ONI steam geyser aquatuner cooler/dirty water distiller + tungsten crafting

[chemie]

1 minute ago, Saturnus said:

Your complaint about it generating less heat is quite valid, however, a lot can be regained by optimization as described above.

The thing you don't understand is feedback loops. The flow through the aquatuner is not less, it's the same. You see, you limit the input but half the output is fed back to the input. Let that run for a cycle and the flow is exactly double the input limit. So if we set the input limit to 4999.9g/s that means the throughput in the aquatuner is 9999.8g/s... pretty darn close to the maximum of 10000g/s. 

OK i missed the inlet/outlet of the top bridge.  But still, you end up with hotter water (which I do not want) and less heat (1 vs 2 tuners)

[Cilya]

1 minute ago, Saturnus said:

Your complaint about it generating less heat is quite valid, however, a lot can be regained by optimization as described above.

His design already optimizes the flow as he already have 10kg of water going through the aquatuners.

2 minutes ago, Saturnus said:

The flow through the aquatuner is not less, it's the same.

It is actually half as I said above. with two aquatuners in series, you have 20kg going through aquatuners each cycles.

[Saturnus]

11 minutes ago, Cilya said:

It is actually half as I said above. with two aquatuners in series, you have 20kg going through aquatuners each cycles.

No. The throughput through the aquatuner is the same as it's already the maximum it can be. And the temperature drop is the same.

What is different is that you use half the power and have half the heat output.

If your purpose is to just distil PW into clean water, that's probably fine. That's not what I use it for though. I use the output to drive an LOx liquefier. That the prime purpose of the aquatuner in my set up. I then use the heat generated from the aquatuner to also distil water but the throughput is not critical. And I use an LOx evaporation chamber to condense the steam efficiently.

So I think it's just that we see it from a different perspective. I'm focused on making highly efficient integrated systems that take excess heat or cold generated in one part to augment the efficiency of another part where the opposite effect is needed.

[chemie]

1 minute ago, Saturnus said:

No. The throughput through the aquatuner is the same as it's already the maximum it can be. And the temperature drop is the same.

What is different is that you use half the power and have half the heat output.

If your purpose is to just distil PW into clean water, that's probably fine. That's not what I use it for though. I use the output to drive an LOx liquefier. That the prime purpose of the aquatuner in my set up. I then use the heat generated from the aquatuner to also distil water but the throughput is not critical. And I use an LOx evaporation chamber to condense the steam efficiently.

So I think it's just that we see it from a different perspective. I'm focused on making highly efficient integrated systems that take excess heat or cold generated in one part to augment the efficiency of another part where the opposite effect is needed.

well, that was the point of my example, albeit specific to boiling PW and making water.  You take the steam and cool it with the cold water.  Essentially closed loop PW--> clean water

[Cilya]

11 minutes ago, Saturnus said:

No. The throughput through the aquatuner is the same as it's already the maximum it can be. And the temperature drop is the same.

The througput of one is the same. But you have two, so twice the throughput. In your setup, this means that you can double the valve input and output settings if you are using two aquatuners. The heat exchange perspective works for reducing the temperature of the pipe contents as well.

[Saturnus]

2 minutes ago, Cilya said:

The heat exchange perspective works for reducing the temperature of the pipe contents as well.

Not quite. The heat exchange of pipes (in the game) is not linear. As long as the heat capacity is large enough there is no point in having larger than needed flow.

[Cilya]

Just now, Saturnus said:

As long as the heat capacity is large enough there is no point in having larger than needed flow.

That's always true. If you don't need twice the heat, don't build two aquatuners. But that wasn't the point.

[Saturnus]

52 minutes ago, Cilya said:

That's always true. If you don't need twice the heat, don't build two aquatuners. But that wasn't the point.

I was talking about the cooling heat exchanger actually. The amount of water that is actually needed to run through the heat exchanger to cool the steam down is equal to (or ever so slightly larger than) the amount of PW being evaporated in the first place. So 3500g/s ( times the heat capacity difference between PW and H2O) is what is needed to cool down the steam efficiently.

[Cilya]

I tried to build a boiler inspired by the op design. I didn't want to use doors or wire bridge as heat conductors since it feels to me like cheating. So I only used

1. liquid pipe to gas,
2. liquid pipe to liquid and
3. aquatuner to liquid

heat transfer. I now understand what have been said several times in this forum: it is way too slow. My attempt simply does not work and won't unless there is a major change in heat conductivity mechanics.

I understand better what seems to be the key idea in @Misha_SOS design: the use of a large heat stock (the water basin where the geyser is ; the geyser is not mandatory but very helpful). This heat stock is used to heat the incoming water the nearest possible to the boiling point and is heated by the condensed steam. So, without a geyser, the heat stock would equilibrate between the input temperature and boiling point of water. Using this stock greatly increases the efficiency of the boiler. Then I wanted to follow @Suinatra suggestion of using polluted water inside the aquatuner. I used a closed loop for that and heat back the closed loop with outgoing clean water to prevent freezing. This does work only if there is enough flow of output clean water. In case there is not (for instance big change in the colony plumbing) a tepidizer as in @chemie design could work as a backup system.

So I believe my design is a bit simpler as op's one (but mine doesn't work) as it only use 4 parts.

1. Heat exchanger between the big geyser basin and input polluted oxygen

2. The aquatuner, boiling the polluted water and cooling the cold closed loop

3. The steam condenser using the cold closed loop

4. Heat exchanger between the cold closed loop and the output water

It doesn't work because the heat exchange between the pipes and the water they are in is only several degrees or several tenth of degrees which is not close enough to a working solution. To work, the design would have to be at least ten times bigger which will require an unreasonable time to initialize. (Filling ten time this much water requires a lot of water) The cold loop should be heated by 14°C inside the 4th heat exchanger, and with the input temperature I used for polluted water, I believe that the first heat exchanger would have to heat the incoming liquid by 30 to 40°C at least.

So, I'm sad, because this means I need to use heat conductors that have not been implemented to work as heat conductors.

[Sevio]

@Saturnus That feedback loop is a useful technique to help save power on pumping, thanks for that!

Since we're sharing Aquatuner boiler builds here, I thought I'd share my standalone boiler which came out of my experiments in heat transfer between fluids and happens to be posted in that thread:

In my survival games I rarely seem to get to the point where I can just hollow out half the asteroid and have lots of space available, so my main goal for this one was compactness while still maximizing throughput for a single aquatuner. As a result it does use a bunch of wire bridges and doors but that allowed me to keep the size down to 16 tiles wide by 18 tiles tall. It can process 2250 g/s polluted water in cold mode and up to about 3250 g/s in power mode.

Edit: Updated design which can do 5000 g/s standalone!

[trukogre]

On 9/2/2017 at 6:44 AM, Cilya said:

 

 

edit:

I'm a bit disappointed by how things work. The wiki says that the shower output water at the same temperature it gets it. But actually my showers and lavatories outputs polluted water at ~30°C, which is the temperature of the building, while the input temperature is much higher. Those building are not particularly hot, so it seems heat is just being destructed. This annoy me because it's then much harder to boil the polluted water then.

 

The wiki was correct for AU, the showers and lavatories were changed in OU: my guess as to the reason for this change is that if the output temperature were left at the input temperature, and everyone put in 90 C water from the geyser, than the output pwater would be so hot that it would kill all the food poisoning germs, so the devs changed the output temp to make germs more of an issue in the output pwater.  That's just my guess, but it seems reasonable.

[brummbar7]

57 minutes ago, trukogre said:

 That's just my guess, but it seems reasonable.

It seems the most obvious reason they would have done that.  That sad part is they could have just made it so the dupes are severely injured by showering in scalding water.  It would have had the same effect - germ-habitable shower effluent (well, that or dead dupes).  We even have a water cooling plant now, so it could have been done.  Especially considering showers aren't required anyway.  I just really hope we end up there at some point, rather than just relying on heat-destroying kludges permanently.

[trukogre]

2 minutes ago, brummbar7 said:

It seems the most obvious reason they would have done that.  That sad part is they could have just made it so the dupes are severely injured by showering in scalding water.  It would have had the same effect - germ-habitable shower effluent (well, that or dead dupes).  We even have a water cooling plant now, so it could have been done.  Especially considering showers aren't required anyway.  I just really hope we end up there at some point, rather than just relying on heat-destroying kludges permanently.

They need to finish getting rid of thermodynamic bugs like the cold water dripping exploit first, then I like your thoughts, my only reservation about implementing it simply is that water cooling is pretty difficult in quantity, takes a lot of power etc, and showers are something you research early on.  I wouldn't want to make showers something people wait a hundred cycles to build because of the heat requirements.  I'm sure that can be balanced out with enough thought.

[brummbar7]

1 minute ago, trukogre said:

I wouldn't want to make showers something people wait a hundred cycles to build because of the heat requirements.  I'm sure that can be balanced out with enough thought.

There's many times more than enough already-germ-free-water existing in the map at generation in relatively moderate temperature slime biomes to shower your dupes through turn 100 and beyond.  I agree it'd be nice to get all the heat bugs worked out as well, though I don't think that the aquatuner requires them to be worked out in order to serve it's function. 

[Coolthulhu]

8 hours ago, brummbar7 said:

It seems the most obvious reason they would have done that.  That sad part is they could have just made it so the dupes are severely injured by showering in scalding water.  It would have had the same effect - germ-habitable shower effluent (well, that or dead dupes).

No, it would have the effect of players not building showers, which are, at the current point in development, rather useless. Plus, dupes are already dumb enough that adding self-harm as a "feature" would not add anything good to the game. A red mark saying "input too hot, building unusable" is the right way to solve this kind of problems.