KSP Interstellar Extended Continued Development Thread

[danielboro]

10 hours ago, qwertyza said:

Is is it normal that first nuclear engine from KSPI, Solid core one, is accelerating and deccelerating for a very long time? It takes appr. 30 seconds to drop thrust from 100% to 0%???

It makes the engine nearly unusable =(

Second part of the question, can I adjust this value myself? I want all engines to have instant thrust response.

this is wat i use

 

@PART[KspiLANTR]
{
    @MODULE[ThermalNozzleController]
    {
        @engineAccelerationBaseSpeed =5
        @engineDecelerationBaseSpeed =50
} 

the bigger the number the faster the response
cool down is very short and worm up is close to the old 1.2.2 value

Edited July 15, 2017 by danielboro

[FreeThinker]

13 hours ago, qwertyza said:

Is is it normal that first nuclear engine from KSPI, Solid core one, is accelerating and deccelerating for a very long time? It takes appr. 30 seconds to drop thrust from 100% to 0%???

It makes the engine nearly unusable =(

They are still very formidable early on, allowing for double delta V budget, they do however do not behave like chemical engines with near instant reaction, instead primitive solid core nuclear rocket engine like the classic NERVA required at least 30 second to fully heat up and down. Stock Ksp has spoilt you in this regard making you think they should accelerate to full speed instantly, just like they spoiled you with reaction wheels with infinite momentum. And by now we all know that not reality

Edited July 15, 2017 by FreeThinker

[DrScarlett]

Hey again guys,

just to simplify my previous question, could anyone provide me with a simple setup to test a vessel that has any fission/fusion setup for producing a constant 5GW of power. I need to test it to see if I am not going crazy. Either something has radically changed since I last played KSPI, or something is really wrong with my mods. So any 5 GW setup (not beamed). I just need to know: which reactors, which generators and which heat management systems.

Been testing things left and right, and nothing is working - I am going crazy. If I have anything that I know for sure should work I have a reference. If anyone could help me out with a setup like this that should work under normal circumstances, I would be much obliged. Thanks in advance!

Edited July 15, 2017 by DrScarlett

[FreeThinker]

@DrScarlett

All that what is needed is, a control unit, a reactor, sufficient amount of radiators, a Science Lab crewed by 2 kerbals, (preferably 5 star scientist), an connected  antimatter storage container (with fuel access) . In campaign you need  to have at least Scientific outpost researched, more advanced energy physics nodes will improve efficiency up to 1%

Notice that I fount a bug which caused it to produce 100 times less antimatter, it will be fixed next release

Edited July 16, 2017 by FreeThinker

[DrScarlett]

@FreeThinker, waow, thank you! That simple, eh?

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I hope you do not mind I ask a few follow up questions. First up, see this

:

I have been trying to add enough heat management to get this in the green, which resulted in ridiculous amounts of panels, and my generators dropped in efficiency over time any way, resulting in my power seeping away.

Q: Is it not necessary to get the heat management in the green, and if it is, any idea what i had been doing wrong when you read this?

Then this:

This looks to be a copy of your setup.

Q: Does this fusion reactor not need any "startup power" - is that no longer necessary at all?

Q: 21 micro grams? That's the bug, right?

Q: If I want to go for the full 5 GW I just need to bump up the size of the reactor i guess?

Q: Up to now I have been trying setups of reactors without built-in generators/energy converters, and the heat management always killed my setup, because generator efficiency would always drop into the cellar over time (see above) Any advice on that, maybe?

Thanks a lot, man, whatever you are able to answer me is fine, at the very least I have something to work with now!

Dr. Scarlett

[DrScarlett]

Ow, another question,

I am trying to find LithiumHydride containers, and when I read around here I think I need full IFS for that, not only core - but according to CKAN it conflicts with configurable containers from Allista (used in Ground Construction and TCA, both via ATUtils dependancy). That true, or am I good to manually install it?

[danielboro]

3 hours ago, DrScarlett said:

Ow, another question,

I am trying to find LithiumHydride containers, and when I read around here I think I need full IFS for that, not only core - but according to CKAN it conflicts with configurable containers from Allista (used in Ground Construction and TCA, both via ATUtils dependancy). That true, or am I good to manually install it?

you can maunaly install it
but it can cause a discontinuity
if IFS gets implemented first (it wont, MM works a-b-c and G is before I)
make a queksave
exit KSP

install IFS
run KSP and see if you have wired thing in reconfigured continers
if all is well continua
if not. exit ksp  remove IFS and load the queksave

[danielboro]

10 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

primitive solid core nuclear rocket engine like the classic NERVA required at least 30 second to fully heat up and down.

this is an engineering problem
not a technology limit
and affects of the reactor on trust dont have to be 1 to 1.
as an in game ksp example we can use is nerta`s NERVA altiration
he decoupled the nuclear reactor from the roket
to use it one need to start the reactor wait until its hot, then use the trust liver to add propellant to get trust
wen no propellant are used to cool the reactor radiators are used to keep it from over hieating
this decoupling allows instant start and stop of trust bast on flow of propellant but the actual ISP and trust depends on reactor temp
(i dont like because i needed to start the reactor 1-3 minutes bifur i did the node and its micromanagement that i dont want to do)

i dont have the level of knowledge you have on the subject
but i can imagine a reactor using a cooling system to allow it to run hot without a propellant, allowing at the very list a shorter time to warm/cool and the abilete to cut the propellant wen the reactor gose under some temp the cooling system can handle whit out propellant help and not getting that 1N trust i see at the end of the cool down

[FreeThinker]

7 hours ago, DrScarlett said:

Q: Does this fusion reactor not need any "startup power" - is that no longer necessary at all?

A1 The Tiri alpha is a inertial confinement reactor is kind of an internal combustion engine which use many small explosion to generate power.  It main a small amount of power to initiate a single fuel fusion cycle. As long as it not deactivate, it can deliver power like chemicar battery, except it is a mission times more powerfull and last a billion times longer.

7 hours ago, DrScarlett said:

Q: Is it not necessary to get the heat management in the green, and if it is, any idea what i had been doing wrong when you read this?

Then this:t

Only for theremal reactors. The thermal helper is mend for use with  thermal reactors

Edited July 16, 2017 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

7 hours ago, DrScarlett said:

Q: 21 micro grams? That's the bug, right?

 

Yes, According to my calculation it is 100 times too little

7 hours ago, DrScarlett said:

Q: If I want to go for the full 5 GW I just need to bump up the size of the reactor i guess?

Yes, bigger is better as mass scales at exponent at 2.5 while power with exponent 3

7 hours ago, DrScarlett said:

Q: Up to now I have been trying setups of reactors without built-in generators/energy converters, and the heat management always killed my setup, because generator efficiency would always drop into the cellar over time (see above) Any advice on that, maybe?

Use reactions with a higher percentage of charged particles because they can be converted directly in electric power up to 90% which signifiantly reduces wasteheat and there radiator requirements

33 minutes ago, danielboro said:

this is an engineering problem
not a technology limit
and affects of the reactor on trust dont have to be 1 to 1.
as an in game ksp example we can use is nerta`s NERVA altiration
he decoupled the nuclear reactor from the roket
to use it one need to start the reactor wait until its hot, then use the trust liver to add propellant to get trust
wen no propellant are used to cool the reactor radiators are used to keep it from over hieating
this decoupling allows instant start and stop of trust bast on flow of propellant but the actual ISP and trust depends on reactor temp
(i dont like because i needed to start the reactor 1-3 minutes bifur i did the node and its micromanagement that i dont want to do)

i dont have the level of knowledge you have on the subject
but i can imagine a reactor using a cooling system to allow it to run hot without a propellant, allowing at the very list a shorter time to warm/cool and the abilete to cut the propellant wen the reactor gose under some temp the cooling system can handle whit out propellant help and not getting that 1N trust i see at the end of the cool down

Sure the problem can be fixed with engineering, that why more advanced nozzles and reactors have significant better acceleration behavior. In this regard this is a property of the first generation nuclear reactors, which get solved in with advances in technology

Edited July 16, 2017 by FreeThinker

[DrScarlett]

@danielboro, heyhey thanks for the warning. What wired thing? And if I have it, is that then good or bad?

@FreeThinker Thank you again for your replies!

 

@FreeThinker Here's a pic of a station with four labs

Edited July 17, 2017 by DrScarlett

[danielboro]

 

3 hours ago, DrScarlett said:

@danielboro, heyhey thanks for the warning. What wired thing? And if I have it, is that then good or bad?

 

i had IFS first
wen CC was add to MKS i got it
my active ship has the fule in the tanker changed by IFS
CC reset it to default and added the option to change it using CC GUI

[DrScarlett]

Aaah I understand. I had CC first, and need IFS to get that specific IFS cargo container, not yet used in my save. I will check the existing CC changed tanks yto see if they are affected in any way.

Thanks again!

[FreeThinker]

On 14-7-2017 at 11:40 AM, dankis said:

@FreeThinker

If we want to keep it realistic, whole FEL with transmitter attached should be movable, not just transmitter. Due to Angle of incidence limitations, you can't aim with just optics without huge loss of efficiency and very long aparature.

My quick solution would be: Take movable base of Diode Infrared Beamed Power Laser model and attach it to bottom of FEL model, then attach head of DT-L-IR-1 Laser Beam Transmitter to our new model. It should yield FEL with integrated transmitter for very short wavelengths. IMO quite good option to add specialized  FEL with integrated transimiter for UV and X-Rays.

Regards

Is this what you had in mind? I imagined something like a FEL on a pivoting turret. A big advantage of this configuration it can be shot into space quite conveniently in stand up position

Although the X-ray laser would not have an aperture bigger than the diameter of the FEL, its 0.1 nm wavelength would more than enough compensation for that

 

Edited July 17, 2017 by FreeThinker

[dankis]

35 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Is this what you had in mind? I imagined something like a FEL on a pivoting turret. A big advantage is this configuration it can be shot into space quite conveniently in stand up position

Exactly.

36 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Although the X-ray laser would not have an aperture bigger than the diameter of the FEL, its 0.1 nm wavelength would more than enough compensation for that

And by quite lightweight or big receiver which is basically little thicker photovoltaic cell. Due to high receive efficiency, less heat exchange is required so weight can be kept low.

[FreeThinker]

1 hour ago, dankis said:

Exactly.

And by quite lightweight or big receiver which is basically little thicker photovoltaic cell. Due to high receive efficiency, less heat exchange is required so weight can be kept low.

I wonder how far it would be possible to push it further with even more narrow wavelength like 0.01 nm, would a conceivable FEL be able to produce this wavelenth, would we still be able to affect them with slanted mirrors?

I found this:

Quote

It is possible to produce a mirror to image soft x-rays if the x-rays hit the mirror at small angles to the reflecting surface. This is known as a grazing incidence telescope. This does not work with hard x-rays, however. Obtaining images of hard x-ray sources has required a less direct approach called Fourier-synthesis imaging. This approach uses pairs of filters, or collimators, to obtain information about the source structure on different size scales. The signals obtained from each of the collimators are combined on a computer to construct the image. The image quality improves as the number of collimators, and the number of size scales sampled, increases.

The first x-ray images above 30 keV have been obtained with the Hard X-ray Telescope on the Yohkoh satellite. The figure below compares the hard x-ray image from one flare with white light and soft x-ray images. The hard x-ray image is similar to the white light image. The soft x-rays, however, come from a more extended region than the hard x-rays.

It is possible to produce a mirror to image soft x-rays if the x-rays hit the mirror at small angles to the reflecting surface. This is known as a grazing incidence telescope. This does not work with hard x-rays, however. Obtaining images of hard x-ray sources has required a less direct approach called Fourier-synthesis imaging. This approach uses pairs of filters, or collimators, to obtain information about the source structure on different size scales. The signals obtained from each of the collimators are combined on a computer to construct the image. The image quality improves as the number of collimators, and the number of size scales sampled, increases.

The first x-ray images above 30 keV have been obtained with the Hard X-ray Telescope on the Yohkoh satellite. The figure below compares the hard x-ray image from one flare with white light and soft x-ray images. The hard x-ray image is similar to the white light image. The soft x-rays, however, come from a more extended region than the hard x-rays.

 

This might also be use full

http://photon-science.desy.de/research/research_teams/fs_petra/overview/x_ray_optics/refractive_x_ray_lenses/index_eng.html

Edited July 17, 2017 by FreeThinker

[dankis]

1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

I wonder how far it would be possible to push it further with even more narrow wavelength like 0.01 nm, would a conceivable FEL be able to produce this wavelenth(...)

Actually I was looking into this problem before. I didn't find a physical limitation to how narrow wavelength FEL can be. Seems like even Gamma ray FELs are possible but somone more competent shiould relate. 

1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

(...) would we still be able to affect them with slanted mirrors?

Maybe not slanted mirrors, but with other optics probably.

After some researching I am astonished by possibilities of FELs and high energy light optics.

Please take a look at this magnificent piece of discovery.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/may/09/silicon-prism-bends-gamma-rays

And this:

http://www.laserfocusworld.com/articles/2011/08/bragg-reflectivity-of-x-rays.html

It could actually GREATLY increase X-ray FEL efficiency. What is more, "more standard" optics with much higher angle of incidence could be used.

Our universe is a truly amazing place.

1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

(...)This does not work with hard x-rays

100% not true for "low energy" hard X-Rays like <20 KeV, not sure about higher energy.

Edited July 17, 2017 by dankis

[FreeThinker]

4 hours ago, dankis said:

It could actually GREATLY increase X-ray FEL efficiency.
 

 

I already assumed this is the case. Currently, I have the following efficiency config planned for the FEL

Beam Name	Wavelength
		specializedScienceTech	longTermScienceTech	scientificOutposts	highEnergyScience	appliedHighEnergyPhysics	ultraHighEnergyPhysics
X-band Microwave	250 mm	60	75	90
Ka-band Microwave	85.65499 mm	55	70	85
W-band Microwave	31,89281 mm	52	68	82
D-band Microwave	22 mm	50	65	80
Long Infrared	11 μm	45	60	75
Short Infrared	2,200 μm	35	50	70
Near Infrared	1,050 μm	30	45	65
Red Light	700 nm	25	42	60
Yellow light	600 nm	23	40	58
Green Light	500 nm	20	38	56
Near Ultra Violet	400 nm		32	45	53
Middle Ultraviolet	300 nm		25	38	50
Far ultraviolet	200 nm		16	32	45
Vacuum Ultraviolet	110 nm			20	30	40
Near Extreme Ultraviolet	35 nm			18	28	38
Far Extreme Ultraviolet	13 nm			15	25	35
Long Soft X-ray	4 nm				22	28	32
Middle Soft X-ray	1 nm				19	24	29
Short Soft X-ray	300 pm				15	20	26
Near Hard X-ray	100 pm					16	22
Middle Hard X-ray	30 pm					12	17
Far Hard X-ray	10 pm					8	12

Notice that besides adding X-ray wavelength, the lower wavelength become available much sooner than before, allowing you to play around with the FEL earlier

But perhaps I should extend it to Gamma rays as well

Edited July 17, 2017 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

3 hours ago, dankis said:

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/may/09/silicon-prism-bends-gamma-rays

 

 

Holy cow, if refraction becomes better with higher energies, perhaps we can create Terrawatt Hard Gamma ray laser transmitters powered by Antimatter, that would truly be the ultimate in beamed power

Edited July 17, 2017 by FreeThinker

[dankis]

Beaming power to Proxima Centauri, heh.

What about receivers? For penetrating radiation , special high temperature thermal receivers with [generator] should be fasible. 

[FreeThinker]

7 minutes ago, dankis said:

Beaming power to Proxima Centauri, heh.

What about receivers? For penetrating radiation , special high temperature thermal receivers with [generator] should be fasible. 

Well, that unlikely but reaching the Pluto would be feasible. And for the receiver, I was kind of hoping 50mx50m x 25m thick photovoltaic panel would be able to convert a decent amount of the gamma energy

Edited July 17, 2017 by FreeThinker

[Eleusis La Arwall]

If we talk about realism, an important point is the dimension of a X-ray FEL. The XFEL ( http://www.xfel.eu/overview/how_does_it_work ) is over 3 km long and a comparison with FLASH ( http://www.xfel.eu/overview/in_comparison ) shows that the ~0.4 km long FEL can only reach 4.1 nm. So even for 0.1 nm beam, a very very large construction is required. My point is that a realistic X-ray FEL will not fit into a single part with a pivot. I'd rather suggest to have a seperate part for the pivoting (if possible; like Infernal Robotics) or assume the transmitter can redirect the beam.

This also brings me to another point about the FEL. The current model of the FEL is "long" compared to other parts but for a real FEL it is tiny. The current plan is to split the FEL into multiple pieces and make it modular.
1. Particle Source and pre-accelerator (at first only for electrons but later on it can be any inonized atom) produces a particle(electron)-beam with low speed.
2. Linear Particle Accelerator speeds up the particles(electrons).
3. Undulator produces light-beam from particle beam depending on particle(electron)-speed.
This will allow customized FEL to suit individual settings. If the player needs/wants an IR FEL, he can just put the 3 parts together. If he rather wants a UV / Xray FEL he will need to build one Particle Source and multiple Linacs and Undulators. The more Linacs, the smaller the wavelength can be and the more Undulators, the better the energy-conversion-rate will become.
I hope we can use docking-port mechanics on the parts to allow restructuring on the fly.
 

[FreeThinker]

What do you think of the FEL table. I added several intermediate wavelengths and gave them a name. Notice I intend to place the FEL, Diode, LaserTurret and Laser Transmitter and All Dishes in the Specialized Science Tech, as they are the fruits of high tech energy research. This will make the Transmitter separate from the receiving technologies, which leads to more interesting choice

Edited July 17, 2017 by FreeThinker

[dankis]

1 hour ago, Eleusis La Arwall said:

If we talk about realism, an important point is the dimension of a X-ray FEL. The XFEL ( http://www.xfel.eu/overview/how_does_it_work ) is over 3 km long and a comparison with FLASH ( http://www.xfel.eu/overview/in_comparison ) shows that the ~0.4 km long FEL can only reach 4.1 nm. So even for 0.1 nm beam, a very very large construction is required. My point is that a realistic X-ray FEL will not fit into a single part with a pivot. I'd rather suggest to have a seperate part for the pivoting (if possible; like Infernal Robotics) or assume the transmitter can redirect the beam.

This also brings me to another point about the FEL. The current model of the FEL is "long" compared to other parts but for a real FEL it is tiny. The current plan is to split the FEL into multiple pieces and make it modular.
1. Particle Source and pre-accelerator (at first only for electrons but later on it can be any inonized atom) produces a particle(electron)-beam with low speed.
2. Linear Particle Accelerator speeds up the particles(electrons).
3. Undulator produces light-beam from particle beam depending on particle(electron)-speed.
This will allow customized FEL to suit individual settings. If the player needs/wants an IR FEL, he can just put the 3 parts together. If he rather wants a UV / Xray FEL he will need to build one Particle Source and multiple Linacs and Undulators. The more Linacs, the smaller the wavelength can be and the more Undulators, the better the energy-conversion-rate will become.
I hope we can use docking-port mechanics on the parts to allow restructuring on the fly.
 

I have to disagree with you. 

At first, I would like to mention that we are talking about tech levels parallel to warp drives, super powerful, compact antimatter reactors and man-made, controlled black holes.

Actually, there are papers regarding developement of not only relatively small, but table-top hard X-Ray FELs.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0168900295013288

https://www.intechopen.com/books/free-electron-lasers/laser-driven-table-top-x-ray-fel

TL,DR Not only small, but tiny X-Ray FELs are possible, but we need to develop Wakefield accelerators.

How about Wakefield accelerator tech increasing maximum power of FEL?

 

Edited July 17, 2017 by dankis

[dankis]

Or, how about moving last FEL upgrade to the same science node as Wakefield engine?

1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

What do you think of the FEL table. I added several intermediate wavelengths and gave them a name. Notice I intend to place the FEL, Diode, LaserTurret and Laser Transmitter all in the Specialized Science Tech, as they are the fruits of high tech energy research.

Table looks great.