Jump to content

Weird problem with overheat of structural components


Recommended Posts

My launcher has six SRBs with my standard design.

Means octagonal struts to keep the sepratrons on top clear and then cones at the top.

rWNadXY.png

This worked beautifully until 1.0.4.

But now those octagonal struts according to the flight log "explode due to overheating" during ascent one after another, causing the top cones to fly off

and damaging my rocket. The sepratrons are not firing while this happens.

Before I added launch stability enhancers, those octagonal struts even began to explode out of nothing while still idling my rocket on the launch pad.

And one time a 1x6 unshielded, still packed solar cell within the fairing also exploded "due to overheat" while standing on the launch pad.

What the fork?

What exactly am I experiencing here and how to avoid it?

I'm using FAR, if that's important.

Edited by Cairol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Throw out the cones as they aren't doing anything unless actually attached to the fuel tanks. Occlusion doesn't work.

What you want is the cones attached to the tanks and the sepratrons stuck on the sides somewhere.

Or even better...lower the tanks so that they are really low down on what they are separating from and then you won't need sepratrons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Throw out the cones as they aren't doing anything unless actually attached to the fuel tanks. Occlusion doesn't work.

What you want is the cones attached to the tanks and the sepratrons stuck on the sides somewhere.

Or even better...lower the tanks so that they are really low down on what they are separating from and then you won't need sepratrons.

(re:occlusion) Sorry OP gonna sidetrack a bit: What is the difference between attaching a connector to the top of a rocket and attaching the nose cone directly? Does the benefit of the cone apply only to the part to which it is attached?

Back on topic. FWIW, I too have this problem from time to time. Seems to attack random parts as I cannot reproduce the effect consistently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that you need to ditch the octogons, stick the sepratrons on in the inside and rotate them every so slightly so they carry the boosters away safely when lit. As for the overheating thing, it perhaps may be something with FAR? I saw this and it sounds a simliar to the issue you are having http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/20451-1-0-4-Ferram-Aerospace-Research-v0-15-3-1-Garabedian-6-22-15/page1050.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to have the sepratrons clipped inside the cones. It disturbs me somehow.

The reason why I use the octagons is, that I want the sepratrons to be clear while I only need 1 sepratron per SRB.

If I stick them to the sides, I need 2 per SRB.

This comes from my bad expierience with rapidly overheating tanks because my sepratrons often were firing directly into the central tank.

So I reduced them from 2 to 1 per SRB to not blow my main tank up when staging.

In this current rocket I would not need this. It's just my "standard". Or it was until 1.0.4...

I knew that cones did not really have a positive effect on drag. But with FAR I guess they do.

And even if I redesign this, I still don't understand why this current design will "overheat" those octagons.

But the link Glaran provided describes exactly my problem. So a bug in FAR might be the cause.

I'll try it without FAR then.

Edited by Cairol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea some people are disturbed by clipping :confused:, I totally get it. But I actually meant what you described where you attach them to the boosters, but you needed two. Hope you sort out the overheating too! Saw that literally 2 minutes before I saw your post so it was perfect timing.

Edited by Glaran K'erman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to have the sepratrons clipped inside the cones. It disturbs me somehow.

The reason why I use the octagons is, that I want the sepratrons to be clear while I only need 1 sepratron per SRB.

If I stick them to the sides, I need 2 per SRB.

This comes from my bad expierience with rapidly overheating tanks because my sepratrons often were firing directly into the central tank.

So I reduced them from 2 to 1 per SRB to not blow my main tank up when staging.

In this current rocket I would not need this. It's just my "standard". Or it was until 1.0.4...

I knew that cones did not really have a positive effect on drag. But with FAR I guess they do.

And even if I redesign this, I still don't understand why this current design will "overheat" those octagons.

But the link Glaran provided describes exactly my problem. So a bug in FAR might be the cause.

I'll try it without FAR then.

I've noticed this overheating bug and i do not use FAR. KER is installed however. Could it be an any-mod-installed type bug?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to have the sepratrons clipped inside the cones. It disturbs me somehow.

NASA clipped septatrons into nosecones of the Space Shuttle's SRB's, and they felt Ok with it. Nosecones are empty structures in KSP anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mine are usually attached at the first point that they're non-vertical, pointing mostly up ... I get a lot of down thrust and some out, and the SRBs rotate their tops AWAY from the rocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've uninstalled FAR for now.

After a structural part of my space station spontaneously exploded "due to overheating", I'll wait until this is fixed.

Thanks for your valuable comments on this! Especially for better methods of attaching those sepratrons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
I've uninstalled FAR for now.

After a structural part of my space station spontaneously exploded "due to overheating", I'll wait until this is fixed.

Thanks for your valuable comments on this! Especially for better methods of attaching those sepratrons.

Interesting. Just found this thread googling for the problem. I'm experiencing the same problem with a Eve Mission Rover attached to my heavy lifter.

An Octagonal Strut, which is on the very top of the ship and part of the rover for holding scientific instruments, kept randomly exploding whenever I tried launching the ship directly after the loading screen.

vNa9WrHl.png

Spent like 2 hours yesterday trying to figure out what the problem was. But gave up eventually. Now I read this thread and remembered I installed several mods yesterday and FAR was one of them. Removed it. Problem gone. LoL. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just posted a similar thread. I think it's the new heating effects in the stock game. My rockets suddenly can't even get into orbit without some heating. I solved it by putting a small radiator on sensitive parts. It is a bandaid but it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NASA clipped septatrons into nosecones of the Space Shuttle's SRB's, and they felt Ok with it. Nosecones are empty structures in KSP anyway.

That might be a good mod part--a 'sepracone' with a small rocket motor integrated into an aerodynamic nosecone. Or yeah, clip away :) I am generally an anti-clipper myself but I think this solution definitely passes the reasonableness test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That might be a good mod part--a 'sepracone' with a small rocket motor integrated into an aerodynamic nosecone. Or yeah, clip away :) I am generally an anti-clipper myself but I think this solution definitely passes the reasonableness test.

I remember back in 0.2x I had a mod which had such a part. Don't remember exactly. But was B9 or KW Rocketry if I remember correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(re:occlusion) Sorry OP gonna sidetrack a bit: What is the difference between attaching a connector to the top of a rocket and attaching the nose cone directly? Does the benefit of the cone apply only to the part to which it is attached?

Basically, yes.

Generally, KSP has no idea of parts sitting behind each other. At least not when it comes to drag, it works more often than not for re-entry heat.

The one exception where KSP understands parts being behind each other is when they are assembled as a stack. Which is a pretty common exception, I grant that. Still, KSP doesn't look any further than the nearest neighbour in the stack. In the picture above, the booster's drag is modified by the octagonal strut, but not by the nosecone.

All radially attached parts will always have their full drag. So the sepratrons as pictured will have just the same drag as if they were attached to the side of the booster. Clipping them to mostly sit below the surface won't help, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless of course you use FAR, in which case it's the actual shape of the resulting rocket that matters.

Stock aero takes quite a few shortcuts, as seen in the above explanation.

Link to comment
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...