Jump to content

[WIP] Sum Dum Heavy Industries Service Module System (Stockalike)

sumghai

By sumghai
in KSP1 Mod Development

 Share

Recommended Posts

sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Progress Report, 23 July 2014

The invisible parachute bug has finally been fixed, and the next version of the Service Module pack will be compatible with RealChute 1.2.2.2. Huge thanks to stupid_chris for showing me how to finesse the RealChute TextureLibrary system. As always, if you're not squeamish, you can get this off the GitHub repo.

Over the next couple of days, I will be doing a final series of acceptance tests of all the new / updated functionality that will come in V2.0 - most of these would be checking dependency compatibility with KSP 0.24. While this should be straightforward, once again I make no promises regarding an actual release date.

I will also need to do a truckload of documentation for various places, in order to prepare for the upcoming release.

As always, patience (and bacon) would be greatly appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mostlydave

mostlydave

Posted
Posted (edited)

I just tried the github build on win x64 and everything seems good to me, I'm missing the effects for the small engine but I'm sure that has something missing in the build? I didn't alter anything I just downloaded a zip and put it in my Gamedata.

I am also missing/not seeing how to decouple the CM from the SM

Edited by mostlydave
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I just tried the github build on win x64 and everything seems good to me, I'm missing the effects for the small engine but I'm sure that has something missing in the build? I didn't alter anything I just downloaded a zip and put it in my Gamedata.

It might be something to do with HotRockets - compatibility testing for HR is one of the items on the final acceptance testing list.

I am also missing/not seeing how to decouple the CM from the SM

That requires a special animated decoupler plugin Starwaster wrote - said plugin is currently not compatible with x64 due to the decoupler bug (and sarbian's fix won't help).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Progress Report, 24 July 2014

SDHI SMS V2.0 Final Acceptance Test for KSP 0.24 is almost complete! (GitHub #20)

The main obstacle right now is TAC Life Support compatibility - since TaranisElsu updated TAC LS to 0.9 prerelease, the associated resource quantities and consumption rates have changed, and thus the associated ModuleManager patch I originally wrote one month ago is now invalid. Obviously, I do want to fix this before pushing V2.0 out, but to be honest, I'm a wee bit confused by the new numbers.

In older versions of TAC LS, the Mk 1-2 Pod by default provided its crew of three Kerbals enough food, water, oxygen plus waste, waste water and CO2 storage for 24 hours (four Kerbin days). The patch I wrote would extend this period to a total of eight Kerbin days, by directly modifying the pod to hold double its original amount of food, and stashing the extra oxygen and water reserves in the Service Module itself.

The newer version of TAC LS appears to supply enough provisions for up to three Kerbin days, but the individual items run out at different times (e.g. Electricity lasts for just over an hour, oxygen for a day, food for three days). Furthermore, TaranisElsu stated that he would not be around for the next couple of weeks, meaning I won't be able to seek help from him.

Here's my current TAC LS patch, written for older versions of TAC LS. I would greatly appreciate some help getting the resource quantities tweaked to fit the new version of TAC LS, with the following requirements:

- Pod itself should have enough food to feed three Kerbals for eight Kerbal days total, plus the associated waste storage

- Service Module should add enough water and oxygen to support three Kerbals for eight Kerbal days total, as well as including the CO2 extractor / water purifier systems

- Avionics Ring should only have the CO2 extractor / water purifier systems

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SebFierce

SebFierce

Posted
Posted

The newer version of TAC LS appears to supply enough provisions for up to three Kerbin days, but the individual items run out at different times (e.g. Electricity lasts for just over an hour, oxygen for a day, food for three days). Furthermore, TaranisElsu stated that he would not be around for the next couple of weeks, meaning I won't be able to seek help from him.

Here's my current TAC LS patch, written for older versions of TAC LS. I would greatly appreciate some help getting the resource quantities tweaked to fit the new version of TAC LS, with the following requirements:

- Pod itself should have enough food to feed three Kerbals for eight Kerbal days total, plus the associated waste storage

- Service Module should add enough water and oxygen to support three Kerbals for eight Kerbal days total, as well as including the CO2 extractor / water purifier systems

- Avionics Ring should only have the CO2 extractor / water purifier systems

I'm at it, will update this post as soon as I'm finished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Progress Report, 25 July 2014

The good news is that I've finally figured out what quantities of life support provision I would need for the MM patch.

The bad news is that TAC LS 0.9 exhibits peculiar behavior in 0.24.1, at least in my own setup - a crew compartment may be missing storage tanks for oxygen / CO2 / waste / waste water, even though they are defined in the TAC-LS cfgs. It appears that 0.24.1 is truncating the total number of PartModules / Resource definitions.

I have a feeling that I should just push out V2.0 sometime this weekend, after finishing up all the documentation. TAC LS support will come in a future hotfix / patch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted
How did you calculate the provisions? I used the spreadsheet with all the calculations made by TaranisElsu but the values never quite added up. :(

I consulted the spreadsheet briefly, but ultimately noted that the TAC-LS defaults for the Mk1-2 Pod provides a crew of three with three Kerbin day's worth of provisions.

Progress Report, 4 August 2014

After yet another weekend of banging and shouting, I've managed to revise the life support patch for use with TAC LS 0.9 pre-release:

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sumghai/SDHI_ServiceModuleSystem/master/GameData/SDHI/Service%20Module%20System/Parts/MM_configs/SDHI_SMS_MMPatch_TACLifeSupport.cfg

Recalculating the new resource quantities was the easy part, while getting the patch to actually apply was a bit trickier - the solution was to disable Modular Fuel Tank-powered TAC-LS definitions for the Mk1-2 Pod, so that my patch could be applied properly. (Note that this does not affect normal usage of MFT / RealFuels in the Service Module).

I've also re-added the Carbon Extractor and Water Filter TAC generators, and they all seem to work okay in conjunction with the stock Fuel Cell generator - furthermore, none of the three interferes with the Command Pod / Service Module decoupler.

I've tossed up the link above for those who wish to try this patch out, and if there are no issues, I might be able to push out SDHI SMS V2.0.1 later this week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walsht9

Walsht9

Posted
Posted

Sumghai, this mod is probably my absolute favorite out of all of the 130+ I have installed (no joke, 64 bit. It all works). With that being said I have a small suggestion/request that I wanted to throw out there. Would it be possible to have a version of the service module/fairingless engine that use monopropellant instead of liquid fuel and oxygen? It would be cool to have the option for realism freaks like myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Sumghai, this mod is probably my absolute favorite out of all of the 130+ I have installed (no joke, 64 bit. It all works). With that being said I have a small suggestion/request that I wanted to throw out there. Would it be possible to have a version of the service module/fairingless engine that use monopropellant instead of liquid fuel and oxygen? It would be cool to have the option for realism freaks like myself.

That's an interesting idea, although I couldn't find any publicly-available sources which states that the Orion SM uses a monoprop main engine. Link?

You'll obviously also need to use Modular Fuel Tanks to change my SM to only contain monopropellant, since someone has written a config for that already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walsht9

Walsht9

Posted
Posted
That's an interesting idea, although I couldn't find any publicly-available sources which states that the Orion SM uses a monoprop main engine. Link?

You'll obviously also need to use Modular Fuel Tanks to change my SM to only contain monopropellant, since someone has written a config for that already.

I haven't been able to find out much on the actual specs either but most sources say it is based on the ESA Automated transfer Vehicle which uses 4 R-4D engines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-4D). They are apparently the same engines used as rcs on the Apollo LM and CM. That's actually pretty awesome. :confused:

ATV: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_Transfer_Vehicle

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Helix935

Helix935

Posted
Posted
That's an interesting idea, although I couldn't find any publicly-available sources which states that the Orion SM uses a monoprop main engine. Link?

You'll obviously also need to use Modular Fuel Tanks to change my SM to only contain monopropellant, since someone has written a config for that already.

how about just making a new dual nozzle linar RCS port as shown in this picture as a substitute which can be attached at the bottom

mnWKYnb.gif

Edit: oh wait oh crap i think those are verniers but oh well..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Walsht9

Walsht9

Posted
Posted
how about just making a new dual nozzle linar RCS port as shown in this picture as a substitute which can be attached at the bottom

http://i.imgur.com/mnWKYnb.gif

Edit: oh wait oh crap i think those are verniers but oh well..

I don't think they are verniers, I think they are just regular old rcs thrusters. Seems to me there would already be more than enough control authority from the rcs alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sumghai

sumghai

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I haven't been able to find out much on the actual specs either but most sources say it is based on the ESA Automated transfer Vehicle which uses 4 R-4D engines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-4D). They are apparently the same engines used as rcs on the Apollo LM and CM. That's actually pretty awesome. :confused:

ATV: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_Transfer_Vehicle

The ESA ATV uses four R-4D-11 engines, which are the small nozzles at the back of the craft in this artist's impression. According to the R-4D's manufacturer (Aerojet Rocketdyne), they are actually bipropellant (NTO / MMH), hypergolic engines. And while NASA did say that their new Orion SM was going to be based on the ESA ATV, note that the R-4D's are very tiny compared to the SM main engine.

You confusion most likely arose from the use of the R-4D as altitude control / RCS thrusters for the Apollo LM and CSM - while this is true, note that page 2.5-25 from this 1969 Apollo Operations Handbook actually states that the Apollo RCS are bipropellant:

The CM RCS consists of two similar and independent subsystems, identified as subsystem 1 and subsystem 2. Both susbsystems are pressurized simultaneously. In the event a malfunction develops in one subsystem, the remaining subsystem has the capability of providing the impuls required to perform necessary pre-entry and entry maneuvers. The CM RCS is contained entirely within the CM and each reaction engine nozzle is ported through the CM skin. The propellants consist of inhibited nitrogen tetroxide (N2O2) used as the oxidizer and monomethylhydrazine (MMH) used as fuel. Pressurized helium gas is the propellant transferring agent.

The LM RCS engines / thrusters were also bipropellant.

I suspect that NASA is simply using the ESA ATV propulsion trunk as the structural framework for their new Orion SM, while the SM main engine itself is most likely still another, even bigger bipropellant design from Aerojet Rocketdyne engine (rumor has it that this engine will be derived from the shuttle program):

CHRIS: We’re here with Bernardo Patti from the European Space Agency. Today, we’re going to be talking about the Orion Service Module. Bernardo, how are you doing?

BERNARDO: I’m doing fine. Thank you very much and thank you for being here.

CHRIS: How is ESA going to be leveraging the ATV technologies into the Orion Service Module?

BERNARDO: Right. Let’s first see what is the service module. Let’s imagine it as a big truck which is pushing the crew module. What a big truck needs is an engine. So, essentially it’s a big propulsion module.

CHRIS: Okay.

BERNARDO: That’s where the analogy stops because it provides also other services to the crew module; power, storage of consumable, heat rejection. So, many of these features are already built in onto the ATV propulsion module. We are going to use similar architecture and put together similar equipment. Sometime we’re going to customize it and make it work for beyond LEO mission.

CHRIS: Also, you may be putting in some cutting edge technology into the vehicle as well.

BERNARDO: Yes. We are using similar technologies for the propulsion elements. Where we are using the main engine is a U.S. provided engine from the shuttle.

CHRIS: Right.

BERNARDO: We are using other engines that were already in the ATV. On the solar panels, you can consider that the solar panels are in evolution from the one on the ATV. We are using some heritage but also some quite great deal of innovation. The storage of consumable is essentially similar and, of course, what is being customized is the heat rejection, which is quite different. And also the structure itself because it’s really mission tailored.

tl;dr - Nope, the Orion SM main engine does not run on monopropellant.

how about just making a new dual nozzle linar RCS port as shown in this picture as a substitute which can be attached at the bottom

http://i.imgur.com/mnWKYnb.gif

Edit: oh wait oh crap i think those are verniers but oh well..

I'm going to pass on those.

The SDHI SMS pack is meant to be a rough analogue of the Orion MPCV, and not a faithful replica - there are already many other add-on authors who have made (or are attempting to make) genuine Orion/SLS replicas, and so things like solar panels, RCS thrusters etc are outside the focus of this pack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bomoo

Bomoo

Posted
Posted
how about just making a new dual nozzle linar RCS port as shown in this picture as a substitute which can be attached at the bottom

Not quite perfectly aligned, but it'll do for a demonstration.

6A5ABC9380436496A8C26299EF19C37C131F088A

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
tg626

tg626

Posted
Posted (edited)

I think this monoprop idea may be driven in part by KW Rocketry deciding to make their SPS fueled by mono prop.

The real Apollo SPS used hypergolic fuel as did the RCS system, as previously mentioned.

It seems to be a compromise, based on the fact that its not LFO and the fact that the game doesn't have hypergolic fuels and always uses monoprop for all RCS systems.

I'm not worried about it, but since I noticed this change with the last update from KW, I thought I'd mention it.

Just started trying this out. When are the SM fairing meant to be jettisoned? I did it during powered ascent and Boom! The fairings 'sploded. Is it Sum Dum Heavy Industries intent that they NOT be ejected while under acceleration?

Edited by sumghai
Consolidated consecutive replies by the same poster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...