RoverDude

[1.8.x] - Modular Kolonization System (MKS)

Recommended Posts

So what do I need to do to get this working in 144? CKAN seems to indicate that it's compatible, but its dependencies (ground construction) are not. but it sounds like some people have gotten it working... maybe? confused here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, se5a said:

So what do I need to do to get this working in 144? CKAN seems to indicate that it's compatible, but its dependencies (ground construction) are not. but it sounds like some people have gotten it working... maybe? confused here.

Tell CKAN that your install is compatible with 1.4 (which it is), and you will be able to install anything that is compatible with 1.4 or later(I have heard there are a few mods that specifically refuse to work if the version is not a 100% match, but MKS and GC are not among those)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, se5a said:

So what do I need to do to get this working in 144? CKAN seems to indicate that it's compatible, but its dependencies (ground construction) are not. but it sounds like some people have gotten it working... maybe? confused here.

If you can convince CKAN to install it (I've never used CKAN), everything should work except trying to use ground construction parts, and maybe the trouble I have with multiple-bay manufacturing parts. If you are starting a new campaign it will be a while before you need either. Manually installing ground construction 2 seems to work ok, or you could wait for the next MKS release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RoverDude Does your reply mean that you have observed converters with multiple bays hitting 200% or 300% load on Kerbin in a 1.4.3/1.4.4 game?

I noticed the Tundra ISM LFO configuration has the LF/Ox ratio reversed. Here's my patch:

--- orig/Tundra_ISM.cfg	2017-04-28 21:23:16.000000000 -0500
+++ fixed/Tundra_ISM.cfg	2018-07-24 16:28:48.881960468 -0500
@@ -71,3 +71,3 @@
 		resourceNames = Silicates,Silicon;Substrate,Polymers;ExoticMinerals,RareMetals,Chemicals,RefinedExotics;Hydrates,Water;Karbonite,Water;Ore,Water;Minerals,Chemicals;Gypsum,Fertilizer;Minerals,Fertilizer;MetallicOre,Metals;Ore,LiquidFuel,Oxidizer;Ore,LiquidFuel;Ore,MonoPropellant;RefinedExotics,Silicon,SpecializedParts;Metals,Polymers,Chemicals,MaterialKits;Substrate,Water,Organics,Fertilizer;Dirt,Water,Organics,Fertilizer;Organics,SpecializedParts,MaterialKits,ColonySupplies;SpecializedParts,MaterialKits,Machinery;Recyclables,Metals,Polymers,Chemicals;Mulch,Fertilizer,Supplies;Substrate,Water,Fertilizer,Supplies;Dirt,Water,Fertilizer,Supplies
-		resourceAmounts = 55,11;55,11;11.5,11.5,34.5,11.5;46,23;55,11;55,11;55,11;46,23;55,11;55,11;55,6.05,4.95;55,11;55,11;4.38,43.75,21.88;14,14,7,35;30.6,30.6,8.6,1;32,32,5.8,1;21,7,7,35;7,28,35;35,7,7,7;31.5,3.5,35;78,78,1,7.8;34.2,34.2,1,1.4
+		resourceAmounts = 55,11;55,11;11.5,11.5,34.5,11.5;46,23;55,11;55,11;55,11;46,23;55,11;55,11;55,4.95,6.05;55,11;55,11;4.38,43.75,21.88;14,14,7,35;30.6,30.6,8.6,1;32,32,5.8,1;21,7,7,35;7,28,35;35,7,7,7;31.5,3.5,35;78,78,1,7.8;34.2,34.2,1,1.4
 		initialResourceAmounts = 0,0;0,0;0,0,0,0;0,0;0,0;0,0;0,0;0,0;0,0;0,0;0,0,0;0,0;0,0;0,0,0;0,0,0,0;0,0,0,0;0,0,0,0;0,0,0,0;0,0,0;0,0,0,0;0,0,0;0,0,0,0;0,0,0,0

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Johould said:

I noticed the Tundra ISM LFO configuration has the LF/Ox ratio reversed.

Good catch.  I submitted a fix for the same bug in the Ranger ISM awhile back (and that got merged and released), but I hadn't noticed that the Tundra one was affected too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Wyzard said:

Good catch.  I submitted a fix for the same bug in the Ranger ISM awhile back (and that got merged and released), but I hadn't noticed that the Tundra one was affected too.

I thought I had already seen a similar report, it must have been your fix for the Ranger ISM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, I likeOxidizerrfuel said:

RoverDude are you updating MKS to 1.4.4?0

No need really since it is fine in any 1.4.x version, and the version file clears it through 1.4.9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recovering an inflated Tundra ISM that is configured for refining RefinedExotics subtracts almost 7 million funds! It seems to have something to do with "inflatedCost" in the save, but I don't see how that field affects recovery cost.

Spoiler

ByMKmb3.jpg

 

Edited by Johould
Fix image link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RoverDude said:

No need really since it is fine in any 1.4.x version, and the version file clears it through 1.4.9

I know bringing up CKAN in this thread is sensitive, but I think a lot of people are asking this question because according to CKAN your mod isn't 1.4.4 compatible because of dependencies on GC, which listed as only being 1.4.3 compatible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tsaven said:

I know bringing up CKAN in this thread is sensitive, but I think a lot of people are asking this question because according to CKAN your mod isn't 1.4.4 compatible because of dependencies on GC, which listed as only being 1.4.3 compatible.

Wouldn't that be better to ask  over at GC?  I know he's working on GC2, so I'd guess this is one of those issues the CKAN people may have to "Deal with" at least until GC2 is the one integrated into MKS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, RoverDude said:

No need really since it is fine in any 1.4.x version, and the version file clears it through 1.4.9

Does this mean that we should manually update to the new GC version (with the in-situ kit construction)? (Or did I miss an update?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, invultri said:

Does this mean that we should manually update to the new GC version (with the in-situ kit construction)? (Or did I miss an update?)

Manually update to keep current (for now)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I finally managed to get to the bigger drills with multiple bays, however for the life of me I can not enable more than 2 of them without getting into cooling problems. It seems that it is not possible to extract the heat out of the drill quick enough. Is it possible to have all 3 bays running? (I am still on 1.4.3 btw, not sure if that matters)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, invultri said:

So I finally managed to get to the bigger drills with multiple bays, however for the life of me I can not enable more than 2 of them without getting into cooling problems. It seems that it is not possible to extract the heat out of the drill quick enough. Is it possible to have all 3 bays running? (I am still on 1.4.3 btw, not sure if that matters)

What radiators are you using? Pay attention to the "core heat transfer" stat that is the maximum heat the radiator can extract from a single part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, voicey99 said:

What radiators are you using? Pay attention to the "core heat transfer" stat that is the maximum heat the radiator can extract from a single part.

The problem is the "Max Cooling" on the drill itself, 100kw on the MEU-500. This is more than enough radiators:

Spoiler

jFxX0vM.jpg

(That's 15 Ranger TCS attached to the parent of the drill - one hidden under the battery stack)

Exactly the same temperature is reached with 2 edge radiators (150kw core cooling each).

Here are relevant bits of the MEU-500-A part file:

Spoiler

 


        MODULE
        {
                name = ModuleResourceHarvester_USI
                HarvesterType = 0
                Efficiency = 6.55
                ResourceName = Dirt
                ConverterName = Dirt
                StartActionName = Start Dirt Drill
                StopActionName = Stop Dirt Drill
                INPUT_RESOURCE
                {
                        ResourceName = ElectricCharge
                        Ratio = 13.1
                }
                ImpactTransform = ImpactTransform
                ImpactRange = 5
                AutoShutdown = true
                UseSpecialistBonus = false
                EfficiencyBonus = 1
                GeneratesHeat = true
                TemperatureModifier
                {
                        key = 0 20000
                        key = 250 10000
                        key = 500 5000
                        key = 750 500
                        key = 1000 0
                }
                ThermalEfficiency
                {
                        key = 0 0.1
                        key = 250 .1
                        key = 500 1
                        key = 750 .1
                        key = 1000 0
                }
        }
        MODULE
        {
                name = ModuleCoreHeat
                CoreTempGoal = 500                                      //Internal temp goal - we don't transfer till we hit this point
                CoreToPartRatio = 0.1                           //Scale back cooling if the part is this % of core temp
                CoreTempGoalAdjustment = 0                      //Dynamic goal adjustment
                CoreEnergyMultiplier = 0.1                      //What percentage of our core energy do we transfer to the part
                HeatRadiantMultiplier = 0.25            //If the core is hotter, how much heat radiates?
                CoolingRadiantMultiplier = 0            //If the core is colder, how much radiates?
                HeatTransferMultiplier = 0                      //If the part is hotter, how much heat transfers in?
                CoolantTransferMultiplier = 0.01        //If the part is colder, how much of our energy can we transfer?
                radiatorCoolingFactor = 1                       //How much energy we pull from core with an active radiator?  >= 1
                radiatorHeatingFactor = 0.05            //How much energy we push to the active radiator
                MaxCalculationWarp = 1000                       //Based on how dramatic the changes are, this is the max rate of change
                CoreShutdownTemp = 1000                         //At what core temperature do we shut down all generators on this part?
                MaxCoolant = 100                                        //Maximum amount of radiator capacity we can consume - 50 = 1 small
        }

According to this post:

the "Temperature Modifier"  means each active harvester would put out 5000/50 = 100kW at 500K, but MaxCoolant = 100 means the drill core can't be cooled by more than 100kW total (maybe plus a bit of conduction from core to the rest of the part?). It looks like it can eke out a bit more production with a second harvester active overheating slightly past 500K because the section of the curves just above 500K has the ThermalEfficiency curve cutting productivity slightly more slowly than the TemperatureModifier curve cuts heat output.

 

Edited by Johould

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2018 at 2:03 PM, Johould said:

I thought I had already seen a similar report, it must have been your fix for the Ranger ISM.

And now I've also submitted the fix for the Tundra ISM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone else checked if an MPU with multiple bays set the same product works properly in KSP 1.4.3/1.4.4? It should run up to 200% load with two bays (plus Kolonization bonus), but I only get 100%.

I'm pretty hesitant to design any bigger bases until I can correct this ;.;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RoverDude About the inflated tank costs, I wonder if it was a problem that this commit

https://github.com/UmbraSpaceIndustries/UmbraSpaceIndustries/commit/17ac57b6909d76bde6dbf2af38457004c09f2a0c#diff-65293d6df5b927b868a7f2800b7472d7L322

removed the method

        float IPartCostModifier.GetModuleCost(float defaultCost)
        {
            return inflatedCost;
        }

added in "Add inflatable cost modifier when inflated"?

Edit: @RoverDude after remembering how compile mods, I can confirm that was the problem. That method's signature has changed slightly, but adding this

        ModifierChangeWhen IPartCostModifier.GetModuleCostChangeWhen()
        {
			return ModifierChangeWhen.CONSTANTLY;
        }
        float IPartCostModifier.GetModuleCost(float defaultCost, ModifierStagingSituation sit)
        {
			return inflatedCost;
        }

makes an inflated "Refine RefinedExotics" recover for the same cost as the uninflated part, rather than subtracting ~7M funds when recovered.

Edited by Johould

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the bay problem comes from only the drills and the Duna agriculture module having been changed to use the new ModuleSwapControllerNew/ModuleSwappableConverterNew system.

Edit: Ah, that's not exactly it - the cause was the deletion of the ModuleSwapConverterUpdate code while adding the new system, without anything else replacing its role of setting a "SwapBay" bonus on the active conversions. Putting the bay counting into ModuleSwappableConverter seems to fix all the production issues I was seeing. (Before getting into this code I first tried switching parts to the *New system, but didn't see a way to have a converter bay that could also reconfigure as an efficiency part, which the MPUs need).

Here's what I changed:

Spoiler

 


--- a/USITools/USITools/ModuleSwappableConverter.cs
+++ b/USITools/USITools/ModuleSwappableConverter.cs
@@ -261,23 +261,30 @@ namespace USITools
             var modules = part.FindModulesImplementing<BaseConverter>();
             for (int i = 0; i < modules.Count; ++i)
             {
-                if (EnabledByAnyModule(i))
+                int enableCount = NumEnablingModules(i);
+                if (enableCount > 0)
+                {
+                    var module = modules[i];
+                    if (module is IEfficiencyBonusConsumer)
+                        ((IEfficiencyBonusConsumer)module).SetEfficiencyBonus("SwapBay", enableCount);
                     modules[i].EnableModule();
+                }
                 else
                     modules[i].DisableModule();
             }
             ChangeMenu();
         }
 
-        private bool EnabledByAnyModule(int moduleId)
+        private int NumEnablingModules(int moduleId)
         {
             var modules = part.FindModulesImplementing<ModuleSwappableConverter>();
+            int numEnabling = 0;
             for (int i = 0; i < modules.Count; ++i)
             {
                 if (modules[i].currentLoadout == moduleId)
-                    return true;
+                    numEnabling += 1;
             }
-            return false;
+            return numEnabling;
         }

 

 

Edited by Johould
found a fix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey friends,

I've been having a ton of trouble the last few days with this. I'm building a base on the Mun, and to speed that up I sent a 5m KIS container filled with Ranger Ag modules, ILMs, multitrusses and tundra multihubs, and sent an engineer out to build the base on site. The problem is that whenever I load the save or the base loads into view, the parts that I constructed in eva become really distorted, like they've been clipped into each other or off centered. But according to the vessel view, the pieces are all still connected to each other, even though certain modules are displayed as ten meters or more away. Each load also seems to push the base farther down the 2.5 degree slope it's sitting on, as measured by distance to my first flag planted, despite the ground tether. I'm not really sure what's happening, my base has just become a mess and frankly I don't really want to play this anymore if it's going to be like this. I spent an hour setting it up just for it to mess itself up, and then I went out and fixed it and it just did it again. I don't know what to do anymore. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Minit said:

Hey friends,

I've been having a ton of trouble the last few days with this. I'm building a base on the Mun, and to speed that up I sent a 5m KIS container filled with Ranger Ag modules, ILMs, multitrusses and tundra multihubs, and sent an engineer out to build the base on site. The problem is that whenever I load the save or the base loads into view, the parts that I constructed in eva become really distorted, like they've been clipped into each other or off centered. But according to the vessel view, the pieces are all still connected to each other, even though certain modules are displayed as ten meters or more away. Each load also seems to push the base farther down the 2.5 degree slope it's sitting on, as measured by distance to my first flag planted, despite the ground tether. I'm not really sure what's happening, my base has just become a mess and frankly I don't really want to play this anymore if it's going to be like this. I spent an hour setting it up just for it to mess itself up, and then I went out and fixed it and it just did it again. I don't know what to do anymore. 

Which version of KSP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RoverDude said:

Which version of KSP?

1.4.5. I thought it might be the version, so I made a copy of my save and rolled it back to 1.4.4 by changing the persistence file, but that didn't fix it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A further oddity - the Ranger inflatable hab module shows both "Start Hab-Common" and "Start Hab-Quarters" buttons.

Putting the "ModuleSwappableConverter" after everything it is supposed to swap somehow works around the problem.

Edited by Johould

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/31/2018 at 6:57 PM, Minit said:

Hey friends,

I've been having a ton of trouble the last few days with this. I'm building a base on the Mun, and to speed that up I sent a 5m KIS container filled with Ranger Ag modules, ILMs, multitrusses and tundra multihubs, and sent an engineer out to build the base on site. The problem is that whenever I load the save or the base loads into view, the parts that I constructed in eva become really distorted, like they've been clipped into each other or off centered. But according to the vessel view, the pieces are all still connected to each other, even though certain modules are displayed as ten meters or more away. Each load also seems to push the base farther down the 2.5 degree slope it's sitting on, as measured by distance to my first flag planted, despite the ground tether. I'm not really sure what's happening, my base has just become a mess and frankly I don't really want to play this anymore if it's going to be like this. I spent an hour setting it up just for it to mess itself up, and then I went out and fixed it and it just did it again. I don't know what to do anymore. 

The "bases getting all twisted up" over time bug or whatever it is has been happening to me for years :(  I just thought it was just KSP being not really designed for long term bases, KIS, KAS, etc. You can minimise it by not having to many things connected together and making modules standalone (not connected physically with pipes winch cables etc) and using umbra's local warehouse recourse swapping and microwave power transferring to make things work. That does no help with swapping crew though:( and I agree it's really annoying building a cool base and it getting all twisted up:(

Share this post


Link to post
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.