Open Source Construction Techniques for Craft Aesthetics

[sgt_flyer]

@Rath heh, it's what happens when we have access to plenty of parts and a reasonable physics engine you can go crazy

 

well, it has been quite some time i haven't posted some aesthetic trick here,

here's a simple trick i use to get a much nicer look on flaps, with a lower part count when using a single big plane wing (not sure if anyone else use it, but at least it'll be posted somewhere for other to use )

here's the technique :

- the FAT-455 aeroplane tail fin has almost the best profile for the 'angled' section of the wing, combined with the fat 455 control surface for the 'straight' section of the wing to form really nice looking flaps - and you can even let a slight space between the two to let your 2.5m engine tail protrude (like if it was acting as a support for the flaps)

 

to turn those into 'functionnal' flaps, i simply adjust the wing so the beginning of the 'flap' gets centered around the COM of the plane - when they deploy, they can even allow the plane to take-off 'flat' with SAS enabled, without any action on the controls, as soon as it has enough speed (so just increased lift at the expense of additionnal drag)

here's the .craft file if you want to check the wing / test the plane

(1.05 file)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xrm8i99tl2g7xsb/nice%20Flaps.craft?dl=0

actiongroup 1 toggle the landing gear bay (of course, you shouldn't close them while the landing gear is deployed ^^)

actiongroup 2 toggle the flaps - you can use them both for takeoff and landing (during landing with engine idle, the extra drag and lift will allow you to slow down for a gentle touchdown)

actiongroup 3 thrust reversers toggle (if you need to brake extra hard)

 

Edited April 2, 2016 by sgt_flyer

[Rath]

Cool

[Speeding Mullet]

Simple one for me today, but simple is sometimes desired and often forgotten (i.e. this one may have been covered previously).

When building an amphibious plane (or other amphibious vehicle) the Mk3 cargo bay rotated 90 degrees and book ended with a pair of Mk3 to 3.75m adapters acting as ballast tanks can create a nifty little wet bay for your small water craft and such .

 

SM

[Columbia]

By request of a KerbalX member, I went back to 1.0.5 to make a tutorial on making WW2 aircraft cockpits (I'm still in 1.1.0.1230, so I can't use Editor Extensions Redux.) (NOTE: If you're on 1.0.5, you need NoOffsetLimits, and in 1.1, an alternative is Editor Extensions Redux which has similar functionalities in terms of offset.)

This tutorial is pretty long.

So, say you have some sort of setup of a fuselage.

Let's assume you looked up the blueprints of the aircraft you're replicating, and you've completed the nose right up to the cockpit.

Much of it depends on how you designed it. If you built something like this, utilizing multiple fuselages together;

You can easily build it leaving a bit of space for the cockpit (but not much for the pilot.)

A slightly more rudimentary way of doing it is by leaving hollow space and building around it via wing parts. 

It's slightly more rudimentary but leaves a lot of space for the pilot and to "furnish" the interior, even perhaps add an ejection seat.

And while we're on the topic of it, some WW2 single engined plane canopies have a front that's somewhat triangular-shaped as it embeds into the fuselage more, for example, on the Fw 190:

The ideal part for copying that is the Basic fin. You may notice this on other aircraft such as the Bf 109 and Ju 87.

Alright, here is *the* most important part.

To replicate the aircraft's cockpit via struts, we need to learn the mechanics of strut and fuel line connection and how they react with Offset:

Observe this GIF. Notice how:

-I connected the first part of the strut to a random point in the fuselage

-The second point of the strut is where we want the strut to start from 

-It's the first point of the strut that can be moved (NoOffsetLimits plays a part here!) and therefore can be exploited used for our purpose.

It's a bit difficult to understand so it's best that you try it yourself to see how it works.

See how we're able to use the struts to provide a similar cockpit-esque shape? That's what we're going to be using to complete our cockpit.

The second, slightly less significant but still important part is that the second point of struts can be connected with another strut's end.

See here:

Also, a bit of a sidenote: Especially on German aircrafts where completely bubble canopies are few and far in between, most frames will be connected to each other in some way. Look at the Bf 109's cockpit as an example.

For example: If you're making something like the Me 262,  you can connect the ends of struts together to form the first segment of frames in the cockpit.

Or you can connect the first point to a random place in the fuselage, connect the second point at the place where the bottom of the frame is supposed to be, and offset the first strut point to look attached to the rest of the frame. Similar result.

Another thing to keep in mind: The rest of the cockpit can be engineered using what I've covered. Keep in mind, however, that some cockpits are different from others. Remember that the first part of the strut (that can be moved to anywhere you please) is your friend. Think of it as string. When you're trying to hang something to the ceiling, you tie it to the ceiling, and then to the object you want to be hanging, or vice versa. Either way, at one point, you have one point that's permanently there and another that can be moved around.

So, since you're able to do this, you can attach struts to each other to form the cockpit.

Alright, let's wrap it up one more time before finishing:

To build the rest of the cockpit after you've finished the first part; you:

-Attach first part of strut to anywhere in the cockpit, since you'll be able to move it around.

-Attach second point of strut to where the previous strut ended because that's where the rest of the strut will root from.

-Offset first part of strut to second point of frame that you're recreating.

And also, make sure that if you're replicating something, you have the blueprints at hand. That way, you'll have something to base it from.

Once again, it might be easier to get if you try it yourself in KSP. You'll get it eventually.

And that wraps up our tutorial -- Best of luck!

 

 

 

 

[Rath]

I've been doing similar stuff to that for a while now.

[EVA_Reentry]

On 4/26/2016 at 4:19 AM, Speeding Mullet said:

Simple one for me today, but simple is sometimes desired and often forgotten (i.e. this one may have been covered previously).

When building an amphibious plane (or other amphibious vehicle) the Mk3 cargo bay rotated 90 degrees and book ended with a pair of Mk3 to 3.75m adapters acting as ballast tanks can create a nifty little wet bay for your small water craft and such .

 

SM

Hiya! Can we have the .craft?

[Speeding Mullet]

9 hours ago, EVA_Reentry/Strangelove II said:

Hiya! Can we have the .craft?

Sure thing!  I'll try and update for 1.1.2 and upload when I am back from work for you.

Thanks for your interest

EDIT: @EVA_Reentry/Strangelove II here you go!

SM

Edited May 13, 2016 by Speeding Mullet

[HafCoJoe]

PSA: Docking port "magnetic force" gets weaker the closer two ports get to each other.

This allows for some interesting levitation techniques when floating a hinge between opposite facing docking ports. As the bearing nears one port, their attraction weakens and the opposite side's attraction increases, causing the bearing to float locked between both ports. A new method of truly friction-less hinges is born.

http://imgur.com/a/YmiRZ

 

Edited September 17, 2016 by Avera9eJoe

[Majorjim!]

Interesting. I imagine however that it might not be able to handle much if any lateral forces. More testing needed.

[HafCoJoe]

29 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

Interesting. I imagine however that it might not be able to handle much if any lateral forces. More testing needed.

You'd be surprised how much force it can take - the one thing that it's really missing is a dampener to keep it from wobbling. Because it isn't touching any parts, it doesn't have anything to slow down wobble if it starts. I tried using wheels but either they're blocked and don't do anything or they aren't blocked and explode as soon as they touch the probe core.

If I can get the wobble to stop then I'm hoping to use this as the center hinge for a torus station. I did this back in 1.0.5 with the old wheel physics but wheel-against-craft interactions in 1.1.3 are something to fear. The wheels even seem to exert some kind of new phantom force with their suspension.

Edited July 20, 2016 by Avera9eJoe

[Majorjim!]

Yeah they are less than ideal. 

 Well wheels blocking will be gone soon man and the suspension issues are know so should be being looked at. It's a very promising idea indeed, keep working on it!

[HafCoJoe]

1 minute ago, Majorjim said:

Yeah they are less than ideal. 

 Well wheels blocking will be gone soon man and the suspension issues are know so should be being looked at. It's a very promising idea indeed, keep working on it!

It worked extremely well in 1.0.5 I hope it's fixed sooner rather than later. Wait - You said that wheel blocking is going to be gone soon?

[Majorjim!]

Yeah mate, confirmed in the latest dev notes.

[Majorjim!]

5 hours ago, Majorjim said:

Yeah mate, confirmed in the latest dev notes.

Well, in the responses anyway. Sometimes you really gotta squeeze to get the details from the devs.

Edited July 20, 2016 by Majorjim

[sgt_flyer]

On 20/07/2016 at 4:51 PM, Avera9eJoe said:

PTA: Docking port "magnetic force" gets weaker the closer two ports get to each other.

This allows for some interesting levitation techniques when floating a hinge between opposite facing docking ports. As the bearing nears one port, their attraction weakens and the opposite side's attraction increases, causing the bearing to float locked between both ports. A new method of truly friction-less hinges is born.

ok, did some tests with those magnetic bearings under gravity / g forces seems a small dry bearing cage does wonders to stabilize the wobbling (doesn't even need high part count cage - i only used 3 ox-stats to stabilize the thing, without adding much friction (though when g-forces kick in, friction increase, but stability is kept)

the spinning part's docking port is attached to the small 0.625m decoupler, when the part is decoupled, all docking ports magnetize

 

the 3 ox-stats are attached to the outer structural fuselage, they serve as the stabilisator (they are just wide enough to leave a little clearance to the RTG's collision layer) - the solar panels also 'press' against the reaction wheel (blocks back & forth movement)

 

 

animated gif - click the image to get to the .gif

 

Edited July 21, 2016 by sgt_flyer

[HafCoJoe]

Could you send me a .craft file of that? I'm curious if I can do some testing w/ it myself

The one thing I've heard though but haven't tested myself is that docking port phantom force sometimes vanishes when reloading scenes/vessel or docking another thing together. I haven't been able to replicate it but it's definitely something to watch out for if you're using this for a base design. - If you can get an example of it breaking, I'd implore that you make a bug report on it so it can get fixed in the next release or soon ^(tm) http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/projects/ksp/issues

Edited July 21, 2016 by Avera9eJoe

[sgt_flyer]

@Avera9eJoe my current test platform is much more down to earth (or down to kerbin ^^), so i didn't really tested it in saving / reloading

searched for something to replace the small wheels i used in this kind of bearing before 1.1 your finds on magnetic bearings just came neatly ^^

i'll send you a link to the bare bearing for testing

for g-loading, when manoeuvering this plane (5.4g's when pulling out of a sea level dive with the test plane) they only slowed down a bit due to friction (once the G-forces lowered, they started spinning back to their old speed, without noticeable wobbling )

edit : - mmh checking on the disassembled thing, i have a slightly shorter gap on the side where the ox-stats are touching the reaction wheel - so the other docking port is pulling harder, pulling the reaction wheels onto the ox-stats (which i guess is one of the things that helps on stability)

 

Edited July 21, 2016 by sgt_flyer

[Bloojay]

Here is how I construct my Apollo-a-like command capsule:
(Imgur album: http://imgur.com/a/ZFhwT)

The basic componetns, a .65 to 1.25m structural adapter, and a docking port are the main components, attached to a capsule of course

smush 'em down

nice 'n flush

this is how i do my Launch escape system and shroud

Its just more historically accurate and sleeker. Its done in 2 segments, the first extending downward and out, parallel to the capsule,
and then cuts in and finishes connected to the Heat-Shielding, decoupler, Or even the capsule if done correctly.
It may result in less than pretty edges, this is easily resolved with offsetting the entire fairing upwards a smidge.

 

[monstah]

Hey there. I was just gonna browse through some of the designs on the OP, but their links are broken! Not 404-broken, but they take me back to the OP.  

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

5 hours ago, monstah said:

Hey there. I was just gonna browse through some of the designs on the OP, but their links are broken! Not 404-broken, but they take me back to the OP.  

Those are links to individual posts from the old forum software.  The switch to IPS was smart enough to fix broken links to other threads, but not to posts.  So it just converts the links into links pointing at this thread.  Unfortunately, there's nothing that can be done about it, as adding the old post number to the new URL does not do anything.  Searching the thread works fairly well, though.

Edited July 28, 2016 by Mad Rocket Scientist

[Gman_builder]

On ‎7‎/‎21‎/‎2016 at 1:10 PM, sgt_flyer said:

ok, did some tests with those magnetic bearings under gravity / g forces seems a small dry bearing cage does wonders to stabilize the wobbling (doesn't even need high part count cage - i only used 3 ox-stats to stabilize the thing, without adding much friction (though when g-forces kick in, friction increase, but stability is kept)

the spinning part's docking port is attached to the small 0.625m decoupler, when the part is decoupled, all docking ports magnetize

 

the 3 ox-stats are attached to the outer structural fuselage, they serve as the stabilisator (they are just wide enough to leave a little clearance to the RTG's collision layer) - the solar panels also 'press' against the reaction wheel (blocks back & forth movement)

 

 

 

I'm super interested in this. Seems like it has a relatively high max RPM and can possibly be utilized in high performance turboprops.

Will look into it further and report back.

[Gman_builder]

Here is my test rig. It doesn't work at all. I think the ports are not magnetizing for some reason. When I decouple the levitate-e it immediately reconnects with the port on the other side of the craft. Then if I decouple it again none of the 4 ports are magnetized. Am I missing something?

 

[pTrevTrevs]

5 hours ago, Gman_builder said:

Snip

I believe decoupling docking ports will cause them to push whatever was decoupled away with a slight force. This probably causes the center section to be pushed right onto the other port.Docking port magnetization will also only be armed once the two ports reach a certain distance from each other, so when you undock the second port you can't redock because the rig doesn't provide sufficient distance to arm the magnets.

[sgt_flyer]

 

11 hours ago, Gman_builder said:

Here is my test rig. It doesn't work at all. I think the ports are not magnetizing for some reason. When I decouple the levitate-e it immediately reconnects with the port on the other side of the craft. Then if I decouple it again none of the 4 ports are magnetized. Am I missing something?

 

can you show us a picture of before decoupling ? I think what happens is that two of your docking ports are connected together node to node in the vab, and you decouple this. Leave the 'external' body docking port free (node avaible), and mount the future rotating part on a lateral decoupler.

[Gman_builder]

2 hours ago, sgt_flyer said:

 

can you show us a picture of before decoupling ? I think what happens is that two of your docking ports are connected together node to node in the vab, and you decouple this. Leave the 'external' body docking port free (node avaible), and mount the future rotating part on a lateral decoupler.

Oh ok. That makes more sense. I will try that later.