[1.19.2] Reactor Planner issues megathread

[Geekerandy]

The Reactor Planner's simulation and in-world Nuclear Reactor testing function correctly, and are the same. The Heat Exchanger, Balancer, and Pump stats shown in the Reactor Planner are half of their actual working values, which can be observed in the Reactor Planner simulation or within a Nuclear/Steam Reactor.

In the video, I show each of the 9 components that have incorrectly listed stats, then displaying the components functioning with their actual stats via the use of placed Nuclear Reactors and low-durability Coolant Cells.

https://youtu.be/tJ_Er0jlZrI

[Geekerandy]

Forge 43.4.2, IC2 Classic 1.19.2-2.1.0.1 Only dependency mods and JEI.

[Speiger]

@Geekerandy turns out there is a design flaw in my reactor implementation. And its explained why.

Note that this bug applies to ALL IC2C versions

[Geekerandy]

I'm not sure if it is intended or if this can be an enhancement, but the Reactor Planner's Explosion Strength does not consider capping out at the maximum explosion strength set in the config. I think it should. Same applies for Steam Reactor setting.

[Geekerandy]

ANY component that is NOT one of the three types of Reactor Plating, or is a Uranium rod, will break the Explosion Strength calculation. Broken: Functioning normally with the three types of Reactor Plating:

[Geekerandy]

In the Setup Result Prediction tab of the Reactor Planner, when testing a lone Quad Charcoal Enriched Uranium Rod, the Expected Power stat displays 143 EU/t instead of the Quad Charcoal Rod's 144 EU/t.

Rather, given a setup that has any number of Quad Charcoal Enriched Uranium Rods, the Expected Power may be 1 EU/t under the actual value. The issue is reproducible under these conditions: -No rod pulses are being sent to ANY Quad Charcoal Enriched Uranium Rods, whether from other Rods or Reflectors -There are none of these specific types of Rods in the Planner: Any Quad Rod, Dual Redstone, Dual Ender Pearl, Dual NetherStar, or Single Netherstar. For example in this screenshot, the actual EU/t is 1,748 EU/t, but the Expected Power is 1,747 EU/t. There are also "outlier" setups that may cause the Expected Power to have an incorrect EU/t value, but these conditions always reproduce the issue. The issue also seems to be consistent for every setup, if a specific reactor layout displays an incorrect Expected Power value, that layout will always display that incorrect Expected Power value.

The Active Simulation, of course, does the correct EU/t calculation.

The odd part about this issue is that it only affects the Quad Charcoal Enriched Uranium rod. It does not occur with any other type of rod. This is also an extremely minor and low-priority issue since the active simulation works just fine.

[Geekerandy]

While the value displayed for Explosion Strength is likely rounded for readability, I believe the Reactor Planner is underestimating the effects of Reactor Plating in reducing the Explosion Strength.

Both of these setups are listed with an Explosion Strength of 36. Setup 1: Setup 2:

However you can see here in the screenshot, both explosion craters are significantly different. Setup 1 is on the left, and Setup 2 is on the right.

Furthermore, this is a setup with an explosion strength of 41. Setup 3:

In this screenshot, you can see Setup 2's crater on the left, and Setup 3's on the right. Despite Setup 3's listed as having a higher explosion strength, the crater is smaller.