Jump to content

[WIP] MSI's Infernal Robotics - Model Rework (v02 Pre-Release Beta)

ZodiusInfuser

By ZodiusInfuser
in KSP1 Mod Development

 Share

Recommended Posts

Garek

Garek

Posted
Posted (edited)

  • The Joint Pivotron Half Basic without the 90-degree offset.
  • Six-way hubs for each structural part type.

I especially agree to these. The Half Basic starting straight would help to make certain constructions look better/more logical. Also, I build a kind of fold-out overhead crane with the new parts. Looked nice, worked nice, until I tried to pick up a FusTek-module with legs and realized I didn't make my base wide enough for it to fit in.

Also, the pistons would be really helpful, but they are already on your list :D

EDIT: What just occured to me: for some constructions, especially if I want to fold stuff so it fits into as small of a fairing as possible, some 'truss offset plates' would be helpful. What I mean is e.g. I make a folding arm thingy, which should have a senior docking port on it's end, but to fit inside a reasonable fairing, the DP would have to be folded in the middle. Currently, this is not possible while maintaining the 'IR-rework' style, because you have to insert a smaller offset into the folding arms shoulder than any of those robotic truss pieces available. Maybe you could do something like a .125m offset plate?

Edited by Garek
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ZodiusInfuser

ZodiusInfuser

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

New Robotics Update Out!!

It includes the Off-Axis rotatron, and latest TweakScale plugin. Please read the red warning text when downloading

Edit: I should probably ask. Are people still ok with me pre-releasing these parts in their MS Paint textured state? Would you want this to continue for the rest of the planned parts (such as ship trusses, athlete arms etc)?

--------------------------------------------------

I finally started messing with these last night. Wonderful, exciting work.

In the process of trying to build various fun things, I found myself wishing for the following parts:

  • The "rotate between in-line and 90-degree bend around a 45-degree axis" joints which I see you're already working on. :)
  • The Joint Pivotron Half Basic without the 90-degree offset.
  • Hinge Pivotron-Flat variants with exactly 0.625m and 1.25m between the attachment nodes and the axis of rotation.
  • A 90-degree-elbow structural piece identical in dimensions to the Joint Pivotron in the 90-degree orientation, but with no robotics. (Should be surface-attachable)
  • Six-way hubs for each structural part type.

The first joint in your list is now released! As for the second, since tweakables are a thing, you can achieve the effect you want with the Basic Pivotron, by setting it to not go in one direction. Although it would be nice to add a version of the Half Basic without an offset, I'm trying to avoid part bloat where possible. Regarding the hinge, I plan to do a reduced selection of 1.25m parts (scaleable down to 0.625m, and maybe up to 2.5m) for where the dimensions of these aren't suitable. Is this the kind of thing you'd be after?

More structural parts are on my list. For the elbow would you prefer it to be sized to fit with the Joint Pivotron (0.3m from axis of rotation), or Right-Angle Rotatron (0.35m from axis of rotation). Up to now I've been leaning to the latter, as that could make the rotatron far more useful (see curiosity rover arm image)

rover-arm.png

Also, should hubs conform to this same size or be something different?

--------------------------------------------------

I especially agree to these. The Half Basic starting straight would help to make certain constructions look better/more logical. Also, I build a kind of fold-out overhead crane with the new parts. Looked nice, worked nice, until I tried to pick up a FusTek-module with legs and realized I didn't make my base wide enough for it to fit in.

Also, the pistons would be really helpful, but they are already on your list :D

EDIT: What just occured to me: for some constructions, especially if I want to fold stuff so it fits into as small of a fairing as possible, some 'truss offset plates' would be helpful. What I mean is e.g. I make a folding arm thingy, which should have a senior docking port on it's end, but to fit inside a reasonable fairing, the DP would have to be folded in the middle. Currently, this is not possible while maintaining the 'IR-rework' style, because you have to insert a smaller offset into the folding arms shoulder than any of those robotic truss pieces available. Maybe you could do something like a .125m offset plate?

Pistons are on my list, but I'm not happy with my current design yet. For now you can use the existing telescopic pistons, since these seem to fit fine inside the current truss segments.

As for the docking port idea. I think I get what you're saying, but could you show me a picture with the current parts to clarify how it doesn't line up?

Edited by ZodiusInfuser
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BudgetHedgehog

BudgetHedgehog

Posted
Posted
Edit: I should probably ask. Are people still ok with me pre-releasing these parts in their MS Paint textured state? Would you want this to continue for the rest of the planned parts (such as ship trusses, athlete arms etc)?

The texture is something I've been meaning to ask you about. People say sirkuts parts aren't stockalike, but these parts.. I'll just say I'm happy to read the texture isn't the actual final one you'll use. I don't mind the untextured parts being released, not at all, but could I possibly request a plan/picture/texture of what you had in mind for the 'final' release?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kanddak

Kanddak

Posted
Posted (edited)
Edit: I should probably ask. Are people still ok with me pre-releasing these parts in their MS Paint textured state? Would you want this to continue for the rest of the planned parts (such as ship trusses, athlete arms etc)?

Actually, I love the current textures. They have a very clean look that works well with FusTek station parts, and eases visual identification from a distance.

you can achieve the effect you want with the Basic Pivotron, by setting it to not go in one direction. Although it would be nice to add a version of the Half Basic without an offset, I'm trying to avoid part bloat where possible.

That's what I've basically been doing, but currently it's hard to tweak the offset to exactly zero. I guess I'll go post in the main IR thread and ask Sirkut if there's anything to be done.

Edit: Sirkut says "Make the stepIncrement in the CFG equal to 1.0 instead of the value 0.01", so I guess it's a part issue rather than IR.

Regarding the hinge, I plan to do a reduced selection of 1.25m parts (scaleable down to 0.625m, and maybe up to 2.5m) for where the dimensions of these aren't suitable. Is this the kind of thing you'd be after?

Sounds like it. My main application right now is being able to put a 90-degree bend between two docking ports in a 2.5m fuselage, while keeping things precisely aligned.

More structural parts are on my list. For the elbow would you prefer it to be sized to fit with the Joint Pivotron (0.3m from axis of rotation), or Right-Angle Rotatron (0.35m from axis of rotation). Up to now I've been leaning to the latter, as that could make the rotatron far more useful (see curiosity rover arm image)

Either one would probably be within tolerances for my current projects.

Also, should hubs conform to this same size or be something different?

Same size. Mainly the Truss Pro and the Tube Lite are the main pieces in need of hubs, since the Truss Lite and Tube Pro fit the stock Not-Rockomax Micronode reasonably well. It's not pretty, but it is functional.

Edited by Kanddak
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Garek

Garek

Posted
Posted
As for the docking port idea. I think I get what you're saying, but could you show me a picture with the current parts to clarify how it doesn't line up?
Javascript is disabled. View full album

As you can see, the 1.25m truss piece would be overkill, while using stock parts doesn't quite fit the look. Although it's not as bad as I would have expected.

For some constructions I have in mind it would be nice to fold the docking port inside like shown, to make them fit inside as small of a fairing as possible.

I also like the current textures, but I would like to see what you have in mind for the final textures, maybe they are even better :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ZodiusInfuser

ZodiusInfuser

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The texture is something I've been meaning to ask you about. People say sirkuts parts aren't stockalike, but these parts.. I'll just say I'm happy to read the texture isn't the actual final one you'll use. I don't mind the untextured parts being released, not at all, but could I possibly request a plan/picture/texture of what you had in mind for the 'final' release?

Since my skill is modelling, having solid colour textures makes it easy for me to iterate on the design of parts. The 'final' style will be similar to these, in the sense that there will be dark end caps, with a white hinge, copper-ish motor on the side, and glowing amber lights at the base. Texture work will be outsourced to Porkjet though if he's still willing (he did the structural texture before).

Actually, I love the current textures. They have a very clean look that works well with FusTek station parts, and eases visual identification from a distance.

I do intend to maintain the current palette since it matches well with much of the reference material I've seen for such joints on real spacecraft and the like.

FYI, i'm using things like these as reference:

36277.jpg

e0020d48870dad144d7ee23053c86c181.jpg

http://imgur.com/a/y7o2C

As you can see, the 1.25m truss piece would be overkill, while using stock parts doesn't quite fit the look. Although it's not as bad as I would have expected.

For some constructions I have in mind it would be nice to fold the docking port inside like shown, to make them fit inside as small of a fairing as possible.

Ok, I was imagining a completely different setup to what you described :blush: I'll have a think about this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirkut

sirkut

Posted
Posted
http://imgur.com/a/y7o2C

As you can see, the 1.25m truss piece would be overkill, while using stock parts doesn't quite fit the look. Although it's not as bad as I would have expected.

For some constructions I have in mind it would be nice to fold the docking port inside like shown, to make them fit inside as small of a fairing as possible.

I also like the current textures, but I would like to see what you have in mind for the final textures, maybe they are even better :D

Tread carefully when using IR parts of any sort on a docking port. If you dock two crafs that are set up with IR parts with a docking port expect things to misbehave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AntiMatter001

AntiMatter001

Posted
Posted

i'm sorry for being a bit confused here but what do i do to install this?

what i think i have to do so far;

1) remove scale.dll from my goodspeed folder

2) put this mod into gamedata.

3) (start game??)

idk about revision 02 is that the one i got? i clicked the "IR rework - robotic (pre-release)" so i'm stuck in this part. halp?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darren9

Darren9

Posted
Posted
Tread carefully when using IR parts of any sort on a docking port. If you dock two crafs that are set up with IR parts with a docking port expect things to misbehave.
Back in DR and the first Squad docking parts you were extremely lucky if it docked, normal behavior was half of one ship would be torn off/explode and slightly bad luck if both were lost. It's definitely got better :) I still think I'd return the IR parts to the starting position before docking though if I didn't want to rely on an amount of luck.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ZodiusInfuser

ZodiusInfuser

Posted
  • Author
Posted
i'm sorry for being a bit confused here but what do i do to install this?

what i think i have to do so far;

1) remove scale.dll from my goodspeed folder

2) put this mod into gamedata.

3) (start game??)

idk about revision 02 is that the one i got? i clicked the "IR rework - robotic (pre-release)" so i'm stuck in this part. halp?

If you downloaded the version of the 16th, you may have the issue that the rework parts are in MagicSmokeIndustries/Parts rather than MagicSmokeIndustries/Parts/_Rework_Robotic. If that is the case then delete the ones with the IR_ prefix in the parts folder and all should be good :). If you don't you will likely end up with duplicate or non-working parts when you load the game up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirkut

sirkut

Posted
Posted
Back in DR and the first Squad docking parts you were extremely lucky if it docked, normal behavior was half of one ship would be torn off/explode and slightly bad luck if both were lost. It's definitely got better :) I still think I'd return the IR parts to the starting position before docking though if I didn't want to rely on an amount of luck.

One workaround I have found is to not actuate the docking "arms" when docked. After undocking I save the game and reload the save. It has to do with how the parts parenting each other gets all screwy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biotronic

Biotronic

Posted
Posted (edited)

@ZodiusInfuser: Currently, IR_TweakScale.cfg file is in the TweakScale folder. This is problematic if people want to update only TweakScale and delete the TweakScale folder and replace it with the new version from the TweakScale package. I suggest it be moved to the MagicSmokeIndustries folder. (for ease of transition, place an empty IR_TweakScale.cfg in the TweakScale folder, then people won't have to go around looking for files to delete)

Edited by Biotronic
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BudgetHedgehog

BudgetHedgehog

Posted
Posted
Could you perhaps upload a .craft file?

Sure, here you go. It's just a fuselage as the root part (the lander can was the root in the previous pictures), a probe core and battery on top with the 4 hinges around the outside. As you couldn't replicate the issue, I'm guess it's something I've done wrong then, hmm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...