# Deployments & Site Configurator

> Configure a HELIX site: pick a facility style and an environment and see live module sizing from our 324-case engineering register, net output per module, N+1 reserve, derates, and the verification evidence every operating scenario produces. All figures are parametric design-study estimates; pre-application.

Deployments · 324 computed cases · parametric model, pre-QAPD

# Configure a HELIX site for your facility.
**HELIX sites number up from a single 4.40 MWe sealed module to a hyperscale campus, and every configuration on this page is computed, not quoted.** Our engineering register runs 324 cases, six facility styles across six environments through nine operating scenarios, and each case logs the verification evidence it produces. Pick a facility style and an environment below and the page sizes the site live from the same parametric models, showing the honest derates along with the capacity. Every figure is a pre-application design target, not field data.
The discipline here is the same as everywhere else on this site: the model is printed, the inputs are visible, and the numbers follow from them. Net output per module falls on a hot afternoon and at altitude, so the configurator shows that fall instead of quoting a nameplate. Module counts carry an N+1 reserve because sealed-core swaps and single-module trips are planned events, not surprises. And every scenario in the register is paired with the attested record an operating site would actually produce, because a deployment you cannot verify is just a promise.

## Which deployment fits your facility?
Choose a facility style and an environment. The results update from the parametric model; without JavaScript the page shows the mid-size colocation case in a Northern Virginia environment.
Facility style
Edge / enterprise data center 4 MW IT · single-tenant compute, hospital-grade reliability Campus CHP hybrid 3 MW IT · power plus district or process heat Colocation, mid-size 20 MW IT · multi-tenant, utility backup retained AI training cluster 40 MW IT · high-density racks, large load steps buffered by molten-salt storage Hyperscale campus 96 MW IT · phased number-up build-out Remote / defense island 2 MW IT · no utility, black-start capable
Environment
Hot-arid (Phoenix class) design ambient 45 °C · 340 m Temperate-humid (N. Virginia) design ambient 35 °C · 90 m Continental (Ohio class) design ambient 32 °C · 300 m High-altitude (Denver class) design ambient 35 °C · 1600 m Cold (Alaska / northern plains) design ambient 25 °C · 150 m Coastal (marine air) design ambient 38 °C · 10 m
Colocation, mid-size · Temperate-humid (N. Virginia)
Net per module 3.61 MWe
Modules (req + reserve) 6 + 1 = 7
Site capacity 25.3 MWe
Margin over IT load +5.3 MWe
Annual attested output 166.4 GWh
Heat rejected 48.6 MWth
Interconnect Grid-parallel
Heat tap (CHP style only) 2–5 MWth per module

Sizing computed live from the parametric model below · pre-QAPD screening

**Why this is lower than the 4.40 MWe on the spec sheet:** 4.40 MWe is the cycle rating, 11.0 MWth at 40% net. The figure above is what reaches the meter at this site, after the ambient derate on cycle efficiency, dry-cooler fan parasitics, house load, transformer losses and altitude. Site ambients here are design highs, not annual averages, so this is the conservative end. Model, exactly as computed: net-cycle efficiency η = 0.395 − 0.0009 × max(0, T − 15); gross = 11.0 MWth × η × 0.98; fan parasitics = 0.25 + 0.006 × (T − 25) MWe; net = (gross − fans − 0.10) × (1 − 0.011) × (1 − 0.01 × altitude_m / 1000). Modules required = ⌈IT ÷ net⌉, plus the reserve for the facility style. Annual attested output assumes a 95% capacity factor against the IT load. Heat rejected per installed module is whatever the cycle does not convert, 11.0 MWth − gross, computed at the same ambient.

## How does this configuration behave when things go wrong?
The register runs every configuration through nine operating scenarios, from an ordinary Tuesday to an extended station blackout. Across all 324 cases in the register, every capacity scenario passes: the N+1 reserve carries a swap or a trip, and the peak-ambient derate never takes a site below its IT load. That is a property of how the sizing rule works, sized against the honest derate with reserve on top, and it is a screening-level claim on the frozen design basis, not credited analysis. The table below is the selected configuration's row of the register, with the verification evidence each scenario produces.
Scenario Capacity vs load RankShield evidence produced
S1 Normal operation | PASS 25.3 MWe available vs 20 MW load | attested net MWh and efficiency baseline
S2 Peak-ambient day (+5 °C) | PASS 24.7 MWe available vs 20 MW load | derate visible and attested, not estimated
S3 Sealed-core swap | PASS 21.7 MWe available vs 20 MW load | N+1 carries the load; swap chain of custody witnessed
S4 Grid loss, island transfer | PASS 25.3 MWe available vs 20 MW load | attested island transfer and frequency record
S5 Black start | PASS 25.3 MWe available vs 20 MW load | attested restart sequence, no external power
S6 50% load step | PASS 25.3 MWe available vs 20 MW load | thermal buffer bridges; reactor never chases load, logged
S7 Single module trip | PASS 21.7 MWe available vs 20 MW load | reserve margin absorbs; transient attested
S8 Extended station blackout | SAFETY CASE Safety case, not a capacity check | passive air cooling, zero operator action; decay-heat state attested
S9 Cooler fouling / efficiency drift | PASS 25.3 MWe available vs 20 MW load | expected-behavior model flags drift from the same signed stream

Capacity checks: swap and trip scenarios use (total modules − 1) × net; the peak-ambient scenario recomputes net output at design ambient + 5 °C. Extended station blackout is a safety scenario, decay heat leaves by passive air cooling with zero operator action, so it is never a capacity question.

## How does net output move with the environment?
This is the curve doing the work in the configurator. Output falls as ambient rises, because the dry cycle rejects heat to hotter air and the cooler fans work harder, and it falls about one percent per thousand meters of altitude. Both lines are computed at build time from the same model printed above; nothing on this chart is drawn by hand.

Figure 3 · Net MWe per module vs design ambient, 10–50 °C · sea level and 1600 m

## How does the verification work here?
Every scenario in the register ends the same way: with evidence. That is the point of deploying HELIX rather than a reactor you have to take on faith, and it works on three layers.
**Protection.** Each module's identity begins with a witnessed genesis at the factory, and its telemetry crosses a hardware one-way path, an observe-only boundary that physically cannot carry a command toward a safety system. Because custody and configuration are attested from the factory floor onward, diversion or tampering is detectable rather than deniable: a module that is moved, opened, or altered stops matching its own signed history.
**Efficiency.** The same signed stream that proves a site's output also polices it. An expected-behavior model, the same parametric model on this page, normalized to the site's own environment, flags a module that drifts from what its conditions predict. Cooler fouling, instrument drift, and tampering all surface as the same signal: attested reality diverging from the model. One detector serves both the maintenance plan and the security case.
**Independence.** A tenant, an insurer, or a regulator verifies a site against the append-only log and its independent off-site witnesses, not against our word. The attested MWh in the table above are checkable by the party buying them. Read [how the reactor works](https://rankshieldenergy.com/technology) and [where the program stands with the NRC](https://rankshieldenergy.com/pre-application).
Honesty statement
Every number on this page is a parametric design-study estimate on the frozen design basis, computed from the models shown above. It is unqualified pre-QAPD screening: an input to design, not credited analysis, not a performance guarantee, and not an offer of sale. It will be superseded by qualified analyses once the quality program is stood up.
RankShield Energy · HELIX · pre-application

Evaluating a real site?
The dimensioned drawing packages and the full 324-case register are deliberately not published here. We share them directly, honestly labeled, with qualified partners and hosts.
[Request the full engineering package](https://rankshieldenergy.com/contact)