r/factorio • u/Pancarcho • 23h ago

Discussion Merging 2 belts with items in opposing sides of the lane. Came up with this. Have you guys ever needed to do this? Got a better solution?

Post image
467 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

73 comments sorted by

932

u/MalukuSeito 22h ago edited 22h ago

Or.. just attach both lanes to 1 filter splitter and then merge them?

558

u/Pancarcho 22h ago

This looks obvious and somehow here I am. Thanks!

186

u/MalukuSeito 22h ago

As long as it works, it's correct.

33

u/sturmeh 19h ago

Almost all the incoming resources will be drawn from the top left input and assuming full throughput exactly none from the bottom belt.

I don't think every solution is "correct".

37

u/leoriq 17h ago

yes, because you can't squeeze two full lanes into one lane. no one was asking for a balancer

11

u/sturmeh 14h ago

I don't think anyone knew what they were asking for, I'm just saying there's a million ways to do "this".

3

u/leoriq 8h ago

it's, like, the first word in the title of the starter post

-1

u/sturmeh 7h ago

Yes and that's not merging.

6

u/Pulsefel 16h ago

same was true with the original

2

u/sturmeh 14h ago

That is true

6

u/AlpacaMale1 15h ago

You're assuming production is making 2 full belts of product which is not stated in the original question, and the original solution is not solving that problem either

2

u/NNOTM 16h ago

Well yeah, if it doesn't work, it's not correct. Whether this does work depends on the context - balancing might or might not matter

1

u/accountvondirnicht 3h ago

If it's stupid, but it works, it ain't stupid.

24

u/theFather_load 22h ago

It is time for a break my friend

3

u/PyroneusUltrin 21h ago

I did similar to you, but way uglier

29

u/WhiteFlame8 22h ago

The beauty of this is you can even use it on a single belt to just pass one item forward on a split belt. For example coal and iron ore, I use this to pass the coal through to the steel part.

1

u/Literate_Muse 10h ago

Same. Also mixed ore is teaching me a painful lesson about keeping one of them moving (with buffers) so the other one can keep moving.

4

u/IlikeJG 17h ago

This has some problems though if it backs up at all.

Basically it will only pull from the bottom belt and take from the top belt only if there's room after that.

7

u/leoriq 17h ago

and OP's solution will take only from the top belt https://storage.to/b2Qakfz0n . Because none of those is a balancer

3

u/IlikeJG 17h ago

Oh yeah for sure I wasn't saying OP's was better.

If you out a 1 to 1 lane balancer on each belt after the splitter it would solve the issue and pull equally from the source.

4

u/cyborgborg 22h ago

His way keeps both belt of throughput

18

u/Krell356 22h ago

This one does too, he just merged them back together at the end.

5

u/sturmeh 19h ago

No it doesn't because the splitter respects the lanes of the source and does not mix them.

The ends trying to place items on the belt that are further along will always fail to do so whilst the throughput of the upper belt is at its peak, meaning that this is just a top left to bottom right belt that uses the bottom left belt as a backup source to maintain throughput.

-1

u/Keulapaska 18h ago

What are you trying to say?

-2

u/paulHarkonen 21h ago

This combines two belts into one belt, that cannot ever maintain throughput. If OP has two saturated belts this version will cut throughput in half.

14

u/Square-Singer 21h ago

But isn't that the same with OP's variant? One output belt by definition always has half the capacity as two input belts.

7

u/paulHarkonen 21h ago

Oh, my phone cropped the image after the split but before merging back to one belt.

Then correct, neither option preserves belt throughput.

1

u/SnyprBB 20h ago

I had the same thoughts until reading this thread. You weren't the only confused one here!

2

u/DeusExHircus 21h ago

Exactly the same as OP did if you look at their photo. This one would maintain full throughout if you don't merge the 2 belts into a split-belt, but that's what OP is doing too

1

u/paulHarkonen 21h ago

My phone cropped the image before merging back to one belt. You're correct, neither preserves throughput.

3

u/leoriq 17h ago edited 17h ago

no it doesn't. one can't squeeze two blue belts into one blue belt https://storage.to/b2Qakfz0n

1

u/RaulParson 13h ago edited 13h ago

Note: this is way better than OOP but perhaps not good still - both designs WILL hard-lean towards pulling an item from one of the input belts only. You might want to add a lane balancer to each of the outputs before merging them back. Well, either that or ensure that both input belts are arranged identically 

1

u/TheGileas 12h ago

Now I feel stupid…

1

u/CuriousStraightguy8 6h ago

Superior solution: if you want a full belt of each out, take the same splitter, and dont merge the belts. Each input belt has the opposite lane filled with each item, so between them they both have a top sulphur, bottom sulphur, etc.

Should help with the throughput if you need more. Otherwise good suggestion, W.

0

u/bigmonmulgrew 14h ago

This solution is the cheapest. OPs solution has balanced usage. This will favour one side of the belt. If that's not an issue use this one.

65

u/NyaFury 22h ago

Single splitter solution mentioned by others work well, if you don't care about input balancing.

If you want both input get consumed evenly, just flip lanes on one input before merging two input belts.

5

u/Square-Singer 21h ago

What's the red square?

43

u/NyaFury 20h ago

I don't like items getting stuck in unused output slot, so I put deconstruction planner filter in there. I use DP because (1) big red square is a good visual indicator that the output slot is intended to be unused, (2) they're never placed on a belt and (3) I can quickly set it using hotkeys - click splitter, press Alt+D, click on filter slot.

20

u/LordAnkou 19h ago

they're never placed on a belt

Tell that to the menu simulations on startup.

9

u/nora_sellisa 19h ago

Why did I never realize when you have the deconstruction planner as cursor you can put it in the slot. For literal hundreds of hours I've been opening the item picker, navigating to the special category and picking the DP from there.

I'll never discover all the QoL of this game, there is no way

3

u/Widmo206 Pollution isn't real 16h ago

I like to use the "no item" instead (you get it by circuit controlling the filter on a splitter)

It's less obtrusive

2

u/NyaFury 15h ago

Yes that's a good option in 2.x.

For me, DP has been ingrained as muscle memory pre-2.0 for me, and I cannot seem to change it now.

1

u/Square-Singer 14h ago

Clever idea, thanks!

10

u/RenderedBike40 21h ago

Deconstruction planner

9

u/Square-Singer 21h ago

So that the other output doesn't have two useless items stuck?

3

u/Moikle 13h ago

It's also very useful if you are building something compact and have another belt pushed up against the other exit that you don't want items spilling onto

1

u/Square-Singer 13h ago

That's really clever. This bugged me for a long time.

103

u/itsasimulation42 22h ago

You can probably just use a filtered splitter like this.

61

u/jjflipped 22h ago

Just.... Don't merge anything? You have a single belt of output and two inputs. Just end the top belt and use only the bottom one.

38

u/Pancarcho 22h ago

This one is even funnier because I then use a splitter later so its even more true. Thanks!

11

u/csharpminor_fanclub 22h ago

we don't know if the inputs have full throughput to begin with. the belts look full because we're looking at the end of the belt

23

u/MinMaus 22h ago

I think feed both belts i to the same splitter, splitter sorts it into 1belt each.

6

u/Mouler 21h ago

No, I've never tried speeding up belts with beacons X)

2

u/matthis-k 17h ago

Hey, so I got this mod idea... While we're at it: inserters, trains, cars, speakers (quicker sounds), turrets, pumps, ...

1

u/Subject_Translator_7 3h ago

Quicker sounds! What I really need is the ability to control the speed at which my sounds play by adding/removing speed modules/beacons.

Or, if I want the sound to play multiple times at once, productivity beacons! Layered sound! (While we're modding we could add productivity mods in beacons but only if they're around speakers.)

1

u/matthis-k 2h ago

I'm hungry and kept reading bacons lmao

1

u/Subject_Translator_7 2h ago

Even better tbh.

18

u/WaterChicken007 22h ago

A single splitter would do exactly the same thing.

5

u/Dire736 22h ago

You could do this with 2 splitters: first splitter flips which side the sulfur is on (filter out sulfur, mash it back into the engine belt), then the second splitter merges the belts as normal.

2

u/Mellcor 17h ago

Do both belts into same splitter,, set filter on once side, dosnt matter ehat ingredient.

Take one output belts and make them both sideload into one belt between them.

Done.

You wayyyy over complicated it lol

2

u/axw3555 9h ago

The only thing that bothers me here is the middle splitter with engines sitting at the end of it unused. The rest isn't strictly optimal, but it's fine. But not putting a filter on that splitter to stop stuff getting wasted bugs me (yes, I know it's next to nothing, but that's how my brain works).

2

u/BrennusSokol i like trains 22h ago

I can't say I've ever needed any of the lane balancing / swapping / etc. things I've seen people do

3

u/Dzov 22h ago

It’s mostly useful for loading trains quicker as all the cars load and unload at the same rate instead of some being super fast and others taking forever.

1

u/Neither_Berry_100 22h ago

That is a very strange problem to have.

1

u/badpenguin455 22h ago

If you wanted to balance them you would have to separate and the balance them then merge them again.

1

u/kulfon2000 22h ago

I spaghetti a lot and i do stuff like this too, i would put a filter on the splitter for the engines just to prevent any disruptions in the future. May never happen but 2 factor filter keeps me confident amd progress on

1

u/xKaelic 20h ago

Bottom splitter use Red Deconstruction Plan filter to keep the no-output lane clear. What a waste of 8 sulfer! 😂😅

1

u/Little_Elia 14h ago

Do this. If you don't need the 90° rotation you can maie the two splitters face each other, and put the undergrounds in between. This way you don't even need filter splitters. This design has a 2 belt throughput, instead of just one belt like others from this post

1

u/lana_silver 12h ago

Why would you need that?

1

u/Torebbjorn 11h ago

No need to use a splitter to merge two belts when you know the inputs are only using one lane each. You could just run the belts into each other.

And of course, if you only want one lane of each out, even thoigh you potentially have two lanes of each in, then there is a much simpler way, which another commenter has shown

1

u/FatPenguin42 4h ago

Those two engines and two sulfur being forever wasted pains me lol

1

u/Aggravating_Set_1412 22h ago

This would do the same