|
10-27-2015, 03:26 AM | #1 |
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Land of Enchantment
|
[Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
The Chemical Refinery (SS1 p.19) requires one power point and produces rocket fuel (e.g. 0.5 tons/hour at SM+5). This is specified as LOX and H2.
The Fuel Cell (SS1 p.20) runs on rocket fuel and produces one power point for an arbitrary amount of time, which is 3 hours at TL7 on integral tankage A Fuel Tank (SS1 p.17) of rocket fuel will power a fuel cell for 4x as long as integral tankage, strongly implying that the integral tankage is 1/4 of whatever a system mass is (e.g. 1/4 of 5 tons at SM+5 is 1.25 tons). Since the TL7 Fuel Cell runs for 3 hours on 1.25 tons of rocket fuel, it consumes 0.4167 tons of rocket fuel per hour. If it powers the refinery this makes 0.5 tons of rocket fuel per hour. Thus, this combination can produce a net 0.0833 tons of rocket fuel per hour forever. It's even worse at higher TLs and larger systems. At TL10+ for SM+5 it's a net 0.495 tons/hour. I'm thinking that Chemical refinery production should be divided by 10- that would be just enough to keep from breaking even. Errata? Or just a rounding error/below granularity? Also, since the chemical refinery makes rocket fuel, is there a rule to divide production by 9 if you're only keeping the hydrogen? This seems reasonable- an oxygen molecule is mass 32, and two hydrogen molecules are mass 4, so the mass fraction is 4/36 = 1/9. Another question: For rockets that have the option of using water as reaction mass- can one switch between water and hydrogen at will, or must the rockets and tankage be fuel-specific? Clearly in the Real World it is the latter, but I don't see how making a multifuel rocket would be beyond the capabilities of a society that can make a ram-rocket. Perhaps double cost (since a ram-rocket is 5x cost)? There are also rules for other reactions masses, like ammonia; same question. Related question: Clearly, one uses the Chemical refinery to crack water into LOX/H2 or to make hydrogen. I assume that one can specify a version that isolates ammonia or methane as well. But what about water? It only costs $20/ton, but I assume that's at the starport and is mostly infrastructure and handing costs. So if you have to do a true frontier refuel someplace that liquid water is available can I assume that one can just filter it and pump it into the tanks, and that any ship capable of using water will have such a filter/pump? If so, what is a fair pumping rate? One fuel tank per hour? Is it different if the water is ice? Final question: Are there stats for what one power point is, somewhere? Last edited by acrosome; 10-27-2015 at 04:07 AM. |
10-27-2015, 03:43 AM | #2 |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: [Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
I think much of problem comes from how many different types of power production are made equal.
Fuel cells would really produce only 1/10 PPs, and solar arrays 1/100. There are also a few types of fusion plants with most not producing more power than fission, just requiring easier to get/make fuel. Spaceships may be the only thing we have unless and until the Vehicle Design System gets published, but it's compriseD of very "chunky" units.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
10-27-2015, 03:46 AM | #3 | ||
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
|
Re: [Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
Quote:
The industrial systems are probably too efficient. SS7 addresses this: Quote:
__________________
My Blog: Mailanka's Musing. Currently Playing: Psi-Wars, a step-by-step exploration of building your own Space Opera setting, inspired by Star Wars. |
||
10-27-2015, 04:44 AM | #4 |
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Land of Enchantment
|
Re: [Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
|
10-27-2015, 05:50 AM | #5 | |
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
|
Re: [Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
Sure!
Quote:
__________________
My Blog: Mailanka's Musing. Currently Playing: Psi-Wars, a step-by-step exploration of building your own Space Opera setting, inspired by Star Wars. |
|
10-27-2015, 09:41 AM | #6 |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: [Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
I'm not actually sure whether the error is that refineries are to productive (suggested by the Slower Industrial Systems) bit, or that Fuel Cells are too efficient as well as being vastly too powerful (as part of the design choice to make them unrealistic so they can be playable alongside reactors).
Of course, it could easily be both.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
10-27-2015, 10:28 AM | #7 |
Join Date: Apr 2015
|
Re: [Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
I don't see any problem at all, we do the same thing on earth. Oil refineries require some amount of energy (say 1 unit) to produce fuel. That fuel provides enough energy to power the refinery and have some extra left over (for example, the fuel provides 3 units of energy). This means infinite power, up until the point where you run out of raw materials.
For your spaceship you need access to raw fuel components to generate fuel, so really you are turning cargo space and a factory into an inefficent fuel tank.
__________________
I run a low fantasy GURPS game: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdo...YLkfnhr3vYXpFg World details on Obsidian Portal: https://the-fall-of-brekhan.obsidian...ikis/main-page |
10-27-2015, 10:37 AM | #8 | |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: [Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
Quote:
Looking at this realistically, water has a heat of formation of about -16 MJ/kg, so converting a short ton of water into hydrogen and oxygen takes 14.4 GJ or 4 MWh, meaning the SM+5 fuel processor requires a minimum of 2 MW (plus additional for liquefying). 1 EP, based on other items, is somewhere in the 50-100 kW/ton (of ship) range, or 1.5-3 MW. That's pretty high given its size, but the actual efficiency isn't absurd if we go with the higher estimate for an EP. However, a fuel cell is grossly unrealistic. A 1 EP fuel cell producing 3 MW and weighing 1.125 tons has a power density of 2.7 kW/kg, which is order of magnitude higher than any realistic device. At realistic TL 7 efficiencies, it should produce 2-3 MWh per ton of fuel; with 0.375 tons of internal fuel, it should run out of fuel in 20-30 minutes, not 3 hours, and even TL 10 reactors should last less than an hour. |
|
10-28-2015, 08:53 AM | #9 | |
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Land of Enchantment
|
Re: [Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
So- errata.
Any commentary on the other questions: Quote:
|
|
10-28-2015, 10:03 AM | #10 |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: [Spaceships] Perpetual Motion?
Not exactly - it's more just an issue of the simplification than an outright error in the document (like, say, when the projectile damage was written in Damage rather than dDamage, making them 10x as powerful as they should have been). Probably the ideal solution is to just have certain systems (like factories and refineries) have reduced output when powered by fuel cells.
No rule, but making your own would be fine. Your numbers look fine here; I'm assuming you intend to use the hydrogen as reaction mass? |
Tags |
spaceships |
|
|