CleverRaven / Cataclysm-DDA

Cataclysm - Dark Days Ahead. A turn-based survival game set in a post-apocalyptic world.
http://cataclysmdda.org
Other
10.69k stars 4.2k forks source link

Alcohol/Ethanol energy density is wrong #60818

Open anoobindisguise opened 2 years ago

anoobindisguise commented 2 years ago

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

Alcohol fuels have the wrong energy density. Per https://www.iea-amf.org/content/fuel_information/fuel_info_home/ethanol/e10/ethanol_properties/ I get about 27mJ of ethanol per kg, or 21 mJ per liter. So that's 27kJ/gram, 21kJ/mL. However, in game ethanol, methanol, denatured alcohol, etc have a density of 1:1, they all weight 1g per 1mL. Thus they get differing energy densities. However, in game Alcohol (the fuel used for ethanol, denatured alcohol, etc) are all 15.6kJ per mL. This is vastly too low, it should be at about 33% higher. Denatured alcohol is usually within 98% of ethanol energy IIRC.

Solution you would like.

Can weight be specified to less than 0.001kJ per charge? If so that should be done, and then energy density should be corrected in addition to that per the alcohol material. As far as I know alcohol material is used as fuels basically only for concentrated alcohol, and for vodka and other hard liquors for the ethanol cell bionic.

Describe alternatives you have considered.

Split alcohol into several different types to represent the varying proofs?

Additional context

No response

borsek commented 2 years ago

I've been thinking about revamping the chemistry system, how to tackle all of it, whether to go with actual densities of fluids, trivial or chemical names with concentration percentages, energy, reaction yield, etc.

So with all these errors, as well as the wildly inaccurate energy consumptions of some items - 10W night vision vs. what feels like 0.1W thermal vision, etc. I don't think highly accurate energy density is worth worrying about and going to 0.1J per charge accuracy for.

After all this is a game, and going with IRL values gets tedious at a certain point. How far are you actually willing to go, and how much is even feasible for simulation (due to the eventual laaaaag). Much better to have 'whole values', and relative rough relations between them - otherwise, are we going to assign a measly 30% energy efficiency of a thermal combustion engine to the burning process? What about the bionics, do they use combustion or fuel cells, which have much better yields?

TL;DR: everything is so wrong with energy density that a slight difference in it between practically identical fluids is the least of our worries, imho.

github-actions[bot] commented 1 year ago

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. Please do not bump or comment on this issue unless you are actively working on it. Stale issues, and stale issues that are closed are still considered.