Jump to content

[Plugin/Parts] Kerbal Foundries - Continuation [Latest: 1.9g]

Gaalidas

By Gaalidas
in KSP1 Mod Development

 Share

Recommended Posts

linuxgurugamer

linuxgurugamer

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, V8jester said:

On the other hand. The more Dev's break up a given mod. The more there is to keep track of. As well as, more troubleshooting for new players that will absolutely ask.

"Where are those hover thingy's"

Honestly, control of what is or is not included in a mod should probably be left to the end user.

If you don't want them, just remove them from the folder. A good Dev will have an organized and easy to understand file structure.

And me personally, I think CKAN has spoiled everyone into thinking mods come from a button and not a person. But that's just my 2 cents worth. Ok maybe a buck 25 ;)

 

I'm not asking for a new package, it's merely a matter of how it is packaged and setting up the Netkan files properly

but I understand, I'm working on the same issue with KW Rocketry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
*Aqua*

*Aqua*

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, V8jester said:

On the other hand. The more Dev's break up a given mod. The more there is to keep track of. As well as, more troubleshooting for new players that will absolutely ask.

Actually I was thinking of making DustFX an seperate plugin, maybe combining it with Destruction Effects, CollisionFX and the new Kerbal Krash System in one mod. They all complement each other nicely so it might be a good idea.

 

3 hours ago, lo-fi said:

Had a message from whoever Richard Kerman is apologising for uploading without permission. I don't think any harm meant, and aware that will be deleted when you guys get around to it. The SpaceDock guys seem to have jumped on it quite quickly.

I suspected it's like that. No harm was done.

Edited by *Aqua*
Link to comment
Share on other sites
drtedastro

drtedastro

Posted
Posted

I would like to see the DustFx as a separate plugin.

It would be nice to be able to not use it for memory starved versions and then to use it along with others like the cool, and smoke etc...

 

just my opinion.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lo-fi

lo-fi

Posted
Posted

It's a sorry state of affairs when bit picking over a few K...

Seems to me that people here have grown to demand far more of mod authors than is reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stone Blue

Stone Blue

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, lo-fi said:

It's a sorry state of affairs when bit picking over a few K...

Seems to me that people here have grown to demand far more of mod authors than is reasonable.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME???!!!

Mod authors exist SOLELY TO SERVE THE MASSES... How DARE you all not be on instant call 24/7, or not have working versions 2 minutes after a new release of KSP drops, or not write mods to fit the wants NEEDS, of each and EVERY specific user... Or to let your download links get outdated.... Or to not instantly know why your mod is not working for an end user, just because they say it doesnt work, with not even a single line of logs offered...Much less on their 64bit workaround, unfixed, CKAN-modded to heck install....

Well, with 1.1 going 64bit, hopefully it wont require bit-counting on file/texture sizes nearly as much, and that aspect of the culture will change for the better...

Thanx to all you mod authors everywhere... Who thanklessly share your creations with us nits who cant code or model for ourselves... :)

Edited by Stone Blue
Link to comment
Share on other sites
damerell

damerell

Posted
Posted (edited)

I've been digging into the innards of KF and spotted two things.

One is that MoleTracks.mu seems to reference "RoadWhee2". I wonder if this explains why one Mole Track wheel always droops into the landscape.

More seriously, and feel free to tell me I'm wrong, KFModuleWheel seems to have power consumption per unit time be proportional to torque. Of course work is proportional to force times distance & hence for a given torque, power consumption should rise at higher speeds (with a fix to ensure some power consumption at zero speed and to limit or eliminate regenerative braking). This is perhaps why the power consumption for many KF parts seems to be absurdly low.
A fix to this would also open the door to parts having a maximum power input other than that implicit in the torqueCurve.

Edited by damerell
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kershu5

Kershu5

Posted
Posted

huh..  ..Somewhere along the way, I completely lost track of how the mod was doing, and only saw some confusion and complaints.  So uh.  ...Is it still going well?  Or are there major problems, or is there just a lot of brainstorming stuff happening?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
damerell

damerell

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Kershu5 said:

huh..  ..Somewhere along the way, I completely lost track of how the mod was doing, and only saw some confusion and complaints.  So uh.  ...Is it still going well?  Or are there major problems, or is there just a lot of brainstorming stuff happening?

I don't know what any of the other recent posters in the thread have done. I've just finished a circumnavigation of Kerbin on KF tracks and spotted some issues I intend to try and fix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
*Aqua*

*Aqua*

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, damerell said:

Of course work is proportional to force times distance & hence for a given torque, power consumption should rise at higher speeds

You are right. That's something we should change.

 

4 hours ago, Kershu5 said:

Is it still going well?

We are waiting for the upcoming KSP patch which will force us to redo a lot of stuff. Expect that there'll be no working KF available for a few weeks or months after 1.1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kershu5

Kershu5

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, *Aqua* said:

We are waiting for the upcoming KSP patch which will force us to redo a lot of stuff. Expect that there'll be no working KF available for a few weeks or months after 1.1.

Ah okay cool.  Thanks Aqua.  Hope we get to see that soon..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
varsass

varsass

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hi,

I'm having some trouble with massive lag each time I trhottle up on a rocket (with KF parts), the oupout_log file goes like this :

  

(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 480.7437
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 480.5878
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 480.432
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 480.2761
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 480.1203
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 479.9646
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 479.8088
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 479.653
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 479.4971
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 479.3413
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[KF - KFModuleWheel]: colliderMass: 479.1855

and again and again, until I stop throttling.

I'm still using 1.0.4 ( I know it's bad).

Is there a way to fix that ?

 

PS : great mod, glad to see it's not going to die !

Edited by varsass
Link to comment
Share on other sites
*Aqua*

*Aqua*

Posted
Posted (edited)

I looked at the code and found nothing suspicious. KF doesn't react on throttle settings (it only checks for wheel throttle which is different from [rocket] engine throttle) although it checks for changing vehicle mass to update the wheel colliders.

What other mods are you using? It's likely the culprit is another mod.

Edited by *Aqua*
Link to comment
Share on other sites
varsass

varsass

Posted
Posted (edited)

I've tried in 1.0.5 and got the same problem (at least thanks Kerbal foundries for motivating me to update everything :D).

Mods I use :

ATM aggressive

Adjustable Landing Gear

B9 procedural

Bahamuto Dynamics

Community ressource pack

Docking port aligment

FAR

Karbonite and K+

KAX

KAS

KIS

Kerbal Engineer redux

Kerbal foundries

Kerbal Joint reinforcement

KW rocketery

LLL

MSI infernal robotics

Mechjeb

Procedural fairings

ScanSat

IR sequencer

Stockalike part expansion

Tweakscale

and all the USI mods

 

I'll try to remove mods and add them one by one to find out wich one is the problem.

 

Quote

it checks for changing vehicle mass to update the wheel colliders.

That's the problem, when launching a rover on Duna with KF wheels, throttling the rocket burn liquid fuel thus change the whole vehicle mass.

Maybe that's just to much computing for my computer :D

Edited by varsass
Link to comment
Share on other sites
*Aqua*

*Aqua*

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, varsass said:

That's the problem, when launching a rover on Duna with KF wheels, throttling the rocket burn liquid fuel thus change the whole vehicle mass.

KF checks every physics frame (usually happens every 1/10 second) for changed vessel mass no matter the throttle settings.

IMO the likely cause if FAR. On my machine it sucks up fps like hell. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
varsass

varsass

Posted
Posted

Thanks for answering, and sorry for the inconvenience, after more tests the problem is obviously not related to KF.

So I have massive lag with rockets in space, and no clue inside logs ...  I've tried removing FAR and it does fix the problem, I'll keep searching on my own.

Thanks again

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xEvilReeperx

xEvilReeperx

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, varsass said:

So I have massive lag with rockets in space, and no clue inside logs ...  I've tried removing FAR and it does fix the problem, I'll keep searching on my own.

 I think the logs are telling you the truth here. I checked out the version from SpaceDock and every KFModuleWheel does some really inefficient stuff if the total vehicle's mass has changed by more than a tenth of a unit since the last Update. If the rate of change is fast enough to trigger this very often, your frame rate will get heavily penalized (mainly by the debug statements themselves) by however many KFModuleWheels you have on that vessel :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
*Aqua*

*Aqua*

Posted
Posted

Yep, I also saw a lot of optimization potential. For example if doesn't need to poll for all KFModuleWheels each physics frame. It's sufficient to do it once when loading the vessel and later again when the vessel changes (docking, lithobraking, etc.). But I don't believe the accelerated processing will be noticable. The code will look more streamlined though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lo-fi

lo-fi

Posted
Posted

Yeah, you could probably change the amount by which it checks for a change. I couldn't see any other way of making the wheels actually react to the made of the vessel - you can't just assume that the mass will stay the same in KSP :(

Unity, annoyingly, does not take into account the mass of connected rigidbodies, only the "mass" setting in the wheel collider. This may be different in U5, though - I don't know.

My effort to mitigate the effect of checking the vessel mass was to make the first kfmodulewheel that gets to measure the vessel mass in any physics frame set the value for all other modules. This way the check only happens once per physics frame for any given vessel vessel. Should probably remove the debug statement at beers least... yes, I'm afraid it's a bit of a cludge in lieu of any better ideas :/

1 minute ago, *Aqua* said:

Yep, I also saw a lot of optimization potential. For example if doesn't need to poll for all KFModuleWheels each physics frame. It's sufficient to do it once when loading the vessel and later again when the vessel changes (docking, lithobraking, etc.). But I don't believe the accelerated processing will be noticable. The code will look more streamlined though.

The elephant in the room here is that vessel mass changes. Frequently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
*Aqua*

*Aqua*

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yep.

With optimization potential I meant code like that:
var _moduleWheel = vessel.parts.GetComponent<KFModuleWheel>();

There's no need to retrieve the references every frame. Just once on loading the vessel and after crashes etc. is enough. GetComponent() seems to use Reflection which can have a (small) impact on performance.

Edited by *Aqua*
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...