[1.12.x] SystemHeat - a replacement for the CoreHeat system (November 20)

[intelliCom]

Just now, Nertea said:

Start a new ship. Place 1 mk1 lander can, 1x 0.625m reactor and enough radiators to run it (doesn't really matter what). Launch to launchpad and observe. If there are any issues, provide:

• Log
• ModuleManager Cache
• Screenshot of gamedata/mod list. 

 

I don't know how to provide these, but while I set that situation up, tell me the process for it.

Also, with the radiators, do they have to be active as soon as the ship loads in, or are they left idle?

[Nertea]

10 minutes ago, intelliCom said:

I don't know how to provide these, but while I set that situation up, tell me the process for it.

Also, with the radiators, do they have to be active as soon as the ship loads in, or are they left idle?

Radiators can be off if the reactor is off. To get these log, check here:

Screenshot of GameData folder should be easy. When you take that screenshot, you should see a file called ModuleManager.ConfigCache in the folder: that is the cache. 

 

[intelliCom]

31 minutes ago, Nertea said:

Radiators can be off if the reactor is off. To get these log, check here:

Screenshot of GameData folder should be easy. When you take that screenshot, you should see a file called ModuleManager.ConfigCache in the folder: that is the cache. 

 

Ok, so something interesting happened. When going by the conditions you asked me, Waste Heat was at 0 kW, and the core temperature went up a bit, to about 288 kW. It did this regardless of whether I had 1 XR-175 radiator or two of them. I then launched my previous ship to the launchpad with its XR-175, and it went the same way: 150 kW waste heat, reactor core destroyed. Even after reducing the ship down to just the probe, same effect. Very strange.

Technically, there were no issues with the reactor or radiator in your experiment, but my previous craft still did the same as before. I have the files on hand though, should I send them?

Edited May 1, 2021 by intelliCom

[Nertea]

5 minutes ago, intelliCom said:

Ok, so something interesting happened. When going by the conditions you asked me, Waste Heat was at 0 kW, and the core temperature went up a bit, to about 288 kW. It did this regardless of whether I had 1 XR-175 radiator or two of them. I then launched my previous ship to the launchpad with its XR-175, and it went the same way: 150 kW waste heat, reactor core destroyed. Even after reducing the ship down to just the probe, same effect. Very strange.

Technically, there were no issues with the reactor or radiator in your experiment, but my previous craft still did the same as before. I have the files on hand though, should I send them?

Can you send me your original craft file then?

[intelliCom]

1 minute ago, Nertea said:

Can you send me your original craft file then?

Sure, here:
https://mega.nz/file/z3oEgTiD#2maYyyvp_qJf9rMyUBFI1P-TbPDEY_JguhYFiGSzERc

[Nertea]

2 hours ago, intelliCom said:

Sure, here:
https://mega.nz/file/z3oEgTiD#2maYyyvp_qJf9rMyUBFI1P-TbPDEY_JguhYFiGSzERc

Thanks, I will investigate this at some point and see if I can replicate things. In the meantime, it's likely if you delete the part in the editor and re-add a new copy everything should be ok. 

Edited May 1, 2021 by Nertea

[intelliCom]

12 minutes ago, Nertea said:

Thanks, I will investigate this at some point and see if I can replicate things. In the meantime, it's likely if you delete the part in the editor and re-add a new copy everything should be ok. 

So literally replace the reactor in the editor with the same reactor again?

[Nertea]

26 minutes ago, intelliCom said:

So literally replace the reactor in the editor with the same reactor again?

Yes, making sure to delete and re-add from the part list, don't just remove into the build area. Your ship's reactor has a field that says it has been launched already which shouldn't be possible so I'm not sure what's caused this but it's certainly the problem. It's causing the simulator values to not be cleared when the ship is launched.  

[intelliCom]

3 minutes ago, Nertea said:

Yes, making sure to delete and re-add from the part list, don't just remove into the build area. Your ship's reactor has a field that says it has been launched already which shouldn't be possible so I'm not sure what's caused this but it's certainly the problem. It's causing the simulator values to not be cleared when the ship is launched.  

In trying to learn about the new things, I did play around with some of the simulator values prior to saving. Speeding up, slowing down, changing the situation,  and a bunch of other stuff I can't remember.

Maybe, in playing with these values, I somehow, inadvertently, unintentionally,  "left the reactor in the oven too long." Would this be a likely theory?

[Nertea]

Seems unlikely but I'll keep it in mind. 

[intelliCom]

1 minute ago, Nertea said:

Seems unlikely but I'll keep it in mind. 

Just did it, it works! Now I know what to try if something's acting up, just replace it. Thank you for the help!

[ChainiaC]

FYI:

It turns out transferring Nuclear fuel and waste is impossible when you have the option "fuel transfer obeys crossfeed rules" turned on.  I use NFE with System Heat patches and was unable to transfer uranium. I tested some things and this setting proved to be the culprit. I do not believe this is intended? I tested with two fuel drums, one full and one empty, connected to each other. 

 

[WarriorSabe]

1 hour ago, ChainiaC said:

FYI:

It turns out transferring Nuclear fuel and waste is impossible when you have the option "fuel transfer obeys crossfeed rules" turned on.  I use NFE with System Heat patches and was unable to transfer uranium. I tested some things and this setting proved to be the culprit. I do not believe this is intended? I tested with two fuel drums, one full and one empty, connected to each other. 

 

It is intended, you're supposed to use kerbals on EVA. Might be a setting in the mod to disable that, but I'm not sure

[ChainiaC]

45 minutes ago, WarriorSabe said:

It is intended, you're supposed to use kerbals on EVA. Might be a setting in the mod to disable that, but I'm not sure

Actually, that feature was removed in System Heat 0.4.0

From GitHub:

• Redid nuclear transfer mechanics
  • Presence of an engineer of Level 3 on the vessel will allow nuclear transfer using the stock transfer system

And like I noticed, the stock transfer works.... IF obey crossfeed rules is disabled in game settings.

Also notworthy is that when I docked a vessel with stored uranium with another vessel with and empty nuclear fuel drum and an engineer, I could still not transfer the uranium to the empty drum. I had to unload and reload the vessel before I could transfer. 

 

 

[WarriorSabe]

31 minutes ago, ChainiaC said:

Actually, that feature was removed in System Heat 0.4.0

From GitHub:

• Redid nuclear transfer mechanics
  • Presence of an engineer of Level 3 on the vessel will allow nuclear transfer using the stock transfer system

And like I noticed, the stock transfer works.... IF obey crossfeed rules is disabled in game settings.

Also notworthy is that when I docked a vessel with stored uranium with another vessel with and empty nuclear fuel drum and an engineer, I could still not transfer the uranium to the empty drum. I had to unload and reload the vessel before I could transfer. 

 

 

Oh, I never noticed that update I guess. Yeah, sounds like a bug then

Edited May 16, 2021 by WarriorSabe

[Nertea]

It's not really a bug. KSP resources have two flow definitions: what happens when you feed them to a consumer (engine) and what happens when you transfer them. By toggling that setting you are forcing the game to use the feed definition which for uranium is 'don't move it', thus overriding my functionality :shrug:. 

[ChainiaC]

54 minutes ago, Nertea said:

It's not really a bug. KSP resources have two flow definitions: what happens when you feed them to a consumer (engine) and what happens when you transfer them. By toggling that setting you are forcing the game to use the feed definition which for uranium is 'don't move it', thus overriding my functionality :shrug:. 

Ah ok, makes sense. Thanks for elaborating! 

I just figured the obey crossfeed rule appeared as being more realistisc, which is why I used it. 

Still, this issue had me stumped for some time since I had no idea what caused it. Perhaps my FYI saves some other poor schmuck some frustration;)

[aristurtle]

Hey I just noticed that the automatic reactor throttling doesn't work for engines that generate electricity (it should be throttling them to the maximum amount that they generate electricity at, but instead just pins it to 100%). I suspect the bug is in this function but I can't quite follow where it is exactly:

https://github.com/post-kerbin-mining-corporation/SystemHeat/blob/f0cc2ab84c9c033421a9758db54a6109f264eea9/SystemHeat/SystemHeat/Modules/ModuleSystemHeatFissionEngine.cs#L237

[kspnerd122]

Hey, um, does this work with MKS

since otherwise, I cant use FFT in my MKS save

Which would suck, since I would be stuck with KSPIE then

[Spaceman.Spiff]

18 minutes ago, kspnerd122 said:

Hey, um, does this work with MKS

since otherwise, I cant use FFT in my MKS save

Which would suck, since I would be stuck with KSPIE then

Probably?

I don’t know if MKS touches the heating system   

[kspnerd122]

Well, it has its own reactors, Refineries, etc.

[TBenz]

34 minutes ago, kspnerd122 said:

Hey, um, does this work with MKS

since otherwise, I cant use FFT in my MKS save

Which would suck, since I would be stuck with KSPIE then

System heat does not integrate into MKS, both use their own extension of the resource converter and resource producer modules that don't interoperate.

MKS still does work fine when system heat is installed, because system heat doesn't remove core heat. However that means you need to consider both system heat and core heat when designing cooling systems.

[kspnerd122]

So wait, the rads still behave under coreheat too? if yes, thats awesome

[TBenz]

1 hour ago, kspnerd122 said:

So wait, the rads still behave under coreheat too? if yes, thats awesome

Yeah, they can function with core heat. They have their full ability to cool core heat and system heat simultaneously.

[Nertea]

On 5/16/2021 at 1:29 PM, aristurtle said:

Hey I just noticed that the automatic reactor throttling doesn't work for engines that generate electricity (it should be throttling them to the maximum amount that they generate electricity at, but instead just pins it to 100%). I suspect the bug is in this function but I can't quite follow where it is exactly:

https://github.com/post-kerbin-mining-corporation/SystemHeat/blob/f0cc2ab84c9c033421a9758db54a6109f264eea9/SystemHeat/SystemHeat/Modules/ModuleSystemHeatFissionEngine.cs#L237

Can I assume you mean consume rather than generate electricity?

Can you give me a test case? I tested a quick Kerbopower with the AFTER engines (both ~40 Ec/s ratings) and things seemed to behave correctly, if the engine was throttled to ~75% the reactor produced 30 Ec. 

On 5/16/2021 at 10:37 AM, ChainiaC said:

Ah ok, makes sense. Thanks for elaborating! 

I just figured the obey crossfeed rule appeared as being more realistisc, which is why I used it. 

Still, this issue had me stumped for some time since I had no idea what caused it. Perhaps my FYI saves some other poor schmuck some frustration;)

It's good to bring to my attention because I didn't know about this setting. I can try to think eventually of a mitigation that doesn't break other things.