Jump to content

[1.8-1.9] Modular Fuel Tanks v5.13.1

taniwha

By taniwha
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Darinth

Darinth

Posted
Posted

If you (or anybody else) wants these, they weren't generated in the most scientific of methods (I used the limited knowledge of geometry and trig to calculate conservative guesses based on in-game observable size comparisons), but these should be reasonable if a bit conservative guesses on the capacities for the bi/tri/quad couplers and the mini-to-small and large-to-huge adapters.

Spoiler 

@PART[adapterSmallMiniTall]:FINAL {
    MODULE {
        name = ModuleFuelTanks
        volume = 62
        type = Structural
        basemass = 0.05
    }
}

@PART[Size3to2Adapter]:FINAL {
    MODULE {
        name = ModuleFuelTanks
        volume = 2600
        type = Structural
        basemass = 0.2
    }
}

@PART[stackQuadCoupler]:FINAL {
    MODULE {
        name = ModuleFuelTanks
        volume = 500
        type = Structural
        basemass = 0.175
    }
}

@PART[stackTriCoupler]:FINAL {
    MODULE {
        name = ModuleFuelTanks
        volume = 400
        type = Structural
        basemass = 0.15
    }
}

@PART[stackBiCoupler]:FINAL {
    MODULE {
        name = ModuleFuelTanks
        volume = 300
        type = Structural
        basemass = 0.1
    }
}

@PART[adapterLargeSmallQuad]:FINAL {
    MODULE {
        name = ModuleFuelTanks
        volume = 600
        type = Structural
        basemass = 0.2
    }
}

@PART[adapterLargeSmallTri]:FINAL {
    MODULE {
        name = ModuleFuelTanks
        volume = 500
        type = Structural
        basemass = 0.15
    }
}

@PART[adapterLargeSmallBi]:FINAL {
    MODULE {
        name = ModuleFuelTanks
        volume = 400
        type = Structural
        basemass = 0.1
    }
}

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
invultri

invultri

Posted
Posted (edited)

I am making my own tank (welded panels to make rectangular tanks) and am trying to figure out how to determine the units of volume such that I can add MFT to it.

For the 2.5m short tank ( Rockomax8BW ? ) I can see it has a volume of 800, however pi * 1.25^2 * 1.25 is not equal 800, what is the thing that I am missing?

Edited by invultri
Link to comment
Share on other sites
taniwha

taniwha

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@invultri: KSP's resources are mostly 5L/u (or 200u/m3) (exceptions are XenonGas and Ablator). However, what you are "missing" is that the tank is assumed to have the internal structure of a capsule (ie, rounded ends) rather than a simple barrel. I worked out that a Jumbo-64 (and the other 2.5m tanks) are actually pretty close to correct in both capacity and mass for a certain thickness of iron (about 9mm iirc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
invultri

invultri

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, taniwha said:

@invultri: KSP's resources are mostly 5L/u (or 200u/m3) (exceptions are XenonGas and Ablator). However, what you are "missing" is that the tank is assumed to have the internal structure of a capsule (ie, rounded ends) rather than a simple barrel. I worked out that a Jumbo-64 (and the other 2.5m tanks) are actually pretty close to correct in both capacity and mass for a certain thickness of iron (about 9mm iirc).

@taniwha Thanks for the explanation, I was missing that 200u/m3. A 2.53 tank is 15.625 m3, giving it a raw volume of 3125 units, versus the 2454 of the cylindrical x16. Making it ~27% bigger, 1600*1.27 = 2037units. Lets round that to 2000units (25% bigger) and call that fair :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
JoE Smash

JoE Smash

Posted
Posted

How is this particular mod similar and how is it different from configurable containers and interstellar fuel switch?

Does anyone have a screen shot or two of what the interface looks like while trying to swap fuel types in game for this mod?

I don't like the look of Configurable Containers, but I do like the slider in the part info for Interstellar Fuel Switch....

Thanks....

JoE Smash

Link to comment
Share on other sites
linuxgurugamer

linuxgurugamer

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, JoE Smash said:

How is this particular mod similar and how is it different from configurable containers and interstellar fuel switch?

Does anyone have a screen shot or two of what the interface looks like while trying to swap fuel types in game for this mod?

I don't like the look of Configurable Containers, but I do like the slider in the part info for Interstellar Fuel Switch....

Thanks....

JoE Smash

Similar in theory to IFS, I find that IFS is better

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JoE Smash

JoE Smash

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Similar in theory to IFS, I find that IFS is better

I like the interface of switching fuels with IFS, because its simple and looks stock.

Configurable containers has this whole extra popup window that I don't really like using.

I looked for pics of what this mod looks like in the internet....and in this thread and I don't see any....

Does it do anything to mess with the unit of fuels measurement.....like real fuels does? That's one of the things I am confused about...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
linuxgurugamer

linuxgurugamer

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, JoE Smash said:

I like the interface of switching fuels with IFS, because its simple and looks stock.

Configurable containers has this whole extra popup window that I don't really like using.

I looked for pics of what this mod looks like in the internet....and in this thread and I don't see any....

Does it do anything to mess with the unit of fuels measurement.....like real fuels does? That's one of the things I am confused about...

No, it's just another way to switch the fuels in a tank

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tonka Crash

Tonka Crash

Posted
Posted

@JoE Smash, In the seven hours you've been looking for a picture why didn't you just install it and see for yourself. 

I prefer MFT over IFS because I didn't want the IFS parts pack and I don't want to deal with always downloading and deleting items after an update. MFT does what I want.

In the right click menu you get typically two buttons that change on context (Show/Hide UI) and (Remove All Tanks/Add Tank). Unless you are splitting a tank into multiple fuel types Mono & Liquid/Fuel + Oxidizer in one tank you don't need the UI to change a tank from one type to another. To switch fuels on a tank you would delete all tanks, MFT detects the engine type installed for the stage and gives you a button for that fuel type, click it and the tank is now set for that fuel. If you don't have an engine installed you have to use the UI.

For example, in the picture, if I swap the rocket engine for the LV-N, I'd right click on the tank, choose remove all tanks, and the button changes to 100% Liquid fuel, click that and I'm done.

PRYZ03f.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
taniwha

taniwha

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 hours ago, Gordon Dry said:

This information is confusing - °C or °K ??

Actually, it is pretty clear: "absolute 0" very specifically refers to 0K or -273.15°C. However, I agree that the language could do with tightening up.

However, it's not really relevant for MFT (only for RealFuels which is a separate mod using the same code base).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
ss8913

ss8913

Posted
Posted

so, before 1.5.1 ... MFT was compatible with B9 part switch... I had made some modulemanager patches to add MFT capability to the MarkIV system parts... now it says that "B9 part switcher and ModuleFuelTanks cannot manage the same resource" and forces KSP to hard-exit to desktop... what changed/what happened?  any way to fix it without completely recoding all the MarkIVSystems part configs to stop using the useless B9 tank switcher module (LFO/MP don't cut it.. I'm using interstellar fuels like HTP, hydrazine, etc, and have no use for stock fuels).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tonka Crash

Tonka Crash

Posted
Posted

@ss8913 It's not MFT throwing the error, it's B9 part switcher. Whoever wrote that POS decided quitting to desktop is the only way to deal with compatibility with MFT. It had nothing to do with MFT. I use the Mk2 and Mk3 expansions and those both recently switched to B9PS and it does the same crap of quitting to desktop when B9PS is used on a part with the MFT module. I had to find any parts using B9PS and comment out the MFT patch. If they're not compatible and B9 is a hard requirement why include a patch for MFT at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blowfish

blowfish

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, ss8913 said:

so, before 1.5.1 ... MFT was compatible with B9 part switch... I had made some modulemanager patches to add MFT capability to the MarkIV system parts... now it says that "B9 part switcher and ModuleFuelTanks cannot manage the same resource" and forces KSP to hard-exit to desktop... what changed/what happened?  any way to fix it without completely recoding all the MarkIVSystems part configs to stop using the useless B9 tank switcher module (LFO/MP don't cut it.. I'm using interstellar fuels like HTP, hydrazine, etc, and have no use for stock fuels).

The MFT patches should remove the fuel switching ModuleB9PartSwitch (or if it also switches meshes, remove the fuel switching capability from it)

Edited by blowfish
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ss8913

ss8913

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, blowfish said:

The MFT patches should remove the fuel switching ModuleB9PartSwitch (or if it also switches meshes, remove the fuel switching capability from it)

yeah I think I see how to do it but ... previous B9 versions didn't do this; now it does.. unfortunately the way MarkIV is written it's going to require almost a complete rewrite of their part configurations.  Damn.  those are useful parts.  Maybe I'll talk to the MarkIV maintainer about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blowfish

blowfish

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, ss8913 said:

yeah I think I see how to do it but ... previous B9 versions didn't do this; now it does.. unfortunately the way MarkIV is written it's going to require almost a complete rewrite of their part configurations.  Damn.  those are useful parts.  Maybe I'll talk to the MarkIV maintainer about it.

I've been trying to get dirty data cleaned up lately, but I could be convinced that this should be a warning rather than a fatal error (still gives you a dialog but allows you to dismiss rather than exiting).  Really fuel switching should be disabled in the config if another resource management system is present on the part, but I don't think there's any universal way to do that, there are too many edge cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...