[1.1.3] Procedural Parts - Parts the way you want 'em - v1.2.5 July 3

[RadarManFromTheMoon]

Hi, found an issue with PP and FAR. FAR isn't able to calculated the cross-sectional area correctly with the PP fuel tanks. Same problem with the PP Structural element. Works fine with the PP nose cones though.

http://imgur.com/a/KeXVS

:/ That was actually fixed. Thanks for the heads up.

[NathanKell]

Glorious Dear Leader: you _are_ using the current versions of PP and FAR, yes? On what version of KSP?

[Glorious Dear Leader]

Yes Farrem pointed out that this was an old bug that had been addressed some time ago.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/20451-1-0-3-Ferram-Aerospace-Research-v0-15-3-1-Garabedian-6-22-15?p=2037342&posted=1#post2037342

KSP 1.04

FAR v0.15.3.1

ProceduralParts 1.1.1

[NathanKell]

Well, I'd wait until PP is actually released for 1.0.4 before reporting 1.0.4 bugs then

[Glorious Dear Leader]

Just letting them know what the current bugs are as it stands in it's current condition.

[JonDahm]

You will have to inherit from ProceduralAbstractShape. And deal with stuff like:

- Create Mk2/Mk3 meshes procedurally (of course)

- that includes normals, tangents and uv mapping for (custom) textures

- adaptors (MK1->MK2, MK1/Mk2->normal PP surface of revolution)

- Part attachment repositioning after shape changes

- balancing (correct mass/cost/resource amount scaling)

- other things I just don't think about right now

Best way to see how the implementation works is to dig through the code.

If you have a good idea how to do it. Please do. You can always open an issue on github, discussing conceptual stuff / send pull requests / ask questions.

I've just been looking through the source code. It looks a whole lot like the mesh generation in ProceduralAbstractSoRShape is easily abstracted so that it doesn't have to care about the actual shape the ProfilePoints make -- if I did that, it'd be pretty easy from there to write code that creates straight Mk2/Mk3 parts, and from there to make other extruded parts (as soon as I put together their 2D profile mesh, of course). Slanted cylindrical parts could be added on fairly easily, too, followed by generic adaptors (which will be harder, especially with slants). Of course, that's just my first impression. We'll see how easy this is once I actually get into it.

Quick question, though. What's the SoR in ProceduralAbstractSoRShape stand for? I want to make sure I don't screw up any code structure you have in place with my additions.

[RadarManFromTheMoon]

Yes Farrem pointed out that this was an old bug that had been addressed some time ago.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/20451-1-0-3-Ferram-Aerospace-Research-v0-15-3-1-Garabedian-6-22-15?p=2037342&posted=1#post2037342

KSP 1.04

FAR v0.15.3.1

ProceduralParts 1.1.1

You are using an old PP version (1.1.1). The bug you described was fixed with version 1.1.2. Please always make sure you have the newest PP version (1.1.3) before you report bugs. I guess you thought that to be the newest release because of the threads title. Sorry for that. Otherbarry will have to change that (or we remove the version tag from the title alltogether)

Well, I'd wait until PP is actually released for 1.0.4 before reporting 1.0.4 bugs then

Thats okay. Like I said, I havent found any incompatibilities with KSP 1.3/1.4 yet. Still testing though, and everyone is invited to help testing.

I've just been looking through the source code. It looks a whole lot like the mesh generation in ProceduralAbstractSoRShape is easily abstracted so that it doesn't have to care about the actual shape the ProfilePoints make -- if I did that, it'd be pretty easy from there to write code that creates straight Mk2/Mk3 parts, and from there to make other extruded parts (as soon as I put together their 2D profile mesh, of course). Slanted cylindrical parts could be added on fairly easily, too, followed by generic adaptors (which will be harder, especially with slants). Of course, that's just my first impression. We'll see how easy this is once I actually get into it.

Quick question, though. What's the SoR in ProceduralAbstractSoRShape stand for? I want to make sure I don't screw up any code structure you have in place with my additions.

SoR stands for surface of revolution. GitHub might be the better suited place to go further into the details. Would be great if you could open an issue there.

[Carraux]

But... but I used the thrust plate to get around the problem!

I'm just gonna insert the Twilight Zone music here and crawl under a table.

Oh sorry, my fault, on my rocket the problem is exactly the opposite: I place a thrust plate directly under the tank and when I load the rocket, there is a huge gap between tank and thrust plate (although KSP thinks, they are tightly connected).

So maybe your bug and mine are cancelling each other?? Er... Hmmm....

[Northstar1989]

Are the textures for the procedural parts currently in DDS format? Would that be workable with this mod, or does the procedural nature of the parts make that unworkable?

If DDS is feasible, and not already done, it should be implemented- to save on memory.

Regards,

Northstar

[mythbusters844]

Are the textures for the procedural parts currently in DDS format? Would that be workable with this mod, or does the procedural nature of the parts make that unworkable?

If DDS is feasible, and not already done, it should be implemented- to save on memory.

Regards,

Northstar

Yup, they're in DDS format.

[Glorious Dear Leader]

You are using an old PP version (1.1.1). The bug you described was fixed with version 1.1.2. Please always make sure you have the newest PP version (1.1.3) before you report bugs. I guess you thought that to be the newest release because of the threads title. Sorry for that. Otherbarry will have to change that (or we remove the version tag from the title alltogether)

Yeah, sorry I mistakenly thought I had the latest version! Thanks for your help.

[Goddess Bhavani]

This mod is the Burger King of mods, since you can have your rocket just the way you want it

Also the procedural SRBs are really great for early game, where stock SRBs just don't give enough control to the shape, power and size of SRBs. Here's Icarus I showing the world that size isn't everything, and that there's such thing as a cute rocket ship

[RadarManFromTheMoon]

You can find the download and changelog here

[edit]

Seems like I forgot to change the minimum KSP version in the .version file. So when KSP AVC warns you about an incompatibility, it lies

Sorry for that, I will upload a fixed release as soon as I can.

Edited June 27, 2015 by RadarManFromTheMoon

[Svm420]

Thank you for the update. I had hope seeing a couple of the changes that the linux issue with this mod and tweakscale would be fixed, but alas it is still present.

[anythingbut]

Procedural Parts error when running with Real Fuels. Missing the Procedural Tanks texture selection GUI element.

Debug Report: [Error]: ItemPrefab for control type 'UI_ChooseOption' not found.

Screen-Cap: http://i.imgur.com/6QW07Yi.jpg

KSP Version: 1.0.4

Mods: Real Fuels v10.4.1 , Procedural Parts v1.1.4

Not sure if this is a issue with Procedural Parts or Real fuels.

[Venusgate]

Things seem to be working for me except the SRB rightclick menu doesnt come up.

Ideas?

[GrafZahl]

Hi,

is there an autopruner-file available to get rid of the parts they are replaced by this mod?

I read that the SETI Balance Mod provides an autopruner file that should do this job, but this Balance Mod is quite old, so I wonder if it's autopruner really still fits to the current version of the prodedural parts mod?

Best regards,

Graf Zahl

[TrooperCooper]

Procedural Parts error when running with Real Fuels. Missing the Procedural Tanks texture selection GUI element.

Debug Report: [Error]: ItemPrefab for control type 'UI_ChooseOption' not found.

Screen-Cap: http://i.imgur.com/6QW07Yi.jpg

KSP Version: 1.0.4

Mods: Real Fuels v10.4.1 , Procedural Parts v1.1.4

Not sure if this is a issue with Procedural Parts or Real fuels.

I have the same problem and I dont use real fuels at the moment. I also cant change the shape of tanks (cylinder etc.).

[Goddess Bhavani]

[Redacted - redownload solved issue]

Edited June 28, 2015 by pandoras kitten

[GrafZahl]

Hi

first of all, thanks for that mod. You are completely right, when you write "Parts the way you want 'em", because this is exactly the way I want to design my rockets.

However I think that some procedural parts are a little bit unbalanced.

For example the Procedural SRB that is available from the very beginning of career mode.

With that I can design a rocket that comes very easily to a deltaV of more than 3700m/s.

With stock parts instead I can just create a rocket with a deltaV of around 2600m/s.

And the most funny thing about that: The SRB rocket is much smaller than the Stock-Rocket...

Maybe this misalignment will get better in the mid-game, but at the beginning of career the procedural parts mod makes everything extremely easy.

Best regards,

GrafZahl

[Goddess Bhavani]

I have the same problem and I dont use real fuels at the moment. I also cant change the shape of tanks (cylinder etc.).

Redownloaded the 1.0.4 compatible update of PP. Having same problem with being unable to select texture, shape and tank contents of parts. KSP32.

http://i.imgur.com/U6u3Qz0.jpg

EDIT:

Issue Resolved by downloading 1.0.4 version of TweakScale!

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/112693-1-0-4-TweakScale-v2-2-1%28Jun-26%29-Drag-cube-scaling

Edited June 28, 2015 by pandoras kitten

[RadarManFromTheMoon]

This is the same as version 1.1.4, but comes with a correct version file.

download

Hi

first of all, thanks for that mod. You are completely right, when you write "Parts the way you want 'em", because this is exactly the way I want to design my rockets.

However I think that some procedural parts are a little bit unbalanced.

For example the Procedural SRB that is available from the very beginning of career mode.

With that I can design a rocket that comes very easily to a deltaV of more than 3700m/s.

With stock parts instead I can just create a rocket with a deltaV of around 2600m/s.

And the most funny thing about that: The SRB rocket is much smaller than the Stock-Rocket...

Maybe this misalignment will get better in the mid-game, but at the beginning of career the procedural parts mod makes everything extremely easy.

Best regards,

GrafZahl

I totally agree. balancing needs an overhaul. Will be done successively now that KSP balancing is in a somewhat finished state.

Regarding the "missing right click options" problems:

please do the following:

1) See what mods you have that come with KSPAPIExtensions.

2) Strip them away from your install one at a time and see which one is causing the issue

3) Go to the mods forum thread and check if you have installed the most recent version. If you have, ask for a release which comes with the newest KSPAPIExtensions

I'm not sure why it is causing so much trouble. Normally KSPAPIExtensions is designed to tolerate diverging versions.

[Goddess Bhavani]

Sorry to be a bother - I was testing a prop plane with the Procedural cone and cylinder tanks when I realized selecting the 'liquid fuel only' option in SPH didn't do anything - the aircraft spawned with full tanks of LF + Oxidizer.

Do you have a fix for this?

[RadarManFromTheMoon]

Sorry to be a bother - I was testing a prop plane with the Procedural cone and cylinder tanks when I realized selecting the 'liquid fuel only' option in SPH didn't do anything - the aircraft spawned with full tanks of LF + Oxidizer.

Do you have a fix for this?

Oh! I see whats happening there. All the tanks now have resource nodes to let them appear in the right editor categories. Looks like the parts take their resources from the parts cfg file and overwrites them with the resources from the craft file. resulting in an oxidizer node where it shouldnt be. I'll release a hotfix. As a workaround you can remove these two nodes from "1TankLiquid.cfg" and ConeLiquid.cfg.

RESOURCE {
	name = LiquidFuel
	amount = xxxx
	maxAmount = xxxx
}
RESOURCE {
	name = Oxidizer
	amount = xxxx
	maxAmount = xxxx
}

make sure to NOT remove the RESOURCE nodes from the TankContentSwitcher.

[edit] same applies to the conic tank

Edited June 28, 2015 by RadarManFromTheMoon

[Goddess Bhavani]

Thanks for the quick reply - removing the two RESOURCE nodes from the indicated file fixed the cylinder tank, but the cone tank still spawned with a small amount of Oxidizer. I'll wait for the hotfix, no worries