|
Post by ash19256 on Apr 8, 2017 22:18:16 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. If you're using mods, then for high-temperature reactors I'd say you should be using graphene/vitreous carbon, which at higher temperatures (like what can be achieved with RiftandRend 's TaHfC-coated U-233 fuel rods (and a modified version of the TaHfC-coated Boron Carbide rods that trades the carbide for nitride) can achieve efficiencies above 25%, which is very impressive for 2400-2300 K output reactors.
|
|
|
Post by teeth on Apr 9, 2017 0:24:35 GMT
1: It needs to be a large difference between the n-type sensitivity and the p-type sensitivity. Osmium/tungsten is outstanding, if expensive. If you're using mods, then for high-temperature reactors I'd say you should be using graphene/vitreous carbon, which at higher temperatures (like what can be achieved with RiftandRend 's TaHfC-coated U-233 fuel rods (and a modified version of the TaHfC-coated Boron Carbide rods that trades the carbide for nitride) can achieve efficiencies above 25%, which is very impressive for 2400-2300 K output reactors. Seeing all the uses for vitreous carbon, I think it should become stock. Since it's already done, qswitched could possibly add it in the next hotfix.
|
|
|
Post by kaiserwilhelm on Apr 18, 2017 9:54:02 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. The best stock coolant for high temp reactors is sodium as far as I know. If you want high temperature smal reactors then ethane is your friend. For low temperature reactors you'll have to search in the Standard thread. Altough I think it's hydrogen. Polyethylene is a good turbopump but if you can get away with litium or calcium or potassium take it.
|
|
|
Post by ash19256 on Apr 23, 2017 2:57:04 GMT
If you're using mods, then for high-temperature reactors I'd say you should be using graphene/vitreous carbon, which at higher temperatures (like what can be achieved with RiftandRend 's TaHfC-coated U-233 fuel rods (and a modified version of the TaHfC-coated Boron Carbide rods that trades the carbide for nitride) can achieve efficiencies above 25%, which is very impressive for 2400-2300 K output reactors. Seeing all the uses for vitreous carbon, I think it should become stock. Since it's already done, qswitched could possibly add it in the next hotfix. Although, funnily enough it turns out that Graphene/Pyrolitic Carbon is even better, allowing for efficiency around 28%. Which is just slightly nuts.
|
|
|
Post by dichebach on Nov 1, 2017 14:58:38 GMT
I've been having some fun with nuclear reactors. This design, you'll note, is much less massive, much less expensive, has a higher outlet temperature (good for more efficient radiators), less radiation, narrower profile (for shadow shield, if it's even necessary), and produces a more than three times the power...at the cost of nearly halving efficiency, and putting out a staggering 1.61 Gigawatts of waste heat. You're not gonna be hiding anything packing one of these babies with a Nitrocellulose flare, that's for sure! Still, that's a metric shit-ton of energy to play with. If you've already resigned yourself to lighting up every IR sensor in a parsec, why not go all in? Throw in a 150 MW, 10mm railgun? Why not? Giant death lasers? Yes, please. It's based mostly on this design, by Tuna-Fish. The internals of his and my designs are available by following the links. Tuna's comments were thusly: "If I increased the output temp even more, I could have made it even better to the point of needing just a single radiator, but I wanted to keep output above 60MW to fit my legacy designs, and once I accidentally hit 666MW thermal, I had to keep it for entirely juvenile reasons. Other findings is that you can min-max the reactor size to be really tiny by increasing the neutron flux, this makes the reactor nice and light, and radiation shielding very cheap. Also, the best thermocouple I could make work at high temperatures is definitely Tungsten/Tantalum. Can anyone make any power at all out of any carbon electrode (diamond, graphite, etc)? I feel like there should be a reason they are in the list, but they just produce no power for me. Also, I think there are a few bugs in this screen and the laser design screen. Thermocouple thickness has the opposite effect that it's mouseover hints at, and thermocouple stress is computed between input and the melting point of secondary loop fluid, instead of input and output as it should (even if there is a carnot cycle of some kind going on there, it should be to the vaporization point, not to the melting point). On laser design screen, you get to pick cooling fluid entry temp, and after this gets heated in the cavity, the outlet temp is the cavity temp. This means that the cooling pump does not matter -- you can just pick your starting temp so it doesn't melt the cavity. Instead, the input temp should determine the outlet temperature, and the cavity temperature should be higher than this, the difference depending on how good a pump you have." Can anyone do better, or even better than that, do comparable better and manage to have some efficiency? Taking my first steps into module fiddling and I took a screen cap of this design and plugged in the values. Weird thing is: all the downstream values match up EXCEPT power output. NO POWER!? Also, what is up with radiator design? Changing out silicon carbide with diamond, silver and boron nitride (all of which have higher thermo conductivity) has little appreciable effects on the thermal performance of the actual radiator?
|
|
|
Post by dichebach on Nov 1, 2017 17:54:07 GMT
So having browsed the reactor designs on Steam workshop, I gather that the stock reactors are actually pretty damned good. Yes, there are quite a few big power reactors but they all seem to come at the cost of worse efficiency, ridiculous heat output and higher mass/cost.
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Nov 1, 2017 18:28:41 GMT
Hmm, wasn't there a newer thread about reactors? Anyway, the stock reactors are really very heavy. Here's the stock 13.5MW compared with an Apophys Electrics 10MW: There's a good post about why efficiency generally doesn't matter in this very thread here: childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/post/670I say 'generally' since someone did the math on a 3000K reactor I made and at that point the drop in efficiency from increasingly restrictive material choices for the thermocouple does finally overcome the savings in radiator area.
|
|
|
Post by SevenOfCarina on Nov 1, 2017 18:29:40 GMT
So having browsed the reactor designs on Steam workshop, I gather that the stock reactors are actually pretty damned good. Yes, there are quite a few big power reactors but they all seem to come at the cost of worse efficiency, ridiculous heat output and higher mass/cost. Thee has't defil'd all yond this forum holds sacred! Thee has't besmear'd the miracles wrought by the might of humanity, taint'd th'm with thy unholy thoughts! Thee has't madeth thyself an foe of our en'rgetic ord'r, did insult the v'ry creations yond tam'd the gods! Thy doom awaits, heathen, and the mighty apophys emself shalt beest thy execution'r! Prepareth to die!
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Nov 1, 2017 18:44:23 GMT
So having browsed the reactor designs on Steam workshop, I gather that the stock reactors are actually pretty damned good. Yes, there are quite a few big power reactors but they all seem to come at the cost of worse efficiency, ridiculous heat output and higher mass/cost. Steam workshop guys are trash compared to Apo-chan.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Nov 1, 2017 18:52:55 GMT
So having browsed the reactor designs on Steam workshop, I gather that the stock reactors are actually pretty damned good. Yes, there are quite a few big power reactors but they all seem to come at the cost of worse efficiency, ridiculous heat output and higher mass/cost. Thee has't defil'd all yond this forum holds sacred! Thee has't besmear'd the miracles wrought by the might of humanity, taint'd th'm with thy unholy thoughts! Thee has't madeth thyself an foe of our en'rgetic ord'r, did insult the v'ry creations yond tam'd the gods! Thy doom awaits, heathen, and the mighty apophys emself shalt beest thy execution'r! Prepareth to die! ye' olde' english' is' a' terrible' idea'
|
|
|
Post by treptoplax on Nov 8, 2017 16:38:00 GMT
So having browsed the reactor designs on Steam workshop, I gather that the stock reactors are actually pretty damned good. Yes, there are quite a few big power reactors but they all seem to come at the cost of worse efficiency, ridiculous heat output and higher mass/cost. childrenofadeadearth.boards.net/post/26403/thread
|
|
|
Post by thehardestmetal on Nov 12, 2017 5:47:09 GMT
This is the best I've been able to come up with: It's a 1.15 GW 10 ton reactor with a rather low outlet temp of 1800k ,but an exceptional efficiency of 33.9% due to its Graphene/ Pyrolytic Carbon thermocouple. Its based off of the stock 542 MW reactor as I'm terrible at reactors for now. It only costs 178 Kc which is exceptionally cheap for a reactor of its power output as far as I can tell. Also only puts off 3.44 GW of heat which is also pretty low.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Nov 12, 2017 7:54:54 GMT
This is the best I've been able to come up with: It's a 1.15 GW 10 ton reactor with a rather low outlet temp of 1800k ,but an exceptional efficiency of 33.9% due to its Graphene/ Pyrolytic Carbon thermocouple. Its based off of the stock 542 MW reactor as I'm terrible at reactors for now. It only costs 178 Kc which is exceptionally cheap for a reactor of its power output as far as I can tell. Also only puts off 3.44 GW of heat which is also pretty low. What. Stock reactors only go up to 60.4 MW. Edit: Holy shit are graphene thermocouples good.
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Nov 12, 2017 8:18:32 GMT
This is the best I've been able to come up with: It's a 1.15 GW 10 ton reactor with a rather low outlet temp of 1800k ,but an exceptional efficiency of 33.9% due to its Graphene/ Pyrolytic Carbon thermocouple. Its based off of the stock 542 MW reactor as I'm terrible at reactors for now. It only costs 178 Kc which is exceptionally cheap for a reactor of its power output as far as I can tell. Also only puts off 3.44 GW of heat which is also pretty low. What. Stock reactors only go up to 60.4 MW. Edit: Holy shit are graphene thermocouples good. Boron v2.0
|
|
|
Post by thehardestmetal on Nov 12, 2017 9:18:52 GMT
This is the best I've been able to come up with: It's a 1.15 GW 10 ton reactor with a rather low outlet temp of 1800k ,but an exceptional efficiency of 33.9% due to its Graphene/ Pyrolytic Carbon thermocouple. Its based off of the stock 542 MW reactor as I'm terrible at reactors for now. It only costs 178 Kc which is exceptionally cheap for a reactor of its power output as far as I can tell. Also only puts off 3.44 GW of heat which is also pretty low. What. Stock reactors only go up to 60.4 MW. Edit: Holy shit are graphene thermocouples good. Must have grabbed that 542 MW reactor off of steam or the forums then. I've never been too familiar with what is and isn't a stock design, especially after how much custom stuff I now have or have downloaded. Graphene thermocouple are pretty good if you can keep them from shattering from thermal expansion stress. As far as I've played around with thermocouple materials graphene and another carbon work well together at relatively low temps. Anything else becomes rather bulky pretty fast or is just plain useless.
|
|