- Joined
- Mar 9, 2022
- Messages
- 4
The problem is that they are not good enough to compete with other cooling solutions. It feels like they got left behind.
I did some testing to see were they are standing in terms of usability. Spoiler, it's not that gread but easy to fix.
At first I tested some setups. Each one was one fuel chamber and one generator.
Format:
fuel chamber | generator | generator limit for running endless | electricity production
3 Cooling Cells:
T3 + T3 -> 15.625% (500/32) -> 195.3 e/s
T3 + T2 -> 16.666% (500/30) -> 166.66 e/s
T2 + T3 -> 15.151% (500/33) -> 189.387 e/s
T2 + T2 -> 16.129% (500/31) -> 161.29 e/s
T1 + T1 -> 17.241% (500/29) -> 172.41 e/s
2 Cooling Cells:
T3 + T3 -> 12.5% (400/32) -> 156.25 e/s
T3 + T2 -> 13.333% (400/30) -> 133.33 e/s
T2 + T3 -> 12.121% (400/33) -> 151.512 e/s
T2 + T2 -> 12.903% (400/31) -> 129.03 e/s
T1 + T1 -> 13.793% (400/29) -> 137.93 e/s
1 Cooling Cell:
T3 + T3 -> 6.25% (200/32) -> 78.125 e/s
T3 + T2 -> 6.666% (200/30) -> 66.66 e/s
T2 + T3 -> 6.06% (200/33) -> 75.75 e/s
T2 + T2 -> 6.451% (200/31) -> 64.51 e/s
T1 + T1 -> 6.896% (200/29) -> 68.96 e/s
0 Cooling Cells:
T3 + T3 -> 6.25% (200/32) -> 78.125 e/s
T3 + T2 -> 6.666% (200/30) -> 66.66 e/s
T2 + T3 -> 6.06% (200/33) -> 75.75 e/s
T2 + T2 -> 6.451% (200/31) -> 64.51 e/s
T1 + T1 -> 6.896% (200/29) -> 68.96 e/s
What you can see is that the third coolant cells efficency is only 50%, why? I don't know.
You can also see that there is no difference beetween 0 and 1 cooling cells. That's because the fuel chamber and generator have each a base dessipation rate of 5 heat units per second, so a total of 10.
Means the cooling racks are not treated as an additional cooling option, instead replacing the base dessipation.
And 1 coolant unit can cool 10 heat units, because cooling cells regenerate 1 coolant unit per second.
The other competitors are heat sink cube + radiator extension (heat sink) and just radiator extension (radiator).
Comparison of stats on a T3 fuel chamber with one T3 generator:
Format:
type | weight | generator limit for running endless | heat production | were the heat goes | electricity production
Data:
Heat sink 5620.8 kg | 100% -> 160 heat units -> 50 heat sink cube, 110 radiator -> 1250 e/s
Radiator 534 kg | 71.875% -> 115 heat units -> 10 base, 105 radiator -> 898.4375 e/s
Cooling Rack 1901.1 kg | 15.625% -> 25 heat units -> 25 cooling cells -> 195.3 e/s
Okay, that's not looking good for cooling racks.
How many trinagle thruster could it power? T2 base other parts T3, electricity consumption between 81.675 and 81.676 e/s can't find out exact value, 3 digit limit. 81.676 for calculation used
Data:
Heat sink 15 thruster -> 24.86 e/s leftover
Radiator 11 thruster -> 0.0015 e/s leftover
Cooling Rack 2 thruster -> 31.948 e/s leftover
Hm, lets do some scenarios to see when cooling racks would become competitive.
All cooling cells are working with 100%.
Calculated for one T3 fuel chamber and one T3 generator.
The coolant regenration rate per second is different.
All thruster are working with 100%
Format:
generator limit for running endless | electricity production | supplyable thruster amount | leftover electricity | cooling capacitiy
Cases:
Regeneration rate of 6:
100% -> 1250 e/s -> 15 thruster -> 24.86 e/s | 180 heat units
Regeneration rate of 5:
93.75% -> 1171.875 e/s -> 14 thruster -> 28.411 e/s | 150 heat units
Regeneration rate of 4:
75% -> 937.5 e/s -> 11 thruster -> 39.064 e/s | 120 heat units
Regeneration rate of 3:
56.25% -> 703.125 e/s -> 8 thruster -> 49.717 e/s | 90 heat units
Regeneration rate of 2:
37.5% -> 468.75 e/s -> 5 thruster -> 60.37 e/s | 60 heat units
Regeneration rate of 1:
18.75% -> 234.375 e/s -> 2 thruster -> 71.023 e/s | 30 heat units
So what does this mean. Well to be competitive they should be better than a single radiator extension, for that the regeneration rate must be 4 or more. In my mind it should not be better than a heat sink cube in the given scenario, so regeneration rate below 6.
Means, a regeneration rate of 4 or 5 would make the cooling rack competitive to other cooling solutions.
Ps. The symbol used to create the spaces is U+2008, " " the on in brackets.
Pss. I also included my test setup, so feel free to test it.
I did some testing to see were they are standing in terms of usability. Spoiler, it's not that gread but easy to fix.
At first I tested some setups. Each one was one fuel chamber and one generator.
Format:
fuel chamber | generator | generator limit for running endless | electricity production
3 Cooling Cells:
T3 + T3 -> 15.625% (500/32) -> 195.3 e/s
T3 + T2 -> 16.666% (500/30) -> 166.66 e/s
T2 + T3 -> 15.151% (500/33) -> 189.387 e/s
T2 + T2 -> 16.129% (500/31) -> 161.29 e/s
T1 + T1 -> 17.241% (500/29) -> 172.41 e/s
2 Cooling Cells:
T3 + T3 -> 12.5% (400/32) -> 156.25 e/s
T3 + T2 -> 13.333% (400/30) -> 133.33 e/s
T2 + T3 -> 12.121% (400/33) -> 151.512 e/s
T2 + T2 -> 12.903% (400/31) -> 129.03 e/s
T1 + T1 -> 13.793% (400/29) -> 137.93 e/s
1 Cooling Cell:
T3 + T3 -> 6.25% (200/32) -> 78.125 e/s
T3 + T2 -> 6.666% (200/30) -> 66.66 e/s
T2 + T3 -> 6.06% (200/33) -> 75.75 e/s
T2 + T2 -> 6.451% (200/31) -> 64.51 e/s
T1 + T1 -> 6.896% (200/29) -> 68.96 e/s
0 Cooling Cells:
T3 + T3 -> 6.25% (200/32) -> 78.125 e/s
T3 + T2 -> 6.666% (200/30) -> 66.66 e/s
T2 + T3 -> 6.06% (200/33) -> 75.75 e/s
T2 + T2 -> 6.451% (200/31) -> 64.51 e/s
T1 + T1 -> 6.896% (200/29) -> 68.96 e/s
What you can see is that the third coolant cells efficency is only 50%, why? I don't know.
You can also see that there is no difference beetween 0 and 1 cooling cells. That's because the fuel chamber and generator have each a base dessipation rate of 5 heat units per second, so a total of 10.
Means the cooling racks are not treated as an additional cooling option, instead replacing the base dessipation.
And 1 coolant unit can cool 10 heat units, because cooling cells regenerate 1 coolant unit per second.
The other competitors are heat sink cube + radiator extension (heat sink) and just radiator extension (radiator).
Comparison of stats on a T3 fuel chamber with one T3 generator:
Format:
type | weight | generator limit for running endless | heat production | were the heat goes | electricity production
Data:
Heat sink 5620.8 kg | 100% -> 160 heat units -> 50 heat sink cube, 110 radiator -> 1250 e/s
Radiator 534 kg | 71.875% -> 115 heat units -> 10 base, 105 radiator -> 898.4375 e/s
Cooling Rack 1901.1 kg | 15.625% -> 25 heat units -> 25 cooling cells -> 195.3 e/s
Okay, that's not looking good for cooling racks.
How many trinagle thruster could it power? T2 base other parts T3, electricity consumption between 81.675 and 81.676 e/s can't find out exact value, 3 digit limit. 81.676 for calculation used
Data:
Heat sink 15 thruster -> 24.86 e/s leftover
Radiator 11 thruster -> 0.0015 e/s leftover
Cooling Rack 2 thruster -> 31.948 e/s leftover
Hm, lets do some scenarios to see when cooling racks would become competitive.
All cooling cells are working with 100%.
Calculated for one T3 fuel chamber and one T3 generator.
The coolant regenration rate per second is different.
All thruster are working with 100%
Format:
generator limit for running endless | electricity production | supplyable thruster amount | leftover electricity | cooling capacitiy
Cases:
Regeneration rate of 6:
100% -> 1250 e/s -> 15 thruster -> 24.86 e/s | 180 heat units
Regeneration rate of 5:
93.75% -> 1171.875 e/s -> 14 thruster -> 28.411 e/s | 150 heat units
Regeneration rate of 4:
75% -> 937.5 e/s -> 11 thruster -> 39.064 e/s | 120 heat units
Regeneration rate of 3:
56.25% -> 703.125 e/s -> 8 thruster -> 49.717 e/s | 90 heat units
Regeneration rate of 2:
37.5% -> 468.75 e/s -> 5 thruster -> 60.37 e/s | 60 heat units
Regeneration rate of 1:
18.75% -> 234.375 e/s -> 2 thruster -> 71.023 e/s | 30 heat units
So what does this mean. Well to be competitive they should be better than a single radiator extension, for that the regeneration rate must be 4 or more. In my mind it should not be better than a heat sink cube in the given scenario, so regeneration rate below 6.
Means, a regeneration rate of 4 or 5 would make the cooling rack competitive to other cooling solutions.
Ps. The symbol used to create the spaces is U+2008, " " the on in brackets.
Pss. I also included my test setup, so feel free to test it.
Attachments
-
24.9 KB Views: 44