Jump to content

FusTek Station Parts Dev Thread (continuation of fusty's original work)


Recommended Posts

Now that I've finally got 0.21+ working, I'm in the process of updating the main Karmony modules to have SAS and Reaction Wheels, and have decided to make them a bit more powerful than the stock parts - as cheaty as that may sound, bear in mind that these are quite large compared to stock command pods, and are intended for complex space station structures that would otherwise have great difficulty maintaining their orientation.

No that's quite realistic. The ISS has several monstrous CMGs for precisely that reason. Note also that CMGs are more power-efficient than reaction wheels... which sounds even cheatier, but you can't argue with physics. ;)

Edited by Gaius
Link to post
Share on other sites
No that's quite realistic. The ISS has several monstrous CMGs for precisely that reason. Note also that CMGs are more power-efficient than reaction wheels... which sounds even cheatier, but you can't argue with physics. ;)

Aye.

One day, I also hope to make my own series of CMGs to match the FusTek aesthetic, but as I may have mentioned previously, I'd need to be able to make the rotors visually and dynamically change their orientation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

R0.03.2a released - see announcements thread for download link

R0.03.2a          2 August 2013
---------------------------

Changes:
- Compatibility Patch for KSP 0.21+
- Karmony series modules and Kupola now use SAS and Reaction Wheels
- No change to monopropellant reserves; future releases will include RCS thrusters built into selected modules
- Karmony Parts Warehouse Module now uses RocketParts resource, to reflect changes in the OrbitalConstruction Redux mod by its author

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sumghai, do you have any plans on adding a 6 point 'docking hub' to match the style of your & Fusty's parts? Kind of like the one the ISS has on Zvezda now?

1280px-Zvezda_Service_Module_under_construction.jpg

I ask because I'm currently using the stock 1.25m hub and udk_lethal_d0se's 2.5m hub, and while udk's is a great texture, it obviously doesn't match that well and I'm slightly OCD about such things.

Edit: Also just saw this:

One day, I also hope to make my own series of CMGs to match the FusTek aesthetic, but as I may have mentioned previously, I'd need to be able to make the rotors visually and dynamically change their orientation.

That sounds awesome!

Edited by MainSailor
Link to post
Share on other sites

hey there, I had a chance to test out the RCS update you released the other day, by and large it works great. I made a linear 2 component station (with an connection adapter in between the two), which had a total of 4 rcs rings (one at each end of the station modules). It all works pretty well, but the RCS only rings only seem to fire on pitch and yaw, not roll. The station can still roll fine but just not through rcs. any thoughts why that might be? I can upload a screenshot of the station design if that will help you out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Aye.

One day, I also hope to make my own series of CMGs to match the FusTek aesthetic, but as I may have mentioned previously, I'd need to be able to make the rotors visually and dynamically change their orientation.

something to look at might be the code for the magicSmoke rotator rings, which work in 0.21.1 and might give some guidance how to make the CMGs visually rotate.. that or the mapsat dishes..

Link to post
Share on other sites
hey there, I had a chance to test out the RCS update you released the other day, by and large it works great. I made a linear 2 component station (with an connection adapter in between the two), which had a total of 4 rcs rings (one at each end of the station modules). It all works pretty well, but the RCS only rings only seem to fire on pitch and yaw, not roll. The station can still roll fine but just not through rcs. any thoughts why that might be? I can upload a screenshot of the station design if that will help you out.

.. translation rcs also works great with the new rings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It all works pretty well, but the RCS only rings only seem to fire on pitch and yaw, not roll. The station can still roll fine but just not through rcs. any thoughts why that might be?

I think the RCS thrusters are to weak (0.125x the normal) to show the effect. The roll is a combination of several thrusters direction at reduced power. the stock RCS block also have a much reduced effect when fired in the roll action. i will increase the power and make a new test

EDIT: nope, does not matter.

Other theory: It might be because the unit is symetric around the centerline, therefore the system does not think it can generate a rotation torque due to a lack of lever arm.

See atq6ol.png

The endcaps mounted on a extention arms fires on rotation command. the one mounted in the centerline does not.

Most likely a function on how KSP works and not a bug for this part.

If this is the case, then a module with all integrated rcs-thruster will not show any RCS effects for rotation the one part. The rotational torque seems still be there.

Edited by Prime flux
added some more
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sumghai, do you have any plans on adding a 6 point 'docking hub' to match the style of your & Fusty's parts? Kind of like the one the ISS has on Zvezda now?

I ask because I'm currently using the stock 1.25m hub and udk_lethal_d0se's 2.5m hub, and while udk's is a great texture, it obviously doesn't match that well and I'm slightly OCD about such things.

Technically speaking, the Karmony Node Mk III variants are six-way docking hubs.

Also, do bear in mind that the FusTek modules are based on the Unity/Harmony/Tranquility nodes in the US Orbital Segment (USOS) of the International Space Station, whereas the stock 1.25m / udk's 2.5m hubs are more of a Russian Mir flavor - the two styles cannot be reconciled, even with a simple re-texture. So no, I don't think I will be making a Zvezda-style hub.

That said, I am thinking about making a shorter version of the Node (Karmony microNode?), but that'll be after the R0.04a IVA internals release.

hey there, I had a chance to test out the RCS update you released the other day, by and large it works great. I made a linear 2 component station (with an connection adapter in between the two), which had a total of 4 rcs rings (one at each end of the station modules). It all works pretty well, but the RCS only rings only seem to fire on pitch and yaw, not roll. The station can still roll fine but just not through rcs. any thoughts why that might be?
I think the RCS thrusters are to weak (0.125x the normal) to show the effect. The roll is a combination of several thrusters direction at reduced power. the stock RCS block also have a much reduced effect when fired in the roll action. i will increase the power and make a new test

EDIT: nope, does not matter.

Other theory: It might be because the unit is symetric around the centerline, therefore the system does not think it can generate a rotation torque due to a lack of lever arm.

-snip-

The endcaps mounted on a extention arms fires on rotation command. the one mounted in the centerline does not.

Most likely a function on how KSP works and not a bug for this part.

If this is the case, then a module with all integrated rcs-thruster will not show any RCS effects for rotation the one part. The rotational torque seems still be there.

Yes, I have observed this as well - especially in 0.21+ with the Reaction Wheels disabled. The GE-06 RCS block from the THSS truss pack also suffers from this issue.

It seems that having a monolithic thruster assembly with ports symmetric about the main rotational axis causes problems with the game's lever arm-based algorithms.

The solution would be to either make the thrusters separate (thus defeating the purpose of reducing part counts), or having a new plugin handle RCS rotation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Or just ignore that the rcs-effect does not fire for rotations and use Reaction Wheels for rotation and the RCS for translations.

I'm a bit of a perfectionist, so I'll probably will still try to find a workaround.


Stealth patch for R0.03.2a uploaded

CFG change only - this removes the last of the old 0.20+ RCS / Torque code left over in the Kirs and Kuest modules

If you do not wish to redownload the whole pack just for this fix, you can edit the appropriate CFGs and delete the appropriate lines.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That said, I am thinking about making a shorter version of the Node (Karmony microNode?), but that'll be after the R0.04a IVA internals release.

Something like Unity then?

I know the Russian segment has a different look, I was more thinking of something like a shorter structural alternative to using the longer Karmony as a six point hub, and the module on Zvezda was the first one that came to mind. For some reason in my head I thought the US segment had a similar hub.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That said, I am thinking about making a shorter version of the Node (Karmony microNode?), but that'll be after the R0.04a IVA internals release.
Something like Unity then?

I know the Russian segment has a different look, I was more thinking of something like a shorter structural alternative to using the longer Karmony as a six point hub, and the module on Zvezda was the first one that came to mind. For some reason in my head I thought the US segment had a similar hub.

To be honest, I'm still trying to make sense of the proportions fusty used in making his original Karmony modules.

A cursory glance suggests that the Unity/Harmony/Tranquility has the side docking nodes offset towards their forward end(s), whereas the Karmony appears to be 33% longer and has the side nodes centered along the length of the module.

The proposed Karmony microNode will be about the same size as the Kuest Airlock while still retaining the side docking nodes; however, it will have much less monopropellant stored internally due to its reduced size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Progress Report, 5 August 2013

Time to start thinking about IVAs! I did some mockups for the Karmony Logistics and Mk III Node modules in SolidWorks first, as parametric modelling is good for determining key dimensions:

ksp_fustek_karmony_stor_module_iva_mockup_wip_by_sumghai-d6gpg5m.png

Fig 28 - (WIP) FusTek Karmony Logistics IVA mockup

ksp_fustek_karmony_node_mkiii_iva_mockup_wip_5_by_sumghai-d6gpg5s.png

Fig 29 - (WIP) FusTek Karmony Node Mk III IVA mockup

The general design inspiration for these interiors comes (naturally) from those in the real ISS's USOS segments, especially the Unity/Harmony/Tranquility nodes, therefore for the most part only a narrow cuboid of corridor space (with the obligatory beveled edges and the stepped recesses for the hatches) will actually be accessible to Kerbals. The remaining space will be for monopropellant and batteries as well as faux storage lockers for crew provisions and equipment.

A fair amount of time was devoted to determining the optimal bulkhead thicknesses and devising structurally sound joints, as these would indirectly affect the dimensions of the interior layout. Special care was taken near the hatches, as I envision some sort of clever pull-in-and-slide-away design preferable to swinging panels blocking access to drawers. For clarity, details such as the actual hatch mechanisms, light fixtures, standard environmental controls and microgravity handgrips were omitted in this mockup.

Obviously, to keep poly counts and draw calls low, only the innermost faces will actually be modelled in Blender. These are temporarily highlighted in a rather loud shade of mauve*, which will eventually be replaced with a FusTek'd version of the USOS interior aesthetics (white panels with blue trimmings).

*Not exactly the panty-twisting, dinky di aussie way of doing things, but still, a sensible approach nonetheless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking really good :o

I'd love to see these parts integrated with TAC life support since you've already got modules described to do different things(like storing/recycling waste). More mod collaboration everywhere! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
The proposed Karmony microNode will be about the same size as the Kuest Airlock while still retaining the side docking nodes; however, it will have much less monopropellant stored internally due to its reduced size.

Sounds great!

IVA mockup for the modules look great. I like that they have a functional, rational design rather than the somewhat generic 'stuff in a cylinder' look of Fusty's Karmony IVA. Have you heard any more from the guy working on KASPAR at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd love to see these parts integrated with TAC life support since you've already got modules described to do different things(like storing/recycling waste). More mod collaboration everywhere! :D

We'll see :)

Have you heard any more from the guy working on KASPAR at all?

At the time of writing, nothke hasn't been logged in since June 25th. He last visited the KASPAR thread on June 13, and up until the 25th he has been working on the DROMOMAN robot arms pack.

Let hope that he hasn't lost interest, or at least he has plans to pass on his WIP to someone capable of finishing it off for him.

Will there be a switch over for the warehouse to support the new Orbital Con Redux?

I uploaded a stealth patch a few days ago renaming SpareParts to RocketParts. Have you tried downloading that first before asking?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Progress Report, 6 August 2013

Another IVA mockup, this time for the Hab module:

ksp_fustek_karmony_hab_module_iva_mockup_wip_6_by_sumghai-d6guokp.png

Fig 30 - (WIP) FusTek Karmony Habitation Module IVA mockup

In order to increase the living area available, I had to expand the galley and exercise area out sideways by extruding out the sides of the standard corridor and directly to the pressure hulls; floor and ceiling heights remain constant, so that these modules would still be usable on planetary surfaces. consequently, I have determined that there is enough room for a stationary bicycle after all (yay!).

Some of you may notice the dinky little fridge under the food heater and beverage dispenser, as well as a distinct lack of a pantry - the vast majority of crew provisions will actually be stored in the Logistics module, only taken out of their storage lockers on an as-needed basis. Rest assured that unlike the real ISS, cold brewskis are just as easily obtainable from the beverage dispensers as warm or hot drinks.

One other aspect not shown in this mockup is that one of the crew portraits will (by popular request) be inside one of the sleep stations. A bit of a shame that Kerbal postures in IVA are currently limited to "sitting at a command seat", but I'm sure I can bundle the Kerbal up in a sleeping bag with no mesh colliders.

These three mockups I've made to date should help me get started with standardizing some key dimensions, as well as possible prop placement. Time to hit Blender!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Progress Report, 6 August 2013

ksp_fustek_karmony_hab_module_iva_mockup_wip_6_by_sumghai-d6guokp.png

Fig 30 - (WIP) FusTek Karmony Habitation Module IVA mockup

It looks very good!

One thing though, the sleeping compartments in what orientation are the kerbals suppose to sleep?

The compartments looks kind of narrow, hence i guessing the kerbals will be sleeping standing upright. This does not matter in weightlessness in space but on planet it do.

A solution could be to put the sleeping compartments together and rotate them 90 degrees, so it becomes like a bunk bed.

o05tlx.png

On the other hand I have no idea in which position Kerbals prefer to be sleeping. They might like to sleep hanging upside down like a bat...

Edited by Prime flux
Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm, that sounds like something that will probably be easily done in a non-sumghai adaptation. Heck you could just have some hammocks if you wanted too.

I for one forsee this pack launching a variety of other mod packs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It looks very good!

One thing though, the sleeping compartments in what orientation are the kerbals suppose to sleep?

The compartments looks kind of narrow, hence i guessing the kerbals will be sleeping standing upright. This does not matter in weightlessness in space but on planet it do.

A solution could be to put the sleeping compartments together and rotate them 90 degrees, so it becomes like a bunk bed.

On the other hand I have no idea in which position Kerbals prefer to be sleeping. They might like to sleep hanging upside down like a bat...

Yeah, this has been an issue of contention.

A cursory glance and some quick arithmetic suggests it is indeed possible for the bunks in the Hab module to be horizontal without adversely affecting shower/toilet/galley/exercise area placement.

The main problem is determining viewport positions - I suppose I've had this fanciful notion that each sleep station has a viewport to allow its Kerbal occupant to look out into space / planetary surface, and I had a feeling that having horizontal bunks would result in strange viewport placement.

Looks like I'd better start a poll...

hmm, that sounds like something that will probably be easily done in a non-sumghai adaptation. Heck you could just have some hammocks if you wanted too.

I for one forsee this pack launching a variety of other mod packs.

Now that you mention it...

R0.03.2a Blender model files and textures

Link to post
Share on other sites
It looks very good!

One thing though, the sleeping compartments in what orientation are the kerbals suppose to sleep?

The compartments looks kind of narrow, hence i guessing the kerbals will be sleeping standing upright. This does not matter in weightlessness in space but on planet it do.

A solution could be to put the sleeping compartments together and rotate them 90 degrees, so it becomes like a bunk bed.

o05tlx.png

On the other hand I have no idea in which position Kerbals prefer to be sleeping. They might like to sleep hanging upside down like a bat...

Astronauts normally sleep upright in harnesses, but all in all, you could adjust it just by rotating the whole module if you want to adapt it to a ground station, with horizontal beds. Anyhow, Kerbals are cubic, their height barely exceeds their width, hence their beds should be squared. Solution. :]

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...