Is there a way to use Accumulators on space platforms beside fusion?

[Universalgenie]

Hello!

I have a space platform wich uses fusion power to reach the solar system edge but while flying between the inner planets it can/could run completly with solar panels. Because of the lower footprint of accumulators (2x2) compared to solar panels (3x3) it would be possible to put several accumulators on places, where the panels don't fit. But because of the fusion they will never be used until the fusion runs out of power.

Is there a way to use the accumulators before the fusion? On a planet one would connect the fusion with power switches, but ist dosn't work on space platforms (as far as I know).

[PunCrathod]

Wire an accumulator and the reactor to the inserter that puts fuel into the reactor. Put the inserter in blacklist filter mode. Read reactor fuel. Enable the inserter when accumulator is below 5%.

Should result in the reactor only turning on when solar is not enough.

[RiO]

Originally posted by PunCrathod:

Wire an accumulator and the reactor to the inserter that puts fuel into the reactor. Put the inserter in blacklist filter mode. Read reactor fuel. Enable the inserter when accumulator is below 5%.

Should result in the reactor only turning on when solar is not enough.

Fusion cells last a long, long time though and the current cell would be fully drained before accumulators would take over. And because power networks on platforms are global, power switches don't accomplish anything, as OP has also already realized.

[Hurkyl]

Since the fusion reactor needs fluid to function, you could use pumps to turn the fluid inputs on/off.

[Fel]

The main thing to remember is that a fusion reactor only consumes as much fuel as needed, like boilers but unlike nuclear reactors.
There isn't really a need for accumulators when using fusion, unless you plan to have spikes in demand that go beyond what fusion can give, but at that point you would need a large array of accumulators and adding more fusion reactors and generators would probably take significantly less space (and consume even less fuel thanks to the neighbour bonus).

If your platform consumes so little power that pure solar would be enough (in the inner system at least), your fusion cell would probably be lasting several real world hours (perhaps even days), which means that your power is already quite close to being free already, and with way less space required.

[PunCrathod]

Yeah... I forgot to include my main point. Accumulators are pretty much useless if you have fusion. Other than as a measuring stick for whether the solar you have is enough to power your ship where it is currently at.

[Universalgenie]

Originally posted by Hurkyl:

Since the fusion reactor needs fluid to function, you could use pumps to turn the fluid inputs on/off.

I think, this will work! Why I havn't seen this option? This should also be much faster in switching than turning the fuel cell inserters on and off.

Originally posted by Fel:

There isn't really a need for accumulators when using fusion,
...
If your platform consumes so little power that pure solar would be enough (in the inner system at least), your fusion cell would probably be lasting several real world hours (perhaps even days), which means that your power is already quite close to being free already, and with way less space required.

Yes, but I want that... Because it's a game :D The platform has enough cargo space to carry several thousands of fuel cells, lasting for maybe a real world year. But my personal goal is to waste as few as possible. To be honest, there's also no need for using even solar panels on space platforms once the reactors have started.

And accumulators need no extra space because there will always be some spots on a platform were a 2x2 part fits without building extra foundation.

Thanks for your answers!

[PunCrathod]

Originally posted by Universalgenie:

Originally posted by Hurkyl:

Since the fusion reactor needs fluid to function, you could use pumps to turn the fluid inputs on/off.

I think, this will work! Why I havn't seen this option? This should also be much faster in switching than turning the fuel cell inserters on and off.

For turning on there isn't much of a difference between the two methods. Turning off however the fluid pump on average wins by minutes. So I think the pump strat is much better. I will try to remember it the next time someone asks how to throttle fusion.

Now that I think about it you don't actually need a pump. Just control the cryogenic plant that recycles the fluoroketone. The delay on that is just one crafting cycle which is 2.5 seconds. Less than that if you have quality and or speed modules. Just set the accumulator charge threshold high enough to last those 2.5 seconds. If you need faster response time than that tough using a pump is the best way that I can currently think about.

[Fel]

Oh, wanting to do things just because you can in a game like this is definitely a good reason to at least attempt it.

Since it doesn't consume the fuel when not needed, cutting off the fluids with a pump (I would cut off the fluids going out rather than in to have an even more direct effect) is definitely a good way to do it.

[Chindraba]

Originally posted by Fel:

Oh, wanting to do things just because you can in a game like this is definitely a good reason to at least attempt it.

Describes 75% of my crazy builds. The other 25% are "I wonder what would happen if....?"

Of course, answers to the second often result in more of the first.

[Fel]

I think nearly a third of my time in this game (way more than what steam shows by the way) was trying out weird or over-complicated ideas just for the sake of it.

But I still think we need a sanity check before starting such projects, like "am I going to do this because I want to or because I somehow believe that it is a good idea (hint: usually isn't)?".
Too many times I went for complex solutions when I didn't really want to but because I couldn't see the more obvious and way simpler one.

[RiO]

Originally posted by Hurkyl:

Since the fusion reactor needs fluid to function, you could use pumps to turn the fluid inputs on/off.

Oh! That's a good one actually. You could halt the fluoroketone cycle. Nice!

Originally posted by PunCrathod:

Now that I think about it you don't actually need a pump. Just control the cryogenic plant that recycles the fluoroketone. The delay on that is just one crafting cycle which is 2.5 seconds. Less than that if you have quality and or speed modules. Just set the accumulator charge threshold high enough to last those 2.5 seconds. If you need faster response time than that tough using a pump is the best way that I can currently think about.

The best way to have this instantly take effect is probably if you'd near-saturate the ketone loop. In that case it wouldn't matter whether you block an incoming pump, outgoing pump, or the cryo-plant itself. It would just near-instantly jam, after one or maybe two cycles and halt.

Would require some careful calculations wrt fluid network capacity, of course.

[Hurkyl]

Controlling the cryogenic plant would definitely be simpler for cutting the fluid intake. With pumps, you also have the option of pumping out the fluid currently in the pipes, so that you get a quicker response time to the shutdown signal.

I'm not sure blocking the output would be more direct. IIRC there isn't all that much fluid moving through the system, so I'm not sure about getting the system to back up -- the stopping condition would be "all of your fluids are sitting in the output buffer". Maybe if you attached the pump directly to the reactor so there is no pipe buffer... I don't know how much the internal buffer can store, though.

[Chindraba]

One game was built around the idea of "you shouldn't ...." Well, I wanted to see just how bad "this" idea was, or why everyone thought you shouldn't.

What was most interesting about that one was how many times "shouldn't" was based on personal dislike of some style which just got spread through the community because "My mother’s, brother’s, sister’s, cousin’s, auntie’s Uncle Barney’s, father’s, brother had a cousin from Killarney" who said it was bad. When, if done with any brains behind it worked as well as, or better than, the "accepted" system. There were also plenty of cases where 'bad idea' is an understatement as well. Even then I learned something anyway. And it was certainly fun.

[Fel]

Originally posted by Hurkyl:

I'm not sure blocking the output would be more direct. IIRC there isn't all that much fluid moving through the system, so I'm not sure about getting the system to back up -- the stopping condition would be "all of your fluids are sitting in the output buffer". Maybe if you attached the pump directly to the reactor so there is no pipe buffer... I don't know how much the internal buffer can store, though.

Since it works the same way as the boiler, blocking the output means shutting it down (maybe not that exact tick but most likely the next one) when it is working under-capacity already (which it usually would on a platform).
It seems to work in my (admitedly very limited) test at least.

Of course, if it is not working under-capacity, cutting off the input probably brings a much more direct stop comparatively.

[Universalgenie]

I tried it in the editor. A fusion reactor stores 1000 cold fluoroketone and can't be connected to a network. A fusion generator stores 100 hot fluoroketone and has also no networtk connection. Plasma cannot use a pump. The buffered cold fluoroketone can't be removed by using a pump once it is in the reactor. So if there is low energy consumption in the system this is everything but direct.

To control this more directly, it seemed to be nescessary to prevent that the buffer will be filled. This should be much more complicated...