Jump to content

# Multi-part Fairings Sans Plugin?

## Recommended Posts

What's up folks.

In an effort to save my welded 3x fairing system from total obsolescence I turned on my brain for a moment and came up with a very basic idea that I honestly don't expect to work, but I figured it's worth a shot.

As will no doubt be apparent in a second, I have no idea how part occlusion works vis-ÃƒÂ -vis aerodynamics, but it occurred to me that it might be possible to occlude parts contained within the fairings by giving the fairing segments a "cylindrical" drag cube equal to the diameter of the stack and height of the fairing segment, and setting the CoM at the centre of the stack.

To clarify, take the following image in which the fairing segment shown is the same height as a Jumbo-64 tank, and the stack is 2.5m in diameter. I would give each fairing segment the drag cube and CoM of a Jumbo-64, thereby (hopefully) occluding everything within the fairings, while the nose cone up top would (hopefully) occlude the 3x "Jumbo-64'" beneath.

If someone could explain to me why this is destined to fail, I'd very much appreciate it.

##### Share on other sites

What's up folks.

In an effort to save my welded 3x fairing system from total obsolescence I turned on my brain for a moment and came up with a very basic idea that I honestly don't expect to work, but I figured it's worth a shot.

As will no doubt be apparent in a second, I have no idea how part occlusion works vis-ÃƒÂ -vis aerodynamics, but it occurred to me that it might be possible to occlude parts contained within the fairings by giving the fairing segments a "cylindrical" drag cube equal to the diameter of the stack and height of the fairing segment, and setting the CoM at the centre of the stack.

To clarify, take the following image in which the fairing segment shown is the same height as a Jumbo-64 tank, and the stack is 2.5m in diameter. I would give each fairing segment the drag cube and CoM of a Jumbo-64, thereby (hopefully) occluding everything within the fairings, while the nose cone up top would (hopefully) occlude the 3x "Jumbo-64'" beneath.

http://i.imgur.com/0AmrIQf.jpg

If someone could explain to me why this is destined to fail, I'd very much appreciate it.

Shielding / occlusion uses the 'render bounds' of the shield to determine if other parts are shielded (and some stuff regarding render-bounds centers/centroids); drag cubes do not enter into the shielding equation. So, at best, your 1/3 of a cylinder will shield ~1/3 of the contents

##### Share on other sites

Ah, thanks.

That just saved me from a lot of fruitless trial and error.

*edit: as an aside, how are overlapping drag cubes handled?

Edited by little square dot
##### Share on other sites

Ah, thanks.

That just saved me from a lot of fruitless trial and error.

*edit: as an aside, how are overlapping drag cubes handled?

Not too sure on the drag cubes end of things. I believe a part can only have 1 drag cube assigned at a time, but I'm not sure how overlapping cubes would be treated from multiple different parts; though I think that anything that is radially attached gets full drag applied for its cube regardless of if it is actually clipped in/intersecting other cubes.

They don't so much use actual occlusion calculations for drag as far as I can tell; rather it is more node and attach-system based. An uncovered node generates full drag for that face/part, a covered node generates -far- less, though still some. A radially attached part generates full drag for its given orientation to the airstream. Actual clipping and part size-based occlusion is not used; e.g. clipping a surface/radially attached 1.25m fuel tank completely inside of a 2.5m tank will -not- remove its drag in the slightest. Putting -anything- on a node results in the same reduction in drag for the covered node, regardless of the size of part used to cover it (though I believe the different sized parts will themselves have different drag, still resulting in an overall difference to the vessel). If I remember correctly somebodies tests had shown that the best nosecone for nearly anything (from a drag perspective) was the tiny little cubic strut; it had the lowest drag itself (even with an uncovered top-node), and as such is the best suited to cover any other node.

Others would likely know more though; I've tried to stay away from the whole drag-cube system as much as possible.

Edited by Shadowmage
##### Share on other sites

yeesh... sounds as though the aero system is somewhat awkwardly cobbled together.

thanks again for your help.

##### Share on other sites

While you could add fake drag cubes to the fairings, the problem is it'll only ever occlude a part stack-attached to it, not parts attached to that first attached part. Occlusion isn't transitive.

##### 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.

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.

×

• #### Community

• Release Notes

• #### Social Media

• Store
×
• Create New...