Graploos Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 So what settings should i use for a default install? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futrtrubl Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 So what settings should i use for a default install?The default settings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svm420 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 It shows up in game as as 6.4.0 is that intended? Also alternate density calculation is enabled as well as had settings having max fx at 3000m/s is all that normal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share Posted March 8, 2015 It shows up in game as as 6.4.0 is that intended? Also alternate density calculation is enabled as well as had settings having max fx at 3000m/s is all that normal?6.4.0 is the latest full release. 6.5.3 is the latest beta releaseFor certain settings in that version, yes alternate density is intended Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svm420 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 What i mean is I download the 6.5.3 file you linked last page. after install it shows 6.4.0 in game and I don't have any new buttons for rss vs default that I can see. All the files in the 6.5.3 beta you linked and that i DLed on last page say they were edited in January not recently. On the page to download is says is was released Jan 21st I just wasn't certain I am getting the correct file so if I am please excuse my confusion. I just feel I got 6.4.0 not 6.5.3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maeyanie Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 (edited) Yeah, the 6.5.3 beta doesn't include Stock/RSS buttons here either.It is definitely 6.5 despite the debug menu saying 6.4.0, though, as it includes the new heating model (as evidenced by my pods exploding on default settings again )Edit:Not noticing any new context menu entries with the debug menu open either, though it could be that I'm just not noticing.Edit 2:Nope, looking through your git commit for what they were, they're definitely not there. I think 6.5.3 has the wrong DLL packaged. Edited March 8, 2015 by Maeyanie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share Posted March 8, 2015 Crap, I see what happened. Download is fixed.Delete the entire previous downloaded zip to ensure it doesn't stick around and cause problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svm420 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 Glad that got fixed I knew I wasnt crazy. Hopefully I noticed before to many downloaded the wrong files. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share Posted March 8, 2015 Glad that got fixed I knew I wasnt crazy. Hopefully I noticed before to many downloaded the wrong files.Yeah, I almost had you thinking you were crazy.And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling kids! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnanimousCoward Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 (edited) This latest beta (6.5.3) results in Module Manager reporting an error in the "DeadlyReentry-Patches.cfg" file from Ven's Stock Part Revamp.I did a bit of digging, and it appears to be from the section where Ven's adds a heatshield to the Mark1-2 pod. It references a "conductivity" line from the Deadly Reentry 2.5m heatshield which has been commented out in the latest version of Deadly Reentry.Commenting out line 13 in Ven's "DeadlyReentry-Patches.cfg" resolves the error. Edited March 9, 2015 by UnanimousCoward Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted March 9, 2015 Author Share Posted March 9, 2015 This latest beta (6.5.3) results in Module Manager reporting an error in the "DeadlyReentry-Patches.cfg" file from Ven's Stock Part Revamp.I did a bit of digging, and it appears to be from the section where Ven's adds a heatshield to the Mark1-2 pod. It references a "conductivity" line from the Deadly Reentry 2.5m heatshield which has been commented out in the latest version of Deadly Reentry.Commenting out line 13 in Ven's "DeadlyReentry-Patches.cfg" resolves the error.That's a non-issue. I'd actually leave that config file alone. Errors like that don't require resolution and you're actually hurting yourself if I ever decide to add conductivity back in later on. The obvious intent of that line in Ven's config file is to match behavior of the 2.5m shield and that's still happening regardless of the error. If I later re-add conductivity changes to the shield, Ven's pod won't match.Understand now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyFace83 Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 (edited) Can someone point me to a DRE config for KSOS?Edit: nvm, i r nub. Edited March 9, 2015 by DirtyFace83 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funk Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Are there recommend values for maxTemp of parts, which have a dedicated shape or material?. I'd like to know them for cylinder- and cuboid-shaped and typical used materials and composites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black-Talon Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Crap, I see what happened. Download is fixed.Delete the entire previous downloaded zip to ensure it doesn't stick around and cause problems.Glad I'm not the only one but now sorry I didn't report it sooner... I was really confused for a couple days and decided not to worry about it. :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted March 9, 2015 Author Share Posted March 9, 2015 Are there recommend values for maxTemp of parts, which have a dedicated shape or material?. I'd like to know them for cylinder- and cuboid-shaped and typical used materials and composites.I would say no higher than the melting point of the materials involved. For aluminum for example, 660C. Steel melts at 1370. If you REALLY want to get realistic, it should be lower than that because not everything on the part would be aluminum or steel. And although aluminum doesn't melt until 660, it starts to deform even lower than that. So you would really want to put it at the point where that part fails due to the various components overheating. I think RO sets everything to 600.... somewhere around there. Or was it 800. I actually looked at it today but my brain is turning to tapioca.... (mmm tapioca pudding...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svm420 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) Would you say then that engines have relative heat output to make that viable though? I mean if most everyone is designing parts and engines to output and withstand absurd temps it doesn't really make sense to lower max temp without drastically lowering heat output across the board. Does the mod already make the necessary changes to lower max temps to 600? Edited March 10, 2015 by Svm420 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funk Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 I would say no higher than the melting point of the materials involved. For aluminum for example, 660C. Steel melts at 1370. If you REALLY want to get realistic, it should be lower than that because not everything on the part would be aluminum or steel. And although aluminum doesn't melt until 660, it starts to deform even lower than that. So you would really want to put it at the point where that part fails due to the various components overheating. I think RO sets everything to 600.... somewhere around there. Or was it 800. I actually looked at it today but my brain is turning to tapioca.... (mmm tapioca pudding...)THX for the hint. So shape doesn't matter. Besides realism and for gameplay reasons... is 1250°C still the default value for the new release? Perhaps I should go lower for inflatables. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted March 10, 2015 Author Share Posted March 10, 2015 Would you say then that engines have relative heat output to make that viable though? I mean if most everyone is designing parts and engines to output and withstand absurd temps it doesn't really make sense to lower max temp without drastically lowering heat output across the board. Does the mod already make the necessary changes to lower max temps to 600?Any time changes are made to an engine's maxTemp, its heat output should be reduced as well.DRE supports setting an absolute maximum temperature and if any engines have their maxTemp reduced as a result of that setting then their heat output is also automatically scaled back. Originally that was done entirely by the plugin itself, but I noticed timing issues with Real Fuels engines where configurable engines were overriding DRE changes so I moved that functionality into a MM config that sets all engines at 1250 and then scales the heat output for all RF engine configurations. (those changes happen before the game actually runs so they can't get overridden)THX for the hint. So shape doesn't matter. Besides realism and for gameplay reasons... is 1250°C still the default value for the new release? Perhaps I should go lower for inflatables.Yes, the default is going to stay as is. Some individual parts might be adjusted in the future but I have no plans to do so at this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlrk Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 How does hard differ from normal, and how does alternate differ from RSS mode? And doess RSS mode work for 6.4x RSS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted March 12, 2015 Author Share Posted March 12, 2015 How does hard differ from normal, and how does alternate differ from RSS mode? And doess RSS mode work for 6.4x RSS?Hard mode is a little hotter overall and the heating starts earlier. (higher up in the atmosphere).Alternate and RSS use the same model but Alternate increases incoming heat 8x and starts the heating higher up in the atmosphere than RSS does.RSS should work for 6.4x but might the ablation metric tweaked if you feel that you have too much left at the end of a reentry. (it will burn off less than a standard RSS reentry) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlrk Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Is there some more info about the settings anywhere? Legacy areothermodynamics, alternate heating model, altenrate density, etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted March 13, 2015 Author Share Posted March 13, 2015 Is there some more info about the settings anywhere? Legacy areothermodynamics, alternate heating model, altenrate density, etc?Scattered throughout the thread. Not consolidated in one place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcFurnace Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) Are there recommend values for maxTemp of parts, which have a dedicated shape or material?. I'd like to know them for cylinder- and cuboid-shaped and typical used materials and composites.Material is the most relevant for maxTemp values, shape could affect heat loading during reentry but would not really alter maxTemp. Very few materials meet the dual criteria of (a) structural strength at high temperatures and ( low weight. The Space Shuttle thermal protection system gives several examples of high-temperature materials. One of the highest real-world values is the reinforced carbon-carbon leading edges on the Shuttle, which are structural and rated for up to 1,500 °C, although RCC can be very brittle. RCC may even be able to go higher than 1,500 °C. A lower-temperature but tougher material is titanium metal, which can maintain structural strength at 600-800 °C (600° is the safe end, 800° is pushing it pretty hard and may lower lifetime). Stainless steel can do a similar temperature range as titanium but is generally too heavy for aerospace uses. The Shuttle actually used an aluminum structure that could not go above 175 °C without failure, plus lots of lightweight non-structural insulation to keep the heat away from the aluminum. The "high-temperature reusable surface insulation" tiles (rigid silica-fiber foam, 94% empty space) are ultra-lightweight and can tolerate up to 1250 °C, but are very delicate with respect to mechanical impact. The "flexible insulation blanket" is a lightweight silica-fiber cloth that can handle up to 650 °C, probably a good minimum value for part maxTemp unless it's something explicitly never intended to handle reentry. Easier to work with and less likely to shatter than the tiles. Short summary: Reinforced carbon-carbon = 1,500 °C or higher, titanium 600-800 °C, other structural materials rely on insulation rather than inherent temperature tolerance. Space Shuttle silica fiber foam tile insulation = 1,250 °C, silica fiber cloth insulation = 650 °C. Probably no part that one would reasonably expect to be exposed to the air should be much less than 650 °C, although delicate bits could be less (science gadgets, unshielded solar panels, etc. that are shielded by fairings or external heat shields instead). Edited March 13, 2015 by ArcFurnace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwaster Posted March 13, 2015 Author Share Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) Re: RCC1500 is just the temp that it was expected to withstand during a shuttle's reentry. Its upper limit would have been higher than that. (you wouldn't select a material which can just barely withstand that temp)I forget what the actual max is but it was pretty high.... at which point it would sublimate.Edit:at least 3550, but texts seem to differ as to whether it melts or sublimes....Edit #2: which actually doesn't really matter.... Edited March 13, 2015 by Starwaster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funk Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) I've a problem with DRE and FAR regarding spaceplanes. When flying above Kerbin around 25-30km with Mach 4-5.2 the temperature increases continuously from ~1100-1300° though equivalent air speed drops from 100m/s to 75m/s. Even if getting higher to 35km temperature increases to ~1450° and seems to be related to mach only. EAS decreases to 55m/s. I´m not sure if it is intended, but which parameters could be affecting this behaviour / can I change? Perhaps I'm wrong assuming, that heat is a result of friction? Another weird thing... I used an octogonal strut as mounting in the cargobay, and it burned up, though it should be shielded? Edited March 13, 2015 by funk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.