[1.3.1, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7] Procedural Parts - Tidal Stream Branch

[BeastlyBean]

Can also confirm, when I change the shape of a procedural part the right click menu freezes and won't show up again, for everything. I have to leave and reenter the VAB but then again it freezes if I work on a procedural part.

[NippyFlippers]

Thanks! The Menu now works.

But now another bug popped up: The procedural nose tank has a weirdly small diameter and crashes the game when the length is changed.

[SkiRich]

@Tidal Stream I can confirm the two errors reported above by @BeastlyBean and @NippyFlippers

The nose cone is bugged out.  No matter what size I select its always tiny and flat.  Editing that part causes a freeze.

The other parts seems to work fine, just the nose cone.

Nothing in the logs specific to this mod or nose cone is throwing an error.

I went back to 2.0.5 and all is fine.

The 2.0.6 release says its a hot fix for NaN.

I dont know what that is or if I am affected by NaN so I'll stay with 2.0.5 for now.  I'll gladly test any new code you put out if you want me to.

[CalixK]

Can someone tell me why my procedural tanks load like this? 

https://imgur.com/a/HKwmM2N

Edit: Playing on 1.10.1 with version 2.1.0

Edited August 4, 2020 by CalixK
Adding Versions

[Cheesecake]

KSP 1.8.1, last RO-version of Procedural Parts

In the rightclick menue there is onbly the button for th eTU-GUI but there I can not change the size.
Play career with all nodes researched.

[Michaelo90]

The 2.1.0 version is completely unusable for me. For the liquid fuel tank, it gives me a range of options of 1.0093-1.1654m in diameter, and 625-750mm in length. The other parts are weird too. I reverted to the 2.0.3 version I had before and it works perfectly. I'm running KSP 1.9.1.

Edited August 21, 2020 by Michaelo90

[Cap Arcona]

Hopefully someone here can help me with this.

Procedural Parts makes any craft with a vertical fin (for lateral stability and yaw control) generate lift (a yellow arrow) to the left. Whether it's two or one or eight vertical stabilizers, they always generate a lift arrow to the left. If I swap out a procedural fuel tank for a vanilla tank (or any other mod), then the problem is solved. This also happens with the vanilla structural tube (the resizable one) if I put the fin directly on that tube. With PP it doesn't care where the part is, it messes up vert stabs for the whole craft, whereas with the structural tube I simply need to move the fin to another part. Any fixes for this or am I just SoL?

 

https://imgur.com/a/2UcRDmW

[lemon cup]

On 8/21/2020 at 12:32 PM, Michaelo90 said:

The 2.1.0 version is completely unusable for me. For the liquid fuel tank, it gives me a range of options of 1.0093-1.1654m in diameter, and 625-750mm in length. The other parts are weird too. I reverted to the 2.0.3 version I had before and it works perfectly. I'm running KSP 1.9.1.

Just confirming I am experiencing same exact issue. Only difference is I am in 1.8.1. I have v2.0.6 and it seems to be working as intended, whereas 2.1.0 has all the issues listed above.

[Zelda]

On 8/23/2020 at 12:39 PM, lemon cup said:

Just confirming I am experiencing same exact issue. Only difference is I am in 1.8.1. I have v2.0.6 and it seems to be working as intended, whereas 2.1.0 has all the issues listed above.

Same here, on 1.9.1. 

[DRVeyl]

Please see the release notes for v2.1.0, particularly in regards to part sizes.

"When upgrading an existing career, you may need to purchase the part size upgrades in R&D for previously unlocked tech nodes.
In sandbox play, you will need to enable "All Part Upgrades Applied In Sandbox" in the Difficulty settings, Advanced tab."

If you are not able to play on 2.1.0, v2.0.3 is probably a reasonable fallback.  2.0.4-2.0.6 attempted to re-institute some volume limits that were around in the pre-2.0 releases.  This illustrated a few inconsistencies in how we were handling the tech limits, and so I moved away from the roll-your-own approach since adjusting just the dimension limits in the UI fits the stock PartUpgrades model very well.

One such example is the nose cones not having the right end size.  That should be fixed in 2.1.

I don't have any idea what the ProcParts part has to do with the lift generated by a different part (the winglet).

[CardZLol]

On 8/9/2020 at 4:56 PM, Cheesecake said:

KSP 1.8.1, last RO-version of Procedural Parts

In the rightclick menue there is onbly the button for th eTU-GUI but there I can not change the size.
Play career with all nodes researched.

Same.

[darthgently]

This may be a big PR ask, but in kOS I'm trying to compute center of mass of parts of ships still connected to the main ship by walking the parts tree from the decoupler down.  My method is working great until I hit a cone shaped ProcParts fuel tank.  The position reported by kOS for that tank is not its center of mass as with all other parts.  When I change it to a cylinder it works fine.  KSP correctly adjusts for the cone shape in its CoM calculation so I'm guessing the information is there, just not exposed in a way that a kOS script can get to it.  Is this something that kOS should be computing from the shape info?  Or is it something that ProcParts should be exposing more directly?  idk, but wanted to bring it up

[darthgently]

On 9/1/2020 at 6:47 PM, DRVeyl said:

 

I don't have any idea what the ProcParts part has to do with the lift generated by a different part (the winglet).

I'm not sure this is relevant but I noticed while writing a kOS script that traverses the ship parts tree that at least some (all I was working with) ProcParts have the kOS HASPHYSICS flag set to false, and yet they report a MASS.  Which is unusual.  Anyway, KSP transfers the drag and mass of physicsless parts to the parent part typically (which is why they report zero mass; it has been moved) and idk what the entire approach is for KSP on physicless parts.  So maybe in the confusion a procpart item is somehow altering the aero on a winglet if that winglet is attached to a ProcPart?  I don't know.  But ProcParts should probably not be coming up as physicsless in kOS.  Whether that is a kOS or ProcParts issue I'm not stating here because I don't know

[HebaruSan]

On 9/1/2020 at 5:47 PM, DRVeyl said:

"In sandbox play, you will need to enable "All Part Upgrades Applied In Sandbox" in the Difficulty settings, Advanced tab."

Is there a downside to enabling this setting? I'm thinking about doing it programmatically in the next SmartTank release (which essentially won't work at all otherwise), but I don't want to break other things for folks.

[darthgently]

2 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

Is there a downside to enabling this setting? I'm thinking about doing it programmatically in the next SmartTank release (which essentially won't work at all otherwise), but I don't want to break other things for folks.

I'm not sure if that is a question directed at a particular person or the forum in general, but in my view doing that automatically would change the game a lot for people who wouldn't be expecting it.  A better approach might be to let potential users know up front that for SmartTanks in their current form to be usable they will have to select that option.  Leave it up to them.  Another option is to break up the functionality of SmartTanks into progressively more powerful options and work them into the tech trees so it isn't all or nothing.  Procedural Parts does this by gradually lifting restrictions on how large and how small you can make things, along with delaying when you get certain items like procedural ore tanks and such

[HebaruSan]

Just now, darthgently said:

doing that automatically would change the game a lot for people who wouldn't be expecting it.

Howso? What would change?

[DRVeyl]

@darthgently Most parts don't have a CoM Offset, so the position of the part is the position of the center of mass.  What you want is part.position + part.CoMOffset.  That CoM offset I believe is part-local, so if the part is placed upside-down you may need to account for this.

Interesting catch on the HASPHYSICS flag.  I don't know quite what that translates to, exactly, in the KSP part info.  But it does seem like ProcParts should definitely not be physics-less and should not apply their mass to any parent parts.  Maybe part.physicalSignificance or part.PhysicsSignificance?

@HebaruSan I don't know what the downside would be of enabling all PARTUPGRADEs in Sandbox.  Sandbox inherently doesn't have a tech tree, and the way PARTUPGRADEs work, you generally would not want "side-grades" where they come with actual tradeoffs.  I don't know why that flag is an option, really, since the only choices are "all" or "none."

[darthgently]

1 hour ago, HebaruSan said:

Howso? What would change?

Maybe I misunderstand and should have kept quiet.  I thought he was talking about changing a user setting that would make a sweeping change of how the tech tree worked in sandbox and just figured that is something best left to the user, or at least make it clear up front that it would be required for that mod.  I think I must have misunderstood.  Please disregard

[HebaruSan]

Just now, darthgently said:

how the tech tree worked in sandbox

That's just it, the tech tree isn't available in sandbox.

Just now, darthgently said:

I think I must have misunderstood.  Please disregard

Fair enough, thanks for clarifying.

[darthgently]

1 hour ago, DRVeyl said:

@darthgently Most parts don't have a CoM Offset, so the position of the part is the position of the center of mass.  What you want is part.position + part.CoMOffset.  That CoM offset I believe is part-local, so if the part is placed upside-down you may need to account for this.

Interesting catch on the HASPHYSICS flag.  I don't know quite what that translates to, exactly, in the KSP part info.  But it does seem like ProcParts should definitely not be physics-less and should not apply their mass to any parent parts.  Maybe part.physicalSignificance or part.PhysicsSignificance?

@HebaruSan I don't know what the downside would be of enabling all PARTUPGRADEs in Sandbox.  Sandbox inherently doesn't have a tech tree, and the way PARTUPGRADEs work, you generally would not want "side-grades" where they come with actual tradeoffs.  I don't know why that flag is an option, really, since the only choices are "all" or "none."

Is part.position and part.CoMOffset coming from a C# environment?  I can get position in kOS, not sure about CoMOffset.  But I'll pass that on to some kOS devs, thanks for the info. 

As for the HASPHYSICS flag, strangely ProcParts do have MASS in their structure in kOS so I don't think it is being assigned to the parent.  The CoM I calc is within 5 or 6 decimal places of the actual CoM with cylindrical tanks so I don't think their mass is going to the parent, which is located some distance away and because they have more symmetry than a cone (I assume) their offset dovetails better with KSP use of position or something similar

[CardZLol]

I Cant scale parts more than the first notch, not diameter, not lenght, anything. I tried installing with CKAN, manually, everything but it doesnt work. All dependencies are installed, i'm on version 1.10.1 using the newest (2.1.1) version of Porcedural Parts.

[HebaruSan]

6 minutes ago, CardZLol said:

I Cant scale parts more than the first notch, not diameter, not lenght, anything. I tried installing with CKAN, manually, everything but it doesnt work. All dependencies are installed, i'm on version 1.10.1 using the newest (2.1.1) version of Porcedural Parts.

Are you in sandbox? Those limits are managed by part upgrades, and KSP doesn't give you any part upgrades in sandbox unless you turn on a setting:

On 9/1/2020 at 5:47 PM, DRVeyl said:

"When upgrading an existing career, you may need to purchase the part size upgrades in R&D for previously unlocked tech nodes.
In sandbox play, you will need to enable "All Part Upgrades Applied In Sandbox" in the Difficulty settings, Advanced tab."

 

[CardZLol]

Just now, HebaruSan said:

Are you in sandbox? Those limits are managed by part upgrades, and KSP doesn't give you any part upgrades in sandbox unless you turn on a setting:

 

I'll try that, thanks!

[Ultimate Steve]

Is there any known bug where none of the textures will show in flight, leading to a fully white rocket? I'm in 1.3.1 and experiencing this issue.

[Crimeo]

I have textures available for procedural parts, but 100% of them are just variants of brushed metal...??? Nothing else. What am I missing?