<Qboid>
awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
aradapilot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aradapilot has joined #RO
ProjectThoth has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 207 seconds]
QuantizedRaptor is now known as UmbralRaptor
awang has joined #RO
Raidernick has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Raidernick has joined #RO
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 207 seconds]
aradapilot has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
aradapilot has joined #RO
awang has joined #RO
aradapilot has quit [Quit: Leaving...]
blowfish has joined #RO
ProjectThoth has joined #RO
<awang>
ferram4: Why do the FAR windows seem to appear/disappear semi-randomly in flight?
<awang>
Sometimes during a launch they'll be up, then vanish without me touching anything
<awang>
They also seem to appear/disappear upon staging a lot of the time
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
<BadRocketsCo>
Howdy
<awang>
\o
<BadRocketsCo>
I wondered, are radiators actualy of any use these days?
<BadRocketsCo>
As if in, say I do a Mars mission with a cryogenic stage, will the radiators be good enough to slow boil off enough?
<awang>
That's not a question I can answer, unfortunately
<awang>
Probably partially depends on whether "cryogenic" means hydrogen or oxygen, at least
<BadRocketsCo>
Hydrogen, ye
Shoe17 has joined #RO
<Starwaster>
be aware that radiators are useless in analytic mode (time warp greater than 100x)
<Starwaster>
stock radiators anyway
<BadRocketsCo>
Oh, dang
<BadRocketsCo>
I guess I'll have to attack the cfg files then
<Starwaster>
heat pump mod is somewhat better with analytic but the way the two mods interact during analytic needs reworking
<BadRocketsCo>
Oh, I see
<BadRocketsCo>
So they're incompatible right now?
<Starwaster>
analytic mode is very temperature based and responds to flux removal differently. It calculates temperature for the entire vessel instead of on a part by part basis
<Starwaster>
RF requires special handling during analytic
<Starwaster>
I've made several stabs at it in the past but didn't fully understand the scope of the problem until relatively recently so I have to go back and redo the whole thing
ProjectThoth has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<taniwha>
Starwaster: did you see my forum message? (PP thread)
<Starwaster>
I replied to your message in your EL thread
<taniwha>
ah, ok, I'll take a look
<taniwha>
cool :)
Senshi has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<Starwaster>
did 1.3.1 change supersonic convection or radiation? Or heat shield ablation calculations?
egg|zzz|egg has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<taniwha>
no idea
ProjectThoth has joined #RO
schnobs has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
blowfish has quit [Quit: Leaving]
Starwaster has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Starwaster has joined #RO
ProjectThoth_ has joined #RO
TM1978m_ has joined #RO
ferram4_ has joined #RO
ProjectThoth has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
TM1978m has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
ferram4 has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
ProjectThoth_ is now known as ProjectThoth
ProjectThoth has quit [Quit: +++out of cheese error+++]
TM1978m_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Shoe17 has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
egg has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has quit [Quit: Bye]
Shoe17 has joined #RO
ferram4_ has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
egg is now known as egg|train|egg
Starwaster has quit [Quit: Leaving]
ferram4_ has joined #RO
<awang>
lamont: Does PEG automatically perform doglegs for you?
<awang>
I clicked "launch into plane of target", and that set orbit inclination to -28.608
<awang>
But during my actual launch inclination rose to over 30 degrees, so the upper stage is burning partially normal to bring the inclination back down
<awang>
Is that expected?
<awang>
Actual inclination ended up being 23.something degrees
<awang>
I'm slightly confused
<taniwha>
awang: about Debug.Log: make sure LOG_INSTANT_FLUSH in settings.cfg is true
<taniwha>
that way, messages get flushed out to the log file right away
<taniwha>
(if it already is true, then the problem is something else)
<awang>
taniwha: It's not set, but I'm inclined to think that's not the issue
<awang>
Since the messages aren't showing up at all
<awang>
And other Debug.Log messages from other mods are showing up
<awang>
And they should show up after the missing messages do
<taniwha>
still, worth setting
<taniwha>
but ok, then the code is not being executed
<taniwha>
if there's an exception nearby, then that might be what's blocking the log
<taniwha>
(ie, exception happening before (or during!) the log)
<awang>
I'll try setting it next time I start KSP
<awang>
I don't think there's an exception?
<awang>
I'm just logging a string
<awang>
And all the surrounding code executes just fine
<taniwha>
you'd know, because there'd be a message to such in the log
<taniwha>
that implies execution is not getting to your debug line for one reason or another
<awang>
It's definitely getting there
<awang>
Just passing around it
<awang>
Or so it seems
<taniwha>
not blocked by an if statement?
<awang>
Nope
<taniwha>
since I've not seen the code, I'm pulling at straws (from personal experience, mind you)
<taniwha>
also, not in the wrong function? (overloaded functions with similar code, same name, etc)
<awang>
I gave up and used some kind of custom logging calls
<Qboid>
[#21] title: Disable TestFlight during simulations | This isn't done yet; I got something working, but I'm not sure how to make it work when TF isn't actually around. What is the proper way of doing such a thing?... | https://github.com/linuxgurugamer/KRASH/issues/21
<awang>
^That's what I had been working on
<awang>
Using Debug.Log, no output
<awang>
Log.Info, get output
<awang>
Go to declaration using Visual Studio on "Debug" leads me to the UnityEngine Debug class, so I think it's calling the right function, in theory?
<awang>
lamont: PEG does truly bizarre things when asked to launch to 0 inclination from the Cape
<awang>
It's pointing literally straight down right now
<taniwha>
awang: I guess that despite what VS says, Debug.Log is not what it should be
<taniwha>
since it seems to be not well known, try Debug.LogFormat
<taniwha>
(it may not have been messed with)
<taniwha>
(Debug.LogFormat is essentially a shortcut for Debug.Log(String.Format(...)))
<taniwha>
awang: yeah, looks like despite what VS tells you, Debug.Log is not what you expect
<taniwha>
Another thing to try is UnityEngine.Debug.Log (that's what KRASH's Log uses)
<taniwha>
(ie, be very explicit about what you call)
<taniwha>
ah, yeah, "public static class Log"
<taniwha>
while there's no Debug in there, the declaration might be confusing thing
<taniwha>
(I don't know C# well enough to say for certain)
<taniwha>
but there has to be a reason KRASH needed to specify UnityEngine
<taniwha>
using System.Diagnostics; <- maybe?
<awang>
idk, I'll give it a shot
<awang>
LogFormat first
<awang>
Might be a bit though
<awang>
Looks like KRASH needed to specify UnityEngine in one place but not the other because KRASH.cs had "using UnityEngine" while Log.cs did not
<awang>
So the missing UnityEngine should be fine, I think?
<soundnfury>
launches on top of a parallel-staged 2xLR79 + 1xLR105. The plane itself has an Agena
<soundnfury>
can get a man in orbit & back using techs all <= 25 (so you don't need to upgrade the R&D centre ;)
<awang>
egg|train|egg: How do I get line numbers in a KSP exception?
<BadRocketsCo>
soundnfury: oooh, nice!
<BadRocketsCo>
I wonder if it's even possible to pull an proper SSTO in RO
<soundnfury>
SSTO is easy. It's getting it _back_ that's hard ;)
<BadRocketsCo>
I once saw a youtuber create one but IIRC it didn't get more than an Apollo capsule into orbit
<BadRocketsCo>
(It wasn't an plane but a rocket)
<awang>
Er
<awang>
egg|train|egg: Didn't mean to ask you specifically
<awang>
Think I was going to tag you for something in #principia and forgot when switching
<BadRocketsCo>
Any of you watch Tyler Raiz? He does some pretty cool stuff in RO
Starwaster has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has quit [Quit: Bye]
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
schnobs has joined #RO
qwertyy__ has joined #RO
qwertyy_ has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
<awang>
ferram4_: Is aerothermal flux supposed to be 1/2 * rho * v^3, or 1/2 * sqrt(rho) * v^3?
<ferram4_>
IIRC, it is the sqrt version
<awang>
Oh
<awang>
I read an Arianespace PDF that said they calculated it as 1/2 * rho * v^3
Senshi has joined #RO
<awang>
What is that calculating then?
<ferram4_>
They're calculating raw heat flux, while the aerothermal flux being used is an approximation of the peak heating for a rounded surface.
<ferram4_>
Because raw heat flux is q_w = 1/2 * rho * v^3 * C_H, where C_H is Stanton Number and in a rounded surface's peak heating at the stagnation point it's proportional to 1/sqrt(rho)
<awang>
Uh
<awang>
Seems they're calculating for a plane surface, interestingly
<awang>
"This flux is calculated as a free molecular flow acting on a plane surface perpendicular to the velocity direction (½ ρ V3
<awang>
)
<awang>
Wow, copy/paste screwed that up
<awang>
So they're missing the Stanton number?
Hypergolic_Skunk has joined #RO
<awang>
Unless it's 1 for a plane?
VanDisaster has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
VanDisaster has joined #RO
<awang>
Anyone around familiar with the RP-0 dev codebase?
<awang>
I have a few questions
<ferram4_>
awang, Sorry, was distracted. Oh, if they're doing free molecular flow that's different.
<ferram4_>
That means that they're in fucking space. Different equations because continuum mechanics are no longer valid.
ferram4_ is now known as ferram4
<soundnfury>
yeah, continuum is only valid in _regular_ space https://xkcd.com/90/ ;)
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
schnobs has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<soundnfury>
awang: ok, let's hope we don't have to revert this one ;)
<awang>
ferram4: Oh, I wasn't aware of that
<awang>
So 1/2 * rho * v^3 should be right for free molecular flow aerothermal heating?
<awang>
Hmmm
<awang>
This might make adding heating to MJ tricker than I thought
<awang>
Is there a good rule of thumb as to when continuum mechanics are valid?
<awang>
So I know when to use a particular equation?
<ferram4>
Generally, somewhere far above 1 is free molecular flow, far below 1 is continuum mechanics, and in between the behavior changes smoothly.
<awang>
soundnfury: I've actually played KSP with the sig fig change, so we should be good there :P
<ferram4>
awang, FWIW, this will only matter in the very upper atmosphere, unless you're planning on calculating some sort of extended atmosphere to handle only this in timewarp.
<awang>
ferram4: Well, the context for this is I'm trying to teach MJ to only jettison fairings when heating falls below a certain threshold
<awang>
So I guess it's mostly in the upper atmosphere
<ferram4>
Oh.
<ferram4>
Then in that case, don't worry about Knudsen number.
<ferram4>
You only need a close-enough baseline, and in the realm where it will really matter the sqrt() won't be useful.
<awang>
I also figured it might be nice to have MJ display current heating, so the player can see if jettisoning the fairings at the current moment would be ok
<awang>
And I'd like to give accurate values for the entire launch
<awang>
Unless it doesn't matter
<ferram4>
It'll be difficult, I'm not exactly sure what RealHeat / stock end up using for that.
<awang>
Oh
<awang>
Hmmm
<awang>
Maybe I can just take the easy way out and specify that it's "free molecular aerothermal heating"
<awang>
ferram4: Just making sure I understand this right
<awang>
I'm writing a commit message for adding this to MJ, and I want to explain why I'm calling the thing "free molecular aerothermal flux" instead of just "aerothermal flux"
<ferram4>
I dunno why not just pull it from the vessel itself.
<ferram4>
It has to be available somewhere.
<awang>
The explanation I have is "Free molecular aerothermal flux is specified instead of aerothermal flux in general because the equation used in this commit isn't valid lower in the atmosphere, where continuum mechanics can be assumed"
<awang>
I am, more or less?
<awang>
I think?
<ferram4>
You're right, with the additional thing that the fairings aren't going to be dropped below the point where free molecular flow is happening.
<ferram4>
But as a number it's kinda useless.
<awang>
Really, useless?
<awang>
Seems like an odd metric to use to determine when to drop fairings
<awang>
Now that I think about it.... Just how many things in RO are vulnerable to heat?
<xShadowx>
lamont: well......i might be the only person with a computer to handle it, but i vote yes ;p
Daz has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Daz has joined #RO
TM1978m has joined #RO
Hypergolic_Skunk has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<ferram4>
awang, Kinda late to respond, but I meant that the number itself was kind of useless to display to users. As a metric for dropping fairings it's good enough. I mean, satellites are pretty heat sensitive.
Senshi has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
ferram4 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]