[1.3] Kerbal Joint Reinforcement v3.3.3 7/24/17

[ferram4]

@jrandom: Try boosting the Linear "Soft" Movement Limit values; look in the readme for documentation. Just don't reduce the linLimit value too much or weird jumpiness will happen.

I honestly don't know if anything can be done for it, since boosting stiffness values further tends to cause Kraken attacks.

@Garloth": You're launching at 4x physics warp with 2.5 g's of acceleration and haven't shown any pictures of the craft or told us what happened when it failed. It sounds like you're just trying to break the physics simulation.

[Andrewmacor]

So I had this mod since the release but for some reason, on this update (1.5) the reinforcement dont work, i tried everything, reloaded several times and nothing. All wables like if it was a stock game. Please help!!!

[ferram4]

What are you trying to launch? I need more information than "it doesn't work," since from everything I've seen, it does work. I need a picture of the problem to even have a chance of figuring out what's wrong.

[Thorbane]

What do I need to tweak to make the KAS EVA struts less wobbly? I can see the strut attachment points shifting around on the part they're attached to.

[AveXx]

Help

i do think that there is a bug with 0.23. Because without your mod this dosen´t happen

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[ferram4]

@Thorbane: You would have to find out what the PartModule or Part "type" is, and then add the appropriate exemption to the config.xml. I don't use KAS, so I don't know exactly what you would want to add, but look at the exemptions that are already there; once you figure that out, come back and post what you found and I'll add the exemption to stock KJR.

@AveXx: I dunno it seems fine:

You are using KJR v1.5 in KSP 0.23, correct?

[Krist]

I am using the docking rings from the Fustek Expansion pack, and they are very wobbly. Is there a way of having KJR make these stiffer as well?

[ferram4]

I have attempted to reproduce the wobbling issue with Fustek and couldn't; the parts seem as rigid as they should be.

In order to attempt to fix the many complaints about this version "not working" I've re-uploaded it to spaceport and mediafire using the file from my save. If it doesn't work for you you will have to turn on debugging in the config.xml and provide a full output_log.txt in order for me to figure out what's wrong. As far as I can tell, all of the complaints are missing important information necessary to reproduce the issue, such as the exact circumstances the issue appeared in and a full mod list (including versions).

[Starwaster]

I am using the docking rings from the Fustek Expansion pack, and they are very wobbly. Is there a way of having KJR make these stiffer as well?

I have attempted to reproduce the wobbling issue with Fustek and couldn't; the parts seem as rigid as they should be.

In order to attempt to fix the many complaints about this version "not working" I've re-uploaded it to spaceport and mediafire using the file from my save. If it doesn't work for you you will have to turn on debugging in the config.xml and provide a full output_log.txt in order for me to figure out what's wrong. As far as I can tell, all of the complaints are missing important information necessary to reproduce the issue, such as the exact circumstances the issue appeared in and a full mod list (including versions).

something else to consider is what version of the parts are we talking about? Sumghai has tried to address the problem by adjusting the collision bodies in the ring or removing it outright. Krist if you're still having trouble make sure you have the latest version.

[Andrewmacor]

it was a wide space station part wider than 5 meters mounted on a 3 m rocket. Now on the past version i was able to send that with no problem. i mean i got it up there but it was wobbly as if there was no KJR.

[PlasmaDynamics]

Does this increase the strength of docked parts?

[ferram4]

@Andrewmacor: Picture of the vehicle please? Maximum g-forces? There is no part smaller than 3m between the space station and the launcher, correct? Struts to stabilize the load? Running KJR v1.5 in KSP 0.23? Component isn't a gigantic tank of fuel with lots of parts between it and the connection to the launch vehicle, right?

Like I said initially, a picture would be nice, since it's more revealing than mere words.

@PlasmaDynamics: Yes, but it will still be a weaker connection than between a parts connected by decouplers. If you're intending to build an interplanetary ship with this it will make the flexing easier to deal with but it won't let you get away with 5 g acceleration on a spindly ISS/MIR-looking thing.

[Galane]

Another case of KJR apparently weakening a connection, or does it do something to landing leg suspension strength?

I set this down on Eve without KJR. Saved, quit completely out of KSP then reloaded. The legs are OK. The default suspension settings are too soft. Even with this many legs they still collapse to the point where the engines touch the ground. Locking them all just punches the feet into the ground instead of lifting the lander up.

After quitting, dropping KJR back in then reloading. Switch to the lander and uh-oh. Something has made some of the I-beams fall off. It looks like the legs could be pushing up harder, I could see them start dropping right after switching to it.

It also does this after a quit and reload if the landing is made with KJR installed. They don't fall off until KSP is quit then re-run and the save reloaded.

[ferram4]

Yeah, that makes sense; the I-beams are relatively small, but they're expected to have very high breaking strengths. This is why I didn't want to override breaking strengths initially.

Just go into the config.xml and set breakStrengthPerArea to zero and that will remove the modifications of breaking forces. I'll have to come up with some way to handle this that; probably just have it set the breaking forces to be the maximum of the stock breaking force and the one calculated for the area. Unfortunately, that leaves things like KW Rocketry having stupidly large breaking forces for no reason, but there's probably nothing I can do about that.

[crazyewok]

Wow I can finaly make REAL rockets and not rockets that look like a 5 year put together!

Thanks!

[Damaske]

Ferram,

I have solved the issues of breaking up, for some reason it did not like me adding stuff into the very end side of the tanks with the Radial Attachment Point set to the opposite side of each other. The attachment point thing was causing the parts to be forced apart. When i changed to why i had them attached and then supported the upper part with a launch clamp it stopped happening. But it still broke due to how the upper half would fall to the side from the rocket wobble before i was able to hit the space bar to launch the rocket. so i am not sure if it is a problem with KJR or just how KSP does there physics.

[Draft]

Bug report:

One of the parts in Procedural Fairings uses a 'dummy decoupler', which is the stock decouple module with an ejection force of zero (so far as I can tell). Without KJR, this decoupler doesn't disconnect when triggered. With KJR it does. Could you put in some sort of exception for strength-0 decouplers like that?

Hopefully I'm not misunderstanding what the issue is.

[Deltac]

Bug Report time! The Agena target vehicle in FASA has a bad reaction to undocking after you return to it from the tracking station.

After undocking, most of the parts want to seperate from the main probe core. Here's the thing, they haven't actually disconnected. The fuel tanks and engines still bring up their little context menus when right clicked. After some tests, I ended up unistalling KJR, and the bug did not occur. I took the liberty of reinstalling KJR, turning on Debug mode, and getting a copy of the output_log.txt

Dell_output_log.txt

Vehicles used in test: Gemini Test and Agena Test. That should be the only flight in that output log.

[MaverickSawyer]

Confirmed. I shut down KSP for the night and came back to it in the morning, only to find that, not only did it break, the parts were scattered all over the place. Some were in their correct orbit, but on the far side of Kerbin. Others... were departing Kerbin's SoI at a VERY high rate of speed. 10 seconds to Minmus speeds.

[ferram4]

@Draft: I can try and look into that, but it looks more like an issue of playing fast and loose with adding PartModules when they aren't needed in procedural fairings.

@Deltac: Confirmed; it's due to the fact that the part of the nosecone with the docking port also contains a decoupler to separate it. I'm going to see if I can have KJR only kill the joints that it adds specifically and see if that works.

[NathanKell]

Ferram: that's the issue with pfairings. The interstage adds joints just like you, and they decouple on fairing separation, not decoupler fire. When the decoupler fires and you kill all the extra joints, it kills those extra pfairing ones too.

Not that we mind; as it happens, we've been requesting this of e-dog for months.

[ferram4]

Alright, version 1.6 is out, fixing the I-beams-made-of-toothpicks and FASA Agena disassembly-phasing bug.

I'm leaving pFairings as they are with this, since it works out to be a lot of work to try and fix that, and I kind of like the result anyway.

[NathanKell]

Yay!

Off to build proper interstages, now that I know of the existence of the bug.

[Galane]

Yay! Now I can use the Eve puncturing landing legs and they'll at least stay attached to the ship.

[Tangle]

Does this reinforce docking connections or no? As far as I know, neither quantum nor docking struts work anymore, so I've been looking for a replacement.