the 9800 aux cell, a list of possible 3d rectangle combinations

[wanzer]

hi
I came to believe having aux power systems grouped to stacks of 9800 units is the most optimum way of making use of them.

for anyone that likes to make neat and even blocks, I rendered a list of dimensions that all end up in 9800 sized 3d rectangles

this however does not cover all of them

the most square you can get is [14 X 25 X 28]

[1, 1, 9800]
[1, 2, 4900]
[1, 4, 2450]
[1, 5, 1960]
[1, 7, 1400]
[1, 8, 1225]
[1, 10, 980]
[1, 14, 700]
[1, 20, 490]
[1, 25, 392]
[1, 28, 350]
[1, 35, 280]
[1, 40, 245]
[1, 49, 200]
[1, 50, 196]
[1, 56, 175]
[1, 70, 140]
[1, 98, 100]
[2, 2, 2450]
[2, 4, 1225]
[2, 5, 980]
[2, 7, 700]
[2, 10, 490]
[2, 14, 350]
[2, 20, 245]
[2, 25, 196]
[2, 28, 175]
[2, 35, 140]
[2, 49, 100]
[2, 50, 98]
[2, 70, 70]
[4, 5, 490]
[4, 7, 350]
[4, 10, 245]
[4, 14, 175]
[4, 25, 98]
[4, 35, 70]
[4, 49, 50]
[5, 5, 392]
[5, 7, 280]
[5, 8, 245]
[5, 10, 196]
[5, 14, 140]
[5, 20, 98]
[5, 28, 70]
[5, 35, 56]
[5, 40, 49]
[7, 7, 200]
[7, 8, 175]
[7, 10, 140]
[7, 14, 100]
[7, 20, 70]
[7, 25, 56]
[7, 28, 50]
[7, 35, 40]
[8, 25, 49]
[8, 35, 35]
[10, 10, 98]
[10, 14, 70]
[10, 20, 49]
[10, 28, 35]
[14, 14, 50]
[14, 20, 35]
[14, 25, 28] << closest to perfect cube

 

[Falcon_One]

Just a heads up: the most efficient a single aux cell gets is ~2mil e/sec at 10403 aux reactors. Gives it an efficiency of ~192.25 e/sec per block. Seems to be a soft cap per aux cell.

I appreciate the post though - definitely going to tweak some of your dimensions and use them.

Cheers,
Falcon One

 

[wanzer]

I pressed your number trough the number cruncher, this is the list it spit out

[ 1 X 101 X 103 ] [ 1 X 10403 X 1 ] [ 101 X 103 X 1 ]

[ 101 X 1 X 103 ] [ 101 X 103 X 1 ] [ 103 X 101 X 1 ]


looks like waffles

 

[Nickizzy]

looks like waffles

Waffle radiators give the best explosive protection and look the coolest.

 

[wanzer]

that 10403 got me curious
so I did some testing of my own
and here are the numbers so far
1999992.1/10403 = 192.2515 << power per block
1890544.6/9800 = 192.9127 << power per block
1910060.2 / 9900 = 192.9354 << power per block
so from the test 9800 did score high but 9900 topped it marginally
when going higher then 9900, the power per block starts to decline again.
just to be sure I did a test on different dimensions but all yielded the same output.

the 9900
[1, 1, 9900]
[1, 2, 4950]
[1, 3, 3300]
[1, 4, 2475]
[1, 5, 1980]
[1, 6, 1650]
[1, 9, 1100]
[1, 10, 990]
[1, 11, 900]
[1, 12, 825]
[1, 15, 660]
[1, 18, 550]
[1, 20, 495]
[1, 22, 450]
[1, 25, 396]
[1, 30, 330]
[1, 33, 300]
[1, 36, 275]
[1, 44, 225]
[1, 45, 220]
[1, 50, 198]
[1, 55, 180]
[1, 60, 165]
[1, 66, 150]
[1, 75, 132]
[1, 90, 110]
[1, 99, 100]
[2, 2, 2475]
[2, 3, 1650]
[2, 5, 990]
[2, 6, 825]
[2, 9, 550]
[2, 10, 495]
[2, 11, 450]
[2, 15, 330]
[2, 18, 275]
[2, 22, 225]
[2, 25, 198]
[2, 30, 165]
[2, 33, 150]
[2, 45, 110]
[2, 50, 99]
[2, 55, 90]
[2, 66, 75]
[3, 3, 1100]
[3, 4, 825]
[3, 5, 660]
[3, 6, 550]
[3, 10, 330]
[3, 11, 300]
[3, 12, 275]
[3, 15, 220]
[3, 20, 165]
[3, 22, 150]
[3, 25, 132]
[3, 30, 110]
[3, 33, 100]
[3, 44, 75]
[3, 50, 66]
[3, 55, 60]
[4, 5, 495]
[4, 9, 275]
[4, 11, 225]
[4, 15, 165]
[4, 25, 99]
[4, 33, 75]
[4, 45, 55]
[5, 5, 396]
[5, 6, 330]
[5, 9, 220]
[5, 10, 198]
[5, 11, 180]
[5, 12, 165]
[5, 15, 132]
[5, 18, 110]
[5, 20, 99]
[5, 22, 90]
[5, 30, 66]
[5, 33, 60]
[5, 36, 55]
[5, 44, 45]
[6, 6, 275]
[6, 10, 165]
[6, 11, 150]
[6, 15, 110]
[6, 22, 75]
[6, 25, 66]
[6, 30, 55]
[6, 33, 50]
[9, 10, 110]
[9, 11, 100]
[9, 20, 55]
[9, 22, 50]
[9, 25, 44]
[10, 10, 99]
[10, 11, 90]
[10, 15, 66]
[10, 18, 55]
[10, 22, 45]
[10, 30, 33]
[11, 12, 75]
[11, 15, 60]
[11, 18, 50]
[11, 20, 45]
[11, 25, 36]
[11, 30, 30]
[12, 15, 55]
[12, 25, 33]
[15, 15, 44]
[15, 20, 33]
[15, 22, 30]
[18, 22, 25] << closest to perfect cube"