The little big reactor that could.
- Thread starter GreenZombie
- 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
...I wonder if I could make a program to brute-force the "best reactor" answer for this mod...
Different coolants: diamond, cryotheum, pyrotheum, water, air, etc. Need to experiment with different rod insertion levels, rod layouts and configurations. Though, given the number of possible combinations, that might take a while to figure out. Hrm...
Different coolants: diamond, cryotheum, pyrotheum, water, air, etc. Need to experiment with different rod insertion levels, rod layouts and configurations. Though, given the number of possible combinations, that might take a while to figure out. Hrm...
Best efficiency, or best output per tick?
Tangent: I'm actually a bit curious how the efficiency of Skyqula's reactor compares to ReC, but I'm not really sure what to measure on. Uranium Cells vs Yellorium Ingot isn't necessarily a fair or accurate measure.
Yellorium ingot = uranium ingot in BR's default configs. Ofcourse, yellorium ore is much more common (then IC2's uranium, atleast).
Good point.
I still worry that the comparison might be meaningless because the ReC processing is so vastly different, unless maybe you gave each team X ingots to start with and compared the end results, with no cyanite-reprocessor or breeder reactors allowed.
ReC would lose ~90% of the fuel to processing right off the bat (would become depleted uranium) and would have to try to catch up with the remaining 10%.
Its tricky to compare apples to apples here.
Why? At the end of the day you want to know how many RF you get out, per ingot put in. That is something that can be computed for both mods.
Not really, because one mod accepts ingots, the other doesn't. So you need to try to compare ingots to uranium fuel pellets, and my math-fu isn't up to the challenge.
BR has no processing: you get uranium, you plonk it in, it makes power. (Recall that we're talking about Ingots here, not Dust, so ore duplication/ingot cooking isn't relevant)
With ReC, you process it, most of it is (on the surface) useless, and you use the rest. But, in reality, that 90% isn't useless at all. I can convert a lot of it into plutonium and use that.
It gets weirder.
That conversion process actually produces a ton of power. Do we consider that? On the other side of the argument, BR can convert depleted fuel (cyanite) into b/plutonium as well. On the one hand it does it for free and with no up front processing loss to offset, but on the other hand it doesn't produce any power.
I think a blanket statement about the value of an ingot in one mod versus the other is a bit silly unless you look at it from a very large perspective. Taking my earlier idea as an example, give both teams 1000 ingots of uranium and tell them to do as they please with them. Everything's on the table: cyanite reprocessing, breeder reactors, ammonia, HP turbines, whatever floats your boat (So long as its a mechanism specific to the mod in question).
Check back week(s) later and find out how much power they made.
Edit: @Demosthenex I want your input on this. Also, if we do this test, I want you on Team ReC
Last edited:
You make pellets, from the fuel you dig up.
Digging up stuff is the extra-mod effort thats common between the two.
If you are using a mining laser, or a quarry, it costs you an amount of time, and RF, to produce an ingot of uranium. If you consider your entire ReC setup a black box that takes ingots in, and spits RF out, then they can be compared.
alternatively, if you want to consider the MFR laser "part of the machine". Then theres no real point to comparing the running costs at all.
All you have is the initial setup effort/cost, and expected RF out.
Digging up stuff is the extra-mod effort thats common between the two.
If you are using a mining laser, or a quarry, it costs you an amount of time, and RF, to produce an ingot of uranium. If you consider your entire ReC setup a black box that takes ingots in, and spits RF out, then they can be compared.
alternatively, if you want to consider the MFR laser "part of the machine". Then theres no real point to comparing the running costs at all.
All you have is the initial setup effort/cost, and expected RF out.
Little tip about the ic2 rtg fuel and big reactors. Blutonium can be used at plutonium in ic2. So you can make rtg fuel from processed cyanite. Makes going into ic2 a whole lot easier
No, I am saying compare 1 ingot to 1 ingot.
The processing pipeline is (a) part of the setup and (b) part of the whole ReC reactor. You can't - as you point out - compare a Big Reactor (in isolation) to a ReC reactor (in isolation). A ReC reactor is not just the reactor - its that, PLUS all the bits and pieces that interact with an ingot on the way to becoming pellets.
So then, like I said, give 1000 ingots to each theoretical team and say have at it. Best way to compare?
how do you go about feeding this monstrosity?These arent designed for output, they are designed for efficiency
Edit: I am sure @Reika beats this, but its a significant gap closer
Creative mode test world, thankfully. So fill an enderium lockbox with ingots, copy it with pick block and hopper chest hopper chest hopper chest (I should have added JABBA to this test instance, creative barrels TY). An AE system can easely keep up though. And alot of laser drills to generate the cyanite ore... Just to fill it you need 62744 ingots....(Just short of 109 stacks of yellorite blocks)
It depends on how you program the simulator. Ideally, it could tell you both as well as a host of other potentially useful statistics.
Instead of making a full-blown algorithm to test every possible design configuration (of which, depending on the size, there could be trillions or more), I could just make a simulator...allow people to input their desired dimensions, maybe even supply the config they're using so it can read in any useful data, and allow them to arrange fuel rods and place coolant(s), separating the view into a series of scrollable layers...
You know, you could probably use a creative strongbox with yellorium ingots/blocks in it and some form of ultra-fast item transport, instead.
Yeah, my test world is 1.6.4 ;( Everything is updatetable to 1.7.10 though....
I only started playing on 1.7 yesterday, the thing of which I speak has, from my memory, been a feature since TE went over to its own power network.
Alternatively, if you have Factorization, you could use the creative bedrock barrel. It does the same thing, and you can see what its got in it without having to actually open the thing.
So looking around reddit for Big Reactor things I came across this. Wich made be curious for a max size reactor. Ofcourse I derped and made it 32x32x42.... I plan to get a proper 32x32x48 for checker and dotted sometime.
Annyway, I made a 32x32x7 using the same pattern as my 15x15x3. Just to see what the effects of upscaling your reactor is.
Then I was like, lets try this max size: 32x32x48.
- Passive: Controll rod at 10%, 72100 RF/t with a fuel efficiency of 157M RF per fuel ingot.
- Active: Controll rod at 0%, 40650 mB of steam per tick with a fuel efficiency of 972M RF per fuel ingot.
The results are... crazy.Dont mind the floadgate "OOPS!"
So yeah, over a billion of RF per ingot...
- Passive: Controll rod at 69%, 212000 RF/t with a fuel efficiency of 221M RF per fuel ingot.
- Active: Controll rod at 89%, 50 buckets of steam per tick with a fuel efficiency of 1176M RF per fuel ingot.
That might be able to power my redstone furnace. Maybe.