[1.1.3] Procedural Parts - Parts the way you want 'em - v1.2.5 July 3

[MatterBeam]

Can anyone comment on why spacecraft with procedural parts produce as much lag as stock-part spacecraft with twice the number of parts?

[troyfawkes]

Hey all! Is it possible for some super smart person to hack together an MM patch to get PP to have usable tanks for Cryo Engines?

[Kolago]

I use ModularFuelTanks with this MM config for LqdHydrogen:

@TANK_DEFINITION[Default]
{
	TANK
	{
	  name = LqdHydrogen
	  amount = full
	  utilization = 56
	}
}

[63Hayden]

This mod is extremely underrated. It's certainly one of my favorites, and I was pretty excited when I saw that it had been updated to 1.0.2. Thanks, 'OtherBarry', for your spectacular work.

[OtherBarry]

This mod is extremely underrated. It's certainly one of my favorites, and I was pretty excited when I saw that it had been updated to 1.0.2. Thanks, 'OtherBarry', for your spectacular work.

Ha. RadarManFromTheMoon does all the work. I just post things...

[westamastaflash]

Can anyone comment on why spacecraft with procedural parts produce as much lag as stock-part spacecraft with twice the number of parts?

Perhaps it's not parts that's causing your lag?

[Mokmo]

Can anyone comment on why spacecraft with procedural parts produce as much lag as stock-part spacecraft with twice the number of parts?

Do you have Tweakable Everything ? ProceduralFairings has issues with it...

[Svm420]

Since the new super fancy FAR got released, I have a little anouncement to make: Yes, PP makes FAR revoxelize the craft after changing the shape of a part. So it should be fully compatible. You can check that by pressing alt-F12 and open the debug console. A Message like "voxelization something something" should pop up everytime the shape gets updated. However, if you encounter any weirdness. Please let me know.

I have some weirdness. FAR is not displaying any voxels for any Ppart i put on my craft. It as if it isn't even there when I diplay voxels. I message is there in the log that FAr is re voxilizing after changing the part, but it never display voxels for the part and they have no effect on the CoL. Latest version with latest FAR. Nothing in the logs to indicate it isn't working so im not sure what to do or what else I can give you. I can take some pic if you want. Thanks!

[futrtrubl]

I have some weirdness. FAR is not displaying any voxels for any Ppart i put on my craft. It as if it isn't even there when I diplay voxels. I message is there in the log that FAr is re voxilizing after changing the part, but it never display voxels for the part and they have no effect on the CoL. Latest version with latest FAR. Nothing in the logs to indicate it isn't working so im not sure what to do or what else I can give you. I can take some pic if you want. Thanks!

Pics for sure, logs definitely, and a post in the FAR thread for certain.

[Svm420]

Pics for sure, logs definitely, and a post in the FAR thread for certain.

I think I have the issue down. I had some cfgs to overhaul the tech limits for all the Pparts. It deleted every node and replaced them with new ones with different unlock times and size limits. No matter what I did in the cfg the part was invisible to FAR aerodynamically. I went so far as to copy and paste the exact same info from the part itself and it still would not work. As in I copied the file and made it a MM patch that first deleted all nodes then re added them exactly as before. This was with FAR, MF, and Pparts only along with MM obviously all latest versions. Hope this is what it is. Had a hell of a time narrowing it down.

[Mipe]

So I took the "Launch our first vessel!" contract, slapped a procedural SRB onto pod (and a parachute, naturally), a couple containers, did ground experiments and then staged... Woo, we're off! Do experiments, pop parachute and gleefully return to the launchpad.

Then I check contracts.. "Launch our first vessel!" contract is still under Active Contracts.

Huh. Was it all a lie? Are all those tinfoil hatted Kerbals right?!

[RadarManFromTheMoon]

I appreciate the +60% capacity increase in both liquid fuel and oxidizer tanks. And while this is a definitely a step in the right direction, I'm going to argue that it's not quite enough. The fact that there was a +60% increase in the latest update implies that some if not all of what I'm about to say, have already occurred to you, but I'm going to say it anyway.

*snip*

Don't agree? I would love to hear arguments against.

I agree. Balancing needs some work anyway. Stock balancing is a bit inconsistent though, so it might take some time and will involve tweaking curves and other lovely tasks. So... yeah, lets first fix all the little bugs and kinks and after that, I will be happy to discuss balancing issues.

Can anyone comment on why spacecraft with procedural parts produce as much lag as stock-part spacecraft with twice the number of parts?

When does the lag occur? When changing a pPart, KSP needs to recalculate the drag cube for it and I guess that might lead to some lagging.

This mod is extremely underrated. It's certainly one of my favorites, and I was pretty excited when I saw that it had been updated to 1.0.2. Thanks, 'OtherBarry', for your spectacular work.

Ha. RadarManFromTheMoon does all the work. I just post things...

You're welcome. But I didn' t do it alone. BenChung, NathanKell and futrtrubl helped. (Hope I didn't forget anyone)

I think I have the issue down. I had some cfgs to overhaul the tech limits for all the Pparts. It deleted every node and replaced them with new ones with different unlock times and size limits. No matter what I did in the cfg the part was invisible to FAR aerodynamically. I went so far as to copy and paste the exact same info from the part itself and it still would not work. As in I copied the file and made it a MM patch that first deleted all nodes then re added them exactly as before. This was with FAR, MF, and Pparts only along with MM obviously all latest versions. Hope this is what it is. Had a hell of a time narrowing it down.

I'm not sure I get what you mean. FAR refuses to revoxelize the craft when you edit tech restrictions per module manager patch? Thats odd. Actually the voxelization has nothing to do with tech constraints. (handled in different modules) The shape part modules just send a message to FAR after rebuilding the model, which then triggers FAR to revoxelize the craft. FAR showing the debug log message without actually voxelizing sounds more like a bug within FAR. Maybe an incompatibility with another mod?

So I took the "Launch our first vessel!" contract, slapped a procedural SRB onto pod (and a parachute, naturally), a couple containers, did ground experiments and then staged... Woo, we're off! Do experiments, pop parachute and gleefully return to the launchpad.

Then I check contracts.. "Launch our first vessel!" contract is still under Active Contracts.

Huh. Was it all a lie? Are all those tinfoil hatted Kerbals right?!

Humm? Thats weird. I tried to reproduce that (command pod with procedural SRB beneath) and it triggered the the contract immediately after launch. Maybe KSP just glitched out.

Edited May 10, 2015 by RadarManFromTheMoon

[westamastaflash]

So I took the "Launch our first vessel!" contract, slapped a procedural SRB onto pod (and a parachute, naturally), a couple containers, did ground experiments and then staged... Woo, we're off! Do experiments, pop parachute and gleefully return to the launchpad.

Then I check contracts.. "Launch our first vessel!" contract is still under Active Contracts.

Huh. Was it all a lie? Are all those tinfoil hatted Kerbals right?!

Did you use launch sticks or clamps? I've had this problem when I was using launch clamps - for some reason the game wants your rocket to be touching the pad..

[Mipe]

Nope, no launch clamps. Tier 0, first launch... I somehow doubt I could get clamps by then

[Svm420]

I'm not sure I get what you mean. FAR refuses to revoxelize the craft when you edit tech restrictions per module manager patch? Thats odd. Actually the voxelization has nothing to do with tech constraints. (handled in different modules) The shape part modules just send a message to FAR after rebuilding the model, which then triggers FAR to revoxelize the craft. FAR showing the debug log message without actually voxelizing sounds more like a bug within FAR. Maybe an incompatibility with another mod?

Alright solved the issue. It was that I was deleting all node from the part via MM as I stated. This however was occurring relatively late in the order of MM patches. It was after FAR adds it needs modules to the part. So my patch deleted the FAR modules and made the parts "not exist" to FAR. They had no effect on aerodynamics, and would never voxelized. It would stated the updated in the logs, but voxel would never appear for the part. Thanks for trying to help with my mystery.

Now onto the other issue. Nose cones and any item taken down to a diameter of 0 causes a NaN error in FAR. It is most obvious when it occurs as it causes the blue CoL/P marker to disappear. Trying to calculate any of FARs graphs or derivatives results in massive log NRE spam.

[ratchet freak]

Any plans for procedural anti-shock bodies?

They will help with FAR's area ruling.

[RadarManFromTheMoon]

Alright solved the issue. It was that I was deleting all node from the part via MM as I stated. This however was occurring relatively late in the order of MM patches. It was after FAR adds it needs modules to the part. So my patch deleted the FAR modules and made the parts "not exist" to FAR. They had no effect on aerodynamics, and would never voxelized. It would stated the updated in the logs, but voxel would never appear for the part. Thanks for trying to help with my mystery.

Now onto the other issue. Nose cones and any item taken down to a diameter of 0 causes a NaN error in FAR. It is most obvious when it occurs as it causes the blue CoL/P marker to disappear. Trying to calculate any of FARs graphs or derivatives results in massive log NRE spam.

Ahh, I see. Alright that explains it. Instead of bruteforce stripping all modules from the part you could also just do something like this:

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ProceduralPart]]:Final
{
	@MODULE[ProceduralPart]
	{
		@TechRequired = start

		!TECHLIMIT[*],*{}

	}
}

That should remove all TECHLIMIT Nodes from all procedural parts. The remaining standard values should be pretty much freestyle.

A nosecone with a diameter of zero is, well, impossible. no wonder it causes problems. The solution is to choose feasible minimum values The standard value for diameterMin is 0.01. Should be small enough.

Any plans for procedural anti-shock bodies?

They will help with FAR's area ruling.

The mod contains structural parts. I guess you could use them to recreate something like that. Another solution would be to create such a part from scratch (or find someone who does it) and then scale it with TweakScale.

Edited May 10, 2015 by RadarManFromTheMoon
0.01 not 0.001

[Svm420]

A nosecone with a diameter of zero is, well, impossible. no wonder it causes problems. The solution is to choose feasible minimum values The standard value for diameterMin is 0.01. Should be small enough.

PART{
    // --- general parameters ---
    name = [COLOR=#ff0000]proceduralNoseCone[/COLOR]
...
MODULE     {
        name = ProceduralShapeBezierCone
        displayName = Smooth Cone

        selectedShape = Round #1
        length = 0.625
        [COLOR=#ff0000]topDiameter = 0[/COLOR]
        bottomDiameter = 1.25

        coneTopMode = Constant
    }

Issue is you have default 0 diameter. Users can't change that in game for the nose cone resulting in NaN whenever the item is attached. Also a few other parts using the MODULE[ProceduralShapeBezierCone] have 1 of the diameters equal to 0. I'd recommend 0.005 instead works just about the same and no division by 0. For now here is a nice MM patch to fix it.

@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ProceduralShapeBezierCone]:HAS[#topDiameter[0]]]{
    @MODULE[ProceduralShapeBezierCone]
    {
    @topDiameter = 0.005
    }


}
@PART
[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ProceduralShapeBezierCone]:HAS[#bottomDiameter[0]]]
{
    @MODULE[ProceduralShapeBezierCone]
    {
    @bottomDiameter = 0.005
    }


}

Edited May 10, 2015 by Svm420

[Medicus]

I use ModularFuelTanks with this MM config for LqdHydrogen:

@TANK_DEFINITION[Default]
{
    TANK
    {
      name = LqdHydrogen
      amount = full
      utilization = 56
    }
}

Cryogenic Engines need both oxidiser and liquid hydrogen to work.

If we could get a MM patch or new config that added the options of Liquid Hydrogen or Liquid Hydrogen/Oxidiser, PP would not just be a massive improvement on the stock parts, but perfect.

[RadarManFromTheMoon]

Svm420:

Okay, sorry. Classic misunderstanding. I never had problems with the nosecone and FAR and "item taken down to" somewhat implied active user action to me. So I assumed you somehow figured out to create a Nosecone with a bottom diameter of 0 (through MM patches). Which is of course an impossible shape.

I just tried to reproduce the error and for me the nosecones work perfectly fine with the official FAR release 0.15. Could it be that you use a devbuild?

Edited May 10, 2015 by RadarManFromTheMoon

[Svm420]

Svm420:

Okay, sorry. Classic misunderstanding. I never had problems with the nosecone and FAR and "item taken down to" somewhat implied active user action to me. So I assumed you somehow figured out to create a Nosecone with a bottom diameter of 0 (through MM patches). Which is of course an impossible shape.

I just tried to reproduce the error and for me the nosecones work perfectly fine with the official FAR release 0.15. Could it be that you use a devbuild?

That maybe it. I have been keeping FAR updated with the latest fixes. Either way I think changing the default to be 5mm or 0.005 would avoid any potential issues in the future. Just wanted to get all this clarified. Thanks!

[Rohaq]

Is there any reason I can't make a procedural RCS tank that's smaller than an 1.843m diameter and 0.750m length in the standard cylinder shape? Other shapes also have similar limits that mean I can't stick smaller tanks on my smaller craft.

[Yngv4rr]

Is there any reason I can't make a procedural RCS tank that's smaller than an 1.843m diameter and 0.750m length in the standard cylinder shape? Other shapes also have similar limits that mean I can't stick smaller tanks on my smaller craft.

As far as I know, size of part (both max and min) is determined by tech nodes you've unlocked. I think you have to unlock parts of small diameter, at least that worked for me.

[jrandom]

A bit of an odd question here, but I wasn't sure where else to ask:

I'm working on a Sandbox Science config and have managed to get everything in Procedural Parts to show up except for the different shape selections for ProceduralShapeBezierCone. The cone itself is available (Smooth Cone) and all the attributes are there in the tweakables menu except for the control that lets you choose "Round #1", "Round #2", etc...

Is there a way to get this to show up at the beginning of a Science game? The .cfg I'm using currently looks like this:

@PART[*]:HAS[~TechRequired[]]:Final
{
    TechRequired = start
}

@PART[*]:Final
{
    @TechRequired = start
}

@PART[*]:HAS[~entryCost[]]:Final
{
    entryCost = 0
}

@PART[*]:Final
{
    @entryCost = 0
}

@PART[*]:Final
{
    @MODULE[ProceduralShapeCone]
    {
        @techRequired = start
    }

    @MODULE[ProceduralShapePill]
    {
        @techRequired = start
    }

    @MODULE[ProceduralShapeBezierCone]
    {
        @techRequired = start
    }
}

@PART[proceduralTank*] 
{
    @MODULE[ProceduralPart]
    {
        @TECHLIMIT,*
        {
            // Increase the max length for all tech levels by 3*
            @lengthMax *= 10
            // Corresponding volume increase
            @volumeMax *= 10

            // Increase the max diameter by double
            @diameterMax *= 10
            // Since volume goes up on diameter^2, need to use increase^2
            @volumeMax *= 100
        }
    }
}

[RadarManFromTheMoon]

jrandom: You need to set allowCurveTweaking=true in your techlimit