Factorio Forums

I had a "crazy" idea today. I am facing difficulties with the interaction chests and my robots in that the robots tend to empty one chest at a time rather than in a balanced fashion like they do with requester chests. So i thought i could just place storehouses between the railloaders instead, thus each railloader would feed to and from said storehouses (they are 3x3 tiles, thus can sit neatly between railloaders) but doing so caused about half the throughput on the railloaders.

So, does distance affect the rate of transfer on railloaders? That is, distance to the center of the storage placed next to it?
Can anything be done about that?

EDIT: Alternatively, would it be difficult to make logistics versions of the railloaders?

EDIT #2: I tested my own theory about distance using a warehouse instead. Indeed, distance affects the rate of transfer. Warehouses (6x6 tiles) were even slower.

Cadde wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 27, 2018 7:23 pm

I had a "crazy" idea

So, does distance affect the rate of transfer on railloaders? That is, distance to the center of the storage placed next to it?
Can anything be done about that?

I can have a look.

I would assume it's got something to do with...

https://github.com/mspielberg/factorio- ... ol.lua#L63 The positions they pick up and drop from depend on the positions of the interacting chests. Are they important? Are they only for visuals?
There is a target entity field. So doesn't that suffice?

EDIT: Targets: https://lua-api.factorio.com/latest/Lua ... rop_target

Cadde wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 27, 2018 7:43 pm

EDIT: Targets: https://lua-api.factorio.com/latest/Lua ... rop_target

Note where it says “Read-only.” I have a feature request in to make those writable, but no word on if it will make it into 0.17.

Oh right, i just noticed myself damn.

So, positions matter?

Reading into it, i would say maybe? At least for extension speed.
I will try to raise it and see what happens.

EDIT: That definitely had an effect... On ALL THREE cases unfortunately...
- Regular interface chests (1x1 tile) got much faster.
- Bigger chests became faster.
- Train loading/unloading also became faster.

EDIT #2: In summary, one inserter prototype per distance between railloader chest and interface chest?

The solution is to always use the position of a 1x1 chest, which would be the corner of a larger chest, instead of the center.

Dammit, i should have tried that first... I am so stupid.
But... How? How do you determine that position? That's a lot of orientation stuff and whatnot. That's definitely in your hands because i don't know how that works in your code.

Extension speed is a no-go as far as i can tell. It produces weird results.

Cadde wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 27, 2018 9:02 pm

Dammit, i should have tried that first... I am so stupid.
But... How? How do you determine that position? That's a lot of orientation stuff and whatnot. That's definitely in your hands because i don't know how that works in your code.

The rail loader has 4 chest connections. So figure out the positions for those. Then you need vertical and horizontal versions, which just flips the x/y coords around, since the loader only has 2 orientations.

mrvn wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 29, 2018 1:28 pm

The rail loader has 4 chest connections. So figure out the positions for those. Then you need vertical and horizontal versions, which just flips the x/y coords around, since the loader only has 2 orientations.

Yeah but i was knee deep in doing it the extension speed way. And then when i tested it the inserters put stuff at the old positions. Maybe i just did something wrong in code though, trying to take the easy way out.
It's no rush though, i've just load balanced my heavy on logistics robot base instead so there not so many different items being delivered to the same stop.

I think its save to assume that a back-port to 0.15 is high impossible?


also, claybricks aer not considered load-able, right?

Yijare wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 23, 2018 10:00 am

I think its save to assume that a back-port to 0.15 is high impossible?


also, claybricks aer not considered load-able, right?

Not if you set it to ores only. Realistically they would shatter when you drop them or at least get chipped.

yeah, and my english is broken, sorry bout that.

Is there a way to connect the miniloaders directly to these bulk loaders/unloaders without having to use inserters?

shda5582 wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:12 pm

Is there a way to connect the miniloaders directly to these bulk loaders/unloaders without having to use inserters?

Yes, I use them all the time that way.

Of course you can!




(Extends the available inputs/outputs to 6 rather than 4)

Except that doesn't happen for me. I throw the miniloader down, facing outwards to unload on a test section, and nothing comes out. Yes, there is stuff in the silo AND the train, so it should pull out yet it does not. Setup is similar to what you posted Cadde, but nothing works. Using latest version of the bulk loader and the miniloader mods.

Cadde wrote: ↑

Sun Dec 30, 2018 5:57 am

Where did you get those combined chest graphics?

shda5582 wrote: ↑

Sun Dec 30, 2018 7:27 pm

Except that doesn't happen for me. I throw the miniloader down, facing outwards to unload on a test section, and nothing comes out. Yes, there is stuff in the silo AND the train, so it should pull out yet it does not. Setup is similar to what you posted Cadde, but nothing works. Using latest version of the bulk loader and the miniloader mods.

You likely have the mini loader oriented backwards, with the belt portion facing the rail loader. There’s a current bug with automatic snapping that causes that to happen in some circumstances.