[1.3.0] Mobile Frame System [MFS] (v0.3.3) [29.05.2017]

[A-Stax32]

TES-3:

http://blog.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/wp-content/das-fahrbare-sowjetische-kernkraftwerk-tes-3.jpg

What is that? I searched Wikipedia and the closest thing to that that the keyword TES-3 turned up was the TE3, a Soviet diesel locomotive. Where did you find that picture?

[DigitalProeliator]

I couldn't find one either, but I did find this. Its an interesting read so far. The TES-3 (or TNP-3, for Transportable Nuclear Plant) is half way down.

[Mecripp]

There is this mod you could make something close to that http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/113302-WIP-Modular-Rover-Parts-%28RV-X%29

[lo-fi]

Loving the latest stuff! Really nice work.

[riocrokite]

Awesome! Any news on the cab IVA's?

Loving the latest stuff! Really nice work.

cheers,

Currently I have no motivation to work on IVAs (eventually I will) so I'm doing stuff I'm enjoying the most.

Yah, TES-3 was Russian '50 mobile nuclear reactor and consisted of at least 4 vehicles setup in total (reactor, command center, probably another one with cooling engine)

1.5 MW (2MW at the turbine), 350t, produced large amount of radioactivity around:)

After that in '70 there was also a Belarussian trailer design - Pamir 630D, which has smaller power however it was also much lighter. It had also 2+2(4) trailer configuration:

0.6 MW, 65t

Source article

[Hotblack Desiato]

What is that? I searched Wikipedia and the closest thing to that that the keyword TES-3 turned up was the TE3, a Soviet diesel locomotive. Where did you find that picture?

I found that:

https://translate.google.at/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20110310121824%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ippe.obninsk.ru%2Frpr%2F2-2rpr.php

the IPPE is the sovjet/russian institute responsible for creating that mobile reactor.

it even has its own wiki-site, although just in russian.

https://translate.google.at/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F%D0%A2%D0%AD%D0%A1-3

I guess, someone who is fluent in russian could help with the technical details and it's weight. from what I can see, it's like a submarine-reactor mounted on such a mobile frame.

it also had an successor, the Pamir

https://translate.google.at/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F%D0%A2%D0%AD%D0%A1-3

EDIT: apparently I got ninjaed...

[riocrokite]

good job Hotblack those materials are different than mine so it's good

by the way, if anyone speaks Russian or Belarusian maybe he/she could help me find some photos / informations about this development:

"Today, Atomenergoprom, Inc. is working on a 2.4-2.6 megawatt portable reactor to be made commercial by 2013, produced in a single block. it will cost 750 million roubles per block."

[Hotblack Desiato]

yours is good aswell

I wasn't aware that these reactors were in fact multi-part units, consisting of 4 respectively 2 trucks.

regarding this new portable unit, I found this

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle/Power-Reactors/Small-Nuclear-Power-Reactors/

approximately in the middle, there is a section about the MTSPNR.

MTSPNR

A small Russian HTR which was being developed by the N.A. Dollezhal Research and Development Institute of Power Engineering (NIKIET) is the modular transportable small power nuclear reactor (MTSPNR) for heat and electricity supply of remote regions. It is described as a single circuit air-cooled HTR with closed cycle gas turbine. It uses 20% enriched fuel and is designed to run for 25 years without refuelling. A twin unit plant delivers 2 MWe and/or 8 GJ/hr. No recent information is available, but an antecedent is the Pamir, from Belarus:

Since 2010 NIKIET is also involved with Luch Scientific Production Association (SPA Luch) and a Belarus organization, the Joint Institute for Power Engineering and Nuclear Research (Sosny), to design a small transportable nuclear reactor. The new design will be an HTR concept similar to Pamir but about 2.4 to 2.6 MWe.

The project draws on Sosny’s experience in designing the Pamir-630D truck-mounted small air-cooled nuclear reactor, two of which were built in Belarus from 1976 during the Soviet era. The entire plant required several trucks. This was a 600 kWe HTR reactor using 45% enriched fuel and driving a gas turbine with nitrogen tetraoxide (N2O4) through the Brayton cycle. After some operational experience the Pamir project was scrapped in 1986. It had been preceded by the 2 MWe TES-3, mounted on an extended heavy tank chassis. The prototype started up in 1961 and was abandoned in 1969.

EDIT: and this link, which contains a small picture of that unit (or something that looks like a box on a truck).

http://www.uxc.com/smr/uxc_SMRDetail.aspx?key=MTSPNR%20%28GREM%29

EDIT2: and on the uxc-page, they refer to it with its new name GREM

so, I found that:

http://www.nikiet.ru/eng/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26&Itemid=51

nikjet or nikiet is the above mentioned producer of that unit, and they have an english website...

EDIT3: they have a project for spaceflight-reactors aswell

http://www.nikiet.ru/eng/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=27:2011-02-21-06-37-16&catid=3&Itemid=38

Edited April 25, 2015 by Hotblack Desiato

[riocrokite]

Excellent, thx that grem reactor seems to be the one I was looking for :

"It has twin reactors with a total thermal capacity of 4.8-5.2 MWt, producing 2 MWe of electricity, it is a high-temperature reactor with a single circuit. The unit has a closed cycle gas turbine and is air-cooled, eliminating the need for local sources of water, a design life of 25 years and will be factory fabricated and factory fueled, ensuring lifetime core operation."

Interesting - air-cooled so no heavy liquids needed

Edited April 25, 2015 by riocrokite

[Hotblack Desiato]

I could imagine, that with 50t mass, it can be put on top of a falcon heavy, sending it into space. up there, it needs to be loaded into a martian lander. this way, it is powerfull enough to supply a medium sized martian colony.

cooling shouldn't be a problem as the station will need vast amounts of heat.

but that's a bit off topic...

[riocrokite]

I could imagine, that with 50t mass, it can be put on top of a falcon heavy, sending it into space. up there, it needs to be loaded into a martian lander. this way, it is powerfull enough to supply a medium sized martian colony.

cooling shouldn't be a problem as the station will need vast amounts of heat.

but that's a bit off topic...

Yah, I'm gathering RL info to later on balance it around other mods that use nuclear reactors. From this perspective MKS uses now 5.5t (+1.25t fuel) reactors that produce 1.5MW. FTT and I think NF reactors are balanced around that as well. Don't know much about KSPI. Also modular design makes casing much smaller than MKS (even including no control room for Kerbals) so probably will do something around 2-3t and 0.5MW output per nuclear module and then balance LFO/karbonite generators around that figure.

As for KSP Colonization perspective I think that even large colony EC usage including mining/processing and manufacturing are much smaller than 2000 EC/s so there's currently no need for that kind of power. That will of course change with my MPE mod

[kerbiloid]

This is translation of the original article. A pair of photos and several numbers more.

https://translate.google.ru/translate?hl=ru&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.liveinternet.ru%2Fusers%2F3790905%2Fpost226085901%2F

Russian "Atomenergoprom" introduced in v2009 year at the international exhibition "ATOMEXPO Belarus" in Minsk draft block transportable nuclear installations of low power, which developer is NIKIET. Dollezhal.

As the chief designer of the Institute Vladimir Smetannikov, 2.4-2.6 MW power unit capable of operating 25 years without refueling. It is assumed that it will be ready to put on a pad, for launch within two days. It requires maintenance of not more than 10 persons. The cost of one unit is estimated at about 755 million rubles, but the optimal placement - two blocks. Industrial design can be created in 5 years, but for R & D will take another 2.5 billion rubles

The project was demonstrated in Belarus, at the exposition "Atomexpo Belarus 2009"

https://www.google.ru/search?q=%D0%90%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC%D1%8D%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%BE-%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%8C+2009&newwindow=1&rls=org.mozilla:ru:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=FoQ7VZbfGcvmyQPpnICQBA&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAjgK&biw=1920&bih=938

(Nothing specific, just a link)

http://www.web-energo.by/userfiles/Expo/Atom-expo/061.jpg

The developer (googlish "NIKIET. Dollezhal.") is in Russia:: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIKIET

Their webpage: http://www.nikiet.ru/

The plant you mean is called ÓàíÃÅ“ (GREM or so, not googlish "graham" of course)

Of course it's classified and nothing is known exactly.

https://translate.google.ru/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Feffectenergy.eu%2Fnews%2Fall%2Fmini-aes-grem-sotrudnichestvo-prodolzhaetsja.html&edit-text=

https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=ru&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.ru&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://www.rg.ru/2009/07/09/reaktor.html&usg=ALkJrhgxNmDaI4ig8lop6i0Ij59fY4PFWQ

The first video (link is also in the article):

Narrator is V. Smetannikov, the chief constructor of the NIKIET, place is Moscow Polytechnical Museum.

"ßÃÂíá" = "PAES" = "portable atomic energy station"

Briefly:

01:08-02:15

"80% of Russian treasures are at Far North, 60% of that Far North, fuel delivering is expensive;

building a permanent energy plant on the permanent frozen ground makes a permanent bog under it;

so portable plants would be great.

If use the plant, then energy price decreases from 75 to 3 roubles/kW, pay-off period is very little."

02:15-02:35. How to deliver PAES?

Make a solid rink of ice and wooden planking over the permafrost, then let PAES go over it.

02:35-02:45. History of the problem

In 50s-80s the were built three PAES projects but they were expensive and bulky.

02:45

80s PAES Pamir.

02:55 Modern project. How it works.

(As I can understand, Narrator describes the modern project, illustrating his words with an old TES-3 plant exhibit item. I.e. nice rovers which he demonstrates by his hands are NOT the modern project, but a similar one from the past. He just describes a difference between this one and the future one.)

"It will be on wheels, not on tracks. Plant size are decreased. All over the energy-producing plant itself (reactor + gas turbines) is placed in one module, not two as here."

03:45

"Here will be used technologies originally designed for a Space needs. Lesser active zone; higher temperature; more reliable (nuclear?) fuel - which can work at a temperature impossible for pressurized water reactors; "

04:14

"Its design is beautiful and fine"

04:29 When it will be ready?

"It will be ready not earlier than in 5-6 years." (video is 2009)

04:58

Energy price is 25 times less with it. One such PAES can provide energy for 40 000 persons. Will continuously work for 25 years.

------

Just on the subject

Another NIKIET current project of the similar theme (TEM)

https://translate.google.ru/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fkosmolenta.com%2Findex.php%2Fnew-tech%2Fnuclear-proplusion-module&edit-text=

https://translate.google.ru/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fmykosmos.ru%2Ftransportno-energeticheskij-modul%2F&edit-text=

Just several more articles:

https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=ru&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.ru&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://www.rg.ru/2009/07/16/atom.html&usg=ALkJrhgnAihDZ82bN5vLnEQioNVNXP4fgw

https://translate.google.ru/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fmasterok.livejournal.com%2F443215.html&edit-text=

https://translate.google.ru/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=ru&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvpk-news.ru%2Farticles%2F12650&edit-text=

Google search string is "ÿõрõôòøöýыõ ðтþüýыõ ÑÂûõúтрþÑÂтðýцøø" ("portable nuclear plants"):

Pictures:

https://www.google.ru/search?q=%D0%9F%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B6%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5+%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5+%D1%8D%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B8&newwindow=1&client=firefox-a&hs=D0L&rls=org.mozilla:ru:official&channel=rcs&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=xoo7VYjJDoyrsQG_2IG4BA&ved=0CCkQsAQ&biw=1920&bih=938

Videos (including the one from the article):

https://www.google.ru/search?q=%D0%9F%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B6%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5+%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5+%D1%8D%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B8&newwindow=1&client=firefox-a&hs=D0L&rls=org.mozilla:ru:official&channel=rcs&source=lnms&tbm=vid&sa=X&ei=xoo7VYjJDoyrsQG_2IG4BA&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAg&biw=1920&bih=938

Edited April 25, 2015 by kerbiloid

[riocrokite]

that's excellent! thanks for the translation and research kerbiloid:)

[kelvindeschutter]

riocrokite there just that one part i miss and thats a transition part between normal and xl here is a pic so you can see it

[riocrokite]

riocrokite there just that one part i miss and thats a transition part between normal and xl here is a pic so you can see it

Yah, I probably won't do FH-FHX adapters soon for a couple of reasons:

- I don't know whether FHX width is good, I'll know it when I finish mining/processing extension mod and model all the machinery

- Short, light adapters have really weak joints so whole vehicle would become excessively wobbly;

- real life machinery frames are rather boxy than sleek for couple of reasons, no Cx needs, machinery dimensions, extendability and modularity so from RL perspective it doesn't look bad

In short I'll probably do more versions of FHX with skewed lines but not soon:) Same applies to FHN-FH adapters

edit: I think I might have an elegant solution, will try to add it to the next release

Edited April 27, 2015 by riocrokite

[riocrokite]

as for 1.0 compatibility I'll have to review all attachment nodes since with 1.0 version nodes are one-directional (instead of 2-directional as with 0.9). Other than that other stuff should work.

[LORDPrometheus]

as for 1.0 compatibility I'll have to review all attachment nodes since with 1.0 version nodes are one-directional (instead of 2-directional as with 0.9). Other than that other stuff should work.

Now why did they make that change? Seriously anyone know?

[forsaken1111]

Now why did they make that change? Seriously anyone know?

Probably to keep parts from snapping to nodes 'inside' other parts and only allow attachment to the 'outside'.

[ZodiusInfuser]

Now why did they make that change? Seriously anyone know?

I think this was always intended behaviour but it never worked right. For instance now you're able to attach the HubMAX via its side attachment node which you could never do before.

[riocrokite]

I think this was always intended behaviour but it never worked right. For instance now you're able to attach the HubMAX via its side attachment node which you could never do before.

holy crap, yes, so hubs and parts could be attached from any side, not just one axis nodes. That's very nice, it will reduce MFS part clutter in editor:)

[LORDPrometheus]

holy crap, yes, so hubs and parts could be attached from any side, not just one axis nodes. That's very nice, it will reduce MFS part clutter in editor:)

I guess confusion led to revelation here

[riocrokite]

new adapter + free moving IR wheel:

[Mecripp]

Are them docked like that ? What did you use ?

[Helix935]

Are them docked like that ? What did you use ?

he used the free moving IR part on most likely new attachment points

[riocrokite]

modified a bit FVE-hub to be extendable so you can perform side loading (as opposed to front/back one) of modules

mockup of module loading operation:

Javascript is disabled. View full album