@ArcturusAerospace Ty! I'm surprised that I managed to finish it in a month too. I suppose being stuck inside makes it a little easier to find the time to crank out a build.
@ArcturusAerospace It took me about a month to finish the build. That would be wild if I did take 3 years lol. The old timestamp is because I recycled an old forum post of mine. I don't like to make unnecessary forum posts.
Fun challenge! Opting to grade each of my entry's subsystems indicates that this was a well-run challenge that you put a lot of effort into. Well, I already knew that you were gonna host a good challenge regardless of that, but I really, really appreciate that you took a good look at the documentation.
.
Once again, good challenge. I had a lot of fun with my entry, and I learned a lot too! It was fun to make those little code diagrams - I hope they were useful to add.
Sorry... I do not know what is wrong but... The only conclusion is that i have cancer!
... This seems like clickbait designed to get you some attention. Given your history and behavior, I would say that this explanation is likely. It is also very common for doctors to determine what kind of cancer it is upon diagnosis. Very tasteless, considering how cancer affects families, friendships, etc. of many, many people.
.
If I am wrong then I’m sorry. Get well soon.
Eh, points don’t matter to me. Individual build performance does. I could pump out decent builds at 3 times my normal upload rate, but I’d rather make something excellent that I’m really proud of.
.
But taking a break from Uber-high quality is refreshing once in a while. The stakes aren’t too high then. I might do that to put some concepts out there.
A standard 4-component vapor-compression cycle using R-134a is shown in the figure to the right. The cycle is used as a refrigeration cycle to cool a refrigerator at 5 °C with a cooling capacity of 200 W, with a heat transfer to a kitchen at 20 °C. Assume that the pressure drops in the evaporator and condenser are negligible, and that the compressor and expansion valve are adiabatic. Take the boundary temperature for heat transfer into the evaporator to be 5 °C, and the boundary temperature for heat transfer out of the condenser to be 20 oC. Assume the compressor suction state is P1 = 2.4 bar and saturated vapor, the compressor discharge pressure is P2 = 7.0 bar, the compressor isentropic efficiency is 70%, and the condenser outlet state is saturated liquid. Determine:
@ThomasRoderick Feels good to hear that! I can be a harsh self-critic at times, but it helps me improve. If I remember right, I was pumping out builds daily (or something close to that) before this forum post. Spacing things out by a week or so let me really focus on the concept and functionality of the build. Orbidyn-L, for example, would be impossible to design in a day.
.
I also had too much free time back then lol. But hey, I got a lot of internet points out of it.
$0.86 will get you 26 ounces of table salt. A grain of salt is about 0.0000585 grams or 0.000002064 ounces. That's somewhere around 12,596,900 grains of salt. If you really wanted to splurge, you could spend an extra $0.14 to get another 1,900,000 grains to take you up to an exhilarating 14,500,000 grains of salt. Just imagine how much fun you could have with almost 15 million grains of salt. You could even pour some into a water bottle and drink it to pretend you're lost at sea and can only drink salt water. The possibilities are as endless as the number of grains of salt you have.
Ah. In that case, you should only have one gyroscope, at the CoM of the aircraft. Adjust the location of your engines to balance your CoT with your CoM, if you haven’t already done that. You will need to tweak with your gyroscope’s speed and stability. Let’s say, a stability of 2 with a much higher speed (start with 10).
@JustDatGuy Two users can agree to always add each other as collaborators to effectively double their points from each upload. There would be plenty other ways to abuse the system, too. Given the questionable habits that players already have to maximize their points, I have no doubt that the system would be heavily abused regardless of how it would work.
@Makerofplanes It is. I do not believe, though, that this attention is undeserved. The flight system, alone, took me about 10 hours to complete. This build was a month-long project that is, by my standards, incredibly intricate. Feel free to take a look at the complete technical documentation to see what I’m talking about.
@CookieCrumz Ty! I try my best to avoid using too many parts. This build has a high part count compared to my other builds, but it is also quite complex. I think it’s flight systems take a total of at least 30 parts.
Sounds good. Use this funky trees input for your activationGroup in overload:
. Activate7 * floor(smooth(clamp01(Activate7), Activate7 ? 1 / 7.5 : pow(10,10) ))
.
While I haven't worked with parachutes in a while, but this should work. Let me know if it doesn't work.
@Flightsonic Definitely. The conditional statement, in the function that I call the bidirectional delay, really just changes how fast the smooth function rises or falls. In most applications, it is best to have the function fall really fast. However, the function can be generalized to have any rise or fall rate. Just replace the big number (pow(10,10)) with another rate.
.
For things like landing gear doors, using a different rise and fall rate can be pretty useful. I think I used similar logic on my weapons bay doors on Orbidyn-L. Don’t remember entirely though.
@Flightsonic No problem. I like talking about funky trees. That code should work, too, for a basic delay function. If you will be using this delay more than once, then you will need this modification:
.
The smooth function needs to return to its default state instantly when Activate1 is false. To do this, add a conditional statement in the delay part of the code.
.
While the technical documentation that I mentioned is really dense, it does shed some light on why the conditional statement is nice to have. Feel free to check it out. The TL:DR is that the smooth function, in its basic form, isn’t reset instantly when the user lets go of the input.
@deadzoro333 As much as I would love to make that tutorial, I wouldn't be able to. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to design. It takes a lot of inspiration, practice, and a lot of trial-and-error to make a good design. It's a long journey, but its a fun one!
I covered this, among other topics, extensively in my most recent build's technical documentation. You can find the general formula there. Or, this funky trees code should do what you need it to do:
. Activate1 * floor(smooth(clamp01(Activate1), Activate1 ? 1 / 5 : pow(10,10) ))
.
Edit: Looks like the code wasn't formatted properly for mobile. Here's the code, again: Activate1 * floor(smooth(clamp01(Activate1), Activate1 ? 1 / 5 : pow(10,10) ))
Very nice, especially for a first build. Great build, and good job explaining the theory. While variations of this technique have been done before, you are the first to put a name on it, and execute it well.
No problem. Good build!
+1@ArcturusAerospace Ty! I'm surprised that I managed to finish it in a month too. I suppose being stuck inside makes it a little easier to find the time to crank out a build.
@ArcturusAerospace It took me about a month to finish the build. That would be wild if I did take 3 years lol. The old timestamp is because I recycled an old forum post of mine. I don't like to make unnecessary forum posts.
Fun challenge! Opting to grade each of my entry's subsystems indicates that this was a well-run challenge that you put a lot of effort into. Well, I already knew that you were gonna host a good challenge regardless of that, but I really, really appreciate that you took a good look at the documentation.
+1.
Once again, good challenge. I had a lot of fun with my entry, and I learned a lot too! It was fun to make those little code diagrams - I hope they were useful to add.
62 now. :)
+1... This seems like clickbait designed to get you some attention. Given your history and behavior, I would say that this explanation is likely. It is also very common for doctors to determine what kind of cancer it is upon diagnosis. Very tasteless, considering how cancer affects families, friendships, etc. of many, many people.
+4.
If I am wrong then I’m sorry. Get well soon.
Eh, points don’t matter to me. Individual build performance does. I could pump out decent builds at 3 times my normal upload rate, but I’d rather make something excellent that I’m really proud of.
+1.
But taking a break from Uber-high quality is refreshing once in a while. The stakes aren’t too high then. I might do that to put some concepts out there.
A standard 4-component vapor-compression cycle using R-134a is shown in the figure to the right. The cycle is used as a refrigeration cycle to cool a refrigerator at 5 °C with a cooling capacity of 200 W, with a heat transfer to a kitchen at 20 °C. Assume that the pressure drops in the evaporator and condenser are negligible, and that the compressor and expansion valve are adiabatic. Take the boundary temperature for heat transfer into the evaporator to be 5 °C, and the boundary temperature for heat transfer out of the condenser to be 20 oC. Assume the compressor suction state is P1 = 2.4 bar and saturated vapor, the compressor discharge pressure is P2 = 7.0 bar, the compressor isentropic efficiency is 70%, and the condenser outlet state is saturated liquid. Determine:
(a) the mass flow rate of the cycle, in g/s
(b) the compressor input power, in W
(c) the compressor discharge temperature (0C)
(d) the COP of the cycle
+1@ThomasRoderick Definitely inspired by star citizen. Some of those ships look really, really good.
+1That’s a username that I haven’t seen in a hot minute. Welcome back!
+6@ThomasRoderick Feels good to hear that! I can be a harsh self-critic at times, but it helps me improve. If I remember right, I was pumping out builds daily (or something close to that) before this forum post. Spacing things out by a week or so let me really focus on the concept and functionality of the build. Orbidyn-L, for example, would be impossible to design in a day.
+1.
I also had too much free time back then lol. But hey, I got a lot of internet points out of it.
@ThomasRoderick Yeah. I think my unity broke so I needed to fix it. I also had no idea how to use unity then either.
+2Looks quite nice. I like the details, though the overall shape seems too boxy for my taste. Regardless, it's great, and deserves a spotlight.
+3@OrangeConnor here
+1Some nice techniques were used on the canopy here. Good job!
+1$0.86 will get you 26 ounces of table salt. A grain of salt is about 0.0000585 grams or 0.000002064 ounces. That's somewhere around 12,596,900 grains of salt. If you really wanted to splurge, you could spend an extra $0.14 to get another 1,900,000 grains to take you up to an exhilarating 14,500,000 grains of salt. Just imagine how much fun you could have with almost 15 million grains of salt. You could even pour some into a water bottle and drink it to pretend you're lost at sea and can only drink salt water. The possibilities are as endless as the number of grains of salt you have.
+8Ah. In that case, you should only have one gyroscope, at the CoM of the aircraft. Adjust the location of your engines to balance your CoT with your CoM, if you haven’t already done that. You will need to tweak with your gyroscope’s speed and stability. Let’s say, a stability of 2 with a much higher speed (start with 10).
@switdog08 Ah. That would be an input then.
Hm. Just by looking at it I can say that the gyro setup is what is wrong. Is this build supposed to always have the gyro on?
Does your gyro, or do your VTOL nozzles, respond to the VTOL input?
+1.
I can also link the build that @Omel was talking about, if you want.
@switdog08 Depends. What part are you using it on?
@DEVINBOSS Sure! I’ll try to answer some questions, although my response times are usually slow. My discord is spefyjerbf#8985
”Come on, flip the pickle, Morty. You're not gonna regret it. The payoff is huge.”
+8@DEVINBOSS Hmmmm, I have yet to see a great globemaster replica. Maybe you could give that plane a shot!
@DEVINBOSS No problem. I love talking about the technical aspects of my builds. I’m glad that you enjoy them. Thanks for the feedback!
Some good looking builds! I wouldn’t say that more than 80 (will be 90 in a few days) upvotes is underrated though.
+1🦀🦀Lazy challenges are no more🦀🦀
+14🦀🦀Lazy challenges are no more🦀🦀
🦀🦀Lazy challenges are no more🦀🦀
@TheTomatoLover It is really fun to dogfight with. Ty!
+1Gotta agree with @Ultra0
+1.
This country seems too inconceivable for any form of RP.
Nice. This makes me want to make an airship.
+1@JustDatGuy Two users can agree to always add each other as collaborators to effectively double their points from each upload. There would be plenty other ways to abuse the system, too. Given the questionable habits that players already have to maximize their points, I have no doubt that the system would be heavily abused regardless of how it would work.
Ooh, nice cosmetic use of the magnet!
All good. The system is free for everyone to use and modify. I haven't tested it, but great work!
No problem. It’s nice to see you experimenting with ground vehicles.
+1Airplane collabs will not be added due to how easy the feature would be to abuse.
+5@Perfectron I used a custom designer mod that I made myself.
@Alpha6 Ty! In general, the disruptors are best for anything on the ground, while Radicor is best against naval ships.
@Makerofplanes It is. I do not believe, though, that this attention is undeserved. The flight system, alone, took me about 10 hours to complete. This build was a month-long project that is, by my standards, incredibly intricate. Feel free to take a look at the complete technical documentation to see what I’m talking about.
+2@CookieCrumz Ty! I try my best to avoid using too many parts. This build has a high part count compared to my other builds, but it is also quite complex. I think it’s flight systems take a total of at least 30 parts.
Sounds good. Use this funky trees input for your activationGroup in overload:
+8.
Activate7 * floor(smooth(clamp01(Activate7), Activate7 ? 1 / 7.5 : pow(10,10) ))
.
While I haven't worked with parachutes in a while, but this should work. Let me know if it doesn't work.
@Flightsonic Definitely. The conditional statement, in the function that I call the bidirectional delay, really just changes how fast the smooth function rises or falls. In most applications, it is best to have the function fall really fast. However, the function can be generalized to have any rise or fall rate. Just replace the big number (pow(10,10)) with another rate.
+2.
For things like landing gear doors, using a different rise and fall rate can be pretty useful. I think I used similar logic on my weapons bay doors on Orbidyn-L. Don’t remember entirely though.
@Flightsonic No problem. I like talking about funky trees. That code should work, too, for a basic delay function. If you will be using this delay more than once, then you will need this modification:
.
The smooth function needs to return to its default state instantly when Activate1 is false. To do this, add a conditional statement in the delay part of the code.
.
While the technical documentation that I mentioned is really dense, it does shed some light on why the conditional statement is nice to have. Feel free to check it out. The TL:DR is that the smooth function, in its basic form, isn’t reset instantly when the user lets go of the input.
Not sure why the other commenter believes that it can’t be done. What delay do you need, and what activation group will the parachute use?
+10@deadzoro333 As much as I would love to make that tutorial, I wouldn't be able to. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to design. It takes a lot of inspiration, practice, and a lot of trial-and-error to make a good design. It's a long journey, but its a fun one!
I covered this, among other topics, extensively in my most recent build's technical documentation. You can find the general formula there. Or, this funky trees code should do what you need it to do:
+4.
Activate1 * floor(smooth(clamp01(Activate1), Activate1 ? 1 / 5 : pow(10,10) )).
Edit: Looks like the code wasn't formatted properly for mobile. Here's the code, again:
Activate1 * floor(smooth(clamp01(Activate1), Activate1 ? 1 / 5 : pow(10,10) ))
Looks like you are using a bunch of VTOL nozzles to make those afterburn effects? One of them probably disconnected.
Thanks! It looks like you are well on your way. This is an excellent first build.
@OmegaDestroyer Ty!
@TheFlyingGyro Lots of practice, some luck, and the right inspiration. I have 4 years of experience here on SP!
Very nice, especially for a first build. Great build, and good job explaining the theory. While variations of this technique have been done before, you are the first to put a name on it, and execute it well.