[1.8.1 - 1.12.2] KSP Interstellar Extended 1.29.5 Release Thread

[AntaresMC]

5 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Well I currently do not have power production on the Plasma nozzle (only on the Deadalus and Z-Pinch) but think it would be an interesting option.

Or just make the CP production scale up... Its quick and dirty but gets the job done. And if wanna make the plasma nozzle generate electricity, has to curve towards inside somewhere, and I prefer an accelerator nozzle (like a railgun). Do I draw it? Its hard to explain, and Im as good at it as a closed book...

Edit: wait, wait, no! The kinda cilinder it has in the start would do the trick, no need for design change. Still prefer accelerator nozzle.

Edited May 27, 2020 by AntaresMC

[FreeThinker]

13 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

In TweakScale it says 3.75 (Im in an old version of a few months ago, mabe is 1.9 incompatibility). And Im referring to the real one that around 10×10×15m plus nozzle

Also 3.75 base looks more sensible since you want upgrades to make it bigger, you dont miniaturize an engine that gets worse smaller

Yes but the diameter is 5m, similar to the MCF which I defined as the default minimum size. I made it that because these reactors inherently are very bulky.

19 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

Right, also the more WasteHeat the engine has, the more difficult is to maintain fusion, as hotter magnets go worse.

Yes, the more wasteheat is produced, the hotter the radiators get, the less efficient power production becomes.

But you didn't answer my question which is "does doubling the thrust (by lowering isp from 12000s to 6000s) double or quadruple the power cost?"

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

7 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Yes but the diameter is 5m, similar to the MCF which I defined as the default minimum size. I made it that because these reactors inherently are very bulky.

Tokomaks are bulky, but a Discovery like engine will not need most its things, as it doesnt have to confine the plasma for longer than seconds until goes out.

Also shielding and things like that are needed for thermal power production, but they are all unwanted in a direct fusion rocket.

Ive seen concepts of dirct MCFR 2m r sized (and kerbal engines are all 1/2 diameter as real ones), and the burn chamber of less thn a m...

Edited May 27, 2020 by AntaresMC

[FreeThinker]

16 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

Or just make the CP production scale up... Its quick and dirty but gets the job done. And if wanna make the plasma nozzle generate electricity, has to curve towards inside somewhere, and I prefer an accelerator nozzle (like a railgun). Do I draw it? Its hard to explain, and Im as good at it as a closed book...

Edit: wait, wait, no! The kinda cilinder it has in the start would do the trick, no need for design change. Still prefer accelerator nozzle.

how much of the energy can you reasonably extract from a plasma exhaust? 0 to 10%, also at what efficiency?

1 hour ago, AntaresMC said:

3rd) WHEN THE HELL DO YOU WANNA ADD DEGENERATE MATTER!!? Yea, its not as famous as fusion or antimatter, but deserves love, and its so useful... its like a happy middle between the two, AM is really underpowered in KSPIE, like an order of mzgnitude less than its potential, looks like an early technology that hasnt evolved enogh... I think pressurized degenerate fusion fuels (can be even stable with active support and cryo cooling) and then neutronium would easily fill the gap. Ultimately quark matter could be a direct competence to antimatter... I only let it fall...

Love to but I figured the stuff would be too hard and dangerous to store. How should a degenerate matter storage container look like?

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

11 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

how much of the energy can you reasonably extract from a plasma exhaust? 0 to 10%, also at what efficiency?

Same efficiency as an MHD (same system) is a hard max, can extract all you want but 1w you extract, 1 less w you have... for the mini-cilinder of the mag nozzle Id say 10% is optimistic. BUT Id like if you could change it, like a slider, the more left the more power it gets, the center gets 0, the more right, the more power it uses but improves Isp (equal to the energy it uses, times nozzle efficiency) and thrust (equal to 1/2 its energy).

You know, all MJ get in, MJ in Psp (1/2thrust×Isp), MJ get out, MJ in Psp get out, and mabe can tweak it by +-10%, this gets to balance, your work.

Even you could get a slider of the railgun size, as stock rotors with its motor, and the more, the heavier but bigger the extractable/injectable power is.

Edited May 27, 2020 by AntaresMC

[FreeThinker]

11 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

Tokomaks are bulky, but a Discovery like engine will not need most its things, as it doesnt have to confine the plasma for longer than seconds until goes out.

Also shielding and things like that are needed for thermal power production, but they are all unwanted in a direct fusion rocket.

Ive seen concepts of dirct MCFR 2m r sized (and kerbal engines are all 1/2 diameter as real ones), and the burn chamber of less thn a m...

To reduce weight, I excluded the lithium breeding blanked (that is present in the Tokamak) and assumed only 50% of the neutrons would be available for thermal power. and limited it to Low Neutron fuel modes.

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

19 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

To reduce weight, I excluded the lithium breeding blanked (that is present in the Tokamak) and assumed only 50% of the neutrons would be available for thermal power. and limited it to Low Neutron fuel modes.

MEEEH, WROONG! The Li6 blanket double as coolant and its not extra weight, it can even be even shooted out the back open cycle like. Lets explain. Imagine a LCNTR, with its vortex, but made of Li6H and very thin. The D and T breed buble out to burn, mabe some Li6 burn as well, and the ones that dont burn will inneficiently burn in the bottleneck of the nozzle and give extra free thrust and cooling. If do it, you can make tinfoil thin CNHf alloy that let the almost all neutrons scape, and the ones absorbed by Li go out the back, heating only a little bit.Thats why in my example I assumed n transparency. Also the shiny LH (moreless) help keep plasma temperature.

Low n fuel modes are almost the same as high n ones, the only difference is low n ones require less fuel flow for same temp, making them better in Isp, worse in thrust, both linerarly with n % times total output (this means even D-D is better than H-B, take that, silly H-B fans! ) Im a bit H-B hater, was it noticed?

All thermal power comes from blackbody and bernsstahlung rad. A bit from cherenkov and n but negligible.

Edited May 27, 2020 by AntaresMC

[FreeThinker]

22 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

MEEEH, WROONG! The Li6 blanket double as coolant and its not extra weight, it can even be even shooted out the back open cycle like. Lets explain. Imagine a LCNTR, with its vortex, but made of Li6H and very thin. The D and T breed buble out to burn, mabe some Li6 burn as well, and the ones that dont burn will inneficiently burn in the bottleneck of the nozzle and give extra free thrust and cooling. If do it, you can make tinfoil thin CNHf alloy that let the almost all neutrons scape, and the ones absorbed by Li go out the back, heating only a little bit.Thats why in my example I assumed n transparency. Also the shiny LH (moreless) help keep plasma temperature.

Low n fuel modes are almost the same as high n ones, the only difference is low n ones require less fuel flow for same temp, making them better in Isp, worse in thrust, both linerarly with n %

In a way, This is already part of the engine, Lithium counts as a neutron absorbent propellant which when used as a propellant will gain extra energy from neutron absorbtion , which translates into a thrust bonus.

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

1 minute ago, FreeThinker said:

In a way, This is already part of the engine, Lithium count as a neutron absorbent propellant which when used as a propellant will gain extra energy from neutron absorbtion , which translates into a thrust bonus.

The idea is to breed D and T, the free propellant is a plus because its too heavy to have a closed loop, not worth it, and a dood chunk of the Li6 fuses at the nozzle. 

12 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

All thermal power comes from blackbody and bernsstahlung rad. A bit from cherenkov and n but negligible.

 

[FreeThinker]

18 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

Low n fuel modes are almost the same as high n ones, the only difference is low n ones require less fuel flow for same temp, making them better in Isp, worse in thrust, both linerarly with n %

What I also did is make the effective core temperature depend on the Fusion CP% percentage, meaning DT fusion would have lowest Isp and D-He3 would produce higher isp

4 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

The idea is to breed D and T, the free propellant is a plus because its too heavy to have a closed loop, not worth it, and a dood chunk of the Li6 fuses at the nozzle.

You mean the Hydrogen propellant  would absorb neutrons and turn into Deuterium and Tritium?

edit: Yes I figured a closed loop would be too heavy, that why I said it lacks a (closed cycle ) lithium blanket

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

11 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

What I also did is make the effective core temperature depend on the Fusion CP% percentage, meaning DT fusion would have lowest Isp and D-He3 would produce higher isp

Exactly! But, warm He3+D-He3 is more energetic, and like 99.5% CP (better than H-B). Also He3-He3 is 100% CP, but les energetic.

Edit: not more energetic, actually less, but lower Lawson and 10 times less neutrons, so more usefully energetic.

11 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

What I also did is make the effective core temperature depend on the Fusion CP% percentage, meaning DT fusion would have lowest Isp and D-He3 would produce higher isp

NONONONO, sorry, no.

The core temp is only dependant on Size²/FuelFlow (only if you want a, lets say not single use, not violently deflagrative engine) XD

The thing is that low n modes require less fuel flow to the same energy, so, its a byproduct, not a direct ralationship

Ok, replies merged, do I delete the 1st, wrong one?

Edited May 27, 2020 by AntaresMC

[FreeThinker]

15 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

The core temp is only dependant on Size²/FuelFlow (only if you want a, lets say not single use, not violently deflagrative engine) XD

Alright so core temperate scale with size exponent 2, How about magnet nozzle power cost, will also scale with fuelflow  exponent  2?

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

Yes, the more wasteheat is produced, the hotter the radiators get, the less efficient power production becomes.

But you didn't answer my question which is "does doubling the thrust (by lowering isp from 12000s to 6000s) double or quadruple the power cost?"

No, the power production gets inneficient AND the magnets as well, leading to a cascade effect (dont worry blackbody goes with T⁴, this effect is just squared)

Double the thrust would multiply cost by 2 (1/2 as hot plasma gives 1/8 the heat, but need twice the energy to maintain, so 1/4, its a log curve), but also 2× power output, but as 1/2 core temp, its not 2× but 1.4× (sqr2) effective cost

[FreeThinker]

27 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

Exactly! But, warm He3+D-He3 is more energetic, and like 99.5% CP (better than H-B). Also He3-He3 is 100% CP, but les energetic.

Edit: not more energetic, actually less, but lower Lawson and 10 times less neutrons, so more usefully energetic.

Alright, but what about wasteheat, wouldn't D-He3 require hotter temperatures to fuse compared to D-T, also produce more wasteheat?

Sorry for all the questions but it isn't often that I meet someone with more knowledge on fusion than me ;-)

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

41 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

You mean the Hydrogen propellant  would absorb neutrons and turn into Deuterium and Tritium?

edit: Yes I figured a closed loop would be too heavy, that why I said it lacks a (closed cycle ) lithium blanket

No, H is a good moderator, absorbs very little thermal n when hot, but a lotta when they are cold, this means that only a small % will transmute into D

D is the best moderator/deflector I know of (close to He) wont absorb a n in its life (has so little cross section that I would need scientific notation). Use Li6H, or if dont care about n, Li7H (mabe too much embrittlement, the mag coils still block them). The T is bred fine, the D, not quite, youll have to recycle H over and over.

And dont need closed loop, just dump the unburnt out the nozzle, free thrust and if Li6, may fuse and give a bit more power.

33 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Alright so core temperate scale with size exponent 2, How about magnet nozzle power cost, will also scale with fuelflow  exponent  2?

No, size² is because surface area (aka thermal mass) is squared, fuel flow is exp -1, as the plasma has to be cooler to not damage the engine 

25 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Alright, but what about wasteheat, wouldn't D-He3 require hotter temperatures to fuse compared to D-T, also produce more wasteheat?

Sorry for all the questions but it isn't often that I meet someone with more knowledge on fusion than me ;-)

Nope, because you cant have too much heat (read radiative absorption) per unit of mass (area in this case) because all radiation can become ionizing if hot enough and last thing we want is a burn/embrittlement in our tinfoil thick CNHf alloy.

[FreeThinker]

17 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

No, H is a good moderator, absorbs very little thermal n when hot, but a lotta when they are cold, this means that only a small % will transmute into D

D is the best moderator/deflector I know of (close to He) wont absorb a n in its life (has so little cross section that I would need scientific notation). Use Li6H, or if dont care about n, Li7H (mabe too much embrittlement, the mag coils still block them). The T is bred fine, the D, not quite, youll have to recycle H over and over.

Ok, regarding neutron absorption I had the following Idea which is "VAB Beeding Blanket switching". Instead of using the blanket to breed tritium from Lithium6, it could be replaced by hydrogen to breed deuterium or Thorium to breed Uranium 233 or Depleted Uranium to Breed Plutonium.

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

43 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Sorry for all the questions but it isn't often that I meet someone with more knowledge on fusion than me ;-)

No problem, I learnt by asking, enjoy answering (make me think, I havent done the math for the Discovery before, the 1st posts were eyemeasured).

The trick is just brute force, read a lot, memorize formulae and interactions, make a tierlist in your head (dont matter, jus for organization, but He3+He3-D #best and H-B #worst XD), and forget about quantum mechanics, the formulas and theory contain all you need without much weirdness.

Just as the Saitama trainig, just brute force. Read everything you possibly can, and contain the tinyest amout of info, even YT videos contain info (better papers, more info/time). And Im not an expert just a super nerd that wastes most his time searching and playng KSP. AthomicRockrts is your friend! You are lucky to be english speaking...

8 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Ok, regarding neutron absorption I had the following Idea which "Beeding Blanket switching". Instead of using the blanket to breed tritium from Lithium6, it could be replaced by hydrogen to breed deuterium or Thorium to breed Uranium 233 or Depleted Uranium to Breed Plutonium.

Th requires a sh1tload of heat to melt and U not that lot less, and you are using fusion fuel, and the Li blanket isnt enough by no means.

You could mix the Li blanket with other fertiles in a %, that would solve the heat problem, also you'd need a closed loop and thats not worth the extra mass.

Instead why dont do it with reactors? And with no active nozzles attached, if not I can see exploits. Dont think Discovery can afford a lot of extra mass...

Edited May 27, 2020 by AntaresMC
Excrementsload dont exist XD

[FreeThinker]

15 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

Th requires a sh1tload of heat to melt and U not that lot less, and you are using fusion fuel, and the Li blanket isnt enough by no means.

You could mix the Li blanket with other fertiles in a %, that would solve the heat problem, also you'd need a closed loop and thats not worth the extra mass.

Instead why dont do it with reactors? And with no active nozzles attached, if not I can see exploits. Dont think Discovery can afford a lot of extra mass...

No, the blanket is not intended for the Discovery (which is mend for deep space exploration), but rather the MFC on the surface  Planets or Moonm space station to power beamed power transmitters

4 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

Talking on exploits, is there any thread to post bugs/exploits. Im a spiffing brit level amazing person in gaming and would wanna report some bizarre things I found. And exploits are ethically correct and more fun if they are can be patched (aka, the dev knows)...

Well, you can report bugs either on the KSPIE Support thread, on the bugs discord chat or create a ticket in KSPIE GitHub What ever you like best

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

6 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

if not I can see exploits. 

Talking on exploits, is there any thread to post bugs/exploits. Im a spiffing brit level amazing person in gaming and would wanna report some bizarre things I found. And exploits are ethically correct and more fun if they are can be patched (aka, the dev knows)...

[AntaresMC]

41 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

No, the blanket is not intended for the Discovery (which is mend for deep space exploration), but rather the MFC on the surface  Planets or Moonm space station to power beamed power transmitters

Well, you can report bugs either on the KSPIE Support thread, on the bugs discord chat or create a ticket in KSPIE GitHub What ever you like best

Wasnt yet? I dont use the tokomak a lot, prefer the stellerator or the MIF. I see it a no brainer, GOGOGO GO! XD

But do it with all neuron sources, not just the tokimak.

Got it, thaks! Ive got really bizarre things from being a rock to a hyperglic ship, violations of thermodynamics and double nozzles (Id love if that last was legit)

41 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

No, the blanket is not intended for the Discovery (which is mend for deep space exploration), but rather the MFC on the surface  Planets or Moonm space station to power beamed power transmitters

Talking on that (almost):

Id love to know how do thermal nozzles work, because its says it has a heat exchanger but the math dont say the same (at least not for things hotter than the pebble bed). A complete therm nozzle descriptions' overhaul is needed (also thermal nozzles become useless at around 6000K)

Edited May 27, 2020 by AntaresMC

[FreeThinker]

17 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

Id love to know how do thermal nozzles work, because its says it has a heat exchanger but the math dont say the same (at least not for things hotter than the pebble bed). A complete therm nozzle descriptions' overhaul is needed (also thermal nozzles become useless at around 6000K)

Yes, well its more like a universal power to thrust converter with configurable behavior. The plasma nozzle and thermal nozzle are technically the same thing with some altered config settings which are partially derived from the connected reactor, and chosen propellant , so when its connected to a gas core reactor it performs different than when connected to a molten salt reactor.

Edited May 27, 2020 by FreeThinker

[AntaresMC]

44 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Yes, well its more like a universal power to thrust converter with configurable behavior. The plasma nozzle and thermal nozzle are technically the same thing with some altered config settings which are partially derived from the connected reactor, and chosen propellant , so when its connected to a gas core reactor it performs different than when connected to a molten salt reactor.

The plasma and mag nozzle aint the same, as one is a mag mirror with a hall effect or something along the lines accelerator. 

The other is an MHD backwards with a railgun. And actually they have different mag field configurations (insert technobable) that dont work the same.

I know its a placeholder for "everything that control heat explosions" but Id like a good review, because there are some problems:

1st) whats the reason plasma nozzles dont work in athmo? As long as they have enough pressure shoud work.

2nd) there's no reason ever to use the thermal aerospike, less fuel variety, less thrust, same weight, same Isp. For some reason, there's no Isp curve in the thermal nozzles (nor in every other nozzle), that would be AN's strong point.

3rd) there's no reason ever to use the thermal ramjet nozzle, all the other do whatever job better. Same of the Isp curve complaints.

4th) thermal nozzles work by the same principle as the orbital scanner, witchery (its canon lol).

5th) Id love interchangeable nozzles, for example an AIFF with a turbojet for thrust/athmo and a plasma nozzle (thats 2× as efficient with that reactor) for in space, or an AFFRE like nozzle (can use CP or plasma). It can be done with exploits, but Id like if it was legit and there's no reason why dont do it...

Also, the Tory engine isnt very realistic as a ramjet, but works exactly as a thermal turbojet would work, there's no reason for a differentiated turbojet and ramjet, they would work both very similarly and its so easy to shift gears from one to another. Also there's no reason why regular Zpinch (exist in the first place) cant work in athmo, nor the plasma, bell, aerospike, lightbulb (that need a small buff), the plasma drives (that have enogh pressuse, probably only ATILLA) and probably Im forgettig someone cant work on air intake...

And why the mag nozzle is so big!? CP only need channeling, the less they expand the better, and mag fields work better closer. Id suggest a smaller, not as wide model, and a bit shorter.

Edited May 27, 2020 by AntaresMC

[FreeThinker]

8 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

1st) whats the reason plasma nozzles dont work in athmo? As long as they have enough pressure shoud work.

True that exactly how they work now, its exhaust pressure versus nozzle exit air pressure , as long as exhaust pressure wins, you got thust, otherwise you just heating up the air.

11 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

3rd) there's no reason ever to use the thermal ramjet nozzle, all the other do whatever job better. Same of the Isp curve complaints.

Well, do allow smaller engines and lower power reactors to operate at higher atmospheric pressures, but given enough power, it doesn't matter

[AntaresMC]

3 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

True that exactly how they work now, its exhaust pressure versus nozzle exit air pressure , as long as exhaust pressure wins, you got thust, otherwise you just heating up the air.

But they can be really thrusty, Ive made plasma nozzles with around 100kN 1000s, thats a good pressure isnt it? And havent never had one working on Kerbin

Edited May 27, 2020 by AntaresMC

[FreeThinker]

14 minutes ago, AntaresMC said:

3rd) there's no reason ever to use the thermal ramjet nozzle, all the other do whatever job better. Same of the Isp curve complaints.

KSPIE ramjet are more like scramjet than true ramjets as they allow you speed up to higher speed in upper atmospheres

Just now, AntaresMC said:

But they can be really thrusty, Ive made plasma nozzles with around 100kN 1000s, thats a good pressure isnt it? And havent never had one working on Kerbin

Weird, it should work, perhaps the exhaust area is configured wrong.