Is it below 1000C then it needs more fuel rods to radiate each other. A graphs would GREATLY ease this process.

Of course on smaller reactors you cannot always get the optimum as close to 1000C as with bigger reactors, simple because changing one block from cooling to fuel rod or other way around would change the balance massively.

 

[Skyqula]

Nice, though this bug still bothers me greatly:

Correct use of m (mili or *10^-3) vs M (mega or *10^3) IE: 37 000MB/t = 37 000 000B/t = 37 000 000 000mB/t

IE, the reactor in this screenshot says its generating 40 131MB/t. M stands for mega or *10^6. Wich means this reactor is generating 40 131 000 000 000mB/t. Wich it ofcourse isnt, its generating 40 131 mB/t.

Edit: Played around with it abit, seems its actualy realy laggy for big reactors (30x30x46) on my laptop (i5 4200u, 6GB). Ill try again when I am home on my game PC. Might need a calculate button instead of constantly calculating whenever something is changed.

Edit2: Ok, on my game PC(i5-4690k, 16GB, SSD), still very laggy. Reactor in question (altough anny reactor of that size will produce it): H4sIAAAAAAAAAGNgYGBkYGCQg2I9EAhmYE3NS0ktojWthw6CGTiTiyrzSzJSS3MHG3vUsXRxLCKNENbohgyIsxUt4ZFkG+04tHHvaOiMhs5o6IyGzmjojIbOaOiMhs5o6NAqdAYDWw8dDAZHjQTH0r2PjEOCGgAAqbGtOA4QAAA=

 

[immibis]

Nice, though this bug still bothers me greatly:


IE, the reactor in this screenshot says its generating 40 131MB/t. M stands for mega or *10^3. Wich means this reactor is generating 40 131 000 000mB/t. Wich it ofcourse isnt, its generating 40 131 mB/t.

Edit: Played around with it abit, seems its actualy realy laggy for big reactors (30x30x46) on my laptop (i5 4200u, 6GB). Ill try again when I am home on my game PC. Might need a calculate button instead of constantly calculating whenever something is changed.

Edit2: Ok, on my game PC(i5-4690k, 16GB, SSD), still very laggy. Reactor in question (altough anny reactor of that size will produce it): H4sIAAAAAAAAAGNgYGBkYGCQg2I9EAhmYE3NS0ktojWthw6CGTiTiyrzSzJSS3MHG3vUsXRxLCKNENbohgyIsxUt4ZFkG+04tHHvaOiMhs5o6IyGzmjojIbOaOiMhs5o6NAqdAYDWw8dDAZHjQTH0r2PjEOCGgAAqbGtOA4QAAA=

Have some optimizations. Now that reactor is a bit laggy, but not very laggy.