[0.25] Engine Ignitor (Workaround for some bugs V3.4.1: Aug.31)

[Chestburster]

Well, my idea was to basically have 1 global config with all default values listed for different fuel mixtures. So if you have a blank ModuleEngineIgnitor module defined within the engine part config, it will use all values defined in the global config. If you have only the ullageSimulation defined, it will skip that and fill in the missing values defined in the global config.

[HoneyFox]

Well, my idea was to basically have 1 global config with all default values listed for different fuel mixtures. So if you have a blank ModuleEngineIgnitor module defined within the engine part config, it will use all values defined in the global config. If you have only the ullageSimulation defined, it will skip that and fill in the missing values defined in the global config.

Oh... now i get to understand that a bit...

So there will be a config containing something like:

EngineIgnitorPresets
{
    Preset
    {
         name = Pressurized MMH+N2O4 ElectricCharge
         isPressureFed = true
         ignitionsAvailable = 8
         IGNITOR_RESOURCE 
         {
             name = ElectricCharge
             amount = ...
         }
    }
    Preset
    {
        name = Pressurized UDMH+N2O4
         isPressureFed = true
         ignitionsAvailable = 12
    }
    ...
}

And in ModuleEngineIgnitor definition there will be: "preset = Pressurized MMH+N2O4 ElectricCharge" line followed by other additional lines for value overrides like "ignitionsAvailable = 12"?

This does sound both flexible and convenient, but it is really quite a big change and will raise many issues in loading procedure & save file consistency. Frankly speaking, I'm not quite willing to do this, at least recently, until I think it over and make sure that this design won't break other things.

[Chestburster]

Yes, that is kinda how i imagined it.

I feared that would be a rather big change but i just wanted to share my mind. It would be great if this gets realized some day.. but until then we can still use the old system

[xZise]

I don't know if this was asked yet, but with RF, how do I set the igniter resource to the same of the source the engine is using because it is hypergolic?

Fabian

[xZise]

Okay I guess, I figured this out. I made the ullage pack you linked in the first post compatible with RealFuels:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4788dw2go1o5t5k/UllagePack.zip

It does use either MonoPropellant, Hydrazine or HTP. I left UllageFuel as a resource to maintain upgradability. You need ModuleManager and the Ullage Pack (the complete pack should work too) from Rocket Power Industries. Tell me how it works out for you especially with those numbers. Be aware that the MonoPropellant will use it from all tanks, while Hydrazine and HTP need to be fuelled to the engine. Also the engines are like normal engines so you need to apply thrust like with a normal engine, even when it does use MonoPropellant. I recommend to use an action group to toggle the current status. To ignite it always uses the fuel it usually would use and it can be ignited 32 times (this should be more than enough).

Fabian

[HoneyFox]

OK, the new version V3.2.0 has just been released!

Here's something I have to say about it:

The new logic of pressurized-uel tank & pressure-fed-engines is not very realistic. Though you can consider these PFTs as bladder fuel tanks, which is the type that can eliminate the need of ullage. Anyway this design might be changed later so get prepared.

The new logic of cryogenic-boiling-off-acceleration won't actually affect orbit, but slightly change the ullage simulation a bit. It might not be very realistic as well, but I think it works in game just fine.

[Guest]

Could you add some way to make Dtobi's sparkers work as external ignitors for non-hypergolic engines? Preferably as a separate integration config. If installed, instead of only having to stick a launch clamp near the engine, you'd actually have to place a sparker under each of them so that they could ignite. A very neat feature IMO, though probably should be optional.

[DasBananenbrot]

Could you add some way to make Dtobi's sparkers work as external ignitors for non-hypergolic engines? Preferably as a separate integration config. If installed, instead of only having to stick a launch clamp near the engine, you'd actually have to place a sparker under each of them so that they could ignite. A very neat feature IMO, though probably should be optional.

Wanted to ask that too So totally second that

[HoneyFox]

Could you add some way to make Dtobi's sparkers work as external ignitors for non-hypergolic engines? Preferably as a separate integration config. If installed, instead of only having to stick a launch clamp near the engine, you'd actually have to place a sparker under each of them so that they could ignite. A very neat feature IMO, though probably should be optional.

Hi, although that sparker might not be doing the actual ignitor work, it's only consuming vented fuel to avoid explosion AFAIK, it might be cool to add that.

It's actually quite easy, just edit the IgnitorStock.cfg, change the first section where external ignitor is added onto launch clamp, change the [launchClamp1] to the name of the sparker part. and also adjust the range so that it can only affect engines close enough to it. That's done.

[Guest]

Yeah, but this would cause the thing to work regardless of where it's placed, as long as it's close enough. I wanted it to do something else - draw a line from the sparker's effect transform and engine thrust transforms. If they are within specified distance from each other, ignition can occur. Sparker's line would be as long as the effect, but thin and the one on engines shouldn't extend too far down from the bell, but have a decent radius. Also, I'd like it to be possible to still use the launch clamp to fire ground-ignited SRBs.

[HoneyFox]

Yeah, but this would cause the thing to work regardless of where it's placed, as long as it's close enough. I wanted it to do something else - draw a line from the sparker's effect transform and engine thrust transforms. If they are within specified distance from each other, ignition can occur. Sparker's line would be as long as the effect, but thin and the one on engines shouldn't extend too far down from the bell, but have a decent radius. Also, I'd like it to be possible to still use the launch clamp to fire ground-ignited SRBs.

OK. I can make a plan for this, might need some information about that sparker from dtobi. perhaps need him to expose something so I can check these conditions more easily.

[unWinged]

How does this mod work with not-fuel-burning engines? Like termal rocket nozzles from KSP Interstellar for example.

[Guest]

It doesn't. You don't need to worry about ignitors with a thermal rocket.

OK. I can make a plan for this, might need some information about that sparker from dtobi. perhaps need him to expose something so I can check these conditions more easily.

That would be awesome. It'd definitely add a layer of immersion.

[Arthree]

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but pressurized tanks don't seem to exist for me. I've extracted the PressurizedFuelTanks.cfg to the GameData\EngineIgnitor directory, and the small engines say they require pressurized tanks, but no matter what tank I attach to them, they won't ignite and the fuel status on the engine's context menu always says "Unpressurized".

Also I get this in the ksp.log:

[LOG 17:45:59.847] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTankSmallFlat/part/fuelTankSmallFlat'

[ERR 17:45:59.851] Cannot find a Module of typename 'ModuleFuelTanks'

[LOG 17:45:59.866] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'Squad/Parts/FuelTank/miniFuelTank/part/miniFuelTank'

[ERR 17:45:59.871] Cannot find a Module of typename 'ModuleFuelTanks'

Edited February 21, 2014 by Arthree

[xZise]

Can I simply update to EI 3.2.0 when I'm using RealFuels? I'm asking because with the new pressurized fuel tanks logic it appears that RF needs to add the info if a tank is pressurized.

Fabian

[brooklyn666]

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but pressurized tanks don't seem to exist for me. I've extracted the PressurizedFuelTanks.cfg to the GameData\EngineIgnitor directory, and the small engines say they require pressurized tanks, but no matter what tank I attach to them, they won't ignite and the fuel status on the engine's context menu always says "Unpressurized".

Also I get this in the ksp.log:

[LOG 17:45:59.847] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTankSmallFlat/part/fuelTankSmallFlat'

[ERR 17:45:59.851] Cannot find a Module of typename 'ModuleFuelTanks'

[LOG 17:45:59.866] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'Squad/Parts/FuelTank/miniFuelTank/part/miniFuelTank'

[ERR 17:45:59.871] Cannot find a Module of typename 'ModuleFuelTanks'

I'm having the same problem, but maybe I can make a suggestion? instead of specifying which tanks are and aren't pressurized, why not just add helium as a resource, and if you have an rcs tank with helium, any tank that is connected to it is pressurized. Because I looked through the config, and there are only a few tanks that are pressurized. Sure, I could add the ones I want myself (mostly stretchy tanks), but why pigeon-hole the user?

Also, is there a preferred engine cfg for this? I use RftS but it looks like it's meant to work with RealEngines.

[Arthree]

Yeah I think ModuleFuelTanks is a Real Fuels module, that's why it isn't working. And I don't want to use Real Fuels. I guess the easy solution is to just turn off ullage simulation for the "pressurized" ones and don't require the actual RF stuff.

[tygoo7]

I'm a bit confused on the pressurized config. What mods does it support? Also is there a config for the KSO engines?

[HoneyFox]

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but pressurized tanks don't seem to exist for me. I've extracted the PressurizedFuelTanks.cfg to the GameData\EngineIgnitor directory, and the small engines say they require pressurized tanks, but no matter what tank I attach to them, they won't ignite and the fuel status on the engine's context menu always says "Unpressurized".

Also I get this in the ksp.log:

[LOG 17:45:59.847] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTankSmallFlat/part/fuelTankSmallFlat'

[ERR 17:45:59.851] Cannot find a Module of typename 'ModuleFuelTanks'

[LOG 17:45:59.866] PartLoader: Compiling Part 'Squad/Parts/FuelTank/miniFuelTank/part/miniFuelTank'

[ERR 17:45:59.871] Cannot find a Module of typename 'ModuleFuelTanks'

Oops... sorry, this logic needs RealFuels/ModularFuelSystem plugin... I should tweak some codes to check that. But still I suggest you install one of the two plugins. If you don't like realistic fuel types, at least you can try ModularFuelSystem which still uses stock fuel types. But then that PressurizedFuelTanks.cfg might need some change because IIRC LiquidFuel & Oxidizer types are not defined as "(pressurized)" in that config.

Edited February 25, 2014 by HoneyFox

[HoneyFox]

Can I simply update to EI 3.2.0 when I'm using RealFuels? I'm asking because with the new pressurized fuel tanks logic it appears that RF needs to add the info if a tank is pressurized.

Fabian

If you have RF installed, it should be OK. That PressurizedFuelTanks.cfg will modify ServiceModule tank type to be pressurized.

And in that config file, some of tanks are changed to use ServiceModule type as well.

[HoneyFox]

Yeah I think ModuleFuelTanks is a Real Fuels module, that's why it isn't working. And I don't want to use Real Fuels. I guess the easy solution is to just turn off ullage simulation for the "pressurized" ones and don't require the actual RF stuff.

You might simply delete the "PressurizedFuelTanks.cfg", after doing this all these engines will fallback to "ullageSimulation = false" with no "isPressureFed = true".

[HoneyFox]

It doesn't. You don't need to worry about ignitors with a thermal rocket.

That would be awesome. It'd definitely add a layer of immersion.

I've sent a PM to him weeks ago, but no reply at all...

[Frijolez]

Im not sure if my mod has problems or not. Everytime i launch a spaceship and reach over 100km altitude, I am unable to reactivate my engine because the fuel is always "very unstable" ive tried a lot of things to make it "stable" again and ignite my engines but nothing work. This has got to a point in which i cant turn my engines for nothing not even time speeding because it would just go unstable and unusuable, its getting to my nerves because i havent been able to do any real thing in kerbal for the past week.

Please help me and if im doing something wrong then please teach me how to stable the fuel and work out through this mod, seriously...

[HoneyFox]

Im not sure if my mod has problems or not. Everytime i launch a spaceship and reach over 100km altitude, I am unable to reactivate my engine because the fuel is always "very unstable" ive tried a lot of things to make it "stable" again and ignite my engines but nothing work. This has got to a point in which i cant turn my engines for nothing not even time speeding because it would just go unstable and unusuable, its getting to my nerves because i havent been able to do any real thing in kerbal for the past week.

Please help me and if im doing something wrong then please teach me how to stable the fuel and work out through this mod, seriously...

How did you launch your craft onto 100km? Did you boost the Ap to 100km first and just cut-off the engine and coast to Ap? That way, the fuel will be floating inside the tank all around and not staying at the bottom of it during the coast phase. And when you want to re-ignite the engine, you need to use any kind of measure that can push the craft a little bit to make sure the fuel falls back to the bottom of the tank. This can be done by RCS forward by several seconds (time depends on how heavy your ship is and how big your RCS thrust is), small ullage motors (e.g. the small Separatron SRB), etc.

[Scripto23]

There was mention in the OP of rotation affecting fuel flow, does this mean the mod will model the "centrifuge effect"; if the rocket is spinning too fast my engines won't light?