Dread Industries Unlimited (Potential Project Poll Posted!)

Northstar1989 · October 25, 2014

Hey Northstar,

Howdy Dreadicon. Always good to hear from you.

I made a pull request to Kell like 4 days ago which was accepted next day. He just hasn't released it yet; it's all in the main RF repo as we speak.

Awesome! So it included all the things we were talking about before? Adding LqdWater wherever Kerosene can be held. Fixing the various NTR reactions, fuel densities, etc.?

Regarding Vista and Hybrid, I was wondering about those. They were already removed from the repo, but I wasn't aware they needed to not make it back in. I worked up configs for them anyhow which were accepted into the RF repo along with the general config. It did seem off, but then, so does all the NTR and ElectricPropellant config changes. So I figured they were just weird edge cases. I'll see about dealing with those sooner or later if no one picks them up.

The Al-Hybrid and DT Vista might be fine. TBH, I think NathanKell was more reacting against the Meth/LOX engine being in there, after I pointed out all the potential problems it could have being in both the "Stockalike" engine config and the main RealFuels mod...

You need to at least make sure the Meth/LOX engine config goes to Raptor831 instead of the main RealFuels mod though- which may even mean sending a pull request to NathanKell w/o it- as otherwise it could create issues when trying to fix the Meth/LOX engine TWR and ISP in the "Stockalike" engine config (and perhaps the other ones, if those engine configs play nice with Interstellar...)

Regarding Raptor's configs, I quite honestly find engine configs tedious and irritating. No good way to automate them, or make them elegantly with current tools. Part of why I have the procedural engines on my Kerbal Mod Building Bucket-list. I'll see about the engine configs, as I said, when I get around to it. Not like I am getting paid for any of this

Each person contributes what they can, and does what they're good at. For instance, I'm good at being really persistent, and sometimes quite charismatic when I need to be- which makes me a great political organizer. Which is why I'm volunteering with a political campaign IRL (now if only I could get a moment to talk to the potential-Congresswoman about the importance of the space program w/o my pesky supervisor breathing down my neck like a jackal- he doesn't value or understand space exploration at all...)

My most recent obsession has been space planes, and by proxy, the Procedural Wings mod, which I am trying to build an addon for with solar panel-covered wings and wings which carry fuel.

That would be absolutely AWESOME. Both would be EXTREMELY useful for my attempts to build for the Flying Duna challenge, which I keep hoping to get around to...

Finally, i'll be frank as to why I haven't made configs for the KSPI ISRU to have full water functionality: It's a big magic 'I-can-do-everything' box (maybe scientifically accurate magic box, but none the less, a magic box). KSP is about design and engineering to me, so when a mod adds a simple cylinder which does 10 jobs (many of which are relatively unrelated), I consider it a poorly implemented part. Yet another idea on my WAY too long list is to fork the code from Karbonite and make a realistic ISRU alternative. But again, really long list......

I'm not sure what you're actually talking about with "full water functionality". Haven't you already added the ability to hold water to most RealFuels tanks?

I'm a big fan of the merged refinery parts myself- for a very simple reason. There are LIMITS on the number of parts my RAM and patience when scrolling through the part catalog can handle. I'd MUCH rather have a wider selection of useful parts related to PROPULSION, AERODYNAMICS, and LANDING, than 20 different parts all related to ISRU. I think Squad agrees- which is why the new Resources system will be very simple (even a little so for my tastes- and they certainly won't include multiple new resources and realistic reaction names). However they can't even be convinced to switch over to procedural fuel tanks or wings, even though it would DRASTICALLY bring down part-counts in the catalog, so I really don't know what to say...

Configs beyond RealFuels I always considered extra, and I'm not sure how much faith I have in Raptor's pack going forward anyhow; it's been lagging behind RF, and other mods even more so. It still doesn't have Methane configs for tons of parts which it logically could/should, and Raptor expressed little to no interest in electric RCS configs or in integrating the Near Future configs into the pack. Speaking of, I should really write up a config for RF for those....
I have played maybe 6 hours of KSP this whole week, and havent even had time to upgrade to 0.25 yet on my personal build of the game! So, I intend to enjoy myself this weekend, and maybe squeeze in some time writing code/configs and updating my personal copy of KSP xD

Have fun with KSP. Personally, I've spent so much time on the forums (and simply too tired to play) that I haven't really had much time to play KSP myself. And when I finally did get some hours in tonight, my game decided to crash! Darn it!

Have fun exploring!

Regards,

Northstar

Northstar1989 · October 26, 2014

@Dreadicon

Howdy!

I'm currently trying to get TaranisElsu (the creator/maintainer of TAC Life Support) to add the capability to electrolyze WasteWater (urine) into the Water Splitter/Electrolysis recycler part already in his mod:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/40667-0-25-TAC-Life-Support-v0-10-1-10Oct-No-Win64-Support?p=1503269#post1503269

But, I was wondering if, maybe you couldn't find a way to add this functionality through MM patches yourself?

In real life, water electrolysis units work perfectly well on urine as well, and are getting looked at being used to treat human waste water before returning it to the environment, among other applications...

http://www.ohio.edu/engineering/ceer/research/urea.cfm

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920586112000739

The reaction looks like this:

CO(NH2)2 + H2O -----> N2 + 3H2 + CO2

The products are Nitrogen (RealFuels already contains a Nitrogen resource!), CO2, and H2 gas. All of these resources already exist in RealFuels+TACLS, and all of them actually have uses! (Nitrogen can be used as RCS propellent in RealFuels, CO2 can be recycled to obtain O2 or Methane+Water, and H2 can be used as fuel or in a Sabatier Reaction)

So adding this reaction onto the existing part (the electrolysis unit wouldn't need any modifications- in real life it works with any pair of standard electrodes and current passed through urine) would be a simple, easy task that could turn a currently useless resource (WasteWater) into a useful one (Water/KSP-Interstellar LqdWater) without any inefficiency/waste! (TACLS Water Purifiers recycle WasteWater into Water, but turn the mass of the urea into Waste)

You know how you were talking about recycling CO2 into methane and using it in RCS before? Well this is actually a lot more efficient! Methane is actually more useful as a primary rocket propellant (in a RealFuels "Stockalike" NERVA, a KSP-Interstellar NTR, or a Meth/LOX Interstellar chemical rocket) than as RCS fuel, but Nitrogen doesn't have any alternative uses! (unless you're talking about experimental Nitrogen-based plasma thrusters)

Regards,

Northstar

Edited October 26, 2014 by Northstar1989

Northstar1989 · October 26, 2014

@Dreadicon

It appears upon more careful perusal that there are several resource definitions that were present in the old KSP-I/RealFuels integration file ("KSPI_MFS") that are no longer present in your version, and need to be replicated. Specifically, I noticed the Kerbin/Laythe atmospheric resource definitions to change the gatherable resources from "Oxidizer" to "LqdOxygen" were missing. The code looks like this:

@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[LaytheOxygen]
{
	@resourceName = LqdOxygen
}

The atmospheric resource definition is different than the resource name, changing one won't change the other- as one is changing things externally to ORS, and the other is changing it internally, as I understand it. So this line of code (as well as the similar ones for Kerbin, Duna, etc.) will need to be replicated in the new config. You had the right idea with these *NEW* resource fixes in the new config, the same thing just needs to be repeated with the old ones that were fixed previously... (as the old config was thrown out entirely)

//Resource Definition updates
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#resourceName[Ammonia]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[RealFuels]
{
	@resourceName = LqdAmmonia
}
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#resourceName[Ammonia]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[RealFuels]
{
	@resourceName = LqdAmmonia
}
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#resourceName[H2Peroxide]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[RealFuels]
{
	@resourceName = HTP
}
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[*]:HAS[#resourceName[H2Peroxide]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[RealFuels]
{
	@resourceName = HTP

The older definitions need to be added back into the new integration config (and the updated version sent to NathanKell/Regex) since the old config was thrown out entirely. In fact, I recommend going through the old config (I have copied in the entire code below so you wouldn't have trouble finding it) and making sure *every single function* it had is replicated in the new config.

@PART[AluminiumHybrid1]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines]
	{
		@PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]
		{
			@name = LqdOxygen
			@ratio = 4.05
		}
	}
	@RESOURCE[Oxidizer]
	{
		@name = LqdOxygen
		@amount = 1543
		@maxAmount = 1543
	}
}

@PART[FNMethaneEngine]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines]
	{
		@PROPELLANT[LqdMethane]
		{
			@ratio = 0.443
		}
		@PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]
		{
			@name = LqdOxygen
			@ratio = 0.557
		}
	}
}

@PART[vista]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines]
	{
		@PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel]
		{
			@name = LqdHydrogen
			@ratio = 20
		}
	}
}

@PART[FNMethaneTank3-2]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleFuelTanks
		volume = 6400
		type = Cryogenic
		TANK
		{
			name = LqdHydrogen
			amount = 0
			maxAmount = 0
		}
		TANK
		{
			name = LqdMethane
			amount = full
			maxAmount = 23.95%
		}
	}
}

@PART[FNMethaneTank3-1]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleFuelTanks
		volume = 3200
		type = Cryogenic
		TANK
		{
			name = LqdHydrogen
			amount = 0
			maxAmount = 0
		}
		TANK
		{
			name = LqdMethane
			amount = full
			maxAmount = 23.95%
		}
	}
}

@PART[25PureLiquidTank]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleFuelTanks
		volume = 3200
		type = Default
	}
}

@PART[375PureLiquidTank]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleFuelTanks
		volume = 54200
		type = Default
	}
}

@BASIC_NTR_PROPELLANT[Hydrolox]
{
	@guiName = Hydrolox
	@PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel]
	{
		@name = LqdHydrogen
        @ratio = 0.73
	}
	@PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]
	{
		@name = LqdOxygen
		@ratio = 0.27
		@DrawGauge = False
	}
}

@BASIC_NTR_PROPELLANT[Hydrogen]
{
	@guiName = LqdHydrogen
	@PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel]
	{
		@name = LqdHydrogen
	}
}

@BASIC_ELECTRIC_PROPELLANT[Hydrogen]
{
	@guiName = LqdHydrogen
	@PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel]
	{
		@name = LqdHydrogen
	}
}

@WARP_PLUGIN_SETTINGS
{
	@HydrogenResourceName = LqdHydrogen
	@OxygenResourceName = LqdOxygen
}

@BASIC_ELECTRIC_PROPELLANT[Hydrogen]
{
	@guiName = LqdHydrogen
	@PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel]
	{
		@name = LqdHydrogen
	}
}

//atmospheric
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[KerbinOxygen]
{
	@resourceName = LqdOxygen
}
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[DunaOxygen]
{
	@resourceName = LqdOxygen
}
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[LaytheOxygen]
{
	@resourceName = LqdOxygen
}
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[KerbinHydrogen]
{
	@resourceName = LqdHydrogen
}
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[JoolHydrogen]
{
	@resourceName = LqdHydrogen
}
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[JoolAmmonia]
{
	@resourceName = LqdAmmonia
}
//oceanic
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[EveWater]
{
	//@resourceName = water resource
}
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[KerbinWater]
{
	//@resourceName = water resource
}
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[LaytheWater]
{
	//@resourceName = water resource
}
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[LaytheAmmonia]
{
	@resourceName = LqdAmmonia
}

So far, I can see that Oxygen, Hydrogen, and Methane resource definition MM patches need to be included in the new config. (Oxygen and Hydrogen were present previously, but there was never a fix for Methane- which is present in very low but directly gatherable concentrations in the atmospheres of Kerbin and Duna...)

The DT-Vista engine resource-consumption fix (LiquidFuel --> LiquidH2) also should be updated to use the name "LiquidH2" rather than "LiquidHydrogen", and included in either the "Stockalike" engine config integration file or the base RealFuels integration config file, depending on how NathanKell feels about it persisting in the base mod's integration config... (I doubt anyone will ever try and change its TWR or ISP to match reality, since it doesn't exist yet in reality- so leaving it in the base config is probably safer than with the Al-Hybrid or Meth/LOX engine parts...)

I'll try and help you find any other missing pieces, of course.

Regards,

Northstar

Edited October 26, 2014 by Northstar1989

dreadicon · October 27, 2014

@Northstar1989

Have you seen any in-game flaws with the new configs? I examined the KSPI code carefully, and I removed any MM configs that were obsolete. There are no longer any ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION modules in KSPI that refer to Oxidizer, so I simply removed them. I will probably add one for oxidizer some time just to be safe, but unless you've seen it actually cause issues, I am going to assume my assessment is correct. This is the current resource definition folder for KSPI: https://github.com/FractalUK/KSPInterstellar/tree/master/GameData/WarpPlugin/PlanetResourceData

I covered everything there, and duplicated the resources in oceanic for atmospheric, and vice versa.

Methane's name definition doesnt change, so there is nothing that I need to do there. What I am writing here is a conversion script, not a tweaking script to add stuff that isn't in KSPI. Therefore, if KSPI doesnt add methane to planets, my script wouldnt add it anyhow even if I put in the script for it like i had the other items.

The Vista and Aluminum hybrid are both in the config I submitted for the core Real Fuels already with the rest of my configs last week. Kell doesn't mind pull requests, but I doubt he wants them constantly to fix minor issues that no one has even confirmed exist outside theory. the Vista and Hybrid are both fixed, unless Kell removed them.

Also, the copy on my thread is not fully up to date, as it is intended for a different use (standalone) and I was focused on getting the one for Real Fuels proper done with. I will update the copy in my thread soon as Kell pushes the configs he pulled in to a release.

Here's what the configs would be for Oxidizer and LqdFuel if needed. Methane needs no configs for Real Fuels in terms of planetary resources.

@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION
[*]:HAS[#resourceName[Oxidizer]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[WarpPlugin]
{
	@resourceName = LqdOxygen
}
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION
[*]:HAS[#resourceName[Oxidizer]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[WarpPlugin]
{
	@resourceName = LqdOxygen
}
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION
[*]:HAS[#resourceName[LqdFuel]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[WarpPlugin]
{
	@resourceName = LqdHydrogen
}
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION
[*]:HAS[#resourceName[LqdFuel]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[WarpPlugin]
{
	@resourceName = LqdHydrogen
}

Regarding electrolysis, you've provided sufficient evidence, than I very much appreciate it. I will add configs for it at some point, for some mod, weather it's TACLS, US, or KSPI.

Finally, Nitrogen, IIRC, actually does have one very important use in modern spacecraft: offgassing replacement. Apparently nitrogen is very difficult to prevent from leaking into space, so replenishing the cabin supply is still a use

Northstar1989 · October 27, 2014

Have you seen any in-game flaws with the new configs? I examined the KSPI code carefully, and I removed any MM configs that were obsolete. There are no longer any ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION modules in KSPI that refer to Oxidizer, so I simply removed them. I will probably add one for oxidizer some time just to be safe, but unless you've seen it actually cause issues, I am going to assume my assessment is correct. This is the current resource definition folder for KSPI: https://github.com/FractalUK/KSPInterstellar/tree/master/GameData/WarpPlugin/PlanetResourceData
I covered everything there, and duplicated the resources in oceanic for atmospheric, and vice versa.
Methane's name definition doesnt change, so there is nothing that I need to do there. What I am writing here is a conversion script, not a tweaking script to add stuff that isn't in KSPI. Therefore, if KSPI doesnt add methane to planets, my script wouldnt add it anyhow even if I put in the script for it like i had the other items.

You're right- methane doesn't need a MM patch, since the resource name doesn't change. I don't know how I missed that earlier- probably because I was writing at 4 AM... :blush:

As for the hydrogen and oxidizer, I haven't had the opportunity to play-test them yet. Since the config you posted does *NOT* include the DT-Vista, Meth/LOX, or Al-Hybrid engine, but *DOES* include some of the same fixes present in the old config, I can't safely delete the old config and install the new without possibly risking messing up my save. I suggest you get the version you sent to NathanKell, that includes *ALL* of the fixes, posted here as soon as possible, so I can actually test the config for functionality. The first thing I intend to do is launch a ISRU refinery in Sandbox mode, and see if it is still capable of collecting Oxygen on Kerbin without the additional definitions. You're right, it probably works without them- but I just want to be sure...

The Vista and Aluminum hybrid are both in the config I submitted for the core Real Fuels already with the rest of my configs last week. Kell doesn't mind pull requests, but I doubt he wants them constantly to fix minor issues that no one has even confirmed exist outside theory. the Vista and Hybrid are both fixed, unless Kell removed them.

By "issues that aren't confirmed outside theory", I assume you mean the issues with ISRU collection of Hydrogen and Oxygen? There's nothing theoretical about the DT-Vista and Al-Hybrid engines not working without a config- that should be painfully obvious. Just make sure that those engine configs make it to base RealFuels or the "Stockalike" engine config (especially with the Meth/LOX engine, which needs to go to "Stockalike" so it can have its TWR/ISP adjusted- although after that's done I'll also take a peak at the AL-Hybrid TWR/ISP to see if it needs adjustment, so I would advise kicking that over to "Stockalike" as well...)

Also, the copy on my thread is not fully up to date, as it is intended for a different use (standalone) and I was focused on getting the one for Real Fuels proper done with. I will update the copy in my thread soon as Kell pushes the configs he pulled in to a release.

The sooner you get that updated, the sooner I can actually play-test the config to see if it works...

Here's what the configs would be for Oxidizer and LqdFuel if needed. Methane needs no configs for Real Fuels in terms of planetary resources.

@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION
[*]:HAS[#resourceName[Oxidizer]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[WarpPlugin]
{
	@resourceName = LqdOxygen
}
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION
[*]:HAS[#resourceName[Oxidizer]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[WarpPlugin]
{
	@resourceName = LqdOxygen
}
@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION
[*]:HAS[#resourceName[LqdFuel]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[WarpPlugin]
{
	@resourceName = LqdHydrogen
}
@OCEANIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION
[*]:HAS[#resourceName[LqdFuel]]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:AFTER[WarpPlugin]
{
	@resourceName = LqdHydrogen
}

Looks good- that would be a simple/elegant solution if a resource definition MM patch proves necessary like it did back when the original integration config was created.

Regarding electrolysis, you've provided sufficient evidence, than I very much appreciate it. I will add configs for it at some point, for some mod, weather it's TACLS, US, or KSPI.
Finally, Nitrogen, IIRC, actually does have one very important use in modern spacecraft: offgassing replacement. Apparently nitrogen is very difficult to prevent from leaking into space, so replenishing the cabin supply is still a use

Cool to know that you'll look at adding urine/WasteWater electrolysis... It should still produce a *little* Waste, though, as upon further research it appears it eventually leaves some salt (as in NaCl) residue behind... (no, it doesn't produce chlorine gas- the current/voltage levels used for urine/water electrolysis aren't sufficient for that...) Or maybe it's just best to abstract that and ignore it, since it would be less than 1% of total WasteWater mass, and the Electrolysis part already has some inefficiency built in- your call.

Finally, I'm also bugging FractalUK to add a Nitrogen fuel-mode for the KSP-Interstellar plasma thruster, and even trying to get Raptor831 to add one for the RealFuels "Stockalike" config (I can't thing of a better place for it...) We'll see if any of that works out...

Regards,

Northstar

Edited November 14, 2014 by Northstar1989

Northstar1989 · October 28, 2014

@Dreadicon

Another issues I noticed with the config- this one related to Monopropellant/Hydrazine.

Currently, the code you sent NathanKell has changes the KSP-Interstellar plasma thrusters to use "Hydrazine" instead of "Monopropellant"


+@ELECTRIC_PROPELLANT[MonoPropellant]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:FOR[RealFuels]
+{
+ @guiName = Hydrazine
+ @PROPELLANT[MonoPropellant]
+ {
+ @name = Hydrazine
+ }
+}

The problem with this is, not all players using RealFuels necessarily play with ModuleRCSFX installed. Some, such as myself, choose to delete it, per the instructions on some of the engine config pages (such as the one for "Stockalike") so that we can use Monopropellant instead...

Why would I ever choose to delete ModuleRCSFX, you might ask? Because KSP-Interstellar normally includes an ISRU reaction that allows players to make Monopropellant- but not Hydrazine. Also because several of the crew capsules still carry Monopropellant rather than Hydrazive even with ModuleRCSFX installed, and the O-10 Monopropellant Engines haven't yet been fixed to use Hydrazine instead in the "Stockalike" engine config... (despite my having reminded Raptor831 of this issues several times)

You could create code to fix some of these issues (a catch-all to make capsule Monopropellant tanks into modular RCS tanks, and a line of code to make the KSP-Interstellar reaction produce Hydrazine instead of Monopropellant- which I think would just be a matter of a MM patch to change the KSP-Interstellar resource name for Monopropellant...), but you should probably also make the change from Monopropellant to Hydrazine dependent on having ModuleRCSFX installed, rather than the base RealFuels folder.

Regards,

Northstar

dreadicon · October 30, 2014

@Dreadicon
Another issues I noticed with the config- this one related to Monopropellant/Hydrazine.
Currently, the code you sent NathanKell has changes the KSP-Interstellar plasma thrusters to use "Hydrazine" instead of "Monopropellant"
+@ELECTRIC_PROPELLANT[MonoPropellant]:NEEDS[WarpPlugin&RealFuels]:FOR[RealFuels]
+{
+ @guiName = Hydrazine
+ @PROPELLANT[MonoPropellant]
+ {
+ @name = Hydrazine
+ }
+}
The problem with this is, not all players using RealFuels necessarily play with ModuleRCSFX installed. Some, such as myself, choose to delete it, per the instructions on some of the engine config pages (such as the one for "Stockalike") so that we can use Monopropellant instead...
Why would I ever choose to delete ModuleRCSFX, you might ask? Because KSP-Interstellar normally includes an ISRU reaction that allows players to make Monopropellant- but not Hydrazine. Also because several of the crew capsules still carry Monopropellant rather than Hydrazive even with ModuleRCSFX installed, and the O-10 Monopropellant Engines haven't yet been fixed to use Hydrazine instead in the "Stockalike" engine config... (despite my having reminded Raptor831 of this issues several times)
You could create code to fix some of these issues (a catch-all to make capsule Monopropellant tanks into modular RCS tanks, and a line of code to make the KSP-Interstellar reaction produce Hydrazine instead of Monopropellant- which I think would just be a matter of a MM patch to change the KSP-Interstellar resource name for Monopropellant...), but you should probably also make the change from Monopropellant to Hydrazine dependent on having ModuleRCSFX installed, rather than the base RealFuels folder.

I see. I will have to look into fixing this. I just had a wisdom tooth removed, so it may take me between 3-7 days, but seeing as this isn't an edge case, I should do something about it. I have a couple ideas on how to fix it already, but it may take a few days before I can write them up confidently.

Northstar1989 · November 14, 2014

I see. I will have to look into fixing this. I just had a wisdom tooth removed, so it may take me between 3-7 days, but seeing as this isn't an edge case, I should do something about it. I have a couple ideas on how to fix it already, but it may take a few days before I can write them up confidently.

Don't forget that the *best* solution would not be to disable the Monoprop --> Hydrazine fix for KSP-Interstellar, but to eliminate the reasons for disabling ModuleRCSFX in the first place.

This means, as I said before:

(1) Creating a catch-all so that command capsule RCS tanks all contain Modular RCS tanks (which can contain Hydrazine, N2, etc.) instead of Monopropellant.

(2) Creating a fix for the products of the KSP-Interstellar ISRU reaction producing Monopropellant, so it produces Hydrazine instead (the existing ISRU reaction's chemistry/rate etc. was already based on Fractal_UK's assumption that Monopropellant represents Hydrazine- really all that is required is a name-change...)

Regards,

Northstart

Northstar1989 · November 19, 2014

The KSP-Interstellar/RealFuels integration config still needs a fix to change the Monopropellant-producing reaction to produce Hydrazine instead (although KSP-Interstellar also has Hydrogen Peroxide- so I guess could use that for RCS instead if it were properly integrated into RealFuels, and they were willing to deal with the decay-rates, which I think are actually native to KSP-Interstellar...), and the latest version (the one you sent to NathanKell, with any updates you've added since) also needs to be posted on your dev thread's OP so I can finally play-test it and see if there are any more bugs/fixes we need to iron out!

Speaking of which, here's a new one- the KSP-Interstellar ISRU refineries' integrated tanks need to be changed into insulated tanks- right now products like LiquidOxygen and LiquidMethane boil off MUCH too quickly, thanks to the fuel tanks being considered non-cryogenic (considering the integrated fuel tanks were DESIGNED to hold LOX and Methane for long periods of time, I doubt they wouldn't have insulation...)

Regards,

Northstar

P.S. There is no catch-all in the version of the config on the OP to change Monopropellant to Hydrazine. Right now the only MM patch is specifically to change just the plasma thrusters to use Hydrazine instead of Monopropellant- there is nothing to alter the function of the ISRU reactors that produce Monopropellant in the first place...

Edited November 19, 2014 by Northstar1989

Northstar1989 · November 22, 2014

One more issues I just noticed, going through the files.

The current dev version of RealFuels (where I managed to find the file you sent NathanKell before- so it's not as important to post it here anymore- until you make further changes) doesn't have a specific part fix for the tank capacity of the radial Ammonia tank in KSP-Interstellar.

I already whipped something up for this before, although it didn't up-rate the capacity at all, despite the decrease in resource density (meaning it now holds less mass of Ammonia than before). Here it is, for reference:


@PART[FNAmmoniaTank]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleFuelTanks
		volume = 10731
		type = Default
	}
}

I don't have any idea how to submit pull requests, or I'd just submit this change to NathanKell directly. But the tank volume also needs to be increased, to maintain the same mass fraction as before, so it's not ready to go yet anyways (I'll try to get back to you with the correct numbers for tank capacity, remind me about it if I forget).

Also, one last thing. NathanKell seemed concerned that I might be "bugging" you too much about this integration config. I hope I'm not getting on your nerves about it?

I understand what's it's like to get your wisdom teeth removed and then have to catch up with everything afterwards- so I'm certainly not trying to be bothersome about this. Let me know if you'd prefer I stop updating you about tweaks/fixes that need to be made to the config entirely.

Regards,

Northstar

Edited November 22, 2014 by Northstar1989

dreadicon · December 4, 2014

One more issues I just noticed, going through the files.
The current dev version of RealFuels (where I managed to find the file you sent NathanKell before- so it's not as important to post it here anymore- until you make further changes) doesn't have a specific part fix for the tank capacity of the radial Ammonia tank in KSP-Interstellar.
I already whipped something up for this before, although it didn't up-rate the capacity at all, despite the decrease in resource density (meaning it now holds less mass of Ammonia than before). Here it is, for reference:
@PART[FNAmmoniaTank]
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleFuelTanks
        volume = 10731
        type = Default
    }
}
I don't have any idea how to submit pull requests, or I'd just submit this change to NathanKell directly. But the tank volume also needs to be increased, to maintain the same mass fraction as before, so it's not ready to go yet anyways (I'll try to get back to you with the correct numbers for tank capacity, remind me about it if I forget).
Also, one last thing. NathanKell seemed concerned that I might be "bugging" you too much about this integration config. I hope I'm not getting on your nerves about it?
I understand what's it's like to get your wisdom teeth removed and then have to catch up with everything afterwards- so I'm certainly not trying to be bothersome about this. Let me know if you'd prefer I stop updating you about tweaks/fixes that need to be made to the config entirely.
Regards,
Northstar

There's no problem with pointing out things that need fixed/updated or even suggestions, as long as you understand that as this is one of many things in my life, I will get to it in my own time if I can, but there is no guarantee it will ever be fixed/updated, much less when. You can be rather pushy, and I encourage you as I did in another thread to be more humble and appreciative to modders in general, but the information itself is appreciated. I receive email updates from it daily, and just to be sure I don't miss anything, check this thread every now and then anyhow. If I don't reply, I'm probably busy with wife, health, job, local friends, family, another hobby, or some recent obsession with another game or field of science. Most of my posts here are lofty aspirations and the things I would do if I had the time and energy my job consumes. Sometimes I find time, sometimes I don't. Usually I have partial work or progress on a task, but get stuck and/or loose motivation at some point. Sometimes I come back to it, sometimes I don't. But anyone wanting to continue my work in any of these aspirations is free to PM me and ask to pick up where I left off; I would always be happy to discuss things and pass on what I know.

So long and short; I am still here and fiddling with mods and code. KSPI-RF config has minor issues, but is much better than before for now. TACLS-RF-KSPI is still a WIP. I am not currently working on either config, though that does not mean I won't some time in the near or far future.

I have been looking into some other mods to try and help them out as they are floundering a bit, such as Kopernicus, Procedural Dynamics, and Real Heat. Each has different hangups, but I am toying with them, trying to solve problems and improve them.

Feel free to report things; if/when I get back to working on the configs, this information will be helpful. As always, suggestions and bug reports are welcome, but I make no guarantees as to if/when updates and progress will happen. Unless someone was to pay me enough to quit my job, that's the best I can offer! lol.

Edited December 4, 2014 by dreadicon

Northstar1989 · December 10, 2014

I *just* saw your reply, so... Sorry for the slow response.

There's no problem with pointing out things that need fixed/updated or even suggestions, as long as you understand that as this is one of many things in my life, I will get to it in my own time if I can, but there is no guarantee it will ever be fixed/updated, much less when. You can be rather pushy, and I encourage you as I did in another thread to be more humble and appreciative to modders in general, but the information itself is appreciated. I receive email updates from it daily, and just to be sure I don't miss anything, check this thread every now and then anyhow. If I don't reply, I'm probably busy with wife, health, job, local friends, family, another hobby, or some recent obsession with another game or field of science. Most of my posts here are lofty aspirations and the things I would do if I had the time and energy my job consumes. Sometimes I find time, sometimes I don't. Usually I have partial work or progress on a task, but get stuck and/or loose motivation at some point. Sometimes I come back to it, sometimes I don't. But anyone wanting to continue my work in any of these aspirations is free to PM me and ask to pick up where I left off; I would always be happy to discuss things and pass on what I know.
So long and short; I am still here and fiddling with mods and code. KSPI-RF config has minor issues, but is much better than before for now. TACLS-RF-KSPI is still a WIP. I am not currently working on either config, though that does not mean I won't some time in the near or far future.
I have been looking into some other mods to try and help them out as they are floundering a bit, such as Kopernicus, Procedural Dynamics, and Real Heat. Each has different hangups, but I am toying with them, trying to solve problems and improve them.

I know and understand what's its like to be busy and have other things going on in real life. We're almost done with the config (as far as I can tell- I'm having some difficulties play-testing it with RF 8.2 due to trouble locating the updated DLL on Github...) If you're able to help push just a couple more odds-and ends through, we'll have a 100% complete config!

Feel free to report things; if/when I get back to working on the configs, this information will be helpful. As always, suggestions and bug reports are welcome, but I make no guarantees as to if/when updates and progress will happen. Unless someone was to pay me enough to quit my job, that's the best I can offer! lol.

Well, I can't pay you, but I can summarize all of the remaining things that need doing in one place, so you don't have to hunt for them. They are:

(1) The KSP-Interstellar ISRU Refinery needs to produce Hydrazine instead of Monopropellant. AFAIK the resource proportions are only correct FOR THE CURRENT DENSITY OF AMMONIA (see goal #2), so this is a bit more than a simple name-change... (see goal #2) It might be worthwhile to make the name-change contingent on the presence of Module RCSFX, for both this and the plasma engines that already use Monoprop/Hydrazine... (and had their fuel name changed so they *always* require Hydrazine)

(2) The density of the Ammonia resource changes when going from KSP-Interstellar "Ammonia" to RealFuels "LqdAmmonia". This means the rates of Ammonia-consumption need to be adjusted for the Monoprop/Hydrazine production reaction, as mentioned in goal #1, to ensure conservation-of-mass. The rates of resource-extraction should also be adjusted if possible (gathering 100 units of "Ammonia" a second IS NOT the same as gathering 100 units of "LqdAmmonia" a second...)

(3) The dedicated KSP-Interstellar Ammonia Tank needs to have its fuel capacity switched from "Ammonia" to "LqdAmmonia". The capacity (in units) should ideally be altered to preserve the same fuel-fraction as before, although an argument can be made for leaving it as-is (and I posted code to do this before, without changing unit-capacity, back in the Request thread... I also re-posted the code earlier on this page, for your convenience.) That fuel tank should probably also be insulated- as the main place it gets used is on Eve- where it's hot enough to boil Ammonia.

(4) The KSP-Interstellar ISRU Refinery needs to have insulated tanks for its integrated cryogenic fuel-storage. Namely, LqdOxygen, LqdAmmonia, and LqdHydrogen. Oh yeah, did I mention LqdHydrogen? I can't emphasize that one enough- otherwise all the Hydrogen from Water Electrolysis will boil-off before it even has a chance to be stored in another fuel tank- as electrolysis can proceed quite slowly if the power supply is limited...

I hope having everything in one place helps. As you can see, there are only 4 things left to be done- and (part of) one of them I already did for you, if you consider my solution satisfactory...

Regards,

Northstar

Edited December 10, 2014 by Northstar1989

Northstar1989 · January 26, 2015

Dreadicon, one more confirmed issue that needs to be fixed.

While the code you wrote up for re-defining the LOX/LH2 resources generated compatibility for all ISRU Refinery-related functions, it did NOT fix the KSP-Interstellar "Atmospheric Scoop" parts. They are currently scooping "Oxidizer" and "LiquidFuel" instead of "LqdOxygen" and "LqdHydrogen".

The following code needs to be integrated into the integration config, according to FreeThinker, who I have been working with on some additional RealFuels/KSP-Interstellar cross-compatibility with, as well as extensions to the ISRU functionalities within KSP-Interstellar (adding the ability to scoop Nitrogen, and use it for electric propulsion, such as to enable Propulsive Fluid Accumulators, for instance)


@ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_PACK_DEFINITION[InterstellarAtmosphericPack]
{

    @ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[KerbinOxygen]
    {
        resourceName = LqdOxygen
    }
    @ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[KerbinHydrogen]
    {
        resourceName = LqdHydrogen
    }
    @ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[JoolHydrogen]
    {
        resourceName = LqdHydrogen
    }
    @ATMOSPHERIC_RESOURCE_DEFINITION[LaytheOxygen] 
    {
        resourceName = LqdOxygen
    }
}

These additional MM patches should allow Atmospheric Scoops to scoop LOX/LH2 with RealFuels installed. Can't say I didn't warn you before these lines of code would be necessary, and your resource re-names wouldn't be enough.

BUT, it's my fault for not catching this bug sooner. I never thought to test the Atmospheric Scoop part when I was testing the KSP-I/RF integration config we created before...

Regards,

Northstar

FreeThinker · January 27, 2015

(1) The KSP-Interstellar ISRU Refinery needs to produce Hydrazine instead of Monopropellant. AFAIK the resource proportions are only correct FOR THE CURRENT DENSITY OF AMMONIA (see goal #2), so this is a bit more than a simple name-change... (see goal #2) It might be worthwhile to make the name-change contingent on the presence of Module RCSFX, for both this and the plasma engines that already use Monoprop/Hydrazine... (and had their fuel name changed so they *always* require Hydrazine)

Alright, I can make sure the amount of Ammonia used in the ISRU Refinery monopropellant production becomes configurable in my next release of KSPI 0.90 Extended configration

Edited January 27, 2015 by FreeThinker

Dread Industries Unlimited (Potential Project Poll Posted!)

Which Whimsical Wonder shall Dread Development Devise? 97 members have voted

1. Which Whimsical Wonder shall Dread Development Devise?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Which Whimsical Wonder shall Dread Development Devise?
97 members have voted