[1.8+] Real Fuels

[blowfish]

28 minutes ago, Arivald Ha'gel said:

When can we expect it on CKAN?

Looks like the job that pulls new updates to mods (NetKAN) hasn't been run for about a week.  Might be something to ask in the CKAN thread.

[Arivald Ha'gel]

2 minutes ago, blowfish said:

Looks like the job that pulls new updates to mods (NetKAN) hasn't been run for about a week.  Might be something to ask in the CKAN thread.

I'll do that

[blowfish]

Looks like RealFuels v12.4.1 is now on CKAN

[Bersagliere81]

I am missing the procedural tank (the one customizable with skins and type). It should come with this mod, what am i doing wrong?

[blowfish]

2 hours ago, Bersagliere81 said:

I am missing the procedural tank (the one customizable with skins and type). It should come with this mod, what am i doing wrong?

It comes with Procedural Parts, which is a separate mod.

[Bersagliere81]

So procedural parts is still missing on ckan. Thank you

[Calvin_Maclure]

Where, in the config files, does one find where the progression value(s) is(are) set, or what to look for? I've got a Science mode game going, and I cant seem to unlock the more advanced engines as I advance through the tech t ree, since, well, no progression...

Thanks

[blowfish]

3 hours ago, Calvin_Maclure said:

Where, in the config files, does one find where the progression value(s) is(are) set, or what to look for? I've got a Science mode game going, and I cant seem to unlock the more advanced engines as I advance through the tech t ree, since, well, no progression...

Thanks

Really depends on if you're talking about RF Stockalike or RO.  RF doesn't do anything to engines by itself so it's up to whichever mod is providing the engine configs to add RF and possibly move them around in the tech tree.

[Calvin_Maclure]

21 hours ago, blowfish said:

Really depends on if you're talking about RF Stockalike or RO.  RF doesn't do anything to engines by itself so it's up to whichever mod is providing the engine configs to add RF and possibly move them around in the tech tree.

Ah, yes, forgot to mention that... I'm using RO. Just not RP-0. 

[blowfish]

19 hours ago, Calvin_Maclure said:

Ah, yes, forgot to mention that... I'm using RO. Just not RP-0. 

In general I wouldn't expect RO to work well with the stock tech tree.  It's really designed for either sandbox or RP-0.

E: just to clarify, I don't think RO does anything with the tech tree.  So RO parts will end up in whatever node the stock/mod part they are based on was originally in

Edited November 4, 2017 by blowfish

[Calvin_Maclure]

On 11/4/2017 at 4:36 PM, blowfish said:

In general I wouldn't expect RO to work well with the stock tech tree.  It's really designed for either sandbox or RP-0.

E: just to clarify, I don't think RO does anything with the tech tree.  So RO parts will end up in whatever node the stock/mod part they are based on was originally in

You're correct, RO doesn't do anything to the tech tree. But, what I am trying to figure out is progression. In RP-0, as you progress you can research better performing parts, right? So a given engine will have multiple variants as you research them improving performance, and what not. Where or what should I be looking for to find this progression? That's where I'm stumped. 

[blowfish]

33 minutes ago, Calvin_Maclure said:

You're correct, RO doesn't do anything to the tech tree. But, what I am trying to figure out is progression. In RP-0, as you progress you can research better performing parts, right? So a given engine will have multiple variants as you research them improving performance, and what not. Where or what should I be looking for to find this progression? That's where I'm stumped. 

Might be a better question for the RO thread.  I don't know off the top of my head.

[SpacedInvader]

I'm returning to KSP again after about a year away and I'm running into an odd issue with some of my vehicles, namely that the dV of some stages is dropping much faster than MJ / Engineer are expecting them to, resulting in failed maneuvers or much less dV budget than I was expecting. For example, I've got a probe in orbit of Kerbin with ~2300m/s dV and then I perform a ~850m/s burn to encounter the Mun, but am left with only ~300m/s dV on the stage. This particular stage is using Aerozine / NTO, neither of which boil off if I recall, but there is clearly something going awry here. I'm not entirely sure that this has anything to do with RF as I've got my typical overload of mods going, but I figured this might be a good place to start to see if this was an issue that had been seen before and how I might go about correcting it, especially since my initial searches have drawn blanks as I've got no idea how to describe the problem in keywords.

Thanks.

[delta wee]

I'm trying to add a new rocket propellant and need some help.

What I've done up to this point is:

1. Added my new propellant as a resource in "CommunityResourcePack\CommonResources.cfg".

2. Added my new propellant to "RealFuels\Resources\RealTankTypes.cfg" and "RealFuels\Resources\ResourceHsps.cfg".

My goal is to fill the Rockomax X200-32 fuel tank with my new propellant. Is there some other config file I need to edit to get this to work?

[Starwaster]

1 hour ago, delta wee said:

I'm trying to add a new rocket propellant and need some help.

What I've done up to this point is:

1. Added my new propellant as a resource in "CommunityResourcePack\CommonResources.cfg".

2. Added my new propellant to "RealFuels\Resources\RealTankTypes.cfg" and "RealFuels\Resources\ResourceHsps.cfg".

My goal is to fill the Rockomax X200-32 fuel tank with my new propellant. Is there some other config file I need to edit to get this to work?

First: I suggest you do NOT implement your new resource by editing other mod files. Sooner or later they will be updated and your changes will be erased forcing you to reimplement them all over again.

Instead you should create your own resource config file for the basic resource definition.

For the tanks you should patch them using a Module Manager patch. Your resource definition file and your patch files should live in a single folder that you can back up and move around (such as to new KSP installations when you update KSP)

If the new resource is to be cryogenic then it should not (at this time) have an hsp value.

For the tank definition patches see the example below where the new resource is called deltaWeeResource (the example assumes a like named RESOURCE_DEFINITION)

@TANK_DEFINITION[Default]
{
	TANK
	{
		name = deltaWeeResource
		mass = 0.000012
		utilization = 1
		fillable = True
		amount = 0.0
		maxAmount = 0.0
	}
}

That patch adds a new tank to the Default tank type that can be filled with the deltaWeeResource. In the game every default tank can now be configured with that resource. You would need to do the same with every other tank type that you want to be able to contain the resource. (i.e.  Cryogenic, Structural, Fuselage, etc etc)

[delta wee]

1 hour ago, Starwaster said:

First: I suggest you do NOT implement your new resource by editing other mod files. Sooner or later they will be updated and your changes will be erased forcing you to reimplement them all over again.

Instead you should create your own resource config file for the basic resource definition.

For the tanks you should patch them using a Module Manager patch. Your resource definition file and your patch files should live in a single folder that you can back up and move around (such as to new KSP installations when you update KSP)

If the new resource is to be cryogenic then it should not (at this time) have an hsp value.

For the tank definition patches see the example below where the new resource is called deltaWeeResource (the example assumes a like named RESOURCE_DEFINITION)

@TANK_DEFINITION[Default]
{
	TANK
	{
		name = deltaWeeResource
		mass = 0.000012
		utilization = 1
		fillable = True
		amount = 0.0
		maxAmount = 0.0
	}
}

That patch adds a new tank to the Default tank type that can be filled with the deltaWeeResource. In the game every default tank can now be configured with that resource. You would need to do the same with every other tank type that you want to be able to contain the resource. (i.e.  Cryogenic, Structural, Fuselage, etc etc)

I added a new .cfg file with a new @TANK_DEFINITION for my new resource for default tanks, but I still am unable to fill the Rockomax tank with my new resource. I can put the new .cfg file anywhere in my GameData folder and Module Manager will find and apply it, right?

Edited November 16, 2017 by delta wee

[Starwaster]

2 minutes ago, delta wee said:

I added a new .cfg file with a new @TANK_DEFINITION for my new resource for default tanks, but I still am unable to fill the Rockomax tank with my new resource. I can put the new .cfg file anywhere in my GameData folder and Module Manager will find and apply it, right?

Yes but the Rockomax is a Cryogenic type

[delta wee]

17 minutes ago, Starwaster said:

Yes but the Rockomax is a Cryogenic type

Thanks, I changed "Default" in the tank definition to "Cryogenic" and now I can fill the Rockomax tank with my new propellant. I incorrectly assumed "Default" meant "Stock".

[Jim123]

i need help in rss ro how do i stop fuel boil off on liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen im wanting to use nervas i know i can do servies tanks for the tank type it drains slowly but i'd like to get rid of boil off 

[Starwaster]

3 hours ago, Jim123 said:

i need help in rss ro how do i stop fuel boil off on liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen im wanting to use nervas i know i can do servies tanks for the tank type it drains slowly but i'd like to get rid of boil off 

• Stock radiators will cool those parts. (only valid in RO because the default overcoolFactor is too high to allow cooling at cryogenic temperatures). However: they do not function at all during analytic mode which happens when you time warp faster than 100x
• Heat Pumps mod (once part of Real Fuels until it was removed from the mod because of reasons) will also provide cryogenic cooling and are somewhat more effective during analytic mode then the stock radiator system - but not entirely so.

[Jim123]

okay thanks

[phoneix_007]

What configs should I modify to reduce LH2-LOX boil-off? Tried increasing Insulation thickness  to 100 and lowering insulation conduction to 0.00000002

[Starwaster]

2 hours ago, phoneix_007 said:

What configs should I modify to reduce LH2-LOX boil-off? Tried increasing Insulation thickness  to 100 and lowering insulation conduction to 0.00000002

So your tank walls are one meter thick?

[phoneix_007]

39 minutes ago, Starwaster said:

So your tank walls are one meter thick?

I guess

wallThickness = 10000.0025
        wallConduction = 0.0000000000000001
        temperature = 90.15
        insulationThickness = 10000.11
        insulationConduction = 0.0000000000000001
I've tried to mess with these, but I have no idea what to change to lower boiloff nor which of these is the right one

@RESOURCE_DEFINITION[LqdOxygen]:FOR[RealFuels]
{
    
    %vsp = 213000 // heat of vapourization (KJ/tonne as units)
    %conductivity = 0.152
}
@RESOURCE_DEFINITION[LqdHydrogen]:FOR[RealFuels]
{
 
    %vsp = 448500 // heat of vapourization (KJ/tonne as units)  or 8.97 * 10^5 or 8.97E5?
    %conductivity = 0.072
Will lowering %vps and conductivity reduce boil-off?

Edited December 18, 2017 by phoneix_007

[Tonas1997]

I was not sure whether to post this here or on the KSPI-E thread, so I chose one randomly.  Guess what.

So here it goes: for those of you who play with Interstellar, you probably know about the Turbojet/Ramjet engines (both of which use that whole thermal power shenanigan and some fuel to produce ungodly amounts of thrust). Well, as I expected, RealFuels rendered these engines obsolete, since their fuels - and the very concept of "IntakeAir"! - were overwritten by RF; most likely, it has something to do with the fact both mods change the way resources work.

This doesn't seem to translate to other "simpler" KSPI-E engines, like the Kerbstein.

The question is: is it possible to create/edit configs so I can revert the engines to their "normal" functionality (quotation marks because there would be some adjustments to be made, like writing custom configs for Kerosene and RF's Hydrazine), and has anyone attempted it?

Edited January 10, 2018 by Tonas1997