Jump to content

[1.3] Kerbal Joint Reinforcement v3.3.3 7/24/17


ferram4

Recommended Posts

There are still a few issues, particularly with launch clamps. Basically, they end up making things worse in the most recent (and private) dev build by creating internal stresses in the rocket. So that needs to be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got to say ferram... I go away for a couple of months and someone works out how to make my ships keep shaking apart boosting to orbit... That's me now stuck to the PC for hours on end again lol.

Thanks dude. This is something that has been needed since version 0.1 :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Connection nodes don't have anything to do with how strong the connections are. Odds are that it's control induced issues, which no amount of stabilizing will fix. Normally, if things wobble with KJR, it means that you've either A: got a bad design or B: are controlling it stupidly aggressively and the realistic thing would be for the rocket to break right then and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NP conical tanks are always a weak point for me, especially that 3.75m->5m one... And it fails from the wide end. I get over it with mad strutting but there is definitely an issue i think (5m connections should not fail that easily..)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess the crazy control, with three delta IV mains on, I've probably got too much gimballing. I'll disable gimbals on the outer ones

Yeah, that's a good fix. I use it a lot on my outer boosters that feed the main tank. If I leave all three engines gimballing the thing just shakes itself to bits (yeah, I use MechJeb to orbit because I make a LOT of designs and repeating manual launches to contact is frustrating).

The fix is to put the outer engines on an action group. I select toggle gimbal and assign it to group 8 every time. Then I have to hit the 8 button twice (stupid bug with KSP) before launch... if I forget to do it I can just toggle them off mid launch that way as well.

I have to say that my rockets seem WAY more resistant to the dreaded spin now. I can now get my payload to orbit without it spinning at all with KJR (with ZERO struts as well). Top marks Ferram.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this doesn't appear to work with the Infernal Robotics hinges... that, or the hinges just need to have more surface area... but it becomes pretty much impossible to make a crane with any sort of a variable-angle boom...

otherwise, i've had zero problems, helps a ton, especially with my more... unusually shaped payloads. haven't had a structural failure on launch in a long time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are still a few issues, particularly with launch clamps. Basically, they end up making things worse in the most recent (and private) dev build by creating internal stresses in the rocket. So that needs to be fixed.

Posting here, since it says that your PM inbox is full:

Did you test if it is necessary for the decoupler reinforcing to create all the links it creates now, i.e. connect basically everything on one side, to everything on the other side? Maybe it can use some heuristics based on the masses of the specific parts and the vessel to decide that. In my case I referred to previously in my PM I have this tiny rocket develop serious orbital drift, which causes a 500km change in Pe height within minutes if amplified by an encounter. This happens on its own without doing any rotations or similar, but only if decoupler reinforcing is enabled. It also seems that the more links I eliminate by a mass cutoff, the more stable it is; I think that at the very least it shouldn't create any links to parts that are already excluded from changing attachJoint because of too small mass.

Javascript is disabled. View full album
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my case I referred to previously in my PM I have this tiny rocket develop serious orbital drift, which causes a 500km change in Pe height within minutes if amplified by an encounter. This happens on its own without doing any rotations or similar, but only if decoupler reinforcing is enabled.

I'm running into a very related issue with almost the same craft. I have the DR decoupler below the service bay on my craft, though. When I hit a Munar encounter, my planned periapsis moves about 500km and the G spike kills my crew. This has happend on 2 of 3 separate attempts. My log also begins to spam with "KeyNotFoundException: The given key was not present in the dictionary."

This is using version 1.7, though. Not sure if your issue was with 2.02, a.g. I'll give 2.02 a shot tonight to see if the same thing happens.

EDIT: Wasn't KJR at all. Was the test version of Visual Enhancements City Lights & Clouds. Discovered it here. Thanks AndreyATGB.

Edited by amo28
Update
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Improved Part-to-Part Joints

There is one unassuming line in the Unity 4.3 changelog that made a world of difference to us. I'll quote it here in fact: "Physics." Joints can now have separate anchor points configured for both connected rigidbodies. What this means is that the era of rockets 'dancing' on top of their engines is coming (finally) to an end. We are completely re-doing the joints, to have much more control over how they link together, and not least, how much we want them to be bendy and wobbly. We're not eliminating the wobble altogether, as that would actually be removing a lot of what makes failures fun. We're aiming to have better control over it, so we can have wobbly bits where we want them to wobble, and more rigid connections where things are supposed to be firmly attached.

From http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/content/250-The-0-24-Update-Goals-Post

What say you ferram how will this affect this mod and will it still be necessary to prevent wet spaghetti rockets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know no more than you do. If they shift to doing things the way KJR does them, then KJR may not be necessary anymore. I don't know if they will though, since they don't want to get rid of wobble altogether (I thought that was a bug that "wasn't deserving of being defended as some players do?"), which would mean that KJR still has a place, but a smaller one.

Really, we need to see how things play out with the mod parts and RSS. Depending on how this is done, it could actually break things quite badly on physics load. It's a nasty problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if that anchor thing is all it's hyped up to be: as I understand it, anchors are the points specified relative to each connected body, which are considered connected (and around which the joint will rotate if rotation is allowed). That is a PhysX thing, and every joint always has one anchor per body. The only thing they seem to have added is the ability to specify both anchors, instead of specifying one, and having the other one computed automatically by literally converting the first anchor coordinates into local space of the second body via global.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way I can see it being really good is if they replace every joint with 3 joints at the corners of a part, which might help reduce wobbling. At the same time, that'll make every joint 3 times as expensive in the part of the main thread that needs optimizing... which seems unwise unless there are some other serious changes they're looking at to reduce overhead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, what's your opinion on the idea to reduce the number of joints decoupler reinforcing creates by using some heuristics? That rocked doesn't really need any, but it patches it up with struts like a spider web - even those bits inside the service bay that connect to the decoupler.

Maybe it should only connect parts that are 5x or whatever the setting is heavier than the decoupler and/or any part in the path to them, exclude any that are smaller than the 0.01 mass threshold or are surface attached and don't have anything connected to them, etc?

Edited by a.g.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps the best choice would be to find the "end" parts for the stiffening and only connect those, and only if they have other things connected to them. It should give approximately the same effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hey Ferram, you excited for the UNITY update that should help make this mod even better?

I was going to ask the same thing, and also pretty excited for 2.0 i'll try it out when I have the time. Thanks for all the work ferram.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Ferram,

Kerbal Joint Reinforcement's Version Log system needs copy-editing. Would you like some? Below is an example of what I can do:

--Full release of proper inertia tensors! Massive parts will feel more massive.

--Full release of greater physics easing! Gravitational, centrifugal and coriolis forces will slowly be added to landed and pre-launch crafts, tremendously reducing the initial physics jerk

--Launch clamps much more stiffly connect to more-massive-than-stock mod parts

--Tightened default joint settings

--Decoupler Stiffening Extension will extend to one more part if it is much less massive than the parent / child part

--Added Majiir's CompatibilityChecker, which warns users of not using a compatible KSP version

-Duxwing

PS You cannot receive PMs because you have exceeded your PM limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tested quickly with my 1500t Eve mission launcher - it's TIGHT, so much that i think it's moving Kerbin around when it's on the launch clamps XD Didnt have time to test the kraken summoning with 8x symmetry though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...