Moderators please remove this thread, thanks!

[steedcrugeon]

Whilst this isn't strictly a Plugin problem it seems to fit better in this sub-forum rather than the modelling one.

I'm having an issue with using "NODE {}" to specify some precise attachment nodes for one of my external parts. Here is the config part causing issues:

NODE 
 	{ 
 		name = topNode 
 		transform = topNode 
 		size = 1 
 		method = FIXED_JOINT 
 	} 
NODE 
 	{ 
 		name = bottomNode 
 		transform = bottomNode 
 		size = 1 
 		method = FIXED_JOINT 
 	} 
NODE 
 	{ 
 		name = ExpansionNode1 
 		transform = ExpansionNode1 
 		size = 0 
 		method = FIXED_JOINT 
 	} 
NODE 
 	{ 
 		name = ExpansionNode2 
 		transform = ExpansionNode2 
 		size = 0 
 		method = FIXED_JOINT 
 	} 
NODE 
 	{ 
 		name = ExpansionNode3 
 		transform = ExpansionNode3 
 		size = 0 
 		method = FIXED_JOINT 
 	}	 
NODE 
 	{ 
 		name = ExpansionNode4 
 		transform = ExpansionNode4 
 		size = 0 
 		method = FIXED_JOINT 
 	} 

Now topNode and bottomNode appear as expected, however if the Expansion Nodes aren't commented out then the part will not compile (I have repeated this over and over reading the Output log so many times!). I have re-imported the model from blender several times, changed the parents of the offending transforms in both blender and Unity a few times also. None of these rectify the issue 

The confusing bit is that this external part is almost a duplicate of another I have already made (carbon copy of the NODOE config file above, except there are only 3 expansion nodes) and the ExpansionNodes on that part work properly and don't throw compilation errors. It spawns in the VAB as expected, additional attachment nodes and all.

Has anyone seen something like this before? or have any suggestions as to what else I can try to get the part compile properly with the extra transforms (as a side note the use of transforms for the nodes is critical to the accuracy of the part's internals, hence why it needs to be so specific).

Edited May 8, 2017 by steedcrugeon

[steedcrugeon]

Moderators can you remove this thread please. I have resolved the issue and this post currently stand as a record to my own ineptness.

[FreeThinker]

On 8-5-2017 at 9:22 PM, steedcrugeon said:

Moderators can you remove this thread please. I have resolved the issue and this post currently stand as a record to my own ineptness.

Why delete, we all make mistakes, perhaps there is a lesson in this if you would also include the solution

[steedcrugeon]

3 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

Why delete, we all make mistakes, perhaps there is a lesson in this if you would also include the solution

It was a typo in the reference to the correct model. Not sure much can be learned there except that I should pay more attention