(Nuclear) Reactor Hull

[IthiQQ]

So if I understand correctly, the reactor hull is unable to lose any heat at all? I used to cool my reactors with ice in the old version of Tekkit but that obviously doesn't work anymore.

So now when I want to dispense heat from the hull I have to remove the reactor with the wrench and place it back where it was...?

[SemiPr0]

Uh if you're setting up your coolant cells and heat dispersal panels correctly and not overloading the reactor with uranium cells, you shouldn't run into a heat issue at all.

This is a Mark II Reactor design I use, its spendy on cooling but its safe and I never overheat or burn out my coolant system.

Mark II - 14 Stable

Its understandable that if you're used to the EE2 infinite ICE cooling that you might be having some trouble in this area. This is as powerful as I can get with a Mark II Reactor without heating issues. I'm toying with Mark III Designs but this Mark II - 14 is completely stable. (Though the changes to the uranium cells may have some new effects, hopefully just in total capacity and not in heat risk).

[theprolo]

Isn't an MKII reactor a reactor which needs cooling periods? You seem to be describing that as an MKI design, which never overheats or needs cooling periods.

[IthiQQ]

Uh if you're setting up your coolant cells and heat dispersal panels correctly and not overloading the reactor with uranium cells, you shouldn't run into a heat issue at all.

This is a Mark II Reactor design I use, its spendy on cooling but its safe and I never overheat or burn out my coolant system.

Mark II - 14 Stable

Its understandable that if you're used to the EE2 infinite ICE cooling that you might be having some trouble in this area. This is as powerful as I can get with a Mark II Reactor without heating issues. I'm toying with Mark III Designs but this Mark II - 14 is completely stable. (Though the changes to the uranium cells may have some new effects, hopefully just in total capacity and not in heat risk).

Okay, thank you!

That appears to be a nice, nifty tool by the way, how up to date is it?

[SemiPr0]

That Mark II won't overheat, I've run it, the 6 units of excess heat it produces is dispersed by the reactor being submerged in water. Its required no cooling periods, we've never even had to change the coolant cells after multiple uranium cells had been burned through...its balanced, its dispersing the heat production completely evenly, and its a Mark II, not a Mark I.

[SemiPr0]

Okay, thank you!

That appears to be a nice, nifty tool by the way, how up to date is it?

Fairly accurate, though the changes to coolant cells and uranium cells may have some variable effect, the new cells seem to be based around total available resource to a cell, as compared to the previous version where it was a cell was a cell was a cell.

There may be anomalies in reactor heat array due to them though, so I suggest experimenting in creative mode in single player mode to get a full handle on how the new cells affect heat dispersal and generation.

[Portablejim]

Uh if you're setting up your coolant cells and heat dispersal panels correctly and not overloading the reactor with uranium cells, you shouldn't run into a heat issue at all.

This is a Mark II Reactor design I use, its spendy on cooling but its safe and I never overheat or burn out my coolant system.

Mark II - 14 Stable

Its understandable that if you're used to the EE2 infinite ICE cooling that you might be having some trouble in this area. This is as powerful as I can get with a Mark II Reactor without heating issues. I'm toying with Mark III Designs but this Mark II - 14 is completely stable. (Though the changes to the uranium cells may have some new effects, hopefully just in total capacity and not in heat risk).

That planner is for the old system. Here are designs for the new system http://forum.industrial-craft.net/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=7681

EDIT:

That Mark II won't overheat, I've run it, the 6 units of excess heat it produces is dispersed by the reactor being submerged in water..

Water sumbmersion does not effect the new reactors.

Look at the new nuclear reactor mechanics:

Explanation of a Mk1 reactor (by Direwolf20):

[SemiPr0]

Ahh crap yeah that changes everything, I'm going to have to do some creative mode experimentation tonight when I get home.

[Jivaii]

I'm gonna try an ice injected machine. Snow Golem interment camp is a go.

EDIT: So ice can't be injected according to the little planner.

Mk II reactor

That's what I came up with instead. 160 eu/t, but only needs a 5ish minute cooldown and no replacement components outside refueling it with uranium cells.

[theprolo]

Thats the V3 planner. In IC2 past Minecraft 1.2.5, reactors can no longer be ice cooled, so your setup will unfortunately no longer work.

[Jivaii]

Lawls, there is no ice in that design I used for the mk II. Just two quad uranium.

Mark - II - 2 EB

This one produces more power and needs less cooldown time, can still cycle a fully twice, but if you do that you'll need a 9ish minute cooldown. 4 minute 37 second cooldown per full cycle to keep from burning anything out.

[youeatp00]

I modded Jivaii's a bit to make it mark 1 EB. There is still tons of excess cooling and I'll probably work with it to get more eu produced. Otherwise its also cheaper if I'm not mistaken. Will test it out tomorrow.

Mk - 1 - EB

[Asstmgrmike]

Hey all, i dont know much about reactors id assume since im fairly new. I did however end up using this setup Mk - 1 -EC. It will put out 310 EU/T without ever needing turned off. Lemme know what you all think.

[Shinma]

Lemme know what you all think.

Uranium left off in singles without another cell next to it only return 5EU/t. Very little output for the cost. They need to be grouped together to really get the most efficiency. The only real power generation is from those double-cells together, with all the singles basically being wasted. Being that's a fully-loaded six-chamber reactor with all those heat sinks it's very expensive to build as well. (Not to mention consuming 30 uranium per cycle, plus the stack of copper for the double packs.)

I've found unless you need high output of peak on-demand power running multiple smaller nukes is just far cheaper and easier to operate. Then they just serve as backup power at night while you push your factories towards HV solar.

Our facility uses a bank of these: http://www.talonfiremage.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/v3/reactorplanner.html?21p0axsp4l073uhxj0vluhyyum4k6qvj0sqr867wl4ylcn4qdoix3yd83b78y8enonfoolys5g23280

These aren't even the most efficient designs I've seen, but they're cheap to build and operate so they've become our "go-to reactor..." 100 EU/t on 6 fuel rods, no additional operating costs. They require no additional chambers so they're cheap to build. (Can put together three of them to match the output of your reactor with stacks of copper to spare, and it only runs 18 uranium per cycle.) They take very little space (since they require no timers or monitoring equipment) and can easily be rigged up to automatically exchange spent fuel with a simple system of a few pipes.

[Asstmgrmike]

Thats a nice little setup. Plus i can just take my extra chambers and turn them into more compact reactors. Thanks Alot