steam turbine Occupational Upgrade Steam Turbine

[uraharakisuke]

18 minutes ago, Saturnus said:

if proving that something can be done is really a better idea than taking a long walk in the park? 

YOU DARE ASK THAT QUESTION?! 

[Vectrobe]

not to mention, they changed it so that dupes almost immediately die from the slightest excess of heat, coupled with them being all to willing to jump into something hot over and over again without a care in the world...

[Oozinator]

Just now, Paul17041993 said:

not to mention, they changed it so that dupes almost immediately die from the slightest excess of heat,

Vitals overlay open - dig - medbay, repeat..

[Saturnus]

There's no change to the steam turbine with patch 254302 so I guess this is the version that it's going to be released in.

[Lifegrow]

2 hours ago, chromiumboy said:

I'd argue that it gives you a very interesting choice; run a base with a small number of dupes with a large amount of power to have machines do the heavy lifting, or have a large number of dupes and find other ways of power generation (like manual generators)

Huge scale, heavily industrialised bases could be served just by having additional world customisation options

Not trying to argue with you buddy, but couldn't both of those things be a choice you make without it being forced upon you by either strict POI spawning rules, or machines whose sole purpose, it seems; is to force you to waste resources.

Personally, this game was way more fun when I had no idea exactly how many resources I had to play with on a specific world spawn. Geysers were random, so bases were sculpted around that. For example, If I had multiple nat gas gens I could do a large nat gas powered monster base very easily - without the need for a huge fert synth build along side it. On the flip side, If I had many steam geysers I could afford to waste oxygen for an extravagant hydrogen power set up, or overly-luxurious food setups, etc etc etc. 

The way it is now - the game is becoming very "cookie cutter" in as much as : "Right, we have 2 steam geysers that output X so you can afford to build Y. Process the waste of A and you can run B...." It's bland, stifling and dull - and it's one of the reasons we've seen very few interesting builds on these forums in the last 4-5 months. Same "generic, hands-tied, usual tricks" builds. 

POI system needs to be fixed, ruins need to be overhauled and rethought entirely imo. But again, this is only my vision of the game I suppose  

 

[clickrush]

2 minutes ago, Lifegrow said:

Not trying to argue with you buddy, but couldn't both of those things be a choice you make without it being forced upon you by either strict POI spawning rules, or machines whose sole purpose, it seems; is to force you to waste resources.

Personally, this game was way more fun when I had no idea exactly how many resources I had to play with on a specific world spawn. Geysers were random, so bases were sculpted around that. For example, If I had multiple nat gas gens I could do a large nat gas powered monster base very easily - without the need for a huge fert synth build along side it. On the flip side, If I had many steam geysers I could afford to waste oxygen for an extravagant hydrogen power set up, or overly-luxurious food setups, etc etc etc. 

The way it is now - the game is becoming very "cookie cutter" in as much as : "Right, we have 2 steam geysers that output X so you can afford to build Y. Process the waste of A and you can run B...." It's bland, stifling and dull - and it's one of the reasons we've seen very few interesting builds on these forums in the last 4-5 months. Same "generic, hands-tied, usual tricks" builds. 

POI system needs to be fixed, ruins need to be overhauled and rethought entirely imo. But again, this is only my vision of the game I suppose  

 

I fully agree with you on that the game can be more fun for experienced players if it had more geographical challenges and POIs and more variation in respect to that. Geysers, wells, nullifiers force you to go out there and think more about your progression and your layout. More randomness in that manner opens up new choices.

This is why my biggest wish for the game is a sophisticated worldgen parametrisation, where we can define the size, biome distribution, POIs and randomness of the worldgen.

I didn't take time to look into this but I think the worldgen is parsable right? People have been sharing yaml files I believe. This makes me think that it would be quite easy to set up a small handmade tool, which spits out these worldgen files until hopefully we get the real thing from Klei.

A next step from that would be just more geographically sensitive content that has meaningful implications on sustainability and problem solving.

[Collic]

21 minutes ago, Lifegrow said:

Not trying to argue with you buddy, but couldn't both of those things be a choice you make without it being forced upon you by either strict POI spawning rules, or machines whose sole purpose, it seems; is to force you to waste resources.

Personally, this game was way more fun when I had no idea exactly how many resources I had to play with on a specific world spawn. Geysers were random, so bases were sculpted around that. For example, If I had multiple nat gas gens I could do a large nat gas powered monster base very easily - without the need for a huge fert synth build along side it. On the flip side, If I had many steam geysers I could afford to waste oxygen for an extravagant hydrogen power set up, or overly-luxurious food setups, etc etc etc. 

The way it is now - the game is becoming very "cookie cutter" in as much as : "Right, we have 2 steam geysers that output X so you can afford to build Y. Process the waste of A and you can run B...." It's bland, stifling and dull - and it's one of the reasons we've seen very few interesting builds on these forums in the last 4-5 months. Same "generic, hands-tied, usual tricks" builds. 

POI system needs to be fixed, ruins need to be overhauled and rethought entirely imo. But again, this is only my vision of the game I suppose  

 

This is a great post. In my opinion, in active development strict rules for resource generation are a good thing, just because it helps provide a consistent baseline for feedback; it's easier for the devs to work toward a game that allows the resource juggling that is ONI to feel fair and not overly punishing. However, I absolutely agree that more variation in the longer term should be something Klei seriously looks at. It's the only way to really boost the games longevity and create interesting challenges for veterans. 

Ideally we should have more options in world gen for variation, but it could be Klei have decided against that (for now) so players are giving more useful feedback about how well the systems in ONI are working. Fingers crossed for more expanded options in the future though!

[Saturnus]

Forget what I said earlier.

The current iteration of the steam turbine is workable but to make it useful or even somewhat desirable for player to even contemplate building it needs to be changed back to its original 8KW power output. That at least would give an incentive to build the ridiculously complicated set up it requires.

If the steam output was put into two separate gas outputs then the steam could be reheated with a more effective heat exchanger that would make it much more desirable to build as you didn't need rolling door compressors to recirculate the steam.

And if the power station was reworked so that an engineer would only tune up generators in the room where the power station was I could see a use for it in a double steam generator room as it would output 24KW.

Edit: I forgot add, temp sensors would also need to have their range increased to 2000C or it will be next to impossible to effectively automate it. You'd have to constantly actively monitor it and make adjustments without that.

With these changes it would actually start to compete with a magma based crude oil to natural gas cooker. Not quite as you'd forego the positive mass feedback of the NGGs but at least it would be getting to a point where people would consider building it if their base have a massive constant power demand because you definitely wouldn't want this to spin up and shut down on a regular basis.

[TheOlz]

This thread has a couple of topics running now, but just on the world generation thing -

From memory Don't Starve and Shipwrecked didn't come with world gen options in their early iterations, it was after most of the content was in game and some balancing had taken place before we got those options.  I would suggest that this makes sense as the game needs to be balanced around the "standard" world.  Once you start playing with world gen options you can make it as unbalanced as you like.

Luckily though, for those who want to go down the route of modified worlds early/now, and unlike DS, OnI uses yaml so the option of making custom maps and even custom POI's, etc is completely in the hands of the users.  We've already seen some unique map designs on the forums and I'm sure there are plenty to come.

[0xFADE]

That is unfortunate. Sounds like they made them impractical for real use.

[Guest]

So on the occupational stream they talked about the turbine. Basically they expect us to dig down to lava and use that to evaporate water.

There are issues I have with this:

-Steam produced by lava will still exit very hot out of the turbine, meaning you cannot pump it away immediately without further cooling it down further. If you can't do that in time, areas underneath and above the steam turbine will get the same pressure and the turbine will stop working.

-Lava is a very finite source and will quickly cool down to solidify into igneous rock, meaning this will slow down heating of water. It will eventually further cool down, at quite a quick rate actually as the turbine destroys any heat above a certain temp, until it becomes unusable

-Your are also bound to RNG to how much lava you have available. Sometimes most or all pockets of lava are encased in neutronium, in which case you are out of luck.

So I think the steam turbine unfortunaly is not viable, atleast not without mechanical means of getting the steam to 250 °C.

[Logicsol]

26 minutes ago, turbonl64 said:

So on the occupational stream they talked about the turbine. Basically they expect us to dig down to lava and use that to evaporate water.

There are issues I have with this:

-Steam produced by lava will still exit very hot out of the turbine, meaning you cannot pump it away immediately without further cooling it down further. If you can't do that in time, areas underneath and above the steam turbine will get the same pressure and the turbine will stop working.

-Lava is a very finite source and will quickly cool down to solidify into igneous rock, meaning this will slow down heating of water. It will eventually further cool down, at quite a quick rate actually as the turbine destroys any heat above a certain temp, until it becomes unusable

-Your are also bound to RNG to how much lava you have available. Sometimes most or all pockets of lava are encased in neutronium, in which case you are out of luck.

So I think the steam turbine unfortunaly is not viable, atleast not without mechanical means of getting the steam to 250 °C.

They have worked to mitigate this somewhat, by increasing the specific heat value for magma/ingneous rock/rock gas to 1(from .2).

 

That means  magma has 5 times the previous energy, and can last much longer before cooling into rock. Still, we need a mechanical means to create higher temperatures without resorting to exploits.

[FIXBUGFIXBUGFIX]

Why not use magma to boil oil? We can get more power in this way.

[Saturnus]

13 minutes ago, R9MX4 said:

Why not use magma to boil oil? We can get more power in this way.

This has been mentioned quite a few times in this thread already that a steam turbine should in essence compete with a standard magma oil to gas cooker build or it is quite pointless.

[Lifegrow]

1 hour ago, R9MX4 said:

Why not use magma to boil oil? We can get more power in this way.

Is this all you contribute to threads? You said the same thing in my own turbine-related thread

We all know we can do other things with oil/petroleum/nat gas - but this thread is about the steam turbine - and based on the fact it's currently 8 pages long, people obviously want to know if/how it will work.

I've personally invested a fair few hours tinkering in the hopes of finding a workable build - but sadly as @Saturnusmentioned previously - until we get temp switches with a much, much larger range - automation is very difficult (if not impossible?). For me, personally, the output could be increased from 2kw, however 8kw seems a tad high (especially if it could be further tweaked...)  - although I haven't built a steam turbine build without debug, so arguably who knows.

I'd be happy for better thermo switches, and pumps that can be made of refined metals to withstand the heat of both superheated steam, and magma pumping.

The choice of having to place my turbines at magma level, or being able to relocate that magma to a carefully constructed "holding tank" is whats really putting me off building this in a non-debug setting.

[Vectrobe]

The turbine in its current state can be used as a pre-cooler for oil burning, but that's about all its useful for, thermal runaway is still only solvable via the drip exploit as there simply isn't enough cooling available in most maps, and the turbine's heat requirements are beyond what the current heat exchangers can handle...

edit; and yea, the thermo's are useless for this and the 2kw output is pretty mediocre, considering you can only really have one on the map reliably...

[FIXBUGFIXBUGFIX]

8 minutes ago, Lifegrow said:

this thread is about the steam turbine - and based on the fact it's currently 8 pages long, people obviously want to know if/how it will work.

As a generator, steam turbine should show some profit comparing with other generators, or at least recover invested electricity.

But by analyzing, sadly, my answer is no.

 

 

Here is its current work information.

On 2018/2/7 at 10:56 AM, R9MX4 said:

Some information

input > 525 Kelvin

output = 450 Kelvin

rate 10kg/s

pressure difference>3kg

 

The best and infinite heat source, which also meets steam turbine's requirement, is aquatuner. I've done some calculation in this thread before.

On 2018/2/7 at 7:56 PM, R9MX4 said:

ST

power: +2000W

heat elimination: at least 3134kw      (525-450)K*4.179kJ/kg/K*10kg/s

aquatuner

power: -1200w

heat transference: less than 840kw      14K*6kJ/kg/K*10kg/s

Only if steam turbine provides more than 4477w power, it will be beneficial. Take building & decomposition and heat loss into account, 6~8 kw might be a reasonable number.

(Of course we have some trick to reduce the steam input rate from 10kg/s to 2kg/s, but I guess we shouldn't take an exploit as a prerequisite)

 

The best and finite heat source is magma. But obviously boil oil is better.

 

The only use of it may be eliminating heat.

[Steelflame]

I suspect that until we get a "Fire" update, this thing will remain a pipe dream.

Once said "fire" update comes along, we would really be able to utilize it, with the potential to pump excess O2/Hydrogen into a room and trigger a spark that ignites it into a giant ball of fire, and would play a great synergy with Electrolizers as a power source as it would give you a way to destroy the excess O2 that generates if you scale up an electro setup.

IIRC, a single geyser can produce enough for 6.66 electros, which would be enough O2 for about 46 dupes.  Few people would utilize that many, so the massive excess could instead be used for kickstarting things like the Steam Turbine.

[FIXBUGFIXBUGFIX]

7 minutes ago, Steelflame said:

6.66 electros

4.194

7 minutes ago, Steelflame said:

massive excess could instead be used for kickstarting things like the Steam Turbine.

Steam Turbine has a min Active Temperature = 525K. Geyser outputs steam in 150C. In general, geyser is helpless.

[Vectrobe]

1 hour ago, R9MX4 said:

The best and infinite heat source, which also meets steam turbine's requirement, is aquatuner. I've done some calculation in this thread before.

Which would be the main method I'd use it for, even if it used a fraction more power to run than it generates as it'd still remove thermal runaway. Except now that they increased the temp requirements you cant actually use aquatuners directly...

Is there a particular method you use to double the temperature transfer without cooking the aquatuner? other than dissipation plates?

[Steelflame]

Well when you compare them to completely different unit scales, yea it looks helpless.  And the point isn't to output steam.  The point is to cycle the existing water in the Steam Turbine room and heat it via igniting the extremely high density oxygen you pumped in there.

 

But yea, completely impossible in the current patch, so it really doesn't matter, even if they do decide to eventually make use of the ridiculous flammability of such high density oxygen.

[Vectrobe]

Just now, Steelflame said:

Well when you compare them to completely different unit scales, yea it looks helpless.  And the point isn't to output steam.  The point is to cycle the existing water in the Steam Turbine room and heat it via igniting the extremely high density oxygen you pumped in there.

oh wait, you can burn H2 and O2 provided enough heat? interesting...

[TheScaryOne]

I've noticed on a few of my most recent world gens that a lot more lava is open at the bottom, rather than encased in neutronium. Haven't made it to the turbine, but it seems that we need an easier way to move magma. I thought a wolframite pump would last, but it still gets damaged by heat despite not melting. That plus abyssalite or obsidian pipe would allow us to easily move the magma around. Another idea would be a dwarfy screw pump that we'd have to assemble in multiple parts: a dupe operated pumping station and a multi part screw that could be built in a shaft down to magma.

If the steam comes out of the turbine "too hot" could it not be recycled via rolling door pumps until it cools enough? Or is this what everyone is referring to as being too micromanagy without having better ranged temp sensors? IIRC, using aquatuners submerged in PW to create steam and PD deletes heat pretty well, plus you could reuse the water.

[Steelflame]

5 minutes ago, Paul17041993 said:

oh wait, you can burn H2 and O2 provided enough heat? interesting...

No you can't.  Flammability is going to be some future update.   There are many materials that already have the flammability marked, but it isn't being put to any use.   It would definitely force people to rethink their bases though, the current "Pump the world full of several thousand tons of high density oxygen" would be very very prone to backfiring..... in a very very big ball of fire that would probably just about instantly trigger the heat death of your base as it hits several hundred degrees everywhere.

[Vectrobe]

5 minutes ago, Steelflame said:

No you can't.  Flammability is going to be some future update.   There are many materials that already have the flammability marked, but it isn't being put to any use.   It would definitely force people to rethink their bases though, the current "Pump the world full of several thousand tons of high density oxygen" would be very very prone to backfiring..... in a very very big ball of fire that would probably just about instantly trigger the heat death of your base as it hits several hundred degrees everywhere.

damn, was hoping that I could make a combustion core for superheated steam, cool the steam output from the turbine and make a heat-draining cycle...

With fire though, you need fuel as well as oxygen, are you referring to coal fires? because pretty much everything else other than loose hydrogen isn't going to be very flammable, if at all. Plastic could be though depending on the particular plastic it's designed off...