Heat movement challenge.

[Zarquan]

I had an idea for a challenge for your engineering minds.  Suppose you had a one tile block of igneous rock at 500 C and infinite mass.  My challenge is for you to design a setup that can draw the most heat from this block in a internally sustainable manner.

There are four three rules:

1. Once the setup is created, it is stable and it can be left alone to run forever.
2. No split-room steam turbines.  Feel free to block steam turbine inputs, but no glitchy 2 room steam turbines.  I misunderstood the purpose of these and thought they created power where there wasn't any heat.
3. Please avoid any major heat creation bugs.  This challenge is about moving heat, not creating it.
4. This should be buildable in survival (other than the heat source).

I am personally not planning on spamming space materials.  You can use large amounts of resources, but try to keep it reasonable. 

I spent a little time on this and got 12082 kJ from steam turbines in a single cycle, but I am curious how other people approach this problem.

EDIT:  I would also like to add that you are allowed to use aquatuners in the steam rooms solely to cool the steam turbines.  Heat creation buildings should avoided or used as little as possible, as this challenge is about moving heat, not creating it.

[gabberworld]

bigger challenge is how you managed make infinite mass? you use some mod? that outputs from igneous rock the 500 C all the time?

 

[Saturnus]

2 hours ago, Zarquan said:

No split-room steam turbines.  Feel free to block steam turbine inputs, but no glitchy 2 room steam turbines.

Nothing glitchy about a split room turbine setup. What on Earth are you talking about?

[mathmanican]

@Zarquan Is the hidden intent behind this challenge, "Let's give sulfur a purpose for existence?"   

[OxCD]

4 minutes ago, mathmanican said:

@Zarquan Is the hidden intent behind this challenge, "Let's give sulfur a purpose for existence?"   

Isn't Sulfur mostly known for its "cooling" potential ? (as it results from oil-to-NG setup, so approx -160°C).

Or you have something else in mind... ?

[mathmanican]

31 minutes ago, OxCD said:

Or you have something else in mind... ?

Answer in spoiler to not ruin thread.

Spoiler

Partial evaporation is one of the fastest ways I know of to move heat. He gave temperature limits that make sulfur the best option for a self contained system.

 

[OxCD]

7 minutes ago, mathmanican said:

Answer in spoiler to not ruin thread.

Ok so a glitch is needed... ? It goes against rule n°3.

[gabberworld]

not sure what is goal off this but this pop to my mind first

 

 

[mathmanican]

1 hour ago, OxCD said:

Ok so a glitch is needed

Unless I'm wrong, @Zarquan would not consider partial evaporation a "glitch." The mechanic was updated to perform heat computations correctly. It is definitely NOT a heat creation bug (his choice of words was very precise).  If you want to call it a glitch, then it is a "heat transfer" glitch, that bypasses thermal conductivity. @OxCD, I'm on board with that description, if that's a restriction you want to place on your own challenge. These mechanics are not a heat creation bug. 

@Zarquan , you may need to clarify this issue for any involved.  Since you want to move heat, I can't think of any way to do it faster than using partial melting/evaporation (flaking) mechanics. They are not heat creation bugs, and have been reworked by the devs to the point I think we've decided they are no longer bugs, rather completely intended mechanics. 

6 hours ago, Zarquan said:

This should be buildable in survival (other than the heat source).

I believe you can make just about anything in survival.  Oh, we don't get to use neutronium however we want. Dang....  

[gabberworld]

50 minutes ago, mathmanican said:

 we don't get to use neutronium however we want. Dang....  

 

 

[Zarquan]

1 hour ago, mathmanican said:

Unless I'm wrong, @Zarquan would not consider partial evaporation a "glitch." The mechanic was updated to perform heat computations correctly. It is definitely NOT a heat creation bug (his choice of words was very precise).  If you want to call it a glitch, then it is a "heat transfer" glitch, that bypasses thermal conductivity. @OxCD, I'm on board with that description, if that's a restriction you want to place on your own challenge. These mechanics are not a heat creation bug. 

@Zarquan , you may need to clarify this issue for any involved.  Since you want to move heat, I can't think of any way to do it faster than using partial melting/evaporation (flaking) mechanics. They are not heat creation bugs, and have been reworked by the devs to the point I think we've decided they are no longer bugs, rather completely intended mechanics. 

Flaking is good now that it's calculations are correct.  Old flaking would have been a problem because it created or destroyed heat, but since they fixed the calculations, it is completely legitimate.  It also contributes to an effect we see in real life called the leidenfrost effect.

7 hours ago, gabberworld said:

bigger challenge is how you managed make infinite mass? you use some mod? that outputs from igneous rock the 500 C all the time?

 

I used debug with a mass of 99999999999999999999999 kg.  Effectively infinite.

5 hours ago, Saturnus said:

Nothing glitchy about a split room turbine setup. What on Earth are you talking about?

The point is that these turbines aren't about moving heat, but instead tricking the building to produce more power than they should given the heat deleted.

4 hours ago, mathmanican said:

@Zarquan Is the hidden intent behind this challenge, "Let's give sulfur a purpose for existence?"   

...maybe?

3 hours ago, gabberworld said:

not sure what is goal off this but this pop to my mind first

...

The issue with this is that you are severely limited in how much heat you can produce.  I currently have 20 turbines on full tilt and 8 at about half power.  I doubt you can get that many with just temp shift plates.  Straight thermal conductivity can only get you so far.

 

[Saturnus]

42 minutes ago, Zarquan said:

The point is that these turbines aren't about moving heat, but instead tricking the building to produce more power than they should given the heat deleted.

Nope. You're not tricking it to do anything you couldn't do without splitting the chamber. If you have a 1 tile high steam room and the vent on say the left side. And what you want to cool comes from the right, and you alternate window tiles and insulation then the steam on the vent side is just over evaporation point thus creating the exact same effect as the split turbine. The split steam turbine set up just makes it easier to manage the heat exchange.

Basically you're simply using the steam turbine as part of a counterflow heat exchanger, or are you saying we can't use counterflow heat exchangers for this so-called challenge?

I'm getting a bit tired of people thinking there's anything insidious going on in a split steam turbine set up just because they don't understand how it works.

[Zarquan]

1 minute ago, Saturnus said:

Basically you're simply using the steam turbine as part of a counterflow heat exchanger, or are you saying we can't use counterflow heat exchangers for this so-called challenge?

No, it's not the same, as split room steam turbines draw more power and thermal energy from the steam than there is.  Counterflow heat exchangers don't create heat out of nothing.  While it is unfortunate that the steam turbine's steam room has a warmer and cooler side and it uses the warmer side to determine how much heat it should produce, this is nothing in comparison to running a steam turbine full tilt with 110 C steam that it shouldn't even run with at all.   

This challenge isn't about the steam turbines, it is about moving heat. 

[mathmanican]

@gabberworld Digging out neutronium is easy (though it gives your dupe a permanent glitch - beware of the skill scrubber).  Building neutronium is an entirely different problem which can't be accomplished without debug/sandbox.

As per the split steam turbine, my guess is you would like the challenge to be involved with getting heat out down to the 125C temp turbines generally operate at.  Removing this, then leads to building hordes of extra turbines to extract the last remaining heat down to 100C or so. I don't see split turbines as glitchy. 

Just now, Zarquan said:

split room steam turbines draw more power and thermal energy from the steam than there is.

I may have missed something, but I don't think this is true.  They draw exactly the heat out that is available. One side just enables the thing to keep working beyond the 125C limit.

[Saturnus]

2 minutes ago, Zarquan said:

No, it's not the same, as split room steam turbines draw more power and thermal energy from the steam than there is.

No. It does not. That is just flat out wrong and just shows you don't understand the steam turbine at all.

[Zarquan]

13 minutes ago, Saturnus said:

No. It does not. That is just flat out wrong and just shows you don't understand the steam turbine at all.

Well, first of all, that is rude.  Why do you feel the need to belittle other people who are just trying to have a good time?  I understand steam turbines well enough to understand how they operate and how much power I will get from them in a single room. 

Second, I believe I am wrong about split room steam turbines.  I was under the impression they were used to create more power than they destroyed due to using the warmer input to determine power production, but this was incorrect.  They are definitely allowed then.

[Saturnus]

2 minutes ago, Zarquan said:

Well, first of all, that is rude.  Why do you feel the need to belittle other people who are just trying to have a good time? 

I have no idea how you can even come to that conclusion.

13 minutes ago, Zarquan said:

...this is nothing in comparison to running a steam turbine full tilt with 110 C steam that it shouldn't even run with at all.   

This is what I'm referring to.

In my split steam turbine post (see below) I very carefully explained that the output power of a steam turbine relies on the total amount of heat removed. And that a steam only requires above 125C steam in a single of it's inputs to run. I also demonstrate that the output power in the case were one side is higher than 125C and the other side is lower but still steam that the output power is in fact exactly proportional to the amount of heat removed.

I can if you will but that is outside the scope of this thread I think, demonstrate that you can do the exact same thing without actually splitting the steam room but just have a hotter side and a colder side. The advantage of splitting it in the first place is that when not in use the two sides don't equalise temperature and thus making it difficult to use with volcanoes and other things that are intermittent in nature. With a continuous source set up to run forever it is just as easy to not split it but just have a hotter and a colder side.

 

[Zarquan]

13 minutes ago, Saturnus said:

I have no idea how you can even come to that conclusion.

This is what I'm referring to.

In my split steam turbine post (see below) I very carefully explained that the output power of a steam turbine relies on the total amount of heat removed. And that a steam only requires above 125C steam in a single of it's inputs to run. I also demonstrate that the output power in the case were one side is higher than 125C and the other side is lower but still steam that the output power is in fact exactly proportional to the amount of heat removed.

I can if you will but that is outside the scope of this thread I think, demonstrate that you can do the exact same thing without actually splitting the steam room but just have a hotter side and a colder side. The advantage of splitting it in the first place is that when not in use the two sides don't equalise temperature and thus making it difficult to use with volcanoes and other things that are intermittent in nature. With a continuous source set up to run forever it is just as easy to not split it but just have a hotter and a colder side.

 

I actually learned about split turbines from a reddit post.  I never read your post on the matter.  I recall that they were running the steam turbine full tilt on 110 C steam, which I flagged in my head as "glitchy."  I didn't look to deep in to it because I am happy with my steam turbines cooling to 125 C, but I now I believe they were using extremely hot steam on the other side. 

It wouldn't be the first time Klei had a building that was glitchy in this way.  I remember melting steel with a tricked tepidizer before automation (back when door tiles were made of steel regardless of construction material). 

I hope some people come up with some clever heat moving designs.

[mathmanican]

2 hours ago, Saturnus said:

I have no idea how you can even come to that conclusion.

Maybe "blunt" and "rude" are considered the same, based on culture differences.  I saw your post as very blunt. 

Many people I work with consider blunt to be the same thing as rude.When I work with them, I have to be careful what I say so I don't offend.  Others I work with are very happy with direct, blunt, statements, and don't take offense at all. I prefer to be blunt with those I trust most, and figure they won't take offense as they know my goal is to help them. 

2 hours ago, Zarquan said:

They are definitely allowed then.

This means longer chains of turbines to get sulfer down to 113C, before flaking it back up into the 300s to siphon off power again. I see this challenge as, "How many constant flaking contact points can I create with a single block of 500C material?"

[Zarquan]

21 minutes ago, mathmanican said:

This means longer chains of turbines to get sulfer down to 113C, before flaking it back up into the 300s to siphon off power again. I see this challenge as, "How many constant flaking contact points can I create with a single block of 500C material?"

You can spread out the heat to create more flaking points, but this can lead to problems.  Depending on the material you are flaking, it might not even be faster than larger batch boiling. 

[gabberworld]

still not get the point off this tho

[Zarquan]

32 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

still not get the point off this tho

The point is that moving heat efficiently is an interesting challenge in ONI and in the real world.  Most of what differentiates modern laptops with similar or even identical specs is how efficiently they are able to dissipate heat.  Challenges like this allow us to see how others do things and potentially learn clever new tricks.

2 hours ago, mathmanican said:

This means longer chains of turbines to get sulfer down to 113C, before flaking it back up into the 300s to siphon off power again. I see this challenge as, "How many constant flaking contact points can I create with a single block of 500C material?"

I'm not sure that flaking is necessarily the answer here.  Flaking can result in a leidenfrost effect between the material you are boiling and the heat source, which can reduce the amount of heat removed from the heat source.  Essentially, there is a hard on how quickly flaking can transfer heat which may be higher or lower than traditional heat transfer. 

In my first design, I had around 6 flaking points, but flaking actually slowed down the heat transfer as my liquid built up at the flaking points rather than flowing evenly.

[OxCD]

15 hours ago, mathmanican said:

The mechanic was updated to perform heat computations correctly. It is definitely NOT a heat creation bug (his choice of words was very precise).  

My bad. Digging up to Partial Evaporation through Google leads me to the bug you've opened saying that heat could be created under some circumstances.

I just thought this one was still topical and was needed for the sulfur purpose you talked about. That was the only explanation I could see to get what you have in mind with the duet flaking/sulfur.

Now that you and the OP confirmed what I had in mind (no more heat creation when using flaking) before reading you, I think I'll need a deeper explanation as I really don't get how you're gonna use above duet... 

[mathmanican]

@OxCD Sounds like I have a fun reason to open the game this week and play.  Maybe it's time for an updated "Partial Metling/Evaporation" thread.  I'll try to make it exciting, and keep the gory details in spoilers. 

1 hour ago, Zarquan said:

Essentially, there is a hard on how quickly flaking can transfer heat which may be higher or lower than traditional heat transfer.

For me the key would be to spread the 500C out rapidly enough to keep lots of spots open to flaking at 400C (or a bit lower). I do know that puts a cap on 25kg/s of material being processed per flaking point, but I don't know of any faster way to move heat (though I'm excited to learn). It' will probably be a few days before I can devote decent time, but I like the challenge.  It will probably keep me up tonight, trying to devise something new. The game is on.  

[ghkbrew]

12 hours ago, mathmanican said:

@Zarquan Is the hidden intent behind this challenge, "Let's give sulfur a purpose for existence?" 

If so, he's failed. Super coolant has more than 10x the SHC and a higher boiling point and will flake off a 500C tile...

I declare sulfur to still be useless, order is restored to the ONIverse.