Jump to content

Stockalike RF Engine Configs v3.2.6 [01/20/19][RF v12]


Recommended Posts

Raptor831

I hate to bug, but I'm trying to follow up and make sure things are being taken care of from many different angles...

Did Dreadicon send you any engine configs for the KSP-Interstellar engines that need MM patches in order to work with RealFuels?

These engines are: the Meth/LOX chemical engine I mentioned earlier, the Aluminum-Oxygen Hybrid Rocket, and the DT-Vista propulsion system. All of them need resource name changes in order to work with RealFuels at all. The Meth/LOX engine (and possibly also the Al-Hybrid Rocket) need TWR/ISP fixes in order to follow real-world TWR/ISP like the other engines in your engine config do...

Regards,

Northstar

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worth noting that this mod is *not* Realism Overhaul, which tries to model real engines; this is Stockalike RF Configs, which merely tries to give realistic Isp and TWR to stock engines without changing their role. If you want a Raptor, this probably isn't the place. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
this is Stockalike RF Configs, which merely tries to give realistic Isp and TWR to stock engines

That's all I'm asking for. It would be NICE if the thrust were up-rated, instead of the engine mass decreased, to match real-world TWR (the current Meth/LOX engine is *ALREADY* a heavy-lift engine, so this doesn't change its role- just make it more realistically effective at what it already does), but I'd be happy with either solution. I *do* want the ISP increased to real-world values, though.

Regards,

Northstar

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raptor831

Hi Raptor, this is your friendly reminder that the stock O-10 Monopropellant Engines still haven't been fixed to use Hydrazine and other RCS resources instead of Monopropellant (when ModuleRCSFX is installed) yet.

Also, any progress on the KSP-Interstellar Meth/LOX engine yet? I still haven't heard any hint from anyone that it's being worked on. Dreadicon doesn't seem to want to do it (he doesn't like writing MM engine patches), and I don't have the first idea how to do it myself, but I already provided you with the correct TWR/ISP and thrust values...

Regards,

Northstar

Link to post
Share on other sites
@Raptor831

Hi Raptor, this is your friendly reminder that the stock O-10 Monopropellant Engines still haven't been fixed to use Hydrazine and other RCS resources instead of Monopropellant (when ModuleRCSFX is installed) yet.

Also, any progress on the KSP-Interstellar Meth/LOX engine yet? I still haven't heard any hint from anyone that it's being worked on. Dreadicon doesn't seem to want to do it (he doesn't like writing MM engine patches), and I don't have the first idea how to do it myself, but I already provided you with the correct TWR/ISP and thrust values...

Regards,

Northstar

Northstar,

You might need to give him a break. People have other stuff going on sometimes. And it's only been a little over a week since his last update. I'm sure that he will notice your requests from the last couple pages soon enough. :)

(Not to mention he hasn't logged on in two days.)

Cheers,

~Claw

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm coming guys, and I haven't forgotten. Been busy with RL stuff lately, on top of now I have a failing hard drive. Was planning on getting this started over this weekend. I'll be going over this thread to make sure I don't miss anything that's been requested, and trying to add that to the config.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm coming guys, and I haven't forgotten. Been busy with RL stuff lately, on top of now I have a failing hard drive. Was planning on getting this started over this weekend. I'll be going over this thread to make sure I don't miss anything that's been requested, and trying to add that to the config.

Yuck, hardware issues. Get well soon, computer!

I started to work on Tantares pack for my own install, but its a bit of a hackjob honestly. Not to add to the mayhem, but maybe to the back of the line, if it suits your interest to look into it.

(The spreadsheet nearly brought down my old copy of Excel for OSX ><. If I get anything serviceable, i'll send it in, but i'm in a similar boat timewise as you are, so no worries from me!)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yuck, hardware issues. Get well soon, computer!

I started to work on Tantares pack for my own install, but its a bit of a hackjob honestly. Not to add to the mayhem, but maybe to the back of the line, if it suits your interest to look into it.

(The spreadsheet nearly brought down my old copy of Excel for OSX ><. If I get anything serviceable, i'll send it in, but i'm in a similar boat timewise as you are, so no worries from me!)

Yeah, computer is limping along ok at the moment. I'm running from an external drive until I can get a new drive. I'm on an iMac too, which pretty much means I need to hit the Apple store (and pay the Apple tax) to fix it. Good hardware, but boy do you pay for it.

Also, I'm adding Tantares to my list. And yes, that spreadsheet is a nightmare. To get it to conjure magic, though, there's really not another way short of writing code to do so. Not in the mood to wrangle a Python script or something to do that!

It might be worth considering scaling the fuel costs to bring them inline with KSP costs? While RF uses 1 root = $1000USD in 1965 (as, I think, RO will) people playing this config pack might want to play a traditional campaign. You also should consider giving engines appropriate costs if you do not already do so; the final cost column of the spreadsheet can be useful here. :)

Going back a bit on this, but Nathan, what is the cost column based on? I looked at it for 0.24 but it seemed odd to me, and it being Stockalike I figured Squad/Mods would be close to stock-ish anyway. I'll see about cost all around though, considering that really alters how you play, and gives another layer of choice (more $ = more ISP/thrust/etc). And I like choices. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

For a guy who notionally dislikes functional programming, I actually like Excel a good deal, though a Python script would be more flexible (albeit it would need a crapton of work to get results in a GUI for configuring-and-seeing-results).

That said, the spreedsheet is heavy enough to crash Google Docs; I'm not surprised it's causing trouble. :D

Regarding cost: as of the current spreadsheet, cost/liter is the cost in $USD1965 per liter of that resource (though per discussion in the RF thread, EC should be 0.5/liter and SolidFuel should be 17.8 ($10/kg). When exported, however, they are multiplied by 0.001, so that one fund (root) = $1000USD.

These costs have very little in common with KSP resource costs. Kerosene and LOX are 195,000x and 4,000x cheaper respectively than LF and Ox, for example (or 39,000x and 800x, if you take into account that resource quantities increase by 5x going from KSP to RF liters-only measurements).

As for engines, the cost column is the old formula I used for Mission Controller Extended's auto-costing algorithm. It's basically

(IspSL * 0.2 + IspV*0.8 - 200)^2 * thrust_in_MN*(1+gimbal*0.2). NTR get a 4x multiplier. Finally, an efficiency multiplier is assessed, by considering how effective it is per ton, with cost increased for low-mass engines. Scale it however you like, but it should cost things according to performance given, more or less. Scale it by some constant factor to make it adhere to KSP's general engine costs, if you like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, don't get me wrong. I boggled at the art that the spreadsheet is, and bow before you for thinking such a thing up (I don't think it would have occurred to me!), I was mostly dumping on Office 2004 for mac. (*grumblecursegrumble*) :D

Agree on the apple store. Thank goodness for (relatively) painless backups, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, don't get me wrong. I boggled at the art that the spreadsheet is, and bow before you for thinking such a thing up (I don't think it would have occurred to me!), I was mostly dumping on Office 2004 for mac. (*grumblecursegrumble*) :D

Agree on the apple store. Thank goodness for (relatively) painless backups, though.

Trust me, Office 2011 for the Mac doesn't fare much better! :wink: Stupidly enough, 2009 version on my 7-year-old black MacBook runs it like a dream. Go figure... OpenOffice does a decent job, but you can't seem to add newline characters inside a cell, which is rather important to that sheet.

And for reference, I am not the original creator of that spreadsheet magic. NathanKell set up the original sheet for his "Reach for the Stars" thread/configs and someone (Chestburster I believe) adjusted the engines for stock. I took that and began to add/tweak engines and then added new features (ModuleEngineFX and the new RCS configs) as needed. A with all of my mods, I stand on the shoulders of others and make some enhancements.

In any case, I've updated my XLS with the new resource data, so all that's left is to add the new engines. Hopefully, I'll have something by the end of the weekend to release.

EDIT/ADDITION: Does anyone have some data on the real (or the real data) aluminum hybrid engine that the KSPI one is based upon. I'd like to add that into the sheet, but so far I can't find any data on mixture ratios, ISP, etc. Unless, of course, the original configs are good and accurate, in which case I'll just update those.

Edited by Raptor831
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok all, I've updated the configs fully to RF 8.x. I have not tested these yet, so I'm not making an official release at least until tomorrow. The files are updated on the repo, however, so for anyone willing you can grab them and test them out. Let me know of any bugs or omissions. (Repo link here)

Few things to note:

The thrust is now the same for all configs, so all Hydrolox engines will now have 33% more thrust than they did before. Makes it easier going forward, but might throw off any current designs. This is in line with what NathanKell had in his latest datasets.

The new resource data has been used, so some fuel/oxidizer ratios may be a bit tweaked. Fair warning.

This now includes KSPI engines, Tantares, MRS, and the BahaSP release. RCS thrusters in those packs are included as well. The Monoprop stock engine I missed before should be included as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you, Raptor. :)

You're welcome! :)

I'm trying it out now!

Let me know if you find anything odd.

Also wanted to mention about the KSPI methane engine. It is not a direct port of the Raptor engine, and that is intentional. The XLS, which is set up by people much smarter than I, was implying that the thrust and ISP were way out of line with the rest of the engines unless the engine mass was substantially increased. Since that's not really in-line with what the Stockalike configs are (or at least what I want them to be), I chose to keep the thrust as initially designed, increase the ISP to somewhere near those numbers, and decrease the mass slightly. All of this is in the XLS, which is in the repo now. The calcs probably weren't set up to account for the staged combustion cycle that SpaceX is using, but even so, I just didn't like where it went with the reported numbers.

That said, I've been pondering a large heavy lift methane/LOX engine to fill that role in Stockalike. Most likely this would be a 3.75m engine with those thrust numbers (or at least closer). Probably will do a part-copy alternate config for a NovaPunch or KW engine to do so, or maybe the KX-2 stock one. Most engines in this class don't even come close to 8000 kN, and the only ones that do are boosters from NovaPunch (which I might nerf a bit). If you want a straight Raptor clone, I imagine the RO thread has that somewhere.

Still, the XLS is there for a reason. If you'd like to tweak it for your personal install, feel free. The instructions are in the file, and it's exactly how I generate these files. Do come back and let me know how it goes, if you do!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, i would love to know whether we currently have any working configs for Real Fuels and the Engines from Near Future Propulsion? I managed to find this one here: config, but since RealFuels was updated to 8.x, I do not know if it still works correctly...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi, i would love to know whether we currently have any working configs for Real Fuels and the Engines from Near Future Propulsion? I managed to find this one here: config, but since RealFuels was updated to 8.x, I do not know if it still works correctly...

The only breaking change (in regards to the NFP config) from RF 7.x to 8.x is the resource names. If you search and replace everything that changed, it should be compatible. Namely: N2O4 is now NTO, and LiquidH2 is now LqdHydrogen. You can do that with Notepad or TextEdit or any other text editor you have, just find and replace. Since aristurtle's license allows it, I'll post that here.

RF 8.x compatible NearFuture Propulsion config (click download source in the top right)

This is all aristurtle's work, with the only changes being the resource names are updated.

EDIT: Ninja'd

I just tried this latest config, and had a weird bug. The game hung on loading the stock LVN. Reverting back to the previous config fixed the issue.

I'll check that out today. Thanks for the info.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a problem with the LANTR (aka trimodal NTR) and it's my fault as I wrote up the config for it originally. It has way too much thrust. Not sure how that happened except that I had done up several configurations for different LOX / H2 mix ratios and I might have put in the thrust for a higher LOX ratio. Here's an updated config that's a lot closer to what it should be for a 3-1 mix ratio:


+PART[nuclearEngine]:BEFORE[RealFuels_StockEngines]
{
@name = nuclearEngine-trimodal
@author = NovaSilisko, Starwaster


@title = LV-N Atomic Rocket Motor, trimodal

@description = Despite the big scary trefoil painted onto the side of this engine, its radioactive exhaust, and tendency to overheat, the LV-N Atomic Rocket Motor is harmless. Mostly. This one can inject LOX into the nozzle stream to increase thrust at the expense of fuel efficiency.






@MODULE[ModuleEngines]
{
@minThrust = 0
@maxThrust = 111.2
!atmosphereCurve{}
atmosphereCurve
{
key,0 = 0 925
key,1 = 1 556
}
}
!MODULE[ModuleEngineConfigs],*{}
MODULE
{
name = ModuleAlternator
OUTPUT_RESOURCE
{
name = U235Rods
rate = -0.0000000005
}
OUTPUT_RESOURCE
{
name = DepU235Rods
rate = 0.0000000005
}
OUTPUT_RESOURCE
{
name = ElectricCharge
rate = 3.0
}
}
MODULE
{
name = ModuleGenerator
//resourceThreshold = 0
isAlwaysActive = true
OUTPUT_RESOURCE
{
name = ElectricCharge
rate = 1.5
}
OUTPUT_RESOURCE
{
name = DepU235Rods
rate = 0.0000000005
}
INPUT_RESOURCE
{
name = U235Rods
rate = 0.0000000005
}
}
RESOURCE
{
name = U235Rods
amount = 5
maxAmount = 5
}
RESOURCE
{
name = DepU235Rods
amount = 0
maxAmount = 5
}
MODULE
{
name = ModuleHybridEngine
configuration = Hydrogen
techLevel = 5
origTechLevel = 5
maxTechLevel = 8
engineType = N
origMass = 6.8
CONFIG
{
name = Hydrogen
thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
exhaustDamage = True
ignitionThreshold = 0.1
minThrust = 0
maxThrust = 111.2
heatProduction = 300
fxOffset = 0, 0, 1.0
PROPELLANT
{
name = LqdHydrogen
ratio = 1.0
DrawGauge = True
}
PROPELLANT
{
name = U235Rods
ratio = 0.00000000001
}
atmosphereCurve
{
key = 0 925
key = 1 556
}
IspSL = 1.016483516483516
IspV = 1.016483516483516
}
CONFIG
{
name = LqdHydrogen+LqdOxygen
thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
exhaustDamage = True
ignitionThreshold = 0.1
minThrust = 0
maxThrust = 303.9466
heatProduction = 325
fxOffset = 0, 0, 1.0
// Assuming LOX / H2 ratio of 3-1 (mass)
// 0.6941 Isp
// volume ratio conversion
// 1.141 kg LOX (1L) x3
//
// 1.141 kg LH2 (16.10444601270289L)
// mixture ratio by mass:
// = 0.003423 kg O2
// = 0.001141 H2
PROPELLANT
{
name = LqdHydrogen
ratio = 16.10444601270289
DrawGauge = True
}
PROPELLANT
{
name = LqdOxygen
ratio = 3.0
DrawGauge = False
}
PROPELLANT
{
name = U235Rods
ratio = 0.00000000001
}
atmosphereCurve
{
key = 0 642
key = 1 386
}
IspSL = 0.6941
IspV = 0.6941
}
}
}

Edited by Starwaster
missing fuel rods
Link to post
Share on other sites
There's a problem with the LANTR (aka trimodal NTR) and it's my fault as I wrote up the config for it originally. ..snip..

Replaced the current LANTR config with the one you posted. Repo is updated. I'm thinking this should be ready for a "release" here, so next time I load everything up I'll do a double check for myself. If you have any other bugs or suggestions to note, let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to interrupt development, but I'm having a little problem with the mod. It works great and like it should, but for someone reason, the parts it affects no longer have TweakScale support, non-affected parts still allow scaling though. I searched the thread, and I really didn't see anything mentioning this, so just wanted to check with anyone who might know of a solution to this?

Edit 2: After going through the RF folder, I noticed a file called Tweakscale_remover.cfg, I assume that could be the reason for this first problem. Sorry for my stupidity if it is.

I was also wondering how to get engines that aren't supported by the mod to work, like ones that still just use LF/OX and don't have a GUI element. I have the remodel of Aerojet Kerbodyne installed, and some of the newer parts don't have StockAlike support yet, but was wondering how I might be able to use them anyway. I know this is probably a more RF in general oriented question, but thought I'd ask it here since I'm using this mod rather then RF for RO.

Edit: What I mean is, is there a way to also use non-configured engines using the stock resources while this is installed? When I put a non-configured engine, for example, the LV-900 from Aerojet Kerbodyne together with one of the service modules included, which also isn't configured for StockAlike, nothing shows up under delta-v in MechJeb.

Sorry for the mouthful :D. Hope to hear back from you fine contributors to the community!

Edited by SuccessPastaTime
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...