-
Posts
13,406 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Everything posted by NathanKell
-
Starwaster: It already has them for Engine Ignitor, but due to a persistent typo they're never applied. I'd say that would be Word of God^H^H^HRaptor831 on what they should and shouldn't have.
-
How Do You Deal with Inerplanetary Aerocapturing in 1.0.4?
NathanKell replied to Geschosskopf's topic in KSP1 Discussion
Blacks: Um, I was talking about modifying body properties. RSS already has the correct body properties. What you're looking at is the global physics properties, i.e. changing them to be appropriate for a real-size universe not the KSP one. Anyway, here's the thread. It even has an example for Jool. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/127755-Bodyloader-A-lightweight-body-modifier -
I wrote some code to modify bodies in KSP. It's very lightweight, doesn't do a ton, but it doesn't need much configuring either. Supports changing atmospheric properties of bodies, and the body radius. Supports global rescaling of radii, orbital altitude, rotation period, and atmosphere height. Please adopt this and release it as your own! It's all on the repo, you can grab it as a zip to play with it. Two examples are included, one that modifies Jool's atmosphere, and another that rescales planets by 10x. If all you want is a changed atmosphere for Jool, delete the second example. GitHub License: MIT
-
Blacks: I suggest reading this post, it should help clarify some things. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/123268-1-0-2-Kerbol-3-7-Stock-system-re-scaled-x3-7-%28A-Kopernicus-based-mod%29?p=2056072&viewfull=1#post2056072 (and two posts up too, where I link the 1.0.4 version of RO_Physics.cfg, not the 1.0.2 version).
-
skinThicknessFactor doesn't exist, it's what DRE used. KSP 1.0.4 uses skinMassPerArea (in kg/m^2)
- 5,919 replies
-
- reentry
- omgitsonfire
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Ullage and igntiion are part of the engine config. RF Stockalike hasn't been correctly setting Engine Ignitor configs, and thus also doesn't work with RF 10.4 (which is backwards compatible with Engine Ignitor configs in engine CONFIG nodes...but only if they're done correctly ).
-
Stockalike RF Engine Configs v3.2.6 [01/20/19][RF v12]
NathanKell replied to Raptor831's topic in KSP1 Mod Releases
Sorry to say this, but your EI configs are broken (and probably have been since the start). Inside a CONFIG, you need a ModuleEngineIgnitor {} node, not a MODULE node. Note that once you fix that, RF 10.4+ will notice those configs as well, so you get limited ignitions and ullage on 1.0.4 with RF 10.4+ without EngineIgnitor. -
"Hi, I'm buying carpet. Can you give me a ballpark price?" "How much carpet do you want? Which kind of carpet?" "Can you give me a ballpark price first?" See the problem here? :] AngelLestat: If you want to save memory by not loading a part, any craft using it will not load. If you only want the part to not appear in the parts list (but still take up memory), then you can make it safe for craft using it (set its category and TechRequired to -1).
-
How Do You Deal with Inerplanetary Aerocapturing in 1.0.4?
NathanKell replied to Geschosskopf's topic in KSP1 Discussion
It is, but a very simple mod and cfg can change it. I'll post the code in the dev forum, anyone who wants can make a release of it. -
You're very welcome! Speed of sound depends on only three things: the ratio of specific heats, the gas constant for the gas (which can be gotten by dividing the universal gas constant by the molecular weight of the gas, the latter of which KSP stores), and the temperature. Neither density nor pressure are required.
-
How Do You Deal with Inerplanetary Aerocapturing in 1.0.4?
NathanKell replied to Geschosskopf's topic in KSP1 Discussion
Yes, there are two models, see Physics.cfg -- one is the newtonian model, and one is the hypersonic model. Well, 2.5, since the newtonian model behaves a bit differently when you're splashed. And I don't disagree in the slightest that the slope should be fixed. -
1.0.4 suborbital flights: too slow to land safely ?
NathanKell replied to Gaarst's topic in KSP1 Discussion
The real elephant in the room that nobody's mentioned yet is that the Mk1 pod has the same mass as Mercury but one quarter the drag (it's 1.25m in diameter, Mercury was roughly 2m in diameter). So of course it's going to have more trouble slowing down. This holds equally for the Mk1-2 pod (kitted out it's the same mass as Apollo but 1/4 the drag). -
[1.2] Procedural Fairings 3.20 (November 8)
NathanKell replied to e-dog's topic in KSP1 Mod Releases
By design. Anything attached to that node is supported by the fairings (as, say, the Apollo CSM was by the SLA panels). That's why that node decouples when you decouple the fairings. -
How Do You Deal with Inerplanetary Aerocapturing in 1.0.4?
NathanKell replied to Geschosskopf's topic in KSP1 Discussion
It does go down smoothly to zero. Do any test you like, measure density at any arbitrarily small altitude below max atmosphere altitude. It's just that it increases above zero too fast, which can appear nearly wallish when you're moving super-fast but (unlike .90) is not actually a wall. -
How Do You Deal with Inerplanetary Aerocapturing in 1.0.4?
NathanKell replied to Geschosskopf's topic in KSP1 Discussion
In pretty much all the books and journal articles I've seen on reentry heating, it's broken down into convective heating (the shock/friction/hot-air-against-fuselage heating) and radiative heating (black-body radiation from air molecule temperature). That's my $0.02. -
As I mentioned, the _slopes_ are too sharp, or rather, they start at too high a slope rather than starting flatter and curving upwards more as they should. That is, pressure increases too rapidly on Jool, and a bit too rapidly on Laythe. But unlike .90 where the atmosphere went from a pressure of zero to a pressure of 0.0001 kPa in no meters, 1.0 atmospheres don't have walls. They may have a fairly linear slope between 0 kPa at the atmosphere edge and 0.51kPa at 38km (Laythe), but it's still a slope, not a wall. As for why you get flame effects: I suggest using mechjeb or KER or AeroGUI or something to measure density, and compare where you get a given density on Jool, on Kerbin, and on Laythe. A similar test would be to ensure you have exactly the same surface velocity in all cases, since that will eliminate the effect of velocity on the strength of the flames (the flames are proportional to the 0.75 power of density and the cube of velocity).
-
Glad it worked! Under normal circumstances, dry mass is calculated by RF as the sum of: that tank type's basemass * volume + for each tank added total tank volume * tank mass So you might have to pay 0.1kg per liter base, plus another kg per liter for each liter of kerosene tank. That sort of thing.
-
NovaSilisko: that's true as of 0.90, no longer true in 1.0 (for any atmosphere). Cutoff is gradual and there's no wall, it's just the slope is a bit too sharp on Jool (and perhaps elsewhere, but Jool is what I'm familiar with).
-
erinym: welcome to the forums! I'm not sure what you mean by the dry mass changing when adding propellants--you mean when adding tanks for them, or when increasing/decreasing how full the tanks are in tweakables? If you're making a replica, it's best to set the part mass as desired and then add 'basemass = -1' to the ModuleFuelTanks module, so that RF doesn't mess with part dry mass. In other news, repack/recompile is out.
-
G_glop: Welcome to the forums! https://ksp.sarbian.com/jenkins/job/ModuleManager/ On the left, the build history. That's all MM builds. Click on the #n for each build to see what MM version it corresponds to. LostOblivion: @atmosphereCurve { @key,0 = new_vals //etc } Note that @NODE[nodename] is just a shortcut for @NODE:HAS[#name[nodename]], there's nothing particularly magic about it
-
The lower it is, the higher the flames will start. Density is almost always less than 1 kg/m^2, so a <1 exponent will increase it.
-
In 1.0 it's an 80% atmosphere (so 12km Kerbin = 15km on Earth).
-
It's for RO, so the goal is "real numbers everywhere." However, what you mostly want to tune are these: @convectionFactor = 1.1 @machTemperatureScalar = 7.5 // ~6000 at 7.3km/sec @machTemperatureVelocityExponent = 0.75 the factor is a multiplier to the transfer coefficient*; the others determine how a high-mach velocity is converted into a shock temperature. Stock has 21 as the Scalar, so that even 2000m/s is around 6000K, but you'll probably want something in between. Possibly also the newtonian stuff and the turbulent stuff need fixing; if you alter hypersonic convection, you probably should alter newtonian to match so there's a smooth transition in heating over the transition range (M=2 to M=4). *Convection works like this: 1. Get shock temperature, applying any behind-shockwave multipliers 2. Get part convection multiplier (i.e. is part of it occluded) 3. Get temperature delta (shock temp - part temp) 4. Get transfer coefficient. 5. Heat flux per exposed m^2 = coefficient * temperature delta * multiplier shock temperature is aerodynamicHeatProductionFactor * velocity when below mach 2, and machTemperatureScalar * velocity^machTemperatureVelocityExponent when above mach 4 (well, technically machConvectionStart and machConvectionEnd not 2 and 4). The transfer coefficients are Newtonian: (newtonianConvectionFactorBase + velocity^newtonianVelocityExponent) * density^newtonianDensityExponent * newtonianConvectionFactorTotal, or just convectionFactorSplashed if splashed. Hypersonic: convectionFactor * density^convectionDensityExponent * velocity^convectionVelocityExponent the temperatures and the coefficients are interpolated when velocity > M=2 and < M=4.