[1.12.2] BARIS - Building A Rocket Isn't Simple

[larkvi]

I have read all of the documentation, and I am still having trouble understanding what is required of me or what the intent is. I have run tests firings of all the separate parts multiple times, paid 179K funds twice for improvement (it's only a 40K launcher, so this seems extreme), and BARIS makes a launcher that had a 100% success rate before installing it into a launch craft that has a 100% failure rate, generating 28–35 failures every single launch, which is basically every single part on the craft. I am playing with KCT, so integration should not be an issue, but even when I turned integration off, it still happens. I get to about 30K meters and then all at once 20+ parts fail. By the time I reach space, another 8–15 have failed, always including the upper stage motors and tanks, so that the craft is dead when the booster runs out. I thought the intent was to create interesting failures, but what it seems to do is just make every craft a complete failure.

Note the 35 messages on the top--every single one was a part failure on this same launch. Fifth straight time this vehicle failed, and another vehicle which shares 90% of the parts failed every time too.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/a4iv74s1lax04q1/20170822_larkvi_Player.log?dl=0

Edited August 23, 2017 by larkvi

[Hotaru]

That looks like a bug, not the intended behavior. Maybe something's up with the BARIS-KCT interactions? With BARIS on default settings in a new sandbox game (and no KCT) it took me three tries plus a couple of pre-launch aborts to successfully orbit a satellite. They all had something go wrong--one had a second-stage engine failure, one had a bunch of failures when the payload fairing deployed--but none of them had anywhere near everything go wrong. Given that I didn't do any testing on the parts, that's about the rate of failures I'd been expecting.

[CaribeanSoul]

Your screenshot shows the vessel reliability at 8 ... which is really bad.  What level are your facilities at?  I was getting pretty constant failures with everything at 35 so not surprising that 8 is failing badly.  I can't really say any more than that though.  I've not had any time to play with the last release.

[larkvi]

10 hours ago, CaribeanSoul said:

Your screenshot shows the vessel reliability at 8 ... which is really bad.  What level are your facilities at?

All facilities are level two except mission control and the astronaut complex, which are level three. Given that I have launched this same booster/bus/probe combo more than ten times now, and spent 300K+ on the test bed for one version, and launched about 10 individual testfires with component parts (two of just the satellite and bus), I would have expected decent reliability, but none of that seems to make any difference. Part failures are immediate and complete.

I am also running an entirely unmanned program, so if every probe is going to fail constantly, I have no way to repair them.

[CaribeanSoul]

2 hours ago, larkvi said:

All facilities are level two except mission control and the astronaut complex, which are level three. Given that I have launched this same booster/bus/probe combo more than ten times now, and spent 300K+ on the test bed for one version, and launched about 10 individual testfires with component parts (two of just the satellite and bus), I would have expected decent reliability, but none of that seems to make any difference. Part failures are immediate and complete.

I am also running an entirely unmanned program, so if every probe is going to fail constantly, I have no way to repair them.

Well it doesn't sound like it is working as intended for you.  I'm not sure what to tell you to change.  My first guess is that it doesn't think you've done vehicle integration and thus your terrible reliability number.  Hopefully I'll have some time to play today and see if anything is amiss for me using KCT.  All I can tell you for now is that I'm pretty sure that's not how things are supposed to go and you must have an install issue, a compatibility issue, or a bug.

[Hotaru]

So I've been playing in a sandbox save with the latest BARIS since last night; at this point I've launched 11 basically identical satellites, five of which have achieved orbit and only one of which achieved the intended orbit. They're still having lots of failures but they do seem to be getting more reliable. (I haven't touched the difficulty settings yet, I'll experiment with them before I try and use this in a career.) First impressions: extremely cool.

I have noticed one fairly serious issue, though: failures aren't persistent across save/reloads or scene changes. I've definitely confirmed this is true of fuel leaks and reaction wheel failures--strongly suspect it is true of other types as well. To reproduce: when a vehicle develops a fuel leak, immediately F5/F9: upon reloading, the leak has stopped. A broken reaction wheel also seems to be restored to operation after leaving the flight scene and returning.

This does not seem to be true of all failure types: a stuck throttle, for instance, does appear to be persistent.

 

This is what a leaking fuel tank looks like after F5/F9:

Registers as "broken" in an unspecified manner (it said "medium leak" before) but, as shown by the resource panel, it isn't actually leaking.

That screenshot is obviously from a heavily-modded install but I have confirmed this does occur in an otherwise-stock install as well.

[CaribeanSoul]

On 8/22/2017 at 1:05 PM, Angel-125 said:

- New VAB/SPH button: Test Bench - If you assemble a collection of parts in the VAB/SPH, you can spend Science in Science Sandbox and Career games and/or Funds in Career games to simulate launch conditions and gain flight experience. That flight experience will improve your vessel Reliability ratings on future craft. You can adjust the per-part Funds cost in the Difficulties screen; Science cost is based on how many flights it takes to gain a flight experience bonus point.

Test Bench certainly provides a way for me to get what I want out of BARIS so thanks for that.  I do have some feedback if you don't mind:

• With KCT installed the test bench window will tell me how many breakable parts I have that can be improved but I have no way of seeing what parts they are or what their current quality ratings are aside from clicking the button to improve them and trying to read the popup text really quick.
• If I have a vessel loaded that has only one breakable part the funds/science needed to increase the quality seem to be based on the total vessel cost rather than the part cost.  For example I have a little rover that I use to gather science around the KSC that has a probe core on it.  The probe core is the only breakable part.  When I load the rover I have the option to increase the quality of the one part for ~33k funds.  If I just have the probe core in the editor with no other parts the cost to increase quality is ~500 funds.
• It would be nice to have a way to see when I'm using test bench what the part qualities will be after vehicle integration.
• If I need to increase the quality of a part by quite a bit it becomes a little click-spammy.  Obviously not a big deal but an option to do +5 (or a slider or something) would be a nice addition.

Also, if you don't mind, would you some light on how the math works for the part checks vs. the quality ratings?  And how the difficulty slider affects those checks?

[Angelo Kerman]

2 hours ago, Hotaru said:

So I've been playing in a sandbox save with the latest BARIS since last night; at this point I've launched 11 basically identical satellites, five of which have achieved orbit and only one of which achieved the intended orbit. They're still having lots of failures but they do seem to be getting more reliable. (I haven't touched the difficulty settings yet, I'll experiment with them before I try and use this in a career.) First impressions: extremely cool.

I have noticed one fairly serious issue, though: failures aren't persistent across save/reloads or scene changes. I've definitely confirmed this is true of fuel leaks and reaction wheel failures--strongly suspect it is true of other types as well. To reproduce: when a vehicle develops a fuel leak, immediately F5/F9: upon reloading, the leak has stopped. A broken reaction wheel also seems to be restored to operation after leaving the flight scene and returning.

This does not seem to be true of all failure types: a stuck throttle, for instance, does appear to be persistent.

 

This is what a leaking fuel tank looks like after F5/F9:

Registers as "broken" in an unspecified manner (it said "medium leak" before) but, as shown by the resource panel, it isn't actually leaking.

That screenshot is obviously from a heavily-modded install but I have confirmed this does occur in an otherwise-stock install as well.

Well that's interesting, I know I fixed that before. I think when I transferred the project between computers, something got lost in the process. I should be able to fix that fairly quickly.

 

1 hour ago, CaribeanSoul said:

Test Bench certainly provides a way for me to get what I want out of BARIS so thanks for that.  I do have some feedback if you don't mind:

• With KCT installed the test bench window will tell me how many breakable parts I have that can be improved but I have no way of seeing what parts they are or what their current quality ratings are aside from clicking the button to improve them and trying to read the popup text really quick.
• If I have a vessel loaded that has only one breakable part the funds/science needed to increase the quality seem to be based on the total vessel cost rather than the part cost.  For example I have a little rover that I use to gather science around the KSC that has a probe core on it.  The probe core is the only breakable part.  When I load the rover I have the option to increase the quality of the one part for ~33k funds.  If I just have the probe core in the editor with no other parts the cost to increase quality is ~500 funds.
• It would be nice to have a way to see when I'm using test bench what the part qualities will be after vehicle integration.
• If I need to increase the quality of a part by quite a bit it becomes a little click-spammy.  Obviously not a big deal but an option to do +5 (or a slider or something) would be a nice addition.

Also, if you don't mind, would you some light on how the math works for the part checks vs. the quality ratings?  And how the difficulty slider affects those checks?

Yeah, I have to update the price calculations to reflect just the breakable parts, not the whole vessel.

Check the Wiki for detailed descriptions on how Quality works.

[CaribeanSoul]

1 hour ago, Angel-125 said:

Check the Wiki for detailed descriptions on how Quality works.

Ok, I see it now.  For some reason I have a mental block on github wikis where the pages list on the right has "Show x more pages" at the bottom.  

So check my understanding if you will for the following scenario:

• VAB/SPH both level 3 = +10 facility bonus
• Astronaut complex level 3 = +10 facility bonus
• Lvl 5 astronaut present with relevant skill = +10 bonus
• In this scenario a part with 70 quality should never fail until is starts to degrade after the MTBF expires ...?
• Will a critical fail always fail no matter what bonuses?

Only thing I didn't see in there was how the difficulty slider affects the quality checks... maybe I missed it.

 

On the price calculations ... how hard would it be to re-create the gui with the list of parts and their quality and add a small button for both science and funds with the prices next to them and do it by individual part?  That way KCT users would have access to a list of parts and their quality and also solves the price calculation...?

Edited August 23, 2017 by CaribeanSoul

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

@Angel-125 Why did you drop support for 1.2?

[CaribeanSoul]

On 8/20/2017 at 10:38 PM, Angel-125 said:

BARIS 1.1.0 is now available:

- Created a bridging dll for those who want to optionally incorporate BARIS into their mods.
- Dropped support for KSP 1.2.2; you can thank the bridging dll for that...

 

3 minutes ago, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

@Angel-125 Why did you drop support for 1.2?

The price of progress...

Edited August 23, 2017 by CaribeanSoul

[KerBlitz Kerman]

Looks kool, can we have a probe as signal lost card?

[pheenix99]

Is seemingly random kerbnet outages a feature of this mod? I don't know if I need to start troubleshooting or not.

[Angelo Kerman]

1 hour ago, pheenix99 said:

Is seemingly random kerbnet outages a feature of this mod? I don't know if I need to start troubleshooting or not.

BARIS doesn't touch kerbnet, but it will affect transmitters if they break.

1 hour ago, KerBlitz Kerman said:

Looks kool, can we have a probe as signal lost card?

Wasn't planning on it, I'm keeping the types of parts that break limited to prevent the game from slowing down.

[KerBlitz Kerman]

Or just a 'antenna fractured)

[Angelo Kerman]

New Test Bench window with reliability calculations and option to add 1, 5, or 10 points of reliability to all parts in the vessel. Smaller screen is for KCT, and shows what the reliability will be after KCT finishes vessel construction.

[smotheredrun]

1 hour ago, Angel-125 said:

New Test Bench window with reliability calculations and option to add 1, 5, or 10 points of reliability to all parts in the vessel. Smaller screen is for KCT, and shows what the reliability will be after KCT finishes vessel construction.

Very cool.

[Hotaru]

OK, I've been playing with BARIS in a sandbox save for a few days now and I've come up with a few issues and suggestions. It's kind of a long list and I'm really sorry if I'm coming off as demanding--I'm really, really excited about this mod & severely looking forward to using it in my next career save, so I'd like to do what I can to help get it polished up. It's worth noting all this is in a fairly heavily-modded save--if you need me to try to duplicate any of these problems in a clean save let me know and I'll see if I can.

 

The biggest issue I'm having is that parts are failing all the time. While some of this seems to be launch and staging failures, even after a successful launch of a 10-20 part satellite, parts start to fail after just a day or two in operation, and after a year or so pretty much every part has failed, regardless of its quality.

My theory is that critical failures are happening much too frequently. Per the wiki, a crit fail requires a roll of 1 on a 1d100, which sounds pretty good compared to D&D but is actually a very high rate given how often these checks are getting made. If there's 20 parts on a vehicle and each is being checked 3 times per day, for a total of 60 checks per day, then at least one crit fail is likely within the first two days or so of operation--which is pretty close to the observed rate.

Assuming I'm understanding this right, my suggestion would be to use a much larger roll--more like 1 out of 10,000--to check for crit fails (and just multiply the quality by 100 to check for regular fails, since 80/80 is the same as 8000/8000). Maybe leave the 1/100 rate alone for launch or staging failures, but with a 1/100 rate for regular quality checks, by the time you get to Duna you'll have no parts left.

 

I'm also not sure how condition is supposed to work. My understanding was that it should degrade over time so a part that starts at 80/80 should gradually go down until it gets to 0/80, at which point it will fail, but I've yet to see so much as a single-point reduction in the current condition. The parts just go straight from full condition (1/1 ratio) to broken--although the text does sometimes turn from green to yellow. Not sure if this is how it's supposed to work or not.

 

 

A few other issues, mostly minor:

 

It would be really nice to have an option to disable auto-dewarp on KAC alarms or the alarms themselves, since BARIS keeps track of vessel integration timers on its own anyway. Also, the KAC alarms seem to go off a day or two before the vessel they're set for is actually ready.

 

A couple times I've stupidly hit "Launch" instead of using BARIS to start integration--I get the warning, but the BARIS window shows the parts apparently still at full quality (e.g. 45/5) and if I launch the rocket there doesn't seem to be any more failures than usual. (Related: it'd be nice to have a confirmation added to the "Launch" button in the VAB/SPH to help catch this kind of operator error.)

 

Some of the event cards don't seem to work correctly, at least in sandbox mode. "Open House" mentions damaged facilities, but when I check I can't find anything in need of repair, and workers' strikes don't seem to halt integration work (i. e. a rocket taking 15 days to integrate, interrupted by a 13-day strike, still ends up integrated after 15 days). "Space Cowboy" confirmed to work fine. "Vacation" card seems to result in death of the missing kerbal if "missing crews respawn" is disabled (although there's a small possibility I missed a "died in training" card during warp).

 

I'm a little unclear on what is and isn't affected by radio failures--probe control? KerbNet connection? relay capability? science transmission? All of the above?

 

Thrust doesn't seem to be reduced after a "reduced thrust" failure: a rocket with two 24-77 verniers reports a loss of thrust in one of them, but the right-click menu shows both producing the same amount of thrust and there's no noticeable effect on the rocket's behavior.

 

Most parts seem to have "escape pod enabled" in their tweakable menus, if I understand right this should only be appearing for one or two parts.

 

Thinking about launch failures, what I really want is (call me crazy) less engine underthrusts and broken antennas and more explosions. I really want that sort of "right stuff" feel of riding into space on a massive flammable-fuel-filled machine that could explode at any second. Maybe fuel leaks could cause fires that could somehow spread to other parts or cause explosions (cf. N1), or the odds of a "catastrophic" launch failure could be much higher for the first few staging events, or in the first few minutes of flight?

 

Related to above, I've had two of what seemed to be catastrophic failures (whole vehicle "poofed"), both on unkermanned rockets, both of which reported that my astronauts had been evacuated. Not sure if this is intended behavior or not.

 

 

Again, hope I'm being helpful and not difficult. Really looking forward to using this in a career. Thanks!

Edited August 25, 2017 by Hotaru

[smotheredrun]

@ Hotaru, I'm pretty sure that the KAC timers stopping early can be changed in the KAC window.

[Hotaru]

2 minutes ago, smotheredrun said:

@ Hotaru, I'm pretty sure that the KAC timers stopping early can be changed in the KAC window.

Yeah, that might just be KAC's regular default margin. I'll try to adjust it and see if that helps, but I do know the BARIS alarms don't seem to respect whether KAC alarms are set to default to auto-dewarp or not.

[Tyko]

I've completed an Equipment Container to work with @Starwaster's Procedural Parts mod. Please take a look and let me know if there's anything I should tweak. When I match them up with equal sized BARIS containers I get cost and volume exact. The dry weight is a bit off, but it's really close.

Spoiler

PART:NEEDS[BARIS]
{
    // --- general parameters ---
    name = proceduralEquipmentCarrierBaris
    module = Part
    author = Tyko (with Angel-125 BARIS content)

    // --- asset parameters ---
    MODEL
    {
        model = ProceduralParts/Parts/cylinderTank
        scale = 1,1,1
    }
    scale = 1
    rescaleFactor = 1

    // --- node definitions ---
    node_stack_top=0,0.5,0,0,1,0,1
    node_stack_bottom=0,-0.5,0,0,-1,0,1
    node_attach=0,0,0.5,0,0,-1,1

    // --- editor parameters ---
    cost = 0 // 4000
    TechRequired = generalConstruction
    entryCost = 4000
    category = Payload
    subcategory = 0
    title = Procedural Equipment Carrier
    manufacturer = TykoTek LLC
    description = Made from viscoelastic nanopolymers (which were discovered by accident... growing in the back of the office mini-fridge) this container adapts for all your equipment needs. Hardens to a rigid structure before launch!

    // attachment rules: stack, srfAttach, allowStack, allowSrfAttach, allowCollision
    attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0

    // --- standard part parameters ---
    mass = 0
    dragModelType = default
    maximum_drag = 0.2
    minimum_drag = 0.2
    angularDrag = 1
    crashTolerance = 12
    breakingForce = 500
    breakingTorque = 500
    maxTemp = 2000
    bulkheadProfiles = size1, srf
    tags = baris equipment

    MODULE
    {
        name = ProceduralPart
        textureSet = Mu
        
        costPerkL=0
        
        TECHLIMIT {
            name = generalConstruction
            diameterMin = 0.1
            diameterMax = 1.5
            lengthMin = 0.1
            lengthMax = 0.5
            volumeMin = 0.1
            volumeMax = 1.0
        }

        TECHLIMIT {
            name = spaceExploration
            diameterMax = 3.0
            volumeMax = 3.0
            lengthMax = 1.0
        }

        TECHLIMIT {
            // Make everything unlimited for metaMaterials
            name = largeVolumeContainment
            diameterMin = 0.01
            diameterMax = Infinity
            lengthMin = 0.01
            lengthMax = Infinity
            volumeMin = 0.01
            volumeMax = Infinity
        }
    }
    MODULE
    {
        name = ProceduralShapeCylinder
        displayName = Cylinder
        techRequired = start
        
        length = 0.25
        diameter = 1.25
    }
    MODULE 
    {
        name = ProceduralShapeCone
        displayName = Cone
        techRequired = generalConstruction
        
        length = 1.0
        topDiameter = 0.625
        bottomDiameter = 1.25
    }
    MODULE 
    {
        name = ProceduralShapePill
        displayName = Fillet Cylinder
        techRequired = advConstruction
        
        length = 1.0
        diameter = 1.25
        fillet = 0.25
    }
    MODULE 
    {
        name = ProceduralShapeBezierCone
        displayName = Smooth Cone
        techRequired = advConstruction
        
        length = 1.0
        topDiameter = 0.625
        bottomDiameter = 1.25
    }

    MODULE
    {
        name = TankContentSwitcher
        useVolume = true
        
        TANK_TYPE_OPTION 
        {
            name = Equipment
            dryDensity = 0.09
            RESOURCE 
            {
                name = Equipment
                unitsPerKL = 651.9
                forceEmpty = false
            }
        }
    }
}
 

 

Edited August 25, 2017 by Tyko

[Angelo Kerman]

Another KSPedia update:

[Angelo Kerman]

BARIS 1.2.5 is now available:

Test Bench
- Test Bench now calculates the simulation costs based upon breakable parts, not all the parts in the vessel.
- Test Bench lists both initial and integrated Reliability, both before and after purchasing a Reliability upgrade.
- Test Bench lets you add 1, 5, and 10 points of Reliability at a time, with appropriate cost increases.
- For KCT users, the VAB/SPH BARIS button will show what the vessel's reliability will be after construction.

Escape Pods
- Removed escape pod flag from ModuleQualityControl; it was causing confusion.

Part Failures
- Messages are now displayed in the correct sequence during a staging event's critical failure.
- Added new Settings option to give parts the option to explode during failures. It is off by default. They can explode during failed staging events and during post-launch critical failures when the part has run out of MTBF.
- Added new Settings option to control how likely a part will explode during staging events.
- Added new Settings option to control how likely a part will explode during a post-launch activity when the part critically fails and is out of MTBF.
- Critical failures are less likely to happen during post-launch activities.
- Revised engine failure modes: shutdown (75% chance unless engine can't shut down, in which case it explodes); stuck on (20% chance unless engine can't shut down, in which case it explodes); explode (5% chance).
- Increased the maximum number of seconds in which to make a staging check.
- Fixed persistence issues with broken parts.
- Crew will no longer try to escape an unkermanned vessel.

Event Cards
- The available event cards now depend upon the current game mode.

Edited August 25, 2017 by Angel-125

[Angelo Kerman]

Couple things didn't make it into this release, which was focused on fixing the broken part persistence issue and the test bench:

- Astronauts going on vacation: the stock mechanisms for this don't sound like they work right under certain circumstances so I have to figure out how to pull them out of the rotation. You can safely comment out the astronaut on vacation card for now as a workaround.

- Condition summary: right now this is centered on part quality, and doesn't show part degradation as well as I'd hoped. I'm thinking instead of basing it on your MTBF. So if you have a max MTBF of 600 hours and you've used up, say 225 hours, then your condition would be: 225/600 = 0.375, which translates to Fair condition. This change would also help you know when you need to start performing maintenance; if the condition drops below Poor to, say, Terrible, then you know that you'll need to perform maintenance to improve the part's quality rating. I guess that means I'd need another display string for showing quality..

- Parts failing all the time: parts start will a low quality rating, which is improved by the max integration bonus that the SPH/VAB facility offers (level 1: 20, level 2: 30, level 3: 40) as well as flight experience (default is 1 point bonus per 5 flights). That's just for the part. When you make a quality check, you also get facility bonuses (up to +10 for the highest upgraded VAB/SPH and up to +10 for upgraded Astronaut Complex, but only if you have astronauts aboard) and of course the astronaut bonus (up to +10). Additionally, post-launch, parts will start failing only when they run out of MTBF (or you roll a critical failure, which is now harder to do post-launch). So if parts are failing after launch, then they're running out of MTBF unless you get really unlucky with a critical failure. MTBF only runs out when you keep a part continually in operation, such as running a drill or an ISRU, or several hours of engine burns. So, with the reduced chances of a critical failure, I'd expect that, with proper astronaut experience, upgraded facilities, and a complete vessel integration, part's shouldn't fail as often.

But keep in mind that even with a typical 600 hour MTBF of continuous operation, long trips to other planets should experience failures- and that's to be expected.

Edited August 25, 2017 by Angel-125

[Hotaru]

3 minutes ago, Angel-125 said:

But keep in mind that even with a typical 600 hour MTBF of continuous operation, long trips to other planets should experience failures- and that's to be expected.

I'm a little worried about parts like fuel tanks that are in operation all the time--600 hours isn't very long compared to even a short interplanetary transfer. I'm also a little confused when a reaction wheel classifies as in operation, since they have very short MTBFs (similar to engines--on the order of 20 hours) and in 1.2 they seemed to be failing a lot more than other parts.

I'll play with 1.2.5 for a while though and see what happens--so far all I've done has been send up satellites, I haven't tried any kermanned missions yet. Thanks for the quick update, I'm impressed you implemented so many of our suggestions so fast! (Especially looking forward to the explosion thing. That'll be fun.)