Want to keep Reactor energy topped up.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moroshkin
  • Start date Start date
  • Please make sure you are posting in the correct place. Server ads go here and modpack bugs go here
  • 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
M

Moroshkin

Guest
Trying to figure out how to get ME system to supply Yellorium ingots to my reactor whenever the power in my capacitor bank drops below a certain level.

Tried linking it with a power monitor toggling an export bus but either i'm wiring it incorrectly or this isn't how i do it. Help appreciated :)
 
Feed the redstone output of the power monitor into an AE2 Toggle Bus to switch the export on/off. Toggle buses don't use a channel, but be careful to apply the redstone signal to the block space the toggle bus actually occupies. It's a "cable addon" similar to quartz fibres. Also note that the export bus will not use a channel while disabled, so be careful not to go over the limit when adding things later.
Alternatively you can use an ME interface (or export into a chest/barrel), then apply the redstone control to any other item transport system you're more comfortable with.
 
Moroshkin said:
Trying to figure out how to get ME system to supply Yellorium ingots to my reactor whenever the power in my capacitor bank drops below a certain level.

Tried linking it with a power monitor toggling an export bus but either i'm wiring it incorrectly or this isn't how i do it. Help appreciated :)
Click to expand...
Why don't you just turn the reactor on/off through a Reactor Redstone Port based on the the output of the Power monitor?
 
  • Like
Reactions: immibis and Inaeo
Alternatively, a simple computercraft script with the Reactor Computer Port can set the control rod levels equal to the % full of the internal buffer( ie when the buffer is full, the control rods are at 100%, effectively shutting the reactor down) This makes the reactor self-regulating, and should only produce as much power as is being pulled from it.

Note: in my experience, this can have problems if the reactor is not your primary/only source of power.
 
Fraction2 said:
Alternatively, a simple computercraft script with the Reactor Computer Port can set the control rod levels equal to the % full of the internal buffer( ie when the buffer is full, the control rods are at 100%, effectively shutting the reactor down) This makes the reactor self-regulating, and should only produce as much power as is being pulled from it.

Note: in my experience, this can have problems if the reactor is not your primary/only source of power.
Click to expand...

^ This, although I too have experienced issues with combining the reactor with other power sources. Here's a link to the computer-craft script to automate the reactor.
https://github.com/sandalle/minecraft_bigreactor_control

Edit: Also, you can use ME Export and Import buses to feed and remove a constant supply of fuel and waste to/from the ports on the reactor.
 
Fraction2 said:
Alternatively, a simple computercraft script with the Reactor Computer Port can set the control rod levels equal to the % full of the internal buffer( ie when the buffer is full, the control rods are at 100%, effectively shutting the reactor down) This makes the reactor self-regulating, and should only produce as much power as is being pulled from it.

Note: in my experience, this can have problems if the reactor is not your primary/only source of power.
Click to expand...
Not too many people care about this, but the only downside to this setup is that its considerably less fuel efficient. Reactors have a "sweet spot" for heat efficiency, and if you want to get the most out of your reactors, its best to just run them at that level.

Again, not too many people care about this unless they're running a pack with severe oregen tweaking or limited quarrying capabilities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fraction2 and rhn
Pyure said:
Not too many people care about this, but the only downside to this setup is that its considerably less fuel efficient. Reactors have a "sweet spot" for heat efficiency, and if you want to get the most out of your reactors, its best to just run them at that level.

Again, not too many people care about this unless they're running a pack with severe oregen tweaking or limited quarrying capabilities.
Click to expand...
Yes it is much better to turn the reactor ON when its internal buffer gets low and OFF when the buffer fills up, and then run it with the same fixed sweet spot fuel rod setting. Or toggle it on and off with a Power Monitor on a large Capacitor Bank.
 
rhn said:
Yes it is much better to turn the reactor ON when its internal buffer gets low and OFF when the buffer fills up, and then run it with the same fixed sweet spot fuel rod setting. Or toggle it on and off with a Power Monitor on a large Capacitor Bank.
Click to expand...
I prefer the first option since it means the reactor won't flip on/off rapidly to make you hover around that 90% level or whatever you set it at.

SR Latches are good for this, or computercraft if you don't have the patience for latches. (You're keenly aware of both of these, just mentioning it for anyone else who cares)
 
Pyure said:
I prefer the first option since it means the reactor won't flip on/off rapidly to make you hover around that 90% level or whatever you set it at.
Click to expand...
Well, if you put a Power Monitor on a large Capacitor Bank and set it to toggle ON at 25% and OFF at 75% for example, then it will not flip on and off rapidly. Granted the size of the capacitor you need to get the proper throughput, the reactor will actually be toggled ON for longer periods of time than if you regulated it on its relative small internal buffer.

This is IMO a REALLY good way to automate your power generation, as you can set up multiple Power Monitors and set them to toggle ON/OFF on different ranges, and switch on more power generation solutions as the Capacitor bank gets more and more empty, AKA more power is drawn from it.

For example you can set your most efficient renewable generator/reactor to turn on/off on 75-99%, your second best on 50-75%, third on 25-50% and your most expensive non-renewable on 5-25%.
 
rhn said:
Well, if you put a Power Monitor on a large Capacitor Bank and set it to toggle ON at 25% and OFF at 75% for example, then it will not flip on and off rapidly. Granted the size of the capacitor you need to get the proper throughput, the reactor will actually be toggled ON for longer periods of time than if you regulated it on its relative small internal buffer.

This is IMO a REALLY good way to automate your power generation, as you can set up multiple Power Monitors and set them to toggle ON/OFF on different ranges, and switch on more power generation solutions as the Capacitor bank gets more and more empty, AKA more power is drawn from it.

For example you can set your most efficient renewable generator/reactor to turn on/off on 75-99%, your second best on 50-75%, third on 25-50% and your most expensive non-renewable on 5-25%.
Click to expand...
I misunderstood you, I thought you were suggesting that the reactor would simply flip on at < 90%, and flip on at > 90%.
 
You know I've been looking into the source code of BigReactors recently and i've noticed something.

If you swap out the coolant of your reactor for blazing pyrotheum, it should cause the core heat to max out until it wraps around negative. It'll increase the efficiency calculation for your reactor to the point where you never use any fuel.

You could just leave the thing running permanently then and not have to worry about wasting fuel trying to push RF into a full buffer :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fraction2
malicious_bloke said:
You know I've been looking into the source code of BigReactors recently and i've noticed something.

If you swap out the coolant of your reactor for blazing pyrotheum, it should cause the core heat to max out until it wraps around negative. It'll increase the efficiency calculation for your reactor to the point where you never use any fuel.

You could just leave the thing running permanently then and not have to worry about wasting fuel trying to push RF into a full buffer :)
Click to expand...
It's April 1st isn't it.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
 
malicious_bloke said:
You know I've been looking into the source code of BigReactors recently and i've noticed something.

If you swap out the coolant of your reactor for blazing pyrotheum, it should cause the core heat to max out until it wraps around negative. It'll increase the efficiency calculation for your reactor to the point where you never use any fuel.

You could just leave the thing running permanently then and not have to worry about wasting fuel trying to push RF into a full buffer :)
Click to expand...
Azzanine said:
It's April 1st isn't it.
Click to expand...

Has he added the explosions due to overheating yet? ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fraction2
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom