Jump to content

[1.0.X - Experimental] [On Hold] FusTek Station Parts (WIPs on GitHub)

sumghai

By sumghai
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Kimberly

Kimberly

Posted
Posted (edited)

Silly question: how long is one of the modules with tapered ends? Or, if you have an easy answer, how long is a module with tapered ends with a Clampotron docking port on both ends?

Edited by Kimberly
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Silly question: how long is one of the modules with tapered ends? Or, if you have an easy answer, how long is a module with tapered ends with a Clampotron docking port on both ends?

Excellent question!

Karmony Node Mk III flat end version = 3.6875m (Excluding those very thin decorative rings)

Karmony Node Mk III tapered end version = 4.0625m (Very end of the taper) or 3.8750m (Accounting for partially-recessed end nodes)

Stock Clamp-O-Tron Docking Port = 0.2828832m (Visually, the docking port is significantly thicker, but this figure is the actual distance between the top and bottom stack attachment nodes, as per the CFG; the Clamp-O-Tron has a skirt that embeds itself down into any attached fuselage to eliminate unsightly gaps)

Karmony Node Mk III tapered end version + 2 Stock Clamp-O-Tron Docking Ports on ends only

= 3.8750m + 2*(0.2828832m) = 4.4407664m

Yeah, the numbers are quite funny, but I guess it's because fusty's original modules and the Squad docking ports don't use nice round numbers in their measurements.

Edited by sumghai
Dun goofed some maths
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kimberly

Kimberly

Posted
Posted (edited)

Ah, thank you for the detailed info. Plugging in those numbers, that means my crime against nature has a radius of 25.4437172524 meters:

b7lbTPel.jpg

This was just a proof-of-concept test configuration. I'll use more varied modules for the real thing, and have a central hub. I've calculated that to achieve a comfortable 0.4g, the station would need to rotate at just 3.75 RPM, protecting the station's wussier inhabitants from the Coriolis effect. (I'm aware you can't build circles in the VAB; there is precisely one docking port pair that is slightly misaligned. Ships can dock to themselves to create a functioning circle, so the circle should snap together after orbital construction.) Strangely, though it's light on the part count (just 108 parts for 160 meters' worth of ship), it lags something fierce!

Edited by Kimberly
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeckoOBac

GeckoOBac

Posted
Posted
Strangely, though it's light on the part count (just 108 parts for 160 meters' worth of ship), it lags something fierce!

I'd imagine the physics calcs on that thing would be annoying... Docked into a ring means that every piece depends on all the others... Not sure how the calcs are done exactly, but something like this can get ugly pretty quickly

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kimberly

Kimberly

Posted
Posted

The physics is probably it...I can actually only select either all of the ring (by selecting the root part) or the first quarter of it, after that, there's no response when clicking on the modules. :P And trying to launch it didn't go so well either; I waited for 15 minutes and then decided it was never going to load. Would it work better if I made it with a central hub and made that the root part? It would allow for a the parts to be a basic tree structure branching from the center, with docking ports connections linking the branches. I'm off to experiment. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnsonwax

johnsonwax

Posted
Posted
Would it work better if I made it with a central hub and made that the root part?

I would imagine so. Sounds like the child tree is being exhausted.

You might also consider looking at my tutorial and welding some of those together into more manageable pieces. If you have 36 Karmonys, just welding the couplers (with them welded at the right angle) and 3 of the habs would cut your part count down to 12. The physics would be a lot more predictable as well. There's a bit of trig involved, but nothing worse than that.

To justify that effort - nobody in their right mind would launch a vessel like that which was held together by 72 docking ports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kimberly

Kimberly

Posted
Posted

Well I won't launch it, it'll be built at an Orbital Construction spacedock. :) It weighs like 250 tons.

I took a look at your welding tutorial, and it didn't really enlighten me. Numbers like that tend to make my head swim. :P But I might give it another go later; I think it's fair to weld at least the ports together. I don't know about the modules, it probably wouldn't be possible to keep all of their functionality. (Just welding all of the docking ports would reduce the part count by 36.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HeadHunter67

HeadHunter67

Posted
Posted
There's a bit of trig involved, but nothing worse than that.

Oh, "only" trig? :rolleyes:

I didn't pay much attention in algebra (was busy gaming), so I kind of made it through geometry (but confused), and so barely passed Trig - not by my average, but by Divine Intervention on my final.

So, "only" trig is waaaay beyond me. Especially since I haven't needed it in nearly 30 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kimberly

Kimberly

Posted
Posted
Is the warehouse module going to have actual uses at some point?

It already has a use; it can hold parts from the Orbital Construction mod. Once KASPAR completes development, the module will be made to work with it, and whatever mod makes use of KASPAR (resupply mods, life support mods, perhaps Orbital Construction and such) will be compatible with the module.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Kimberly is correct - the Warehouse module can already be used with the Orbital Construction mod. I'm waiting for nothke to finish up his KASPAR payload rack mod so that I can make the Warehouse replenishable through EVA.

Speaking of which, I'm planning on doing a re-balance (both literally and figuratively) for the RocketPart mass / capacity in light of the latest update.

At present, the Karmony Warehouse can hold up to 100 units of spare parts. Under the old OrbitalConstruction (v3) resource definitions (1 ton per unit), this equates to a maximum in-flight mass of 102.5 t (2.5 t dry mass + 100 t RocketParts).

OrbCon 4.2 adjusted the RocketParts density to 1/400 t per unit, so obviously I need to up the numbers in the next patch for FusTek. The question is: by how much?

Now, I personally think 100t in orbit for a single warehouse module is rather ridiculous, and it would be a gross understatement to say that any vessel / station using my warehouses in their current state would be unbalanced. So ideally, I'd like to limit the total mass of the Warehouse to 6.5 t, to stay in line with all the other Karmony modules.

Next, my intention is that the Warehouse would be resupplied by swapping standard-sized KASPAR payload racks. nothke stated that KASPAR racks will be 650 mm high, and I can fit four racks around a central axis per row. This and the fact that standard Karmony modules have 3375 mm of usable internal length means either four or five racks along the length of the module, equivalent to 16 or 20 racks total with a gap between racks of 155 mm or 20 mm respectively.

As tempting as it is to immediately go for the five-per-side option, bear in mind that while Kerbals may have smaller hands than humans, after putting on EVA suit gloves their fingers would have trouble fitting into the 2 cm gap between modules - waay too close for comfort! So I'm opting for the four-per-side, four-per-ring arrangement that will allow 16 racks total.

Finally, not all of the 6.5 t mass of the Warehouse module will be consumed by the RocketParts payload - the mass of the KASPAR racks and the Warehouse themselves need to be accounted for, too. And so we end up with this neat little expression:

Karmony Warehouse total mass = Number of KASPAR racks * (Mass of RocketParts per KASPAR rack + Mass of each empty KASPAR rack) + Mass of Karmony module support structures

And we know that:

Karmony Warehouse total mass = 6.5 t

Number of KASPAR racks = 16

Mass of each empty KASPAR rack = 0.05 (source: nothke)

So thus:

6.5 = 16 * (Mass of RocketParts per KASPAR rack + 0.05) + Mass of Karmony module support structures

Playing around with some values suggests the following might be good:

Mass of Karmony module support structures = 1.7 t

Mass of RocketParts per KASPAR rack = 0.25 t

∴ Each rack will be able to hold 100 RocketParts

So what do all these numbers mean?

For the impeding R0.03.4a update (IACBMs release and Warehouse rebalance), the Warehouse modules will have a dry mass of 2.5 t and a RocketPart capacity of 1600, giving a total maximum in-flight mass of 6.5 t.

For an unknown future release (When KASPAR comes out), the Warehouse modules will have a dry mass of 1.7 t and no RocketParts by default, but will be restockable via KASPAR racks back up to 1600 units, still resulting in a total maximum in-flight mass of 6.5 t.

Capisce?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

R0.03.4a released - see first post for download link

R0.03.4a          30 August 2013
---------------------------

Features:
 - New Parts
    - IACBM 1.25m
    - IACBM 2.5m
 - The Improved Androgynous Common Berthing Mechanism (IACBM) is a docking port system designed to be directly compatible with FusTek Karmony modules and any generic 1.25m/2.5m diameter fuselages
    - Built-in LED illumninators allow long-distance visual identification / orientation marking of target docking ports
        - LEDS will consume ElectricCahrge and automatically shut down if deprived of power
    - Active/Passive mode toggles rotate guidance fins to appropriate positions for docking
        - Recommendation: The target docking port should be set to Passive, while the docking port on the actively-controlled vessel should be set to Active
    - Hatch mode toggle allows the IACBMs to "unblock" Karmony hatches that are otherwise obstructed, allowing Kerbals to EVA right through them
        - Remember to switch back to Docking mode for docking; weirdness may occur if docking is attempted while in Hatch mode

Changes:
 - Karmony Parts Warehouse Module stats updated to correspond to latest version of OrbitalConstruction Redux (4.2)
    - Dry mass is now 2.5t
    - Maximum RocketParts capacity increased to 1600, in line with RocketParts density reduction.
        - Warehouse preloaded with 100 RocketParts, which can be replenished by supply missions using the OrbitalConstruction Redux mod
    - Total in-flight mass of fully-stocked Warehouse will end up as 6.5t, the same as any other Karmony full-length module
        - The old settings would have resulted in a (ridiculous) 100t warehouse

Issues:
 - IACBM guidances fins don't actually collide
    - This is due to technical limitations of KSP's ModuleDockingNode at the time of writing, which causes terminal docking sequences to ignore part colliders
    - For precise rotational alignment, use in conjunction with Sarbian's MechJeb 2 fork.
 - Transient "Start Deployed" GUI inconsistencies in FusTek_Sumghai.dll animation modules
    - NOT craft or functionality-breaking, just a little annoying

I'll definitely start work on IVAs in R0.04a.

Edited by sumghai
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwaster

Starwaster

Posted
Posted

For the impeding R0.03.4a update (IACBMs release and Warehouse rebalance), the Warehouse modules will have a dry mass of 2.5 t and a RocketPart capacity of 1600, giving a total maximum in-flight mass of 6.5 t.

For an unknown future release (When KASPAR comes out), the Warehouse modules will have a dry mass of 1.7 t and no RocketParts by default, but will be restockable via KASPAR racks back up to 1600 units, still resulting in a total maximum in-flight mass of 6.5 t.

Capisce?

wow so that means if I want to build something larger than 4 tons I need more warehouses? Please tell me I misundersood something here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnsonwax

johnsonwax

Posted
Posted
- IACBM guidances fins don't actually collide

- This is due to technical limitations of KSP's ModuleDockingNode at the time of writing, which causes terminal docking sequences to ignore part colliders

- For precise rotational alignment, use in conjunction with Sarbian's MechJeb 2 fork.

Is that true? The THSS docks definitely respects colliders. They allow positive angle locking and can be a serious PITA to get lined up.

(Anyone else having trouble with the reply quote feature of the forum? Not working for me)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Is that true? The THSS docks definitely respects colliders. They allow positive angle locking and can be a serious PITA to get lined up.

The problem with the THSS docking ports are that once the terminal magnetic docking engages, KSP ignores the colliders.

Believe me, I've experimented with docking colliders before, and I can never get precise (to 2 d.p.) roll alignments. That may not be a huge deal for two ships temporarily docked together, but for constructing space stations with closed-loop trusses and such like, angular errors will accumulate, leading to wonky structures.

I've already suggested that the default Docking Module behaviour be extended with optional parameters for automatic roll alignment.

(Anyone else having trouble with the reply quote feature of the forum? Not working for me)

Forum admins are aware of the quick reply / WYSISYG editor issues and are working on them.

Edited by sumghai
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...