Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post all other topics which do not belong to any other category.
Selvek
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri May 06, 2016 4:04 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by Selvek » Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:59 pm

eradicator wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:23 am
I hate bacon sandwich.
Mmmm.... making me hungry :)

Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5208
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by Koub » Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:17 pm

eradicator wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:46 pm
Koub wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:10 pm
Thx, corrected my post. The cost for extracting the resources and crafting the modules is included in the calculation.
To me it just doesn't make much sense to express the construciton of a sub-factory in Joules. What you really lose is the time that your existing factory spends on crafting all the parts, the time you lose because your ore fields deplete slightly faster, etc. And as that depends - amongst others - on the current size of your factory it's not meaningful to me to calculate it.
I didn't say it made sense, I just answered a question :).
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

coppercoil
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 127
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:14 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by coppercoil » Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:50 am

Why do you use speed modules and beacons here? They increase energy cost per produced item. If you need throughput, just build bigger assembler array.

vanatteveldt
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2015 11:44 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by vanatteveldt » Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:26 am

coppercoil wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:50 am
Why do you use speed modules and beacons here? They increase energy cost per produced item. If you need throughput, just build bigger assembler array.
The payoff is in the production modules. They increase the number of solid fuel you get per coal (both by giving more oil products per coal and by giving more solid fuel per oil product, so overall gain of 1.3*1.3=1.69). However, they also give a speed debuff, which would make the result really slow and actually consume a lot of energy per product (since the machine needs more time per product). So, you want to add speed modules to compensate, and you don't want to add less prod modules, so beacons are the only option.

You can do the math easily, but prod modules plus speed beacons are more energy efficient than just the prod modules.

[edit: and if you think you can do better, just build it and see what your net energy is :) ]

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 3897
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by mrvn » Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:38 pm

vanatteveldt wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:19 pm
Deleting the rocket fuel production indeed had a net positive effect, getting me to 703:

I was hoping using one fewer refinery (with an extra beacon) might give me better results, but I would obviously have to optimize my other beacons (a lot)
If you connect the heavy oil at the top instead looping around the bottom then I think you can remove the pump. Saves a bit of energy.

patrick12222010
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu May 16, 2019 4:31 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by patrick12222010 » Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:41 am

DaveMcW wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:08 am
I got up to 705.6 MW by optimizing beacon placement and inserter movement.




705MW.jpg
Stolen this... Great job!

vanatteveldt
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2015 11:44 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by vanatteveldt » Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:25 am

mrvn wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:38 pm
vanatteveldt wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:19 pm
Deleting the rocket fuel production indeed had a net positive effect, getting me to 703:

I was hoping using one fewer refinery (with an extra beacon) might give me better results, but I would obviously have to optimize my other beacons (a lot)
If you connect the heavy oil at the top instead looping around the bottom then I think you can remove the pump. Saves a bit of energy.
Yeah, like 1kW :). Well, every little helps, I suppose.

The big tickets are refineries and beacons. When the general process is set (liquefaction + solid fuel with full prod modules) the only real optimizations are number of beacons and number of plants... and I don't think I can beat DaveMcW's solution here.

patrick12222010
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu May 16, 2019 4:31 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by patrick12222010 » Wed Jun 19, 2019 1:47 am

patrick12222010 wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:41 am
DaveMcW wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:08 am
I got up to 705.6 MW by optimizing beacon placement and inserter movement.




705MW.jpg
Stolen this... Great job!
I just realized that this is really great! I am planning to compress this more (if possible) and deploy in every coal patch I know...

Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5208
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by Koub » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:13 am

Don't forget you need you need 1.8M water per minute to feed that beast.If your map is wery "landy" and not "watery" enough, you'll struggle.
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

User avatar
darkfrei
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:11 pm
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by darkfrei » Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:33 am

Koub wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:07 pm
eradicator wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:53 pm
If you don't believe me when i tell you drain is *always* active please take the time to confirm it yourself. I don't know who or where this rumor of adaptive drain started. 375kW+12.5kW=387.5kW. It's also the value that @DaveMcW's function produces if you set it to one_second - as you seem to trust him more than me.
Now I did take the time to test it, and you were absolutely right, I apologize, I never noticed drain was active 100% of the time :mrgreen:.
Why it cannot be separated? The entity.working_power = "120kW" and entity.idle_power = "3.6kW". It can be much easier for calculations, but here can be mod, that makes drain much expensive than working power consumption.

User avatar
eradicator
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 3773
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 9:03 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by eradicator » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:14 pm

darkfrei wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 10:33 am
Why it cannot be separated? The entity.working_power = "120kW" and entity.idle_power = "3.6kW". It can be much easier for calculations, but here can be mod, that makes drain much expensive than working power consumption.
Completely off topic. Write an interface request if you want engine changes.
Author of: Hand Crank Generator, Screenshot Hotkey 2.0
Mod support languages: 日本語, Deutsch, English
My code in the post above is dedicated to the public domain under CC0.

User avatar
darkfrei
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 2320
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:11 pm
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by darkfrei » Wed Jun 19, 2019 6:51 pm

eradicator wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:14 pm
Completely off topic. Write an interface request if you want engine changes.
Done. But only in this topic we can understand that even devs think that idle_consumption_power and working_consumption_power must be not simultaneously.

User avatar
eradicator
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 3773
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 9:03 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by eradicator » Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:56 pm

darkfrei wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 6:51 pm
eradicator wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:14 pm
Completely off topic. Write an interface request if you want engine changes.
Done. But only in this topic we can understand that even devs think that idle_consumption_power and working_consumption_power must be not simultaneously.
@Koub is not a dev.
Author of: Hand Crank Generator, Screenshot Hotkey 2.0
Mod support languages: 日本語, Deutsch, English
My code in the post above is dedicated to the public domain under CC0.

Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5208
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by Koub » Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:08 pm

eradicator wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 7:56 pm
@Koub is not a dev.
This. I'm just a moderator, so my duty is only to keep this forum clean and tidy and to censor every bloody one help settle things down when discussions derail.
Btw, moderator-me speaking : this is getting seriously off-topic, so please every one get back to topic
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

SuicideJunkie
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 10:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by SuicideJunkie » Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:13 pm

I imagine it would likely cause trouble with the sandwiching, but what about threading small poles through the system to power the beacons separately?
The working energy is claimed first, and drain gets any leftovers, but doesn't hurt if there is none.
If you use an accumulator buffer to feed only half the required power to your beacons, they'll operate at full effect and you'd save a decent chunk of energy.

Actually, forget separate wiring; just isolate the power generators from the factory as a whole, and only feed in the exact amount (+/- 150kw) that can be usefully used and don't pay for any drain.
DaveMcW's design could free up an extra dozen MW that way.

User avatar
DaveMcW
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 3014
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 11:06 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by DaveMcW » Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:14 am

SuicideJunkie wrote:
Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:13 pm
If you use an accumulator buffer to feed only half the required power to your beacons, they'll operate at full effect and you'd save a decent chunk of energy.
Nope. Beacon bonus shrinks smoothly as power decreases.

SuicideJunkie wrote:
Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:13 pm
just isolate the power generators from the factory as a whole, and only feed in the exact amount (+/- 150kw) that can be usefully used and don't pay for any drain.
DaveMcW's design could free up an extra dozen MW that way.
I only have a drain of 301 kW. But that is better than nothing, I am looking forward to seeing your design. :D

SuicideJunkie
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 10:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by SuicideJunkie » Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:02 pm

Ok, I'm confused now. I was sure that beacons had half their consumption as drain and half as normal consumption. But I loaded up 0.16, and I don't see it there either.

It looks like Beacons lost their extra 480kW drain between v0.15 and v0.16, and I've never noticed.
That makes it far less useful. Sorry.

Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5208
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by Koub » Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:40 pm

I'm not sure I understand the thing about half drain, but with 0.17, beacons consume continuously 480 kW.
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

User avatar
eradicator
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 3773
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 9:03 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by eradicator » Thu Aug 08, 2019 4:00 am

Besidest the whole idea sounds like it is based on the annoyingly stubborn myth that "drain" is only consumed when a machine is idle. Which is ofc false. And if drain is even calculated seperatedly at all it is probably consumed before dynamic consumption, meaning that if you need 100W+10W drain and only supply 100W, you're machine gets 90/100W and thus works 10% slower than maximum.
Author of: Hand Crank Generator, Screenshot Hotkey 2.0
Mod support languages: 日本語, Deutsch, English
My code in the post above is dedicated to the public domain under CC0.

User avatar
DaveMcW
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 3014
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 11:06 am
Contact:

Re: Challenge: maximum net energy from a blue belt of coal

Post by DaveMcW » Thu Aug 08, 2019 2:41 pm

eradicator wrote:
Thu Aug 08, 2019 4:00 am
And if drain is even calculated seperatedly at all it is probably consumed before dynamic consumption
Nope. Test it with 2 assembling-machine-2 and 5 solar panels, they run at full speed and don't pay any drain.

Post Reply

Return to “General discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users