[0.20] Deadly Reentry 2.3 - reentry heat, plus thermal and g-force damage to parts

[Moon Goddess]

Or make it so that damage is applied only after the g forces stay above a certain limit for a few seconds.

This is probably the best, since you can survive more g's in a burst than you can for sustained periods of the same g's

[taniwha]

I'm having a terrible time keeping my parachute (parachuteSingle) intact (mk1 command pod: no problem) after returning from Mun. I think there are two issues. One, the part could do with some reflectivity like noseCone (0.5 made it survive, 0.4 did not). Two: shouldn't the chute be shielded by the command pod? Engine and tank do shield it, but the pod does not.

The first two shots show the engine+tank and then just tank protecting the parachute. The third shot was taken in a separate run because the tank exploding flipped the command pod with predictable results.

[gabmaia]

Or make it so that damage is applied only after the g forces stay above a certain limit for a few seconds.

that sounds perfect

[ANWRocketMan]

I'm having a bit of a problem. There seems to be very little challenge in this... Unfortunately.

Using the FAR mod from an orbit of 14 000 000m x -300m(beyond Munar orbit), re-entry speed of about 3 700m/s, I get a max temp of 1800C. No damage, no problem. Using the 2.5m shield and Mk1-2 Pod.

EDIT: How can I make it more challenging? I'm not sure what exactly t change.. Just max temp of the parts? I love the more dynamic system though!

[Killerblonde]

that sounds perfect

I second (third?) this.

I too have seen the G force spike for no good reason, usually associated with warping or changing SOI's while in 1x warp. I think I have a way to fix this, (bearing in mind that I know little about coding.) First, you know that coming in and out of warp happens outside atmospheres, so make the G force detector method only register when inside an atmosphere. Also, going along with Awaras' suggestion, make whatever G force damage be a function of both the integral and severity of G force, and not just maximum G's. This way, the ship would be able to sustain mysterious spikes in G force, but extended, moderate to high G's would cause damage. However you want to handle this "damage" is completely up to you. (So is everything else I suppose, but that's just my two cents.)

[Sleipnir]

I'm having a bit of a problem. There seems to be very little challenge in this... Unfortunately.

Using the FAR mod from an orbit of 14 000 000m x -300m(beyond Munar orbit), re-entry speed of about 3 700m/s, I get a max temp of 1800C. No damage, no problem. Using the 2.5m shield and Mk1-2 Pod.

EDIT: How can I make it more challenging? I'm not sure what exactly t change.. Just max temp of the parts? I love the more dynamic system though!

With FAR???!!!!! Damn FAR's drag model usually slows rockets down much much less meaning you get more heat...at least the 0.19 DR mod did that

[WedgeJAntilles]

I noticed the same thing with FAR and RC2--there was very little actual heating, even with a very fast re-entry. I haven't updated to RC3 yet, I'll do that this weekend and report back.

[ialdabaoth]

I'm having a terrible time keeping my parachute (parachuteSingle) intact (mk1 command pod: no problem) after returning from Mun. I think there are two issues. One, the part could do with some reflectivity like noseCone (0.5 made it survive, 0.4 did not). Two: shouldn't the chute be shielded by the command pod? Engine and tank do shield it, but the pod does not.

The first two shots show the engine+tank and then just tank protecting the parachute. The third shot was taken in a separate run because the tank exploding flipped the command pod with predictable results.

Confirmed: Some of my raycasts are bugged in RC3. I've fixed this, but I need to fix a few other issues it introduced before I can re-release.

[Lexif]

I'm having a bit of a problem. There seems to be very little challenge in this... Unfortunately.

Using the FAR mod from an orbit of 14 000 000m x -300m(beyond Munar orbit), re-entry speed of about 3 700m/s, I get a max temp of 1800C. No damage, no problem. Using the 2.5m shield and Mk1-2 Pod.

EDIT: How can I make it more challenging? I'm not sure what exactly t change.. Just max temp of the parts? I love the more dynamic system though!

I have tried this without FAR (14500 x 0 km) and got to about 1000° on the shield. (I don't have my notes here, so maybe not exactly.) My reentry speed was also lower. But it pulled about 8 g, right at the edge for a human crew or beyond allready, I guess. An the pod behind got quite hot, too, some 600 degrees. If you go in at about 20 km PE from the moon, you will pull about 4 g, but the pod will get hotter. So if you care for the g-loading, there's a window you have to respect.

[ANWRocketMan]

Yeah... I did notice the G-spike though... I understand now why the "kill on high G" thing is important...

EDIT: By the way, does the Ablative Resource have any effect on the heatshield/heating effects? Would be nice... So far I haven't noticed anything...

Edited May 31, 2013 by ANWRocketMan

[rkman]

- Engines are now damaged if they are run for extended times at an overheat (> 85% maxTemp)

KSP already has a mechanism for engine damage due to overheating (explosion when >100%). This feature of DE just makes it harder (and has little to do with reentry), and in part due to KSP's buggy cooling (larger tanks provide less cooling) and possibly also due to lowered max temp value of parts by DE, it plays havoc with the cooling of the Mainsail engine.

Where the Mainsail can normally be operated at ~80% to prevent overheating (unless care has been taken to mount it on a small fuel tank in which case it can normally run at 100%), Deadly Reentry requires throttling down to 20% to prevent damage (mounted on the large orange tank).

Arguably engine overheating is an issue separate from reentry, so i'd suggest/request to remove this particular feature from DE.

I have actually uninstalled DE just to make my Duna rocket's ascent work as can reasonably be expected.

Edited May 31, 2013 by rkman

[erbmur]

Can anybody explain to me how the "parts catch fire" works/is modeled?

And what is the damage section that now appears to have appeared on the right-click menu of all the parts?

[asmi]

I have tried this without FAR (14500 x 0 km) and got to about 1000° on the shield. (I don't have my notes here, so maybe not exactly.) My reentry speed was also lower. But it pulled about 8 g, right at the edge for a human crew or beyond allready, I guess. An the pod behind got quite hot, too, some 600 degrees. If you go in at about 20 km PE from the moon, you will pull about 4 g, but the pod will get hotter. So if you care for the g-loading, there's a window you have to respect.

Trained humans in a right pose can survive much higher accelerations than 8g. Infact Soyuz capsule during backup ballistic descent pulls out up to 10g acceleration, and no one ever died or suffered any injures during these ballistic reentries. But the orientation and pose of human matters a whole lot in this case - the reason astronauts are in fetus poses is that it was determined that humans can withstand maximum acceleration this way.

Human beings can survive very high bursts of acceleration if it's short enough. For example Soyuz LES subjects humans to accelerations up to 15g for a very short time! The reason for that is obvious enough - LES needs to pull humans out of exploding rocket, or outrun the rocket which engines are firing at full thrust.

[ialdabaoth]

Updated to RC4; I finally got G-forces working right! Also removed the debug menu and some of the internal debug variables (Shockwave and Damage); you can get those back by holding down Alt + R + D.

To answer some questions:

1. Yeah, you can't really push the mainsail past 75% throttle for very long without it overheating, and Deadly Reentry makes this a little more difficult. Unfortunately, heat damage effects can't really be applied piecemeal - by the time the mod is checking for heat damage, it no longer knows where the heat came from, so I can't have it JUST damage on reentry without having the physics turn really dumb and unrealistic. One idea might be to increase the throttle on the mainsail from 1700 to 2000 ("why not just make ten bigger?"), so that everything above 75% throttle is basically "overthrottle" - my ideal solution would be to figure out how to get the throttle display to go up into the red zone, and then tweak all the engines so that they only overheat in the red throttle area.

2. Parts catch fire like so:

If a part is at 85% heat for any length of time, it catches fire and begins sustaining damage. "Damage" means that its maximum temperature, impact tolerance, and torque tolerance all begin weakening. Also, while a part is on fire, if it isn't an engine, it begins generating its own internal heat and so won't cool as quickly even if you take it away from its heat source. Once it stops being on fire, the damage remains but the extra heat generation stops.

G-forces also deal damage - parts have a maximum G-force tolerance and sustain damage if they go above this value.

Parts have six damage thresholds:

(0% - none)

up to 10% - light

up to 25% - moderate

up to 50% - severe

up to 100% - critical

past 100% - destroyed

A part's G-force tolerance, breaking force, and impact tolerance are directly reduced by its current damage, while temperature tolerance can be reduced by up to 15% by heavy damage.

[ialdabaoth]

Updated to RC4; I finally got G-forces working right! Also removed the debug menu and some of the internal debug variables (Shockwave and Damage); you can get those back by holding down Alt + R + D.

Also, before people complain about this, the Shockwave and Damage buttons were always supposed to be for internal use only. Damage is human-readable because I hope to have "inspect damage" be an EVA task in 2.2

[erbmur]

Would it not be more user friendly to have the damage threshold appear as a % rather then text? Would allow you to push things to the edge rather then having to guess when it comes into the severe/critical regions?

[ialdabaoth]

Would it not be more user friendly to have the damage threshold appear as a % rather then text? Would allow you to push things to the edge rather then having to guess when it comes into the severe/critical regions?

Again, damage (as an actual value) is an internal thing. What a Kerbal can see with his eyeballs breaks into roughly four thresholds, and you really can't even tell that unless you get out and look (otherwise we might still have a Space Shuttle Columbia).

[erbmur]

Again, damage (as an actual value) is an internal thing. What a Kerbal can see with his eyeballs breaks into roughly four thresholds, and you really can't even tell that unless you get out and look (otherwise we might still have a Space Shuttle Columbia).

Point taken good sir!

[rhoark]

With this and fuels just updated, is the combination engine heat addressed?

[Killerblonde]

In testing, a long solid fuel booster with only a probe core on top exploded due to exceeding G force tolerance just before running completely out of fuel. However, I was testing a mark1-2 pod with a 2.5m heat shield on the base plummeting straight down at nearly a 90 degree angle to horizon. I took 34.5 G's, but nothing exploded or even damaged due to G tolerance. I lost 500 units (out of 1000) of ablation coating.

EDIT: Just tried the same thing with a 1 man pod. Came down at 3.2km/s straight down, took 41 G's, lost a radial parachute due to heating, but otherwise wasn't destroyed, although my command pod sustained "severe" damage. My heat shield lost about 70 units of ablation.

EDIT 2: After looking at some part values, my guess is that the impact tolerances of the Mark1 and Mark1-2 command pods are way too high. (This probably applies to other parts as well.) Either that, or the way the mod calculates G force tolerance via impact tolerance is off.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Killerblonde

[ialdabaoth]

With this and fuels just updated, is the combination engine heat addressed?

Yep! They should work together fine now.

[ialdabaoth]

EDIT 2: After looking at some part values, my guess is that the impact tolerances of the Mark1 and Mark1-2 command pods are way too high. (This probably applies to other parts as well.) Either that, or the way the mod calculates G force tolerance via impact tolerance is off.

Yeah, 45G is a bit absurd. Right now, I'm computing G-force as SQRT(8 * crashTolerance), so you get roughly the following values:

crashTolerance     G-Tolerance
       6                 7
       8                 8
      10                 9
      12                10
      15                11
      18		12
      21                13
      24                14
      28                15
      32                16
      36                17
      40                18
      45                19
      50                20
      55                21
      60                22
      66                23
      72                24
      80                25

Note that these are for G-forces averaged over 1 second, and discarding any spurious spikes.

[rkman]

1. Yeah, you can't really push the mainsail past 75% throttle for very long without it overheating, and Deadly Reentry makes this a little more difficult.

Without DE, the mainsail under an orange tank can run at 80~85%. Under a small 2m tank the mainsail can run at 100% no problem.

With DE installed and mainsail under an orange tank i (mechjeb) must throttle back to 20% to prevent over heating, causing ascent to fail. That's more than a little more difficult.

Red overheat remains high even though engine temp drops to a relatively low value that i think can not cause overheating (about 600 to 800C).

May a bug or something, have you tried it? Anyone else who has the same problem?

[ialdabaoth]

Without DE, the mainsail under an orange tank can run at 80~85%. Under a small 2m tank the mainsail can run at 100% no problem.

With DE installed and mainsail under an orange tank i (mechjeb) must throttle back to 20% to prevent over heating, causing ascent to fail. That's more than a little more difficult.

Red overheat remains high even though engine temp drops to a relatively low value that i think can not cause overheating (about 600 to 800C).

May a bug or something, have you tried it? Anyone else who has the same problem?

Twenty percent? I'm running right now, and I can stay consistently at seventy five percent with no problems.

What other mods do you have installed, and what does {KSP}/GameData/DeadlyReentry/ look like?

If you have Modular Fuel Tanks installed, please make sure to download the latest version; 0.9 would cause this precise problem with most engines.

[Camacha]

Is this playable in combination with FAR now? Before it worked, but it was crazy hard. I mean, not realistic hard like it should, but near on impossible to get anything down without fiddling with the config values.