Stockalike RF Engine Configs v3.2.6 [01/20/19][RF v12]

[NathanKell]

Yeah, I could _probably_ bung up some sort of global toggle, but an MM patch to remove throttling limits would be much easier to make.

[ebigunso]

How much are you done with ullage switch over? When do you expect you'll be done with it?

[Raptor831]

How much are you done with ullage switch over? When do you expect you'll be done with it?

Soon^TM. Ullage is about half done, but I'm doing some other updates in parallel, so it's not just that. I'm adding some new-to-Stockalike part packs (specifically Vanguard Astrodynamics, SELV, and Cryo Engines), so that's taking some time. Plus I'm considering redoing the solid motors to use the new solid fuels instead of just SolidFuel. So yeah, maybe by the weekend I could have all of that done. But no promises.

[dlrk]

Take your time, we're all looking forward to it (:

[eirinym]

Quick question about recreating realistic engine configs. I'm having a little trouble getting one bit of it exact. I've got the ISP values at the correct ratio, and I've set the maximum thrust so that the value is correct in vacuum, but at sea level the real thrust level is different from what's coming up in game. It's about 50kN off, even though the ISP is the same. Not quite sure how to ensure the SL thrust is also accurate.

If it's a bit vague, say my t/V is 1500 kN and my t/SL is 1400 kN as the goal, but it's turning up as something like 1365 kN. Not sure where that discrepancy is coming from.

[Ralathon]

Raptor, for the seperatron you define the dry mass to be 0. This isn't an issue normally, but if you ever end up with a lone separatron it completely breaks the KSP physics engine and the game will crash.

Just had a booster collision that created that situation. Probably best to set it to something like 0.01 instead.

[Svm420]

I am working through the engines for real plume I have all engines setup just need to tweak positions of the flares/plumes I will post when they are complete.

[Shad0wCatcher]

Awesome to hear Svm420

[Raptor831]

Raptor, for the seperatron you define the dry mass to be 0. This isn't an issue normally, but if you ever end up with a lone separatron it completely breaks the KSP physics engine and the game will crash.

Just had a booster collision that created that situation. Probably best to set it to something like 0.01 instead.

None of the masses should be 0. Hm. I'll have to check that one out. In the meantime, do any of the other SRBs act like that?

I am working through the engines for real plume I have all engines setup just need to tweak positions of the flares/plumes I will post when they are complete.

Sheesh! Did you stay up all night doing those? If you have some pics of what you have so far, I'd totally be interested.

[Svm420]

Sheesh! Did you stay up all night doing those? If you have some pics of what you have so far, I'd totally be interested.

Yeah internet acting up all day till midnight. Finally DLed real plume and kinda went crazy making the configs. I don't have pictures, but it is going to look amazing. I have a ton of engines with the generic configs. I just have to go In game and run all the engines in all the different fuel modes and tweak the offsets for the nozzles. It is a crap ton of work, but it's simple which is quite enjoyable. Working through NP first. I will be able to share most, but some rely on my stocks like engine configs I made for many mods released since or not fully covered by the old DL of stocks like engines. So I dont know if you want them, since you may find you config the engines differently than I have. I followed the basic guidelines for the site you made, but of course I may have slightly different masses or in same cases a bit more thrust as well than you would have chosen. I could send the plumes at least to you, and you can take want you want that will work for you and just add subtract where needed. Let me know

[Raptor831]

Yeah internet acting up all day till midnight. Finally DLed real plume and kinda went crazy making the configs. I don't have pictures, but it is going to look amazing. I have a ton of engines with the generic configs. I just have to go In game and run all the engines in all the different fuel modes and tweak the offsets for the nozzles. It is a crap ton of work, but it's simple which is quite enjoyable. Working through NP first. I will be able to share most, but some rely on my stocks like engine configs I made for many mods released since or not fully covered by the old DL of stocks like engines. So I dont know if you want them, since you may find you config the engines differently than I have. I followed the basic guidelines for the site you made, but of course I may have slightly different masses or in same cases a bit more thrust as well than you would have chosen. I could send the plumes at least to you, and you can take want you want that will work for you and just add subtract where needed. Let me know

Well, really, unless you changed the sizes of the models or something like that, the RealPlume stuff is just a visual mod. So it'll work no matter if you're on RF/Stockalike or just plain stock. And if you do want to share, put them on the RealPlume repo. You've done the work, so you should at least get the credit. Check with that thread as well, in case they already have some.

[NathanKell]

eirinym that sounds like either an issue in RF or an issue in your data. Because thrust at sea level will always be thrust in vacuum * Isp at sea level / Isp in vacuum, by definition. Make sure that's the case for your data.

[Raptor831]

@elrinym: Sorry, was going to reply before but it got lost in the shuffle. Thanks Nathan for the nudge.

Basically, what he said. Do also note that the Isp you set within the ModuleEnginesRF node will not matter. The CONFIG nodes within the ModuleEngineConfigs module is what matters. If you don't specify an explicit Isp curve, then your multipliers adjust what the RF standard Isp for your given role and mixture. It essentially ignores the MERF setup, which is only there as a fallback (I think). We've had some people be surprised at their results before because this wasn't obvious, but it was working exactly as their configs were telling RF to operate.

Actually, posting the config in question wouldn't be a bad idea either.

@All: I've committed the latest ullage/ignitions fixes to the repo. This should get about 95% of the engines. I'm still missing Stock Revamp, SpaceY, Tantares, RetroFuture, NF Spacecraft and TT_modularEngines (which I have no idea if anyone even uses anymore). These I need to go through and fix by hand, or add all engines to the app (which can take some time). Tantares technically has configs that come with the mod, but they're a bit out of date (besides the needed RF v10.x updates). I need to check with curtquarquesso about keeping that there or shifting that back over here.

Anyway, if you want the latest and greatest, download from the repo directly (DL as .ZIP, not from the releases). If you notice bugs or omissions, let me know. The new stock SRB hasn't been added yet; next on my list along with the other additional mods I'm adding.

EDIT: @Ralathon you were right on the money, Separatron had 0 mass. Not quite sure when that got in, but it is now fixed in the repo. That should only affect crafts either created or launched with that issue there. If you remove/replace parts in the VAB/SPH on saved craft it should go away. Thanks!

Edited July 15, 2015 by Raptor831
Another bugfix note

[eirinym]

Thanks for the replies, NathanKell, Raptor831. Yeah I'm pretty new to this, so it's been a bit of trial and error. I got the IspV and IspSL ratios to create the right ISP values in game from the settings config? It's an engine using the L+ type. I'm guessing there's some other line/s I can add to the config to set the curve parameters? The curve's set up in the file and it matches correctly in the game, but it doesn't match with the thrust at SL I want. So I'm guessing there's something going on with the ratio making it off.

Are you talking about @MODULE[ModuleEngine] > @atmosphereCurve > @key,0 / key,1 for the ModuleEngineConfigs? There's one like that in the part.cfg and one in the RF config. Those values match, as do what comes from the IspV/IspSL values. I was able to make closer approximate values with the IspV / IspSL derivatives. Sorry about putting this up here. I'd totally be keen on reading the documentation. If I knew where it was I'd just debug using the guidelines from that.

[Raptor831]

@eirinym: You could just mess with the Stockalike app here: http://bit.ly/rfstockalike Just go to the blank engine template and start filling out the info. It'll do all of the calcs for you. Also, you'll be able to see instant feedback on changing Isp, thrust, mixtures, etc. Don't know if there's docs on engine configs specifically...

[allenby]

I had a chance to test the latest configs a little. Haven't tested with all the mods I play, but it looks like it's coming along nicely.

I've noticed ullage effects on solid rocket boosters, with line vapor flame outs trying to start SRBs in 0g. I'm not sure if this is WAD or a config issue, but I thought I'd mention it.

[Raptor831]

I had a chance to test the latest configs a little. Haven't tested with all the mods I play, but it looks like it's coming along nicely.

I've noticed ullage effects on solid rocket boosters, with line vapor flame outs trying to start SRBs in 0g. I'm not sure if this is WAD or a config issue, but I thought I'd mention it.

Solids shouldn't have any issues firing in 0g. Which is why they're generally used as ullage motors. Are there issues with all solids or just some? It's probably a config issue, but I need to narrow it down.

[Svm420]

Solids shouldn't have any issues firing in 0g. Which is why they're generally used as ullage motors. Are there issues with all solids or just some? It's probably a config issue, but I need to narrow it down.

I think SRBs need ullage simulation turned off for the moduleengineignitor node.

[allenby]

Solids shouldn't have any issues firing in 0g. Which is why they're generally used as ullage motors. Are there issues with all solids or just some? It's probably a config issue, but I need to narrow it down.

So far I tested the Sepratron I and RT-5, and they both have this issue. I glanced at the stock configs and noticed that most (all?) SRB configs have useUllageSimulation set to true. I don't know if the ullage code is supposed to distinguish SolidFuel, or maybe that boolean just needs to be set to false?

[Raptor831]

I really hope that isn't the case, because then I'll have to go through all of my configs... again... I was assuming that anything with SolidFuel would be defaulted to be 1 ignition, no throttle, no ullage. I'll see about setting them properly in the configs anyway.

[NathanKell]

Nope, RF will just use whatever you specify. So if you tell an engine it has 1 ignition and uses ullage...it has 1 ignition and uses ullage. :]

[dlrk]

Getting a hang on launch

U235Rods not found in resource database. Propellant Setup has failed.

(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/StandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object

at ModuleEngines.SetupPropellant () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at ModuleEngines.OnLoad (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at SolverEngines.ModuleEnginesSolver.OnLoad (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at RealFuels.ModuleEnginesRF.OnLoad (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at PartModule.Load (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at RealFuels.ModuleEngineConfigs.SetConfiguration (System.String newConfiguration, Boolean resetTechLevels) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at RealFuels.ModuleEngineConfigs.OnLoad (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at PartModule.Load (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at Part.AddModule (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at PartLoader.ParsePart (.UrlConfig urlConfig, .ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

at PartLoader+.MoveNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

(Filename: Line: -1)

- - - Updated - - -

Looks like the previous version used EnrichedUranium and this one uses U235Rods without putting in the resource database

[Ralathon]

Getting a hang on launch

Got that one as well. Seems that the stock NERVA uses some resource that isn't defined in the community resource pack (U235rods).

I replaced it with EnrichedUranium and DepletedUranium (I also use NFPP, so I like the consistency). Here's the file if you want to do that, just dump it in RF and overwrite. Else you can try updating the Community Resource Pack, the latest version probably has those U235rods in it.

[Raptor831]

Geez, 0 for 2 today. Yeah, apparently didn't change the uranium resource in the templates... Well, I was going through the configs anyway! Just switch the U235Rods for EnrichedUranium and DepU235Rods for DepletedUranium. That'll be fixed (again) with the next round.

EDIT: Fixed the resource issue. Download from the repo. Changelog for the next version is getting rather long...

Edited July 16, 2015 by Raptor831

[ebigunso]

Can we get engine configs for BoxSat engines by any chance?

Oh and is it intentional that you set upper stage engines from KW, like Vesta VR-1 and Maverick-1D to only a single ignition? I remember them having 4 before.

It's really hard to use them as an upper stage engine if they only have a single ignition.

Edited July 16, 2015 by ebigunso