0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Power Plants, Energy Storage and Reliable Energy Supply. All about efficient energy production. Turning parts of your factory off. Reliable and self-repairing energy.
Post Reply
mmmPI
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mmmPI »

Hello !

First of all, i'm not saying this is perfect or even good as system for a challenging game. It is however beautiful in my eyes, the challenge was making it. i hope you like it too :)

mapview.png
mapview.png (85.66 KiB) Viewed 1959 times

This is a test map
because the nuclear plant is trying to decentralize the steam. The main area is where the reactor are, but the turbines are a bit everywhere on the map. Why? You may ask. Knowing that you can power your remote outpost with long power pole and hope the mean insects will not eat them, you can also deliver nuclear fuel to your outpost and have local little nuclear reactor, you can also build isolated grid with solar powered-outpost. But those are nothing compared to the smokiest way of doing it : delivering steam to outpost !

What ? moving steam to the outpost so they can power their own turbines and live off the main grid that's ridiculous !


Oh you think ? but wait there's more ! it's going to be done without using any storage tank !

Wait, but you need storage tank to measure the quantity of fluid ? or at least to store the steam ?

No, 0 storage tank required, not for reading value, not for buffering. They are like combinators, they make life easier, there is an example of outpost using tank and combinators, just to demonstrate how much easier when you use them, but i didn't used any apart for that example.

Wait, no need for any combinators ?

Correct, 0 combinator. 0 storage tank

Ok, and before we go further, it's also very precise, there is no waste, there is no brownout when it's properly used. Using it properly may require a bit more thought than with usual nuclear plant because the steam produced is then used in several different grids. This makes it difficult to acknowledge your current electrical consumption, the sum of all grid's consumptions. As long as you only have 1 nuclear plant, you can read your steam production because this is global.

island.png
island.png (853.1 KiB) Viewed 1959 times


This is the reactor area, I made it look warmer than the regular labtile map, but it was made in the /editor, using x64 speed or tick speed, and then i planted little bushes and trees, and placed some little fish too. But don't let the shiny distract you from the mechanism it was done to make you download the map haha. Here's a closer look at it :


rail plant.png
rail plant.png (520.76 KiB) Viewed 1959 times
The accumulators and solar pannel are there to power the pumps, and the inserters feeding the trains and those used for the reactor's refuel because there is 0 turbines in this area.

The reactor heat up the heatpipes, and the steam is produced directly to be put onto a train. I called the stations smoke machine ammunition loading bay, because that's what they do, they load some steam, for outpost to use, as you would do with ammunition.

The primary driver in the design was to be efficient, as in "not inserting fuel cell when the reactor is too hot", and "not having brownouts because you didn't insert fast enough".

The idea : when you insert fuel in nuclear reactor, you know the amount of energy you are adding in the thermal buffer created by the many heatpipes.


For a 2x2 plant, this represent 4 fuel cell at a time. Each fuel cell is worth 8 GJ. Then you need to add reactor's neighbour bonus.
For a 2X2 plant, each reactor has 2 neighbour, that means each reactor adds to the initial 8GJ 2x8GJ. 1 per neighbour. For a total of 24GJ per fuel cell, or 96 GJ if you count a "fuel cycle", 4 cells at 24GJ worth of energy.

This is how much energy you add the blackbox every refuel, quite easy to know.

Now the tricky part, you need to refuel when this quantity of energy was consumed. Not before, not after.


The energy is taken away from the blackbox/heatpipes under the form of steam.

Each train when taking steam away, is reducing the temperature of the whole system by a little bit. And that's where we need to be precise.

How much energy is a train taking away when he leaves the power plant full of steam ?


Ok let's pause a bit for some math, first we need to know how much represent 24GJ when it's transformed in steam.

A reactor produces 40MW of power, for this it burn a fuel cell of 8GJ, in 200 second.

A heat exchanger produce 103 steam/second, and is able to transform enough heat into steam at the rate of 10 000 000 Joules/sec. ( from the wiki and ingame info).

a 2X2 plant produce up to 480MW thanks to neighbour bonus, using up to 48 heat exchanger when running at 100%.

This means a 2X2 power plant produce 103x48x200 steam per fuel cycle because a fuel cycle will burn in 200 second, producing 103 steam per each of the 48 heat exhanger.
that means 988 800 steam is produced each time 4 fuel cell are added. this require that all the cell's heat is transformed into steam not a single % left away,

for this the power plant will need to be initialized by burning fuel to rise to high Β°. In theory >500Β°, in practice 980Β° for me for this plant.

Now the easy part, we just ask each train to take exactly 98 880 steam,this means every 10 trains, 1 fuel cycle worth of nuclear energy has been transformed into steam, meaning the average temperature is the same as it was before. every 10 train we launch the refuel ! or we could ask each train to take 82400 steam, and count every 12 train, 82400x12=988 800 Here's the logic :

zoomlogic.png
zoomlogic.png (323.44 KiB) Viewed 1959 times
The 3 signal on the left are a train counter, when they are all red at the same time, the item [train signal] on the exterior of the firt loop named (a) goes 1 round.
Given the fuel used and the train composition there is only always 1 train passing when the 3 signals are red.

This trigger a pulse for the second loop (b). This second loop has 2 belts wired that move item tick by tick each pulse they receive. And 1 belt reading when the item has gone a full lap. It required 12 lap of the first loop to make 1 lap of the 2nd loop, that realease an item that is then read to trigger the refuel.

So what's the red box called not necessary ?

Well, to be honnest i omited some detail earlier. You know when i said ask each train to take 98 880 steam ?. and then 10 trains is a perfect count ?. Well that's not exactly how it works. You see the pumps and the heat exchanger have a buffer. When a train leaves and another takes its place, their internal buffer of 400 for the pump and 200 for the heat exchanger build up to max limit. They always consistently do.

This means the first tick of the train getting filled, there is exactly, always 4800 steam injected. Then the tick after that 2400. the buffer from 12 pumps and 12 heat exchanged split onto 3 wagons. And after than, each tick, there is a grand total of 20.6 steam produced and injected into the train. (103/60)*12. Since a heat exchanger produce 103 per 60 ticks and there's 12 of them.

How exactly can you get a perfect count of 988 800 steam if you start with 7200 and go with increment of 20.6 ?

I have no idea ! also i must be forgotting something because my theoric math are over-evaluating the throughput. What i've done instead is measure the different quantity that the train holds. 4800, 7200, 7220, 7241, 7261, 7282, 7303 it goes +20 +21 +20 +21 +21 and repeat... (+20.6) Or so i though, my measurement are the same as in game only at first, then it start differing even for value as low as 20K or so.

But that's not a problem pal, how much does it differs ? i don't know, what i know thought, is that when we ask a train to leave when he has 82400 steam or more, he always consistently leaves with precisely 82404 or 82416 depeding on how many heat exhanger are connected due to testing on different setup.

The problem is that if we remove a tad too much heat, the reactor will dirft toward cold temperature, and some people think it's bad. ( you could always just have an emergy refuel automated when it's critical).

The other solution is removing just a little less energy than what's added. That's the one i went for, each train on the map receive exactly 82 395 steam. ( not superior or equal, exactly 82 395) I didn't choose that number it was the closest under 82400 i could reliably get. That means every 12 train there is a grand total of 988 740 steam carried away out of the 988 800 total. This means every 12 trains we outproduce 60 steam.

But that's wasteful ehhh !

Yes you are right, it's wasteful ( around 0.006067961165049% is lost ) but it makes sure the reactor never gets too cold.

Remember I told you it was very precise? , that's why i added some unecessary mechanism on the side, to make sure in case someone is very very annoying with details and want to point out that it's theorically very important to make sure the reactor can last 1000 hours or so and correct that 0.006% inaccuracy.

We can say that every fuel cycle, there is 60 steam too many that is being produced. This means every twelve trains, there is 5 steam too many that stays in the reactor.
Or that every 988 800/5= 197 760 trains, we need to skip a refuel. Or again that every 16 480 fuel cycle, 1 shoud be skipped.

That's the use of the other loops. y count 515, z count 32, and x is 12. every 32 trains the small loop z goes by 1 tick. and every lap from the loop z couting 32 the longer of 515 goes by 1 tick, and every lap of this loop, increment the loop x counting 12, for a total of 197 760 trains. ( 915 hours at full consumption ).

The loop x is the anti-feeding. It's made to trigger exactly like the loop b, ( every 16480 time) and holds the same signals and send on the same network.
This means every 915 hours, the inserters will receive 2[chain signal], and not just 1[chain signal] on the green wire. They will not understand, they are set up to trigger when [chain signal] is exactly 1, not 2.

But there are some delay on the logic, it will fire few ticks later !

no not few ticks only 2, the item is stuck 1 tick before the read position on each loops that trigger the anti-feeding. The anti-feeding loop will let its counter-signal 2 ticks too late. Which doesn't matter look at this :

zoomfueling.png
zoomfueling.png (771.45 KiB) Viewed 1959 times
The fuel is picked up from static belts not from chests ! This means instead of just 1 pulse triggering the refuel you need 6 ! because picking up from belt is slower than picking up from chest. The signal triggering the insertion is the [read-hold], not [read-pulse]. This means everytime the previous loop b, goes one lap the item [chain-signal] is scanned during the entire duration of the time it is present on the inner side of a red corner belt. This last 6.625 ticks. or 7, enough to trigger 1 refuel, but not more.

The fuel ejection is not controlled it just happens when it's due.

The other wiring allows to stuck 1 fuel in front of each belt, at the exact same position on the belt relative to the inserter, to make sure the insertion is tick-perfect, and that the inserter are not chasing on the belt for a fuel cell.

And also fueling the trains with nuclear fuel without requiring too much buffer :) fuel come from infinity chest. The used fuel are left in infinite chest to help me estimate how much time pass in game due to shifting often between tick speed and x64.



Well that's a lot of math and things to diggest...

Hey it's not finished ! This is only the reactor part. Look at the turbines's logic :

zoomclassicoutpost.png
zoomclassicoutpost.png (424.56 KiB) Viewed 1959 times

This is a "fight for the fish". You place a fish in the middle of the 2 station and 1 of them will grab it and keep it until its train is empty. The the fish is placed in the middle again.
This make sure there is always 1 train full and 1 train being emptied in the station.

but why ?

because no storage tank and no combinator :).

There's other way !


Oh i know, i had fun with those and they are all to visit on the map if you download it you'd see for yourself like this one :

lowconsumption outpost.png
lowconsumption outpost.png (551 KiB) Viewed 1959 times
When the train goes to refill the steam it runs on accumulators. Why not ? that's not storage tank, that's not combinator. The train limit is set to 1 on this one.
outpost2.png
outpost2.png (511.95 KiB) Viewed 1959 times
On this one the train limit for steam train is 2, because there is a waiting bay, this mean you can cover the time between 2 trains with the internal buffer of turbines and pumps (the pipes are not necessary but they tell the idea and are not storage tanks ).

outpost3.png
outpost3.png (420.58 KiB) Viewed 1959 times

This one is all weird. Nothing regular here, turbines are connected via pipes, the draw on every wagon is uneven and could be on each turbine, that's pretty bad usually for multi-wagon trains because you rely on a partial throughput for a moment but here it just means the last wagon is emptied faster due to the vastly superior throughput of the pump compared to what's being consumed by turbines it doesn't cause issue. And when the train leaves to refill steam it relies on internal buffer.

Then there's this horizontal train, that act as an immediate reserve if the accu drops under 99% if the internal buffer runs dry because the steam train is too long. It need 2 position for fill and empty because the pumps are directionnal contrary to storage tanks connected with pipes.


The layout of the rest of the map are bad, and unbalanced, plus you're just feeding beacons and deleting the red science.

I know that's a test map I didn't thought much about what is being produced at outpost and how, just the part that is in relation with the nuclear plant.

There are storage tanks and combinators, and also infinity chests

The storage tanks and the 1 combinator is used in a special outpost to demonstrate how to do things could be done with them.

this is very fragile it breaks if the reactor is too cold and heat exchanger don't output full steam, then the trains don't have 82395, they fill in full and deadlock


Yes you need to have the reactor and heat system at 980Β° to begin sending trains in. From my testing the cold point can reach as low as 650Β° while the hottest 980Β°, this is because if one bay is more utilized than another , the heat dissipate only from on side it creates some interesting dynamics where the reactor is not always the hottest point of the system :) the conducvity didn't caused me any problems and i tested it at full train capacity.

As long as the use of the 4 station is pseudo random it's very good. if only the 2 interior it's very good too, if only the 2 exterior no problem. You may have problems if you saturate only the 2 top and voluntarily block the 2 bottom for more than 5 hours, i haven't tested up that far all possibiliies.

For more safety you can change the train schedule to 82 350 steam or more. It will be imprecise, but you will not have as much as 82 395 steam, so the only consequence will be a little overheating of the reactor over time. ( may as well get rid of the clock counting 197 K trains to skip one refuel).

because of the train-downtime, you can't produce 480 MW

that's right, I think you can only get around 950K steam instead of 988 800. The train down-time need to be larger than the time it takes for the internal buffer of the pump and heat exchanger to fill up to the maximum for math to be consistent. You can't power 1000 beacon continuously.

That's not precise !

nope you can't really tell how much you are producing unless you look at the fluid production tab and "steam". which doesn't work anymore if you build several of those.soyou'd have to look at all the different grids.

It makes it hard to know if you can add more miners or if the power plant would be overloaded with steam request for example.

the good thing though is that you don't have a general brownout, it makes it easy to prioritize what part of the factory receive power and analyze and measure one unit.

You can also buffer energy, steam tanks if you use them are very cheap, once you can transport steam to many places it's that much easier to make emergency power supply.

Even if you have a main grid, you can have some parts like the defense perimeter that isolate themselves from the rest of the factory and rely on they own steam buffer supply.

There is a mockup of this in one outpost whose laser turrets, beacons, and turbines are on 3 separate grid , it has no logic it's just to help manually testing situations. The outer grid is densily covered with power pole in an attempt to intercept ignorant player running with power pole to connect the world and make it a better place. The idea would be the connection is only seemingly happening but it just connect to the outside grid which could spare the inner grid if power was to fail on the outer grid. But i need more testing on this.

don't you also have a version without the clutter ? and no mods

I couldn't upload it as i reached the limit of attachments for 1 post it seems, i can upload the version before i made the island if needed but that one also has mods, you don't have to use them it's all vanilla.

It would be nice if the whole map was decorated like the nuclear plant, also the pictures are not HD

Yes, but plants takes time to grows. And my computer's a potato.



EDIT : This power plant was considered the winner in the contest of the longest-train-based reactor, the evaluating method is secret, but still that means you can use a similar design without problems, it's validated by :
mrvn wrote: ↑
Sat Oct 30, 2021 11:09 pm
Congratulation, you are the winner with a 4x 4 fluid wagon train design.
Attachments
NucularIsland.zip
(3.71 MiB) Downloaded 71 times
Last edited by mmmPI on Mon Nov 01, 2021 2:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

gGeorg
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by gGeorg »

That looks fun. Here is my review:
I like several ideas used there.
You made yourself an insane rule (no tank, no combinator) and made it. +1
The cores are conected only 2, usualy people connect all, its not needed.+1
Core's loading logic made of wires. +1
The fish based switch is hilarious, :lol: I made same logic for my "continuously loading station" with combinators. But yours is more fun to watch. +1
Transport steam and distributed power plants are nice. +1
Double head reversible train +1
Lots of trains +1
All the math and docs +1

Here is mine outpost with a distributed steam and continuously loading pair of stations for ore:
Image
Solars can handle most of mining operations. Steam is for laser fence mostly. Train is double headed because he must plough through unfriendly territory.


BTW : Why you used double row of heatpipes in your power plant?
Last edited by gGeorg on Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:39 am, edited 2 times in total.

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mrvn »

You can pump into and out of a fluid wagon at the same time:
in-out-pumps.png
in-out-pumps.png (365.44 KiB) Viewed 1915 times
Each fluid wagon has 3 spots where pumps connect allowing for 3 pumps. Each one can be filling or emptying.

You can even use 2 pumps on opposite sides of the train and control them with circuits to make one or the other attach to the fluid wagon:
same-pump.png
same-pump.png (2.05 MiB) Viewed 1915 times
The little buffer train going back and forth is fun to watch but a waste of fuel in the end. And oh so much fun with this reactor for all train lovers.

No need to move the buffer train at all. But harder to claim "no tanks" with that. A stationary fluid wagon really is just a tank just like a stationary cargo wagon is vanillas version of a large 2x6 chest.


This reminds me that I should finish my train calculator. That is a calculator doing calculations with trains. Not something to calculate train usage. :)

mmmPI
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mmmPI »

mrvn wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:02 am
You can pump into and out of a fluid wagon at the same time:
No need to move the buffer train at all. But harder to claim "no tanks" with that. A stationary fluid wagon really is just a tank just like a stationary cargo wagon is vanillas version of a large 2x6 chest.
wagonbuffer.png
wagonbuffer.png (215.31 KiB) Viewed 1881 times
There this one on the map, which you could claim is acting like a tank because 1 of the 2 trains is never moving, as you can see it uses 3 pump per wagon, 2 for loading the static train, 1 for unloading.

That still is a different thing than a tank. In a tank the fluid flow in and out, in a wagon you have to pump it, it doesnt flow in and out alone that's very important.

On the pictures you show you need to utilize additional logic to trigger the pump at different time otherwise you could create a circle if both input AND output goes into the same fluidbox

By having the wagon move i make sure the liquid flowing out doesn't come back in at the same time and vice versa because if one pump is connected, the other can't reach the wagon no need for combinator the logic is in the train schedule and accu signal. ( maybe i can do one with the logic in the train station reading a train ID or not reading a train ID).

See how it's different from a tank ? You can only know a quantity through a train station, or indirect guess due to predictible system state to trigger pump in or out. While with a tank you can just read the quantity in the tank and use it to trigger other mechanism because it would go up and down and you could monitor.

With a fluid wagon, quantities go up and down only if you let the pump un-monitored, but then it creates a circle. Or 2 fluidboxes, which is different again than a storage tank especially when not using combinators :) !


gGeorg wrote: ↑
Sun Oct 24, 2021 11:27 pm
That looks fun.
Core's loading logic made of wires. +1
The cores are conected only 2, usualy people connect all, its not needed.+1
Double head reversible train +1
BTW : Why you used double row of heatpipes in your power plant?
Thank you !

You mean everything is on 1 side of the reactor core ? or the reactor core only have 2 heatpipes connected to them ?

everything is on the same side because it makes it easier to make a compact train station in my eyes.

This particular design require reversible train i think, otherwise each locomotive increase the distance between core and wagons.

The reactor have 4 heat pipes connection , but only 2 of them, the other 2 reactor are not connected to heatpipes, it allows for mirroring the powerplant in case :D, or have a more classic local one on the other side, it is a consequence of previous point.

Maybe adding 2 reactor in the middle, and then have 3 modules of 4 loading area for a 2x5 power plant with bays left, right , and top. but then the heat dynamic will be even more difficult to understand x)

The main reason i used so many heatpipes is to increase the size of the thermal buffer there's 364 of them ! It can still be increased if you modify a bit to use reactors instead of heatpipes to move heat on the vertical sections. It would make it easier for the heat to spread to the outside horizontal branch. Using reactor is less efficient spacewise though, so i would also add even more heatpipes around the vertical array of unfed cores.

Here's a schematic description of what the heat flows look like when you don't use all 4 bay of the station at the same time where you can see the vertical area of heatpipes being very often used to move heat.
heatflows.png
heatflows.png (605.74 KiB) Viewed 1881 times
When only the bay with green rectangle are open because a train is stuck on the others for example and the system was stable, then the blue circle are the coldest point. The red circle the hottest point, the heat move along the arrows. And C is the highest differential between cold and hot i measured.


oh also : train grid is 2X2 not 1X1, this forces a pair number of tile between rails, so 2x row of pipe for horizontal was just adapting, and vertical i made to look the same :)

i wanted to re-use the belt clock design i worked on for the previous power plant i made and made a better "feeding from static belt" without combinators.
I avoided using storage tanks, and when the core area was done i realised it was done without any combinators so i forced myself to continue for the outpost and try different methods.

Amarula
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 425
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2018 1:29 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by Amarula »

mmmPI wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 12:08 pm
Thank you for a very entertaining morning read +1
Also thank you gGeorg for an entertaining review, I agree with your points +1
My own personal Factorio super-power - running out of power.

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mrvn »

mmmPI wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 12:08 pm
mrvn wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:02 am
You can pump into and out of a fluid wagon at the same time:
No need to move the buffer train at all. But harder to claim "no tanks" with that. A stationary fluid wagon really is just a tank just like a stationary cargo wagon is vanillas version of a large 2x6 chest.
wagonbuffer.png
There this one on the map, which you could claim is acting like a tank because 1 of the 2 trains is never moving, as you can see it uses 3 pump per wagon, 2 for loading the static train, 1 for unloading.

That still is a different thing than a tank. In a tank the fluid flow in and out, in a wagon you have to pump it, it doesnt flow in and out alone that's very important.

On the pictures you show you need to utilize additional logic to trigger the pump at different time otherwise you could create a circle if both input AND output goes into the same fluidbox
It's a tank in the sense that it's a buffer for steam to bridge the time steam isn't flowing in. So it's not a steam buffer free setup, as much as one can even do that. Every fluid entity buffers to some extend. For others the quantity is just so small. 200 for heat exchangers, 400 for pumps, 200 for steam turbines, 100 for pipes.

In your setup where you move the train you can set the main train station to read trains and set the pumps to T == 0 and T != 0. That makes the mutually exclusive. But sure, it's more fun to watch the train go back and forth.


I made a little test setup to monitor the pumps filling wagons:
steam-pump-test.png
steam-pump-test.png (1.35 MiB) Viewed 1826 times
steam-pump-test-graph.png
steam-pump-test-graph.png (30.52 KiB) Viewed 1826 times


When I let it run look at the graph. But I have no idea what the hell it is graphing there. When I step through it tick by tick the train gets filled up to 25k and leaves and the pumps retract. At that time they have 0 of 400 steam and that slowly fills till it reaches 400. Then the heat exchanger fills up it's 200 steam buffer at 103 steam/s right until the last tick where it does only 20.6 steam/s for one tick and then it is 0. So why does the graph have those sloping rises and falls? The tooltip shows the heat exchangers cut of instantly (or with that one 20.6 fluid/s tick).

And when the train comes back for refill the graph is just as off. The train stops, the pumps extend. When they connect the pumps work at 11600 fluid/s for the first tick going down to 193/400 steam. The heat exchanger goes down to 6.7/200 steam producing nothing yet. Tick 2 the pump does 503 steam/s at 8.4/400 and the heat exchangers 103 steam/s at 0 steam. Tick 3 everything settles to 103 steam/s. Yet the production graph shows a ramp up for ~20 ticks.

So there doesn't seem to be any effect from back pressure like I thought when filling fluid tanks from the heat exchangers. Just a 2 tick spike on the pump from transferring the buffered content. Looks like you can't trust the production graph.

PS: A pump speed of 11600 steam/s is 193.3333 steam/tick. That is the amount flowing into the pump from the heat exchanger and not the 400 steam flowing out of the pump in that tick. And 503 steam/s is 8.383 steam/tick, the remains of the heat exchangers 200 steam + 1.71666 produced that tick.

mmmPI
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mmmPI »

mrvn wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 4:56 pm
It's a tank in the sense that it's a buffer for steam to bridge the time steam isn't flowing in. So it's not a steam buffer free setup, as much as one can even do that. Every fluid entity buffers to some extend. For others the quantity is just so small. 200 for heat exchangers, 400 for pumps, 200 for steam turbines, 100 for pipes.

In your setup where you move the train you can set the main train station to read trains and set the pumps to T == 0 and T != 0. That makes the mutually exclusive. But sure, it's more fun to watch the train go back and forth.
It's like a tank but different because it requires logic to act like a tank contrary to the pipe which is also a tank,that act like a tank naturally but smaller and only 2 connections, or the heat exchanger which is a tank but not very tank-like as it can produce things and only ever store what it has produced. A bit like an assembly, or a chemical plant, those are tanks too, but at this point it's the category of tank that is not very tankly contrary to the pump which is a tank that can isolate fluid boxes on demand. But that's the whole big family of tanks right ? all of them are tank, except the tank, the one that moves, who is a tank that doesn't count as tank not because it moves, otherwise the tank-fluid-wagon wouldn't be a tank, the tank is not a tank because it cannot have liquid flowing in and out. so apart from the tank, all the others are tanks even the turbine, on which you can't read anything and that remove fluid, is a tank, but not the heatpipe because heat is not a fluid.... wait the heatpipes is a tank for heat ! and the accumulator is a tank for electricity ! and the chests are tanks for items ! and you can put fluid in barrel, so chests are tanks ! but then even the tank is actually a tank like the storage tank if you put barrel on it ! Hey you can put barrels on belts so belts are tanks ! oh and robots can carry barrel so robots are tanks ! oh and when you grab a robot-tank it goes in your inventory together with the barrels, so you're the tank !


mrvn wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 4:56 pm
When I let it run look at the graph. But I have no idea what the hell it is graphing there.
me neither !

but i got an idea writing the previous thing. You should test with only 1 heat exchanger and put directly in the flush infinity pipe. see if it's constant 103/s over 20 minutes x64speed or so or if it has spikes that could be roundings accumulating and showing on the graph. then add 1 pump in between. see if graph is spiky or not to know if pump introduce cycle/rounding, then i think it exist infinity fluid wagon, or skip the step and have the steam flow through a wagon before getting destroyed. ( you will need 2 pump to make the fluid wagon act like a pipe !!! )

on your setup you have many things working at once and there will be several things inducing cycle like the train, backpressure on internal buffer, the actions of the pump, it's better to test the simple case first, even as simple as offshore pump=> infinity pipe versus offshore pump=> tank, maybe just that introduce cycle due to how infinity pipe functions.

Also i note here that the trains uses 4 wagons to carry 82 395 steam precisely. This means each wagon should hold 82 395/4= 20 598.75 steam ! This could mean several thing from a coding perspective. but from a gameplay perspective, i think this already implies the math are precise to at least 0.125 steam because if the sum of each wagon was 0.126 steam off it would read 82 396 or 82394 sometimes which doesn't happen on the map, all train leaves with what the game tells me is 82395 steam !

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mrvn »

The error for fluid is 0-1 exclusive since the circuit network just shows the integer part. So each fluid wagon can have an error or 0-0.25 exclusive.

Concerning your trains driving backwards I tested turning them around a bit. I also considered what to do if you can't find a suitable lake. So water comes via train too:
train-turning.png
train-turning.png (507.74 KiB) Viewed 1795 times
There is quite a bit of circuit logic involved but still 0 combinators.
  1. I've made a belt loop with fish to make steam trains leave round-robin.
  2. The turning stops at the reactor have a train limit set by the signals. They only allow 0, 1 or 2 trains depending on how many are in that lane. So each lane gets no more trains than can fit. This prevents trains stopping at the chain signal entering the reactor until they pick a different station.
  3. Trains are configured to leave on a green signal before crossing on the horizontal track. Otherwise they would show with "No Path" which eats up UPS.
  4. Water loading and steam unloading stops also have a train limits set by the signals to allow 0, 1 or 2 trains. Same setup as the reactor. This might be more important in practice than at the reactor because the steam consumers and water fillers could by spread all across the map and you want trains to directly go to a station they can use and no turn around half way.
There is too much congestion with the short trains. I've thought about a better train buffer and added the idea as those disconnected rails. It adds another waiting station and some space for a leaving train between the vertical tracks and the reactor. So train swapping should be real quick and then trains can manage the vertical traffic in leisure. No circuit programming for that though.

I wonder how long you can make the trains before you run into heat exchangers cooling too much or reactors overheating. Maybe 8 fluid wagons? There is still lots of empty space for more heat pipes so the thermal buffer can be increased quite a bit.

Note: Don't comment on the reactor temp or fuel wastage. It's just to play with the train layout.
Attachments
nuclear-reactor-desert-trains.zip
(3.62 MiB) Downloaded 107 times

mmmPI
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mmmPI »

That's a lot of non-sense mrvn, the time loss with fluid-wagon in front of a train or a loco in front of a train is very small compared to time you lose making them switch side.

Its makes every single one of your outpost/subfactory bigger because each of them will need a loop at least, or worse, the thing you did :adding another switch side station at each outpost.

Also not good to turn around all train near the power plant, it waste space and time, the powerplant is already itself a turn around mechanism.

Concerning the round robin you emited the idea and told you i didn't want to add unecessary mechanism, the vertical conductivity of the heatpipes is already enough, and in worse case adding reactors on the vertical sections to increase it instead of round robin is better if someone else wanted to do a similar thing.

Round-robin is counterproductive in case where all your steam train don't have the same schedule because the mechanism is blind to this.

in case of different name for your steam-loading-station , to prioritize correctly your different subfactory, that would be a better way to control steam distribution, only changing names and adding station on existing tracks.

If you consider the conductivity good enough, because it is, that's tested for it, if it wasn't during my test i would have added reactor same as what everyone can do to build his own :) then you don't 1) need round robin 2) want round robin because it prevent you from adding other logic in the train station name and train schedule.

I'm insisting because i know sometimes you miss some point in your haste to answer, it's most often appreciable ( your dedication ) but sometimes you impersonate a bit too well the person who speak like this in the OP , you ask yourself to not comment on the reactor temp and fuel usage, while this is "energy creation" so please refrain from posting your mediocre ( given your own word " there is too much congestion")train layout more, because if that's the only thing i'm allowed to comment i think it's done but it was not really the place for that, gameplay-help is more suited, maybe train creation ?
mrvn wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 9:16 pm
The error for fluid is 0-1 exclusive since the circuit network just shows the integer part. So each fluid wagon can have an error or 0-0.25 exclusive.
ok

gGeorg
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:06 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by gGeorg »

mmmPI wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 12:08 pm
You mean everything is on 1 side of the reactor core ? or the reactor core only have 2 heatpipes connected to them ?
4 cores but only 2 output heatpipes. e.g. 2 cores has no pipe. it works but very few design use it as advantage
mmmPI wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 12:08 pm
The main reason i used so many heatpipes is to increase the size of the thermal buffer there's 364 of them ! It would make it easier for the heat to spread to the outside horizontal branch.
I can understand thermal buffer reason. Althou, speed of spreading heat is slower with more pipes. It works opposite. Fluide logic says more tubes faster fluids. Thermal pipes logic says more pipes slower heat spread.

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mrvn »

mmmPI wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 26, 2021 10:18 am
That's a lot of non-sense mrvn, the time loss with fluid-wagon in front of a train or a loco in front of a train is very small compared to time you lose making them switch side.
Maybe, maybe not. The switch around also makes sure a train comes ready to replace the current train and no train comes that doesn't have somewhere to park and wait. You might note there are 3 times as many trains than reactor stops.

Also don't under estimate the cost of having a fluid train at the front to the train. It cuts down the maximum speed of the train and the acceleration of the train. So it costs you for every meter the train has to travel to your outpost and maybe more importantly at every red signal. Every time the train has to break along the way you loose time and also block the intersection longer slowing down other trains. If your reactor is for a centralized steam production then outpost could be many kilometers away.
mmmPI wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 26, 2021 10:18 am
Its makes every single one of your outpost/subfactory bigger because each of them will need a loop at least, or worse, the thing you did :adding another switch side station at each outpost.

Also not good to turn around all train near the power plant, it waste space and time, the powerplant is already itself a turn around mechanism.

Concerning the round robin you emited the idea and told you i didn't want to add unecessary mechanism, the vertical conductivity of the heatpipes is already enough, and in worse case adding reactors on the vertical sections to increase it instead of round robin is better if someone else wanted to do a similar thing.

Round-robin is counterproductive in case where all your steam train don't have the same schedule because the mechanism is blind to this.

in case of different name for your steam-loading-station , to prioritize correctly your different subfactory, that would be a better way to control steam distribution, only changing names and adding station on existing tracks.

If you consider the conductivity good enough, because it is, that's tested for it, if it wasn't during my test i would have added reactor same as what everyone can do to build his own :) then you don't 1) need round robin 2) want round robin because it prevent you from adding other logic in the train station name and train schedule.

I'm insisting because i know sometimes you miss some point in your haste to answer, it's most often appreciable ( your dedication ) but sometimes you impersonate a bit too well the person who speak like this in the OP , you ask yourself to not comment on the reactor temp and fuel usage, while this is "energy creation" so please refrain from posting your mediocre ( given your own word " there is too much congestion")train layout more, because if that's the only thing i'm allowed to comment i think it's done but it was not really the place for that, gameplay-help is more suited, maybe train creation ?
mrvn wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 25, 2021 9:16 pm
The error for fluid is 0-1 exclusive since the circuit network just shows the integer part. So each fluid wagon can have an error or 0-0.25 exclusive.
ok
It's mend to showcase the train traffic and what I mend with turning the trains around so they always drive forward for long distances. If you had liked it you could have used it for your reactor. Don't like it then don't use it. There simply was no point in replicating your train counting belt loops to test the trains turning around and making sure the right number of trains go to every bay.

As for the round-robin: Don't like it? Don't use it. Easier to ignore it than to have to figure it out yourself if you do want/need it. I totally see your point about having stations with different names, that certainly doesn't work. Not sure why you would need that though. Are you not producing enough steams so every outpost has a steam train unloading and one waiting to take over? That's kind of what I wanted to test in my design too: Having the right number of trains go to each unloading station with more trains than there are loading and unloading stations. No trains stopping mid track with nowhere to go.

Note: The trains do work. There is no grid lock or anything and you get trains through fast enough. But barely at this size. Making a bigger reactor needs better routing. With the water trains added in to the steam trains the traffic is near the limit.

mmmPI
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mmmPI »

mrvn wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:29 pm
If your reactor is for a centralized steam production then outpost could be many kilometers away.
no the reactor is on an island on the side of a ribbon test lab with several outpost poducing red science and beacons. that's ok.
mrvn wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:29 pm
Not sure why you would need that though. Are you not producing enough steams so every outpost has a steam train unloading and one waiting to take over? That's kind of what I wanted to test in my design too: Having the right number of trains go to each unloading station with more trains than there are loading and unloading stations. No trains stopping mid track with nowhere to go.
You can see each bay as a little less than 120MW power plant if fully utilized but never more. If you want to make sure 120MW are reserved for defense you name 1 bay "steam defense". This means the train loading in this bay will always be ready to go to a defense outpost and the one behind it too and that no train will drain energy out of it for another pupose.

You can also implement a logic where you only use 1 bay for mining outpost. This way, you can add a new miner patch, or 2 or 3 it doesn't mean your consumption will go out of control and create a brown out or black out in your defense since it uses another bay it will not be impacted by the bottleneck of train trying to get more steam than their 2 allocated bay allowed.

It's easy to prevent trains from stopping mid track, you just set the train limit to the amount of space you can park train. Some station have a waiting bay, so i put the limit at 2, like the station that receive iron plate to make iron gear. The same for steam train on the iron miner, the limit is set to 2 . This way as soon as one train has finished unloading, the second takes over and simultanesouly a train from the power plant will replace the one that is now unloading.

There is one station where the limit goes from 0 to 1 when the steam buffer is low, when a train arrive it has 82K steam, it start unloading and the limit goes to 0 while the train is still there, but it doesn't matter it finish its unload and goes back to the power plant. The unload stays empty until the limit increases again. That's one way to do when you have low consumption and don't want to park a train full time.

An easiest method would be to have a stacker at the exit of the power plant where you park trains full of steam, so you make sure you utilize the higher % possible of the train down-time allowance but it's not as fun as looking at the train deliver steam around directly from the heat exchanger :)

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mrvn »

mmmPI wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:19 am
mrvn wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:29 pm
If your reactor is for a centralized steam production then outpost could be many kilometers away.
no the reactor is on an island on the side of a ribbon test lab with several outpost poducing red science and beacons. that's ok.
mrvn wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:29 pm
Not sure why you would need that though. Are you not producing enough steams so every outpost has a steam train unloading and one waiting to take over? That's kind of what I wanted to test in my design too: Having the right number of trains go to each unloading station with more trains than there are loading and unloading stations. No trains stopping mid track with nowhere to go.
You can see each bay as a little less than 120MW power plant if fully utilized but never more. If you want to make sure 120MW are reserved for defense you name 1 bay "steam defense". This means the train loading in this bay will always be ready to go to a defense outpost and the one behind it too and that no train will drain energy out of it for another pupose.

You can also implement a logic where you only use 1 bay for mining outpost. This way, you can add a new miner patch, or 2 or 3 it doesn't mean your consumption will go out of control and create a brown out or black out in your defense since it uses another bay it will not be impacted by the bottleneck of train trying to get more steam than their 2 allocated bay allowed.

It's easy to prevent trains from stopping mid track, you just set the train limit to the amount of space you can park train. Some station have a waiting bay, so i put the limit at 2, like the station that receive iron plate to make iron gear. The same for steam train on the iron miner, the limit is set to 2 . This way as soon as one train has finished unloading, the second takes over and simultanesouly a train from the power plant will replace the one that is now unloading.
I've been playing too much with LTN. There I just set priorities and trains go to the highest priority first.

That said with the limit at 2 or higher you do run into the danger of running out of trains or trains stacking up on the wrong side. So you need enough stacker bays to buffer all the trains on either side of the reactor. That's actually one of the things I experimented with in the train design I send you. By having train limits on all the stations the trains can't bunch up anywhere. They will always remain distributed. So there is no need for a large stacker before the reactor in case more steam is used than produced for example. If a station uses more steam than is produced then the empty train won't be able to leave until another is filled.
mmmPI wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:19 am
There is one station where the limit goes from 0 to 1 when the steam buffer is low, when a train arrive it has 82K steam, it start unloading and the limit goes to 0 while the train is still there, but it doesn't matter it finish its unload and goes back to the power plant. The unload stays empty until the limit increases again. That's one way to do when you have low consumption and don't want to park a train full time.
I use that a lot. And I mean a lot. I have this in my standard train station blueprints now. The train limit is set by the amount missing / train carrying capacity.
mmmPI wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:19 am
An easiest method would be to have a stacker at the exit of the power plant where you park trains full of steam, so you make sure you utilize the higher % possible of the train down-time allowance but it's not as fun as looking at the train deliver steam around directly from the heat exchanger :)
But then you burn fuel ahead of time that might be desperately needed to make uranium bullets. You complained about having to much fuel cells buffered on the feeding belt after all. :)

Just in time production is certainly more fun. Greater risk of screwing up and having something go dark. Exciting. :)

mmmPI
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mmmPI »

mrvn wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:38 am

That said with the limit at 2 or higher you do run into the danger of running out of trains or trains stacking up on the wrong side. So you need enough stacker bays to buffer all the trains on either side of the reactor. That's actually one of the things I experimented with in the train design I send you. By having train limits on all the stations the trains can't bunch up anywhere. They will always remain distributed. So there is no need for a large stacker before the reactor in case more steam is used than produced for example. If a station uses more steam than is produced then the empty train won't be able to leave until another is filled.
You read me wrong, the limit of 2 is used for the oupost to make sure the correct number of train is going to them and that those trains won't end up blocking anything because each outpost is in a different environment potentially, the loading bays don't have trains limits, they are in a controlled environnment, easy to make room that will have multiple train using it versus infrastrure far away.

The big stacker before the reactor is mostly to catch train that are coming in with a bit of steam which happened during testing, there was the same at the exit.

In case of a fuel shortage/broken plant, that's where all trains will wait , to me it feel needed, i don't want my trains to wait empty in far away outpost to move to the place they need to go. If it's 15 20 30 40 trains that end up stuck like that, they could have use the time to move which they will have to do at some point anyway, i don't want to delay the traffic i can get done now, that kind of thing especially when it's not me personnaly doing the thing it need be done yesterday !

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mrvn »

No, I read you right.

The limit of 2 means no more than 2 trains go here. That is one side. The other side is the reactor. No train limit there so trains can stack there, hence the need for the stacker for returning trains. If you have 10 outpost with a limit of 2 but only 18 trains then worst case each outpost gets 2 trains except the last gets none. You need at least 19 trains for that. So the train limit of all the train stops gives you a minimum and maximum of trains you can have, 19 to 20 + bays in the reactor. More than that and you need a stacker at the output too.

And sure, building the stacker at the start is no problem. But every time you expand, add an outpost, add a train or two, you need to expand the stacker too. As long as the outpost has small consumption the reactor isn't running out of steam but you get more and more trains.

As for trains waiting empty somewhere.. As long as enough trains are at the reactor waiting to be filled so no bay ever sits empty all is good.
easy to make room that will have multiple train using it versus infrastrure far away
It really comes down to how you play there. If you are at an outpost building it is it "far away"? You are right there building it so it's near. On the other hand he reactors stacker is far away and you have to expand that too. If you have construction bot coverage "far away" takes a different meaning. Suddenly the reactors stacker is near where the construction bots start from. The outpost is far away for the bots to travel or doesn't have coverage at all and you build it out of a train. In the end where you make empty trains wait is a matter of taste.

mmmPI
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mmmPI »

there's so much wrong i really don't know where to start.

mainly it's completly off topic since it's you proposing mediocre train idea on a power plant that can be used with any train idea. discussing train design here is not really the place.

Also you are saying like empty trains need waiting spot, and when you expand you need more trains ,and things like that which is completly ridiculous because this has nothing to do with the power plant itself.

It's good you understand the use of the stacker, and that you are explaining it, but if you look on the picture you would see it is not part of the power plant when i say "look closer at it", that's because as i said in introduction this is a test map, because it is needed to show where the steam goes, otherwise it would just be a power plant that doesn't produce electricity, the stacker is just a generic method that need scaling and adapting if you want to use it yourself that seem obvious and a bit ridiculous to keep coming on, like the red science is not really good , the miners are terrible and so on.
mrvn wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 27, 2021 10:37 am
No, I read you right.
As for trains waiting empty somewhere.. As long as enough trains are at the reactor waiting to be filled so no bay ever sits empty all is good.
mmmPI wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:00 am
The big stacker before the reactor is mostly to catch train that are coming in with a bit of steam which happened during testing, there was the same at the exit.

In case of a fuel shortage/broken plant, that's where all trains will wait , to me it feel needed, i don't want my trains to wait empty in far away outpost to move to the place they need to go. If it's 15 20 30 40 trains that end up stuck like that, they could have use the time to move which they will have to do at some point anyway, i don't want to delay the traffic i can get done now, that kind of thing especially when it's not me personnaly doing the thing it need be done yesterday !
so what's wrong you read and you forget ? you read and you don't understand ? you read but you don't care ?

nice job talking about robots too, really you outdid yourself this time !

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mrvn »

Seems to me that in your mind we two have a very different conversation. Not sure where you think I talked about red science or miners. I only responded to your arguments and tried to explain why I feel some things could be better done differently.

But everything you say is gold and everything I say is garbage so there is no point to it.

mmmPI
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mmmPI »

mrvn wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:39 am
Seems to me that in your mind we two have a very different conversation. Not sure where you think I talked about red science or miners. I only responded to your arguments and tried to explain why I feel some things could be better done differently.

But everything you say is gold and everything I say is garbage so there is no point to it.
not just in my mind on this other topic viewtopic.php?f=208&t=99993 where you keep spaming with argument about this particular power plant not being precise, the math being useless, and not seing the point, while at the same time here you propose additions that are mediocre in themselves, and particularly unecessary as this is just a power plant proof of concept.

it's not that everything say is gold, just that this doesn't need modification to serve the purpose of illustrating how it can be done without storage tank and combinators. Maybe critics on the math ok, the rest is clearly demonstrating purposes, and described as such.

The fact that you insist on saying it's using fluid wagon as tank is your opinion, you can use fluid wagon as tank, or not at all if you consider it's cheating, you are free to do whatever you want, sharing your opinion included, once, twice, three time, at some point you also need to stop because it's pointless, the power plant is done, you can do one with barrels if you want that's fine.

The fact that train are suboptimal and many other things are 1) known 2) on purpose, like the switching wagon. Your propositions to modify the design so that it fits your personnal idea of how it should be done are therefore not really well received as you seem to finally understand.

It's not the case everytime, just this particular topic is not the place for you to spam about train or your opinion on what is a tank 12 times, and the other topic about the nuclear power plant in general is not the place either for you to try and critic the math of this particular power plant, you could have done it here and it would have make more sense.

Now i feel you are polluting this topic with garbage comments uneeded anywhere, AND the other one with comments that should belong here, involving me in the process as i can't let you say gross inaccuracies !

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mrvn »

mmmPI wrote: ↑
Wed Oct 27, 2021 5:22 pm
Seriously, let it go. That was another page of 100% useless argument. I already said we won't be able to agree on anything since we see the world too differently.

mmmPI
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1601
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:10 pm
Contact:

Re: 0 combinator 0 tank precise yet weirdo nuclear plant

Post by mmmPI »

i agree with you on that.

Which makes it again something you said that was wrong.

Post Reply

Return to β€œEnergy Production”