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

[Rafael acevedo]

NathanKell et all I am currently testing a tank that provides usi-ls compatibility, would like to know if you are interested in including it on the mod. 

Edited July 13, 2016 by Rafael acevedo

[Rafael acevedo]

Here are screenshots of the tank, I was able to closely approximate Roverdudes USI-LS  tanks capacities.  The differences can be easily explained to different materials. The tank has 4 different options, life support (supplies, mulch, fertilizer), fertilizer, mulch, and supplies. On the screenshots you can compare the procedural tanks with the equivalent usi-ls tank.  Hope you all like this. Let me know if you are interested in the cfg file for your next release.

3.75 life support tank

2.5 life support tank

1.25 life support tank

fertilizer tank

4 different tank options

 

 

Edited July 14, 2016 by Rafael acevedo

[Plexi]

Hi,

I have a question regarding the procedural SRBs: does the gimbal only works for pitch?

I created an Aris I like rocket with an SRB as first stage and the gimbal for yaw seems not to work in any configuration (tried every tech level up to 7). Only the gimbal for pitch is working. But without control over 2 axis its nearly impossible to get a stable ascent.

Is this working as intended or a bug?

Edited July 18, 2016 by Plexi

[undercoveryankee]

18 hours ago, Plexi said:

Hi,

I have a question regarding the procedural SRBs: does the gimbal only works for pitch?

I created an Aris I like rocket with an SRB as first stage and the gimbal for yaw seems not to work in any configuration (tried every tech level up to 7). Only the gimbal for pitch is working. But without control over 2 axis its nearly impossible to get a stable ascent.

Is this working as intended or a bug?

I've seen a similar report (gimbal not responding in all axes after upgrading to KSP 1.1) for one of the engines in Porkjet's Atomic Age. Apparently something about gimbal changed on Squad's side during the port to Unity 5, and the game has gotten more strict about the orientation of the transform that ModuleGimbal acts on.

[Plexi]

On 19.7.2016 at 5:59 PM, undercoveryankee said:

I've seen a similar report (gimbal not responding in all axes after upgrading to KSP 1.1) for one of the engines in Porkjet's Atomic Age. Apparently something about gimbal changed on Squad's side during the port to Unity 5, and the game has gotten more strict about the orientation of the transform that ModuleGimbal acts on.

Any chance this is getting fixed in the next patch?

[raxo2222]

I'm getting 3 module manager errors related to procedural ore tank when SMURFF is installed.

For now I remove this ore tank, every time new version comes, so game can quickly load configs from cache

[baldamundo]

How does one add preset diameters? (i.e. make it so as you can jump straight to 1.875m or 0.9375 the same way you can jump between 0.625, 1.25 and 2.5)

[ebigunso]

For some unknown cause, infrequently my procedural part tanks become bugged and un-moveable and un-resizable in the VAB.

When this bug occurs, I am unable to pick up the procedural part directly by left clicking on the part, and when I do so my KER build helper stops showing numbers for whatever stages are below that part I clicked on. The right click menu for the part shows, but changing values in it does not do anything to the part as it should. All procedural fuel tanks on the bugged craft produces the same effect.

I can still click and move parts that are not the tanks in question, so if I reattach the entire affected parts by taking a part that is above it, the KER readouts come back. Still when I click again on any procedural tank on the craft again the issue comes back.

Also saving the said craft and trying to load it causes the game to freeze and never come back from it. I have waited pretty long for it to load up but it didn't so I'm quite sure it's not just taking it's time.

 

This has happened about 3 times to me now with my RO play through. I can't post up pictures of the issue now because I am unable to load the said craft. I will try to get one when it happens again.

Here is my output.log: http://www.mediafire.com/download/bb35ofgzzf4b8tf/output_log.txt

It seems below line 338974 is an endless repeat of "PartChildAttached".

My situation of this log is, I was building a craft when I encountered the bug, I saved and tried to reload the craft and the game froze. Then I rebooted the game and tried to load the craft again, and the game froze, so I terminated KSP.

Edited August 6, 2016 by ebigunso

[baldamundo]

Umm...is the procedural heatshield costing almost two hundred thousand dollars at 2.5m scale for anyone else?

[Starwaster]

7 hours ago, baldamundo said:

Umm...is the procedural heatshield costing almost two hundred thousand dollars at 2.5m scale for anyone else?

Its cost is exactly 600 Funds for me

[NathanKell]

@baldamundo I believe the diameters are set in cfg, I think you just set the step size, it's not a list.

 

Also: SIR ARNOLD!

[Kertherina]

On 06/08/2016 at 9:04 AM, ebigunso said:

For some unknown cause, infrequently my procedural part tanks become bugged and un-moveable and un-resizable in the VAB.

I occasionally have the same problem and also KSP crashing when trying to load crafts, although i wasn't connecting them before. Also using RO and RP-0.

[baldamundo]

On 06/08/2016 at 5:35 PM, Starwaster said:

Its cost is exactly 600 Funds for me

Huh. The 1.25m version is costing $11,642 (modified by a few percent by strategies), and the 2.5m version is costing $185,717. Could be SETI Rebalance is changing the price so will ask there as well, but I can't think what else could be doing it. The ablator itself only seems to take up a tiny proportion of the total price.

 

19 hours ago, NathanKell said:

@baldamundo I believe the diameters are set in cfg, I think you just set the step size, it's not a list.

 

Also: SIR ARNOLD!

Sound chap!

Do you have any idea which parameter it is though? I'm struggling to find anything in the cfgs that looks like it might be step size. All the references I can find to "1.25" (which seems to be the step size) are for "diameter" in the shape modules, but it's the same format as e.g.  "topDiameter" which has a value of 0.625 - i.e. it seems to be the default size, not the step size (which is also 1.25).

Edited August 7, 2016 by baldamundo

[NathanKell]

@baldamundo Here is where Proc Parts itself changes its snap diameters when RO is installed. Do something similar yourself. https://github.com/Swamp-Ig/ProceduralParts/blob/master/ModuleManager/RealismOverhaul_1mSnaps.cfg

[baldamundo]

1 hour ago, NathanKell said:

@baldamundo Here is where Proc Parts itself changes its snap diameters when RO is installed. Do something similar yourself. https://github.com/Swamp-Ig/ProceduralParts/blob/master/ModuleManager/RealismOverhaul_1mSnaps.cfg

Thanks!

[Commissar]

can we get procedural cryo tanks... so i can reasonably use LH2 on my rockets?

i suspect that it might be a simple config switch... but i don't know the details

Edited August 10, 2016 by Commissar

[Starwaster]

44 minutes ago, Commissar said:

can we get procedural cryo tanks... so i can reasonably use LH2 on my rockets?

i suspect that it might be a simple config switch... but i don't know the details

It's as simple as changing the type on the tank. Just right click the tank (in the VAB or SPH) and there is an option to change its type.

Edited August 10, 2016 by Starwaster

[ZooNamedGames]

Any chance we could get procedural mk2/mk3 parts? As far as fuel tanks goes, that feels like it's the only aspect missing from this mod.

Keep up the good work.

[Commissar]

7 hours ago, Starwaster said:

It's as simple as changing the type on the tank. Just right click the tank (in the VAB or SPH) and there is an option to change its type.

does that work with modular fuel tanks? i mean, sure, iu can get them to carry LH2, but it boils off...

yeah, in-game, the tank type selector doesn't work at all. i think that the boil-off is due to cryo engines mod...

Edited August 10, 2016 by Commissar

[Starwaster]

52 minutes ago, Commissar said:

does that work with modular fuel tanks? i mean, sure, iu can get them to carry LH2, but it boils off...

yeah, in-game, the tank type selector doesn't work at all. i think that the boil-off is due to cryo engines mod...

Sorry, I thought you were talking about Real Fuels. What I said only applies if you have RF installed alongside of PF. Cryo Engines has its own boiloff code and LH2 resource. I have no idea how it interacts with RF.

[Commissar]

Just now, Starwaster said:

Sorry, I thought you were talking about Real Fuels. What I said only applies if you have RF installed alongside of PF. Cryo Engines has its own boiloff code and LH2 resource. I have no idea how it interacts with RF.

ah. it uses Simpleboiloff... seems silly to have a separate resource. i'll be installing RF as soon as i can get ckan to work,

[Starwaster]

1 hour ago, Commissar said:

ah. it uses Simpleboiloff... seems silly to have a separate resource. i'll be installing RF as soon as i can get ckan to work,

Basically it's a flat boiloff rate independent of actual heat flux. With a flat electric charge rate to counter it. 

RF has boiloff based on actual incoming heat flux with rate being affected by the insulation on eac tank type.   Final penetrating heat flux is then applied to the resource's heat of vaporization. Boiled off resource carries heat away with it. 

Next update, the boiloff byproduct can be stored as a gas if you have a tank to receive it. 

[Commissar]

Just now, Starwaster said:

Basically it's a flat boiloff rate independent of actual heat flux. With a flat electric charge rate to counter it. 

RF has boiloff based on actual incoming heat flux with rate being affected by the insulation on eac tank type.   Final penetrating heat flux is then applied to the resource's heat of vaporization. Boiled off resource carries heat away with it. 

Next update, the boiloff byproduct can be stored as a gas if you have a tank to receive it. 

yeah, i just switched to RF... too bad there isn't a good way to convert the pre-RF procedural liquid tanks to the RF... lost about 12 crafts... but hey, i needed to standardize my launchers anyhow. also a pretty awesome fuel setup... makes it pretty easy, although i wasn't expecting the limited starts, but i should be able to work with it.

Edited August 10, 2016 by Commissar

[Starwaster]

3 hours ago, Commissar said:

yeah, i just switched to RF... too bad there isn't a good way to convert the pre-RF procedural liquid tanks to the RF... lost about 12 crafts... but hey, i needed to standardize my launchers anyhow. also a pretty awesome fuel setup... makes it pretty easy, although i wasn't expecting the limited starts, but i should be able to work with it.

You CAN turn off the limited ignition system but...  it provides some added challenge. With every burn it becomes important to make sure you get it right and also to make sure that it's what you wanted before you start the burn too.

Some engines allow for alot more burns than others, like OMS engines. Nuclear engine allow effectively unlimited starts requiring only that you be able to pump your propellant into the engine. Ion engines I think are also unaffected

[Commissar]

1 hour ago, Starwaster said:

You CAN turn off the limited ignition system but...  it provides some added challenge. With every burn it becomes important to make sure you get it right and also to make sure that it's what you wanted before you start the burn too.

Some engines allow for alot more burns than others, like OMS engines. Nuclear engine allow effectively unlimited starts requiring only that you be able to pump your propellant into the engine. Ion engines I think are also unaffected

yep. i just wasn't expecting it. the thuds should be raised, as they would be, IMO, OMS engines... (at least,t hat's what i used them for). otherwise, i'll probably change a few of the upper stages for me, but most look A-OK IMO.