[1.3.1] Ferram Aerospace Research: v0.15.9.1 "Liepmann" 4/2/18

[steve_v]

4 minutes ago, aluc24 said:

Yes, I have the 1028 version, and the latest FAR. Still, the water seems to have almost no resistance. Why does FAR influence water at all?

I must say I have noticed this too - water drag (at least on the surface) seems improbably low. So I'll second the question: why does FAR need to modify water drag at all? Does it?
I haven't actually booted the game without FAR in... well, I forget - essential mod 'n all, so I'm not sure what stock is like.

Likewise with the latest FAR / KSP versions, no errors logged etc.

[123nick]

8 hours ago, blowfish said:

FAR (usually) only cares about the collider, which you don't see.  And the places where degenerate triangles are likely to occur are usually in high detail areas that you won't look at too closely.  Sometimes it's a zero area triangle that you wouldn't be able to see anyway.

I can't tell just by looking at your logs what model is causing it.  I'd recommend placing parts in the editor one by one and watching the debug output.  When you find it, report to the author.

turns out its completely KF, on there thread they are also having same problems i am, with or without far.

[Van Disaster]

11 hours ago, steve_v said:

I must say I have noticed this too - water drag (at least on the surface) seems improbably low. So I'll second the question: why does FAR need to modify water drag at all? Does it?
I haven't actually booted the game without FAR in... well, I forget - essential mod 'n all, so I'm not sure what stock is like.

Likewise with the latest FAR / KSP versions, no errors logged etc.

Stock water has fairly low drag at low speed, it ramps up very hard 20m/s+ iirc ( I haven't tried it in a while either ). Now I've messed with a flying boat again for a bit I'm casting suspicious eyes at my install because it doesn't seem to have any surface water drag ( at least that craft doesn't ) - I can explain away it's actual deceleration as aero drag. Checked stock physics cfgs as well, all seem up to date... Anyone made a submarine recently?

Edit: well, I made a sub.

Not really sure what part settings water drag looks for - possible some other mod's MM patch is killing the data, perhaps.

Edited December 13, 2015 by Van Disaster

[ferram4]

*sigh*.  I guess it really _is_ impossible to replace the water drag after 1028.  Oh well, I guess I'll try to revert to allowing stock water drag there, if that's even possible.  I hate KSP hotfixes so very much.

[steve_v]

7 hours ago, Van Disaster said:

I'm casting suspicious eyes at my install because it doesn't seem to have any surface water drag ( at least that craft doesn't ) - I can explain away it's actual deceleration as aero drag. Checked stock physics cfgs as well, all seem up to date...

Yeah, that's pretty much what I'm seeing too, I just had a go with a fresh install + FAR, and what little drag I get on the water could easily be aero drag only - my craft decelerates at a rate comparable to rolling down the runway, brakes off. As I write this, it's still cruising along at 40m/s... and I landed some 20km back.

Edit: Went away, made a coffee, came back... craft now upside-down, still doing 30m/s, I swear I've seen it actually accelerate... yep, down to 25 - back up to 30, something real funny happens when I get the splash effect. Still going, doing 35 now...

Comparison with stock coming soon. Sorry to say... it's gotta be FAR. Stock has plenty of drag on the water - so much so that my test craft no longer has the thrust to break 50m/s. Same craft, no other mods, no phantom acceleration either.

Edited December 13, 2015 by steve_v

[steve_v]

39 minutes ago, ferram4 said:

*sigh*.  I guess it really _is_ impossible to replace the water drag after 1028.  Oh well, I guess I'll try to revert to allowing stock water drag there, if that's even possible.  I hate KSP hotfixes so very much.

Thanks boss, I hear ya on the hotfix thing.

[Van Disaster]

2 hours ago, ferram4 said:

*sigh*.  I guess it really _is_ impossible to replace the water drag after 1028.  Oh well, I guess I'll try to revert to allowing stock water drag there, if that's even possible.  I hate KSP hotfixes so very much.

That is a *giant* pity - the whole voxel drag approach has so much to offer for watercraft ( not least for planing hulls which is a superset of every flying watercraft I can think of ) :S maybe Nathan can poke a few fingers in & find an easy solution.

[steve_v]

21 minutes ago, Van Disaster said:

That is a *giant* pity - the whole voxel drag approach has so much to offer for watercraft.

I was kinda looking forward to voxel water drag too tbh, but at this point half-arsed stock drag is certainly better than none at all. Here's hoping a solution can be found to overriding the stock system properly.

[NathanKell]

I just gave ferram 2 methods on how, over IRC, and that's not even counting the original method (just don't use Unity's drag, as FAR itself does not).

[Motokid600]

Is there a way for me to lower max stress? I'm finding myself in way too many instances where the craft should break apart, but instead not one part comes off. So believe it or not I'd like to make it a bit more difficult if possible. 

So I looked in the aerodynamic stresses tab and you have iirc about six boxes on the left side covering structure, wings, etc. Now I'm not at my computer at the moment, but the upper value Is larger around 500 and the lower is 50. Atleast under structure. Now the axis these values are tied too confused me. But I'm guessing the larger number is medial force ( hope that's the correct term. The force rockets are built to withstand ) and the smalller lateral force ( upon which there not meant to withstand ).

So I essentially tried lowering the lower number by half under each category within the aero stress tab. Yet all this seems to have done nothing. I'm still hard pressed for RUDs. Granted... I've yet to experiment with planes. I only lowered the stress values for wings very little by five. 

However my rockets are just too strong. I got half a mind to say that I actually liked it back when structure failure was completely punishing and it was just yardsales all day everyday.

[aluc24]

16 hours ago, ferram4 said:

*sigh*.  I guess it really _is_ impossible to replace the water drag after 1028.  Oh well, I guess I'll try to revert to allowing stock water drag there, if that's even possible.  I hate KSP hotfixes so very much.

Thank you very much, Ferram. I think a lot of us would appreciate this effort.

[acc]

FAR is entirely not working for me. We already talkd about my problem, if you remember, ferram4.

It was nothing related to RSS/RO. I redownloaded KSP and tried it with FAR (+MM & MFI) only and it ends up with the same result. Still MM section of game loading takes extremly long (around 45min) and ingame FAR graph shows all data as zero and can't calculate anything, etc.

 

Specs:

- Win 7 x64

- KSP 1.0.5.1028

- FAR 0.15.5.4

 

Data:

- Output Log

- GameData Dump

 

Let me know if you need more data to debug it. I'm enitrely out of ideas.

Edited December 14, 2015 by acc
typo

[ferram4]

Alright, so good news, I have a hacked way of making water drag work again.  It'll have to be changed when 1.1 comes around, but hey, so will everything else.

@Motokid600: You could bypass the GUI and just modify the values in the CustomAeroStress config.  Reducing the larger value too much is probably going to result in your vehicles spontaneously disintegrating in straight flight while decreasing the smaller value will probably give you the result you want, albeit with much lower margins.  Currently the numbers are really right about where they should be though.

@acc: Again, as we discussed, I need reproduction steps.  I can't cause that issue on a win32 build of KSP on Win 7 x64 with KSP 1.0.5.1028 and that version of FAR.  You need to find out what you're doing differently from every other person who uses this mod.

[acc]

10 hours ago, ferram4 said:

@acc: Again, as we discussed, I need reproduction steps.  I can't cause that issue on a win32 build of KSP on Win 7 x64 with KSP 1.0.5.1028 and that version of FAR.  You need to find out what you're doing differently from every other person who uses this mod.

- Deleted KSP Build in SteamApps

- Redownloaded KSP 1.0.5.1028

- Stripped off the Steam-Files out of the main directory (steamAPI.dll etc, because don't want Steam track me)

- Copy the Built into my "~/games/KSP/1.0.5 RP-0/" directory

- Manually installed FAR 0.15.5.4 (+MM & MFI)

- Launched the Game (using "-force-d3d11 -popupwindow")

- Started a new sandbox save

- Goin to VAB

- Grabbing a probe core

- Put on a cone and SRB

- Open FAR Graph, which shows all data zero and can't do anything when I hit whatever calculation button

- Quit the game and trying without using "-force-d3d11 -popupwindow", which leads to the same result

[tetryds]

@acc No, that is not enough.
You need to include your system specs, which other programs are running on the background, which anti-virus are you using and everything else.
Remember that thousands of people use this mod every day and no one else ever reported an issue like yours, so there is definitely something going on on your side that is not for anyone else and we need to know what that is.

[acc]

15 minutes ago, tetryds said:

@acc No, that is not enough.
You need to include your system specs, which other programs are running on the background, which anti-virus are you using and everything else.
Remember that thousands of people use this mod every day and no one else ever reported an issue like yours, so there is definitely something going on on your side that is not for anyone else and we need to know what that is.

specs are in my post above. and there is nothing running in background.

Edited December 15, 2015 by acc

[acc]

(tried to edit in following lines, but forum does'nt saved it)

 

more detailed sys-specs:

- Win7 Home Premium 64-bit SP1

- AMD Sempron 140 Processor

- 2GB RAM

- ATI Radeon HD 4200

[tetryds]

There we go, you have an AMD Sempron and little RAM.
Did you try AMD compatibility mode already?
I also recommend Active Texture Management straight away, it does not conflict with anything.

[acc]

37 minutes ago, tetryds said:

There we go, you have an AMD Sempron and little RAM.
Did you try AMD compatibility mode already?
I also recommend Active Texture Management straight away, it does not conflict with anything.

ok, I've setup the launcher to AMD compability mode. have I to launch KSP then using the launcher? because would like to use the force-d3d11 for better performance too.

active texture manager should not make any difference, as the stock textures are allready compressed, so far as I know.

 

thanks for your help

[tetryds]

After you turn it on you can launch KSP directly without problems, it's a settings on the settings.cfg.
Yeah, that is true, I forgot that detail.
Please tell us if that solves your problem.

[acc]

Did'nt fix it, sadly. But I talkd to ferram (IRC) and he told me I've not enough RAM for FAR to do the calculations properly. Need a new PC anyways, so guess I've to wait until then.

[terryammon]

Hiya, 

First post here and new to the game  , i've been having the same problem with the Error in mesh triangle too, it really does mess the game up, once the bugged parts have been loaded, but after going through all the items that's on my bugged rocket, I found the that's causing the error with KW Rockerty with the custom fairings, for me it was the 1.25m p.fairing Base expanded that was causing my issue, also seems to be all the KW fairs, so just delete that part, replace for the stock version and reboot  .

 

[Motokid600]

@Terryammon - Use the old KW fairings. The static ones. They work really well I just found.

Because ive been having fairing trouble myself. Sadly it seems the Procedural Fairings issue is still around. Atleast from my experience here. Ive just installed a stock game and installed the base mods. The nodes upon which the fairings attach seem to cause a large amount of drag. The debug often times spams updates as well. Sadly edogs not around to update the mod because at this point it might be on PF's end. Stock fairings and all else work just fine I found.

 

The fairings however do seem to successfully shroud its contents, but the drag.. its not good. Same rocket there with stock fairings didn't make it. Accelerated too fast and exploded. Without FAR those red dots do not exist.

KSP

Output_log

ModuleManager.ConfigCache  or was it the SHA file?

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 2015 by Motokid600

[ferram4]

terryammon: Well, that's news to me that it messes the game up; FAR deliberately stops any calculations based on those errors and continues otherwise.  The only way for those errors to screw up the game is if everything else in the mesh is broken, which I doubt is the case.  Maybe I should just go back to silencing errors, it makes people experience fewer placebo-only bugs.

 

Motokid600: attach nodes have no effect whatsoever on the drag of parts anymore.  The last vestige of that system was removed in FAR v0.15.0, which was months ago.  It has no effect.

The drag force that you are seeing is due to the fact that the procedural fairing is on the very front of the rocket and is, frankly, a very poor shape for low drag.  That's a pretty blunt cone with a sudden shift to a cylindrical wall.  And you're likely going supersonic.  At a very low altitude.  The drag force should be stupidly high, so that is correct.

The placement of the drag vector is always placed at the part origin and by default I don't display the moment vector because it unnecessarily confuses people that don't understand moment-direction conventions.  Since the part origin is always in a weird place for procedural fairings, the arrow is placed there despite the resultant effect of the force and moment putting the true force center more where it will be with the geometry.

[Motokid600]

Interesting. I hadn't thought to elongate the fairing. But why would a stock fairing of a similar shape and size perform so much better? KW as well. They dont show those drag arrows at all.

And you say FAR doesn't go by nodes anymore however the number of drag arrows correlates to the number of nodes set on the fairing base. I forgot to mention that earlier. If I set four nodes I get four drag arrows and so on.

Edited December 16, 2015 by Motokid600