Jump to content

aquatuner loop pipe blocked


Recommended Posts

 

you can see that the aquatuner is saying that the pipe is blocked but the pipe segment that i am hovering with the mouse is empty 

also loop is not flowing smoothly it kinda chugs or pauses at each bridge as if it needs to see an empty pipe on the output of each bridge instead of just filling the pipe as it is emptied if that makes sense 

1826556636_OxygenNotIncluded5_7_202010_00_04AM.thumb.png.f560702e2af5686baa3690d2dc10fa73.png

 

im sure i could just find a new way to run a solid pipe with no bridges but i like to bridge over tiles to ****** heat transfer it might not be needed either way i dont understand why this loop wont flow continuously like any other loop 

im sure this has been covered in the forum somewhere i just have a really hard time searching for anything on this forum it always pulls up 1000 pages of stuff i dont want then if i try to get more specific i dont get any results then i try to search for something else and i get timed out but thats an entirely different topic this post was not intended for    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need a bypass for the aquatuner instead of just going in and out. That makes sure that the liquid flows even when the aquatuner is turned off and it can also leave an empty pipe segment if done right

Putting too much liquid into a loop can also cause stuttering and blocking. Always fill loops with a bridge and maybe remove a bubble or two if it doesn't move properly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@steve8 i know how to make a bypass i dont want one on this loop and i do have an empty pipe segment i also tried it with out any empty pipe segments that didnt work either i just dont understand why this wont work there shouldn't be any restriction to flow as far as i can see 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aquatuners take 1 second to start, which will cause hiccups in flow if it has nowhere to go.

I agree with Steve, you should just make a bypass like this. The bypass section needs to be empty unless in use (fill from top section). This will act as a 20kg reservoir which lets the aquatuner toggle and store 10kg without backing up.

4.5.thumb.gif.02216edd88e6f1f37e38d9f3b8d6182c.gif

4 hours ago, peachkillu said:

but i like to bridge over tiles to ****** heat transfer

I'm not sure what this means, but what you are doing is shunting heat directly from your steam room to your cold room, bypassing insulation, by having bridges (buildings) which touch both rooms at once. You can mostly fix this by making them touch only one room like above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, nakomaru said:

Aquatuners take 1 second to start, which will cause hiccups in flow if it has nowhere to go.

I agree with Steve, you should just make a bypass like this. The bypass section needs to be empty unless in use (fill from top section). This will act as a 20kg reservoir which lets the aquatuner toggle and store 10kg without backing up.

4.5.thumb.gif.02216edd88e6f1f37e38d9f3b8d6182c.gif

I'm not sure what this means, but what you are doing is shunting heat directly from your steam room to your cold room, bypassing insulation, by having bridges (buildings) which touch both rooms at once. You can mostly fix this by making them touch only one room like above.

If you flipped in the inputs and outputs around, I'd say you're almost golden. Otherwise, you're going to be dealing with broken pipes should you try to use that setup with water in the pipes. As your overflow could end up stuck in "overflow" until it boils off... Which isn't to mention possibly preventing the AT from resuming operation because "output is blocked."

20200507133750_1 (2).jpgFor "expansion" overflow scenarios, you'd best look elsewhere, if you don't want to bother with a reservoir, then doing a series of overlapping liquid bridges to create "expansion pockets" of 10 kg per set of bridges does the trick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, TheDeamon said:

As your overflow could end up stuck in "overflow" until it boils off...

I suppose. But so could yours: we both have the overflow contained within insulated tiles. It would take a rather long period of uninterrupted aquatuner usage for that to happen.

Spoiler

2.thumb.png.e4bd966588e716010bd7d9c2c4d6c6f2.png1.png.c7ba0d7072206f2a9becdc4964901e67.png

There are also ways to make the insulated tiles which contain the overflow perfectly insulated from the hot room. Specifically, by dropping any liquid above them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, nakomaru said:

I suppose. But so could yours: we both have the overflow contained within insulated tiles. It would take a rather long period of uninterrupted aquatuner usage for that to happen.

For that to happen with the setup I have, all flow would need to have stopped(which means the AT wasn't running either). While yours simply needs the AT to run continuously long enough to boil the overflow.

Your setup works, not going to disagree, I've used it myself in the past. It's possible that some liquid could still end up stuck in the input of the liquid bridge setup I'm using, but it requires a very specific failure condition to happen for that condition to occur in the first place(things have to back up sufficiently to stop all movement in the pipes, and then have an uninterrupted fluid flow with long-term constant use of the AT until it boils). Both setups are vulnerable to that one. Yours just happens to have some additional risks as your overflow can get liquids trapped in it without needing the entire system to backup to the point of stopping.

I'm all about minimizing the failure modes. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, TheDeamon said:

For that to happen with the setup I have, all flow would need to have stopped(which means the AT wasn't running either).

You're right, sorry. I didn't realize that would not keep a packet at the input. Your solution below.

4.5.thumb.gif.3d2a7ff8fe245c30bfdc671561700f6f.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another option is to use a valve as your bypass. Less convenient as it can't be built in solid tiles and it has an overheat temperature. But it makes a bypass path that is the same length as the AT path. No mucking about with expansion room or worrying about stuck packets or overfilling. Especially useful if you are doing small packet tricks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nakomaru said:

You're right, sorry. I didn't realize that would not keep a packet at the input. Your solution below.

 

Spoiler

4.5.thumb.gif.3d2a7ff8fe245c30bfdc671561700f6f.gif

 

Not really "mine" I swipped it from a FrancisJohn video after I realized what it was doing, and I'm sure he picked it up from somewhere else. So long as things don't back up to the AT output itself, which should never happen in a properly filled closed loop, it should never have a phase change happen in the bypass during normal operations. As the packet from the bypass will have entered the loop and continued on its way before the AT output is able to shutdown the bridge output, and as the AT is also depriving the bridge of its input source, there is no packet present to boil off.. 

Now an open loop with an external source and external destination may be another matter. If the output side gets stopped up, it can back up to the output of the AT. In that case, nothing is getting out of the bypass before or after the AT resumes operating. The only way to fix things at that point is to disrupt the input flow briefly to allow things to exit the bypass. But that was a problem for either version. Except even then, in that particular scenario, you had two pipe sections in the bypass that could break, while the above version just has the one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check this out, it's easy to follow with pictures:

You guys get a delay because the input bypass doesn't have priority over the output. You need those two bridges like you got at the top. What's up with so many bridges?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the OP wanted a pipe to go above the tuner, there are bridges there to allow for it (the mock ups are intended for his use). The other bridges are for a 10kg reservoir and bypass.

In my experience, where I mostly use the the bottom right bypass in that post, I also end up with 10kg waiting in the bypass while the tuner is active. This is okay if you are expecting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't one of my brightest days so bare with me. I meant to ask what's with the double bridges at the top on your previous reply. I never needed more bridges apart the ones to bypass the aquatunner and had no problems.

Obviously in OP's case he needs a few more to bypass the output from steam turbines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, cezarica said:

I meant to ask what's with the double bridges at the top

Sorry, I misunderstood as well.

When you have two bridges in series like that, with a new pipe starting at the outputs, the 2nd bridge input will always be empty unless the flow starts to back up. When it starts to back up, the 2nd bridge input fills and allows the aquatuner output side to keep flowing.

This is necessary with TheDaemon's suggested type of bypass, because when the aquatuner toggles off, it will block the bypass for 1 second. You can see this happen in the animation - the tuner input side halts briefly while the tuner output side continues to flow.

This isn't needed with your linked type of bypass, and my first recommended one. The bypass itself acts as a reservoir. (which risks boiling if not designed around)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to add, of noone already has, that a pipe sensor in the input of a bridge will cause problems. When the flow is perfect (no stuttering) the liquid packets are teleported directly into the output. This means that the input pipe will basically be empty and the sensor will not work (at least that is the case in my experience)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, suxkar said:

I would like to add, of noone already has, that a pipe sensor in the input of a bridge will cause problems. When the flow is perfect (no stuttering) the liquid packets are teleported directly into the output. This means that the input pipe will basically be empty and the sensor will not work (at least that is the case in my experience)

I too have had experience with "erratic" results when placing sensors on top of a bridge, haven't bothered to check to see if it was on an input, output, or both when I was encountering that. I just generally seek to avoid doing that for either end of a bridge these days. Might have to specifically test for it at some point. From memory, I think it holds for both ends of the bridge as the earliest configuration I would have used would have been to place a sensor on the output of a bridge to trigger a shutoff valve which would have been in the next tile over.... IIRC, it was regularly missing about half of the packets, but that was several months ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, nakomaru said:

Aquatuners take 1 second to start, which will cause hiccups in flow if it has nowhere to go.

I agree with Steve, you should just make a bypass like this. The bypass section needs to be empty unless in use (fill from top section). This will act as a 20kg reservoir which lets the aquatuner toggle and store 10kg without backing up.

4.5.thumb.gif.02216edd88e6f1f37e38d9f3b8d6182c.gif

I'm not sure what this means, but what you are doing is shunting heat directly from your steam room to your cold room, bypassing insulation, by having bridges (buildings) which touch both rooms at once. You can mostly fix this by making them touch only one room like above.

Lol it was censored I literally used the word as it is meant to be used but let’s not go down that road I don’t want Karens to get upset.

basically I was trying to avoid having pipes in the block because I figured they would promote faster heat transfer.

But if you are saying bridges will conduct heat from one side to the other that might be worse than what little heat will transfer between an insulated tile and insulated pipe 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheDeamon said:

I too have had experience with "erratic" results when placing sensors on top of a bridge, haven't bothered to check to see if it was on an input, output, or both when I was encountering that. I just generally seek to avoid doing that for either end of a bridge these days. Might have to specifically test for it at some point. From memory, I think it holds for both ends of the bridge as the earliest configuration I would have used would have been to place a sensor on the output of a bridge to trigger a shutoff valve which would have been in the next tile over.... IIRC, it was regularly missing about half of the packets, but that was several months ago.

I think they might have fixed it in the output, but is still present in the input. We can all easily check that pipes in the input are empty when the flow is normal (unless for some reason the pipe is diplayed as empty but the game can still check its "virtual content").
Still, yeah, I agree, in the end I just avoid bridges all together for sensors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, suxkar said:

I think they might have fixed it in the output, but is still present in the input. We can all easily check that pipes in the input are empty when the flow is normal (unless for some reason the pipe is diplayed as empty but the game can still check its "virtual content").
Still, yeah, I agree, in the end I just avoid bridges all together for sensors.

ahha this might be the answer to my actual question and reason for posting this 

basically you do need an empty pipe segment for each bridge because it’s acting like both pipes on either side of the bridge are one pipe and can only hold one packet 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, peachkillu said:

But if you are saying bridges will conduct heat from one side to the other that might be worse than what little heat will transfer between an insulated tile and insulated pipe 

Bridges are VERY bad about conducting temperature through insulated tile, or anything else really. Best practice is to avoid using bridges that span across a thermal barrier. Either have it begin on one side and end in the insulated tile, or keep it confined to within insulated tile blocks(which will mean double insulation, not a bad practice for steam rooms where possible).

Normal pipes/ducts are far less egregious about conducting heat over distance than the bridges are(what's in the pipe may be another matter). In that respect, bridges can be more thermally conductive than radiant pipes, it just isn't conducting that thermal energy to/from what's inside the pipe(as it technically never entered the bridge, but instead teleports from the input pipe segment to the output pipe segment)..

15 minutes ago, peachkillu said:

ahha this might be the answer to my actual question and reason for posting this 

basically you do need an empty pipe segment for each bridge because it’s acting like both pipes on either side of the bridge are one pipe and can only hold one packet 
 

Not quite true.

"Normal operation" for any input is to not have anything in the pipe/duct supplying it. It just happens that very few things can consume what's being supplied as quickly as it arrives. The bridges can.

That is, unless of course, the output side is already full and unable to receive what was just supplied to the input.

If your bridge inputs regularly have something in it on a closed loop, your system is "over full."

That is why the "double bridge" was a suggestion I made for use "as an expansion tank" of sorts. (The double bridge also has another variant with a sensor and shutoff valve attached for packet stacking) where the system would just continually bypass the second "overflow" bridge as normal flow allows the first bridge to teleport anything that comes in so it can never reach the second input... Until the output fills up, at which point the "overflow" condition is met and the packet moves to the next bridge, but as it has secondary priority to the already full first bridge, it cannot go anywhere.

Which in the example above turned that second bridge into a "1 packet" sized expansion tank. If you're using it as a packet stacker(with a sensor on the input of the second bridge) it tells you that the first bridge has a "full packet" (or one of a different type), and you can now signal the shutoff valve to turn on briefly to allow the bridges to clear out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, cezarica said:

Check this out, it's easy to follow with pictures:

You guys get a delay because the input bypass doesn't have priority over the output. You need those two bridges like you got at the top. What's up with so many bridges?

OP had the "stutter" because he overfilled his loop. Nakomaru adressed why there were five bridges in the one gif rather than 3 in the below image. 

 

21 hours ago, nakomaru said:

You're right, sorry. I didn't realize that would not keep a packet at the input. Your solution below.

 

Spoiler

4.5.thumb.gif.3d2a7ff8fe245c30bfdc671561700f6f.gif

 


I do find it kind of funny you had to ask about the double bridge however given the only thing of note on that front is the location was different from this one, as it was moved away from the steam room to prevent the water from boiling in the pipes:
 

bypass.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...