Factorio Forums

Distelzombie wrote:

xBlizzDevious wrote:Hello! I have just come across from this thread about my nuclear power issues: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=47663

Had a quick look and the system looks impressive and would store steam for more suitable power production. Would it be most efficient - and possible - for me to use a 4x4 reactor setup (with modded inserters for range) and for me to hack your controller logic into that system?

Ie. I can produce 2.56GW, but will only use half of that. Then as I consume more and more power, it will accommodate?

A 4x4 setup would be impossible in vanilla. With mods it would work fine if you find a inserter that reaches the inner 4.
The logic can be used almost without changing it. All you need to do is change the T-value and connect the inserters and chests of the reactors. The T-combinator can be found for easy use in the control section. In the picture of it it is the blue highlighted one.

This setup scales perfectly for low power consumption. You may need to fiddle with the steam threshold T though - to not have brown outs when coming from low power comsumption to very high demand because of heat lag.

EDIT: Remembered i wanted to include this into OP but always forgot. Did it now.

Distelzombie wrote:Yea the roboports are needed for the logic to work.

xBlizzDevious wrote:

Distelzombie wrote:Yea the roboports are needed for the logic to work.

I think I figured out what needs what. Either way... I broke the game.

Like, actually broke the game. It doesn't like a 4x4 reactor configuration or something. I have my nuclear setup on its own power grid with a switch to send power through. As soon as I switched it on, it crashed the game.

The game then updated itself to 0.15.11 and I set everything up exactly as before (I saved just a few moments prior to the crash, thankfully) and switched it on again. Waited a few seconds and crash.

Going to do some testing to see if it happens without certain mods or if it does it even in vanilla. I'll post the results in the bugs reports forum if I can't figure it out.

EDIT: Yep... Happens in vanilla.

mrvn wrote:-snip-
In a 4x4 reactor design how do you plan to fuel the reactors? I can see this working if you manually drop in fuel but then you can't automate this.
Would be nice though. 16 reactors providing 64 times the power of a stand alone reactor thanks to bonuses.

mophydeen wrote:factorio 0.15.11 changes heat pipe mechanics.

current setup has 1.0GW not 1.1GW?

Diselzombie wrote: Ok let me add to this quote of yours...

1.tick: 1R input from "when O = 1 then R", 1R ouput because the 1R input is < 600
Yes. BTW "when O = 1 then R" is combinator D
2.tick: 1R ouput because of a 1R input because "when O = 1 then R" doesnt output anything anymore, however the combinator has 1R input because of its own output from 1.tick.
Wrong assumption. D does output R = 1 all the time until it is shut down, over detours, by the clock reaching R = 598. Thats why I need a memory cell to store O =
1
3.tick: 1R input from its own output, so 1R output
The clock does output R into itself again, adding the R= 1 output to its R = 1 input from D - essentially adding 1 every tick
4.tick: 1R input again, so 1R ouput.
Now the clock outputs R= 2 and adds that to the R=1 value from D, outputting R=3 and so on ...

Now if the clock reaches R=598 the E combinator sends an O=1 signal to the memory - deleting it because now the O value is 2 in the second memory combinator - which stops the memory output of O=1 to D and D stops to output R=1 which gives the clock no value to add to its own saved R, stopping it.

But this is the same thing as I said in the post before. Sorry, I cant get more specific.

Distelzombie wrote:

MicFac wrote:Ok, this is probably my last question: why is the combinator set to output after 9 and not a smaller number?

Meh. In testing the clock sometimes stopped later than R=2 or 5, so i used a save value.

Distelzombie wrote:

mophydeen wrote:factorio 0.15.11 changes heat pipe mechanics.

current setup has 1.0GW not 1.1GW?

Youre right. Even worse. Apperentyl heat doesnt transfer as far anymore. I'll test this.

Distelzombie wrote:IT JUST ISNT WORKING! AAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA *going mad here*

MasterBuilder wrote:

Distelzombie wrote:IT JUST ISNT WORKING! AAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA *going mad here*

If you're limited by distance from the reactor, then you should be surrounding your reactor with exchangers, not branching further and further out.

This 8 reactor design is a stable 1.1GW [in 0.15.11]. I have it running right now and the outermost heat pipes are stable at 786c~.

Distelzombie wrote:Well, even this isnt at max power. This time its water.

MasterBuilder wrote:

Distelzombie wrote:IT JUST ISNT WORKING! AAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAA *going mad here*

If you're limited by distance from the reactor, then you should be surrounding your reactor with exchangers, not branching further and further out.

This 8 reactor design is a stable 1.1GW [in 0.15.11]. I have it running right now and the outermost heat pipes are stable at 786c~.

mophydeen wrote:I like the smaller shore size.