Cheerio

[Game Update] - 265438

Recommended Posts

TheScaryOne    87

Or ranching. I mean, I'm sure by cycle 50 or 60 most of your wild critters will be dead.

I've never stopped running vacuum insulated base walls, but this is going to make everything else suck, like my water sieve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Risu    454
3 minutes ago, Nemez said:

10 cycle

It looks like none of the heat is moving through the borders, just the edges interacting with nearby cells.
Funny enough it's the high heat capacity of abyssalite that is the problem with this. They really want to soak up all the nearby heat.
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kasuha    1,217

I'm pretty sure that the best, "most correct" way of "averaging" two heat transfer coefficients c1 and c2 for ONI purposes is:

c(average) = 1/(1/c1 + 1/c2) = c1*c2/(c1 + c2)

Edit: I was wrong by factor of two - it should probably be standard harmonic mean. See my later post:

 

Edited by Kasuha
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nemez    48
6 minutes ago, Risu said:

They really want to soak up all the nearby heat.

for me, abyssalite disseminates stored heat / cold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xedlord    1,133
1 hour ago, watermelen671 said:

What does this even mean?

...Does this mean I have to update my neat little critter sheet? I JUST FINISHED THAT!!! :wilson_cry:

It mean's that, for example: If a hatch lays a stone hatch egg, it should now look like a stone hatch egg instead of a hatch egg, and vice versa.

And no, you don't have too update the sheet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThyReaper    6
52 minutes ago, onebit said:

Average of 0 and 1.

Arithmetic: (0 + 1) / 2 = .5

Geometric: [(0+1) x (1 + 1)]^(1/2) - 1 = .41

Not much difference and higher computational cost.

@Nemez Double every wall.

The geometric mean is the square root of the product, so 0 and 1 would have a geometric average of 0. Abyssalite and anything else would be roughly sqrt(1e-5 * 1) or 0.003.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
neoazureus    110
20 minutes ago, Kasuha said:

I'm pretty sure that the best, "most correct" way of "averaging" two heat transfer coefficients c1 and c2 for ONI purposes is:

c(average) = 1/(1/c1 + 1/c2) = c1*c2/(c1 + c2)

Fourier's law for two bodies in contact (area = 1 = 1*1) ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
regault    2
31 minutes ago, Kasuha said:

I'm pretty sure that the best, "most correct" way of "averaging" two heat transfer coefficients c1 and c2 for ONI purposes is:

c(average) = 1/(1/c1 + 1/c2) = c1*c2/(c1 + c2)

This really is the best way to handle it. Since there's no square roots involved it should be mathematically simple for the game to calculate.

Technically the formula to determine the heat transfer through a pipe from the liquid to the surround atmosphere is U = 1/[(1/h1)+(dw/k)+(1/h2)] Where h1 and h2 are the heat transfer coefficients of the fluids, k is the conductivity of the pipe, and dw is the pipe's thickness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onebit    48

How does that formula compare to the old pipes formula, e.g. granite pipe with oil inside in oxygen atmosphere.

Edited by onebit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kabrute    1,070

I found a bug, or didn't find, um, well, I posted a bug report already but I thought it would be fun to share it here too.
image.thumb.png.8e87809217508b6324091e5b1c009fcb.png

I was playing when I noticed light wandering around randomly like. o.o

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lifegrow    1,085
1 hour ago, Saturnus said:

Well, at least it was mentioned in the update notes. A very effective way to heat death the entire map quite fast I must say.

Guess we'll go back to the vacuum separated outer walled dwarven fortresses we made a year ago before abyssalite was a thing you could build stuff from. We have come full circle it seems.

Fortunately, Borg Cubes still work so we'll have to rely on those a lot more than before to have any chance of making a sustainable base, I guess.

"Fortunately" my arse... :D

What an incredibly silly change. So once a piece of the asteroid is revealed, it begins to average out in temperature. Genius.... :p

Looking forward to the incoming reverts for final release.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilalaunekuh    569

Just reroll the normal thermal energy transfer for insulated items ;)

Would make them usefull even with abysalite, but wouldn´t make every heat transfering build much bigger for the 2. walls^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fihgu    6
4 hours ago, Alpe12 said:

Major change there. :o
Good bye overpowered Abyssalite.

Build two layers of it, problem solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QuantumPion    62

This averaging of heat coefficients does not make any sense physically or gameplay wise! Thermal conductivity is mathematically the same as electrical resistance. If you have a 1 ohm resistor in series with a 1,000,000 ohm resistor, you do not use the arithmetic average of 500,000! The resistance should be the sum of both!

Edited by QuantumPion
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
regault    2

Actually the problem with using the standard equation for thermal resistance is that then materials wind up with much lower conductivity than normal. For instance a block of copper conducting heat to a block of copper would do so at 30 W/k rather than 60.

The more I look into it, the more I think the geometric mean will create values that "feel" right to people.

Of course, given that square roots are a bit more processor heavy than you'd want for something that is calculated for thousands of blocks a tick, it might be best to create a lookup table of material interface conductances.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pnambic    17
19 minutes ago, regault said:

The more I look into it, the more I think the geometric mean will create values that "feel" right to people.

Of course, given that square roots are a bit more processor heavy than you'd want for something that is calculated for thousands of blocks a tick, it might be best to create a lookup table of material interface conductances.

This, exactly. I've played around with the numbers for a bit (see below). The original (minimum) formula breaks radiance (assuming that it's implemented as a constant factor, analogous to insulation before). The arithmetic mean kills insulation between solids. Kasuha's proposal causes self-conductance issues as you noted, but even if you "fix" those (say, by doubling the result), naive radiance still doesn't do what one would expect. The geometric mean looks much more reasonable.

conductivity examples.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, pnambic said:

This, exactly. I've played around with the numbers for a bit (see below). The original (minimum) formula breaks radiance (assuming that it's implemented as a constant factor, analogous to insulation before). The arithmetic mean kills insulation between solids. Kasuha's proposal causes self-conductance issues as you noted, but even if you "fix" those (say, by doubling the result), naive radiance still doesn't do what one would expect. The geometric mean looks much more reasonable.

conductivity examples.png

Factors: Insulated 0.03125(1/32), radiant 32

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pnambic    17
Just now, R9MX4 said:

Factors: Insulated 0.03125(1/32), radiant 32

Serves me right for trusting that Wiki. ;) Thanks! The radiance factor is insane.

conductivity examples.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KittenIsAGeek    982
50 minutes ago, QuantumPion said:

This averaging of heat coefficients does not make any sense physically or gameplay wise! Thermal conductivity is mathematically the same as electrical resistance. If you have a 1 ohm resistor in series with a 1,000,000 ohm resistor, you do not use the arithmetic average of 500,000! The resistance should be the sum of both!

Electrical engineer here.. Wouldn't thermal conductivity be more like resistors in parallel?  If that's the case, then I can see why heat is ignoring the insulators.  1/1 + 1/1000000 = 1.000001 = 1/R-total, so R-total would be 0.999999 -- Basically 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now