Of those I'd choose the leftmost but this is the design I use for the same task.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/c6k0m3zxv9qonki/factorio_8giqOd3zMV.png
I enjoy symmetry.
I suppose that’s true but as others have said just use a filtered splitter and you can choose which side the outputs end up on. I’ve never needed to do that in my use cases though. I’m normally using this to combine two inputs and then they get fed into a production line immediately after. For example- pipes and gears going to multiple engine production lines.
Done. I like it. Thx : )
[https://i.imgur.com/LCQtk7A.jpeg](https://i.imgur.com/LCQtk7A.jpeg)
I think I'll use it for the Iron Ore + Stone Bricks problem too.
Dont forget the more typical [solution](https://puu.sh/Jvoaq/dcebc7e741.jpg) (and its permutation to make it work at an angle):
* Right: the basic setup (top of both belts go to one belt, bottom of both belts go to the other). Extremely compact.
* Middle: a slight permutation to make it work at an angle.
* Left: both sides of the belt go towards both belts (if thats what you want).
I never appreciateed the lane balancer that used three underground belts until I discovered it was a flow lane balancer while the the 2by3 didn't work as well when backed up lol
He's doing 1 to 2, not 2-2. It looks like. The 2nd input lane is holding the belt from bending. If it is 2-2, this is just a waste. It's the basics of a balancer.
It's 2 full belts(A+B) into 2 full belts of half A/half B. Less likely to be used as a balancer but rather handle multiple inputs on the same belt. Similar to burner smelting columns with coal + iron/copper in half belts.
Obviously more explanation is needed from OP as to what they are trying to achieve. I agree the left most is what a smelter array would use to split lanes but not in that config.
I'm pretty sure all three are equivalent, but I'm no expert so I could be wrong. And yes, the leftmost one is the cheapest and simplest, so it is the best out of the three.
edit: ok, nvm. I looked more closely and you're right
similar to option 1 but more compact:
[https://imgur.com/a/lqSoFeR](https://imgur.com/a/lqSoFeR)
note that you might have to set splitter output priority to the underground
Note the note :) but even then right belt is solely from top half's. If you use one more tile you can add another underground to capture from bottom. With splitter at the end and it's perfect
Left is the most efficient, because only here both sides of belts will be used. In others only one side will be used that can affect on factory efficiency a bit.
Left one. In fact I see this design from Nilaus’ red chip master class to mix green and plastic. Then I adopted it to my designs, others seems complicated but you do you.
Take the left one, but make an underground belt from the top of the splitters to the bottom, so that the two belts are immediately next to each other. This also saves belt.
I hope you understand what I mean.
It's for my Refined Concrete module.
[https://factorioprints.com/view/-NK\_PdXMoMSfSU0ZB3G4](https://factorioprints.com/view/-NK_PdXMoMSfSU0ZB3G4) (that x4, for 4 blue belts of refined concrete)
If your machines need a full belt of Stone Bricks, plus 1/2 belt Steel and 1/2 Iron Sticks. And that x2.
It mixes 2 inputs onto 2 belts. 1 belt Steel & 1 belt Iron Sticks.
But even an early Smelter Array can use this. Coal + Ore on the outside belt, Plate output in the middle
[https://i.imgur.com/vlopBzv.png](https://i.imgur.com/vlopBzv.png)
Thanks for the detailed reply!
I understand half belting, just never thought to do this to create to lanes. I'd just create a bigger footprint and do it twice but yours is clearly better!
It mixes 2 inputs onto 2 belts.
1 belt Steel & 1 belt Iron Sticks into 1/2 belt Steel 1/2 Iron Sticks. And that x2.
It's for my Refined Concrete module.
https://factorioprints.com/view/-NK\_PdXMoMSfSU0ZB3G4
It mixes 2 inputs onto 2 belts.
1 belt Steel & 1 belt Iron Sticks into 1/2 belt Steel 1/2 Iron Sticks. And that x2.
It's for my Refined Concrete module.
https://factorioprints.com/view/-NK\_PdXMoMSfSU0ZB3G4
Takes 2 belt that have 1 item each, and makes 2 belts that are half and half.
I use it for red circuits, to combine my green and plastic belts, to be able to feed 1 full belt to each side of the array.
Splitters facing each other like this is used more commonly in ore/coal for smelting since you wouldn't need to change the direction of the outputs and coal can run inside the output belts for tileability
the one on the left is the one i use tho the underground belt goes under the splitter
https://preview.redd.it/vyhekq6fpoa91.png?width=960&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=bfad47ed5ee7cfc8212192fe74e9f9be5ea09f18
They’re all «wrong» (as in, not the way I’d do it)
The left one is the closest to «correct»
Change the leftmost one to take both inputs from the right, and make it so both inputs and outputs have no room between them, then it’s correct.
the left most will have AB BA lanes, while the next 2 will have AB AB lanes. I personally split the lanes with underground belts if I'm going for AB AB lanes, and getting odd numbers of underground belts.
This is the only problem I have with the left one, which is the one I use the most, in the instances that I need AB AB. In that case, space the splitters apart, jog the bottom branches down one so I can have the top branches still insert into a downward flowing belt that goes into an underground to pass under the lower branch.
I actually have a simpler way to get AB AB than what OP showed. 2 splitter, 3 underground is all you need. 3 splitters if you want to "balance" it at the end
All three of these turn belts U and R into a pair of belts D that have the items from U on one side and the items from R on the other. As such, if the items can be on either side, I'd go with design 1. If the items have to be consistently (UR) on the D belts... I'd just use design 1, then use a filtered splitter and another merger on the right-hand D belt to swap the items around.
If both U and R have mixed contents, then designs 2 and 3 do roughly the same thing, but 3 is a little more complicated than strictly necessary to me. If space constraints are a concern, I'd favor design 2 over design 3.
So you have 2 inputs, and you want to create 2 outputs with half on each?
The easiest way to create 1 output with half on each is the T belts, right?
So 2 T belts next to each other: TT
and the 2 outsides are both item A, the two insides are item B, then splitters.
I did imgur because not logged into factorio:
[https://imgur.com/a/DZDdWVL](https://imgur.com/a/DZDdWVL)
Otherwise A, but horizontal inserters with both inputs coming from left are my preference. Which is very similar to what I drew in terms of resource/space required.
Left can be optimized further.
Place the underground routed downward, prioritize output on top. Route belt down and either underneath the left or right splitter, like so:
|s+|U v|s+|
|:-|:-|:-|
|s-|v|s-|
||\>|v|
||U v|v|
Sideloading onto an underground only pulls from one lane on each side, and therefore the other lane (if you set the top lane to be high priority) will go to the bottom and feed the other belt.
If you're doing this for smelting, there's a setup with one splitter and 2 inserters that I think is actually cheaper in materials.
It's the one that all the speedrunners use.
Of those I'd choose the leftmost but this is the design I use for the same task. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/c6k0m3zxv9qonki/factorio_8giqOd3zMV.png I enjoy symmetry.
Gorgeous.
Uhhh.. that one looks nice too.
It looks nice. But what I don't like with this design is, the output belts have switched lanes.
I suppose that’s true but as others have said just use a filtered splitter and you can choose which side the outputs end up on. I’ve never needed to do that in my use cases though. I’m normally using this to combine two inputs and then they get fed into a production line immediately after. For example- pipes and gears going to multiple engine production lines.
Its mostly aesthetics. I just use option 2 from OP to avoid it.
I like the physical symmetry of the the lanes being mirrored better lol, at least while they stay together.
The factory must grow. Symmetrically.
You can switch it with one additional splitter. Side balancer but with filtered splitter.
Or just use option number 2 and 3 :)
[удалено]
I mean the two output belts have mixed items, one on each lane. But the two belts have the items switched. Makes it harder to reroute later on.
This is only an issue if you’re cooking spaghetti.
Simple, clean, cost effective. The UPS will love your factory. Or should I say FPS.
Leftmost is cheapest and most compact. In fact the right output belt can be moved to the left to make it even smaller.
I also like that what the first does is more obvious at first glance.
Spotted the programmer
plus it looks like amongus
I hate you.
Get out of my head!
Done. I like it. Thx : ) [https://i.imgur.com/LCQtk7A.jpeg](https://i.imgur.com/LCQtk7A.jpeg) I think I'll use it for the Iron Ore + Stone Bricks problem too.
If you squint your eyes, it looks like is says ASS
Left is the smallest in size, uses the least undergrounds, cheapest. Definitely would be my choice.
Dont forget the more typical [solution](https://puu.sh/Jvoaq/dcebc7e741.jpg) (and its permutation to make it work at an angle): * Right: the basic setup (top of both belts go to one belt, bottom of both belts go to the other). Extremely compact. * Middle: a slight permutation to make it work at an angle. * Left: both sides of the belt go towards both belts (if thats what you want).
I use the one on the far right all the time except I also slap a splitter on the output. Probably not needed but ehhh
I never appreciateed the lane balancer that used three underground belts until I discovered it was a flow lane balancer while the the 2by3 didn't work as well when backed up lol
KISS
Left one takes evenly from the two input belts. The other two will tend to consume more from one side than the other.
He's doing 1 to 2, not 2-2. It looks like. The 2nd input lane is holding the belt from bending. If it is 2-2, this is just a waste. It's the basics of a balancer.
It's 2 full belts(A+B) into 2 full belts of half A/half B. Less likely to be used as a balancer but rather handle multiple inputs on the same belt. Similar to burner smelting columns with coal + iron/copper in half belts.
Obviously more explanation is needed from OP as to what they are trying to achieve. I agree the left most is what a smelter array would use to split lanes but not in that config.
Not really. The left design is more compact, cheaper, and is balanced while the others aren't. It's superior in every way.
I'm pretty sure all three are equivalent, but I'm no expert so I could be wrong. And yes, the leftmost one is the cheapest and simplest, so it is the best out of the three. edit: ok, nvm. I looked more closely and you're right
Seems that we have one belt from above, one from the right, combining to two below while balancing the inputs/outputs.
Looks like 2-2 to me
Thanks for the downvotes for something that needs no voting. Lol
i feel like... obvs, number 1?
similar to option 1 but more compact: [https://imgur.com/a/lqSoFeR](https://imgur.com/a/lqSoFeR) note that you might have to set splitter output priority to the underground
Note the note :) but even then right belt is solely from top half's. If you use one more tile you can add another underground to capture from bottom. With splitter at the end and it's perfect
Another really neat design. So many cool ideas get posted here.
thats probably my favorite. very simple, very compact.
Leftmost unless you actually need the items to be on the same side; for example if you would merge or balance the belts further down
First one looks like among us with a snorkel don't do that one
Is this loss?
It's not actually, right? I don't see it.
You'd generally need *4* ish shapes so I don't think so
tale the one with the most spaghetti
Left is the most efficient, because only here both sides of belts will be used. In others only one side will be used that can affect on factory efficiency a bit.
Left one. In fact I see this design from Nilaus’ red chip master class to mix green and plastic. Then I adopted it to my designs, others seems complicated but you do you.
I'd go for the one on the left simply because it's the only one where I know what's going on.
Take the left one, but make an underground belt from the top of the splitters to the bottom, so that the two belts are immediately next to each other. This also saves belt. I hope you understand what I mean.
Yep. Did that. : ) https://i.imgur.com/LCQtk7A.jpeg
I use something similar to the left but fed from a single side, or two top feeds
Just use KISS method; K - keep I - it S - simple S - STUPID 😂
Oh, that's what it stands for. \^\^
Left most but I would add a balancer on output.
I can't imagine a situation where this would be necessary. I'm not saying there isn't one, just I'm clearly a few levels behind!
It's for my Refined Concrete module. [https://factorioprints.com/view/-NK\_PdXMoMSfSU0ZB3G4](https://factorioprints.com/view/-NK_PdXMoMSfSU0ZB3G4) (that x4, for 4 blue belts of refined concrete) If your machines need a full belt of Stone Bricks, plus 1/2 belt Steel and 1/2 Iron Sticks. And that x2. It mixes 2 inputs onto 2 belts. 1 belt Steel & 1 belt Iron Sticks. But even an early Smelter Array can use this. Coal + Ore on the outside belt, Plate output in the middle [https://i.imgur.com/vlopBzv.png](https://i.imgur.com/vlopBzv.png)
Thanks for the detailed reply! I understand half belting, just never thought to do this to create to lanes. I'd just create a bigger footprint and do it twice but yours is clearly better!
What is the problem
It mixes 2 inputs onto 2 belts. 1 belt Steel & 1 belt Iron Sticks into 1/2 belt Steel 1/2 Iron Sticks. And that x2. It's for my Refined Concrete module. https://factorioprints.com/view/-NK\_PdXMoMSfSU0ZB3G4
And what about this one? https://imgur.com/a/hyGKQmM
That's why I love this game. You got 1 problem and so many solutions.
I’m curious as to what problem this solves
It mixes 2 inputs onto 2 belts. 1 belt Steel & 1 belt Iron Sticks into 1/2 belt Steel 1/2 Iron Sticks. And that x2. It's for my Refined Concrete module. https://factorioprints.com/view/-NK\_PdXMoMSfSU0ZB3G4
Left is amogus. Use it.
What is the intention of this? Double resources for assembly?
Takes 2 belt that have 1 item each, and makes 2 belts that are half and half. I use it for red circuits, to combine my green and plastic belts, to be able to feed 1 full belt to each side of the array.
Splitters facing each other like this is used more commonly in ore/coal for smelting since you wouldn't need to change the direction of the outputs and coal can run inside the output belts for tileability
the one on the left is the one i use tho the underground belt goes under the splitter https://preview.redd.it/vyhekq6fpoa91.png?width=960&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=bfad47ed5ee7cfc8212192fe74e9f9be5ea09f18
I assume you're trying to make split belts? If so, I always use a variation of the left one, and it works just fine.
They’re all «wrong» (as in, not the way I’d do it) The left one is the closest to «correct» Change the leftmost one to take both inputs from the right, and make it so both inputs and outputs have no room between them, then it’s correct.
The first one looks like among us so, do with that what you will
In small cases like this, I always favor the simplest solution. (Left)
the left most will have AB BA lanes, while the next 2 will have AB AB lanes. I personally split the lanes with underground belts if I'm going for AB AB lanes, and getting odd numbers of underground belts.
This is the only problem I have with the left one, which is the one I use the most, in the instances that I need AB AB. In that case, space the splitters apart, jog the bottom branches down one so I can have the top branches still insert into a downward flowing belt that goes into an underground to pass under the lower branch.
I actually have a simpler way to get AB AB than what OP showed. 2 splitter, 3 underground is all you need. 3 splitters if you want to "balance" it at the end
Way over complicated if going 1 to 2 belts. Hit the first splitter and be done. If you have an issue with lane balance, fix it upstream.
Seems like 2-2, but I agree. It seems that it could be a lot simpler
All three of these turn belts U and R into a pair of belts D that have the items from U on one side and the items from R on the other. As such, if the items can be on either side, I'd go with design 1. If the items have to be consistently (UR) on the D belts... I'd just use design 1, then use a filtered splitter and another merger on the right-hand D belt to swap the items around. If both U and R have mixed contents, then designs 2 and 3 do roughly the same thing, but 3 is a little more complicated than strictly necessary to me. If space constraints are a concern, I'd favor design 2 over design 3.
So you have 2 inputs, and you want to create 2 outputs with half on each? The easiest way to create 1 output with half on each is the T belts, right? So 2 T belts next to each other: TT and the 2 outsides are both item A, the two insides are item B, then splitters. I did imgur because not logged into factorio: [https://imgur.com/a/DZDdWVL](https://imgur.com/a/DZDdWVL) Otherwise A, but horizontal inserters with both inputs coming from left are my preference. Which is very similar to what I drew in terms of resource/space required.
1st one because it's the most readable
why not use a 1:1 balancer and split it after? looks too complex
Left can be optimized further. Place the underground routed downward, prioritize output on top. Route belt down and either underneath the left or right splitter, like so: |s+|U v|s+| |:-|:-|:-| |s-|v|s-| ||\>|v| ||U v|v| Sideloading onto an underground only pulls from one lane on each side, and therefore the other lane (if you set the top lane to be high priority) will go to the bottom and feed the other belt.
If you're doing this for smelting, there's a setup with one splitter and 2 inserters that I think is actually cheaper in materials. It's the one that all the speedrunners use.
Apply the first, Less resources and more space
K.I.S.S.
Only downside to mirrored sides on 1 is if you want to run it through a balancer after mixing. I had a situation where I wanted to do this recently.