|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Jan 5, 2017 5:32:18 GMT
Most probably is that our nuclear reactor simply run on power saving mode to just power the crew modules and sensor on the trip to save up fuel while in combat, the power was tuned back up to max.
Assuming that's possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jan 5, 2017 15:45:19 GMT
So, in a different tack from what this thread normally cranks out, I need a design for a 4 MW reactor/RTG that can run for 20 years. Additionally, it cannot mass more than 50 tons, has to be able to fit into a 6.4 meter diameter hull (to represent a payload fairing), and has to not be more than 10 meters long. To make a reactor run for 20 years, just give it 40x the fuel and 1/40th of the neutron flux (edit the control rod as needed). Here's a small edit of my old 10 MW reactor to fit that specification (used to be 1kg of fuel at 9.6%, so 4kg at 97% should cover 20 years):
ThermoelectricFissionReactorModule 10.1 MW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor 2
ReactorCoreDimensions_m 0.1 0.1
NuclearReactor
Coolant Sodium
Moderator Diamond
ModeratorMass_kg 1
Fuel U-233 Dioxide
FuelMass_kg 4
FuelEnrichment_Percent 0.97
ControlRodComposition Boron Nitride
ControlRodMass_kg 5
NeutronReflector Boron Nitride
ReflectorThickness_m 0
AverageNeutronFlux__m2_s 4.7e+018
InnerTurbopump
Composition Boron Nitride
PumpRadius_m 0.18
RotationalSpeed_RPM 470
ThermocoupleInnerDimensions_m 0.4 0.66
Thermocouple
PTypeComposition Osmium
NTypeComposition Tungsten
Length_m 0.001
ThermocoupleExitTemperature_K 2400
OuterCoolant Sodium
OuterTurbopump
Composition Lithium
PumpRadius_m 0.1
RotationalSpeed_RPM 440
Mass 144 kg, diameter 80.2 cm, length 1.21 m. So it fits the specifications with lots of room to spare. Surely the excess power capability isn't a problem. In fact, you could get up to a gigawatt within your mass & space if you wanted to (the volume is more limiting than the mass). |
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Jan 5, 2017 16:44:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Jan 5, 2017 21:34:44 GMT
It would be nice to expose on the list of informations about the module expected lifetime -- the game must already verify whether it's at least 6 months, it might as well expose it. And then allow us to carry extra fuel rods. |
|
|
|
Post by someusername6 on Jan 5, 2017 22:10:51 GMT
It would be nice to expose on the list of informations about the module expected lifetime -- the game must already verify whether it's at least 6 months, it might as well expose it. And then allow us to carry extra fuel rods. And then allow for very short lived fuel rods, and an electric loader to replace the spent fuel rods. Maybe eject them into space too while we are at it. |
|
|
|
Post by coaxjack on Jan 6, 2017 6:17:30 GMT
Yeah, that would allow disposable reactors for missiles. We can sort of do this now, but it still feels like a waste of a perfectly good Thermos reactor  |
|
|
|
Post by Pttg on Mar 10, 2017 20:47:53 GMT
Anyone have an ultralight 300Mw power plant?
|
|
ndeo
Junior Member
It's not a flashlight... It's a High-frequency relativistic boson cannon
Posts: 67 
|
Post by ndeo on Mar 11, 2017 12:40:47 GMT
Made something stupid.  |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Mar 11, 2017 13:03:21 GMT
Made something stupid. Then, people will break the limit and demand more. Apophys' 25 GW one is already heavy enough... Note that the mass of the standard 40 GW reactor in the SSOS databank is 1.6 kt. |
|
ndeo
Junior Member
It's not a flashlight... It's a High-frequency relativistic boson cannon
Posts: 67
|
Post by ndeo on Mar 11, 2017 14:53:33 GMT
Oh wow I didn't even see that thread Is this better? I'm new to this  |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 11, 2017 15:00:13 GMT
Boron can work as turbopumps, stronger and lighter then diamond, looks like you can cut a little control rod mass.
|
|
|
|
Post by evonix on Apr 7, 2017 21:58:40 GMT
A few things from a newb doing research:
1. Nickel chromium iron and osmium seems like a good Ntype/Ptype combo(What even determens good thermocople matereal? Thermoelectric sensativity aint it thats for sure).
2. Polyethylene seems like a good turbopump materal, also reinforced carbon-carbon.
3. Thermocople lencth seems to work counter to what the tool tip says, why is that?
4. Water seems to be the best coolant but havent tested much.
|
|
|
|
Post by nerd1000 on Apr 8, 2017 0:00:26 GMT
A few things from a newb doing research: 1. Nickel chromium iron and osmium seems like a good Ntype/Ptype combo(What even determens good thermocople matereal? Thermoelectric sensativity aint it thats for sure). 2. Polyethylene seems like a good turbopump materal, also reinforced carbon-carbon. 3. Thermocople lencth seems to work counter to what the tool tip says, why is that? 4. Water seems to be the best coolant but havent tested much. 'Goodness' of a thermocouple is determined by the difference between Thermoelectric sensitivities of the two materials, the electrical conductivity of the materials (Uranium Dioxide has an excellent Thermoelectric sensitivity but doesn't conduct, so it isn't usable) and its ability to withstand the temperatures/heat gradient it's subject to (Selenium-Bismuth would be excellent, but both materials melt at too low of a temperature and are so weak that they break under a tiny temperature gradient). |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Apr 8, 2017 2:14:03 GMT
also light water is a worthless coolant
|
|
|
|
Post by Pttg on Apr 8, 2017 20:14:20 GMT
A few things from a newb doing research: 1. Nickel chromium iron and osmium seems like a good Ntype/Ptype combo(What even determens good thermocople matereal? Thermoelectric sensativity aint it thats for sure). 2. Polyethylene seems like a good turbopump materal, also reinforced carbon-carbon. 3. Thermocople lencth seems to work counter to what the tool tip says, why is that? 4. Water seems to be the best coolant but havent tested much. 1: It needs to be a large difference between the n-type sensitivity and the p-type sensitivity. Osmium/tungsten is outstanding, if expensive. |
|
