Infernal Robotics - Next

[Rudolf Meier]

Magic Smoke Industries presents:

For all your actuation needs!

 

We all use and love infernal robotics. It offers great possibilities and adds a very important part of space exploration to the game: robotics.

But we all know that there were also limitations and problems with early versions of the project. The idea of the new version is to solve all those problems and take it to a new level.

 

What does Infernal Robotics let me do?  

Spoiler

the latest video made by Kottabos

 

this video is from KSP 1.1, so things may be missing or behave differently to that shown

 

What Is Included?

• Many robotics parts to suit almost any need
• A selection of structural parts and struts that allow for futuristic looking arms and contraptions to be built
• A variety of utility parts that enhance a robotics focus play-through

 

Pictures Of The Parts

Spoiler

A selection of structural parts for creating robotic contraptions! Includes trusses, tubes, and beams, each in three lengths, as well as various adapters between them. Also features special struts that can be decoupled during a mission.

Various rotational joints. On the left are Pivotrons that can rotate between two angles, and on the right are Rotatrons that can continuously rotate. By default only the large size is offered, but by using TweakScale a further 8 sizes are available.

A combination of translational joints and specialist rotational joints. On the right there's the normal, stackable, and right-angle Extendatrons in two lengths. On the left there are two Adaptron style Pivotrons that are good as robot arm bases, and in front of those are a controlled and free spinning bearing. By default only the large size is offered, but by using TweakScale a further 8 sizes are available.

The range of Foldatron joints, designed for creating compact arms such as what would be used on NASA's ATHLETE rover concept. By default only the large size is offered, but by using TweakScale a further 5 sizes are available.

This is the band new range of rail parts, including a combination of rotational and translational parts. These are ideal for those times when you want to mount larger items to robotic parts (such as wings). By default only the large size is offered, but by using TweakScale a further 8 sizes are available.

Here are the rail parts in various deployed states.

A selection of utility parts to expand the possibilities of robotics in KSP. There are three landing leg parts (two of which include suspension and can be stacked inside extendatrons), two attachment parts, two science parts, and an IR themed version of the Clamp-O-Tron Jr.

 

What Is New?

• Rewritten plugin that offers many improvements over the previous version! No gaps will form over time and you can use the parts together with docking ports. It is also possible now to undock parts and re-dock them inverted. They will continue to work. The joints should also be stronger and it doesn't allow you to control the parts if you cannot control the ship.
• Two new control modes! Rotor and Control. With those two modes you can control your robotic parts via steering commands (which includes your joystick!).
• 15 new Model Rework styled parts by ZodiusInfuser!
  • 13 Rail parts with short and long variants. Use these for whenever you need a larger surface to attach part to.
  • 2 suspension parts, allowing for DIY landing legs to be made.

 

Supported KSP Version

Works with 1.4 and later. The latest version is compiled against 1.12.3

 

How To Get It

this mod is 

Download: https://github.com/meirumeiru/InfernalRobotics/releases

Source: https://github.com/meirumeiru/InfernalRobotics

License: GPL-3.0

 

Recommended Mods

• KJR Next - If your ships are too unstable, this mod is for you! By reinforcing the unstable joints it makes it possible to fly also large configurations to space. KJR Next is compatible with Infernal Robotics Next and does not prevent robotic parts from moving but can secure them while they are locked!.
• InnerLock - A set of connector parts that allow separate craft, or parts of the same craft to be locked in place. Features parts that match the Model Rework style.

 

Supported Mods

• Community Tech Tree - Infernal Robotics Next is compatible with CTT.

 

Current Contributors

• @Rudolf Meier - Plugin Development and Feature Enhancement
• @ZodiusInfuser - Part Models, User Interface Graphics, Quality Assurance

 

Acknowledgements

Thanks go to the following people who have helped shape Infernal Robotics over its many years!

• @DYJ - For creating the original Damned Robotics that eventually became Infernal Robotics.
• @sirkut - For being the creator and first maintainer of Infernal Robotics.
• @Ziw - For maintaining Infernal Robotics after Sirkut, and doing a complete overhaul of the GUI. They also created the IR Sequencer. 
• @pellinor - For contributing improved servo control to Infernal Robotics (among other things)
• @erendrake - For contributor kOS integration to Infernal Robotics
• @Porkjet - For texturing the current selection of structural parts
• @DMagic - For developing the plugin for the surface sampler part
• @riocrokite - For creating the Infernal Robotics branding
• @Darren9 - For creating the Infernal Robotics Model Rework trailer

 

Info For Developers

[WIP] Infernal Robotics - Next

 

Edited February 17 by Rudolf Meier

[Daniel Prates]

WAT

[garwel]

Great, but I wonder how it will work with (and compared to) Breaking Ground.

[kcs123]

1 hour ago, garwel said:

Great, but I wonder how it will work with (and compared to) Breaking Ground.

IR mod use different module names than previous version of IR and it is different from stock names in DLC. So, it should work with new DLC just fine. Only possible issue might be that you could not use DLC parts with same control GUI as IR mod and vice versa. Possible support might only happen when DLC is released and more info about new API and usages for DLC parts are provided.

Should one work better than other it will be hard to tell until we all have a chance to try both and deceide.

[ZodiusInfuser]

Glad that this is finally out! Hope you all enjoy the new parts! Been a while since I've done modelling for KSP so took me a bit of time to get back into the swing of things.

Note that the suspension feet are new for me so I suspect some tweaking will be needed but hopefully they are good enough for people to have some fun with. Here's some craft I tested with

[Rudolf Meier]

30 minutes ago, ZodiusInfuser said:

Note that the suspension feet are new for me so I suspect some tweaking will be needed but hopefully they are good enough for people to have some fun with. Here's some craft I tested with

with the right settings for spring and damper, you can even use them as shock absorbers! ... at least that's what I think... I never really tested it

[kcs123]

2 hours ago, Rudolf Meier said:

with the right settings for spring and damper, you can even use them as shock absorbers! ... at least that's what I think... I never really tested it

One of first hing to try, as soon as I grab some time for it.

[Daniel Prates]

On 5/27/2019 at 11:09 AM, garwel said:

Great, but I wonder how it will work with (and compared to) Breaking Ground.

If anything, I am hoping it will work better.

[sirkut]

About time! Can't wait to give this a whirl. I've been holding off trying anything until you were happy. Kudos @Rudolf Meier

[kcs123]

For anyone who play with Unkerbaled Start tech tree mod, I have created MM patches for IR Next parts and my own personal usage. Figured out that others may also benefit from it:

 

[JaredTheDragon]

This looks great!

But I'm curious why you don't have the KSP version number in your title, for quick compatibility reference?

[Rudolf Meier]

5 minutes ago, JaredTheDragon said:

This looks great!

But I'm curious why you don't have the KSP version number in your title, for quick compatibility reference?

thanks

because it's almost always automatically compatible with all currently supported KSP versions (if they don't change huge things like the Unity version)... what should I write? [1.4+] ... this will lead to massiv questions when it will be updated to 1.7... or do I write 1.7? then 1.7.1 comes out, needs no updated and someone needs to change the title... or do I write [any] like some do? ... is this more useful? ... in my opinion the user shouldn't  care about those versions as long as we don't see a problem with a specific version of KSP and the modder has to make sure that it works

[goldenpsp]

@Rudolf Meier Congrats on the release!  IR has always been a super fun addition to the game.  And I totally agree with the subject choice.  It is infinitely annoying to see the many replies of "but the subject says KSP version x" simply because players can't be bothered to either read the release notes or check the download link.

[Guest]

1. Don't use TGA files in release versions.
2. The rail hinges are too weak to actually use them in folding wings and the like. As in, the hinge itself is forced open by aerodynamic forces. 
3. Get rid of warning stripes off the trusses. Looks bad in a single part, looks worse when stacked.
4. What happened to the wheels? I remember there being a nice selection at one point.
5. Use ReStock art in the dockport, not stock. Stock looks bad. 

Edited May 28, 2019 by Guest

[ZodiusInfuser]

9 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

1. Don't use TGA files in release versions.
2. The rail hinges are too weak to actually use them in folding wings and the like. As in, the hinge itself is forced open by aerodynamic forces. 
3. Get rid of warning stripes off the trusses. Looks bad in a single part, looks worse when stacked.
4. What happened to the wheels? I remember there being a nice selection at one point.
5. Use ReStock art in the dockport, not stock. Stock looks bad. 

1. Why? What do you suggest I use instead, and what are the benefits of switching?
2. I'll leave that one for Rudolf to answer
3. You're the first person to complain about them in all these years that those parts have existed. Not going to change them.
4. They were broken when KSP updated its wheel physics several years ago. Maybe I'll get time in the coming months to fix them if I can find a good wheel tutorial.
5. I agree it looks bad but using it is consistent with the stock one, and switching to the ReStock one would add a dependency on our mod for a single part. Its only a model reference though, so if you use ReStock it should automatically switch to their version (although the IR geometry may not fully match any more).

[linuxgurugamer]

3 minutes ago, ZodiusInfuser said:

? What do you suggest I use instead, and what are the benefits of switching

Release files should be DDS.  Less processing by the game to load.

[ZodiusInfuser]

Just now, linuxgurugamer said:

Release files should be DDS.  Less processing by the game to load.

Okay, I was not aware of this, nor familiar with that file format. How do we create them?

[Svm420]

6 minutes ago, ZodiusInfuser said:

1. Why? What do you suggest I use instead, and what are the benefits of switching?

DDS. All non DDS textures are converted to DDS during the load screen. Having them already as DDS saves time and memory i believe. Couldn't tell you what DDS format as I don't mess with textures too much but it depending on what the texture is used for eg. normal map vs regular texture sheet.

Ninja'd by LGG

1 minute ago, ZodiusInfuser said:

Okay, I was not aware of this, nor familiar with that file format. How do we create them?

Convert them with a converter, I know Nvidea has one I believe or you maybe able to export the textures in that format deepening on the tool you use.

Edited May 28, 2019 by Svm420

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, ZodiusInfuser said:

1. I agree it looks bad but using it is consistent with the stock one, and switching to the ReStock one would add a dependency on our mod for a single part. Its only a model reference though, so if you use ReStock it should automatically switch to their version (although the IR geometry may not fully match any more).

It doesn't switch. Probably because ReStock doesn't overwrite the model directly. An MM patch would be needed for that.

[linuxgurugamer]

13 minutes ago, Svm420 said:

DDS. All non DDS textures are converted to DDS during the load screen. Having them already as DDS saves time and memory i believe. Couldn't tell you what DDS format as I don't mess with textures too much but it depending on what the texture is used for eg. normal map vs regular texture sheet.

Ninja'd by LGG

Convert them with a converter, I know Nvidea has one I believe or you maybe able to export the textures in that format deepening on the tool you use.

And you will probably need to flip the image vertically

[Rudolf Meier]

38 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

2. The rail hinges are too weak to actually use them in folding wings and the like. As in, the hinge itself is forced open by aerodynamic forces. 

That's the old "unity joints are weak" thing... a joint is stronger when attached to a heavy part. And you can try to add additional struts somehow. Some experimented with that and had success. Depending on how the joint moves under load, you can also try to tweak the cfg file. I haven't tested them myself for this scenario.

[Guest]

How am I supposed to strut a moving part? A wing constructed the same way, without the hinges, is solid enough. It's the hinges themselves that get forced open, and the whole plane looks like an epileptic seagull. It's not even that big (though it does have an engine mounted in the middle, though that doesn't seem to be a problem). It's not joints between the hinge and wing pieces, either (those are perfectly fine). Also, the problems are the worst when in the air, since the wing folds upwards. When it's being pulled downwards by the weight of the engine, thus acting against the hinge's "stop", it's solid enough (unless it's partially folded, of course). As far as engineering goes, I'd say the fault is within the hinge itself.

Edited May 28, 2019 by Guest

[Rudolf Meier]

14 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

How am I supposed to strut a moving part?

use multiple hinges and connect the wing to it via a strut

is this hinge especially weak compared to others?

[Guest]

I didn't test the others, it's the only one that fits (the wing is one panel wide). Short rail hinge, to be specific. Seeing as there's no shorter one, I'd say multiple hinges are not going to work in this design, though I could test that, I suppose. 

[Rudolf Meier]

4 minutes ago, Dragon01 said:

I didn't test the others, it's the only one that fits (the wing is one panel wide). Short rail hinge, to be specific. Seeing as there's no shorter one, I'd say multiple hinges are not going to work in this design, though I could test that, I suppose. 

if they don't need to move in flight -> lock them and KJR Next will do the rest