ReactorCraft - clever reactor setups?
- Thread starter Pyure
- Start date
-
The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
>Breeder Reactors generating a good amount of power using control rods as a heat transfer vector
>Not a Glitchy Mechanic
Pick one.
imo the design itself is glitchy. 300C shouldn't explode a water boiler magicaly, period. Hence why I pester Reika mercilessly. BWR Breeder Reactors are completely realistic.
Having said that, YX33A is responsible for 95% of my monthly likes, so, um, I change my mind and agree.
Having said that, YX33A is responsible for 95% of my monthly likes, so, um, I change my mind and agree.
On one hand, I like the cleverness of the hybrid setup. However, I have seen no designs for breeder reactors using water cooling - they all have the sodium loop - and it is especially important that the boilers not function whatsoever in an HTGR reactor.
There was a breeder reactor in the states (Ohio?) that used light water cooling, decades ago. I don't know where specifically.
I have no issue with the water being inefficient or nearly-useless. But you can't argue that heat + water = steam. Magical explosions are a waste of opportunity for a mod that promotes non-linear solutions.
I've suggested that rather than magical explosions you simply render the reactor a foolish endeavour. If the plant produces 20% plutonium with 20% energy output, you've created a "soft control" in design terms; players will steer themselves properly in the direction you desire.
(Btw, this type of design is analogous to improving on old games where your character would be "blocked" by something like a log across the road. Srsly, wtf.)
I think you're referring to Fermi-1, a prototype Fast Breeder Reactor in Ohio. It suffered a partial fuel meltdown and was cancelled. Fermi-1 was sodium-cooled, and in fact, a failure of a valve controlling sodium flow was said to be at fault.
Now, for the reasoning: You wouldn't want a water-cooled breeder because water is a good moderator (slows neutrons down) and breeding U-238 to Pu-239 needs fast neutrons. One could probably engineer around that, but it probably wouldn't be worth it.
On an interesting side note, India is working on an Advanced Heavy Water Reactor that will primarily breed Th-232 into U-233, but possibly even U-238 to Pu-239. Th-232 can breed to U-233 with slow neturons, so the water moderation isn't a problem at all. But I think they might want to breed U0238 to get a starting load of Pu-239 for a regular, sodium-cooled Fast Breeder Reactor (They take a lot of Pu-239 to start).
Now, for the reasoning: You wouldn't want a water-cooled breeder because water is a good moderator (slows neutrons down) and breeding U-238 to Pu-239 needs fast neutrons. One could probably engineer around that, but it probably wouldn't be worth it.
On an interesting side note, India is working on an Advanced Heavy Water Reactor that will primarily breed Th-232 into U-233, but possibly even U-238 to Pu-239. Th-232 can breed to U-233 with slow neturons, so the water moderation isn't a problem at all. But I think they might want to breed U0238 to get a starting load of Pu-239 for a regular, sodium-cooled Fast Breeder Reactor (They take a lot of Pu-239 to start).
Ah, the Shippingport reactor. That one breeds Th-232 to U-233, so the water's moderation isn't a problem. Thorium breeders aren't the same as Uranium breeders, so I'd say Reika's comment was pretty accurate.
They are called LMFBRs for a reason.
That said, now that I know why water is not used in uranium breeders, I think I can formulate a plan of action to break water breeder designs.
EDIT:
Got it.
Right, which is why it might have been nice to see the design incorporate the negative effects of poor moderation, rather than spontaneous explosions.
Look forward to it; ultimately did you wind up using any of my brainstorming at all?They are called LMFBRs for a reason.
That said, now that I know why water is not used in uranium breeders, I think I can formulate a plan of action to break water breeder designs.
EDIT:
Got it.
Why does this sound like negative effects to a point and then BOOM!Mix these two together.
So long as an implausibly inefficient and horrible water breeder reactor is still possible to assemble for ReC-noobs, I hardly care.
Breeder-type neutrons are now completely absorbed by filled boilers, thus making it impossible to use water cooling and have a well-functioning reactor. I also changed the mechanic on HTGRs so that boilers artificially and forcibly drag the temperature of the entire reactor down.
I also just implemented the reverse; sodium boilers absorb "normal" fission neutrons with a 90% rate.
So sodium neuters a standard fission reactor? May I ask why or is it due to the fact that sodium would neuter a fission reactor IRL?
The thermal neutron absorption cross-section for Sodium is about 0.400 barns, compared to Oxygen at 0.002 and Boron (Used in control rods to catch neutrons) at 758.86 barns. (7k barns for Cd and 180 for In). That's for reference.
For fissioning U-235 you need thermal (slow) neutrons. Water happens to be good at this neutron slowing. Sodium not so much, but to breed U-238 and to fission Pu-239 you need fsst neutrons. Since sodium transfers heat very well but doesn't slow neutrons it's great for breeders (and burning Pu). But if water were around it would slow them down too much and the reaction couldn't happen.
Conversely, if Sodium was the moderator on a reactor using U-235 the neutrons would be too fast, and it wouldn't fission.
While I would suggest something similar for the Plutonium I'm pretty happy with that change.
On a side note, you could have a thermal rector modified by graphite like the Russian RMBK reactors (i.e. Chernobyl), which could allow you to use other coolants. Essentially, the moderator doesn't have to be the coolant.
Love your work Reika, keep it up!
For fissioning U-235 you need thermal (slow) neutrons. Water happens to be good at this neutron slowing. Sodium not so much, but to breed U-238 and to fission Pu-239 you need fsst neutrons. Since sodium transfers heat very well but doesn't slow neutrons it's great for breeders (and burning Pu). But if water were around it would slow them down too much and the reaction couldn't happen.
Conversely, if Sodium was the moderator on a reactor using U-235 the neutrons would be too fast, and it wouldn't fission.
While I would suggest something similar for the Plutonium I'm pretty happy with that change.
On a side note, you could have a thermal rector modified by graphite like the Russian RMBK reactors (i.e. Chernobyl), which could allow you to use other coolants. Essentially, the moderator doesn't have to be the coolant.
Love your work Reika, keep it up!
Thanks Reika.
This is identical to a proposal I submitted a few days ago. Maybe I failed justifying to you that neutrons in low moderation fluid could be regarded as neutralized (mechanically absorbed due to excessive velocity).
Boilers are cooling. There's nothing artificial about this: the mechanic is 100% justified and intuitive.
In fact I assumed they performed this cooling on each other and on fission reactor cores, which is why I've avoided "over boilering" my reactors. Was this an error on my part?