How to divide by 5 with conveyor belts

[buchanant]

This problem has been daunting me for a year. I finally figured it out. First split by 2. Then split each of the 2 by 3. So that you have 1 2 3 4 5 6 splitter nodes. Splitter nodes 3 and 4 divide by 2 and combine 2 of the splits into a 3.5 combiner node and the other 3.5 split feeds back into the initial 2 splits. This evens out all the resources to 5 exits. Enjoy!

To simplify this down, this can be accomplished with 5 splitters and 3 mergers.

https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198004665858/screenshots/

[Vectorspace]

Or, split into 2, then split each of those into 3.
You now have 6 equal belts.
Route one of those 6 back and merge it into the original single supply belt.
5 equal belts, using 3 splitters and 1 merger.

Note that it is not necessary to precise balance using splitters and mergers (aka a balancer), though some do as personal preference. You can use a manifold instead: https://satisfactory.fandom.com/wiki/Manifold
Each has its advantages and disadvantages.

[buchanant]

Vectorspace, I as practice do this manifold thing. In essence, if I have an unequal split, I just flood one constructor and the remaining constructors get equal amounts resulting in very little backed up resources. But now, I dont have to back up anything on a 5 split.

[Stress Tensor]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Vectorspace:

Or, split into 2, then split each of those into 3.
You now have 6 equal belts.
Route one of those 6 back and merge it into the original single supply belt.
5 equal belts, using 3 splitters and 1 merger.

Note that it is not necessary to precise balance using splitters and mergers (aka a balancer), though some do as personal preference. You can use a manifold instead: https://satisfactory.fandom.com/wiki/Manifold
Each has its advantages and disadvantages.

I like this solution better - simpler along with using fewer logistical elements. I also agree that anything other than trivial load balancing is usually not worth it in terms of space-required to implement (favoring manifolds instead).

But on a related side note, I recently implemented nuclear power and then watched a video about it where I heard an interesting example of where load balancing would be useful despite the increase in complexity. The creator suggested load balancing of the uranium fuel rods so that the power plants don't load up the way they would using a manifold, thus reducing accumulation of radioactive elements. I haven't done it myself because I didn't feel that the radiation exposure was that severe in this case, but seemed like a good idea anyway.

[Mister Fabulous]

Oprindeligt skrevet af buchanant:

This problem has been daunting me for a year. I finally figured it out. First split by 2. Then split each of the 2 by 3. So that you have 1 2 3 4 5 6 splitter nodes. Splitter nodes 3 and 4 divide by 2 and combine 2 of the splits into a 3.5 combiner node and the other 3.5 split feeds back into the initial 2 splits. This evens out all the resources to 5 exits. Enjoy!

To simplify this down, this can be accomplished with 5 splitters and 3 mergers.

Do you have a picture of the end result? I'm having a hard time visualizing it and am wondering how it differs from the 1:5 non-bottlenecked splitter on the wiki: https://satisfactory.fandom.com/wiki/Balancer?file=Balancer_odd.png

[Huren Ogeko]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Mister Fabulous:

Oprindeligt skrevet af buchanant:

This problem has been daunting me for a year. I finally figured it out. First split by 2. Then split each of the 2 by 3. So that you have 1 2 3 4 5 6 splitter nodes. Splitter nodes 3 and 4 divide by 2 and combine 2 of the splits into a 3.5 combiner node and the other 3.5 split feeds back into the initial 2 splits. This evens out all the resources to 5 exits. Enjoy!

To simplify this down, this can be accomplished with 5 splitters and 3 mergers.

Do you have a picture of the end result? I'm having a hard time visualizing it and am wondering how it differs from the 1:5 non-bottlenecked splitter on the wiki: https://satisfactory.fandom.com/wiki/Balancer?file=Balancer_odd.png

Here is how I would do it (technically I would just use a manifold but if I were to do it I would do this:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2919541528
forgive the present...it photobombed me and I didnt notice until I took the screenshot
but that is an impure copper node with mk2 miner fully overclocked pushing out 150 units over a mk3 elevator and conveyor into the building
then it hits a merger and outputs mk3 into a splitter which splits left and right.
both directions go to three way splitters with one of those resulting 6 outputs going back to the original merger and the other 5 remaining outputs going to smelters.
it takes like 30 seconds for it to settle down but you end up with exactly 30 unites each on all outputs.
the only caveat to remember is the connection between the merger and the 2 way splitter needs to handle 1.2 the amount coming in from the miner due tot he feed back line. in this case its 180 units so belt upgrade is not needed but in some situations it may need to be a faster belt.

[buchanant]

Mister Fabulous, I added a screen shot in the first post, but here it is again. Not complicated, but does take some space.

https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198004665858/screenshots/

[Wolfgang]

That is actually quite interesting. I need to rework my encased Uranium cell production and this is then actually coming in handy. With 250 Uranium ore/min from the Miner and every Manufacturer needing 25/min this is certainly what I need for it to have the least amount of radiation.

Very nice.

[buchanant]

Hurengo, that's a good solution. My solution handles at 780 with no issues for all splits.

[Stress Tensor]

Oprindeligt skrevet af hurenogeko:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Mister Fabulous:

Do you have a picture of the end result? I'm having a hard time visualizing it and am wondering how it differs from the 1:5 non-bottlenecked splitter on the wiki: https://satisfactory.fandom.com/wiki/Balancer?file=Balancer_odd.png

Here is how I would do it (technically I would just use a manifold but if I were to do it I would do this:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2919541528
forgive the present...it photobombed me and I didnt notice until I took the screenshot
but that is an impure copper node with mk2 miner fully overclocked pushing out 150 units over a mk3 elevator and conveyor into the building
then it hits a merger and outputs mk3 into a splitter which splits left and right.
both directions go to three way splitters with one of those resulting 6 outputs going back to the original merger and the other 5 remaining outputs going to smelters.
it takes like 30 seconds for it to settle down but you end up with exactly 30 unites each on all outputs.
the only caveat to remember is the connection between the merger and the 2 way splitter needs to handle 1.2 the amount coming in from the miner due tot he feed back line. in this case its 180 units so belt upgrade is not needed but in some situations it may need to be a faster belt.

I think this solution is the same as what @Vectorspace proposed above. I like this solution, but unless I am mistaken the picture you attached does not quite reflect what you wrote. I believe you have an extra splitter on the right side, whereas instead I think the two extra outputs from the previous splitter (i.e. other than the output which goes back to the merger) should go directly into those two (rightmost) smelters.

[kLuns]

I like to use this method, works like a charm:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2920057666

[buchanant]

kLuns, that looks like it will have unequal distribution. Half goes left and half goes right. Left puts out 1/6th per outlet and recycles 1/6th to split between left and right, resulting in 5/24th per outlet. Right puts out 1/6th per outlet + the recycle from left, which put out 7/36th per outlet. It doesnt add up to me.

[Huren Ogeko]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Stress Tensor:

Oprindeligt skrevet af hurenogeko:

Here is how I would do it (technically I would just use a manifold but if I were to do it I would do this:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2919541528
forgive the present...it photobombed me and I didnt notice until I took the screenshot
but that is an impure copper node with mk2 miner fully overclocked pushing out 150 units over a mk3 elevator and conveyor into the building
then it hits a merger and outputs mk3 into a splitter which splits left and right.
both directions go to three way splitters with one of those resulting 6 outputs going back to the original merger and the other 5 remaining outputs going to smelters.
it takes like 30 seconds for it to settle down but you end up with exactly 30 unites each on all outputs.
the only caveat to remember is the connection between the merger and the 2 way splitter needs to handle 1.2 the amount coming in from the miner due tot he feed back line. in this case its 180 units so belt upgrade is not needed but in some situations it may need to be a faster belt.

I think this solution is the same as what @Vectorspace proposed above. I like this solution, but unless I am mistaken the picture you attached does not quite reflect what you wrote. I believe you have an extra splitter on the right side, whereas instead I think the two extra outputs from the previous splitter (i.e. other than the output which goes back to the merger) should go directly into those two (rightmost) smelters.

It may be hard to see given the distance I am
but what is there is 1 merger and 3 splitters. one splitter feeds the other two
the merger is the one closest to the miner.

it works. its the standard accepted satisfactory standard for 5 way splitting and similar designs work on pretty much any other prime number splitting. I generally use manifolds but I do this sometimes when I have space and just want to watch things split evenly for some reason.

[Huren Ogeko]

Oprindeligt skrevet af kLuns:

I like to use this method, works like a charm:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2920057666

this picture here is a bit easier to see. Its essentially the same exact thing I posted only much easier to see what is going on. I generally try to lay things out with more compactness having in mind with the whole thing above the ground and having the splitters even meet right up with the machines via elevators when possible,


no wait that is slightly different. that one pre splits before the merger. is uses more and extra splitter and a second merger but it should do the same thing.

[Stress Tensor]

Oprindeligt skrevet af hurenogeko:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Stress Tensor:

I think this solution is the same as what @Vectorspace proposed above. I like this solution, but unless I am mistaken the picture you attached does not quite reflect what you wrote. I believe you have an extra splitter on the right side, whereas instead I think the two extra outputs from the previous splitter (i.e. other than the output which goes back to the merger) should go directly into those two (rightmost) smelters.

It may be hard to see given the distance I am
but what is there is 1 merger and 3 splitters. one splitter feeds the other two
the merger is the one closest to the miner.

it works. its the standard accepted satisfactory standard for 5 way splitting and similar designs work on pretty much any other prime number splitting. I generally use manifolds but I do this sometimes when I have space and just want to watch things split evenly for some reason.

I must be losing it -- I see not 3 but 4 splitters and the 1 merger in your picture. As you have stated, I would expect 3 splitters and 1 merger in the standard arrangement.

[Huren Ogeko]

here is my design laid out more better visibility
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2920109935
this is essentially what was in my first screenshot and what I generally use for 1 to 5 splitting. its one merger and 3 splitters.
the container representing the source of materials and the 5 outputs on the other side.