|
|
Post by JagerIV on Oct 6, 2016 18:49:32 GMT
Huh. Well, I've got a 1 gigawatt generator now. Thanks. What are people's opinions regarding cooling via the inner pump vs the outer pump? How does one have to think about it?
|
|
|
|
Post by tukuro on Oct 7, 2016 0:02:52 GMT
12.4 GW Reactor  This was the largest 2500k I was able to design. Has anyone managed to get more?
|
|
|
|
Post by BLDoom on Oct 7, 2016 4:01:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by randomletters on Oct 7, 2016 6:08:15 GMT
I'm screwing around with making decoy drones, essentially just reactors, heatsinks, and a high accell rocket with enough delta V to dodge missiles for a little while, does anyone have any small light reactors that put out a LOT of heat?
|
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Oct 7, 2016 10:25:15 GMT
This was the largest 2500k I was able to design. Has anyone managed to get more? More you say? How about 37.6 GW?  The limiter is turbopump energy consumption. If you spin them faster to cool more, they eat more power than the cooling helps with. |
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Oct 7, 2016 11:45:15 GMT
What are people's opinions regarding cooling via the inner pump vs the outer pump? How does one have to think about it? If the inner pump is done badly, the fuel will melt at lower core temperatures than it otherwise would (because the heat isn't spread effectively). As an example of this effect, see the 12.4 GW reactor posted by tukuro.  You want a high core temperature for optimal power generation. This makes the inner pump much more important, and you can't shave off quite as much mass from it as from the outer one when optimizing. Keeping the same core temperature, the outer pump can be somewhat shrunken and driven at slightly higher speeds, while the thermocouple is increased. This reduces overall mass (mostly sodium) while the dimensions and power remain about the same. Also, get a forum account, you won't regret it. I'm screwing around with making decoy drones, essentially just reactors, heatsinks, and a high accell rocket with enough delta V to dodge missiles for a little while, does anyone have any small light reactors that put out a LOT of heat? Heat generation depends only on the fuel and neutron flux. Unfortunately, this heat still needs to be dumped out the hard way, so there's no shortcut. The best you can do is run your reactor at a higher output temperature to shave some radiators. How much heat are you thinking about? Another thing you can try is not having any acceleration at all, and just launching reactor+radiator from coilguns. The heat source will be closer and thus more effective as a decoy. |
|
|
|
Post by tukuro on Oct 7, 2016 14:16:20 GMT
What are people's opinions regarding cooling via the inner pump vs the outer pump? How does one have to think about it? If the inner pump is done badly, the fuel will melt at lower core temperatures than it otherwise would (because the heat isn't spread effectively). As an example of this effect, see the 12.4 GW reactor posted by tukuro. You want a high core temperature for optimal power generation. This makes the inner pump much more important, and you can't shave off quite as much mass from it as from the outer one when optimizing. Keeping the same core temperature, the outer pump can be somewhat shrunken and driven at slightly higher speeds, while the thermocouple is increased. This reduces overall mass (mostly sodium) while the dimensions and power remain about the same. Thanks, I figured there was a design flaw somewhere, but I couldn't put my finger on it. Sadly, the problem with too wide inner turbopumps is the massive increase in mass, so a nice balance needs to be kept. My goal here is max power per unit of mass. As my current design only runs at 11.6% efficiency there's still a bit of work to do. |
|
|
|
Post by nivik on Oct 7, 2016 15:34:18 GMT
I'm screwing around with making decoy drones, essentially just reactors, heatsinks, and a high accell rocket with enough delta V to dodge missiles for a little while, does anyone have any small light reactors that put out a LOT of heat? Heat generation depends only on the fuel and neutron flux. Unfortunately, this heat still needs to be dumped out the hard way, so there's no shortcut. The best you can do is run your reactor at a higher output temperature to shave some radiators. How much heat are you thinking about? Another thing you can try is not having any acceleration at all, and just launching reactor+radiator from coilguns. The heat source will be closer and thus more effective as a decoy. Also keep in mind that both combustion and nuclear thermal rockets put out quite a lot of heat. You could try using a combustion rocket with an intentionally low efficiency so it dumps out a large amount of super-hot exhaust and see if that does anything for you. |
|
|
|
Post by targetx on Oct 7, 2016 16:47:09 GMT
12.4 GW Reactor This was the largest 2500k I was able to design. Has anyone managed to get more? Hey there buddy, can't help but noticing that some of your crews eyes glow green in the dark, some are growing additional appendages, whilst a few lucky others have been cooked to the same level as crispy bacon and are now melded with the floor. 143kW of radiation leakages!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Oct 7, 2016 16:58:55 GMT
Thanks, I figured there was a design flaw somewhere, but I couldn't put my finger on it. Sadly, the problem with too wide inner turbopumps is the massive increase in mass, so a nice balance needs to be kept. My goal here is max power per unit of mass. As my current design only runs at 11.6% efficiency there's still a bit of work to do. I didn't realize that gigantic 12.4 GW reactor was meant to be practical.  Well then. Since there's actually a desire for even higher power than my 1GW reactor, I feel compelled to upscale my design. Here's 10 GW. It comes at 151 t of mass, so it's marginally more mass efficient than my 1GW (at the cost of ballooned volume, so armoring will suck). In the course of building this, I find that a slightly lower efficiency than the maximum slightly improves the stats here, because of the absurd draw of the inner turbopump at these scales. The thermocouple can be rearranged to have high radius and low height instead of the current high height and low radius.  ThermoelectricFissionReactorModule 10.1 GW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor
ReactorCoreDimensions_m 0.25 0.1
NuclearReactor
Coolant Sodium
Moderator Diamond
ModeratorMass_kg 1
Fuel U-235 Dioxide
FuelMass_kg 110
FuelEnrichment_Percent 0.97
ControlRodComposition U-233 Dioxide
ControlRodMass_kg 99
NeutronReflector Diamond
ReflectorThickness_m 0.6
AverageNeutronFlux__m2_s 2e+020
InnerTurbopump
Composition Amorphous Carbon
PumpRadius_m 2.3
RotationalSpeed_RPM 480
ThermocoupleInnerDimensions_m 13 30
Thermocouple
PTypeComposition Tungsten
NTypeComposition Tantalum
Length_m 0.001
ThermocoupleExitTemperature_K 2500
OuterCoolant Sodium
OuterTurbopump
Composition Boron
PumpRadius_m 0.75
RotationalSpeed_RPM 800 |
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Oct 7, 2016 18:12:36 GMT
What are you folks building that you need 10 GW reactors???
|
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Oct 7, 2016 19:10:58 GMT
What are you folks building that you need 10 GW reactors??? If I have to guess something with gigantic invisible death rays ? |
|
|
|
Post by leerooooooy on Oct 7, 2016 19:25:28 GMT
Thanks, I figured there was a design flaw somewhere, but I couldn't put my finger on it. Sadly, the problem with too wide inner turbopumps is the massive increase in mass, so a nice balance needs to be kept. My goal here is max power per unit of mass. As my current design only runs at 11.6% efficiency there's still a bit of work to do. I didn't realize that gigantic 12.4 GW reactor was meant to be practical. Well then. Since there's actually a desire for even higher power than my 1GW reactor, I feel compelled to upscale my design. Here's 10 GW. It comes at 151 t of mass, so it's marginally more mass efficient than my 1GW (at the cost of ballooned volume, so armoring will suck). In the course of building this, I find that a slightly lower efficiency than the maximum slightly improves the stats here, because of the absurd draw of the inner turbopump at these scales. The thermocouple can be rearranged to have high radius and low height instead of the current high height and low radius. ThermoelectricFissionReactorModule 10.1 GW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor
ReactorCoreDimensions_m 0.25 0.1
NuclearReactor
Coolant Sodium
Moderator Diamond
ModeratorMass_kg 1
Fuel U-235 Dioxide
FuelMass_kg 110
FuelEnrichment_Percent 0.97
ControlRodComposition U-233 Dioxide
ControlRodMass_kg 99
NeutronReflector Diamond
ReflectorThickness_m 0.6
AverageNeutronFlux__m2_s 2e+020
InnerTurbopump
Composition Amorphous Carbon
PumpRadius_m 2.3
RotationalSpeed_RPM 480
ThermocoupleInnerDimensions_m 13 30
Thermocouple
PTypeComposition Tungsten
NTypeComposition Tantalum
Length_m 0.001
ThermocoupleExitTemperature_K 2500
OuterCoolant Sodium
OuterTurbopump
Composition Boron
PumpRadius_m 0.75
RotationalSpeed_RPM 800mfw  |
|
|
|
Post by leerooooooy on Oct 7, 2016 19:42:48 GMT
Thanks, I figured there was a design flaw somewhere, but I couldn't put my finger on it. Sadly, the problem with too wide inner turbopumps is the massive increase in mass, so a nice balance needs to be kept. My goal here is max power per unit of mass. As my current design only runs at 11.6% efficiency there's still a bit of work to do. I didn't realize that gigantic 12.4 GW reactor was meant to be practical. Well then. Since there's actually a desire for even higher power than my 1GW reactor, I feel compelled to upscale my design. Here's 10 GW. It comes at 151 t of mass, so it's marginally more mass efficient than my 1GW (at the cost of ballooned volume, so armoring will suck). In the course of building this, I find that a slightly lower efficiency than the maximum slightly improves the stats here, because of the absurd draw of the inner turbopump at these scales. The thermocouple can be rearranged to have high radius and low height instead of the current high height and low radius. ThermoelectricFissionReactorModule 10.1 GW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor
ReactorCoreDimensions_m 0.25 0.1
NuclearReactor
Coolant Sodium
Moderator Diamond
ModeratorMass_kg 1
Fuel U-235 Dioxide
FuelMass_kg 110
FuelEnrichment_Percent 0.97
ControlRodComposition U-233 Dioxide
ControlRodMass_kg 99
NeutronReflector Diamond
ReflectorThickness_m 0.6
AverageNeutronFlux__m2_s 2e+020
InnerTurbopump
Composition Amorphous Carbon
PumpRadius_m 2.3
RotationalSpeed_RPM 480
ThermocoupleInnerDimensions_m 13 30
Thermocouple
PTypeComposition Tungsten
NTypeComposition Tantalum
Length_m 0.001
ThermocoupleExitTemperature_K 2500
OuterCoolant Sodium
OuterTurbopump
Composition Boron
PumpRadius_m 0.75
RotationalSpeed_RPM 800This is all your fault  it has 10 km/s of Dv and pulls 3.3 g, there no escape |
|
|
|
Post by Durandal on Oct 7, 2016 19:46:46 GMT
I didn't realize that gigantic 12.4 GW reactor was meant to be practical. Well then. Since there's actually a desire for even higher power than my 1GW reactor, I feel compelled to upscale my design. Here's 10 GW. It comes at 151 t of mass, so it's marginally more mass efficient than my 1GW (at the cost of ballooned volume, so armoring will suck). In the course of building this, I find that a slightly lower efficiency than the maximum slightly improves the stats here, because of the absurd draw of the inner turbopump at these scales. The thermocouple can be rearranged to have high radius and low height instead of the current high height and low radius. ThermoelectricFissionReactorModule 10.1 GW Thermoelectric Fission Reactor
ReactorCoreDimensions_m 0.25 0.1
NuclearReactor
Coolant Sodium
Moderator Diamond
ModeratorMass_kg 1
Fuel U-235 Dioxide
FuelMass_kg 110
FuelEnrichment_Percent 0.97
ControlRodComposition U-233 Dioxide
ControlRodMass_kg 99
NeutronReflector Diamond
ReflectorThickness_m 0.6
AverageNeutronFlux__m2_s 2e+020
InnerTurbopump
Composition Amorphous Carbon
PumpRadius_m 2.3
RotationalSpeed_RPM 480
ThermocoupleInnerDimensions_m 13 30
Thermocouple
PTypeComposition Tungsten
NTypeComposition Tantalum
Length_m 0.001
ThermocoupleExitTemperature_K 2500
OuterCoolant Sodium
OuterTurbopump
Composition Boron
PumpRadius_m 0.75
RotationalSpeed_RPM 800This is all your fault View Attachmentit has 10 km/s of Dv and pulls 3.3 g, there no escape >Power use: 1GW/20GW THE GODS HAVE RISEN |
|
You want a high core temperature for optimal power generation. This makes the inner pump much more important, and you can't shave off quite as much mass from it as from the outer one when optimizing.
Well then. Since there's actually a desire for even higher power than my 1GW reactor, I feel compelled to upscale my design. 
