Starwaster

Ok, try again. I've gone through all assembly and project references with a fine toothed comb and verified everything and rebuilt. https://www.dropbox.com/s/25hzx1lrlcw72w1/RealFuels_Boiloff_Revamp.zip?dl=1 BTW, this requires the very latest Real Fuels before installing these files on top. Can't stress that enough.

Are you updated to the latest RF? All files? (the dll's)

It's possible that I compiled against the wrong version of SolverEngines. I'll look into it. Does it go away if you restore the original current RealFuels.dll file? Try re-downloading. I was definitely linked to a different SolverEngines file than is in the latest RF. I forgot that I had changed my working directories to a different KSP installation and I was still linked to the old ones.

Fun fact: removal of loss_rate is technically optional if the resource has vsp assigned. The code checks for that first and ignores loss_rate. Removing it was just so that people didn't see it and assume it was still serving a purpose. Also, I re-replied to your first message while you were typing that out. So refresh and read

Actually I have to re-analyze that. It does have insulation, it's just in the TANK_DEFINITION. The O2 tank itself probably literally does not have its own separate insulation for that type of tank. The only one that probably really needs it is the H2 tank. In fact, you'll notice that the default H2 TANK originally said 'lacks insulation' but I added some in this revision. The reason for that is because in researching this I noticed that our space program has always insulated the hydrogen tanks while at the same time leaving the oxygen tanks uninsulated. Also, if you are trying this update, put a tank up with H2/O2 and you'll probably not see any O2 boiloff at all while the tank still has H2 in it. The reason for that is that it's getting chilled by the H2 tank's boiloff. (which I'm not sure is really even possible unless they're all common bulkheads, so just assume that they all are )

Yes, as I said, this replaces the old loss_rate determined boil-off. (though that might not have been as clear as I intended, but it's there in the first sentence. The reason for that, BTW, is that with the new KSP 1.0 thermodynamics, tanks and their resources can absorb heat at a rate that doesn't match the loss_rate determined rate. That being the case, even though we've had evaporative cooling for months now (pretty much ever since Real Fuels updated for KSP 1.0) it does no good because because the cooling didn't happen as fast as the heating. That's why I've been working on this, so that boiloff code will be up to snuff with our new thermodynamic system. Uhm it DID have insulation.... HONEST! I'll have to go back and look for it. I think I see it sticking out of the sofa cushions.... I'll have it fixed soonish

Think we need to see the entire log (output_log.txt or player.log if Linux/Mac). Your ModuleManager.ConfigCache file wouldn't hurt either. To Anyone interested in trying out new Real Fuels boiloff before it officially arrives: (this requires manually overwriting and you should only do this if you are comfortable with your file system and installing KSP mods by hand) https://www.dropbox.com/s/25hzx1lrlcw72w1/RealFuels_Boiloff_Revamp.zip?dl=1 How to install: Open the zip file and copy the contents into your RealFuels folder. Overwrite when asked. What it does: It's updated to properly use latent heat of vaporization instead of an emperically determined loss rate. Tanks will also be properly cooled down by evaporative processes. Tank insulation is an actual thing now and uses a combination of modified part conductivity and an internally calculated method using Fourier conduction formula. The tank configs still need a tweaking pass; some tanks may boil off approximately twice as much as they should or half as much as they should. Only LqdOxygen, LqdHydrogen, LqdMethane and LqdAmmonia use the new boiloff process. There are still some resources that don't have vaporization values assigned yet and use the old loss_rate system. Updated using the latest official code. (my github fork: https://github.com/Starwaster/ModularFuelSystem/tree/Dev/Source )

Ok, I have to correct myself on something I said. I thought there were some configs that were explicitly adding MFT to OPT parts but it was just the blanket conversion of resource carrying parts, in 1.8, certain parts have had their resources removed and are handled entirely through the Firespitter fuel switcher. Certain parts that I thought had had their names changed did not. I'm not sure which ones did anymore. Barnstorming?

Except that it is a config changing the engine. What difference does it make whether it's being done specifically and explicitly to that engine or a config blanketing multiple parts. Think about it, you could have arrived at a fix hours ago if not for various arguments against what I said it was from the very beginning.

No, you aren't understanding correctly. This is what I said it was from the very beginning. ModuleEnginesRF isn't 'steamrollering' over anything. A set of configs is being applied to that engine and changing it to something that is not KSPI compatible. My original assessment stands. This isn't a Real Fuels issue.

He said not to install them together. Some of the parts have changed significantly; the old K cargo bay is missing and there's a new one in its place with a more rounded top. (still on the fence as to how I feel about that) There are NO Real Fuels configs for the new parts (if you use RF) EDIT: Actually, the J-K adaptor must have had its part name changed because it DID have RF configs on it and now it doesn't Not sure what else might have changed or might be missing. - - - Updated - - - Understand that I wasn't trying to give you a hard time or anything, just pointing out that OPT itself is just a parts pack. It doesn't make changes to other parts like the Mk2/Mk3 or anything else. It's not going to make them weaker or do anything else to them to make them behave like that.

Does RO recognize any overrides (as Deadly Reentry does with its leaveTemp setting)?

That bit of text is stuck in there by Realism Overhaul. It won't affect Real Fuels behavior. I have no idea how KSPI would react. (or not react) but I'm skeptical of that being the cause. (I know it won't in the case of RF and doubt that it would affect KSPI but maybe Freethinker has another opinion) Screenshot of the affected part please? (In the VAB I mean, showing the text you're referring to)

That would likely be caused by whichever engine pack they installed. Real Fuels itself no longer alters engines. You need engine configs for that.

I don't see that happen with OPT or I'd have a lot more launch failures during take off. These planes are so smooth even Bob could fly one! (not that Jeb lets him)

That's how lots of rocket engines are in real life too. On the Saturn V for instance, 'throttling' meant shutting down the center engine on the first and second stage. They did that when G forces got to be too high. More modern engines are throttleable, like the RS25 (shuttle engine) Anyway, I thought from what I was reading that you were also having G problems towards the end of your launch while the engines were still going. Sorry. All I can think of is to try to make it more shallow. Maybe even make the launch a little more shallow so you have a longer trajectory where you can get more aerobraking done in the higher altitudes.

In the dev version I have locally, the tank's part temperature stays pretty close to the boiling point of the fuel whose boiling point is the lowest. (which actually means that the H2 keeps the O2 cool enough that it doesn't start boiling. Which isn't entirely unprecedented though it's not behavior you see in most fuel tanks historically speaking) But yeah, in the boiloff calculations I'm treating the part's temp as separate from the fuel temp; the difference in temperature between the two determines how much heat is actually being conducted into the fuel. (the tank's skin will tend to be cooler than ambient but not nearly as cold as the interior) (Edit: So, the answer is yes to both. Yes they're separate but the internal part temp will still be pretty cold because of evaporation from boiloff)

I wouldn't say sub orbital is inherently more dangerous but it can be depending on circumstances. A reentry from orbit, while faster, will be on a path that allows plenty of time to brake while in the upper atmosphere. A very steep sub orbital on the other hand might not allow enough time for aerobraking. So you could end up hitting very dense layers of atmosphere at hypersonic speeds and suffer lethal amounts of G forces, or heat up faster than your heat shield can withstand. So if you're sub orbital, make sure that your trajectory still allows for a shallow reentry. (note that even ICBMs have to be heat shielded or the warheads won't survive reentry) Also, make sure that your engines aren't too powerful. They should be starting with a TWR somewhere between 1.2 - 1.6. If necessary (and if your engines allow it) then throttle back if the G force meter goes too high.

FYI about boiloff: research 'Zero Boil Off' (common abbreviation ZBO). There is much research done on the subject by NASA as they consider that any boil off needs to be eliminated. For the Copernicus MTV for instance they expect that with insulation that the amount of heat needing to be eliminated will be 78 watts of heat in LEO and the cost of removal was given as 114 watts electrical per watt of heat removed. So it's definitely not something that we consider IRL as something that we 'just have to live with' - - - Updated - - - What problem are you talking about re timewarping? I don't recall anyone having posted any bug reports or feedback on the subject, so if there's something I need to know about, please go post in that thread or open a github issue please Edit: One other thing about boil off in Real Fuels itself: Very little of the current code takes into account the new thermal model that KSP 1.0 brought to the table. That is something that I've been actively working on updating although I fell behind because I needed to take a break from coding. But when boil off is revamped, the evaporative cooling that should come with it will work properly. (it's actually in there now but the actual boiloff is still based on the old thermal model so it actually heats up too much faster than it can be cooled down) When I get the boil off code properly finalized and pushed off to Nathan, Heat Pump will get a simultaneous update so it will all work properly. (it's really cool right now because you can take an empty tank at ambient temperatures and start pumping hydrogen into it and watch the internal temps start dropping as the hydrogen boils)

Radiators (and the ModuleHeatPump plugin) are no longer part of Real Fuels. Use Heat Pump mod instead: https://github.com/Starwaster/HeatPump/releases/latest (It is based on the latest RF Heat Pump code but revamped to make use of KSP 1.0 thermodynamics. The radiators that they come with actively cool by the amount of conducted heat + a little extra)

Sounds more like problem with the adjustable gear. How are OPT parts going to affect spaceplane parts that DON'T use OPT parts? That makes no sense.

They usually do. Generally the ModuleEngine* config should match the default ModuleEngineConfigs config.

Looks good - - - Updated - - - No, he'll be left with what's in ModuleEngines/ModuleEnginesFX

Make sure that the appropriate filter is enabled for the type of part they are in.

What I want to know is, how many times are we going to have to rescue Matt Damon? First it was Private Ryan then it was Dr Mann and now it's Mark Watney. We need to chain this guy up for his own protection P.S. Nice work!