What is the best way to melt natural Wolframite?

[Tranoze]

7 hours ago, Hjoyn said:

Flaking is far faster than melting and takes less heat

I agree it take less heat, but calling falking is far faster than melting is wrong, especially in this case.
Melting require almost to 0 control of how your heating work, so for this case, i can just bumb all of them to 3k4 in one go with liquid steel, and having metal refinery constanty running. While flaking for this, you still require to go from liquid lead->gold/iron->steel, and after that, im sure you cant run metal refinery constantly without melting your setup.
Using refined carbon normal pipe is also terrible idea, because raw wolframite transfer heat 15 times faster than refined carbon, and normal pipe have heat transfer multiply by 1/10, so heating using refined carbon as transfer material will never allow clorine as you want to reach higher temperature than wolframite.
And diamond only 4 times better heat transfer than wolframite, so i think even with clorine, you still need temperature way past diamond melting point to actually flake wolframite safely.

Im in progress of melting all of them right now, but if you still say flaking all of them is faster than melting all of them, actually flake it in game to prove it.

[Hjoyn]

1 hour ago, Tranoze said:

I agree it take less heat, but calling falking is far faster than melting is wrong, especially in this case.
Melting require almost to 0 control of how your heating work, so for this case, i can just bumb all of them to 3k4 in one go with liquid steel, and having metal refinery constanty running. While flaking for this, you still require to go from liquid lead->gold/iron->steel, and after that, im sure you cant run metal refinery constantly without melting your setup.
Using refined carbon normal pipe is also terrible idea, because raw wolframite transfer heat 15 times faster than refined carbon, and normal pipe have heat transfer multiply by 1/10, so heating using refined carbon as transfer material will never allow clorine as you want to reach higher temperature than wolframite.
And diamond only 4 times better heat transfer than wolframite, so i think even with clorine, you still need temperature way past diamond melting point to actually flake wolframite safely.

Im in progress of melting all of them right now, but if you still say flaking all of them is faster than melting all of them, actually flake it in game to prove it.

You seem to be misunderstanding a lot of things. Regardless of if you flake or melt, you still need temperature control of your metal refinery, to avoid wasting heat and avoid boiling the steel. The only difference is what number you set it to. I'm not sure what you mean by lead to gold/iron to steel, what I proposed for flaking was steel heated by metal refinery to chlorine gas. You could use lead gas, which is less manual but runs greater risk of leaving tungsten tiles behind. Refined carbon cannot be used for pipes, so I'm not sure what you meant by that, I only suggested them as a tile that would not melt at those temperatures. Diamond is only for tempshifts, as they have reasonably high conductivity. They are used because tempshifts only use their own conductivity, and thus allow you to bypass the low conductivity of the chlorine or wolframite. 

I already ran tests in game before posting, and the bottom up strategy worked fine. Flaking is faster because it requires a lower temperature and ignores the conductivity of the material, that's it. 

[Tranoze]

21 hours ago, Hjoyn said:

Refined carbon cannot be used for pipes, so I'm not sure what you meant by that, I only suggested them as a tile that would not melt at those temperatures.

I already ran tests in game before posting, and the bottom up strategy worked fine. Flaking is faster because it requires a lower temperature and ignores the conductivity of the material, that's it. 

Nice test in game, but refined carbon also cant be used to make tile, because it is ***** consumable ore.
"Already ran tests in game before posting", wow.

[LadenSwallow]

How about if you cool sufficient liquid carbon to form a tile?

[Tranoze]

6 minutes ago, LadenSwallow said:

How about if you cool sufficient liquid carbon to form a tile?

Then it's not a tile, it's just a block, and you cant build it where you want. You have to heat solid coal to 300C, not cooling liquid carbon down.

[LadenSwallow]

So how about pre-heating the coal to ~290C, shipping to a vacuum on an airflow tile,  then dripping glass (or similar), similar to making 'natural dirt' blocks by 'cooking' algae. I imagine it will 'entomb' the vent and 'bury' the glass, but if your concern is the wolframite, I doubt you will care about the vent or the glass.

[Tranoze]

4 minutes ago, LadenSwallow said:

So how about pre-heating the coal to ~290C, shipping to a vacuum on an airflow tile,  then dripping glass (or similar), similar to making 'natural dirt' blocks by 'cooking' algae. I imagine it will 'entomb' the vent and 'bury' the glass, but if your concern is the wolframite, I doubt you will care about the vent or the glass.

It is easier to just, build tempshiftplate with coal and let them heat through blocks. Or be casual and just use diamond window, why are you keep going for the refined carbon BS? That dude totally never tried to test run it before and call for building refined carbon tile, which didnt exist, that the point, because everyone else use diamond window.

[Hjoyn]

8 hours ago, Tranoze said:

It is easier to just, build tempshiftplate with coal and let them heat through blocks. Or be casual and just use diamond window, why are you keep going for the refined carbon BS? That dude totally never tried to test run it before and call for building refined carbon tile, which didnt exist, that the point, because everyone else use diamond window.

Errr, that's exactly what I meant, building coal tempshifts and letting them heat up. Natural tiles are still called tiles. You don't build them directly, which is why I didn't use the word build. In this situation where we already have preheated tiles, it's cheaper and less conductive than diamond. 

[Tranoze]

5 hours ago, Hjoyn said:

Errr, that's exactly what I meant, building coal tempshifts and letting them heat up. Natural tiles are still called tiles. You don't build them directly, which is why I didn't use the word build. In this situation where we already have preheated tiles, it's cheaper and less conductive than diamond. 

I call it BS. If you want less conductive for isolation, just use insolated ceramic, they stay around 40~100C even when they in contact with 3000C wolframite. If you want conductive material for transfer heat, use diamond.
In no world you need half-ass material like refined carbon, because you cant use them to transfer heat or isolation. It also suck up heat from your heating element and reduce the efficiency in term of heating.

[Hjoyn]

6 hours ago, Tranoze said:

I call it BS. If you want less conductive for isolation, just use insolated ceramic, they stay around 40~100C even when they in contact with 3000C wolframite. If you want conductive material for transfer heat, use diamond.
In no world you need half-ass material like refined carbon, because you cant use them to transfer heat or isolation. It also suck up heat from your heating element and reduce the efficiency in term of heating.

Insulated tiles do heat up, and especially fast when in contact with gasses, which the internal tiles would be. That's why refined carbon is a safer containment material than ceramic, especially given the time needed to run the setup. The total mass of some refined carbon tiles for gas guidance is low, so the one time heating cost is low, recoverable, and ultimately negligible. There is no impact on efficiency, of course. 

[Prince Mandor]

On 6/18/2021 at 7:18 PM, Hjoyn said:

heat with steel waterfalls

BTW, how to form steel waterfall?

AFAIK,you need door or drop of heavier liquid to form waterfall. But at temperatures only steel can help, what is the way to create waterfall?

[Tranoze]

6 hours ago, Hjoyn said:

especially given the time needed to run the setup.

Then it not faster, in fact is is far slower than straight melt all of them then. I have isolated ceramic tiles in contact with 3k4 steel, and none of them go pass 80 C yet, and i already melted half of my tungsten, which is 90% done because the remaining tungsten are all at 3k3~3k4C.
.
One thing about straight melting them is temperature are much eaiser to control, and you can easy construct heat transfer.

1 hour ago, Prince Mandor said:

BTW, how to form steel waterfall?

That dude only comment BS, i dont think he even play the game but only reading forum post giving the fact he dont know much game basic knowledge, to form a good waterfall with low amount of liquid drop, you need another liquid in the same temperature range. Giving the fact we are melting wolframite, steel is only liquid exist at 2855~3421, other material either become gas or still solid at this point, so making lightweight waterfall is impossible at wolframite melting point, 2926.9, because steel is the only liquid possible at this temperature. You can use vent of meshtile, but at this temp, they will also melt, because steel already melt and wolframite also already melt.

[Hjoyn]

8 hours ago, Prince Mandor said:

BTW, how to form steel waterfall?

AFAIK,you need door or drop of heavier liquid to form waterfall. But at temperatures only steel can help, what is the way to create waterfall?

Niobium is a good choice. You only need a tiny amount to form the waterfall, so that's fairly easy. If you don't want to use niobium, you can use diamond tiles instead of the waterfall, it's just a tad less efficient. 

7 hours ago, Tranoze said:

Then it not faster, in fact is is far slower than straight melt all of them then. I have isolated ceramic tiles in contact with 3k4 steel, and none of them go pass 80 C yet, and i already melted half of my tungsten, which is 90% done because the remaining tungsten are all at 3k3~3k4C.

Oh it's still faster. Insulated tiles conduct far slower with liquids and solids, which is why your tiles are fine, even over a longer period. I specifically mentioned insulated tiles with gasses, because they behave differently. I also prefer to design for long term stability, even if not strictly necessary. Ceramic insulated tiles likely could work, I don't deny that, I just prefer to be safe. 

Oh, and the temp range for liquid steel is 1083.85-3826.85°c. It freezes at a much lower temp than it melts, a quirk shared by a few other materials like refined carbon. 
I'm not sure why you're so upset, especially when your setup seems to be working. Misunderstandings are common in this game, as things are often far more complex than they seem, and it can be difficult to find complete information. You just need to keep learning, as we all do. 

[Tranoze]

3 hours ago, Hjoyn said:

Oh it's still faster. Insulated tiles conduct far slower with liquids and solids, which is why your tiles are fine, even over a longer period. I specifically mentioned insulated tiles with gasses, because they behave differently. I also prefer to design for long term stability, even if not strictly necessary. Ceramic insulated tiles likely could work, I don't deny that, I just prefer to be safe. 

What i will admit, is, flaking abbysalite is better method of getting tungsten than melting wolframite, but, flaking wolframite itself is not. You need gas inside flaking chamber to have way higher temperature than wolframite melting point so it can flake, but wolframite itself transfer heat too well and if you maintain that heated gas for awhile, all chunk of wolframite will turn to tungsten and you cant flake them anymore.
Also it is only faster because you might only tested with 1 tile, for a chunk like this, you cant dig out the last 5 kg even if you can flake the wolframite because they are the entire chunk, and dig out go against the idea of harvest them without digging in first place.

However, melting all chunk of wolframite have a benefit, that being the entire yield after you melt them is higher compare to flaking abbysalite during the same time period and take much less time, Flaking abbysalite may be faster to get the first chunk of tungsten, but the amount of manual control after that is way too much to continue flaking them, include digging/ continue reconstruct

What im upset about is you keep telling me flaking wolframite is possible, but im not asking for possible, im asking for some way to make "Melting wolframite or harvesting them" worth doing than "flaking abbysalite". Example, i dont know how high liquid pressure dig a tile, does it break 50% of the mass like dupliciant dig, have any one tested it? using high pressure liquid to dig rare material might work if it doesnt delete 50% mass. Also after testing some method, i noticed melting steel via kiln is way too slow compare to melting them using liquid lead -> liquid gold. 

[Hjoyn]

3 hours ago, Tranoze said:

What i will admit, is, flaking abbysalite is better method of getting tungsten than melting wolframite, but, flaking wolframite itself is not. You need gas inside flaking chamber to have way higher temperature than wolframite melting point so it can flake, but wolframite itself transfer heat too well and if you maintain that heated gas for awhile, all chunk of wolframite will turn to tungsten and you cant flake them anymore.
Also it is only faster because you might only tested with 1 tile, for a chunk like this, you cant dig out the last 5 kg even if you can flake the wolframite because they are the entire chunk, and dig out go against the idea of harvest them without digging in first place.

However, melting all chunk of wolframite have a benefit, that being the entire yield after you melt them is higher compare to flaking abbysalite during the same time period and take much less time, Flaking abbysalite may be faster to get the first chunk of tungsten, but the amount of manual control after that is way too much to continue flaking them, include digging/ continue reconstruct

What im upset about is you keep telling me flaking wolframite is possible, but im not asking for possible, im asking for some way to make "Melting wolframite or harvesting them" worth doing than "flaking abbysalite". Example, i dont know how high liquid pressure dig a tile, does it break 50% of the mass like dupliciant dig, have any one tested it? using high pressure liquid to dig rare material might work if it doesnt delete 50% mass. Also after testing some method, i noticed melting steel via kiln is way too slow compare to melting them using liquid lead -> liquid gold. 

I am not referring to flaking abyssalite, that's a very different ordeal and is not comparable really. 
The gas used for flaking does not need to be a much higher temperature, it only needs enough heat to flake 5kg of the solid. Flaking also reduces the heat of the solid tile, so as long as your gas temp isn't far higher, it will flake the wolframite down to below 5kg without melting, then melt the sub 5kg tile, which also won't resolidify into a tile. No digging of tiles is necessary. 
Flaking is in no way limited to abyssalite, it's a very common mechanic that can be used for many things, like mathematician's petroleum flaker. I ran several tests using an exact copy of your ore body, copied tile for tile. I was able to consistently and rapidly flake and melt the entire body without forming tungsten tiles. It is very much the most practical solution thus far, whether you chose to utilize it or not. I've detailed a solution to the problem as you've stated it, it's up to you to decide what to do with that solution. 
It's common for people to not fully understand how flaking works, despite how common it's effects are. As a result, it's always good to see people utilizing such a powerful mechanic. There's now quite a good page about it on the wiki documenting the details of how it works, it's worth a read. 

[Tranoze]

7 hours ago, Hjoyn said:

I ran several tests using an exact copy of your ore body, copied tile for tile.

A screenshot pls, or didn't happen. You post too much word without good demonstration.

[gabberworld]

this is simper than you think.

1. heat worlffamite close to 2900 or turn it right away solit

2. heat tungsten solit to tungsten liquid

3 mop tungsten liquid with dupes

4. cool down the bottles

5.release the liquid bottles

you may lose some tungsten in this protsess, as im not sure yet what cause this

 

[Hjoyn]

15 hours ago, Tranoze said:

A screenshot pls, or didn't happen. You post too much word without good demonstration.

This was my test setup. Note that I had to reset it for this image, so it's just reached equilibrium. The tiles being actively flaked stay steady at around 2848°, with the steel being heated to a max of 2967°. 

[gabberworld]

53 minutes ago, Hjoyn said:

This was my test setup. Note that I had to reset it for this image, so it's just reached equilibrium. The tiles being actively flaked stay steady at around 2848°, with the steel being heated to a max of 2967°. 

this is first time where i can see that clorine is useful, but setup self is gind off fake because its rare if you see that much Wolframite in same place

[Hjoyn]

2 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

this is first time where i can see that clorine is useful, but setup self is gind off fake because its rare if you see that much Wolframite in same place

Idk how rare such ore formations are, I copied it tile for tile from op's image of his world. 

[Tranoze]

2 hours ago, Hjoyn said:

This was my test setup. Note that I had to reset it for this image, so it's just reached equilibrium. The tiles being actively flaked stay steady at around 2848°, with the steel being heated to a max of 2967°. 

One of the problem with your setup i already mentioned is 
How do you plan to dig those tile after they drop to the last 5kg? Which is what i mean when i say reconstruct the whole thing to continue get all of them.
Also how do you heat the steel. and keep them at exactly 2967?
How much liquid steel did you use for your setup? cuz stright melting only need 800kg of steel, and if you use that much steel in your setup, heating those steel alone require much more heat than melt the entire wolframite.

2 hours ago, gabberworld said:

this is first time where i can see that clorine is useful, but setup self is gind off fake because its rare if you see that much Wolframite in same place

sometimes there are huge chunk of ore of wolframite, you have to pay attention to frozen biome to notice it, and it somewhat worth it to melt it instead of dig it if, if your map is lack of tungsten like how my map did. My map only have 1 frozen biome and entire tungsten on the map is like how i posted.

[Hjoyn]

2 hours ago, Tranoze said:

How do you plan to dig those tile after they drop to the last 5kg? Which is what i mean when i say reconstruct the whole thing to continue get all of them.

I've addressed this a few times now, but once the tile stops being "cooled" by flaking, it will heat up and melt normally. Since it is now below 5kg, it won't resolidify into a tile and just form debris like the flaked mass. 

2 hours ago, Tranoze said:

Also how do you heat the steel. and keep them at exactly 2967?

In this test setup, it's done via infinite liquid sources. In a practical setup, you'd use whatever temperature controlled metal refinery heater you want, whether it be tungsten pipes, contactless pumps, whatever suits your needs. 

2 hours ago, Tranoze said:

How much liquid steel did you use for your setup? cuz stright melting only need 800kg of steel, and if you use that much steel in your setup, heating those steel alone require much more heat than melt the entire wolframite.

The escher waterfalls are nice for testing because they are passive, but do use a lot of steel. For a practical setup, I'd probably use contactless pumps. You can use much less by using diamond tiles or something similar, but it will be slower due to conductivity limiting it. You should design your own heater based on your needs. Heat from the steel and tungsten can and should be recovered later, something like dumping water in there and using turbines can work. 

[Tranoze]

6 hours ago, Hjoyn said:

 

So what exactly make you claim this setup much faster than straight melting them? you still have to control so that your metalrefinery setup wont overheat, and it is much more pain to control this than melting one.
It may take more heat to melt, not that much (just compare from 3k9 to 4k4, only 13% increase in energy needed) but you can run metal refinery more consistantly, and consider the fact my melting which i did that have me run metal refinery with liquid steel constantly without stopping, it is still much easier and faster to run metal refinery 100% of the time for the cost of 13% more energy needed, than run metal refinery 50% of the time.

Choose one,, which is faster.
Heating element produce 100% power but need 13% more total energy.
Heating element produce 50% power

i dont even think it run on 50% power, consider how slow and hard heat tranfer is for flaking set up to work, it might even only run at 20% total power it could.

I apology for saying your comment are bs, some of them still have logic. But refined carbon is still totally unneeded, they not even contact any gas in your setup xD

[Prince Mandor]

8 minutes ago, Tranoze said:

So what exactly make this setup much faster than stright melting them? you still have to control so that your metalrefinery setup wont overheat, and it is much more pain to control this than melting one.
It may take less heat, not that much (just compare from 3k9 to 4k4, only 13% increase in energy needed) but you can run metal refinery more consistantly, and consider the fact my melting which i did that have me run metal refinery with liquid steel constantly without stopping, it is still much easier than faster to run metalrefinery 100% of the time for the cost of 13% more energy needed, than run metal refinery 50% of the time.

So, you consider 13% energy lost and double dupe working time as a win?

Well, why you asked about it? You have your solution, you disregard any options we propose, you just want to blindly melt it in most inefficient way.

Why you started topic "What is the best way to melt natural Wolframite?" if you insist on using your own way?

[Tranoze]

28 minutes ago, Prince Mandor said:

So, you consider 13% energy lost and double dupe working time as a win?

Well, why you asked about it? You have your solution, you disregard any options we propose, you just want to blindly melt it in most inefficient way.

Why you started topic "What is the best way to melt natural Wolframite?" if you insist on using your own way?

Cant say it 13% energy lost consider you still can harvest them after done melting via steam turbine. And metal refinery give energy base on session and material, so as long as you use good refinery material like steel/aluminium/iron, you actually gain energy.
I expected some better solution than straight melting, and flaking for me is not it. It neither easier or cheaper, the heating element of both are the same, one just connect stright to the metal, the other is indirect via gas and temperature control, and consider how much control you need over the heat, you still need metal refinery and contactless pump for liquid steel.

I did test something like vacuum kiln, and it is super slow+ cost so much coal to be practical.

I still do want to know what's the best way to get hand on liquid steel, right now my method is liquid glass -> melt lead -> liquid gold-> liquid steel.

I asked for best solution, and all you guys provide me is flaking?

One thing i noticed when straight melting them is wolframite turn into liquid tungsten at 2926, and if the atsmostphere is vacuum and there are no tile below it, it will keep acting as liquid. Is there anyway to split a bead of 1200kg liquid into small bead in vaccum so that they wont turn into solid chunk? If so you still only need the heat as flaking, but it will be much faster because you flaking the entire block now.