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

[RedParadize]

Thumbs up, looks great! and you have my vote for the counterweight, but it would be good if the part was not longer because of it.
 

Edited November 9, 2016 by RedParadize

[JoseEduardo]

I also vote for counterweight

[RedParadize]

I know I should not say this. I really should not. Most likely too much work, but it would fantastic to have shield retracting over the windows.

I know, I should not have said this...

[Krux]

So, are you planning on doing any non-inflatable centrifugue? Like the one a few pages ago with the individual nodes or the asymetrical one? Maybe having windows on these would make more sense (glass doesn't like to bend and change shape, I guess)

Thanks for all your amazing work!

[tater]

Counterweights, or a counter-rotating mass?

Regarding the windows, I certainly think the little one (maybe the 2 small ones) don't need any at all. Any that are done should be cognizant of where the floors would roughly be within an IVA, too. When paused, it looks like those windows are "looking downwards" slightly, for example. Hard to tell where the floor would be, though, obviously. 

 

[Shadowmage]

17 hours ago, RedParadize said:

I know I should not say this. I really should not. Most likely too much work, but it would fantastic to have shield retracting over the windows.

I know, I should not have said this...

Might be doable on the rigid centrifuge, but no way I would be able to animate them for the inflatables -- they would first require window meshes that did not distort during the deploy animation (which would require much more time, and experience at mesh-based animations).

 

16 hours ago, Krux said:

So, are you planning on doing any non-inflatable centrifugue? Like the one a few pages ago with the individual nodes or the asymetrical one? Maybe having windows on these would make more sense (glass doesn't like to bend and change shape, I guess)

Thanks for all your amazing work!

Yes, but not immediately.  Will be finishing up the inflatables first, taking a break to work on wheels, and then returning to finish up a few more ST parts + work on the balance and cleanup.

 

14 hours ago, tater said:

Counterweights, or a counter-rotating mass?

Regarding the windows, I certainly think the little one (maybe the 2 small ones) don't need any at all. Any that are done should be cognizant of where the floors would roughly be within an IVA, too. When paused, it looks like those windows are "looking downwards" slightly, for example. Hard to tell where the floor would be, though, obviously. 

 

Technically these are counter-rotating mass (as they are not in place for balance, but for mass), but counterweights is easier to type, and a decently exchangeable term for normal conversation.

 

Windows -- will be doing them all consistent with each other.  If the small ones have windows, so will the large.  And honestly it would be -harder- to add windows to the large ones as the meshes are distorted more during animation.  Positions -- this is a 2.5m diameter module, kerbals are <1m tall; thus the windows need to be more than halfway down the side, assuming a two-level interior, resulting in the slightly downward/outward facing windows as shown.  There could potentially be a second row of windows more along the interior of the torus  (at least I wasn't trying to put them on the exterior... which would be the floor...).

However I'm leaning towards no windows for these parts.  One -- the deploy animation makes them unrealistic -- they would need to be made of some sort of flexible material, not even paying attention to the skin-thickness that the current RL inflatables have.  Two -- the deploy animation mangles their geometry quite terribly, while they do look decent while deployed, they are far less desirable in the stowed animation state.

 

Updated render with counterweights shown (in yellow); managed to fit them onto the central pillar -- might move them up/down a bit, in place of the taper on the central pillar, probably make them taller as well as they don't have much diameter (would love to put them on some sort of extension, as the same mass further from COM = higher MOI/better at their job).  This is still just the rough-draft geometry, figuring everything out; lots of cleanup to do even on what is shown here:

 

Fairly certain I'll be doing the larger models with the same type of bracing layout, and same techniques in general (only larger).  Mostly the differences will be the number of segments (texturing), and the crew tube / truss arrangements (larger parts will have multiple tubes and/or trusses).  Initial tests for bracing on the larger one pointed to there being difficulties with making the bracing much more complex than what is used here, but I'm still playing around with a few things.

Hoping to have the rest of the larger parts rigged up and their models/animations figured out over the next few days, with possibly some initial texturing coming over the weekend.  No way that I'll have the parts finished up this weekend, but perhaps next

[tater]

9 minutes ago, Shadowmage said:

Windows -- will be doing them all consistent with each other.  If the small ones have windows, so will the large.  And honestly it would be -harder- to add windows to the large ones as the meshes are distorted more during animation.  Positions -- this is a 2.5m diameter module, kerbals are <1m tall; thus the windows need to be more than halfway down the side, assuming a two-level interior, resulting in the slightly downward/outward facing windows as shown.  There could potentially be a second row of windows more along the interior of the torus  (at least I wasn't trying to put them on the exterior... which would be the floor...).

However I'm leaning towards no windows for these parts.  One -- the deploy animation makes them unrealistic -- they would need to be made of some sort of flexible material, not even paying attention to the skin-thickness that the current RL inflatables have.  Two -- the deploy animation mangles their geometry quite terribly, while they do look decent while deployed, they are far less desirable in the stowed animation state.

I think I was thinking that the large(est) was going to be rigid, anyway, so yeah, the windows are not really important (they could have a camera looking the right way, and use large displays, instead, so people don't puke).

 

[Shadowmage]

 

1 hour ago, tater said:

I think I was thinking that the large(est) was going to be rigid, anyway, so yeah, the windows are not really important (they could have a camera looking the right way, and use large displays, instead, so people don't puke).

 

Yea, haven't quite figured out how I would manage a 'rigid torus' setup, without just 'poofing' the mesh into existence during the animation.  I'm not entirely opposed to that, but would prefer to keep things smooth looking if possible, and would also like these parts to be consistent across the series.  Will do some tests to see how it looks...

 

 

Updated with expanding tethered counterweight setup (for greater MOI, less mass needed for same effect).  Not entirely sure I like the look, but its not terrible either.  Makes the model look a bit 'busier' than I would like.  May play around with it a bit more to see if there are any changes I can make to solidify its look a bit.

 

Adapting same type of setup to the next largest torus (20m x 3.125m, 6->12 bracing); more bracing lines, same techniques (crew tube will be updated/changed, merely using what I already had in place for this render):

3rd (35m x 3.75m, 8->16 bracing):

 

4th (50m x 5m, 12->24 bracing):

 

May cut down the bracing on the 35m (use same layout as 20m), and use the bracing shown on 35m for the 50m one.  Lots to do, much of it it still experimentation and trying out various geometry setups..

 

Still very hesitant on the windows.  I like the look while deployed, but I really am not fond of the distortion during the animation (or the illogical nature of distorting a rigid window...). 

In -theory- I might be able to manipulate the mesh's stowed state to reduce the distortion... but it would take a ton of time (for each window... can't use mesh-duplication with blend-shape based animation; mesh has to be finalized, and each vertex needs to be manipulated individually, even when doing the same thing 12x rotated around...).  Going to do a bit of an experiment to see if I can get it to work out with a single window, and from there decide if it is worth the time to do it for the whole mesh.

 

Ahh.. tons of fun...

[RedParadize]

I am not so sure about the counterweight. Fix it look good, but when it spin its weird, don't you think? Too much small block maybe?

Edited November 10, 2016 by RedParadize

[JoseEduardo]

the counterweight reminds me of a Ferris Wheel, I think it would look better as a single non-extendable ring, like the yellow one you had

[tater]

Can the windows just appear after it deploys? (I have no idea what I'm talking about, so bear with me) I could imagine them with covers that only get removed after the station is occupied. 

How about this for a goofy idea...

When lights turn on, they sort of fade on... can the fade happen in such a way that it looks like a window shade opening? (like the kind on an airliner). So no windows unless you turn on the cabin lights.

Edited November 10, 2016 by tater

[Shadowmage]

55 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

I am not so sure about the counterweight. Fix it look good, but when it spin its weird, don't you think? Too much small block maybe?

 

49 minutes ago, JoseEduardo said:

the counterweight reminds me of a Ferris Wheel, I think it would look better as a single non-extendable ring, like the yellow one you had

Yeah, will probably go with the simple counterweight setup.  In the end the increased MOI doesn't really matter, as you can just spin the smaller one faster to generate the same effect.

 

 

49 minutes ago, tater said:

Can the windows just appear after it deploys? (I have no idea what I'm talking about, so bear with me) I could imagine them with covers that only get removed after the station is occupied. 

How about this for a goofy idea...

When lights turn on, they sort of fade on... can the fade happen in such a way that it looks like a window shade opening? (like the kind on an airliner). So no windows unless you turn on the cabin lights.

Opening after deployed -- Probably more doable than the other concepts.  Something like:

I think I would be okay with that.  Could be seen as the windows being installed after it was inflated.  Would have to figure out how best to hide the covering meshes -- currently I'm just moving them downwards inside of the torus, which doesn't look too bad, but still room for improvement.

 

Fade-to-open -- not doable with the animation tools that I'm familiar with -- it would require somehow animating the UV's of the mesh (and an interesting texture setup), which I have no idea if it is even possible.

 

Also tried keeping undistorted windows; giant pain to animate, and looks pretty terrible when in the stowed state (will -not- be doing it this way, mostly due to the time and effort needed, but also cause it just looks bad...):

[Jimbodiah]

Show off!

[tater]

Love the mod.

Enjoy the thread.

Sad that it makes me feel inadequate  .

[RedParadize]

There is many way to do opening window if you really want to. Without any rigging or else, it could be done with  a flat ring that follow the scaling of the torus, and once inflated it scale down a bit to reveal the window.

While opening window are nice, I would survive if you decide to not do them.

[tater]

Yeah, I should add that on the small torus, it might not be desirable for "kerbal factors" reasons mentioned above (vomit inducing, lol). The large ones... I sorta like the idea of a window, and we don't have a good cupola part (because stock).

 

Just because:

 

[Jimbodiah]

Tater, check Cx for a ISS cupola replica and USI LifeSupport for a nice glass dome if you want an alternative.

[tater]

Yeah, I have cx's mod, very nice... but part of me wants a realistic, yet "near future " thing. I'll look at the USI part, didn't occur to me since those parts tend to be clunky sometimes (I don't like any of the USILS parts, for example).

[JoseEduardo]

1 hour ago, Jimbodiah said:

Tater, check Cx for a ISS cupola replica and USI LifeSupport for a nice glass dome if you want an alternative.

where? O.o

[Jimbodiah]

Euhm, it might also be HabTech now that you mention it, also has ISS parts in it.

Speaking of ISS parts... would it be possible at some point to make a docking port adapter like the APAS to allow going from the large DOS/COS port to the smaller 0 type and even just a node to attach other mods' ports?

[Duski]

Hey I can't inflate any of the inflatable habs without having rocket parts. I don't have extraplanetary launchpads for the rocketparts resource so any fix or something? By the way, I think it was that I couldn't see the HAB-A, B, C, D habs.

[Cheesecake]

3 hours ago, Duski said:

Hey I can't inflate any of the inflatable habs without having rocket parts. I don't have extraplanetary launchpads for the rocketparts resource so any fix or something? By the way, I think it was that I couldn't see the HAB-A, B, C, D habs.

you don`t need extraplanetary launchpads. You can carry Rocketparts with the SSTU-Tanks.

[Duski]

16 minutes ago, Cheesecake said:

you don`t need extraplanetary launchpads. You can carry Rocketparts with the SSTU-Tanks.

Sweet, I did do looking around in the configure containers section though but I couldn't find rocket parts. I'll look around more.

[Jimbodiah]

It's at the bottom of the list, there are no preset buttons for it at the top so you will have to enter the ratio manually. I can't get them to inflate in- our outside the VAB after the last update, so not sure they still work.

[Cheesecake]

In VAB it works for me with the last Update.