[1.0.5] TAC Life Support v0.11.2.1 [12Dec]

[LMA]

Will Tac Life get textured one day?

[smunisto]

Many people shared textures, other than the ones posted in the first post. You can search for them on the thread. I am currently working on retexturing some tanks for my own personal use. Will share the result when/if they are ready.

[panarchist]

Does anyone else have rapid unplanned disassembly issues when they place hex cans in symmetry? I had this problem a few iterations of this add on ago and it still seems to be an issue. Here's the current ship I am trying to build. You can see in this pic the placement of the TAC pieces in the stack, which also is composed of Goodspeed and stock elements.

Something seems to go wrong once the piece is unrestrained. When it's on the launch vehicle and strutted down it seems to hold together, it seems to hold together fine (which is an improvement since the last time, when it would RUD right on the pad), but as soon as I attempt to free it from the upper stage, it starts to shake more and more violently (the hex cans), before ripping itself apart.

http://imgur.com/a/TXAhr

Anyone else have this problem? If so, how can I fix it?

Scootaloo - check your Module Manager dll version. Updating to the most current may fix the issue - I had the same exact issue recently with 6x symmetry, but with fuel tanks/engines rather than hex cans. There were a few issues with a couple of the recent MM builds which might have impacted it.

[Aedile]

What do you consider to be "complex plants"? National Geographic and NASA appear to think otherwise:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/121207-plants-grow-space-station-science/

The space farmer's problems are many.

There are problems with lack of gravity, a lot if not most plants do use gravity, to spread their biomass, orient their fruit etc. While surely plants can be engineered and adapted, most of our food plants will have issues. You are stuck with gel - a gel you should be able to replenish, and produce out of organic waste, or synthesize it in some way. In any case you'll need the production/recycling facilities. Definitely more complicated than algae tank or lichen(though lichen would need atmospheric nitrogen)

You need 'plant nutrients' - you need nitrogen and magnesium obviously (no green - no profit), some phosphorous and a dozen other things.

Plants need a lot of water. Plants are mostly water, you'll need to bring quite a lot.

However when I get to think about it the biggest problem is space (no pun intended). If we assume that you can somehow grow our known crops, 2800kcal/day, no waste, multiple cucles:

It takes rather large space to produce food for a single person, the less energy dense, the more space you need (it will also weigh more).

Consider lettuce - biggest part of it is edible, but... at 130kcal/kg, you need like - 20kg per day (not that you could survive eating only that but). Now since lettuce does not grow overnight, you'll need 25-45 days for maturity. Do the math. Tomatoes are 180kcal/kg. So if you see sci-fi where people grow lettuce or tomatoes in in space, and are self sufficient, feel free to have laugh about it.

Ok potatoes are at 700/kg, and rather easy and resilient. Still that is 3-4kg in food alone. (though you'll probably need no drinking water at all). Still you need quite some space to grow them. Two square meter of crop will yield your daily consumption. It takes 70 days for the crop to mature, so need some 140 square meters to feed a person.

Even cereals need quite a lot of space. If you ate only cereal, (around 3000/kg) (assuming earth peak efficiency, and multiple harvests), you'd need around 1-2 square meter for required daily meal. The time it takes to harvest can be anywhere between 60 and 200 days (though you don't actually need to plant the stuff for 200 days, but store the seed at particular conditions). Quite some difficult to recycle biomass stays behind as well.

There is of course the miracle soybean (4400/kg + calcium and other good stuff). Unfortunately, its is pretty low yield, however also low plant, so if you are growing it on racks, will probably end up as most cereals. Also needs the micro-flora and atmospheric nitrogen.

Peanuts - well if they somehow manage to grow these they'd be great at 5700/kg and similar yield to soybean.

Unfortunately most other nuts come from trees.

Corn is well - pretty tall

You'll need different types of plants for diet which won't kill you with malnourishment. source of protein, source of fat, calcium etc.

Food processing - human digestion system is rather bad in absorbing energy from raw ingredients, and most high energy foods are not exactly edible when raw.

Energy - most standard plants seem to be pretty dependent on the light cycle, greenhouse on the moon might be an issue - you'll need to provide artificial light etc. When it's dark, plants actually release more CO2 than they absorb (and lose biomass) Also if you are going to outer planets, you'll get less solar energy etc... So more lights, batteries etc.

Life/recycling byproducts - You need to collect every gas, every liquid, every solid. You need to process them differently - Nitrogen - phosphorous oxides.

Recycling - it's a lot more complicated than "let it rot in the soil'. . It can take months and years for process to complete. You take part you eat it, it ends up some place else. We got issues with that on Earth, that's why we fertilize, crop rotate, etc.

Pollination - no fruit without pollination, certainly solvable problem though. Tuberous crops/greens don't have this issue in general, however most fruit/nut/bean/cereal require pollination.

Hybrids - most high yield crops we use are hybrids - that is you'll need a lab to produce high yield seed, or grow non hybrid progenitors separately for seed.

There are of course other venues - algae tank, or lichens (no gel very little waste, one of the promising )

Edited May 5, 2014 by Aedile
typos

[Aedile]

Well, no, they need about 2,800 calories. I'm sorry, but the NASA figures are based on 50 years of actual data. If you want me to accept other numbers, you'll need to quote a source.

The fact that barring skylab crew, astronauts consumed 70% of their 2800 calories - which is, yes 2000 calories...

[panarchist]

The space farmer's problems are many.

There are problems with lack of gravity, a lot if not most plants do use gravity, to spread their biomass, orient their fruit etc.

That statement makes it seem like you didn't read the article I linked - it looks like that's not true. At all.

You need 'plant nutrients' - you need nitrogen and magnesium obviously (no green - no profit), some phosphorous and a dozen other things.

NPK - Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium are the big three. In addition to that, you need upwards of 20 other minerals and nutrients. It's definitely not easy - it's also definitely not the level of detail that an LS or greenhouse mod needs, unless you want to play "Biochemistry 101". Personally, I don't. It's a game, and while I like my games with a lot of realism, I'm happy to have much of it abstracted, or pushed under the rug. I feel Nitrogen should be modeled, but that's mainly because it's necessary for a full-pressure atmo environment, and necessary for plants. (although plant usage of air N2 is still under-studied and opinions differ on how much N2 absorption happens from air)

Plants need a lot of water. Plants are mostly water, you'll need to bring quite a lot.

Initially, yes - but in a closed-cycle system, once the system is at equilibrium you only need enough to replace leakage. H2O leakage rates are *far* less than N2 leakage rates.

It takes rather large space to produce food for a single person, the less energy dense, the more space you need (it will also weigh more).

That's very true, though not as much as many expect. You can support one human on 1/2 acre. (a little over 2,000m2) - see John Seymour's "Self-Sufficient Life" or "The Backyard Homestead" for more details. With kerbals, that might be 1 kerbal per 1,000m2. Microgravity means different plant growth patterns, but by applying permaculture principles and staggering the order of plants, you might be able to "stack" layers of growing surfaces within a given volume, perhaps reducing that to 200-250m2.

Certainly the greenhouse mods currently available are not "realistic" in terms of output - but then, neither are other aspects of the game. Generally, I am willing to accept within half an order of magnitude when I select mods to use.

Grains are horrible users of space, and too much of the plant is inedible. They also are nutrient-poor. It's fairly likely a space garden would be cereal-free, and if there are animals, they'd likely be confined to rabbits and chickens - assuming they can be effectively raised in space. (which is a big assumption at this point) The most believable option is a greenhouse with no animals and no grains - lots of nutrient-rich vegetables, limited fruits, and starchy root veggies for the primary source of calories.

As for growth time, you need enough space for a rotating crop. Maturity time is mostly irrelevant, because the garden will be fully in operation before the ship leaves orbit. The primary factor is how many kg of food can you generate per unit time with the garden in question.

Energy - most standard plants seem to be pretty dependent on the light cycle, greenhouse on the moon might be an issue - you'll need to provide artificial light etc. When it's dark, plants actually release more CO2 than they absorb (and lose biomass) Also if you are going to outer planets, you'll get less solar energy etc... So more lights, batteries etc.

This is actually modeled in the Biomass mod on Github (the more advanced one). I think Taranis mentioned upthread that he was trying for something simpler with the greenhouse to be bundled with TAC LS.

In any case, this discussion is now way outside the confines of this particular mod, and perhaps more appropriate in the Biomass thread.

[panarchist]

The fact that barring skylab crew, astronauts consumed 70% of their 2800 calories - which is, yes 2000 calories...

They consumed 2,850-3,140 calories per day. Source: http://jn.nutrition.org/content/117/3/421.full.pdf

They burned 3,120 per day (same source) - according to a Pub Med doc after the missions, on at least one of the missions, astronauts lost on average 2.62 pounds of body mass, meaning that they were definitely burning more than the 2,800+ calories they consumed.

In any case, we're a bit afield here. Happy to discuss it more via PM, but this will be my last post on it in this thread - I provided my references, and I think the numbers speak for themselves.

[Aedile]

That statement makes it seem like you didn't read the article I linked - it looks like that's not true. At all.

NPK - Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium are the big three. In addition to that, you need upwards of 20 other minerals and nutrients. It's definitely not easy - it's also definitely not the level of detail that an LS or greenhouse mod needs, unless you want to play "Biochemistry 101". Personally, I don't. It's a game, and while I like my games with a lot of realism, I'm happy to have much of it abstracted, or pushed under the rug. I feel Nitrogen should be modeled, but that's mainly because it's necessary for a full-pressure atmo environment, and necessary for plants. (although plant usage of air N2 is still under-studied and opinions differ on how much N2 absorption happens from air)

Initially, yes - but in a closed-cycle system, once the system is at equilibrium you only need enough to replace leakage. H2O leakage rates are *far* less than N2 leakage rates.

That's very true, though not as much as many expect. You can support one human on 1/2 acre. (a little over 2,000m2) - see John Seymour's "Self-Sufficient Life" or "The Backyard Homestead" for more details. With kerbals, that might be 1 kerbal per 1,000m2. Microgravity means different plant growth patterns, but by applying permaculture principles and staggering the order of plants, you might be able to "stack" layers of growing surfaces within a given volume, perhaps reducing that to 200-250m2.

Certainly the greenhouse mods currently available are not "realistic" in terms of output - but then, neither are other aspects of the game. Generally, I am willing to accept within half an order of magnitude when I select mods to use.

Grains are horrible users of space, and too much of the plant is inedible. They also are nutrient-poor. It's fairly likely a space garden would be cereal-free, and if there are animals, they'd likely be confined to rabbits and chickens - assuming they can be effectively raised in space. (which is a big assumption at this point) The most believable option is a greenhouse with no animals and no grains - lots of nutrient-rich vegetables, limited fruits, and starchy root veggies for the primary source of calories.

As for growth time, you need enough space for a rotating crop. Maturity time is mostly irrelevant, because the garden will be fully in operation before the ship leaves orbit. The primary factor is how many kg of food can you generate per unit time with the garden in question.

This is actually modeled in the Biomass mod on Github (the more advanced one). I think Taranis mentioned upthread that he was trying for something simpler with the greenhouse to be bundled with TAC LS.

In any case, this discussion is now way outside the confines of this particular mod, and perhaps more appropriate in the Biomass thread.

Yes it is closed system, but you still need to bring it there, a greenhouse will weight a lot, because of the water captured in biomass - easily 80% of its weight. With other words, both grown food, and the unedible parts will weigh much more than dryfreezed astronaut food. Normal food is heavy.

My estimate was much lower, as it assumes no seasons, and uninterrupted growth cycle. Also I did not count the fact that you need variety of food. Still, 250 square meters is rather large space, and all the racks are not exactly weightless either, assuming you need to fill them with some gel or something. Still 2.5x10m per head...

Yes it's game and it's unrealistic, but LS mod is suppose to bring some degree of realism.

Grains - are pretty well suited for human use, since humankind has largely evolved around them. They are great energy source. Unless people evolve to be able to digest 10-20kg of veg a day... There is pretty good reason most our staple foods are grains. Grains will likely never be grown in zero gravity (they are so easily transportable, that it does not make particular sense).

My guess will be algae, lichens, tubers, perhaps peanuts and soya, likely some type of bean, some type of mushroom/fungus (getting rid of plant biomass). For animals I'd think aquatic animals, worms/catepilars/maggots and other things I'd rather not think about.

[Aedile]

While I have using TAC for a long time, and consider it essential, I still struggle to make sense of the units/weight container size.

Looking at the small water container, I see 30units are 54kg (l), and it can also hold some 30 units of waste water. So it seems it can hold more than twice it should? But I suppose this comes largely due the 'same amount per tank'

[ArcFurnace]

While I have using TAC for a long time, and consider it essential, I still struggle to make sense of the units/weight container size.

Looking at the small water container, I see 30units are 54kg (l), and it can also hold some 30 units of waste water. So it seems it can hold more than twice it should? But I suppose this comes largely due the 'same amount per tank'

The units are in Kerbal-days of life support (using 24 hour days). 1 unit of Oxygen, Food, and Water will support 1 Kerbal for 24 hours (or 2 Kerbals for 12 hours, 3 Kerbals for 8 hours, etc). They are not really volume units in any sense. The densities of the resources (Food, Water, and Oxygen) are adjusted to values that give what TaranisElsu considers accurate mass values for 24 hours of that particular resources (i.e., for water, a single unit weighs 1.8kg, so he is assuming that a Kerbal uses 1.8 kg of water per 24 hours).

[panarchist]

The units are in Kerbal-days of life support (using 24 hour days). 1 unit of Oxygen, Food, and Water will support 1 Kerbal for 24 hours (or 2 Kerbals for 12 hours, 3 Kerbals for 8 hours, etc). They are not really volume units in any sense. The densities of the resources (Food, Water, and Oxygen) are adjusted to values that give what TaranisElsu considers accurate mass values for 24 hours of that particular resources (i.e., for water, a single unit weighs 1.8kg, so he is assuming that a Kerbal uses 1.8 kg of water per 24 hours).

I think the point was that the same tank is being used to hold both resources. A 30 unit tank holds 54kg of water when full, 27kg of water and 27kg of wastewater when 50% used, and 54kg of wastewater when fully utilized. That's completely unrealistic (for water and wastewater to be in the same tank), which I recall Taranis mentioning way upthread somewhere, but it's a fudge to minimize the number of resource tanks.

[Aedile]

The units are in Kerbal-days of life support (using 24 hour days). 1 unit of Oxygen, Food, and Water will support 1 Kerbal for 24 hours (or 2 Kerbals for 12 hours, 3 Kerbals for 8 hours, etc). They are not really volume units in any sense. The densities of the resources (Food, Water, and Oxygen) are adjusted to values that give what TaranisElsu considers accurate mass values for 24 hours of that particular resources (i.e., for water, a single unit weighs 1.8kg, so he is assuming that a Kerbal uses 1.8 kg of water per 24 hours).

I see. It still confuses me that 1kg of water is not 1l (that is the tank visibly does not have the volume to hold 100liters). Haven't bothered calculating actually, but seems at least 2 times more than it should be.

NM, I guess it just one of those things like the xenon unit I should simply remember.

[phoenix_ca]

I think the point was that the same tank is being used to hold both resources. A 30 unit tank holds 54kg of water when full, 27kg of water and 27kg of wastewater when 50% used, and 54kg of wastewater when fully utilized. That's completely unrealistic (for water and wastewater to be in the same tank), which I recall Taranis mentioning way upthread somewhere, but it's a fudge to minimize the number of resource tanks.

If realism-crazy-people come in here and start demanding that every resource have its own part, I'm going to shoot someone.

Besides, your description is a bit off. Water and wastewater aren't in the same tank, they're in two "tanks" in the same part. Abstraction. But it works.

[Aedile]

I have no problem with them being in the same part, in fact its good thing, for minimizing part count. You are correct, they are two separate tanks, there is nothing stopping you from holding 100% water and 100% waste water, which is too much for the tank volume. It's not a big issue, until you use another mod such as modular fuels, or another mod which adds water and somewhat try to reconcile all this in your head or integrate them together.

[Fraz86]

2. I've never heard of this rumor, TAC calculates consumption rates on unloaded vessels regardless of production. Once a vessel is reloaded the appropriate amount of resources is calculated.

Would you mind elaborating on this? Does this mean that resource production/recycling is or is not calculated for unloaded vessels?

[panarchist]

If realism-crazy-people come in here and start demanding that every resource have its own part, I'm going to shoot someone.

Besides, your description is a bit off. Water and wastewater aren't in the same tank, they're in two "tanks" in the same part. Abstraction. But it works.

Hey, I'm not advocating that at all - I'm happy with abstractions, for the most part. If I want "realism", I'll write my own MM config to modify the values.

[phoenix_ca]

Hey, I'm not advocating that at all - I'm happy with abstractions, for the most part. If I want "realism", I'll write my own MM config to modify the values.

Oh good. I don't need to shoot you. Or rig a rocket full of depleted uranium to hit your house. Nice. Now I can spend that money on cupcakes.

Would you mind elaborating on this? Does this mean that resource production/recycling is or is not calculated for unloaded vessels?

It means that it's fudged. The consumption of out-of-focus craft is calculated for every craft. Once you make it the active vessel again, as I understand it, TAC then takes that info (how long since it was last active) and figures out how many resources should be left. It's essentially playing catch-up when you make the vessel active. It does a decent job of it, so much so that it really shouldn't effect gameplay at all.

Edited May 5, 2014 by phoenix_ca

[Aedile]

Would you mind elaborating on this? Does this mean that resource production/recycling is or is not calculated for unloaded vessels?

The energy production on unloaded vessel is not counted, the monitor will show on minus, but once you get to the ship, it will change. Stock game and use of energy in unloaded vessels is weird in general.

The use of oxygen/food/water will be updated for the time elapsed.

Converters need to be focused to work as far as i know, but will complete conversion rather fast.

[panarchist]

Oh good. I don't need to shoot you. Or rig a rocket full of depleted uranium to hit your house. Nice. Now I can spend that money on cupcakes.

Besides, if I wanted separate tanks, I can repurpose existing ones, there are plenty of custom tanks out there and I understand how to mod part.cfg.

People can point out inaccuracies and lack of realism, and that's not a crime, nor a need to get all upset. Bottom line, this is Taranis' show, and his decision as to the direction of the mod. TAC LS is more realistic than most - it was the first mod to calc LS usage on inactive vessels, and the only one to do it from the start. It's the oldest maintained LS mod. It interoperates with a lot of other mods, and Taranis is one of the few people out there with a Google spreadsheet listing the volumes, capacities, and details of all his tanks. (and before anyone asks, the link is in this thread - you'll need to search for it, I don't have the original link anymore)

This is, IMO, the best of the LS mods - that doesn't mean there isn't room to criticize, or that the "realism crowd" shouldn't be allowed to be heard. You use a joking tone, but not everyone will read it that way.

[phoenix_ca]

Oooooh, I'm not joking when it comes to being annoyed with realism-purists, because I haven't seen an argument for realism in KSP that actually stood on its own. Faulty premises abound.

[OOZ662]

As mentioned before, Universal Storage is aiming to give us that realism-based capacity and usage scenario for those of us that want it. But, they're still waiting to see if TAC switches to Liters, apparently.

[Daishi]

As mentioned before, Universal Storage is aiming to give us that realism-based capacity and usage scenario for those of us that want it. But, they're still waiting to see if TAC switches to Liters, apparently.

Yep we are, and still slowly optimising the models and making new parts.

[ArcFurnace]

For those wondering about how resource consumption works while vessels are offloaded, here's the explanation from TaranisElsu:

The MaxDeltaTime is there because my mod does not actually track consumption while vessels are unloaded. It keeps track of the last update time, and when a vessel is loaded it calculates the consumption from the last update time to the current time.

So if you had a space station, and you flew another ship for a year and then returned to the station, it would calculate how much the Kerbals would have consumed during that year.

To avoid issues with immediately consuming a years worth of supplies, and to give the recyclers a chance to act, it limits the consumption per update tick to the MaxDeltaTime. So with the default of 86400, each update tick will be limited to one 24-hour day. So catching up after the year will take 365 update ticks (there are ~25 update ticks per second). You may have noticed that sometimes when you load a vessel, the resources go crazy for a couple seconds and then settle down. That is it catching up with what should have happened while you were gone.

The ElectricityMaxDeltaTime is set to 1 to effectively disallow consuming electricity while the vessel is unloaded. I had to do that because none of the electrical generators -- solar panels, RTG's, etc -- function while the vessel is unloaded so the vessel would quickly run out of electricity, the recyclers would stop functioning, and all your Kerbals would die . If someone can build some solar panels that generate electricity while unloaded, then I can take that out. The problem, of course, is determining if the panels are receiving any sunlight at any particular moment.

He might want to put this in the first post or something, for future reference, but that's his business.

[Castun]

The units are in Kerbal-days of life support (using 24 hour days). 1 unit of Oxygen, Food, and Water will support 1 Kerbal for 24 hours (or 2 Kerbals for 12 hours, 3 Kerbals for 8 hours, etc). They are not really volume units in any sense. The densities of the resources (Food, Water, and Oxygen) are adjusted to values that give what TaranisElsu considers accurate mass values for 24 hours of that particular resources (i.e., for water, a single unit weighs 1.8kg, so he is assuming that a Kerbal uses 1.8 kg of water per 24 hours).

Well I think technically you mean Earth days since they're 24 hours. The latest update actually fixed the game clock so that 1 day is now only 6 hours (so now 1 Kerbal day.)

[Fraz86]

For those wondering about how resource consumption works while vessels are offloaded, here's the explanation from TaranisElsu:

So, while the resource consumption is updating at an accelerated rate of 24-hours-worth-of-consumption per tick, is the recycler activity accelerated to the same rate?