Jump to content

[1.12.x] Konstruction! Weldable ports, servos, cranes, and magnets!


RoverDude
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, Jiraiyah said:

@RoverDude Damn sir, just when i asked for something to work as base for making rovers in space you show this up :D

now a question, is this part (arrow) fixed length? or is there variation to it's length?

86a00307372c43afaec16629adde28d6.png

I'm pretty sure you can move it forward and backwards with the "horizontal" servo option. I'm not sure though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TheEpicSquared said:

I'm pretty sure you can move it forward and backwards with the "horizontal" servo option. I'm not sure though.

No, what i mean is that, what if we push it all the way forward, then rotate it 90 degree and what we want to pull is still not centered for pulling up? then we would need longer length so that the side pull of a wider vehicle would be possible. same goes for the vertical support section, what if the thing that we are going to lift is having more height?

tp be more precise, I am thinking of using this to make rovers on top of KAS pylons on the surface of the planet like what buffalo let us do

and one more question, let's say i have the base of the rover there being pulled up, would i still be able to use KAS to attach wheels to the pulled up rover or not?

Edited by Jiraiyah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, TheEpicSquared said:

Oh idk then. Sorry 

actually, i just a video from kottabos gaming, looks like rover dude had exact same thoughts designing these parts, you can rotate that vertical part to almost horizontal angle and then push the previous horizontal one forward, that gives quit long distance to work with ! now only question is if we can attack parts to a lifted thing using KAS or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ended up asking this question in General when the second half should have been asked here. Will you be able to weld multiple ports together? In order for that to work, there would have to be an option to replace the ports with a fuselage instead of offsetting the new part over the gap.

I guess multi-port docking would also have to work in stock, but I think it's supposed to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Suedocode said:

I ended up asking this question in General when the second half should have been asked here. Will you be able to weld multiple ports together? In order for that to work, there would have to be an option to replace the ports with a fuselage instead of offsetting the new part over the gap.

I guess multi-port docking would also have to work in stock, but I think it's supposed to?

This is not something I am considering.  There's really no point since the use case for a multiport dock (joint strength, and alignment) are already covered.

25 minutes ago, Beeso3 said:

The Akita Wheels aren't working for me?

The other construction wheels do, though.

 

Help?

Too vague, need more info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, RoverDude said:

 There's really no point since the use case for a multiport dock (joint strength, and alignment) are already covered.

04JTHeA.png

The only way to construct this station would be to use multiple ports at some point (I think?).

Edited by Suedocode
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Suedocode said:

04JTHeA.png

The only way to construct this station would be to use multiple ports at some point (I think?).

Might want to try that with DSEV's ports instead (once they are released).  Angel-125's shown that they will have the option of leaving the ports in place when they are welded - so the dimensions shouldn't change.  (Although that's going to be a save-level option, not a port-level option.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RoverDude said:

Well some of those are surface attach, so those could not be used anyway :wink:  Could probably do it one section at a time, autostrut the last one that would not have a port.

 

Here's the steps of my attempts to build it in orbit:

Step 1: Assemble. Looks good so far

ocy7azx.jpg

Step 2: There's one minor issue, but this is to be expected since multi-port docking isn't a thing.

9X9YohS.png

Step 3: Begin merging! I merged the section with the janky edge first to get it out of the way. So far so good. I used cubic octagonal struts to get your ports to be pseudo-surface attached.

1xM9QUK.jpg

Step 4: Merge the next section. Uhhhh...? The port severed completely from the edge section, and now the node section is free-floating.

NsAVqva.jpg

Step 5: MAYHEM!! I merged in order just to see what the end result would be. It's quite amusing. Interestingly, my RCS controls trigger on all of the separated pieces (notice the RCS puffs). It still seems to think it's all one big station (controls are linked), but individual sections are free floating. There's some super weird joint things going on as well.

3LkPwuR.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really thrilled that this is actually possible! No more struggling with how to break up my station into launchable portions without adding yet another two parts (docking ports) and same for less wobbly orbit-assembled ships.

If I could code, I would have beaten you by three years! :D:wink:

On 23.8.2013 at 0:28 PM, KerbMav said:

Can docking ports be made unbreakable by modding? Reducing or negating flexibility between two ports?

And then not name them docking ports, but make them self-bolting-and-welding-construction-rings, cannot be "decoupled" because they weld together (maybe even merge into one single part - although I do not think that is possible?) but would be perfect for station/ship building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Suedocode said:

Here's the steps of my attempts to build it in orbit:

Spoiler

 

Step 1: Assemble. Looks good so far

ocy7azx.jpg

Step 2: There's one minor issue, but this is to be expected since multi-port docking isn't a thing.

9X9YohS.png

Step 3: Begin merging! I merged the section with the janky edge first to get it out of the way. So far so good. I used cubic octagonal struts to get your ports to be pseudo-surface attached.

1xM9QUK.jpg

Step 4: Merge the next section. Uhhhh...? The port severed completely from the edge section, and now the node section is free-floating.

NsAVqva.jpg

Step 5: MAYHEM!! I merged in order just to see what the end result would be. It's quite amusing. Interestingly, my RCS controls trigger on all of the separated pieces (notice the RCS puffs). It still seems to think it's all one big station (controls are linked), but individual sections are free floating. There's some super weird joint things going on as well.

3LkPwuR.jpg

 

 

Precisely my observation, although it does not take a loop to realize it.

Edited by Fat D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After breakfast i made this (legitly launched with stockparts): 

mtfrDNP.png

The expression on this Kerbals face says anything
KSP 1.2 Physics are in my opinion ready to go big like never before:P

jdoU0YW.png

Would be cool to have a structural only option for the Girders... but it looks like the parts have no impact on CPU or framerate at all.

Edited by Mikki
impact:D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/8/2016 at 7:08 AM, maculator said:

I just wanted to give this one a go since it looks really awsome, I got the latest version from github, but it seems to logspam my KSP with the following whenever I select a part in the editor:/

JArz8wg.png

Is it "safe" to use anyways or is this something bad? It keeps spamming the log - when I type a letter and submit it to the log it is gone verry fast since those messages apear mltiple times per second.

Cheers.

 

Edit:

Of course I'm also using the latest built of KSP 1.2 pre. Only other mod would be KER.

 

19 hours ago, RoverDude said:

Then that would be an MM issue it sounds like, which given we're in pre... no surprise there :)

From what I can tell about this problem, it could be a mix between the two, but I think the problem is with USI core. By trial and error, I found the error is only there when we have the file: AddConsumers.cfg. which(as of course you know) adds the ModuleLogisticsConsumer to any ModuleCommand through the use of Module manager. Could there be something wrong with Logistics in 1.2?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just tested the "compress" feature in orbit and it seems that all parts with very low mass <0.01ton get shifted around 1 meter, after leaving the scene or even reloading after restarting the game some of the mentioned parts disappear completly.
Fuellines and struts disappear, Rcs thrusters, small sience stuff and even the puff engine (0.09ton) stay shifted after reloading the scene.
Usually they move towards the rootpart in front, no matter which port is actvated for compression.

Edit: Not all low mass parts behave like this, for example the "surface scanner module" (0.005ton) stays on place after compressing.

Easy to replicate, put a ship in orbit and compress.
For anything else it just works fine, great work!

Edited by Mikki
Edit:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Seeker89 said:

 

From what I can tell about this problem, it could be a mix between the two, but I think the problem is with USI core. By trial and error, I found the error is only there when we have the file: AddConsumers.cfg. which(as of course you know) adds the ModuleLogisticsConsumer to any ModuleCommand through the use of Module manager. Could there be something wrong with Logistics in 1.2?

I reported this bug to sarbian, but he didn't liked it and was a little angry about the report (even with provided log and bug description as described on this forum).

If I understood correctly he said the bug is on roverdude's end, but I'm not sure.

Log is here, if anyone is interested. Tested with only MM and Konstruction.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ikdbywe1zdkn18v/output_log.txt?dl=0

Edited by Crabman
Added log
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...