Station Design Guidelines

[tranenturm]

I found using wings for certain connections are far better than girders. Whatever wing connection logic there is makes for far stiffer links. I can do some things with wings and not require additional struts. Makes for prettier looking space stations (along with mk2 plane parts). 

[Norcalplanner]

Just to expand on my earlier comment about launching large stations, this one was launched in two parts.  Total mass is 700 tons.  Mods include Station Science, Stockalike Station Expansion, Fuel Tanks Plus, and SpaceY, plus KJR to help it stay together.  Both launches used about 5,500 m/s of delta V because of the inefficient launch profile.

Edited February 27, 2016 by Norcalplanner

[DerekL1963]

On 2/27/2016 at 6:21 PM, Norcalplanner said:

On 2/27/2016 at 5:04 PM, DerekL1963 said:

It doesn't have to be a long cylinder, it just has to be balanced.   I've moved an 80-odd ton station that was shaped like a child's jack from Kerbin to Duna before.  (But I had KJR installed, and it was all fastened together with Sr. ports.)

Yep. If you're comfortable building big rockets, it's also possible to send up a large station pre-assembled.

The station in question didn't even go up pre-assembled.  The core (along the thrust axis) went up in three parts, plus three more for the remaining 'arms'.

I think the problem most people have with big stations and mechanical stability is that they rely on regular clamp-o-trons and stock joints, or both.

[PPR]

I'm seeing some beautiful stations on this thread and would love to see more.  

Remember, the point of this thread is figuring out ways to build a better station, so please let everyone know what you were planning to do and how well it worked.  In addition to mass and mods, I would ask the posters to include the part count as well as any issues with performance or functionality.  

 

[Butterbar]

I usually follow several rules.  

- Each Space Station has a "surge capacity", which is every module full.  Stations may not remain in "surge capacity" for more than a month.  The "permanent capacity" of a station must be less than a third of the amount of spots on the station with artificial gravity.  

- For a space station to be considered "permanent" and "self-sustaining", it must provide artificial gravity for its residents and constant power, as well as enough space for leisure activities and whatnot.

- Part count must be minimized as much as possible, since all stations must be able to service ships when necessary.  This includes large interplanetary cruisers (Haven't reached that point yet, soon will).

- Space Stations may only be launched into areas that have already been explored and landed upon and with a satellite relay network to provide constant uplink with Kerbin (Same goes for bases).  This means no stations around the Sun or outside the Kerbin System, due to my lack of interplanetary satellites.

For example, Space Station III, which is the main space station orbiting Kerbin, has a "surge capacity" of 750 Kerbals, but only a "permanent capacity" of 200.  With only 230 parts, it can service every spacecraft I have, and since the station has artificial gravity and a nuclear reactor, Kerbals can stay on indefinitely.  And since there are around 20 communication satellites around Kerbin, it is in constant contact with the Munar base and Mission Control.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Butterbar

[Cornholio]

 

This is my current design for a station.  I designed this specifically with career mode in mind.  Notice that there are multiple science-specific parts such as station science items and 3.75m MPL that contains all science experiments that I have in my career.  I run remote tech and TAC, requiring an antenna LS.  One of the modules is Seti Greenhouse for some TAC replenishment. 

 

I intend to put several of these throughout the Kerbol system (including OPM) and therefore need to prepare for longer intervals between resupply and significant delta-v requirements to get it into place.  Every piece to this is modular with a modular NERV tug.  The modular NERV tug can undock from a liquid fuel tank connected to the NERVs.  the undocked section contains the probe core with docking ports on both sides of a large mono prop tank, general probe pieces (antenna, batteries, etc) and RCS thrusters as the only means of thrust.  I get my piece close to the station, zero out the relative velocity, undock from the NERVs, attach it to the station, and re-dock with the tank and NERVs.  The redocked probe turns into a great probe that I then use as part of my RT relay for that system.  If it's a particularly heavy piece to be attached, I will attach a girder with 4-symmetry RCS thrusters on the connecting side of the piece connected to the to-be-docked docking port with another docking port (I could probably word that better) and undock that small piece when I am just about lined up and ready to connect.  This provides more stability and torque. 

Through my method, I NEVER have any SAS, reaction wheels, or RCS permanently connected to and controlling my station.  This greatly minimizes part count and in my opinion makes it look better through minimalism.

An example module that I would have permanently attached is:

[Docking Port][1.25m->2.5m Adapter][Hitchhiker][1.25m->2.5m Adapter][Docking Port]

That is a functional piece consisting of only 5 parts.  I COULD reduce it further by removing the 2 adapters.  I have a slightly upgraded version of my station that does in fact remove the adapters and uses 2.5m crew tubes (I think from stockalike station expansion mod) with Docking Port Sr instead of regular, and using 2.5m hubs (also I think from stockalike station expansion).

When designing my stations, I will never have connections or create hubs through metal girders/grates or fuel tanks.  Conceptually I can imagine a crew transfer going through a girder....  I also try to design them so that there are obvious clusters of each module: hab/command/LS on one side, science/tech on another.  The only thing that I made consider adding to this station is a larger fuel supply, especially larger liquid supply as in my late career, I run mainly some sort of liquid-only engine.

In my pictures (I should and may provide more/better pictures through EVA) you can see that I left one of my RCS sections of the tug connected to the station (with reaction wheels and RCS turned off) so that I can rearrange pieces when necessary.

I leave my stack of LS exposed so that I can easily switch it out with a resupply mission when necessary.

I built my initial station in Kerib orbit so that I could do it quickly and efficiently and so that if I realized one module did not work/fit for whatever reason, I would not have to wait for a transfer window and transfer.

Because this is incorporating station science, I have every station science experiment connected to a 6-way hub.  This hub has an exposed docking port, 3 legs  to land with, a probe core, little bit of electric, Omni-antenna, and 3 parachutes.  The idea is that I complete all of the experiments over time at the station and can return all of them easily to the surface of Kerbin. 

The hardest part of the station was getting the large dish connected.  I wanted to connect a dish without having the body connected to a probe core, rcs, batteries, etc.  I also love KAS/KIS and was considering having those pieces listed above attached and send out an engineer to remove them, but wanted to make a design that could attach the dish, undock/decouple and leave.  It was not as easy as it sounds as the dish (even while folded) only has one node of connection to it.  That one node would be needed for a girder to be connected to a docking port.  Through the magic of changing roots and symmetrical assembly, I rigged an awful looking craft together that did exactly what I wanted it to do.  I'm not sure if I could have sent up that dish in a KIS container and attached it to the surface of the station using KIS, but intend to find out for future purposes and optimization of part count.

I, too, believe that station solar panels should be uniform and not jumbled.  I also required ample electrical supply because of my station science experiments.  This led me to use the beautiful Soyuz Station Parts panels that you see.  This minimized parts count, provides a real jolt of solar electrical input, and above all, looked stellar.  This is by far my favorite part of all stock or any parts packs for KSP.

Building my station, I tried to make it as most functional for my career as I could.  The following are all of the modules that I launched and docked separately in order of launch to the best that I can remember:

• Stock MPL
• LS Stack with stock Hub
• 3.75m Cupola, 3.75m MPL with all experiments except station science experiments, 2.5m Hab
• Greenhouse (cannot recall if that's the 2.5m or 3.75m
• Arm (crew tube)
• 2.5m Hub with arm extension
• Research Lab
• Zoology Bay
• Cyclotron
• Spectrometron
• Fuel Storage Girder with Solar Panels and Largest Batteries
• Station Science Experiments connected to 6-way Hub
• KIS Storage
• Large Comm Dish

Keep in mind that each of these had a tug made up of NERV and RCS sections.  All of those are either deorbited or creating redundant connection somewhere in my Kerbin system.  Right now I have some of these pieces flying to Duna to make a lesser version of this.  In the next transfer window, I will be sending the rest of the pieces to complete the station there.  Ideally I would get one to every planet (budget and uncorrupted save permitting). 

I don't know the exact numbers right now, but for everything that I have the part count is rather low and the weight is rather high.  I estimate (I will get actual figures later) that part count is around 240 or so.  This allows me to dock other craft and refuel when necessary.

 

I hope you enjoy it.  I will post pictures of the upgraded (2.5m crew tube) version that I made around other planets/moons.  Let me know if you have any questions.  Like I said before, I will try to provide some better pictures later tonight when I am by my PC.

[bncrock]

On 2/20/2016 at 2:08 PM, PPR said:

1) Keep the part count as low as possible. 

This has more to do with performance than gameplay. This is just to avoid performance lag as you dock new parts/ships. 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAaaaa...

 

*takes a momment to breath*

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

But really, I can't follow that. The other ones make sense though. My first station has a ton of fuel on one side and was mostly habitats and SSTO's on the other. I named it the snake because every time I tried to cancel any movement it bent like one.

Edited March 17, 2016 by bncrock

[Warzouz]

I love space station, but I build "exploration space station". I don't make them nice, I make them efficient and usefull.

Here are my tips for space station :

• Make it reasonably compact. Fancy may be nice but is part and mass consuming.
• Make it simple so you always find part sections easily.
• Launch it in one flight if you can. In  the end, it's cheaper and your station will end having less parts.
• Limit orbital assembly : each section may need additional stuff (RCS tanks, RCS thrusters, probe cores, batteries, solar panel...) In the end these are redundant.
• A station don't need RCS thrusters. It may have RCS tanks to refuel arriving ships.
• Use one main docking port type.
• Add ONE large docking ring for extension. Each extension sent should have 2 large docking ring.
• Concentrate your docking ports at one end of the station
• Concentrate fragile parts on the other end (solar panels) to prevent messing a docking procedure
• Put your station on normal orientation, it's easy to find where to dock
• Add lights to target your docking ports. (this is not as easy as it sounds)
• Use lights color to help you identify what is where from a far distance.
• Put lights around ladders and airlocks to help kerbal in EVA
• Don't over do crew quarters
• Add few science equipment to get easy "do science from space around XXX" contracts. Add an antenna.
• If your station has refueling capacity, don't hesitate to stick engines on it. So you can move your station to another body.
• Always add a probe core with locked battery (this will be used as an emergency reserve)
• Add large battery for regular usage.

Here is my design

 

[PPR]

1 hour ago, Warzouz said:

•  
• A station don't need RCS thrusters. It may have RCS tanks to refuel arriving ships.

 

I'm curious about this one Warzouz.  It has been my experience that after multiple dockings, the orbit of the station tends to shift slightly and requires some sort of propulsion to make corrections.  I can see the advantage in terms of mass, cost and part count.  What has your experience been using this?

[Warzouz]

Just now, PPR said:

I'm curious about this one Warzouz.  It has been my experience that after multiple dockings, the orbit of the station tends to shift slightly and requires some sort of propulsion to make corrections.  I can see the advantage in terms of mass, cost and part count.  What has your experience been using this?

I don't use RCS thrusters, I use reaction wheels to keep the station on Normal orientation. You don't need translation on a space station. Corrections are rare, you can live without any dedicated engines (I used to add Twitch engines to a station but I don't any more because I never used them).

Now I add a LVN engine block, but that's the Miner lander which can be used for interplanetary transfers.

One of my space station prototypes coming from Bop and going to Vall orbit (in a Tylo flyby).

[Cornholio]

10 minutes ago, PPR said:

I'm curious about this one Warzouz.  It has been my experience that after multiple dockings, the orbit of the station tends to shift slightly and requires some sort of propulsion to make corrections.  I can see the advantage in terms of mass, cost and part count.  What has your experience been using this?

As stations typically are larger and more massive than any craft that needs to dock to it (landers, refueling, etc), the docking craft should just adapt to the station's orientation.

[oglommi]

Get Kis/Kas mods and Extraplanetary Launchpad. Launch a big ship with materialkits/specializedparts/enricheduranium etc in containers and build the base you want in orbit.

[Warzouz]

7 minutes ago, Cornholio said:

As stations typically are larger and more massive than any craft that needs to dock to it (landers, refueling, etc), the docking craft should just adapt to the station's orientation.

That's true, even if the station I build aren't that big. Basically they are support for science landers and return (to kerbin) vehicles. With ISRU, stations can be much smaller.

Back in beta 0.9, I sent a space station into Laythe orbit to explore Jool system. I launch 13 rocket with payload assembled around Laythe. In the end the station a so many redundant parts that it lagged a lot. I had to install KAS/KIS to remove 300 out of 900 parts. After landing nearly twice or 3 times on every bodies, I even used half of my fuel reserves. (landers where around 15 tons even for Pol and Bop)

[suicidejunkie]

My stations are quite small, so I reorient them to line up the docking ports with the incoming ship to save fuel.

 

For larger stations here's an idea;

Make a docking arm with IR articulated joints and a klaw.  Then you can reach over and grab the ship, then pull it around to the dock.

Or for short visits, just put the docking port on the arm, and bring the dock to the ship.

[PPR]

Just being a little OCD on my part.  I suppose if a correction is needed, one could use a re-supply or crew vessel to make corrections.  I often keep my stations in low orbit 75km to minimize the size of the launch vehicles, so if one docks on the underside or prograde side, you can lower the periapsis into dangerous areas over time.

I can see you point however.  It makes sense.  RCS does have a low ISP, so mass-wise it is not very efficient and part-count wise they are parts you do not need.

[nosirrbro]

Having a lot of fuel is great. A lot of Kerbals, not so much.

Generally only have at most enough room for 4 Kerbals more than is needed to fully fill command pods and science modules, anything beyond that is a bit of a waste. 2 or 3 make more sense, but the crew cans only come in 4

[PB666]

On 2/20/2016 at 3:08 PM, PPR said:

This topic is to develop guidelines for optimizing a space station.  I would like to limit it to stock parts, since mods can easily change the rules that will apply.  So what makes your space station work well?

Some guidelines I like to follow:

1) Keep the part count as low as possible. 

This has more to do with performance than gameplay. This is just to avoid performance lag as you dock new parts/ships.  Keep this in mind as you add parts such as strut connectors, batteries fuel tanks, ladders & solar panels.  They all add up.  As rule of thumb go for the largest part you can manage.  For example, one Z-4K battery bank has the same capacity/mass as 10 Z-400 batteries but in a single part.

2) Keep the heavy stuff in the middle.

You have no doubt by now noticed that if you have a large station and dock something massive at far end it will flex so much that the station becomes difficult to control.  The farther you get from the center of mass the more the wobble will be magnified.  So if you have a central hub with six nodes it is better to dock six modules to the hub than to stack them on top of each other to form a lengthy chain.

3)  Keep it balanced

Same idea.  If you have something heavy on one side and something light on the opposite side, it makes the station difficult to control.

4) Keep one source of torque in the middle.

If you have more than one source of torque (remember, most command parts will have built-in torque), they can fight each other and create wobble.  The farther it is from the middle, the more wobble it will create.  Remember that you can disable torque if you have more than one source.

5) Don't overbuild.

While big stations are impressive, make sure you're building to its purpose.  So if you're building an orbital lab, do you need a Convert-o-tron?

6) Pay attention to tolerance

You want to have sturdy parts in the middle or an accident could cause the whole station to come apart.  For example, an adapter may have a tolerance of 6, while a girder adapter will do the same job but has a tolerance of 80 (and it's cheaper too).

USE Ubioweld whenever possible.

 

[Nich]

I have not seen anyone comment on physicless parts?  Can you get away with higher part counts due to physicless parts being added to it attached part or do they still increase lag?

[PanzerAce]

I tend to use mine more as fuel depots than anything else. I usually put a lab into a polar orbit (to hit all the biomes), have a bunch of solar panels and batteries on board, the transfer and circularization engine, and some docking ports. Then, whenever I send something to that planet/moon, I usually spend the time to dock transfer stages and the like to the station rather than dumping them. So I tend to end up with a hodge-podge station with a TON of fuel reserves if I ever find the need for it. When 1.1 comes out and I do my OPM Grand Tour, I'll probably figure out an actual design for a large station core then go from there.

[el_coyoto]

On 23/2/2016 at 9:26 PM, Fearless Son said:

I would love for docking ports to have low-power inbuilt running lights, similar to the long mobility enhancer.  Not enough to light up much, just enough to see them in the dark.  

Yup, that would be really cool!

What I usually do is putting a few small batteries around the port, using the green led bit as a low power light. No problem docking in the dark, and none of the framerate issues associated with lights.
It feels a bit cheaty though... 

[HalcyonSon]

I'm currently working on my first major station - one that isn't just a 2.5m Science Lab with attached Hitchhiker and Fuel.  This station will have Standard and Junior ports with additional KIS/KAS struts for rigidity because I haven't unlocked Senior ports yet.  Only mods are KER, KIS/KAS, and KAC in my Career play-through.

Laid it all out assembled in the VAB, then broke out sub-assemblies to configure for launch.  All of the boosters will be completely reusable, taking each station component to orbit in a single stage and equipped with Probe Core and Parachutes.  Between the Core and Science Arms, I'll have more than enough Kerbal capacity to meet the contract that spurred this project.   The second Science Arm and Quarters pods and docking ring are just for fun.

Launch One: the Core - Two Hitchhikers, Cuppola, KIS/KAS Storage accessible from inside, twelve 1x6 Solar Panels, RCS jets for station keeping and orientation, five standard docking ports.  Lower center-line port intended for fully reusable LFO Refuel craft.  

Launch Two: Science Arm Number One  - 2.5 m Science Lab, 2.5 m Cargo bay full of 400 EC batteries an RCS tank and Probe Core, Standard ports on both ends.  Tons of EC storage here to get it through the night.  Haven't yet done the calculations to see if the Core Solar Panels will be enough to recharge it during the day.

Launch Two also includes CO Quarters / Escape Capsule Number One - Mk 1-2 Capsule, 1.25 m Crew Cabin, Heat Shield, Parachute, RCS.  The Station Commanding Officer gets a small amount of personal space, at least until the station has to be evacuated.  Officers and Men need some separation.

Launch Three: RCS Refueler - 3,000 units in 2.5 m tanks with attached jets, Probe Core, Parachutes and Heat Shield, one Standard port.  Intended to be a standardized, reusable unit.

Launch Four: Docking Arm - had planned a simple "T" shape to keep incoming craft away from the station's other modules.  After seeing some of the docking rings on KerbalX, I believe I'll make a small ring to fit below the Core instead of the "T" being opposite the RCS Arm.  The Docking Arm will not have RCS.  Instead, I plan to launch a small tug for assembly and Recovery of any unneeded bits.  I've successfully recovered intact components from orbit using a variant of the Klaw Pod that includes a Heat Shield and Parachutes.  The tug variant will have a Junior and Standard docking port as well as the Klaw.  The Ring will be made of 1.25 m Structural Fuselage and Crew Cabins.  I picture these Structural Fuselages as simple no-frills pressurized passageways.

Launch Five: Same as Launch Two - Kerbal of the Month Quarters rather than CO Quarters.  Launch Six will probably be KIS/KAS containers of anything I forgot in the first four.  Launch Seven will be a full Orange Tank.  That's the end of planned assembly launches.  If the EC storage shows signs of depletion, a launch may be added to attach additional Solar Panels.

Edited August 15, 2016 by HalcyonSon

[Corona688]

I build my stations oriented north-south.  Expanding them just means making them taller.  This linear layout makes docking a cinch, just push the target into the north or south origin of the navball then fly towards.  It also makes it possible to relocate the stations later -- a pair of thuds anywhere along the length is guaranteed to be symmetrical.

If you wanted to keep it organized in any way, habitable sections and manned craft to the north end and fuel / robot / power / industrial things to the south end.  Every habitable section gets some of those big flat radial panels, enough that one's always aimed at the sun, and that's been enough so far.

I question the need for a "big" space station at all, really.  When I get contracts to expand them, I send up a ship of some sort which docks then leaves on a mission, briefly bringing the station to spec.

Edited August 15, 2016 by Corona688

[septemberWaves]

For large stations, I usually pre-assemble them in the VAB to check how they will look, and also to ensure that the centre of thrust goes through the centre of mass when the propulsion module is attached.

[Alshain]

On 2/21/2016 at 3:15 PM, Zoidos said:

Try to assemble from as few parts as possibly. Rather 3 big launches than 15 small ones. This also saves on parts (docking ports for example) and adds to the rigidity of the station.

On the other hand, don't build your components so large that it's hard to get them off the ground.  Rather 7 medium sized components than 15 small ones or 3 big ones.

[klesh]

On 2/26/2016 at 3:33 PM, JoeNapalm said:

 

Go big...and remember to build in a way to go home!:

I always include at least one drone core, and some sort of escape pods/life boats

That way, if I need to get the Kerbals off the station, I don't need a mission to do it, and if I evac all the Kerbals, the station is still functional.

 

I do this too.  A  Command pod of some kind, a heatshield, a battery, and enough RCS jets and monopropellant to perform a de-orbit maneuver.  Done right, you can fit it all in a nice little, good looking package.

My latest one was dubbed STEVe (Station Team Evacuation Vehicle [e]).