[WIP][1.8.x] SSTULabs - Low Part Count Solutions (Orbiters, Landers, Lifters) - Dev Thread [11-18-18]

[_Augustus_]

I'm unable to resize the tanks.

[JoseEduardo]

1.2 sandbox? if so you need to go to the KSP advanced settings menu and select to apply all upgrades

[Shadowmage]

On Sunday, October 23, 2016 at 3:16 AM, falken said:

One thing I'd suggest with the ST-MST-ISS solar system would be to reduce the diameter of the 'barrel' section a little, simply so that it can fit into a Mk3 cargo bay. The thing is slightly too big for it, and it would make sense for an ISS inspired part to be able to be ferried up into orbit in a shuttle.

Even just a rescale would suffice I reckon, however no matter what I do to the .cfg it doesn't seem to reflect in game...

edit: Curious. in ModelData-ST-MST.cfg, I modified "diameter = 1.875" to "diameter = 1.25" an it actually increased the size of the main solar part with rotating barrel, and setting it to 2.5 or 3.75 actually reduced it. 

Okay, I've set that last setting back to 1.875 and went back into "ST-MST-ISS.cfg" and changed the following from this:

    name = SSTUModularStationCore
    topDiameter = 1.875
    coreDiameter = 1.875
    bottomDiameter = 1.875

to this:

    name = SSTUModularStationCore
    topDiameter = 1.65
    coreDiameter = 1.65
    bottomDiameter = 1.65

This allows the part to fit (with a tiny bit of wiggle room) into the Mk3 fuselage cargo bay.

E: Shadowmage, one thing I'm going to have a go at doing is making an MM patch that allows you to globally change tankagemass. What you have set up is obviously 100% A-OK for stock, but if you use SMURFF the parts become too heavy to their new lighter counterparts. I painstakingly edited all tankagemasses in my 1.1.3 save to fall in line with the SMURFF tankagemass. Once I'm done I'll probably upload it or something.

Sadly I cannot change the size as it has several design constraints in play.

1.) Needs to be a standard stack size.  I even fudged things here and made it 1.875m (would rather of it been 2.5m..)
2.) It needs to be able to fit around a 2.5m tank (and NF trusses) while in the stowed position.
3.) It needs to fit in the SC-E bay.

Which means, no, it will not fit in the stock cargo bays because they are so 'LoLKerbal' shaped, with thick walls and a flat floor ( who needs flat floors in zero-g?).  But, it will fit in the SC-E cargo bay, if a bit snugly.

Really, there are no simple changes that I can make to that model that would allow it to meet the above requirements -and- fit in the stock cargo bay.  And it is far too late now for me to be completely redoing it.

Tankage mass -- will look into it.  Should be a simple patch to setup.

[_Augustus_]

43 minutes ago, JoseEduardo said:

1.2 sandbox? if so you need to go to the KSP advanced settings menu and select to apply all upgrades

[facepalm]

Why isn't that default anymore?

[Shadowmage]

17 hours ago, falken said:

Alright chaps, I'm conceding defeat here. Here's the MM patch I tried to make to allow me to mess with SSTUVolumeContainer tankageMass quickly and easily:

 

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[SSTUVolumeContainer]]
{    
    @MODULE[SSTUVolumeContainer],*
    {
        @tankageMass = 0.037
        
    }
}

 

Cannot for the life of me get the damn thing to work though. 

You aren't going deep enough.  The tankageMass in SSTUVolumeContainer is the display value, it cannot be changed through config.  You need to go down into the sub-container in each module.

 

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[SSTUVolumeContainer]]
{    
  @MODULE[SSTUVolumeContainer],*
  {
	@CONTAINER,*
	{
		@tankageMass = 0.037
	}
  }
}

 

[tater]

11 minutes ago, _Augustus_ said:

[facepalm]

Why isn't that default anymore?

They added the new upgrade functionality, which is awesome, but as it was not used in stock, no one tested it, really, so no one noticed that Sandbox should have this box checked by default. I made a thread, but almost no one seemed to care.

[Shadowmage]

General development update / news:

Moving to a less-frequent release schedule.  Testing, packing up and uploading/posting releases is/was eating up far to much of my currently quite limited dev time (and causing un-needed stress and bugs, trying to rush things to get them done in time for a release).  So will be going from weekly to bi-weekly, or perhaps once per month.  Mostly it will be whenever I have a large enough batch of progress done and things are in a good state and I've had adequate time for pre-release internal testing.  The exception to this will be for bug-fixing releases to correct game-breaking problems -- will still push those out as soon as they are fixed/available.

Think I finished figuring out a problem with my DDS conversion utility with regards to normal maps.  Was causing some seams to show up where I had mirrored geometry... was quite weird.  Thought it was a problem with the custom shader until it went away when I used the .png image;  then tested vs. the DDS output from other conversion programs and found that they worked okay, so eventually tracked the problem down to my image conversion utility.  Apparently I was missing some filtering that would result in lack of smoothing across the mesh edges.  Sadly sorting all this out took the better portion of this weekends' dev time.  Not fond of spending my dev time making development tools -- but at least I get working tools in the end (which can/will save considerable time).  For now I have a fully functional, and intelligent, DDS conversion utility -- that will result in a fair bit of saved space compared to the other tools I was using -- this tool respects the alpha channel presence, and will only output DXT5 when an alpha channel is actually there, resulting in 50% smaller file-sizes for those images that lack alpha.

Beginning work on the inflatables modules texture setup, examining how it will all look when texture mapped, and how that will play in with the animations.  So far so good, everything does about what I would expect it to.  A few things that will need to be cleaned up or handled a bit special, but nothing too concerning considering the features that are in play for these models.  Should likely have some updated renders of the nearly-finished parts a bit later in the week.  Seems likely that I'll use the same texture for all of the inflatables -- so the large inflatables will mostly be re-using the mesh and textures from the smaller ones.

As soon as I have the basic inflatables finished (models/textures) I will start working on the torus/centrifuge parts.  Might be some pretty big changes coming to those as well -- we'll see how I feel about them when I get there.

When the torus parts are complete that should mark the completion of the initial StationCore offerings.  Always room for expansion in the future, but I will have met the original design goals as far as intended parts and functions.  The one missing bit would be a custom shipyard model... but that is going to wait a bit until I can get a chance to play with MKS and EPL again to see how they all play together now.

Have been working with JoseEduardo a bit on the sidelines to figure out the functions needed for a Modular-Service-Module type part -- most everything needed is available now through the StationCore module, and will probably making some MSM models in the not-too-distant future.  These will likely be the next bits to be worked on after the station stuff is finished (or perhaps take some time to fix/finish the wheels and get the SC-E back in, as well as get KerbalFoundries working again).

On the KerbalFoundries note -- looks like I may be picking up development of that mod in the near future.  Lo-fi seems to be about done with KSP/Unity, so I've offered to pick up development through a fork.  So... yeah... will almost certainly be needing to take time to get that mod back on its feet... which requires taking time to finish up the wheel stuff first.  Pretty sure I have workable solutions to the outstanding problems (aside from critical-damping-induced-harmonic-jitters), just need time to sit down and work on it all.

[falken]

2 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

Sadly I cannot change the size as it has several design constraints in play.

1.) Needs to be a standard stack size.  I even fudged things here and made it 1.875m (would rather of it been 2.5m..)
2.) It needs to be able to fit around a 2.5m tank (and NF trusses) while in the stowed position.
3.) It needs to fit in the SC-E bay.

Which means, no, it will not fit in the stock cargo bays because they are so 'LoLKerbal' shaped, with thick walls and a flat floor ( who needs flat floors in zero-g?).  But, it will fit in the SC-E cargo bay, if a bit snugly.

Really, there are no simple changes that I can make to that model that would allow it to meet the above requirements -and- fit in the stock cargo bay.  And it is far too late now for me to be completely redoing it.

Tankage mass -- will look into it.  Should be a simple patch to setup.

That's perfectly fine, I hadn't actually tried it with the SC-E in fairness. I will just simply resize the part to work with my Mk3 shuttle. 

2 hours ago, Shadowmage said:

You aren't going deep enough.  The tankageMass in SSTUVolumeContainer is the display value, it cannot be changed through config.  You need to go down into the sub-container in each module.

 

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[SSTUVolumeContainer]]
{    
  @MODULE[SSTUVolumeContainer],*
  {
	@CONTAINER,*
	{
		@tankageMass = 0.037
	}
  }
}

 

Thanks very much. I'll give this a shot. 

E: Sad to hear that Lo-fi is done with KSP, but understandable. Its in good hands with you though.

Edited October 24, 2016 by falken

[Shadowmage]

Mmmm... tasty normals...

The 'puffy' look is accomplished purely through the normal-map.  Figured out how to do non-linear hand-crafted normal maps for stuff; bit of an effort, but can get some nice looking effects when used appropriately.

Looks like I may need to add a couple more edge loops on these things on the curves, but other than that, looking pretty good so far   Couple more hours work on the geometry and textures for these and I might be able to start on the torus' parts later this week..

 

[RedParadize]

1 minute ago, Shadowmage said:

Mmmm... tasty normals...

The 'puffy' look is accomplished purely through the normal-map.  Figured out how to do non-linear hand-crafted normal maps for stuff; bit of an effort, but can get some nice looking effects when used appropriately.

Looks like I may need to add a couple more edge loops on these things on the curves, but other than that, looking pretty good so far   Couple more hours work on the geometry and textures for these and I might be able to start on the torus' parts later this week..

 

Windows depression is a tad too squarish and edgy, a bevel would do it (and complicate the blend shape quite allot). Aren't they too big? I always find windows too big... I suggest round window of the same size as the one on the DOS family and maybe a bit less deep. Some extra external details would be nice.

Just my grain of salt.

[Shadowmage]

1 hour ago, RedParadize said:

Windows depression is a tad too squarish and edgy, a bevel would do it (and complicate the blend shape quite allot). Aren't they too big? I always find windows too big... I suggest round window of the same size as the one on the DOS family and maybe a bit less deep. Some extra external details would be nice.

Just my grain of salt.

Yeah, the windows are perhaps a bit on the large size.  Though, these modules are supposed to have very large windows (for space-station stuff anyhow).

External detailing -- doesn't seem to be much in the way of external details on any of the images that I've found on the inflatables -- they are pretty much an inflatable and an adapter, which is what I'm creating.  Any additional detail can/should be added through parts in the editor.

 

[RedParadize]

These are actuality just mockup used to get more investor in. When I was working on Journey to space we got gigs of reference and very little was usable. The blueprint (if we can call it that) I have seen didn't feature windows in fact.

Edit: Just to be clear I am not saying you should remove them, many of Bigalow marketing stuff feature windows. At that point the looks is pretty much on you.

Edited October 24, 2016 by RedParadize

[Temeter]

Yeah, at least all the bigelow material has windows. I'd be somewhat suprised if they drop them.

Of course, all of this is space technology. Nobody ever had a usable, inflatable module in space, so who knows how they're gonna look in the end. Works two ways, tho, a realistic mod can have it's own interpretation of what's to come.

[RedParadize]

I would not be surprised if the drop the window. Take a look at Bigelow Expandable Activity Module recently installed on ISS. Does not look at all like the advertisement. Now the cylinder version would not look like B.E,A,M, but it clearly revealed how difficult it is to fold a thick fabric. From what I read it would be almost a meter thick  on the cylinder version so...

Edit: the actual real picture of Bigelow Expandable Activity Module is not displayed on Bigelow website, just the render... That say allot isn't it ?

 

Edited October 24, 2016 by RedParadize

[Shadowmage]

Updated render -- smaller windows, added a bit more texture work on the banding and adapter bits.  Included the solar and hatch in the render so that all of the geometry details are present.  I think it looks fairly 'complete'.  Perhaps a few more details in the texture, and figuring out the best way to do the banding bits (more texture work).  Window is ~34cm across (at KSP scale) -- so still fairly large, but look more proportionate to the images/examples/renders/prototypes.

 

[JoseEduardo]

@Shadowmage would a version without the cylindrical section at the bottom be possible?

EDIT: actually, would a separate version without both cylindrical ends be possible?

Edited October 24, 2016 by JoseEduardo

[Shadowmage]

1 minute ago, JoseEduardo said:

@Shadowmage would a version without the cylindrical section at the bottom be possible?

Technically, yes.  But I likely won't be doing it.  The bottom section exists for the RCS.  No bottom cap = no bottom RCS.

Basically it would add a ton of parts in the editor / more configs to manage for little purpose.

[JoseEduardo]

yeah, when I asked without these I also meant without the RCS and the hatch

this is what I had in mind to counter the lack of RCS:


using a SM to deliver the module

[Shadowmage]

52 minutes ago, JoseEduardo said:

yeah, when I asked without these I also meant without the RCS and the hatch

this is what I had in mind to counter the lack of RCS:


using a SM to deliver the module

I don't have anything against the concept, or the intended uses.

My main reason for not wanting do do them is the extra configs and in-editor parts that would be needed.  Separating just the inflatable mesh would be easy.  The new shaders would allow for a clean AO texture to be used, so that isn't a problem either.  Most of my concern is that I don't want to double the number of configs I need to maintain for them (initial setup, ongoing balance), nor deal with the increased editor-part-list bloat it would cause (it has already become bad enough with the necessity of different parts for the different sizes and functions of station modules; ideally all of the COS would have been one part, and all of the DOS one additional part).

I suppose if there is enough interest in them (read: at least a couple more people who would want/use them) I can see about doing up the configs/models/etc for them.  Might also see if I can get the core-model switching stuff working (fun trivia -- the ModularStationCore module still supports switching of the 'core' model, but it is unused because the stock ModuleRCS has fits when its transforms are not present, and there was previously (probably still is..) no way to disable the RCS module).

Edited October 24, 2016 by Shadowmage

[tater]

Seems like an easier "stock-a-like" version (less replica, more generic) would be to make an inflatable that is the core diameter of the soyuz SM, and about the right inflated dimensions as the image shown. The only missing bit would be the docking antennas. 

You can get something very close clipping Soyuz parts and the HAB-D right now.

Edited October 25, 2016 by tater

[Shadowmage]

Updated render, showing the 1.25, 2.5, and 3.75m modules, a potential alternate texture, and the potential cap-less modules.  Yes the 3.75m modules are just rescales of the inflatable portion with new caps on them (otherwise would need a second set of textures, not really worth the time investment or memory use) -- rather than new geometry I'll be offering several texture variants on these parts to help differentiate them a bit (multiple textures will be available for all, some may come with different defaults).  Haven't quite settled on what the alternate texture sets will be... but I'll come up with at least 2-3 options for the initial selection.

I suppose the 'good' thing about the no-cap versions (if I do them) is that I would only need to export 2 models (short, long) and can simply use scaling to get the different sizes (2.5m, 3.75m, and whatever the small size ends up being).

Really don't think I'll be doing the 1.25m versions, they would have limited use, and only hold perhaps 2-3 kerbals when inflated.  1.875m might be a better candidate.  Either way they would just use rescaled meshes from the other sizes (though would have no hatch, solar, or RCS, due to no proper scaled end-cap geometry being available).  Will check out some 1.875m scaled ones in-game to see how usable they are / what they look like when used next to other parts.

Should probably have these inflatables wrapped up in a day or two, and will start moving onto the torus/centrifuge parts (which will be seeing quite a few changes / new geometry / whole new models for some of them).

 

[Jimbodiah]

Wow, those look amazing!!!

[JoseEduardo]

it's not because I asked for them, but the no-cap versions look really cool

btw, Mage, what if you made the endcap and the inflatable parts two separate mesh, and have the different versions managed through a config file, one "hiding" the endcaps and one "showing" them? sorta like the tanks

[tater]

Those are great.

[RedParadize]

Does the super small inflatable with only one end cap and node still exist? I realise it had very limited use but I liked it.