Multi-Element Packet Stacking

[@attackandsnack]

999g is actually perfect, because then later on you can use an unpowered filter cycling 1g pick up the 999g bubble wherever you need it. nice work

[@58209]

can we take a moment to appreciate that tony's onomatopoeia for packets merging is "boink!"

[@NikoKun]

I love those 2 smaller designs.. Although I'm curious, what's the practical use for stacking packets into larger ones? Just taking up less space in the pipes? Or is there an energy efficiency reason?

[@caleschley]

"I think that's all I have to say about it" - proceeds to immediately cut the footage. Hah!

[@scaltra6709]

Ohh, I didn't catch that mr.meseeks joke the first time around. Nice one

[@maxstr]

Why would you want to stack full packets anyway?

[@tonyadvanced6315]

It's so you can use the pipe's full capacity. For example, it's easier to filter/store/distribute 3 pipes than 10 pipes.

[@SanderBuruma]

I think it costs the same amount of energy to put a 10g packet through a thermo regulator as it does for a 500g packet. The aquatuner should also have the same issue.

[@Daemonworks]

Yup. Anything that has a per-packet rather than by-volume cost will benefit.

[@Technomancr]

Imagine the stacker gets full of gases A,B, C and then you send in a long string of gas type D. The stacker would never be able to merge and it would back up. What if you filtered each in the stacker into a dedicated merge line? You could do with with a 'primed loop filter' for each, which would cost no power. I'm not sure how this would work without buffer space though.

[@TheXentios]

Can you do a full tutorial and tricks about pipes. I am used to old system but new system all my pipes stuck if i use 2 input and output in the same line.

[@tonyadvanced6315]

I'll put it on my list.

[@kasuha]

To get rid of the gas reservoir, you'd need to merge the input pipe into the stacker backfeed instead of the opposite. But then there's danger you'll fill the loop with small packets of one gas and it will block the input pipe carrying a different gas. So I think the reservoir is necessary. Actually I think I figured out how to make this thing safe with two gas reservoirs. You need two because you need to merge the backfeed smoothly with the feed and to do so without blocking neither the backfeed nor the feed, you need to split both using normal pipe joints, then merge one of each, feed it into the reservoid (one for each branch) and only then merge outputs of the two reservoirs, against using normal joints. The actual merging of packets will then be done in the reservoirs, not through bridges/vents. Only after that put your full packet extractor.

[@tonyadvanced6315]

That's good thinking but I don't think anything works. You should watch the follow-up video where I try things like that and switch to a different strategy.

[@kasuha]

Yeah found it there :) It would work if the reservoir was pushing the largest packet it contains to the pipe but apparently that doesn't happen. The worst case scenario is one tiny packet of every gas followed by uninterrupted stream of full packets of one particular gas, e.g. hydrogen. The stacker needs to store those tiny packets somewhere while letting the full packets through.

[@FerrybigGaming]

My favorite single element packet merger uses an gas reservoir, and lets packets trough until its empty

[@38FerreroX]

I think the issue you had had to do with the length of the pipe to the stacker, the number and order in which your gas arrived

[@1238a8]

Uhhh...just put here gas tank+gas blocker+Not logical element. Set gas tank logic to switch between 1 and 5%. And don't fcuk your brain. Works flawlessly.

[@АртемкаВеклюцкий]

wahahwhawhah useless) it can be made by one element)

[@talschul8612]

First 😂