[1.12.x] SystemHeat - a replacement for the CoreHeat system (September 1)

[Nertea]

57 minutes ago, RedParadize said:

Then the cap might be a tad low, many of FFT engine require a dozen of them if on their own loop. Would be nice to have the possibility of patching it trough config or make bigger one.

Can you explain your use case a little more? I'm having trouble understanding why you would have engines in a separate loop and want to move all that heat somewhere else (end of the workday, sorry).

[RedParadize]

3 minutes ago, Nertea said:

Can you explain your use case a little more? I'm having trouble understanding why you would have engines in a separate loop and want to move all that heat somewhere else (end of the workday, sorry).

No need to excuse! I have yet to figure out what are the benefit from having separated loops. My only experience with SystemHeat so far is with FFT. On some of my built I had heat stabilizing at a temperature over engine safe temp, that seemed like a proper scenario to use heat exchanger. Given your comment I guess the answer is that it should not be separated.

[Nertea]

Probably not. I guess one use case is using the exchanger to increase the loop temp to use better radiators with lower-temp engines. In that case you would need to move a lot of heat between the engine loop and the higher temp radiator loop

[Nertea]

SystemHeat 0.1.5

• Added manual control mode to Fission Reactors
• Added Heat Control wraparound radiators to radiator patch
• Added some background improvements to Converter and Harvester adapter modules
• Fixed wrong target temperature for some radiators

@toric5I looked at adding that RadioactiveStorageContainer module to the nuclear engines, and realized that creates a dependency I don't want. I will reimplement a new version of that for some future version (might use different gameplay)

[toric5]

18 minutes ago, Nertea said:

SystemHeat 0.1.5

• Added manual control mode to Fission Reactors
• Added Heat Control wraparound radiators to radiator patch
• Added some background improvements to Converter and Harvester adapter modules
• Fixed wrong target temperature for some radiators

@toric5I looked at adding that RadioactiveStorageContainer module to the nuclear engines, and realized that creates a dependency I don't want. I will reimplement a new version of that for some future version (might use different gameplay)

If you do, Id love it if we could change the visible module name. It would make it more flexible to add misc 'refurbish-able resources', a generic module for resources that only kerbals on eva can transport (refurbish-able heat shield ablator, electrode erosion for an electric engine, etc.)

[Nertea]

2 minutes ago, toric5 said:

If you do, Id love it if we could change the visible module name. It would make it more flexible to add misc 'refurbish-able resources', a generic module for resources that only kerbals on eva can transport (refurbish-able heat shield ablator, electrode erosion for an electric engine, etc.)

You should be able to edit the module name here: https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/NearFutureElectrical/blob/master/GameData/NearFutureElectrical/Localization/en-us.cfg#L198

[toric5]

4 minutes ago, Nertea said:

You should be able to edit the module name here: https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/NearFutureElectrical/blob/master/GameData/NearFutureElectrical/Localization/en-us.cfg#L198

Thanks, never even occurred to me to look in localization files. Using this for personal MM patches ATM, to allow refurbishable heat shields using engineer kerbals.

 

Of course, editing that will be global, right?

 

[Nertea]

Yes, it is hard to change that on  a per part basis. You could go with making it fairly generic. 

[Nertea]

So I really hope the 1.11 part repair/placement stuff is moddable enough so I can use those effects/interactions for reactor repair and fuelling, have some cool ideas. 

Anyways, interested in people's thoughts about utility of the parts that are included (heat sink, heat exchanger, coolant tank). Are they useful? Are there any other parts you need/would like to manage heat?

[RedParadize]

@Nertea I have yet to figure out how to use the heat exchanger in a fashion where it is better than adding more radiator.  Coolant tanks effect could be buffed a tad, just to make their effect more obvious. Heat sink could be buffed as well, it could partially solve the problem of engines that run super hot.

[lemon cup]

Although I really like the models for the coolant tanks, I am a part-count minded player and so here is my idea for adding to the total thermal capacity of a system. Take your existing radiators from Heat Control and add a slider to them in the Part action window, which would add or subtract extra coolant fluid from the virtual and unseen tankage of whatever the radiator would be attached to. The upside is that balance could be maintained because cost and weight is still added to the craft, while keeping part count low, with the downside being that you sort of have to rely in your imagination to get the idea of where the coolant would be stored, etc.

[toric5]

@Nertea, how do you calculate the volume for the moduleSystemHeat? Im looking at your cfg for the ISRU, and it seems to be hoving around the mass of the part, but with the mini isru its below the mass, and the normal isru is above the mass...

[Nertea]

3 hours ago, toric5 said:

@Nertea, how do you calculate the volume for the moduleSystemHeat? Im looking at your cfg for the ISRU, and it seems to be hoving around the mass of the part, but with the mini isru its below the mass, and the normal isru is above the mass...

Total wag (wild-ass guess) based on a mental model that says 'well, the part has bout this much volume, maybe half of it is coolant'.

3 hours ago, lemon cup said:

Although I really like the models for the coolant tanks, I am a part-count minded player and so here is my idea for adding to the total thermal capacity of a system. Take your existing radiators from Heat Control and add a slider to them in the Part action window, which would add or subtract extra coolant fluid from the virtual and unseen tankage of whatever the radiator would be attached to. The upside is that balance could be maintained because cost and weight is still added to the craft, while keeping part count low, with the downside being that you sort of have to rely in your imagination to get the idea of where the coolant would be stored, etc.

Ooof I'm not sure I like that. Coolant is really a volumetric challenge of a resource, you need tons of it that's going to manifest in terms of 'where do i put that on my ship'?

10 hours ago, RedParadize said:

@Nertea I have yet to figure out how to use the heat exchanger in a fashion where it is better than adding more radiator.  Coolant tanks effect could be buffed a tad, just to make their effect more obvious. Heat sink could be buffed as well, it could partially solve the problem of engines that run super hot.

What does buffed mean in this case? Higher heat acceptance rate? Higher total capacity?

[RedParadize]

24 minutes ago, Nertea said:

What does buffed mean in this case? Higher heat acceptance rate? Higher total capacity?

For coolant tanks I am not 100% sure, I do not know exactly what they do. It seem that heat goes up more slowly. Outside of that... I do not know.

As fore Heat sink, well heat do go up more slowly. btw, venting the gas would be a nice thing to add to this.

[RedParadize]

About coolant tanks, what would make sense is that the "pipe" going from the radiator to engine or else need to be filled as well. If that's how it work then it need to be explained and shown in editor. A nice addition would be to have pipe "hub" that merge "pipes" into a single one to reduce volume needed. That and pumps, because why not?

[Starhelperdude]

An 3.75m or even 5m Inline coolant tank would be nice IMO because I build ships mostly with trusses and I don't want to attach the tank on something where the pipes go into nothingness

[toric5]

getting NREs when placing an ISRU module. Only thing that has changed since I last played was the space dust update...

log

Edited November 29, 2020 by toric5

[Nertea]

37 minutes ago, toric5 said:

getting NREs when placing an ISRU module. Only thing that has changed since I last played was the space dust update...

log

Can't reproduce, steps taken: place large ISRU in VAB, observe log. Also, can't really download the log from that site, makes it really hard to search...

23 hours ago, Starhelperdude said:

An 3.75m or even 5m Inline coolant tank would be nice IMO because I build ships mostly with trusses and I don't want to attach the tank on something where the pipes go into nothingness

Well that's the problem, are they useful? if so maybe effort for more is warranted. If not though...

On 11/27/2020 at 3:27 PM, RedParadize said:

About coolant tanks, what would make sense is that the "pipe" going from the radiator to engine or else need to be filled as well. If that's how it work then it need to be explained and shown in editor. A nice addition would be to have pipe "hub" that merge "pipes" into a single one to reduce volume needed. That and pumps, because why not?

Are you saying that there should be pipe parts and hub parts and what?

[toric5]

1 hour ago, Nertea said:

Can't reproduce, steps taken: place large ISRU in VAB, observe log. Also, can't really download the log from that site, makes it really hard to search...

will try with zero mods. trying different pastebins, pastebin.com didnt accept my large logfile.

 

So... I tried with just systemheat and stock... no bug. I gradually added mods one by one (all 172 of them!!!) and by the time they were all back, no bug...

 

On one hand, I have my frames back when playing with ISRU in the VAB. on the other hand, i just spent 2 hours hunting down a phantom bug.

Edited November 29, 2020 by toric5

[Terrestris]

@Nertea

Feels like part's loop number sometimes change automatically (or switch to 'Loop no found') when switch back from other vessle.

Edited: It's not happening every time, I will provide log when I get the same problem again.

Switch part's loop number in flight is not available?

Ps:

I made the patch to config stock ISRU's cryo propellant production to use SystemHeat module and seted up a pull request.

Also the PlanetaryBaseInc ISRU, should I post it to PBI's topic or just pull it in SystemHeat's Extra foder?

PPs:

Don't know how to modify ELmodules ... 

(ELConverter, ELCoreHeat)

PPPs:

Will ModuleCometDrill and ModuleAsteroidDrill still work when modify them to ModuleSystemHeatHarvester?

(Of course not)

Edited November 29, 2020 by Dr.Lxweei

[RedParadize]

6 hours ago, Nertea said:

Are you saying that there should be pipe parts and hub parts and what?

No, no pipe please! Pipe are simulated and its better that way. What I meant is that if coolant tanks use is to fill the simulated pipes (depending on how far radiators are from heat source) then having hub might be a good idea. Hub would take individual radiator simulated pipe and group them into a single one, reducing the coolant volume needed. Again, that is if that's the usage of coolant tanks.

[Nertea]

21 hours ago, Dr.Lxweei said:

Switch part's loop number in flight is not available?

 

Correct, ripe for abuse otherwise.

21 hours ago, Dr.Lxweei said:

Don't know how to modify ELmodules ... 

 

I'm not committing to rewriting other mods' modules, if they want to be compatible, they will.

21 hours ago, Dr.Lxweei said:

Also the PlanetaryBaseInc ISRU, should I post it to PBI's topic or just pull it in SystemHeat's Extra foder?

My Extras folder is best. 

 

21 hours ago, Dr.Lxweei said:

Will ModuleCometDrill and ModuleAsteroidDrill still work when modify them to ModuleSystemHeatHarvester?

 

I should probably create support for these.

17 hours ago, RedParadize said:

No, no pipe please! Pipe are simulated and its better that way. What I meant is that if coolant tanks use is to fill the simulated pipes (depending on how far radiators are from heat source) then having hub might be a good idea. Hub would take individual radiator simulated pipe and group them into a single one, reducing the coolant volume needed. Again, that is if that's the usage of coolant tanks.

Nah more loop volume just makes the thermal inertia of the loop higher (takes longer to heat up and longer to cool down. It's a less-efficient heatsink the player doesn't manage. 

[Terrestris]

@Nertea

I am getting some trouble on modify the fission reator from PlanetaryBaseInc to use ModuleSystemHeatFissionReactor.

Console spit out a lot of spam.

 

Log: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1SGTtgJ8OpCs-MgGZ6mwL3mwBRA46QLfE?usp=sharing

name = KKAOSS_Nuclear_Reactor

 

 

[Nertea]

5 hours ago, Dr.Lxweei said:

@Nertea

I am getting some trouble on modify the fission reator from PlanetaryBaseInc to use ModuleSystemHeatFissionReactor.

Console spit out a lot of spam.

 

Log: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1SGTtgJ8OpCs-MgGZ6mwL3mwBRA46QLfE?usp=sharing

name = KKAOSS_Nuclear_Reactor

 

 

Ah this is that stupid squad underscore -> . thing.  I will need to add a fix for that. 

[toric5]

@Nertea

    // Map system outlet temperature (K) to heat generation (kW)
    systemPower
    {
        key = 0 40
    }

with this code, what exactly is the math to get the final heat output of a part? (working on that generic converter patch.)