Big Reactors My Big Reactors setup, 20k RF/t

[mm75]

So I decided after everyone helped me so much with my setup in this thread,

/

 

I will share my Big Reactors setup. Just cos some people don't know how to or can't be bothered to do so.

 

My setup is 1 Reactor and 2 Turbines

 

The Reactors is made like this

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8ji4a0dgqr635pm/2014-04-20_15.07.53.png

 

The Bottom is 5x10 blocks big.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/yoero13eznd0u3h/2014-04-20_15.11.11.png

 

There are 4 fuel rods (per layer, so a total of 24), the coolant that I use is Gelid Cryotheum.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/tsr43ihlhzhm37m/2014-04-20_15.22.03.png

 

It is 8 blocks tall (including all casing bottom layer and control rod top layer)

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wlob81065ub322n/2014-04-20_15.20.19.png

 

Just a picture of the top. (All settings will be at the end)

 

 

 

Now to make the turbine.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0ratp8eqf5mxgeg/2014-04-20_15.24.10.png

 

The Bottom is 5x9

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bcectuuclkrv0rt/2014-04-20_15.25.44.png

 

A picture of the overall casing

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cxslebpkpaz3lja/2014-04-20_15.26.49.png

 

I uses 2 coils of enderium blocks

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qej7k0rxuocnjp7/2014-04-20_15.27.43.png

 

I also have 20 blades

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vlajmwlzz2bub1s/2014-04-20_15.30.19.png

 

Picture of the front (Controler, power tap, fluid ports)

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/mn8f4windp8b5l0/2014-04-20_15.30.26.png

 

Picture of the back (Turbine Shaft)

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/mn8f4windp8b5l0/2014-04-20_15.30.26.png

 

So that is one turbine. Remember, we need 2. Both exactly the same.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9kcdn3bdx1b9ety/2014-04-20_15.35.39.png

 

 

Sending Steam

 

Just a few tesseracts on the same channel. One connected to a outputing reactor cooling port and 2 connecting to inputing turbine fluid ports, 1 tesseract per turbine.

 

 

Producing water for the Reactor

 

 

Thanks to jakalth for a method.

 

If you sending all the waste water from your turbine back to your reactor, that alone should make it self sustainable.  But I guess that does require that you have waste water in your turbine to begin with.  You'll need to let the coolant level in your reactor completely fill before turning it on.  let your turbine use the steam produced to fill it's coolant tank, once this is full shut down your reactor and let it's tank fill up again.  once that is done, there should be enough water in the two devices that they can keep each other filled.  Just make sure your turbine is NOT set to dump all waste.  Have it set to only dump the excess waste.  Having it dump all waste works if you use another method to keep your reactor filled.

 

Reactor steam --> turbine

Turbine water --> reactor

 

on seperate tesseract channels otherwise they will get steam and water mixed.  You'll need seperate coolant ports for both steam output and water input in your reactor.  and each tesseract is linked with seperate ones on the steam input and waste water output on your turbine.  With that setup, you'll only need a small input of water, going into a third coolant port on your reactor to make sure it stays topped off.

 

When jakalth says small input of water, I needed about 4-5 auqeous accumulators to keep it full.

 

 

Settings

 

Very simple, all control rods at 60%.

This makes the reactor run at around 195 degrees Celsius, Produce around 3520/3530 mB/t. It uses 0.077/0.078 mB/t of fuel. It's fuel reactivity is around 403%.

 

The turbine (once up to speed) has 1782.7 RPM, 10140 RF/t. Remember to keep the max flow rate at 2000 mB/t.

Remember there are 2 turbines. Both Turbines produce about the same amount of power, with just a few units in differences.

 

Just remember that with these settings each turbine produces slightly more than 10k RF/t so you will need 2 separate lines of redstone energy conduits, 1 for each turbine, and you will need resonant energy cells to harness that power.

 

This is about the size of how much resonant energy cells you will need.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2zb2c0shvbv44i2/2014-04-20_16.43.20.png

I have a few battery stations like this...

 

 

So, thats my setup more or less. Feel free to improve or edit in anyway.

[mm75]

Oh, and sorry for all the links. I had no idea how to put the actual picture since the image button did not work correctly for me.

Edited April 20, 2014 by mm75

[Curunir]

Thanks for sharing.

But one quick note about the reactor design: While this will work okay, it will not yield a very high fertility / core irradiation. This is the percent value in the reactor interface, and getting it above 400% is recommended. It will increase reactor heat, but also reduce fuel consumption dramatically, which equals higher efficiency. Given the already very high efficiency of Yellorium-based energy production, this could be considered a moot point. But some people think that you cannot be "too efficient".

Packing the fuel rods more tightly will increase that value. You could even put them right next to each other, provided there is a potent coolant in the non-column blocks (your Cryotheum is already optimal). A simple and straightforward setup is the "plus shape" with five columns.

 

I don't mean to say your reactor is bad. Just wanted to point this out.

[mm75]

Thanks for sharing.

But one quick note about the reactor design: While this will work okay, it will not yield a very high fertility / core irradiation. This is the percent value in the reactor interface, and getting it above 400% is recommended. It will increase reactor heat, but also reduce fuel consumption dramatically, which equals higher efficiency. Given the already very high efficiency of Yellorium-based energy production, this could be considered a moot point. But some people think that you cannot be "too efficient".

Packing the fuel rods more tightly will increase that value. You could even put them right next to each other, provided there is a potent coolant in the non-column blocks (your Cryotheum is already optimal). A simple and straightforward setup is the "plus shape" with five columns.

 

I don't mean to say your reactor is bad. Just wanted to point this out.

the fuel reactivity is 403%. I produce more power than i know what to do with... I waste most of it just because i cannot store all of it.

 

But I will see how much changing the reactor does to my base. Thank you for pointing that out

Edited April 20, 2014 by mm75

[Curunir]

Well, 403% is pretty good. Looks like they are close enough after all.

You can get ~450% with a tighter setup, up to ~500% if you push it. I was expecting this to be more around 200-300%, but I guessed wrong.

[mm75]

Well, 403% is pretty good. Looks like they are close enough after all.

You can get ~450% with a tighter setup, up to ~500% if you push it. I was expecting this to be more around 200-300%, but I guessed wrong.

well I did write it.

second line under Settings.

so yeah...

but i will look into your point

[mm75]

Well, 403% is pretty good. Looks like they are close enough after all.

You can get ~450% with a tighter setup, up to ~500% if you push it. I was expecting this to be more around 200-300%, but I guessed wrong.

Your right, it does improve. But just not enough (with my setup) to make much of a difference. But still, Good call Edited April 20, 2014 by mm75

[jakalth]

Not a bad looking setup, but yeah tighter packing of the rods, with enough coolant between them and the sides of the reactor, allows the reactor to be slightly more efficient.  But the difference only matters over a LONG time of running the reactor.  And if you've got a quarry or laser drill bringing in yellorium, the added efficiency this would allow isn't that important.

 

All told, you could probably reduce the amount of coolant needed by a collumn or two with the + design but...  Your design is simple, upgradable, and looks clean.  Nicely done.

 

The most important thing to remember here is:  Are YOU happy with the reactor?  If so, I would call that a win.

[mm75]

Not a bad looking setup, but yeah tighter packing of the rods, with enough coolant between them and the sides of the reactor, allows the reactor to be slightly more efficient.  But the difference only matters over a LONG time of running the reactor.  And if you've got a quarry or laser drill bringing in yellorium, the added efficiency this would allow isn't that important.

 

All told, you could probably reduce the amount of coolant needed by a collumn or two with the + design but...  Your design is simple, upgradable, and looks clean.  Nicely done.

 

The most important thing to remember here is:  Are YOU happy with the reactor?  If so, I would call that a win.

lol, i  am happy with the reactor. I am angry at Thermal Expansion for not having even better cables!

[Curunir]

Well, set that into perspective. Which machines are actually taking more than 10.000 RF per tick (or 1.000 MJ, respectively)?

Using TE's own dynamos, you need over 100 to saturate a single Redstone Conduit. It is the nuclear stuff that goes bonkers with power output, so technically speaking, the nuclear mods should bring their own high-level conduits and energy storage.

[The_Glaive]

In this setup, do you have to use tesseracts or can you have everything linked only using liquiducts? Also, can these be set up vertically instead of horizontally? 

Edited April 21, 2014 by The_Glaive

[jakalth]

Liquiducts could not keep up with that high of steam/water flow.  tesseracts or extra utilities transfer pipes would have to be used.  or linking the reactor and turbines directly by building them in contact with each other.

 

the turbines can be veritcal instead of horizontal.

 

if the number of blades in the turbines were increased to between 34-40 blades, the steam requirements of each could be dropped to below 900 without loosing power output.  meaning you could have 4 turbines, each outputting over 10,000RF/tick run off the same 3500mb steam.  You'de just have to make the turbines considerably bigger.

[The_Glaive]

Ok, thanks. I actually had 12 input ports on my reactor with liquiducts connected to max sized tanks, and each tank filled by 5 pumps, and was still running out of water. This setup seems more practical, if less badass looking. 

 

In all, the two turbines and 1 reactor setup would use 7 tesseracts?

 

3 on the reactor, one for water input, one for steam output, and one for water coming back from the turbine. (or can the water input and waste water return be on the same tesseract?)

2 on each turbine, one for input steam, and one for output waste water.

 

When I do the initial fill of the turbine tanks, are they supposed to be turned on, or turned off, and do you do them one at a time or both at once?

Edited April 21, 2014 by The_Glaive

[jakalth]

na, would only need 6 tesseracts once setup.  2 on each turbine and 2 on the reactor.  you'de need a third coolant port on the reactor to add water initially, and to keep it topped off since some of the steam/water seems to leak out of the system slowly.  Seems the larger the reactor, the more "leak" there is, so the more accumulators you'll want hooked up to it.  But 1-4 accumulators should be all you need to keep the setup going once everything is full of water(that includes the two turbines waste tanks as well).

 

Too fill the waste tanks on the turbines you only need to let the reactor fill, pulse it on for a few seconds to send steam to the turbines, then turn it off again and let the reactor refill.  this should have your turbines waste tanks full now of water.  At this point, with your reactor filled with water, and the turbines waste tanks full of water, you should be able to send water from your turbines back to your reactor, start up the reactor again, and leave it running non-stop.

[sedstr]

>29k RF/T

 

I worked out pretty soon, that building the turbines straight onto the reactor was the best way. I had a similar setup to Curunir's setup, but I had two turbines on top of each other (with the mandatory gap in between), I would have had them on different sides, but space was an issue. this however turned out well, because I was able to back both turbines onto a single tesseract.

The reactor started out with 3 rods, 6 high, in an 8 x 7 x 5, with the turbines 16 in length, with 3.5 coils.

With this configuration, I was getting over 18k per tic on each turbine.

I recently watched a video where they had turbines built in a 7 x 7 x 16 configuration, that allowed them to put in more blades and get ~24k per tick.

Although this configuration yields more per tick, it requires many more pieces to build.

Reading a bit more, if you orientate the turbines vertically, you can go as far as 32 rather than 16 in the horizontal position.

2000 mb / 25 = 80 blades, and from testing, more than 80 blades makes no difference.

My latest design consists of 2 turbines each with 20 rotors with full blades (80 blades)
4 full enderium coils plus one coil with 5 enderium blocks only.

27 x 5 x 5.

RPM: 1796.7
RF/t: 29362
@ 2000mB/t

 

I believe this is close to, if not the most efficient turbine configuration.

 

I've updated the reactor with 3 rods 9 high, plus enderium coolant, I'll modify this later on, so I can have both turbines share the same tesseract again.

I've also attached two railcraft Steam Turbines direct to the reactor, which means I have to add water to the system, using upgraded extra utilities liquid transfer nodes.

I'm sure I can redesign my reactor to get more efficiency, currently around 0.080 fuel usage 445% efficiency and I may have to get into the computer programming side of things, to counteract the on/off actions of the railcraft turbines, but its working fine ATM.