ZodiusInfuser

PMed you some comments Sun tracking is not a new feature request. IIRC it's been suggested for all the time that IR has existing, going back to Sirkut's days. I believe the decision at those times was that it should not be a part of IR and instead should either be a separate module or kOS script that controls servos using the API calls. So if you do want to do it then I would suggest separate module, maybe even on a dedicated "sun tracker" part. We can discuss the specifics privately though.

Well if they're anything like the existing trusses then they shouldn't need modifying for at least 5 years Cool! I'll keep an eye out for it! Thanks! Actually finding the creating of these hubs quite therapeutic, and a good distraction from the ActiveStruts parts I've been remodelling Old one in the bottom right for comparison. Did a lot of research to find an IRL mechanism to base these off: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O56oBIwEtp0 On the point of hub modelling, Yay or Nay to hex-hubs? Note: Due to how KSP works the outer ring of trusses in the image below would only be attached on one side, so would need strutting on the other. I thought about doing Oct hubs too but not sure of the benefit there. Hex is nice because it lets you form equilateral triangles as above.

Can you test with just a single rotatron on top of a command pod? Also, do you have KJR Continued installed?

What do you mean by "and right there it goes"?

Here's the parts all properly modelled: Currently 29 vs the 31 in the previous image, as I removed 6 that I couldn't make the geometry look nice for (edit: have an idea i'll try tomorrow though) and added 4 more. So that gives: 1x 6-way 5x 5-way 12x 4-way 7x 3-way (Edit: maybe 6 more) 4x 2-way Is that too many? Is that not enough? And this is a question to everyone, not just @nmc.

I think so. Could make for an interesting design and give more space to add the suspension mechanism. Ah nice! Btw, I like your suggestion of parts inspired by @riocrokite's Mobile Frame System. This is something I too have been thinking about, but purely the chassis portion. True but I myself can think of a few uses for then, plus they will always offer a stronger connection than IR joints. The main ones with those angles that I am interested in though are the ones with 3 or more attachment nodes. As I model them I'll see which ones are practical in terms of geometry, if some look bad then I won't include them.

Can you show your craft? Given IR joints are actually stronger than the DLC robotics (from my testing), then it's either a bug or you are expecting too much from them. Are you testing in the gravity you plan to use it on? After all the real-life Canadarm cannot lift itself under earth gravity.

Well let me leave you with this teaser then, for when I eventually do revisit them (includes an even bigger mecanum and two omni wheel models I started last year) Ah cool! Good luck with it! Which mod?

That's the plan! It won't be any time soon though as the old physically accurate method of a bunch of wheels on a rotating hub was broken several years back so I will have to fake it in some way using a single wheel. On the plus side this does mean the parts will have suspension whereas they couldn't before.

Resizing all the parts isn't really practical. Not only would it be save breaking as you say, but some of the parts genuinely don't need to be made larger. Also they all have the same 0.5m attachment point so if you scaled them to make their grid sizes match then that would no longer match. I'll go with 0.625m for now and decide nearer the end. Btw, had a bit of a play around and the hub may need to be broken out into a part per number of nodes: Top is the 6 way, bottom is 2 way. As you may be able to tell I've thrown in 30, 45 and 60 degree options. Interestingly this is not all of the possibilities but these seem like the most useful. Any you think I'm missing? Note that these are no where near a stage where they can be put in game, but wanted to see what options I could create.

Its interesting that you show that. I actually designed the new gantry with multiple attachment nodes on the rear to that sort of thing could be built easily but sadly IR needs a lot of work to support that so they're currently commented out in the config. Thanks for the list! I think from those I would prefer to do the latter, probably using the stock variants system. That way I can tailor each design to the available attachments. Made a quick mock-up of a 6-way, but just trying to decide on the sizing. Using existing parts for reference, here's the available options (at full scale): 0.5m grid: Not used by anything but smallest possible 0.6m grid: Used by Basic & Half Basic & Hinge Pivotrons and a few others 0.625m grid: Half of shortest large truss (1.25m) plus a common KSP size 0.7m grid: Used by Off-Axis & Parallel & Bearing Rotatrons 0.8m grid: Used by Wide Angle Pivotron Currently torn between 0.625m and 0.7m.

I can do. Honestly never considered it because nobody has asked for one. Maybe you can show me some examples of how you would use one (with the stock part)? The question I have is whether it's better to just have one with all 6 nodes or explore things more thoroughly and offer a larger selection of parts.

Will you be using more IR parts in your future builds? I see you're using the trusses, but it saddens me when the stock robotics parts are placed between them, particularly when we have a wider variety of parts. They will be making a return at some point, don't you worry . As Rudolf says, they may be as a separate mod though (called Infernal Motion/Movement?) as I have ideas for how to expand their capabilities to make the control of these sorts of things much easier:

The stripes are a nice addition to the robotics parts. Just want to point out though that if they are meant to show the positive rotation direction (e.g. like how the rotors do), then the ones on the rotational servos are correct on one side of the part but mirrored on the other side of the part.

Indeed we are! Do you have any examples of the kind of things you've created? Send me a message and we can discuss what is needed so you can decide whether you'd like to do it. As for style, as long as its stock-alike and consistent then being like PorkJet's trusses isn't too important, would still be better than whatever I can achieve

Yes to both questions. You need to grab the Infernal Robotics - Next version from this forum thread:

He did have them pretty badly misaligned to be fair. Overall quite a nice showcase, and good that he showed it with IR, as "docking" of two parts of the same craft it what this mod is best for.

Btw, you've just been reviewed by Kottabos

Hey Darren9, Nice to hear from you, and glad you will be sticking with us . We're still using your great trailer btw!

Have you added a probe core (or the IR Robotic Control Unit)? One is needed as it stores the sequences.

Can you check through this list: Additionally, are you using uncontrolled rotatrons (the thin ones)? Seeing a picture of your craft would be useful.

We have a version we're testing for this now, basically adds a Target Position slider to all IR parts. I wonder if SlaveDriver could work for them too?

Ah okay. Well let us know if it happens again. I'm really curious which other mod is the culprit.

Which KJR are you using, Continued or Next? Because IR Next is incompatible with Continued.

Thanks, that's a good thought! That's a weird one. As you can see below, I tried to reproduce it but it worked fine. Thought it may be autostruts but that did not seem to engage. What other mods do you have installed? Do you have KJR by any chance?