seanth

I probably shouldn't play favorites, but I need to express some love for TAC-LS. It's just really, really well done. It's grounded in solid empiricism, and doesn't lock anyone into assumptions. SO much love. TAC-LS comes set up to present the player with things such that a kerbal consumes or produces things at a rate of 1 unit/86400seconds. But the mod author also did the legwork to work out what the biologic consumption/production rates would be. His work is practically identical to things I worked out before I knew what he had done, and the difference are probably just rounding errors. For those interested in configuring TAC-LS to match BioMass's biologic rates: Those changes should allow everything to work together. I'm still testing things, but with those settings BioMass+Science as it is downloaded from github (i.e. on normal difficulty) should support 2 kerbals in terms of oxygen indefinitely if the greenhouse is full of biomass and is receiving constant light and has enough CO2, O2(yes, plants need O2), and water. If this is not the case, please do let us know. The density values for food and waste may change as testing progresses. Edit: I'm happy to share a spreadsheet used to obtain these values and to explain where starting values came from, why certain calculations were done, etc.

You are correct: there was a resource definition missing. Github has been updated to fix it.

The code is super appreciated, but why not also just release a dll and provide usage documentation?

I updated github last night, so all you need to to re-download. The latest update introduced some minor changes in rates things work at, as well as introduces a new aquatic greenhouse.

The easiest way to to achieve that would be to adjust the life support mods, not Biomass. Adapting Biomass would require adjusting many, many setting in numerous parts, whereas adjusting a life support mod would require altering as few as 1 settings and changing density values. Absolutely. In fact, the BioMass difficulty levels are set up with TACLS in mind. The setup for TACLS is slightly different than how it ships in that the respiration of the kerbals is as TaranisElsu' spreadsheet worked out, and no adjustments are made for 1 unit/kerbal/86400sec. I can post the details if wanted. Making BioMass compatible with asmi's life support mod would be more difficult, but only because he calls a resource CO2 that BioMass and other mods call "CarbonDioxide." If he called it CarbonDioxide, BioMass would be compatible by changing three #s. (one rate and two densities). I would love to see this, and have approached several mod makers suggesting exactly this. There was an interesting thread that seemed to, initially, want this. I don't agree with all of what the thread OP ended up proposing, but the thread made me better realize that modders fall into two basic categories: "realists" that want to use only real world densities and "kerbalists" that take Squad's resource list as canon and try to make everything fit. Kethane, for example would be an example of a "kerbalists" mod. If you accept that Squad resources are around 4.5x denser than any real world counterpart and apply the math to the Kethane resource, Kethane has a density nearly identical to liquid methane. "Realists" and "kerbalists" will never agree for obvious reasons. In a broader sense the "realists" have a much easier time because they already agree that all densities should be real-world values. "Kerbalist" modders have much more wiggle room. I'd absolutely love to see some nice guidelines among "kerbalist" modders, especially the biology-related mods. But, for example, I am absolutely convinced that Squads' resources are (real-world density*4.5), but how does one convince others if showing them a consistent pattern doesn't work <shrug>.

Your points are well received. I would only point out that every life support mod I have looked at, and every life support author I have talked to (yongedevil, TaranisElsu, asmi and to a lesser extent Fractal_UK) use different densities for things common between them. My fear is that, no matter what Roboto and I do, BioMass will always be incompatible with with other biology related mods. This is especially true since I am trying to stay true to the biology, so input masses should equal output masses. Here is where it gets complicated and a bit tl;dr. The KSP community has worked out that Squad's parts use liters as what the "unit" is. Density is in tonnes/liter. This can be confirmed by looking at the solid rocket booster. The part is defined as having a mass of 0.5 (tonne). It hold 433 (liters) of solid fuel, and the density of solidFuel is 0.0075. 433Liters*0.0075tonnes/Liter=3.2475tonnes for solid fuel+0.5 tonnes for the part=3.7475 tonnes. Generators usually consume and produce resources in units (so in Squad parts, liters). So if you are designing something that is mass balanced, you need to set up the generator in such a way that you adjust the numbers in the generator so it uses the correct amount of mass...which is totally determined by how the resource's density is defined. So if different mods define oxygen's density differently, any mod that does mass-related reactions will end up having different (probably unbalanced) outputs. To illustrate, if one looks at oxygen as defined in ioncross, TACLS and amsi's lifesupport mod, is is defined as having a density of 0.0004 0.00002083(ioncross), 0.0004290144(TACLS), 0.00000143(amsi). If a converter says to consume 6 units of oxygen, that would translate as 2.4 0.12498, 2.574 and 0.00858 kg of oxygen being consumed, respectively. And this doesn't even address that I think that _none_ of those densities are Squad-appropriate densities. Me thinks amsi's is closest. There's no good way to solve this since some mod makers insist on realism and use real-world density values, some try and make densities match what Squad has defined for resources, others opt for easier in-game displays, and other use a number that seems good enough. It's a huge mess. EDIT: fixed the ioncross data to use the value from the latest dev build.

Please understand that for testing purposes only, things are in kg. This is because when doing mass balanced equations, one usually does them in terms of mass, not volume. I do not foresee a time when the actual resource called "biomass" will be in anything other than kg, but once testing progresses the units for gasses and liquids will be changed to liters since people tend to discuss gasses and liquids in terms of liters. Even when moved to liters, however, BioMass and the stock TAC-LS will differ in resource densities since TAC-LS currently uses a 1unit/kerbal/86400 second system and BioMass does not. If I recall, TAC-LS had to adjust resource densities in such a way as to achieve the 1 unit/86400sec system, and the densities listed there are not based on anything other than convenience for the user. The Biomass mod was going to start using TAC's Generic Converter but it's no longer available. So there's that.... I am happy to discuss the science and the design decisions being made, in addition to the planned roadmap, if you like. If you have constructive feedback regarding the new test version up on github, it would be very welcome. Alternately, if it bothers people to see design and testing steps, I could just wait until it reaches a point I consider done and then post it. I assumed people would like to follow along and maybe help in testing.

Is your craft in orbit? When still on the surface, there is no oxygen consumption.

The units in biomass are kg. So, in the game, in the resource window, if it says CarbonDioxide 2.8, that means there are 2.8kg of CO2 present The densities for many of the resources are the same because of the way KSP deals with resources. Parts have an amount of a resource, and it uses the density defined in the resource cfg to calculate the mass. Therefore, if you have 33 units of a resource that has a denisty define as 0.001, that will means the numbers you see in game are in kg. This is annoying, in that it'd having density values that are not anywhere realistic can be confusing. I made a conscious choice to go with in-game UI sanity vs configuration file (invisible to the player) sanity. This might change for the gasses and liquid after testing and balancing progresses, and would shift to liters. Biomass, food and other solids would stay as kg As for time units, difficulty levels assume kerbal days (kDays), but all calculations have been done in terms of kg/sec.

You can make kethane(methane) in the MicroBiome part by allowing the biomass and biocake to breakdown. Or you can make liquid fuel (which can also be broken down in the MicroBiome) Please note that (as of 2014-01-17) the MicroBiome and BioReactor parts have not been fully play balanced with the new difficulty level settings, so their production rates might be too slow/fast.

Ok. Github version is fixed. I also updated the test version (https://github.com/VigilanteInc/BioMass/archive/master.zip) so it has the fix. Edit-Moved test versions to github given positive feedback

Could you specify whether you are using the github or spaceport version?

I don't know what LLL is, but can point you to the BioMass Mod.

Right now the version of BioMass I am working on (difficulty levels) uses real-world respiration rates as it's starting point. By that I mean Kerbals are assumed to require about 0.42kg of O2 per 86400 second. The extension of this assumption is that the same mass of plant matter respires in the same way. TACLS makes the same assumption. I have not looked at asmis' work at all, but if he is basing respiration on real-world data, it might Just Workâ„¢. Density of the materials shouldn't impact their consumption rates if I understand how various generators work. What it will influence is the mass of parts. For testing, I have decided that user-friendliness in the in-game UI is important, so when the UI says there are 21 Biomass, that means there are 21kg of Biomass. This can only be done by giving the biomass a value of 0.001, which is definitely _not_ the density biomass would actually have. Edit: I chatted with asmi. It seems like we are starting from the same basic starting assumptions, though he expresses thing in volumes and BioMass+ currently expresses things in masses. It should be possible to make BioMass work with asmi's stuff, though.

Since people are still posting here: Testers Wanted! Required: **Kethane Mod (for the generator module): **Module Manager I believe I have sorted out the most significant problems with the version that allows for difficulty levels. For those interested in helping by testing, please download the latest (2.4a). I'm especially interested in people familiar with Module Manager because I have a sneaking suspicion my Module Manager files might have errors. I will be updating things as I get feedback. Once testing gets a bit further I'll move it to github. I just thought people would like "snapshots" to see how things are working. Next up is to look at the generation of fuels and gasses. To help testers, there's a file giving some basic expectations on how the difficulty levels should work here. My focus has been on how the greenhouse behaves, but compressors also have difficulty levels. Please do give it a try and see how it is for playability.

Let's try this again: Testers Wanted! Required: **Kethane Mod (for the generator module): **Module Manager I believe I have sorted out the most significant problems with the version that allows for difficulty levels. For those interested in helping by testing, please download the latest (2.4a). I'm especially interested in people familiar with Module Manager because I have a sneaking suspicion my Module Manager files might have errors. I will be updating things as I get feedback. Once testing gets a bit further I'll move it to github. I just thought people would like "snapshots" to see how things are working. Next up is to look at the generation of fuels and gasses. To help testers, there's a file giving some basic expectations on how the difficulty levels should work here. My focus has been on how the greenhouse behaves, but compressors also have difficulty levels. Please do give it a try and see how it is for playability. UPDATE: 2014.01.16--new test version up. Fixes AgStudy attachment problem

Hopefully the next update will allow you to "shut them off" in that you can just not plant anything until you get to your destination. Or you can turn off the lights and just let the biomass die and then replant again later. A quick update: everything is in place for the "difficulty level" update. Things work on paper, but it turns out KSP is not very good at doing simulations. Go figure. Lessons I have learned: 1.) The units you enter into a part's Resource node are the numbers that show up in the in-game resource UI and have no inherent relationship to volume or mass 2.) The units you enter into most generator modules reference the number of the Resource node. Again, not directly linked to volume or mass. 3.) The density value in a resource definition is used to calculate the mass of the part when filled with that resource. So, if a solid rocket booster has 433 of SolidFuel, and the SolidFuel density is 0.0075, then resulting mass is 3.2475 metric tonnes. 4.) Biological reactions are usually much smaller than metric tonnes, but KSP, in my testing, ignores values with more than 5 decimal points in generator modules. To get around this, one needs to multiply the resource numbers in the module by some value, and have that resource appear in both the input and output to get the actual desired changes. The take home is that, because I completely misunderstood what the Resource node was, the most recent test release was completely FUBARed. I updated http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/CFG_File_Documentation to reflect my realizations (which probably everyone else knew. Herp). I was testing "Easy" mode last night and will test "normal" today, if I have time.

Is there a way via a mod, or is there a mod, that allows the player to see more than 2 decimal points in the resource level window in-game? I'm running into a situation where, when simulating biologic growth, the user just sees zeros even though things are happening. It's just happening at a finer resolution than the resource window is showing.

Fwiw, the BioMass mod implemented glycerol at one point as an intermediate material in generating biofuels. It was removed to implement a simpler chemical rxn, and because glycerol wasn't used for anything (other than a secondary fermentation input). Anyway, if glycerol were used by something, I'd be willing to put glycerol production back in. Oh, and the density of glycerol in game should probably be around 0.00567

TESTERS WANTED Holy deep problems. Hey kids: never trust automated scripts to do everything correctly for you. At the very least check first.

We're in the process of rolling out a new github release (hopefully today, 2014-01-06). This thread is being superseded by http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/53009-0-21-BioMass-Renewable-Bio-Fuel-Modules?p=854819&viewfull=1#post854819, so I guess watch for things there?

I'm excited to play with this, but am also embarrassed to admit I haven;t had the time to. However that won't stop me from asking a question and suggesting a alteration in how resources are defined Does this take into account where in the atmosphere of a planet a part is trying to harvest things and adjusts the efficiency accordingly? For example, if you at sea level on Kerbin, you'll get oxygen faster that you would if you were 20,000m up, even if we assume the % was still 20.946 And now the annoying suggestion. Right now one needs to define a ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION for each gas in an atmosphere. It would be nicer if we could define things per celestial body, with biome modifiers. With a biome modifier, you could supply a multiplier that would alter the amount of a given material. Like...water vapour in the desert. Something like: ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION { celestialBodyName = Kerbin RESOURCES { Nitrogen = 0.78084 Oxygen = 0.20946 Argon = 0.0093 CarbonDioxide = 0.00035 Neon = 0.00001818 Helium = 0.00000524 Methane = 0.00000175 Krypton = 0.00000114 Hydrogen = 0.00000055 Water = 0.02 } BIOME { name=Desert Water = 0.1 } }

Me thinks, too. In fact, I have done it and am testing it. It's what I've been working on for the past ~ week. For those interested in seeing the spreadsheet I am using to do the calculations and adjustments for easy/normal/hard: https://www.dropbox.com/s/rvsd7knx29aepjz/BioMass%20Calculation%20Helper.xls Please keep in mind that that sheet is a work in progress. My hope is to have a new github version up late tomorrow (mountain time, USA). The github version will ship set to "normal". If players want "easy" or "hard" they would need to unzip a module manager file provided. Spoilers: Easy: 1 Greenhouse holds 30kg of biomass. Starting with 0.1kg of seeds, it takes 6 kerbal days(kday) to fill the greenhouse if given light, CO2 and water constantly. Once full, the greenhouse produces 4 seeds/kday. It will supply enough O2 to keep 3 kerbals alive indefinitely (using TAC-LS and assuming it is set so O2 consumption is ~0.42kg/86400sec/kerbal. This applies to all settings). The biomass does not respire. One water, CO2 and O2 tank supply more than enough material to allow the biomass to fill the greenhouse. Normal: 1 Greenhouse holds 25kg of biomass. Starting with 0.1kg of seeds, it takes 12 kdays to fill the greenhouse if given light, CO2 and water constantly. The biomass respires. Once full, the greenhouse produces 3 seeds/kday. It will supply enough O2 to keep 2 kerbals alive indefinitely. One water, CO2 and O2 tank supply just enough material to allow the biomass to fill the greenhouse. Hard: 1 Greenhouse holds 20kg of biomass. Starting with 0.1kg of seeds, it takes 24 kdays to fill the greenhouse if given light, CO2 and water constantly. The biomass respires. Once full, the greenhouse produces 2 seeds/kday. It will supply enough O2 to keep 1.6 kerbals alive indefinitely. One water, CO2 and O2 tank do not supply enough material to allow the biomass to fill the greenhouse. You will need more than 1 tank of each. Once I get new materials up, I was hoping people could test out specifics. I can supply expected results (like the above numbers) and would love it if people would confirm things work as expected for the different levels. But that's for when I finish up the last stuff and get an OK from Roboto. Once that gets posted, I'll start checking the rxns and rate of the bioreactor and microbiome.

As a kid, I loved a certain image in "Oscar's Book". The specific image is: Does that look like a Kerbal to anyone else?

A few thoughts as a coder that has not done any coding for KSP. Some general, some specific: 1.) Squad's generator module is truly and deeply broken when it comes to using more than one input resource. That alone pretty much guarantees that modders needs to roll their own generator code or use ones made by others. 2.) There are lots of mods out there with great, useful features. For example, I use Majiir's KethaneConverter a lot right now. However, these useful bits are often bundled in with code that might not be wanted. It would be supremely useful if things were more modular, even if it meant including multiple dlls with mods. 3.) To my knowledge, there is no generator module that takes into account the amount of a resource and performs an adjustment on the base output based on that. In my specific case, there is no way to scale oxygen output with amount of photosynthetic biomass. Ideally, the more biomass present, the greater the amount of O2 produced. Put another way: current generators I know of just take a fixed amount of a resource A per unit time and turn it into resource B. I would love something that takes the amount of resource A, has a baseline conversion rate, and then uses the total amount of A to scale the amount of B accordingly. If I am wrong here, please oh please point me in the correct directions. See also point 2. 4.) This is a stretch, but it would nice if we could code right in a cfg using something lightweight (lua? I dunno what else would be considered light weight. Python seems heavy). Then people could roll their own code without needing C# and making a dll. That's all I have. I mean, I have very specific things I'd love to see--and may end up doing some coding, though I do enough of that and would rather not--but the above points hit my basic thoughts.