Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[arphen]

why not just drain one level of the aquifer into another?

[ThatAussieGuy]

why not just drain one level of the aquifer into another?

What would be the purpose of doing that?

[tahujdt]

I was just thinking: "When's the next AussieGuy project going to be?" You were memorialized in dwarven !!SCIENCE!! history when you nvented the dwarven checkerboard, and you've done many things since then. Next: DwArven Chess with goblins and nobles. You might leave out the nobles, cause toady fixed unreasonable mandates. Oh, what am I saying? That's dwaven tradition!

[ThatAussieGuy]

I was just thinking: "When's the next AussieGuy project going to be?" You were memorialized in dwarven !!SCIENCE!! history when you nvented the dwarven checkerboard, and you've done many things since then. Next: DwArven Chess with goblins and nobles. You might leave out the nobles, cause toady fixed unreasonable mandates. Oh, what am I saying? That's dwaven tradition!

This is more of a tutorial than a full-blown project as I wasn't the first to discover it.  It seemed like it wasn't well-known, so I thought I'd share it.  I haven't really had a chance to properly get to grips with 34.xx, but I do have one or two ideas for how to defile the undead and vampires for my own nefarious purposes.  Just gotta learn all the new stuff (and how to set up a proper clothing industry now that the dwarves have discovered modesty) before I do anything fancy.

[Shinziril]

I think the aquifer water might just count as "flowing" entirely without reference to whether any water is actually moving.  I've had this happen before, although the simplest methods only seem to work on maps with rivers.  If there's a river often you can just channel a hole and fill it with buckets, and putting a waterwheel over that will produce power, despite the lack of any reasonable way for the water to be moving.  Of course, the aquifer method is easier to produce ridiculously huge waterwheel farms with. 

[ivanthe8th]

Found my way here, I like this.
One big question for me is what's the impact on FPS from a design like this?

I presume that what's happening is that the pump causes all the aquifer-filled tiles to enter the "flowing water" state, which powers the reactors. But it would appear that the water isn't actually moving, so perhaps the result would be free energy at no FPS cost.

Alternatively, the water being constantly created/destroyed could have a major impact on FPS, depending on how the game deals with it. AussieGuy, what's your experience?

[ThatAussieGuy]

If you have a look in ASCII or with certain tilesets, the water does indeed seem to be moving diagonally.  As for FPS, I've always been running DF on a high-end system so I can't really say as to the FPS cost.  Hasn't been more than 1-2 frames for me though, I think.

[Graknorke]

I look at these pictures but I have no idea what's happening...
How could one tile of water power a room full of waterwheels? Actually, are the waterwheels even shown in those pictures? Whoops, I see how you did that, attaching all of them together. I still don't see how seven units of water powers all of that though.

[ThatAussieGuy]

I look at these pictures but I have no idea what's happening...
How could one tile of water power a room full of waterwheels? Actually, are the waterwheels even shown in those pictures? Whoops, I see how you did that, attaching all of them together. I still don't see how seven units of water powers all of that though.

An aquifer works by both generating and absorbing water.  Normally, a group of aquifer tiles like that just sort of 'sit' together as one big aquifer chunk producing water.  The screwpump essentially 'breaks' the large aquifer and makes water flow back-and-forth through all the individual aquifer tiles.  Thus; never-ending power.

[Graknorke]

So it's the aquifer itself flowing, rather than water from it? I think I get it then.

[ivanthe8th]

Yes, but according to AussieGuy, the water flow isn't much more than your typical stream or river. Therefore the FPS cost is fairly low.

I'm still a little concerned that a system like this, once started, cannot be stopped. It makes me wonder about the utility of building a mini aquifer-power system relative to a more ordinary reactor.

Would it, for example, be better on FPS use a smaller aquifer system simply to power the pumps in a more typical over-under reactor, and have the option of turning the bigger reactor on and off at will? Or would it be better to just build a bigger aquifer system and leave it on indefinitely?

I can only hope AussieGuy or others as knowledgeable could provide insight. Meanwhile I'll try and get good enough at this game to test it.

[ThatAussieGuy]

Honestly, if you're going to involve the aquifer anyway, you might as well just build an aquifer reactor rather than use one to power an over/under design.  The FPS loss would be about the same anyway, probably.  There's no reason you HAVE to build a large one either.  A few rows to give you 2,000-odd urists of power is generally all most forts really need.

[gestahl]

I'm still a little concerned that a system like this, once started, cannot be stopped. It makes me wonder about the utility of building a mini aquifer-power system relative to a more ordinary reactor.

You can turn it off if you drain it somehow, I've done it with 2 layer aquifers before.

AF....bathtub...Fh

A=Aquifer
F=Floodgates
h= channel into aquifer on level below

Also, filling the tub, then leaving both the tap and the drain open for a bit, then closing both, has given me completely sealed off "flowing" water with varying amounts of success.

[quixoticcool]

Cool system. I generally use the ol artificial river flowing through carved fortifications on the map edge but it's nice to know there's a more compact alternative if you have an aquifer.