Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


71 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't mind someone moving forward with updates. I may eventually make some progress with this. I did start on some IVA work, but it is tricky with rotating stuff iirc. The last thing I was doing was testing some more powerful but quite expensive solid boosters. Basically done with that though. Next I may make a mk2 format RDE. The two side by side format is quite often barely enough thrust, might give it more like 2.5.
  2. Now working on Cryogenic Solid Propellants (CSP) and High Energy Density Matter (HEDM) solid rockets. For now in the mod there are two 1.25m parts, one 3.75m and 7.5m length booster. They use a stock friendly configuration with no dependencies. Looking into the best way to account for cryogenics and a new fuel type if desired. HEDM are new molecules for solid propellants that have extremely high energy densities as well as ISP. The molecule I have decided would be a good Kerbal fuel is Cubane (C8H8). While near term these types of rockets would likely be hybrids with LOX I have made the simplification that the cubane would be mixed with solid oxygen. Cubane has an ideal vacuum ISP of 383.1 and a density of 1.29g/cm3. Compare that to RP-1 with an ISP 365.1 and density of 0.80g/cm3. This means that these solid boosters will be greatly more efficient and compact than many other lifters. I will see if there is a way to adjust the thrust in game so that multiple ascent profiles can be targeted.
  3. The RDE-6 H.A.L.B.E.R.D. Engine has been added to the mod. See the first post to download. It may seem over powered, but the idea is that it should exist in the space between the stock tech and the far future electric/nuclear rockets.
  4. Just tried it in a stock game, not sure whats up. Should be called "Sin Phi Solar Disk 12"
  5. They work fine as long as you don't plan on breaking them. When they do break part of the model sticks around for a few seconds and then will go away. I am pretty sure it is not an issue with the model, just something to live with for now until I find a fix.
  6. @theJesuit Ah good call, that ended up looking great. Indecision over.
  7. Working with some place holder textures trying to decide between two models. The bottom one is the first I made, but now I am leaning towards the top. Shows off more of the nozzles and has more intake area. The next set have more flat area on the sides for radial attachment, such as wings for space planes. Broader in the center looks better for those.
  8. *test version of rapier type engine available on git repository Working on the engines now. They will be based on RDE (Rotating Detonation Engine) technology. Jets and rockets of all types now are almost exclusively reliant on deflagration combustion. There are a few experimental scram jets and pulse detonation engines. However a technology that shows even more promise for static thrust with detonation combustion is RDE. Scram jets require an incredible initial speed to utilize the shock waves for compression and have poor mass ratios. Pulse detonation engines have an incredible ISP (efficiency) per pulse, but that efficiency must be integrated over time and there are losses due to the on off thrust. RDE engines like scram jets have a continous detonation wave front, but instead of being stationary it moves like a PDE. Because it is able to maintain a continuous detonation and operable when static it gives tremendous performance benefits over conventional deflagration combustion. This is most easily understood by a comparison of the Brayton cycle to the Humphry cycle: The Brayton cycle is the typical jet engine cycle with constant pressure combustion where as the Humphrey cycle has constant volume combustion. This means that there is about 25% more work available in the flow. With this increased efficiency the combustors can be smaller and more powerful. To represent this in Kerbal the RDEs will have 25% better ISP, 10% better thrust and 50% higher cost than comparable engines. They will require Experimental Aircraft Engines from the CTT. The current plans for the engines include a mixed-mode type, 2 H2/OX and 2 RP1/OX one high thrust and one high ISP each. The one rendered here is the RDE-6 H.A.L.B.E.R.D. (High Altitude Liquid Breathing Engine with Rotating Detonation). It is integrated with an pre-cooler inline intake, an alternator, and a battery. I mainly did that because I would like to build some space-planes without a front intake and as an added differentiation. It has an air-breathing ISP of 4000s and rocket ISP of 325/400s. I have extended the thrust curve out from Mach 6 to Mach 7 to reflect the ability of detonation combustion to take in higher velocity air. I may extend this further, but have the inbuilt intake starve so that you will have to use a shock cone for serious hypersonic flight near mach 8-10. On the image starting from the front you see the pre-cooler inline intake. This has intake ramps which would use fuel or oxidizer to cool the incoming air and heat the fuel. The next section is the 6 RDE combustors. Then in the rear are the 6 bell nozzles and the central turbine exhaust. The concept of operation being that in air-breathing mode the turbine (possibly fed by preburner exhaust, not detonation) drives an axial air compressor and fuel pump. Then in rocket mode a clutch disengages the compressor and engages an oxidizer pump. The bypass from the combustors to the turbine would be varied depending on work needed for pumps and compressor. Some literature on the subject: https://www.netl.doe.gov/File Library/Research/Coal/energy systems/turbines/utsr-25343-kickoff-presentation.pdf There are some cool videos on youtube as well where you can actually see the detonation front rotating at 4kHz.
  9. @Kerbrian If you don't mind a bit of math this can be easily understood through the rocket equation, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsiolkovsky_rocket_equation Just punch in your values to deltaV = ISP * 9.81 * ln( M0 / Mf ). You will see while a high ISP engine is heavy as you add more fuel (increasing the ratio of wet mass to dry mass) you will achieve much better performance. For large/equal ratios of M0:Mf the ISP becomes dominate in determining deltaV.
  10. Ok, I was able to fix it. I was doing a bit of a silly thing I guess with deleting part of the animation that I thought wasn't needed. I was just using the main animation and discarding a part that wasn't needed to play in Unity. Kerbal did not like that. You can see in the image that all I did was leave them in the Animator, still only reference the Deploy animation in the config. https://www.dropbox.com/s/op5eyp50kot1lzo/animationError.png?raw=0 Release 0.1.3 is ready now with solar panel. *I just found that the solar panels don't break off properly, will have to look into it.
  11. *I deleted the child of an armature in unity, but left the armature to animate my colliders. Wondering if that would do it... [LOG 08:22:24.809] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'SinPhiHeavyIndustries/Parts/Electrical/SolarPanels/SolarDisk12/SolarDisk12' [LOG 08:22:24.815] PartLoader: Part 'SinPhiHeavyIndustries/Parts/Electrical/SolarPanels/SolarDisk12/SolarDisk12' has no database record. Creating. [LOG 08:22:24.818] DragCubeSystem: Creating drag cubes for part 'SolarDisk12' [EXC 08:22:24.831] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object ModuleDeployablePart.AssumeDragCubePosition (System.String name) DragCubeSystem+<RenderDragCubes>c__Iterator1F.MoveNext () UnityEngine.SetupCoroutine.InvokeMoveNext (IEnumerator enumerator, IntPtr returnValueAddress) [LOG 08:28:19.014] [Toolbar] [INFO] saving settings (game scene: MAINMENU) [LOG 08:28:19.015] [Toolbar] [INFO] saving toolbar settings (toolbar 'toolbar_241572485') [LOG 08:28:19.017] [Toolbar] [INFO] saving toolbar settings (toolbar 'toolbar_196738260') [LOG 08:28:19.018] [Toolbar] [INFO] saving toolbar settings (toolbar 'toolbar_1749462777') [LOG 08:28:19.018] [Toolbar] [INFO] saving toolbar settings (toolbar 'toolbar_372827719') [LOG 08:28:19.019] [Toolbar] [INFO] saving toolbar settings (toolbar 'toolbar_503619156')
  12. It is just a single panel, just showing in the video what it would look like with 12 of them.
  13. Ok, got the solar panel all done and then the game locks up trying to load it. Not crashes or anything, just stops on the component. If someone knows why this is, I could use some help on this one. It is up on the Git. https://github.com/Turbinia/SinPhiHeavyIndustries
  14. Coming soon for this mod is a set solar panels that can be arranged in a disk. I like the way the fan panels in near future solar looked so decided to make my own that would form a disk with 12 part symmetry on a 3.75m core. Going to do a few more 3.75m parts, a stubby science lab, coupala, and lander can with a lot of integral parts. Might do some passable batteries and mono-prop tanks if they aren't already in a common mod. I am thinking I don't want to do any smaller centrifuges as there are plenty of inflatables in that niche. Also going to work on a line of engines that will be about 25% more efficient and 10% more powerful with 50% higher cost than other offerings as a step up on chemical rockets. There seems to be a pretty good gap between chemical rockets and electrical/exotic from other mods that this could fill. Will probably be a pair each of h2/ox and rp1/ox with sea level and vacuum nozzles. May also do a rapier and turbo/ram jet. I have some good theory and application to base this performance on. Have been reading a lot of journals on it lately and it could be realized in the next few decades.
  15. Added an engine style shroud for launch vehicle attachment on an impassible node (should the shroud have a collider?). I found it basically impossible to launch with the habitat on top of the rocket stack. Here is an example of a lift vehicle I used to get to 200km orbit with SpaceY parts. I found launching without a fairing is still the best way to get this in orbit, just have to watch the heating. Still need to add colliders to the transfer tubes. I think I will leave them off the spokes as that would be another 24 colliders, and it just doesn't seem worth it. Besides it is fun to fly through the wheels on eva. Last model update for a couple of weeks. I can still address issues with the configs if those come up. I may also work up a mission to pay off putting one of these in orbit because the launches are a bit expensive.
  • Create New...