[0.90] KSP Interstellar port maintance thread

[Northstar1989]

Currently It's nothing but making the upgradeTech visible. It's mainly ment for debugging purposes but can also give player an indication with which Tech a part can be upgraded. I'm thinking about making this universal as a help for players

- - - Updated - - -

I hope to implement this in 0.7 durring the weekend. It requires quite some time to test everything and bug fixes alway have priority.

Awesome. But, upon careful review of your solution, I realized (or rather, was reminded of in the case of one) TWO major problems that I didn't mention before...

Reducing the reactor temperature makes it much harder to dissipate the WasteHeat produced by the reactor.

Because radiators in KSP-Interstellar (and real life) radiate heat based on the FOURTH POWER of their temperature (temperature^4), and the maximum temperature they can reach is that of the vessel's reactor core (interestingly enough, I've never tried seeing what would happen to the radiators if I placed two different reactors with different core temperatures on the same vessel...) having a slightly more than 10% lower core-temperature like that DRASTICALLY increases the minimum radiator-mass necessary to keep the reactor from overheating...

Thus, I *strongly* suggest you keep the current (realistic) core temperatures and ThermalPower values, and decrease the ISP multiplier and increase the Thrust/MW instead (until a Thermal Rocket Nozzle produces approximately 1 kN/MW with a 3000 K heat-source) like I originally suggested.

There is a second, even larger problem with not fixing the Thrust/MW properly and reducing the reactor core temperatures instead (and using an excessively high ISP-multiplier to still get the correct ISP for the reactor-type it is simulating...)

NOT FIXING THE THRUST AND ISP MULTIPLIERS PROPERLY WILL *BADLY* MESS UP MICROWAVE THERMAL ROCKETS

You see, if you keep the ISP multiplier too high and the Thrust multiplier too low, like in that solution, you will end up with Microwave Thermal Rockets producing *MUCH* less Thrust/MW at a significantly higher Vacuum ISP (but significantly LOWER Atmospheric ISP- due to the reduced Vacuum Thrust ratings that will result) than they should be doing...

This is a *HUGE* problem for Microwave Thermal Rockets because their main use (in fact their ONLY proposed use in real-life) is as launch-vehicles, as you lose almost all of the beamed-power due to beam-diffraction when trying to beam the power over, say, interplanetary distances... (or even to a rocket in orbit that is not DIRECTLY overhead, due to the atmosphere accelerating beam-diffraction)

If you hurt both the Thrust (both Vacuum and Atmospheric) and Atmospheric ISP of Microwave Thermal Rockets, they will become nearly worthless for their intended purpose- as launch vehicles. Their Thrust/MW will be far too low (thus requiring much more beamed-power to get usable levels of Thrust), and their maximum Thrust rating will also suffer as well (as their maximum Thrust is limited by the number of MW of beamed-power a given Thermal Receiver can absorb, not in terms of kN of Thrust). Their Atmospheric ISP will also consistently be too low, as their Vacuum Thrust ratings will be much lower as well.

BOTH the high ISP multiplier and the low Thrust multiplier will hurt the Thrust-performance of Microwave Thermal Rockets. Due to the way Thrust is calculated in KSP-Interstellar (ThermalPower is divided by ISP, and then multiplied by the Thrust multiplier), BOTH terms will diminish the Thrust/MW of the Microwave Thermal Rockets- and their overall performance as launch-vehicles will be abysmal compared to what it *SHOULD* be...

Once more, here are the necessary changes to the Thrust Multiplier and ISP Multiplier:

Thrust Multiplier: Increase 2x from current value

ISP Multiplier: Decrease from current value (over 22) to 21.

Sorry I didn't realize the effects of not keeping the correct reactor core temperatures and fixing the Thrust/ISP multipliers on Microwave Thermal Rockets and radiator-efficiency earlier...

Regards,

Northstar

- - - Updated - - -

Also, one more possible way to improve the Extension Config to add to the list:

(5) Fix the ISP-cap (as implemented by Fractal_UK) to be more realistic. ISP should cap at 7000 seconds instead of 3000 seconds when using Hydrogen in second-generation fission reactors such as Gas Core Reactors (based on literature on the maximum exhaust temperatures that can safely be achieved with Nuclear Thermal Rockets, as briefly paraphrased in THIS Wikipedia article), and the ISP cap should be proportionally lower for heavier fuels as outlined HERE. As I stated, you DO NOT need a property inside KSP-Interstellar for the molecular mass of the different propellants- that is already intrinsically reflected in the Thrust and ISP-multipliers relative to Hydrogen of each of the propellants. Similarly, the ISP cap will be a constant value for any given propellant, as Molecular Mass is a constant, unchanging value for any given propellant...

Regards,

Northstar

Edited February 19, 2015 by Northstar1989

[FreeThinker]

ALSO, a BUG. EEK!

The current density of the LiquidCO2 resource is off by a factor of 1000x (YIKES!)

It is currently: 0.000001200

It *SHOULD* be: 0.001200

The current density of the LiquidCO2 resource is THREE orders of magnitude off! For reference, the current density of LiquidNitrogen is 0.000824907 (which is accurate), and LiquidCO2 is supposed to be around 50% denser than LiquidNitrogen! (just think about the relative Molecular Masses: 44 vs. 28)

I originally provided the correct density figure HERE (note that in KSP, resource-density is in mT/liter, i.e. a resource of density "2" would weigh two tons for ever unit of the resource... 1000 liters of Liquid CO2 *should* weigh 1.2 tons, not 1.2 kilograms as you currently have it configured)

Alright, if fixed it in in 0.6.5 which can be downloaded from KerbalStuff

- - - Updated - - -

Thrust Multiplier: Increase 2x from current value

ISP Multiplier: Decrease from current value (over 22) to 21.

The Noozle trust multiplier is current set to 6.4 (for KSPI Extended 0.7), (I guess have to modify it a bit to reach targeted thrust)

I rather not modify the global ISP Multiplier as this would affect exisitng saves, but I could modify the ISP Multiplier using the truster ISPMultiplierOffset

The original IspCoreTempMult was set to 22.371670613, so in order to reach 21, I need to 22.371670613 - 21 = -1.371670613

Do note this will affect the thrust/ISP of all connected reactors when constructing new vessels, but they are effected anyway in a big way by the Trust multiplier. I probably have to balance them some way.

Edited February 19, 2015 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

@NorthStar, since you haven't reponded yet to my LFO problem, for the moment I will use a multiplier of 1.8 (see exaplanation below)

First, I found an intresting article about LIQUID OXYGEN AUGMENTED GAS CORE NUCLEAR THERMAL ROCKETS, which mentions LFO significantly improves trust of NTR perhaps you can check it out

Then I found an even more intresting article at Ground testing of Nuclear Thermal Rocket, which states

Aerojet has developed a thrust augmenting technique for an NTR called

the Lox Augmented Nuclear Thermal Rocket

(LANTR). This “oxygen afterburner†can be employed to increase the vehicle

thrust by 100-300% by burning the hydrogen with oxygen in the NTR nozzle. Including the LANTR injectors in the ground

tests would allow condensing up to 50% of the hydrogen. Subsequent injection of oxygen or air into the exhaust ducting can

convert 90% of the hydrogen to water. This reduces the volume of gases that have to be treated by an order of magnitude

allowing steady state treatment.

So on average we can expect about 200% improvement in thrust?

In order to achieve a 200% improvevent we would have to set LFOMultiplier to = 2 /(1/0.6) = 1.2 . A little dissapointing

However, let's assume we can reach maximum trust of 300% improvement.

I guess this represet the maximum amount of oxygen than can be added for full oxydation, meaning equivalent to normal LH2/LOX mix

Then our LFO multiplier have to be 3 / (1 / 0.6) = 1.8 which is Significantly higher. This seems a little to powerfull, but lets continue...

Third: take a look at table 2: Pure Hydrogen NTR generates thrust/ISP of 25000N@900s (on the ground) while in LFO mode 78600N@566s. Note the 900/566 is very close to our existing LFO IspModifier of 0.6 and the thrust is improved by 78600N/25000N = 3.144 which is slighly higher than 300%, but I guess this can partly be explained by the athmosphere static effect.

So I think we can conclude the 300% increase in trust and 0.6 ISP modifier is very close to the real NTR with LOX afterburner and therefore an LFO multiplier of 1.8 seems correct... right?

Assuming this is correct, our NTR with 6.4 multiplier wil generate an enourmous amount of trust with a LFO with 1.8 multiplier. I think KSPI should somehow balance it by demanding usage of real Liquid Hydrogen as a resource instead of the Stock Liquid by default Fuel ASAP.

Edited February 19, 2015 by FreeThinker

[Absurdist]

FreeThinker could you update your github repository? I'll check the changes.

[FreeThinker]

The Sethlans-family reactors are currently *COMPLETELY USELESS* as launch-engines due to their low Thrust-Weight Ratio (currently only about 4 for the "Sethlans" in the release), and as I explained HERE even with the CORRECT Thrust/MW for the Thermal Rocket Nozzles of about 1 kN/MW at 3000K, you would still only get a TWR of about 8 (compared to 30 for the Timberwind NTR's) due to the reactors weight 4x what they should for their size (volume) and power-production...

Completely useless? Exacly how did you calculate the TWR of the Sethlans? When I calculate the TWR of a 1.25m Sethan I get 210kN /((1.8t + 0.4t) * 9.81 )= +/- 9

Now if you used LFO mode, you suddenly would get a TWR of 3x9 = 27 at 0.6x 1050 = 630s ISP with 630kN thrust. That pretty spectacular for a useless 1.25m engine!!

Now if you scale it up to a 2.5m you get more than 5040 kN trust, that's more than 3 times as powerfull as a mainsail with a ISP that is more than twise as good. You still call that completely useless?

That brings me to the following point, what would be a realistic cost of such an useless nuclear engine? originally a 1.25 Sethan cost about 6000 credits. That's seems ok considering it original performance. But now with the new 6x Trust multiplier I think it's justified to increase to cost by 6x as well to 36000. What do you think?

Edited February 19, 2015 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

To start with, here are some real-world temperatures:

Timberwind Exhaust Temperature: 3000 K (source)

Could you point at which page I can find the core temperature of a Timberwind

- - - Updated - - -

I've found that my tech tree has recently started removing the Structural Wing Type A, and the Wing Connector Type A, I've readded it to the save manually about 3 times, but it gets removed whenever I open up the science building. I even tried adding them into the KSPI_techtree_0.90.cfg to no avail.

The mods I have installed are: This, Farram Aerospace, Deadly Reentry, Kerbal Alarm Clock, KW rocketry, Kerbal Joint Reinforcement, Tac Life Support, Kerbal Attachment System, KW Rocketry, Procedural Fairings, Remote Tech, and SCANsat. Oh and basic Texture Management. And the modual manager dll in my gamedata is 2.5.8

I also noticed the Kerbal Alarm Clock has made some backup persistent files, which I noticed still have the Type A parts in them...

I also haven't updated for about a month so, this could be fixed already, possibly.

Nevermind, found them in the advanced aerodynamics node, seems a little far along for such a vital wing part, oh well.

I guess you use CTT, they put many advanced part high in the tree than stock ksp.

[Absurdist]

I think I found the cause for the thermal rocket nozzle resetting to 100 thrust limit but it seems like a legacy issue and was not caused by KSPI Extended..

FNNozzleController.cs in setupPropellants

myAttachedEngine.thrustPercentage = 100;

Probably that.

Btw, the alcubierre drive thing was not a graphics issue. It was warping at 45 degree angles.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Absurdist

[FreeThinker]

I think I found the cause for the thermal rocket nozzle resetting to 100 thrust limit but it seems like a legacy issue and was not caused by KSPI Extended..

FNNozzleController.cs in setupPropellants

myAttachedEngine.thrustPercentage = 100;

Good find, but why is it set at 100?

[Absurdist]

Good find, but why is it set at 100?

No idea. I'm not even 100% sure if that's the cause. Could you try to remove that line and see what happens?

Hm.. if that's the cause then toggling the propellant should reset the limiter. I'll switch back to windows and test it.

EDIT:

Yep toggling the propellant resets the limiter. I suppose that was done so that switching to a propellant with a lower thrust doesn't suddenly make you fall to the ground?

IMO, the limiter resetting when you go out the launch pad is a bug but resetting when you switch propellants.. could be feature of some sort?

Well, your call if this is worth fixing. Worst case that happens when it resets is you have to throttle down. I only found this because I have a 1 terawatt microwave power source and my rockets are exploding if I don't limit the thrust. I could just as easily set the limit on the thermal receivers..

Edited February 19, 2015 by Absurdist
done testing

[Northstar1989]

Could you point at which page I can find the core temperature of a Timberwind

Pages 41-42 of the PDF (Pages 39-40 of the report, due to the title pages not being counted).

"Because the temperature of the hydrogen is 3000 K versus 2400 K for the NERVA reactor, the propellant efficiency is much higher."

OK, technically that's the EXHAUST temperature- which means the reactor *CORE* temperature has to be significantly higher (because you can't assume perfect thermodynamic efficiency, there must be a temperature difference between the exhaust and the heat exchanger, and the reactor core and the heat exchanger...) But I couldn't find data on the reactor CORE temperature anywhere in the report...

Does a 3200 K core temperature sound reasonable? In which case, we need to reduce the ISP multiplier EVEN FURTHER to still get the correct Vacuum ISP of 1100-1150 seconds with the larger exhaust nozzle.

Also, I would suggest creating "legacy" versions of the part instead if you're worried about breaking saves. That way, it will be easier to phase them out in the long run, when most players are now using the new version of the part.

It's a shame the technology didn't survive in real life. As the report/audit reveals, Strategic Defense Initiative was supposed to transfer the technology to the US Air Force, where it would have been used alongside the Space Nuclear Thermal Propulsion program- but *somehow* many of the documents never made it to the Air Force (politics are complex and treacherous- most likely somebody interfered because they considered nuclear thermal propulsion a waste of money and wanted to kill the program...)

Regards,

Northstar

- - - Updated - - -

@NorthStar, since you haven't reponded yet to my LFO problem, for the moment I will use a multiplier of 1.8 (see exaplanation below)

First, I found an intresting article about LIQUID OXYGEN AUGMENTED GAS CORE NUCLEAR THERMAL ROCKETS, which mentions LFO significantly improves trust of NTR perhaps you can check it out

Then I found an even more intresting article at Ground testing of Nuclear Thermal Rocket, which states

So on average we can expect about 200% improvement in thrust?

In order to achieve a 200% improvevent we would have to set LFOMultiplier to = 2 /(1/0.6) = 1.2 . A little dissapointing

However, let's assume we can reach maximum trust of 300% improvement.

I guess this represet the maximum amount of oxygen than can be added for full oxydation, meaning equivalent to normal LH2/LOX mix

Then our LFO multiplier have to be 3 / (1 / 0.6) = 1.8 which is Significantly higher. This seems a little to powerfull, but lets continue...

Third: take a look at table 2: Pure Hydrogen NTR generates thrust/ISP of 25000N@900s (on the ground) while in LFO mode 78600N@566s. Note the 900/566 is very close to our existing LFO IspModifier of 0.6 and the thrust is improved by 78600N/25000N = 3.144 which is slighly higher than 300%, but I guess this can partly be explained by the athmosphere static effect.

So I think we can conclude the 300% increase in trust and 0.6 ISP modifier is very close to the real NTR with LOX afterburner and therefore an LFO multiplier of 1.8 seems correct... right?

Assuming this is correct, our NTR with 6.4 multiplier wil generate an enourmous amount of trust with a LFO with 1.8 multiplier. I think KSPI should somehow balance it by demanding usage of real Liquid Hydrogen as a resource instead of the Stock Liquid by default Fuel ASAP.

Your data seems about right- a LH₂/LOX multiplier (and METH/LOX multiplier) of about 1.8 seems correct based on the data. Go for it!

I love the idea of requiring usage of RealFuels Liquid Hydrogen (which is much less dense than LiquidFuel), however this would create a requirement of installing RealFuels for players to use this mod. I think Community Resource Pack (which comes with KSP-Interstellar) has a version of LH₂, though- I know that when I actually select propellant modes for my Thermal Rocket Nozzles there are currently two differently-named versions of Hydrogen that show up, in addition to LiquidFuels (which reminds me, we *REALLY* need to implement code to phase out the LiquidFuel mode showing up when RealFuels is installed... Kethane should also only show up if Kethane is installed. It makes it harder to switch fuel-modes in-flight when all these useless fuel-modes from stock or other mods show up on the Thermal Rocket Nozzle...)

Regards,

Northstar

- - - Updated - - -

Completely useless? Exacly how did you calculate the TWR of the Sethlans? When I calculate the TWR of a 1.25m Sethan I get 210kN /((1.8t + 0.4t) * 9.81 )= +/- 9

That's with the FIXED Thrust, which you've been testing but not yet released. With the version currently in the release, the Vacuum Thrust is only about 105 kN, and the sea-level Thrust is only about 40 kN (due to a proper relationship between Atmospheric Thrust and Ambient Pressure not yet being implemented for Thermal Rocket Nozzle like with the Plasma Thrusters- it defaults to Atmospheric ISP and Thrust being 40% of Vacuum ISP and Thrust, REGARDLESS OF THRUST LEVELS).

With 40kN of Thrust, the TWR is even lower- only about 2. If the Thrust/Pressure code were implemented for Thermal Rocket Nozzles, and we got the proper sea-level Thrust of around 890 seconds, then we would get 89 kN of Thrust without fixing the Thrust/MW- which is only a TWR of about 4, and still USELESS for a launch vehicle (typical launch engine TWR's in real life exceed 80- even the REAL Timberwind was anemic by comparison). Only if we fixed the Thrust/MW *and* reduced the reactor+nozzle mass to the realistic value for its size of 625 kg (Timberwind 75 was 4x larger and weighed 2500 kg) would we get the realistic TWR of 30.

Now if you used LFO mode, you suddenly would get a TWR of 3x9 = 27 at 0.6x 1050 = 630s ISP with 630kN thrust. That pretty spectacular for a useless 1.25m engine!!

Now if you scale it up to a 2.5m you get more than 5040 kN trust, that's more than 3 times as powerfull as a mainsail with a ISP that is more than twise as good. You still call that completely useless?

That brings me to the following point, what would be a realistic cost of such an useless nuclear engine? originally a 1.25 Sethan cost about 6000 credits. That's seems ok considering it original performance. But now with the new 6x Trust multiplier I think it's justified to increase to cost by 6x as well to 36000. What do you think?

I think we should leave the cost alone. It is already *DRASTICALLY* out-performed by chemical engines (a LV-30 costs 314 Funds in RealFuels+Stockalike, and 850 funds in stock, but produces over 200 kN of Thrust, for instance). The costs were originally too high for the performance- buffing the performance w/o increasing the costs brings them more in line with realistic values (a Timberwind reactor would NOT have cost almost 20x a chemical rocket engine + turbopump with the same Thrust).

Regards,

Northstar

- - - Updated - - -

Also, once we're done with the Thermal Rockets, we *REALLY* need to take a look at buffing the Thermal Turbojets.

Currently, like the Thermal Rocket Nozzles, the Thermal Turbojets produce only a *FRACTION* of the Thrust/MW they SHOULD be producing in real-life. We don't have any great #'s on the Thrust/MW of a TTJ in real life (as no Thermal Turbojet has ever actually flown- only been designed/tested on the ground), but we *DO* know the approximate Exhaust Velocity based on the ISP of the part.

If we know the Exhaust Velocity (which is directly proportional to ISP), we can calculate the correct Thrust at any given ThermalPower level.

From that, we can calculate what the Thrust/MW *should* be based on a known Thrust/MW of slightly less than 1 kN/MW for a Timberwind NTR at 1000 seconds ISP... (so, if the ISP is 200 seconds for a Thermal Turbojet, the Thrust/MW should be approximately 5 kN/MW based on the mathematical relationships we already know, for instance...)

Regards,

Northstar

P.S. I just wanted to remind you of something. The performances of some of the KSP-Interstellar parts *ARE* going to seem a bit unbalanced/broken with realistic values when you compare them to some of the stock parts. That is NOT because there is any problem with the real values (they are *INHERENTLY* balanced, because that's how it really DOES work). It's because you're basing your *assumptions* on what constitutes a "balanced" part on the ABSURDITY of a planet 1/11th the radius of Earth but with an atmosphere and the same surface-gravity. OF COURSE that's not going to work out to real-life performance seeming balanced: it only takes 4.5 km/s to make orbit in stock KSP and 3.5 km/s with FAR, whereas in real life it takes 9 km/s JUST TO MAKE ORBIT, and even more to get anywhere else in the solar system (as the interplanetary distances in KSP are also scaled-down...)

However KSP-Interstellar already has a number of parts balanced against real life (including the Alcubierre Drive, *FOR WHICH THE MOD WAS FIRST CREATED*). I *strongly* believe Fractal_UK instituted the values he did for some of the fission reactors and such simply because he didn't have access to any reliable data on how the technology had *GREATLY ADVANCED* since the days of NERVA (they are very much in line with NERVA performance). It doesn't make sense to stop using realistic values now- rather, if players want "balanced" gameplay, they should go and also install a version of Real Solar System (personally, I play with the 6.4x scale-up, as it's the best balanced against stock part sizes- which are only 40-50% the diameter of their real-life cousins in most cases...) I don't have any problem with players having an "easier" time of the game with the stock solar system, though. If they want to play with a tiny-scale model solar system using little green men, then that's their prerogative. *LET THEM* have their dramatically easier gameplay than real-life, if that's what they really want... Personally, I prefer something a *little* more realistic.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Northstar1989

[FreeThinker]

Here are some picture of the Thruster resizer using Tweakscale

Notice the trust/isp at Sea level grows to a certain point and than shrinks

-

[FreeThinker]

Alright, You can now download the long awaited KSPI Extended 0.7 from Kerbalstuff

Trusters

• Made ISP/Trust performance of Thermal /Plasma Thruster in atmosphere depend on exitArea and atmospheric pressure
  
• replaced specific size Thermal Thrusters by a single resizable Thermal Thruster with GUI which predics thrust in Vacuum and at Sea level
  
• Significantly Increased Thermal Noozle trust to realistic performance levels
  
• Electric engines power usage is limited by available power (optional)
  

Reactors

• replaced specific size Sensan/Akula reactors and replaced by 2 resizable Particle Reactors (Small and Large) and a single resizable Dusty Plasma Reactor
  
• Significantly decrease weight of Particle Reactors
  

Resource

• Added ability of Atmospheric Scoop to function as Propulsive fluid accumulator which can be achieved by placing a vessel in a circular orbit at the edge of space with access to KSPI plasma engines and enough power.
  
• Improved Compatibility with RealFuels
  
• Added Liquid Nitrogen en (RealFuels) Nitrogen as a resource which can be used for Thermal/Magnetic/Electric Rockets
  
• Added Cryotank which stores Liquid Nitrogen at low temperature, requiring electric power to maintain
  
• Added Integrated Nitrogen Radiator which stores Nitrogen gas and can perform Active cooling with Liquid Nitrogen
  
• Nitrogen can be scooped from the atmosphere with Atmospheric Scoop
  

Techtree

• Added support for other Techtrees
  
• Added support for Community Tech Tree (CTT KSPI Config made by Olympic1)
  

Science

• Improved Science Lab research : Profession & Skill now matter (+/- 50%) , effect of stupidity reduced (+/- 10%)
  

• Improved Science Lab feedback, it will at real time show how much science is already collected
  

Fixes

• Fixes KSPI Legacy issue where Computer Core would only give 1/4 of the research it should when unfocused
  
• Fixes KSPI Legacy issue where Reactors Retrofit(upgrade) button would not function
  
• Fixed KSPI Legacy issue where stupid Kerbals would actually improve research output in the Lab
  
• Fixes KSPI Legacy issue where Athmospheric scoop would not reset flow to 0 when flying out of atmosphere
  
• Fixes KSPI Legacy issue where Double Pivoted Solar Power generators could not be converted to Microwave power
  

Installation Steps

• step 1: remove any existing KSPI installation (GameData\WarpPlugin folder)
  
• step 2: install KSPI 0.90
  
• step 3: extract this patch into Your GameData folder.
  
• step 4: (optional but recommended) Download Community TechTree and activate it with Techmanager (exclusively)
  

ChangeLog: Version 0.7

Released on 2015-02-19

• replaced specific size Thermal Thrusters by a single resizable Thermal Thruster with Static Pressure correction
  
• replaced specific size Sensan reactors and replaced by 2 resizable Particle Reactors (Small and Large) and a single resizable Dusty Plasma Reactor
  
• Increased ThermalThruster Thrust Modifier to 6.3
  
• Fixes the ability of Dusty Plasma Reactor to use Magnetic noozles
  
• Set maximum core Temperature of Particle Reactors to 3000 Celsius
  

Edited February 19, 2015 by FreeThinker

[Absurdist]

Wow. 0.7 indirectly fixed my problems. Good thing I saw the word "resizable" in the features..

I thought TweakScale was optional? It wasn't listed as a dependency on the first page. Oh well.. time to play again.

[Northstar1989]

Here are some picture of the Thruster resizer using Tweakscale

http://i.imgur.com/ivVZXZp.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/TeKsoe1.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/xJ3lSk8.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/fTni3wt.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/RKun7OK.jpg

Notice the trust/isp at Sea level grows to a certain point and than shrinks

-

That's AWESOME Freethinker! I had no idea you were working on that!

I don't use TweakScale, though

Maybe I'll have to give it a try now...

One concern though- I see the Vacuum Thrust decreases with smaller nozzle sizes (like it should) but the Vacuum ISP doesn't yet decrease with smaller nozzle sizes- AND NEEDS TO.

Right now, you're magically reducing your fuel-flow in Vacuum with smaller nozzles when what it SHOULD do is decrease your Vacuum Thrust for the same fuel flow with smaller nozzles (and decrease Vacuum ISP as a result). The inverse also applies- increasing nozzle radius should increase Vacuum Thrust and Vacuum ISP, at the expense of having a higher ExitArea (and thus reduced sea-level performance).

Regards,

Northstar

- - - Updated - - -

Alright, You can now download the long awaited KSPI Extended 0.7 from Kerbalstuff

Trusters

• Made ISP/Trust performance of Thermal /Plasma Thruster in atmosphere depend on exitArea and atmospheric pressure
  
• replaced specific size Thermal Thrusters by a single resizable Thermal Thruster with GUI which predics thrust in Vacuum and at Sea level
  
• Significantly Increased Thermal Noozle trust to realistic performance levels
  
• Electric engines power usage is limited by available power (optional)
  

Reactors

• replaced specific size Sensan/Akula reactors and replaced by 2 resizable Particle Reactors (Small and Large) and a single resizable Dusty Plasma Reactor
  
• Significantly decrease weight of Particle Reactors
  

Resource

• Added ability of Atmospheric Scoop to function as Propulsive fluid accumulator which can be achieved by placing a vessel in a circular orbit at the edge of space with access to KSPI plasma engines and enough power.
  
• Improved Compatibility with RealFuels
  
• Added Liquid Nitrogen en (RealFuels) Nitrogen as a resource which can be used for Thermal/Magnetic/Electric Rockets
  
• Added Cryotank which stores Liquid Nitrogen at low temperature, requiring electric power to maintain
  
• Added Integrated Nitrogen Radiator which stores Nitrogen gas and can perform Active cooling with Liquid Nitrogen
  
• Nitrogen can be scooped from the atmosphere with Atmospheric Scoop
  

Techtree

• Added support for other Techtrees
  
• Added support for Community Tech Tree (CTT KSPI Config made by Olympic1)
  

Science

• Improved Science Lab research : Profession & Skill now matter (+/- 50%) , effect of stupidity reduced (+/- 10%)
  

• Improved Science Lab feedback, it will at real time show how much science is already collected
  

Fixes

• Fixes KSPI Legacy issue where Computer Core would only give 1/4 of the research it should when unfocused
  
• Fixes KSPI Legacy issue where Reactors Retrofit(upgrade) button would not function
  
• Fixed KSPI Legacy issue where stupid Kerbals would actually improve research output in the Lab
  
• Fixes KSPI Legacy issue where Athmospheric scoop would not reset flow to 0 when flying out of atmosphere
  
• Fixes KSPI Legacy issue where Double Pivoted Solar Power generators could not be converted to Microwave power
  

Installation Steps

• step 1: remove any existing KSPI installation (GameData\WarpPlugin folder)
  
• step 2: install KSPI 0.90
  
• step 3: extract this patch into Your GameData folder.
  
• step 4: (optional but recommended) Download Community TechTree and activate it with Techmanager (exclusively)
  

ChangeLog: Version 0.7

Released on 2015-02-19

• replaced specific size Thermal Thrusters by a single resizable Thermal Thruster with Static Pressure correction
  
• replaced specific size Sensan reactors and replaced by 2 resizable Particle Reactors (Small and Large) and a single resizable Dusty Plasma Reactor
  
• Increased ThermalThruster Thrust Modifier to 6.3
  
• Fixes the ability of Dusty Plasma Reactor to use Magnetic noozles
  
• Set maximum core Temperature of Particle Reactors to 3000 Celsius
  

So, does this require a separate TweakScale installation to work? What will happen if I don't have it separately installed?

Does the tweakable-sized reactor get better ThermalPower/kg and per cubic-meter of volume like the earlier reactors did? If not, it needs to have its scaling adjusted so that, for instance, a 2.5 meter reactor will produce MORE than 8 times the ThermalPower of a 1.25 meter reactor (it is radius * radius * height = 2*2*2 = 8 times larger- so 8x the ThermalPower would only be a direct scaling...)

Also, I see no mention of LiquidCO2 as a new resource anywhere in the complete changelog, even though you added it in a while ago, and the KSP-I/RealFuels integration config with the changes I added that comes with KSP-I Extension Config allows players to store it with an RealFuels tank (although we're still all waiting on that universal tank you talked about so players can store LiquidCO2 *without* RealFuels installed...)

Regards,

Northstar

[FreeThinker]

One concern though- I see the Vacuum Thrust decreases with smaller nozzle sizes (like it should) but the Vacuum ISP doesn't decrease with smaller nozzle sizes. Thus, you're magically reducing your fuel-flow in Vacuum with smaller nozzles when what it SHOULD do is decrease your Vacuum Thrust for the same fuel flow with smaller nozzles (and decrease Vacuum ISP as a result). The inverse also applies- increasing nozzle radius should increase Vacuum Thrust and Vacuum ISP, at the expense of having a higher ExitArea (and thus reduced sea-level performance).

Ok, so if the vacuum trust decreases by 20%, vacuum ISP should also decrease by 20%. I will fix it.

- - - Updated - - -

So, does this require a separate TweakScale installation to work? What will happen if I don't have it separately installed?

Yes, you can either use 1.50 or 1.51. The 1.51 also offer free scale which should be ideal for tweaking the thermal nozzle to the optimal size.

- - - Updated - - -

Does the tweakable-sized reactor get better ThermalPower/kg and per cubic-meter of volume like the earlier reactors did? If not, it needs to have its scaling adjusted so that, for instance, a 2.5 meter reactor will produce MORE than 8 times the ThermalPower of a 1.25 meter reactor (it is radius * radius * height = 2*2*2 = 8 times larger- so 8x the ThermalPower would only be a direct scaling...)

Yes and Yes. It currently uses Tweakscale default support for KSPI which scales mass by exponent 3 and Thermal Power by exponent 3.2 Edited February 19, 2015 by FreeThinker

[Northstar1989]

Ok, so if the vacuum trust decreases by 20%, vacuum ISP should also decrease by 20%. I will fix it.

You are correct. I look forward to the fix!

Yes, you can either use 1.50 or 1.51. The 1.51 also offer free scale which should be ideal for tweaking the thermal nozzle to the optimal size.

So... TweakScale is not re-distributable? I assume that if we replaced the reactors with just two sizes, we really should be including a re-distributed copy of it with the KSP-I Extension Config, if that's allowable...

Yes and Yes. It currently uses Tweakscale default support for KSPI which scales mass by exponent 3 and Thermal Power by exponent 3.2

Great! It looks like this is all wrapped up quite nicely!

Next, we just need to get to some of the other issues on that list I posted earlier (which I collated for your convenience and my organization- since it was getting a little hard to keep track of which issues had and had not yet been fixed...) A lot of them require coding expertise beyond my meager abilities (but certainly not beyond yours!), but I'll see what I can't contribute in code and in research whenever possible!

The list stated on THIS post, by the way, and continued on in the next few posts:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/104943-0-90-KSP-Interstellar-port-maintance-thread?p=1744095&viewfull=1#post1744095

Regards,

Northstar

- - - Updated - - -

• Set maximum core Temperature of Particle Reactors to 3000 Celsius
  

Also, set "MAXIMUM" core temperature to 3000 CELSIUS?

I hope you mean set MINIMUM core temperature to 3000 KELVIN!

The particle bed reactors produce ZERO THERMALPOWER at their *MAXIMUM* temperature. The Timberwind reactors produced their full rated thrust at 3000 K- they would have operated even hotter than that when producing sub-optimal thrust.

Also, there is a *BIG* difference between 3000 Celsius and 3000 Kelvin, although I assume (hope) that was just a typo... All temperatures given in KSP-Interstellar are normally in degrees Kelvin (what the "K" on the context menu stands for), not Celsius.

Regards,

Northstar

Edited February 20, 2015 by Northstar1989

[Absurdist]

I'm getting infinity again. Maybe because of the thermal receiver?

Also it seem the old thermal rockets are still in the tech tree (CTT)

Edited February 20, 2015 by Absurdist
grammar correction

[Northstar1989]

I'm getting infinity again. Maybe because of the thermal receiver?

http://i.imgur.com/s4ht13N.png

Yeah, it's because sea-level ISP now varies with Mass Flow Rate- and thus, Exhaust Pressure (like in real life!) There's no way for the game to predict your sea-level ISP until it knows how many MW of ThermalPower you will have available... So it's not a bug, but a "feature".

Maybe it's possible to create some sort of interface where you could input a given # for ThermalPower, and see what your sea-level ISP would be- but it seems a little beyond our scope/capabilities for the moment... (FreeThinker, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, of course!)

Also it seem the old thermal rockets are still in the tech tree (CTT)

http://i.imgur.com/wTBkzTY.png

Are they now? I'm guessing FreeThinker left them in there so as to not break save-compatibility, which isn't a bad idea considering the change is new.

They should probably go in a "Legacy Parts" folder, though, and be HIDDEN from the parts catalog so they can't be added to new rockets when TweakScale is installed- which I think should be re-distributed with the Extension Config... (I haven't had time to update yet today, as the update was only a # of hours ago- but I could be wrong, maybe they're already in a legacy folder!)

Regards,

Northstar

[Northstar1989]

Yes, you can either use 1.50 or 1.51. The 1.51 also offer free scale which should be ideal for tweaking the thermal nozzle to the optimal size.

OK, this is confusing.

Tweakscale (which only goes up to 1.5.0) or Freescale (which doesn't have a numbering system at all)?

Which works? Which is recommended?

This is one reason I've never used TweakScale/FreeScale before- there are all sorts of issues even figuring out what VERSION works...

Regards,

Northstar

[EMPeror]

Northstar: Did you calculate ISP/Thrust figures for Water in a thermal nozzle? I'm curious.

[Absurdist]

@Northstart1989

Yeah, I'm not rushing you guys. Just something to take note of.

Btw, I think it's time for KSPI Extended to have it's own thread. I kinda feel that you guys are not getting enough attention from users because it's inside here.

[JeffreyCor]

Well looks like any consideration of using the new update will require a ton of editing to get rid of the horrible tweakscale requirement. Have to give a lot of consideration to if the fixes/improvements elsewhere will be worth the effort to remove tweakscale.

[Absurdist]

@JeffreyCor

Dependency to TweakScale started at 0.6.3, I believe.

[FreeThinker]

OK, this is confusing.

Tweakscale (which only goes up to 1.5.0) or Freescale (which doesn't have a numbering system at all)?

Which works? Which is recommended?

Originally Freescale was called 1.5.1 before it became seperate mod.

I would recommend freescale since it's alive and offer better tweak scaling

Edited February 20, 2015 by FreeThinker

[FreeThinker]

@JeffreyCor

Dependency to TweakScale started at 0.6.3, I believe.

This is actualy an unintended effect, I was required for 0.7