Jump to content

[1.3.0 <= KSP <= 1.12.2] TweakScale - Under Lisias' Management - 2.4.6.5 - 2021-1130


Lisias
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't know if this is the right thread to post on for suggestions, but if it is possible in the future, I would like it if I could scale the robotic parts that come with the Breaking Ground DLC (Mainly the hydraulic cylinders). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Ben J. Kerman said:

I don't know if this is the right thread to post on for suggestions, but if it is possible in the future, I would like it if I could scale the robotic parts that come with the Breaking Ground DLC (Mainly the hydraulic cylinders). 

Yes, it is. Stock + DLC will be handled by TweakScale itself. The Companions will handle everything else.

You request is (almost eternal... :blush:) Work In Progress at this moment. https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/TweakScale/issues/46 (Serenity is the codename for the Breaking Gound DLC).

Once KSP 1.12 is released and settled down (the last releases were, unfortunately, pretty disruptive and we can only hope that 1.12 will break this trend), development on TweakScale will come back to rails (another sad fact is that Real Life is pushing really hard on the last months -- and I can't complain, as my bills are being paid).

There's a roadmap for TweakScale here: https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/TweakScale/milestones and, besides I'm not being able to deliver deadlines, the roadmap is being effectively fulfilled as (real life) time allows.

Edited by Lisias
Adding a link
Link to comment
Share on other sites

METAR

Preliminary (and minimalistic) tests on KSP 1.12.0 suggests that TweakScale will work fine on it.

However, that KSP bug that prevents crafts from being correctly refunded on recovery (and that affects every Add'On that relies on IPartCostModifier, being TweakScale only one of them), so KSP-Recall is still needed - at least for while.

A new release for KSP-Recall will be worked out ASAP, see KSP-Recall Thread for details.

A new release for TweakScale will be issued until the end of the day if I don't find anything too weird in the mean time.

Spoiler

Please note that I'm not specifying which day. :sticktongue:

https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/TweakScale/milestone/33

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

ANNOUNCE

Release 2.4.5.1 is available for downloading, with the following changes:

  • States compatibility to KSP 1.12.x and warns about the need of KSP-Recall on it too.

See OP for the links.

Keep an eye on the Known Issues file.

(Previous Announce)

— — — — —

This Release will be published using the following Schedule:

  • GitHub, reaching first manual installers and users of KSP-AVC. Right now.
  • CurseForge. Right now.
  • SpaceDock (and CKAN users), Right now.

The reasoning is to gradually distribute the Release to easily monitor the deployment and cope with eventual mishaps.

Edited by Lisias
All Distributions Channels updated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CKAN.InvalidModuleFileKraken: TweakScale v2.4.5.1: C:\Users\Crimson\AppData\Local\Temp\tmp77E7.tmp has length 288150, should be 256221
   at CKAN.NetModuleCache.Store(CkanModule module, String path, String description, Boolean move)
   at CKAN.NetAsyncModulesDownloader.ModuleDownloadComplete(Uri url, String filename, Exception error)

Hey @Lisias I am getting this error from CKAN while trying to update.

lol we posted in the same time @Nova1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Juba said:
CKAN.InvalidModuleFileKraken: TweakScale v2.4.5.1: C:\Users\Crimson\AppData\Local\Temp\tmp77E7.tmp has length 288150, should be 256221
   at CKAN.NetModuleCache.Store(CkanModule module, String path, String description, Boolean move)
   at CKAN.NetAsyncModulesDownloader.ModuleDownloadComplete(Uri url, String filename, Exception error)

Hey @Lisias I am getting this error from CKAN while trying to update.

lol we posted in the same time @Nova1

@Juba Lol

@Lisias I'm also missing all my squad separators and decouplers... Idk if that is tweakscale doing something or some other mod...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Juba said:
CKAN.InvalidModuleFileKraken: TweakScale v2.4.5.1: C:\Users\Crimson\AppData\Local\Temp\tmp77E7.tmp has length 288150, should be 256221
   at CKAN.NetModuleCache.Store(CkanModule module, String path, String description, Boolean move)
   at CKAN.NetAsyncModulesDownloader.ModuleDownloadComplete(Uri url, String filename, Exception error)

Hey @Lisias I am getting this error from CKAN while trying to update.

lol we posted in the same time @Nova1

I report the same problem. CKAN download is broken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Nova1 said:

@Lisias I'm getting a kraken download error when trying to download from ckanhttps://imgur.com/a/RH0IVUO

 

23 hours ago, Juba said:

CKAN.InvalidModuleFileKraken: TweakScale v2.4.5.1: C:\Users\Crimson\AppData\Local\Temp\tmp77E7.tmp has length 288150, should be 256221
   at CKAN.NetModuleCache.Store(CkanModule module, String path, String description, Boolean move)
   at CKAN.NetAsyncModulesDownloader.ModuleDownloadComplete(Uri url, String filename, Exception error)

Hey @Lisias I am getting this error from CKAN while trying to update.

lol we posted in the same time @Nova1

 

22 hours ago, Dre4dW0rm said:

I report the same problem. CKAN download is broken.

Hey y'all, the problem arose from @Lisias reuploading the zip three times in very short succession combined with SpaceDock taking some time to update the caches of its web servers. See here and the linked PRs for the technical details.

In any case, with some trickery I managed to make the bot index the metadata according to the zip of the latest reupload. If you hit "Refresh" in CKAN now and retry the installation, it should succeed.

Edited by DasSkelett
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DasSkelett said:

 

 

Hey y'all, the problem arose from @Lisias reuploading the zip three times in very short succession, and SpaceDock taking some time to update the caches of its web servers. See here for details.

In any case, with some trickery I managed to make the bot index the metadata according to the zip of the latest reupload. If you hit "Refresh" in CKAN now and retry the installation, it should succeed.

Worked for me. Thanks a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, DasSkelett said:

Hey y'all, the problem arose from @Lisias reuploading the zip three times in very short succession, and SpaceDock taking some time to update the caches of its web servers. See here for details.

Yep.  Publishing releases after burning the Midnight Oil can backfire on you - there's so much Koffee can do for you. And Recall gave me a hell of a run for my money this weekend...

Thanks, and sorry for the trouble...

 

1 hour ago, Nova1 said:

 I'm also missing all my squad separators and decouplers... Idk if that is tweakscale doing something or some other mod...

I'm not aware of that. My test crafts from KSP 1.11 loaded fine - besides with a warning about the "miniEngine".

Exactly what is the problem? The parts have vanished, or they are not scalable? TweakScale doesn't remove parts - if the part is vanished, it was something else.

Additionally, revamped parts are essentially new parts (using the same name as the old, but with "_v2" added to the name). So anyone relying on the old name will need to update their patches (this includes TweakScale, but I ran out of time to check all new parts, this will be done on this week as time allows).

Edited by Lisias
tyops. I need more sleep.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

News from the Front.

I just finished my preliminary reports about the new KSP 1.12.0 release (using my KSP Tools:: Public)

  Version   |   ReleaseDt    |  ∑Modules  | ∑AllParts  | ∑AllDeprecated |  ∑Stock  |  ∑MH   | ∑Serenity  
------------+----------------+------------+------------+----------------+----------+--------+------------
        0.22|   2013-10-16   |          31|         156|               0|       156|       0|           0
      0.23.0|   2013-12-17   |          36|         157|               0|       157|       0|           0
      0.23.5|   2014-04-01   |          37|         157|               0|       157|       0|           0
      0.24.0|   2014-07-17   |          38|         158|               0|       158|       0|           0
      0.24.1|   2014-07-24   |          38|         158|               0|       158|       0|           0
      0.24.2|   2014-07-25   |          38|         158|               0|       158|       0|           0
        0.25|   2014-10-07   |          38|         153|               0|       153|       0|           0
        0.90|   2014-12-15   |          41|         168|               0|       168|       0|           0
       1.0.0|   2015-04-27   |          69|         245|               1|       245|       0|           0
       1.0.1|   2015-05-01   |          69|         246|               1|       246|       0|           0
       1.0.2|   2015-05-01   |          69|         246|               1|       246|       0|           0
       1.0.3|   2015-06-22   |          71|         250|               1|       250|       0|           0
       1.0.4|   2015-06-23   |          71|         250|               1|       250|       0|           0
       1.0.5|   2015-11-09   |          74|         263|               1|       263|       0|           0
       1.1.0|   2016-04-18   |          80|         267|               0|       267|       0|           0
       1.1.1|   2016-04-29   |          80|         267|               0|       267|       0|           0
       1.1.2|   2016-04-30   |          80|         267|               0|       267|       0|           0
       1.1.3|   2016-06-21   |          80|         267|               0|       267|       0|           0
       1.2.0|   2016-10-11   |          89|         275|               0|       275|       0|           0
       1.2.1|   2016-11-01   |          89|         275|               0|       275|       0|           0
       1.2.2|   2016-12-06   |          89|         275|               0|       275|       0|           0
       1.3.0|   2017-05-25   |          90|         276|               0|       276|       0|           0
       1.3.1|   2017-10-05   |          90|         276|               0|       276|       0|           0
       1.4.0|   2018-03-06   |          92|         279|              12|       279|       0|           0
       1.4.1|   2018-03-13   |          94|         340|              12|       279|      61|           0
       1.4.2|   2018-03-28   |          94|         340|              12|       279|      61|           0
       1.4.3|   2018-04-27   |          94|         340|              12|       279|      61|           0
       1.4.4|   2018-06-21   |          94|         340|              12|       279|      61|           0
       1.4.5|   2018-06-26   |          94|         340|              12|       279|      61|           0
       1.5.0|   2018-10-15   |          94|         340|              19|       279|      61|           0
       1.5.1|   2018-10-17   |          94|         340|              19|       279|      61|           0
       1.6.0|   2018-12-19   |          94|         340|              27|       279|      61|           0
       1.6.1|   2019-01-09   |          94|         340|              27|       279|      61|           0
       1.7.0|   2019-04-10   |          95|         342|              19|       280|      62|           0
       1.7.1|   2019-04-30   |         106|         371|              19|       280|      62|          29
       1.7.2|   2019-06-12   |         106|         371|              19|       280|      62|          29
       1.7.3|   2019-07-11   |         107|         388|              19|       280|      62|          46
       1.8.0|   2019-10-16   |         108|         398|              20|       283|      64|          51
       1.8.1|   2019-10-29   |         108|         398|              20|       283|      64|          51
       1.9.0|   2020-02-12   |         109|         399|              22|       284|      64|          51
       1.9.1|   2020-02-27   |         109|         399|              22|       284|      64|          51
      1.10.0|   2020-07-01   |         117|         409|              22|       292|      66|          51
      1.10.1|   2020-07-28   |         117|         409|              22|       292|      66|          51
      1.11.0|   2020-12-17   |         119|         423|              24|       308|      66|          49
      1.11.1|   2021-01-28   |         119|         423|              26|       308|      66|          49
      1.11.2|   2021-03-16   |         119|         423|              26|       308|      66|          49
      1.12.0|   2021-06-24   |         119|         429|               9|       314|      66|          49

We have 6 new parts on the KSP 1.12.0 release (compared to the 1.11.2 release), but the deprecated part list had decreased!

They cleaned up 17 deprecated assets from the Squad/Parts, and at least some of them were moved into the Squad/zDeprecated folder. Some add'ons relies on these assets, and so we will have some breakage on the wild. Had someone managed to use assets from the zDeprecated folder? @Nova1 this may be the reason you got some missing parts on your rig, but I need to confirm this manually (I think I should had implemented a zDeprecated report too - and so the current AllDeprecated should be renamed to AllDeprecating!).

Curiously, we have the same number of modules - what hints me that some older Modules were removed. I didn't checked what ones yet. If I'm right, we have yet more breakage on the field to cope with. (and way more work on TweakScale that I have anticipated).

MakingHistory and Serenity apparently didn't earn new parts.

Sounds like I'm going to have an excrementsy week...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Lisias said:

Yep.  Publishing releases after burning the Midnight Oil can backfire on you - there's so much Koffee can do for you. And Recall gave me a hell of a run for my money this weekend...

Thanks, and sorry for the trouble...

 

I'm not aware of that. My test crafts from KSP 1.11 loaded fine - besides with a warning about the "miniEngine".

Exactly what is the problem? The parts have vanished, or they are not scalable? TweakScale doesn't remove parts - if the part is vanished, it was something else.

Additionally, revamped parts are essentially new parts (using the same name as the old, but with "_v2" added to the name). So anyone relying on the old name will need to update their patches (this includes TweakScale, but I ran out of time to check all new parts, this will be done on this week as time allows).

All of the squad couplings are gone. I thing some other parts are too. Here's my log.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Nova1 said:

All of the squad couplings are gone. I thing some other parts are too. Here's my log.

Got it. Let's see what's happening.... Yeah, found it!!

[ERR 12:48:36.033] AssemblyLoader: Exception loading 'KSPInterstellar': System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadException: Exception of type 'System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadException'
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) System.Reflection.Assembly.GetTypes(System.Reflection.Assembly,bool)
  at System.Reflection.Assembly.GetTypes () [0x00000] in <9577ac7a62ef43179789031239ba8798>:0
  at AssemblyLoader.LoadAssemblies () [0x000e6] in <a1ca58b5ca7140639de29a81de5e3f32>:0

Something is borking while loading Interstellar assemblies. When this happens, the Modules the assemblies should be providing are loaded half baked - the Modules are "available" to be used, but once KSP tries to use it it gets an Exception and then the Part loading is aborted - i.e., it was not loaded at all.

And then you don't find them on the game.

I think (but need more tests to confirm this) that the problem is due the (new) KSP behaviour of loading the DLL even with the dependencies missing - before this change, any missing dependency would abort the loading of the assembly for good, and so no modules would be available to be tried by KSP (being working or not). And so the Part would be loaded anyway, KSP would just complain about the missing module, and life would just go on.

Now we have this new problem to cope with.

Spoiler

On  personal note, this change is terrible. It will cause way more (and worse, as we can see) problems that the one it aimed to fix

The reason this is happening is because something is missing on your installment:

System.TypeLoadException: Could not load file or assembly 'Interstellar_Redist, Version=1.3.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' or one of its dependencies. assembly:Interstellar

What hints me that you forgot to install at least 1 (but probably all) the DLLs that goes into GameData directly:

  • 666_ModuleManagerWatchDog.dll

  • 999_Scale_Redist.dll

  • Interstellar_Redist.dll

  • ModuleManager.4.1.4.dll

Source: https://github.com/sswelm/KSP-Interstellar-Extended/tree/master/GameData

Open your Interstellar ZIP and manually copy these 4 files into your GameData . This should fix the problem.

-- -- POST EDIT -- -- 

Another possibility is you are using Curse Installer . This tool refuses to install anything into the GameData itself, TweakScale users have this same problem on CurseForge - the good news is that 999_Scale_Redist.dll never changes, so once you copy it to GameData, everything will be good forever.

Edited by Lisias
post edit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Nova1 said:

Nope. Added those and others that were producing errors. Still missing. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SXSOZD2GGxOqsGK9SLcPy0NurxCVIp_9/view?usp=sharing

There's a lot of ugly NullReferenceExceptions on this log. But, granted, nothing that could remove a part from being loaded....

This is now completely unrelated to TweakScale, but since we are here, let's keep digging. Please publish the ModuleManager ConfigCache and the Module Manager PatchLog.

The ConfigCache is inside the GameData. If you don't find it there, you have a really ugly error somwhere in the patching, and without fixing that first I can't help further.

The Patch Log you can find it on <KSP>/Logs somewhere (I don't recall the right folder right now, but it's inside the <KSP>/Logs for sure).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nova1 said:

Nope. Added those and others that were producing errors. Still missing. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SXSOZD2GGxOqsGK9SLcPy0NurxCVIp_9/view?usp=sharing

Your issue and looks similar to this one:

You are also have FilterExtensions mod that was culprit in shown case. However, you have also use mods over steam install. Tips given in linked post can be useful in your case too. Read few posts before and after linked post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck if you try to rescale stock "Breaking Ground" Pistons. Not only do you have change the extension limits so that they don't slide apart, but the attach points seem to wander when you load them out into the world. Lots of weird results that stay in the craft file for later. Also, you might want to go and simply change the version compatability at Spacedock to 1.12.1 so the arbitary system doesn't say your mod is already outdated, simply because Squad did a hotfix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, ColdJ said:

Good luck if you try to rescale stock "Breaking Ground" Pistons. Not only do you have change the extension limits so that they don't slide apart, but the attach points seem to wander when you load them out into the world. Lots of weird results that stay in the craft file for later.

Yep, I know! :D

 

10 hours ago, ColdJ said:

Also, you might want to go and simply change the version compatability at Spacedock to 1.12.1 so the arbitary system doesn't say your mod is already outdated, simply because Squad did a hotfix.

Thanks for the heads up! Done!

— — — METAR — — — 

Well, things are not so good on the rescue of the less old rig for KSP development (a MacMini 6.2).

After salvaging about 900GiB of data and testbeds without any problem (I didn't lose even the mp3 neither the downloads), I opened the damned thing (MacMinis are pretty nice machines - until the need to open the damned thing to service something), replaced the hard disks and fired it up, intending to call it a day.

Guess what?

BOTH HDDs are now with the data inaccessible. BOTH.

After ruling out a mechanical or human mishap (I found some known strings by grepping things in low level, so both devices are still working), I come to this after hours and hours of research:  APPLE FSCK UP AGAIN.

Obviously, I'm using that marvelous new APFS filesystems, the CopyOnWrite thingy is a lifesaver. But it have a catch - by some absurd reason, you should not use MBR on disks with APFS Physical Storages (besides the damned Disk Util gladly doing this without the slightest warning). Apple royally screwed up something, because when you are using an MBR, the metadata needed to access the Volumes apparently is written in some non usual place and another machine cann't find it (or, at least, Modern MacOS - I was told that this worked on the first MacOS versions to support the damned thing).

It's something absolutely weird - both HDDs were working fine during the rescue, that took me half the week. The new HDD was being used on an USB caddle, and the machine was rebooted sometimes (Darwin don't like too much when spinning disks start to tlec-tlec beetween disk accesss too much), so there was no signal that MBRs were going to be a problem.

Things gone south only after replacing the internal HHD with the new one. (sigh)

Well, I still have some options to try:

  • firing up the less old rig on Target Disk Mode on an older MacOS rig (good thing I didn't updated my Sierra rig) to see if it can understand the mess Apple did on the thing.
  • mount the damned thing on Linux and use fuse-apfs to salvage (again) the data on a third 2TB HDD (as I will use the good and old HFS+ this time, so no CoWs…)
  • try to build by hand a GPT partition on the freaking disk, as I read someone on some Forum saying he manage to did it.
  • Worst case scenario, I will buy some partition recovery tool and apply it to see what happens. It's plain impossible I'm the only idiot on this Planet that was caught (again) with his pants down by Apple's Atavistic Idiocy.

Forum Rules prevent me to further commenting on this thing (boy, I'm mad).

In the mean time, development will happen (somehow) using the older old rig, as it still have most of the development tools needed - besides being able to run only up to 1.8.1 or perhaps 1.9.1, as the thing is too old to handle KSP 1.12 or 1.11 - hell, I was getting problems on KSP 1.12 on the less old MacCrap, what to say on a MacMini 5.1?

Edited by Lisias
It's raining sheet…. :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry man. At least I learned what atavistic means :/

I going to whine about some minor physics scaling stuff here... please ignore until you get your h/w sorted.

  1. nosecones scale with squared law but I think it should be cubed law. It's not just a 2-D sheet. The wall thickness needs to scale too.  A scaled-up nosecone would be crushed by aero forces. 
  2. parachute drag doesn't seem to scale, according to the mouse-click menu in KER. Mk16-XL says "deployed drag: 1/500" regardless of scaling. I think this was brought up before.  
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Krazy1 said:

Sorry man. At least I learned what atavistic means :/

There're a lot of new words to be learnt about this incredibly stupid misfeature from Apple. Unfortunately, none of them is forum rules compliant. :P

 

9 hours ago, Krazy1 said:
  1. nosecones scale with squared law but I think it should be cubed law. It's not just a 2-D sheet. The wall thickness needs to scale too.  A scaled-up nosecone would be crushed by aero forces. 

Nosecones are not solid. Their mechanical resistance is achieved by an internal frame. It's like the steel frames used on construction, they are incredibly light and still resistant when done right:

infrastructural-structural-500x500.jpg

https://www.indiamart.com/proddetail/hollow-structural-steel-section-7080402462.html

The mass for these structures don't scale cubicly, they are not solid. Additional material on building bigger structures are not always needed, sometimes you only change the shape of the hollow tubes in order to maximize the resistance on an axis (at expenses of the other one, of course - there's no free lunch!):

rsz_rectangularhollow.jpg

https://www.shrilakshmisteel.in/rectangular-hollow-sections-square-hollow-sections.html

So, besides not exactly exact, quadratic sounds fine to me. Perhaps 2.1 or 2.2, but definitively not 3.

 

9 hours ago, Krazy1 said:
  1. parachute drag doesn't seem to scale, according to the mouse-click menu in KER. Mk16-XL says "deployed drag: 1/500" regardless of scaling. I think this was brought up before.  

Yep. https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/TweakScale/issues/135

This is planned to be pursued after I manage to investigate Serenity.

https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/TweakScale/milestones

 

— — POST EDIT — — 

It's something wrong on KER, probably. The Chutes are being scaled fine.

124534469-babd8380-ddea-11eb-984f-9b73f8

124534497-c6a94580-ddea-11eb-88d4-df8bb0

Had the Chutes some problem on scaling, the test craft would not be tilted on the descend.

Test Craft on the Issue https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/TweakScale/issues/135#issuecomment-874419164

Since I'm currently without a KSP 1.12 capable machine (the oldest rig barely handles 1.8.1, damn it!), I will postpone a test on it by some days - anyone willing to try it, just launch the thing, cheat it into 3K meters high and stage the chutes.

 

Edited by Lisias
Post edit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for testing the parachutes - I'll try some test too but I'm still on 1.11.2.  I just assumed KER is right.

I have to disagree about the nosecone scaling. Beams are engineering design optimization, but fundamentally the physics must scale cubic. If a shell structure (open end or closed, it doesn't matter) has internal beams then those beams need to scale too to maintain strength. The walls of the beams and the skin of the shell have thickness and the thickness of everything has to scale. Or the number of beams needs to increase. Or the strength needs to decrease.

Imagine you built a little model house out of paper and toothpicks and school glue. You can put beams or trusses or internal walls in- it doesn't matter. It's not very strong but it holds together. Now scale it up to the size of a real house without scaling the thickness of the walls or beams. It will be extremely weak. A small breeze will destroy it. If you don't agree just make it bigger... as big as a mountain. The total density of the house (building material and enclosed space) becomes infinitesimal as it scales up with a squared law. 

Conversely, start with a real house and try to shrink it down to a small model size without changing the wall thickness or any 1 dimension of the beams or walls. At some size, it will become a solid block. All of the air space will be taken up by building material. The total density will increase as it shrinks and it will be denser than solid wood, or Kerbin, or neutron star if it's microscopic :sticktongue:.  So I think it should be close to a cubic law... maybe 2.9 or 2.8 but definitely not 2. You seem to agree with me partially because fuel tanks are scaling cubic. It's the same idea.

Sorry I'm taking up your time with this. Hope you can sort your hardware issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Krazy1 said:

Thanks for testing the parachutes - I'll try some test too but I'm still on 1.11.2.  I just assumed KER is right.

It's an usual source of misunderstanding to assume things. The best way to detect and confirm problems is, well, testing for them. ;)

 

8 hours ago, Krazy1 said:

I have to disagree about the nosecone scaling. Beams are engineering design optimization, but fundamentally the physics must scale cubic.

No. 

Mechanical strength does not scales at the same pace of the weight of the material. This is another assumption that is driving you into the wrong path. You can almost double the mechanical resistance of a structure by changing the shape of the structural tubes but using the same mass. Off course you will be strengthening one axis and weakening another, but by then you can reinforce the weakened axis (if needed) with lighter materials, as steel wire ropes, with the net weight growth way less than the twice TweakScale uses.

Corrugating the material is also a well known way to strengthen mechanical resistance with way less material than otherwise. They did it on Saturn, by the way. :)

Untitled-design-2020-06-27T100723.869.jp

One size does not fits all. On your assumptions, you are not considering the function of the scaled part neither.

A scaled up NoseCone will not carry more payload once scaled, as they don't carry payloads at all. So no reinforcements on the floor (or whatever a payload would be attached) is needed - and, frankly, NoseCones don't even have a "floor", as it would be a wast of material and unnecessary weight.

Scaled up nosecones do not need to withhold more load per squared inch than unscaled ones. Since they are bigger, they have more squared inches to account for, but the load that each squared inch will withhold is the same. So I don't need to scale the skin thickness of the NoseCone, and so no extra material will be used on it other that the needed for the extra area.

In a nutshell, scaling up the size of things does not implies automatically on the same scaling up of the materials used. The forces to be withhold are recalculated and the needed amount of materials is used instead.

As an example:

The Saturn V's S-IC (first stage) weights (when empty) 130 tons (and measures 42 x 10 meters).

The S-II (second stage) weights 36 tons (and measures 24.9 x 10 meters).

S-IC is where the engines are attached, and those struts weights about 21 tons. Each F1 engine weights 8.4 tons, so we have now 21 + 5x8.4 = 63 tons of mass. So the S-IC once extracted the engines and respective struts weights about 67 tons.

The amount of fuel the S-IC carries weights about 2.000 tons (the gross mass is 2.280 tons). So it uses 1 ton of materials to carry about 29.8 tons of fuel. Or, in another terms, a ton of fuel needs 0,033557047 tons (or 33.5 Kg!) of materials to be carried on.

The amount of fuel the S-II carries weights about 443 tons. So it uses 1 ton of materials to carry about 12.3 tons of fuel. Or, in another terms, a ton of fuel needs 0,081300813 tons (or 81.3 Kg!) of materials to be carried on.

Spoiler

I'm disregarding the density of the fuels, but since we are arguing about loads and not measures, we are fine - a ton of fuel is a ton of fuel, no matter how much space it takes.

And now even the TweakScale scale of 3 for fuel tanks sounds excessive to me.

Do you see a trend here? The bigger the tank is, the most efficient per ton it became - the "savings" are not linear. And the S-II is not corrugated. ;)

The same happens with Nose Cones, the difference is the "load" happening on the skin from outside.

 

 

Edited by Lisias
tyops. as usulla.
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...