Jump to content

[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.14.0 "металл" 30/Sep/2024)

CobaltWolf

By CobaltWolf
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gordon Dry

Gordon Dry

Posted
Posted

@Zorg @CobaltWolf Would this work or would it create issues because some BDB tanks have no LqdHydrogen by default (but via part switch or ConfigurableContainers they can have then): 

@PART[bluedog*Tank*,Bluedog*Tank*,bluedog*Tank,Bluedog*Tank]:NEEDS[CryoTanks]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name =  ModuleCryoTank
        CoolingCost = 0.09
        CoolingEnabled = False
        BOILOFFCONFIG
        {
            FuelName = LqdHydrogen
            // in % per hr
            BoiloffRate = 0.05
        }
    } 
}

@Nertea What would happen if a tank that has only LqdFuel and Oxidizer by default and this Module is added - does this module recognize there is no LqdHydrogen and just disables itself and reenables as soon as LdqHydrogen is found, also by ConfigurableContainers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wallum61

wallum61

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, space_powder said:

Wait, BDB will have Ares parts?

 

13 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

The interplanetary/orbital segments, yes. I plan on letting people use @TiktaalikDreaming's MEM lander for the actual, y'know, landing part...

 

@TiktaalikDreaming's MEM lander is a bit too part intensive for my liking, so I prefer @Angel-125's somewhat more stockalike DSEV MEM-style lander. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CobaltWolf

CobaltWolf

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, wallum61 said:

@TiktaalikDreaming's MEM lander is a bit too part intensive for my liking, so I prefer @Angel-125's somewhat more stockalike DSEV MEM-style lander. 

I actually forgot Angel made one but that's pretty cool too! Point is, the manned lander stuff is probably outside the wheelhouse of BDB. If only because there really aren't any old school designs besides the MEM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Angelo Kerman

Angelo Kerman

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, wallum61 said:

 

 

@TiktaalikDreaming's MEM lander is a bit too part intensive for my liking, so I prefer @Angel-125's somewhat more stockalike DSEV MEM-style lander. 

 

17 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

I actually forgot Angel made one but that's pretty cool too! Point is, the manned lander stuff is probably outside the wheelhouse of BDB. If only because there really aren't any old school designs besides the MEM.

I think both have merits. @TiktaalikDreaming's looks really good and is a faithful reproduction of the craft in KSP. While DSEV's Estonian only superficially resembles the MEM, what it lacks in accuracy (and some say art quality) it makes up for in versatility- you can build more than just a conic lander with the parts.

As for old school kermanned landers, here's what I found:

geminionthemoon2.jpg

c063b.gif

5605089220_72602a54cf_b.jpg

Lander-Comparisons.jpg

Most of these I think can be done with existing parts. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zorg

Zorg

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, Gordon Dry said:

@Zorg @CobaltWolf Would this work or would it create issues because some BDB tanks have no LqdHydrogen by default (but via part switch or ConfigurableContainers they can have then):

Sorry I don't actually know too much about the ins and outs of module manager to comment on that one, kinda new to all this. I'm mostly looking at existing code and simply trying various things to see if they work.

Give it a try on a testing install and see what happens! :)

I'd guess you might have to put a HAS condition for liquid hydrogen to prevent issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CobaltWolf

CobaltWolf

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, Gordon Dry said:

@Zorg @CobaltWolf Would this work or would it create issues because some BDB tanks have no LqdHydrogen by default (but via part switch or ConfigurableContainers they can have then):

@Nertea What would happen if a tank that has only LqdFuel and Oxidizer by default and this Module is added - does this module recognize there is no LqdHydrogen and just disables itself and reenables as soon as LdqHydrogen is found, also by ConfigurableContainers?

52 minutes ago, Zorg said:

Sorry I don't actually know too much about the ins and outs of module manager to comment on that one, kinda new to all this. I'm mostly looking at existing code and simply trying various things to see if they work.

Give it a try on a testing install and see what happens! :)

I'd guess you might have to put a HAS condition for liquid hydrogen to prevent issues.

Yeah I'm mostly just an artist

56 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said:

Hope you get better soon!

Thank you! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gordon Dry

Gordon Dry

Posted
Posted (edited)

@Zorg dunno why this quote is marked to be from CobaltWolf by the board software...

2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

I'd guess you might have to put a HAS condition for liquid hydrogen to prevent issues.

Well, no, that is the thing.

Some tanks have no LqdHydrogen by default but COULD have it by switchers.

For example all Titan tanks, there is none which can hold LqdHydrogen by default. But there are Titan-certified engines on LH2 so it's a little weird.

Edited by Gordon Dry
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zorg

Zorg

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Gordon Dry said:

@Zorg dunno why this quote is marked to be from CobaltWolf by the board software...

Well, no, that is the thing.

Some tanks have no LqdHydrogen by default but COULD have it by switchers.

For example all Titan tanks, there is none which can hold LqdHydrogen by default. But there are Titan-certified engines on LH2 so it's a little weird.

On second thought I think your patch would work as is. The fuel type is defined in the boiloff module after all and your patch is similar to how CryoTanks targets stock tanks which have LFO by default but switch over to LH2 with B9.

If that patch doesnt work I would probably try to target the specific LH2 B9 tank types defined for Bluedog in B9TankTypes.cfg

Again not so sure but try a couple of things and see if it works.

Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jso

Jso

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Gordon Dry said:

@Zorg @CobaltWolf Would this work or would it create issues because some BDB tanks have no LqdHydrogen by default (but via part switch or ConfigurableContainers they can have then): 


@PART[bluedog*Tank*,Bluedog*Tank*,bluedog*Tank,Bluedog*Tank]:NEEDS[CryoTanks]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name =  ModuleCryoTank
        CoolingCost = 0.09
        CoolingEnabled = False
        BOILOFFCONFIG
        {
            FuelName = LqdHydrogen
            // in % per hr
            BoiloffRate = 0.05
        }
    } 
}

 

No. To use CryoFuels boiloff plugin do it like this:

Spoiler 

@PART[bluedog*,Bluedog*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleBdbBoiloff]]:NEEDS[CryoTanks]:Final
{
    !MODULE[ModuleBdbBoiloff] {}

    MODULE
    {
        name =  ModuleCryoTank
        CoolingCost = 0.09
        CoolingEnabled = False
        BOILOFFCONFIG
        {
            FuelName = LqdHydrogen
            // in % per hr
            BoiloffRate = 0.05
        }
    } 
}

 

To correct some of what @CobaltWolf said, the current plugin on GitHub currently supports:

Reduced boiloff rates in the shade. Either planetary shade or by another part of the vessel. Part shade is determined by the game's existing thermal code and can be hit or miss but basically works. Try it.

Boiloff is scaled based on distance from the Sun. Rates will be much lower at Duna and Jool, and higher at Eve. This works the same way energy input to solar panels does.

If there is a place for it to go in the same stage gaseous hydrogen will be stored rather than vented and lost. You can use it for other purposes or use a resource converter to re-liquefy it back into fuel. I have a prototype resource converter for that but it has issues at high time warp.

In time for Ares there will be some form of EC based boiloff prevention. I prefer a single purpose probably heavy and EC expensive part that is added to the vessel and eliminates boiloff rather than having it installed in every tank. How that all pans out is yet to be determined.

Edited by Jso
syntax, grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gordon Dry

Gordon Dry

Posted
Posted (edited)

@Jso @CobaltWolf I did it now the forcibly way with this patch: 

@PART[bluedog*Tank,bluedog*Tank*,Bluedog*Tank,Bluedog*Tank*]:HAS[!MODULE[ModuleCryoTank]]:NEEDS[CryoTanks]:Final
{
    !MODULE[ModuleBdbBoiloff] {}

    MODULE
    {
        name =  ModuleCryoTank
        CoolingCost = 0.09
        CoolingEnabled = False
        BOILOFFCONFIG
        {
            FuelName = LqdHydrogen
            // in % per hr
            BoiloffRate = 0.05
        }
    } 
}

A Titan tank that by default only got LiquidFuel and Oxidizer and had no cryo cooling before my patch:
BDgr89M.png

When set to LH2 + Oxidizer:
bDfzarr.png

 

This tank already had cryo cooling before my patch, I guess because of the ConfigurableContainers that patched in, now it looks like this:
cKpCDia.png

When set to LH2 + Oxidizer:
FlewB2j.png

 

You can see the different switchers and that the 820 variant doesn't show the boiloff amount in the context menu.

I will see how it works in flight mode later.

Edited by Gordon Dry
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jso

Jso

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Gordon Dry said:

@Jso neat! Thank you.

@Jso Wait, regarding the ModuleManager.ConfigCache no single Bdb tank has the ModuleCryoTank now, but the ModuleBdbBoiloff still is in.
 Using MM 3.0.7

My fault. It's :Final not :Last

bluedog*Tank is common but not guaranteed to hit everything. bluedog*,Bluedog* looks all our parts, HAS[@MODULE[ModuleBdbBoiloff]] restricts it to just the parts that need the module replaced. @PART[*] would also work since the HAS[@MODULE[ModuleBdbBoiloff]] is sufficient to restrict it to the appropriate parts.

@PART[bluedog*,Bluedog*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleBdbBoiloff]]:NEEDS[CryoTanks]:Final

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gordon Dry

Gordon Dry

Posted
Posted (edited)

@Jso by definition of GameData\Bluedog_DB\Compatibility\B9PartSwitch\B9PartSwitchTanks.cfg only tanks would be affected that already have LqdHydrogen as default resource.

Switchable tanks (so all of them in different styles because of different switchers kicking in :cool:) with LqdFuel as default would not be affected.

Edit:

perhaps ^that patch should be altered, to also take IFS and CC into account ??

 

Edit:

because this patch
GameData\ConfigurableContainers\Parts\Bluedog_DB_Patch.cfg

handles some of the tanks, and these ones then already got boiloff AND cooling, but the others don't, how about this patch? 

@PART[bluedog*,Bluedog*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleB9PartSwitch,ModuleBdbBoiloff],!MODULE[ModuleCryoTank]]:NEEDS[B9PartSwitch,CryoTanks]:Final
{
    !MODULE[ModuleBdbBoiloff] {}

    MODULE
    {
        name =  ModuleCryoTank
        CoolingCost = 0.09
        CoolingEnabled = False
        BOILOFFCONFIG
        {
            FuelName = LqdHydrogen
            // in % per hr
            BoiloffRate = 0.05
        }
    }
}

Edit:

@Jso @CobaltWolf I wanna be a bad boy and even test this: 

@PART[bluedog*,Bluedog*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleB9PartSwitch,ModuleBdbBoiloff],!MODULE[ModuleCryoTank]]:NEEDS[B9PartSwitch,CryoTanks]:Final
{
    !MODULE[ModuleBdbBoiloff] {}

    MODULE
    {
        name =  ModuleCryoTank
        CoolingCost = 0.09
        @CoolingCost *= #$/mass$ // then why not? The bigger the tank, the more EC needed for cooling, right? And very small tanks, if even used for cryo fuels, should cost less EC.
        CoolingEnabled = False
        BOILOFFCONFIG
        {
            FuelName = LqdHydrogen
            // in % per hr
            BoiloffRate = 0.05
        }
    }
}

Edit:

Booting KSP, no MM errors.
First glance:

Spoiler 

UrlConfig
{
	name = bluedog_Titan2_FuelTank3
	type = PART
	parentUrl = Bluedog_DB/Parts/Titan/bluedog_Titan2_FuelTank3
	PART
	{
		name = bluedog_Titan2_FuelTank3
		module = Part
		author = CobaltWolf
		scale = 1
		rescaleFactor = 1
		node_stack_top = 0.0,1.1983310748, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2
		node_stack_bottom = 0.0,-1.0626876, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 2
		node_attach = 0.9375, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0
		TechRequired = advRocketry
		entryCost = 3825
		cost = 1275
		category = FuelTank
		subcategory = 0
		title = Titan II-820 Liquid Fuel Tank
		manufacturer = Bluedog Design Bureau
		description = Medium length 1.875m fuel tank for the Titan II second stage.
		attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0
		mass = 0.5125
		dragModelType = default
		maximum_drag = 0.2
		minimum_drag = 0.3
		angularDrag = 2
		crashTolerance = 6
		breakingForce = 200
		breakingTorque = 200
		maxTemp = 2000
		bulkheadProfiles = size1p5, srf
		tags = titan ii prometheus liquid fuel oxidizer 1.875 1875
		tank_cost = 574
		MODEL
		{
			model = Bluedog_DB/Parts/Titan/bluedog_Titan2_FuelTank3
			scale = 1, 0.9396, 1
		}
		MODULE
		{
			name = TweakScale
			type = BluedogStack
			defaultScale = 1.875
		}
		MODULE
		{
			name = AYPart
		}
		MODULE
		{
			name = ModuleSYPartTracker
		}
		MODULE
		{
			name = BuoyancyControl
			enabled = true
		}
		MODULE
		{
			name = ModuleB9PartSwitch
			moduleID = fuelSwitch
			switcherDescription = Fuel
			baseVolume = 820
			SUBTYPE
			{
				name = LF/O
				tankType = bdbLFOX
				addedMass = -0.5125
				addedCost = -950.38
				percentFilled = 100
			}
			SUBTYPE
			{
				name = LH2/O
				tankType = bdbLH2O
				addedMass = -0.5125
				addedCost = -950.38
				percentFilled = 100
			}
			SUBTYPE
			{
				name = MonoProp
				tankType = bdbMonoProp
				addedMass = -0.5125
				addedCost = -950.38
				percentFilled = 100
			}
		}
		MODULE
		{
			name = HotSpotModule
		}
		MODULE
		{
			name = ModuleB9PartInfo
		}
		MODULE
		{
			name = GPOSpeedPump
		}
		MODULE
		{
			name = ModuleCryoTank
			CoolingCost = 0.046125
			CoolingEnabled = False
			BOILOFFCONFIG
			{
				FuelName = LqdHydrogen
				BoiloffRate = 0.05
			}
		}
	}
}

 

Edit:

@Jso @CobaltWolf

So with the new patch I built a test arrangement:

@Nertea btw there is something wrong with CryoTanks itself, when reverting to launch the boiloff readout is missing, it'S okay on first isntance when on the launchpad

Edited by Gordon Dry
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HooHungLow

HooHungLow

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Kerbal01 said:

you do know there are proper nosecones with separation motors already in the pack, right?

You don’t say?

You should look at my Dyna-Soar post a page or so back , I use them on the other titan SRBs , but the titan IV has plain-er nose cones , I did add the separation motors though and they look more realistic that way, rather than the titan III cones that have different lines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...