Jump to content

(Survey) The impact of the steam amount in the turbine's chamber


Recommended Posts

Hello,

From the topic of @Tonyroid :

I decide to do a survey about the potential effect of the amount in the steam turbine chamber. "How much I have to put steam for the turbine" is a really frequent question, so I did a lot of test and here's my results :

Test condition :

turbi1.thumb.png.e410c31af332f6810f0913adb0b56822.png

Insulation : ceramic

AT : steel

Coolant : Polluted Water

First comparative : watts variations and average with 20 Kg Steam in the room

Note it's not 20 Kg / tile, but in total in the room.

tabt1.thumb.png.dd3b4b8fc8dfc95d089e7d9182d77ac6.png

We can see the loss without crude oil on the ground, so the heat deletion occurs even with small amount of steam but with a low rate.

 

Second comparative : watts variations and average with 200 Kg Steam in the room

tabt2.thumb.png.96723493b5d19f54e76772614bd33375.png

With a lot more steam, the chamber without crude oil have a loss more important, almost 3% rather the one with the crude oil.

 

Third comparative : watts variations and average with 20 versus 200 Kg Steam in the room

grapt3.thumb.png.7abcbcb4bbd423f5540f5b57fb2cc862.png

In comparaison, the best scenario in this survey (20Kg steam in room with crude oil) produce 26,62 Watts more than the worst scenario (200 Kg without crude oil).

It may not seem like much but keep in mind, i's not per tile but in the room. So if you put 10 times more steam like 200Kg / tile, you will probably loss around 80-100 Watts.

graph.png

20 hours ago, SamLogan said:

I decide to do a survey about the potential effect of the amount in the steam turbine chamber.

Nice work SamLogan. This is a good extension of the Heat Deleting Bug thread.

Just to clarify, what are the units along the x-axis? I assume it is time, but is it cycles, minutes, something else? Most other tests have been a single point in time, this survey/test shows how those numbers can vary slightly over time.

It is interesting how the 20kg w/crude has such a high variance (bounces around a lot). I'm curious as to why that is.

I'm not nearly as concerned about the amount of power generated as I am about the loss of water over time so that every few hundred cycles I have to go into sandbox mode and replace some of the water in what is supposed to be a *closed loop* system.

6 hours ago, yoakenashi said:

I don't follow. The y-axis is watts, the amount of power generated from the steam turbine. The x-axis cannot also be watts.

It's not watts, it's the number of when I had a watt production change.I noted 50 variations.

Salut sam j'ai vu ta video, le probleme avec ton test c'est que la turbine n'est pas automatisé, donc elle absorbe de la vapeur à temperature variable, peu de vapeur monte plus vite en température que beaucoup de vapeur et le nombre de watt généré par dtu supprimé dépends de ça ( ce qui explique les pics dans ton graph) et il n'y a pas de plaque de régulation thermique pour egaliser la temperature de la vapeur dans toute la salle donc ton test n'est pas très précis :/ pour encore plus de précision il faudrais aussi que les canalisations soient de meme longueur avec de l'eau a la meme temperature a l'interrieur a un instant t( sinon dans un cas l'at va s'arreter plus souvent mais moins longtemps que dans l'autre donc si tu commence a prendre les mesures au mauvais moment cela peu fausser un tout petit peu tes mesures et c'est amplifié si t'as pris tes mesures sur un court laps de temps).

A mon avis qu'il y ai beaucoup ou peu de vapeur change rien a la production d'electricité dans le cas d'un setup automatisé avec une couche de pétrole( la turbine prendras toujours 2 kilos de vapeur et la passeras de 200 a 95°) , la seule difference c'est que ça chauffe moins vite donc dans le cas du refroidissement d'un volcan vaut mieux beaucoup de vapeur pour eviter de dépasser les 200° et egaliser la temperature entre les periodes repos/erruption, par contre sans le pétrole oui, plus de vapeur engendre une plus grosse perte de dtu car il y a plus de vapeur par case donc plus de destruction de dtu ( enfin je crois, je comprends pas très bien ce bug )

 

Sorry for non french people, i explain to sam why i think his survey isn't precise because steam turbine isn't automated for taking only 200°c steam

 

@Badpip I will answer in english, you're right, using Tempshift could smooth the temperature variations. But I did the test with the same parameters, even they not enough specific, so it shows something.

About, volcano, yes you can add a lot of steam to absorb the heat, but the steam is not the best thermal battery, phosphorus will be better with a heat exchanger to control the heat.

@Badpip Adding steam and tempshift, or whatever else that can boost up the global SHC of the steam chamber isn't discussed here into the original post.

The subject of the test is to study how efficiently the heat is traded for watts, depending on the steam pressure (the one at a given moment which is located just below the turbine's vent) and crude oil bed only.

 

While I agree with you, since the watt/DTU trade is supposedly linear, you should get a flat result over a long term. Unfortunately, it seems ONI's not always following the rationnal way (winking at the heat deletion bug, for example). I think this is one of the OP's point.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Please be aware that the content of this thread may be outdated and no longer applicable.

×
  • Create New...