4x Clampotron or 1x Clampotron Sr? (NOW WITH TEST DATA)

[Burninate]

Now that we have a solid 1x2.5->4x1.25 adapter in stock parts, which of these is your preference for general use with larger craft? Do you have some alternate part strategy for solid connections with predictable separations that you've managed to make a standardized docking port out of?

Edited August 21, 2013 by Burninate

[SkyRender]

C-o-T Sr. all the way. Less docking hassle that way, and fewer parts. Plus, it just looks cooler.

[Bothersome]

It really depends upon what the function of the docking port is going to be.

Building a stationary space station? The Sr. will do.

Building something that needs to be pushed hard? The standard is what I use.

Is it a space fuel depot? Need a standard and a Jr. I usually just use the standard because I standardize all my crafts.

[karolus10]

Why to choose if You can had advantages of both ?

It's good for space tugs .

For bolting 2 large spacecrafts together large docking ports are always better.

Edited August 21, 2013 by karolus10

[nimbim]

Sr. can take a lot more stress, I use it for everything except tiny tiny things that I hardly ever build.

[katateochi]

C-o-T Sr. all the way. Less docking hassle that way, and fewer parts. Plus, it just looks cooler.

^^ what he said. stronger and the reduction in part count is the main selling point for me. Not to say I don't use the regular and junior ones too, but if it gotta be strong the Sr is the preferred.

[Burninate]

Okay, testing completed:

I used a quad docking interface and a senior docking interface, with a rocket engine below, to compare Sr Clamp vs Quad Clamp. Throttle was slowly increased to breaking point.

The inline test jig used a Mainsail:

Unstrutted Sr breaks at 78% throttle

Unstrutted Quad breaks at 78% throttle

Strutted Sr breaks at 78% throttle

Strutted Quad takes 100% throttle without breaking (note: early anomaly where it broke at 78% assumed to be misapplication of struts, which was not seen in three repeated tests)

Here is the lateral test jig, using a Skipper:

Lateral Bending is a different animal:

Unstrutted Sr breaks at 48% throttle

Strutted Sr breaks at 48% throttle

Unstrutted quad diagonal breaks at 67% throttle

Strutted quad diagonal takes 100% throttle without breaking, taking a 30 degree deflection

Unstrutted quad parallel breaks at 50% throttle

Strutted quad parallel takes 100% throttle without breaking, taking a 25 degree deflection

It would appear that the quad is superior, especially for bending loads & with struts supporting it

Edited August 21, 2013 by Burninate

[Psycix]

I'm sticking with Sr. for the sake of having 1 part rather than 5.

One advantage the 4x offers over the Sr. is angular alignment. If two components need to be lined up EXACTLY, a multi-port will easily snap into the closest 90* angle.

One thing I hate about the 4x is that inaccurate docking may result with an offset docking, where the opposite corners or sides dock with eachother. And last but not least it is also more work to undock 4 ports than to undock one.

Why to choose if You can had advantages of both ?

It's good for space tugs .

For bolting 2 large spacecrafts together large docking ports are always better.

Now this is beautiful. What happens if you dock two of those double-ports together? Do both dock? Can you still target the middle one to undock?

This gave me an idea: A Sr, with a Jr offset from the center, bringing back the angular alignment advantage.

[karolus10]

Now this is beautiful. What happens if you dock two of those double-ports together? Do both dock? Can you still target the middle one to undock?

It is the main flaw of this design - You can't undock If You use two identical ports (work fine with one port at a time) in this way... They both dock And you will be unable to undock inner port without using action groups :/.

[allmappedout]

It is the main flaw of this design - You can't undock If You use two identical ports (work fine with one port at a time) in this way... They both dock And you will be unable to undock inner port without using action groups :/.

Still, it does seem like a really cool method of getting round the idea of having tugs with versatility, and if you set up the action groups for the tugs to toggle docking (or even just force undocking), then presumably that will carry forward when the vessels are docked?

Makes more sense than my carbuncle creations with a normal port and senior port at either end with bi-directional thrust from 2 sets of radially mounted engines

[Bothersome]

Okay, testing completed:

I used a quad docking interface and a senior docking interface, with a rocket engine below, to compare Sr Clamp vs Quad Clamp. Throttle was slowly increased to breaking point.

The inline test jig used a Mainsail:

<< snippidy snip>>

It would appear that the quad is superior, especially for bending loads & with struts supporting it

But, if I were to make a ship that was going to launch with struts already attached to a payload that was to be "let go" in space. Why wouldn't I use a decoupler instead? Usually I'm not that concerned about a little extra weight so, let's not go there.

So then, if I were needing to dock a ship to a payload already in space, then struts aren't going to be there to help (I'm a stock advocate). Unless I'm building a space station, I have not found the Sr. to be beneficial to loads that need to be pushed.

[Tygroux]

I usually use a standard on my ships, and a senior on big constructions; but my experience says the last one is a mistake.

Quad assembly is much better at fighting the space kraken.

Now... Why not building a quad Sr?

Must... test this...

[Wait- Was That Important?]

One senior is all I can use for lag reasons

[Burninate]

But, if I were to make a ship that was going to launch with struts already attached to a payload that was to be "let go" in space. Why wouldn't I use a decoupler instead? Usually I'm not that concerned about a little extra weight so, let's not go there.

So then, if I were needing to dock a ship to a payload already in space, then struts aren't going to be there to help (I'm a stock advocate). Unless I'm building a space station, I have not found the Sr. to be beneficial to loads that need to be pushed.

You misunderstand - the struts are to connect the docking ports rigidly to the craft, not to connect from the craft to the payload on the other side of the docking ports.

[annallia]

Depends on purpose and design of ship that said:

Standard for all vessels is regular clamp o tron, if more are needed then get into the x2 x3 and x4

Standard for refuelers is the senior so my space stations use both.

[mushroomman]

I kind of like the look of the quad and now that I know it's stronger, I think I'll start using it when building large and mobile vehicles.

[M5000]

Ahem.. Fusty's FusTek Common Birthing Mechanism is the way I go. Sized appropriately to the application, of course.

[Psycix]

Ahem.. Fusty's FusTek Common Birthing Mechanism is the way I go. Sized appropriately to the application, of course.

What's the advantage over stock docking ports?

[Starwaster]

One senior is all I can use for lag reasons

Yeah, when I have to dock something big, Sr. Doing lots of little docking ports causes lag, or at least that's what I keep reading on these forums and it certainly seems that way to me too. Seems to me the docking port module has a lot of code overhead associated with it.

[Captain Sierra]

Sr for most big stuff I need including my bigger space stations and Lazarus payloads. Standard on my docking modules and stuff for regular crafts to dock to and refuel. Jr. only for probes.

[Respawn]

I usually use 1 normal clampotron on each craft, as most of my crafts is "tiny".

Unless the crafts are bigger than 100t + then it all depends on what I plan to use it for.

I had a big modular spacecruiser a couple of saves back,

each section was about 150t and i had a massive command craft at the end which was supposed to control the whole thing.

there i used 4x tricoupplers (12 normal clampotrons) for the command craft and 4 single clampotrons for each module attached in front of it.

So it all depends..

Rarely use jr. or sr.