Jump to content

[1.5.0 <-> 1.8.1] Kerbalism v3.2

N70

By N70
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

eberkain

eberkain

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, william2002730 said:

Yeah, but it doesn't really work, however pressing b works fine for me

what orbital altitude for Kerbin exposes the ship to least radiation? I tried many but all of them the geiger counter said the radiation levels are dangerous, and the ship cannot last for more than 20 days with 20mm of shielding.

Check the numlock key.  

There are 2 high radiation zones, the donut close to the equator, don't be inside that.  Then farther out is another field with a fairly thin wall, dont be inside the wall of that either and you should be good.   There is a little background radiation everywhere also, but I have found that a fully shielded pod is more than enough even when you have a solar storm.   

It would be cool if the system also modeled anomaly zones

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4x4cheesecake

4x4cheesecake

Posted
Posted

I guess, I found a little bug regarding the transfer of science data:

GgtbZ4Z.png

Whenever a Kerbal on EVA takes all the data, it cannot be transfered into a different part of the vessel but the one it is take from.
In the picture above, I collected some data (while Jeb is inside of the vessel), transfered the data to the inline cockpit, went on EVA, Jeb took the data but I cannot put it into the mk1 command pod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lordcirth

lordcirth

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, 4x4cheesecake said:

I guess, I found a little bug regarding the transfer of science data:

GgtbZ4Z.png

Whenever a Kerbal on EVA takes all the data, it cannot be transfered into a different part of the vessel but the one it is take from.
In the picture above, I collected some data (while Jeb is inside of the vessel), transfered the data to the inline cockpit, went on EVA, Jeb took the data but I cannot put it into the mk1 command pod.

I don't see how this is really a problem?  Put it into the pod, then transfer it to the pod you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Jet

Dr. Jet

Posted
Posted (edited)

Configurations for StationPartsExpansionRedux heavy greenhouse parts are ridiculously low (66% and 42% effciency of lightweight Kerbalism greenhouse respectively).

Extra "living space" does not compensate for such tremendous efficiency reduction, rendering those parts obsolete.

Also, quesstimating phytotrone efficiency by it's volume seems incorrect. Square is what plays a role, until we are speaking about algae tank.

Here are some numbers I calculated on base of BIOS-3 CLSS experiment.

Quote

Original Bios-3 project by Krasnoyarsk Biophysics Institute (1968) took place in 14m x 9m x 2.5m camera and hosted 3 humans. It achieved fully closed cycle for oxygen, 95% closed cycle for water and 20% closed cycle for food.

3/4 of this camera were phytotrones (1 algae and 2 plant sections), what gives us 94.5 m2 used AREA or 236.25m3 total VOLUME of phytotrones needed.

Kerbal life support consumption is around 1/4 of human's. Thus we need either 23.625m2 AREA or 59.0625 m3 VOLUME of phytotrones for 3 kerbals (7.875m2 AREA or 19,6875m3 VOLUME of phytotrones for 1 kerbal).

But that assumes we use artificial lighting and VERY densely packaged phytotrones. It's viable for algae, but plant sections more rely on area than volume. One can't effectively grow cereals in aeroponic towers.

So, to satisfy most needs of one kerbal (except food) we need about 5,1975 m2 of insolated AREA for plant phytotrones and ALSO 6,5625 m3 of VOLUME for artificially lightened algae phytotron.

BTW, in BIOS-3 experiment there was not any external supply of fertilizer. Only natural recycling.

P.S. With new invention of Krasnoyarsk Biophysics Institute (2015), efficiency can be even higher. They invented a process to quickly decompose human waste into viable fertilizer using only hydrogen peroxide and electricity.

P.P.S. Main github instance of Kerbalism seems dead. What fork is alive now? 

Edited by Dr. Jet
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lordcirth

lordcirth

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Dr. Jet said:

Configurations for StationPartsExpansionRedux heavy greenhouse parts are ridiculously low (66% and 42% effciency of lightweight Kerbalism greenhouse respectively).

Extra "living space" does not compensate for such tremendous efficiency reduction, rendering those parts obsolete.

Also, quesstimating phytotrone efficiency by it's volume seems incorrect. Square is what plays a role, until we are speaking about algae tank.

Here are some numbers I calculated on base of BIOS-3 CLSS experiment.

BTW, in BIOS-3 experiment there was not any external supply of fertilizer. Only natural recycling.

P.S. With new invention of Krasnoyarsk Biophysics Institute (2015), efficiency can be even higher. They invented a process to quickly decompose human waste into viable fertilizer using only hydrogen peroxide and electricity.

P.P.S. Main github instance of Kerbalism seems dead. What fork is alive now? 

I agree that the SSPX greenhouses seem quite weak.

Github is here, as linked in the OP:

https://github.com/steamp0rt/Kerbalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PiezPiedPy

PiezPiedPy

Posted
Posted

@Dr. Jet See here for Greenhouse information https://kerbalism.readthedocs.io/en/latest/kerbals.html#greenhouse

The SSPX greenhouses have a habitable section which uses the majority of the volume leaving only a small volume for the actual growing section.

The Kerbalism Greenhouse has 24 m^3 volume dedicated to food production (all greenhouses in mod support files are calculated relative to it).

SSPX 2.5m Greenhouse has a total volume of 26 m^3 made up of 10 m^3 habitat on the inner section and 16 m^3 food production on the outer.

SSPX 3.75m Greenhouse has a total volume of 25 m^3 made up of 15 m^3 habitat on the inner section and 10 m^3 food production on the outer.

The reason the SSPX greenhouses seem week is due to the fact that the growing volume on them is small.

@4x4cheesecake Kerbalism combines the separate SSD's on each pod that are on the same vessel into a single vessel wide SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4x4cheesecake

4x4cheesecake

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, PiezPiedPy said:

Kerbalism combines the separate SSD's on each pod that are on the same vessel into a single vessel wide SSD

That's even one more reason why it should be accessable on every pod and while on EVA, isn't it? Right now, it is just the pod my Kerbal was sitting in before he went on EVA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PiezPiedPy

PiezPiedPy

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 4x4cheesecake said:

That's even one more reason why it should be accessable on every pod and while on EVA, isn't it? Right now, it is just the pod my Kerbal was sitting in before he went on EVA.

tbh the science system needs a bit of work, there are a few little odd quirks with it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4x4cheesecake

4x4cheesecake

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, PiezPiedPy said:

tbh the science system needs a bit of work, there are a few little odd quirks with it

You guys already did a very good job on this mod, I'm sure you'll find a solution for all the quirks in it ;) Oh, and btw: thanks for all the comments in the source code, it helped a lot when I tried to find the reason for Science Alert not working with Kerbalism :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Jet

Dr. Jet

Posted
Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, PiezPiedPy said:

@Dr. Jet See here for Greenhouse information https://kerbalism.readthedocs.io/en/latest/kerbals.html#greenhouse

The SSPX greenhouses have a habitable section which uses the majority of the volume leaving only a small volume for the actual growing section.

The Kerbalism Greenhouse has 24 m^3 volume dedicated to food production (all greenhouses in mod support files are calculated relative to it).

SSPX 2.5m Greenhouse has a total volume of 26 m^3 made up of 10 m^3 habitat on the inner section and 16 m^3 food production on the outer.

SSPX 3.75m Greenhouse has a total volume of 25 m^3 made up of 15 m^3 habitat on the inner section and 10 m^3 food production on the outer.

The reason the SSPX greenhouses seem week is due to the fact that the growing volume on them is small.

Yeah, yeah, I have read description in cfg files too... Those assumptions are plain wrong. Using VOLUME to assess crops is WRONG. Growing AREA is what matters. (Yeah, I forgot that word and used word "square").

Let's check this assumptions...

 

I used Blender .mu import to calculate actual growing area of greenhouse parts. (Assuming model size ratio is 1.0)

Kerbalism Greenhouse. 

Easy one, as growing area is simple flat surface, painted with microgreens texture. It has two sections of 2.4m2 each, so exactly 4.8 m2. (

It's not enough for single kerbal, btw. We need 5,2 m2 AND ALSO  6,56 m3 of algae tanks. And this model does not have space for algae tanks.

SSPX 2.5m greenhouse.

Harder to calculate... It uses actual plant models rather than painted surfaces...

We have 18 sections and each of those has two of it's side walls as growing areas.

Using the whole side walls area for calculation it's 0.44m2*2*18 = 15.84 m2... Impressive difference, isn't it? And it is not in favor of Kerbalism Greenhouse.

Though using the area of small "hydroponic pots" only it's 0.0208m2*3*2*18 = 2.2464 m2.

Concidering plant models are about twice as wide as pots they grow in, we have  8.9856 m2. Not so impressive, but still almost twice better than Kerbalism Greenhouse. 

No algae tanks in IVA though. Not even a place for them.

SSPX 3.75m greenhouse.

Two growing areas on "top" and "bottom" are 5.6m2 each, wich gives us 11.2m2. 

No "hydroponic pots" in model though. And plant models are distributed scarcely (to spare our GPUs). Concidering edges of area are hidden beneath "pipes", effective area should be a bit smaller - around 9-9.5m2 possibly.

Also, IVA model has some closets, which can hide algae tanks inside.

 

So... 

Kerbalism configuration was misquided by SSPX plant models being less visually dense than painted surface in KG model.

Gameplaywize I recommend to skip minor differences and configure both SSPX greenhouses to effectively produce oxygen for TWO kerbals.

 

Update:

Patch is ready  https://github.com/steamp0rt/Kerbalism/pull/193

SSPX 2.5m greenhouse is actually an interesting one. 18 independent small greenhouses allow for crop rotation, effectively harvesting 1 section every 11 days.

Edited by Dr. Jet
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Powered By Sprinkles

Powered By Sprinkles

Posted
Posted

so i'm having a problem with the mod, it wont let me view the radiation fields, it doesn't come up with the mod button but some of the stuff from the mod is still working. i have reinstalled it and its dependencies with no luck and i am playing on a clean 1.4.5. is this just my game or do  i need to roll back to an earlier Ver?

 

thanks in advance

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Jet

Dr. Jet

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hm-m-m... According to this model of BIOS-3, I overesimated both the growth area and algae tank volume needed. See those bioreactors? They are not so big... Ans phytotrones does not take the whole sections either.

And during experiment algae section was succesfully replaced with third phytotron, what I didn't know about.

1517747530149757362.png

  1. Living quarters
  2. Phytotrones. One - for wheat, one for veggies.
  3. Algae bioreactors (tanks with inner lighting).

The whole installation is 14 x 9 x 2.5m. Each room is 7x 4.5 x 2.5m.

Also found today a very nice document: http://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/47/9/575.full.pdf

It is the most full and comprehensive online document about BIOS-3 I've ever seen! Much better than even russian documents I read before.

According to table 2, phytotrone with plants only (no algae tanks) can produce enough oxygen for 1 human if it's growth area is 13 m2. For 1 kerbal it should be 4 times smaller - 3.25 m2.

Seems that Kerbalism Greenhouse model with it's 4.8 m2 growth area is OK for 1,47 kerbals than. :huh:

SSPX 2.5 Greenhouse in that case is OK for 2.7 kerbals and SSPX 3.75 Greenhouse if OK for 2.7-3 kerbals.

 

Though gameplaywise, I still see it as balanced for 1, 2 and 2 kerbals accordingly. There should be some surplus space for the case plants won't grow well.

Edited by Dr. Jet
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tricky14

Tricky14

Posted
Posted (edited)

Came across a bug with solar panels. They stop charging my batteries if the battery level gets too low, which is probably as intended to simulate low-powered electronics failing? However, if I run out of battery power completely and leave the vehicle, the solar panels will still charge the battery in my absence. It doesn't resume charging the battery in when I re-enter the vehicle though.

Edited by Tricky14
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lordcirth

lordcirth

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Tricky14 said:

Came across a bug with solar panels. They stop charging my batteries if the battery level gets too low, which is probably as intended to simulate low-powered electronics failing? However, if I run out of battery power completely and leave the vehicle, the solar panels will still charge the battery in my absence. It doesn't resume charging the battery in when I re-enter the vehicle though.

If you right-click on the panels, do they say they are occluded?  Also, are you running Kerbalism 1.8.0, and what KSP version?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lordcirth

lordcirth

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Tricky14 said:

No occlusion. I got the one from CKAN since I don't really have the time to keep track of all the mods I use. I understand that's not the latest? KSP is the latest stable version though.

The CKAN version of Kerbalism is currently broken.  Download 1.8.0 from here: https://github.com/steamp0rt/Kerbalism/releases

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...