 | | Re: Aluminum 2x4 bricks
|
|
(...) Someone, long ago, posted measurements they took which have a better basis for accuracy in my view. The memory is hazy but I think what they did was build a very long wall, ensured it was linear, and measured stud center to stud center across (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Aluminum 2x4 bricks
|
|
(...) Yeah, I know. My brain slipped into "helpful" mode before I finished reading and thinking... :-P (...) Thus demonstrating the "real world" difference between a scientist and an engineer. Good luck, and keep us informed, OK? (And, what do you (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | RE: Aluminum 2x4 bricks
|
|
(...) Those are the dimensions I did use, Franklin :) However, those dimensions are NOT accurate to .001 inch. And that discrepancy apparently makes a significant difference in the connection properties of the part. --Bram Bram Lambrecht (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Aluminum 2x4 bricks
|
|
(...) These are cool as Bram! Aluminium would be cool too ;) Now all you have to do is make the classic minifig! The one we all love and know. Then contact me once you have mastered this :) Mel (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Aluminum 2x4 bricks
|
|
(...) Which is my round-about way of saying, "Your figures/calculations look OK to me"... :-/ No idea why it isn't working for you. Sorry... Franklin (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Aluminum 2x4 bricks
|
|
(...) Bram, The metric I use is 1 LDU = 1/64". Here's how I derived it. The classic 2x4 brick is one and a quarter inches long (1.25") and is 80 LDU long. Thus, 80 LDU = 1.25" = 5/4". Dividing both sides by 80 gives 1 LDU = 5/320" = 1/64". Hope this (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Aluminum 2x4 bricks
|
|
[Please set the follow-up to the appropriate group] I'm currently taking a CNC class at school, so for a little side project I machined a couple 2x4 bricks out of aluminum on the EMCO PC 50 machines we have. Since I wanted to use a 1/8" flat end (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Hi!
|
|
Richard, Have you gotten a user-ID for the Parts Tracker (at LDraw.org), yet? Once you've got an ID and password (ask Steve Bliss, the admin for the Tracker), you can post reviews of the new, prospective parts, or even post your own new parts files! (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Big Messy Wet Kiss!
|
|
Hey Y'all: I got into LCAD during the last 8 months or so and I have actually found it to be ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE!!! This post is just my small way of thanking all the people that have contributed to this massive enterprise in some way or another. (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Fixed New Part: x194.dat ( formerly known as: x192.dat - Minifig Shield Round)
|
|
(...) I'd've just made the entire 'flat' surface of the shield's front from a single 4-4disc.dat. (...) MLCad (or maybe Word) decided to use scientific notation for some very small numbers. For example, "1.29e-005" = 0.0000129, which you probably (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Fixed New Part: x194.dat ( formerly known as: x192.dat - Minifig Shield Round)
|
|
(...) Dude -- it SO rocks! A cajillion thanks! I get closer and closer to a CAD Gherkin...all I need now are those new Alpha Team mecha arms (with ball hinges and technic style pins) and their 2x2x2 female socket counterpart bricks. Anyone working (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) [*SPLUTTER*!] [*COUGH*!] [*CHOKE*!] [*GASP*!] My.... *heart*!.... [**THUD**!!!] (...) Ummmm.... ("(URL) think they're the same person. Franklin (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Fixed New Part: x194.dat ( formerly known as: x192.dat - Minifig Shield Round) [DAT]
|
|
here is the fixed and I hope unwrapped version of the minifig shield round. please notice that due to a request from ldraw.org the part number has changed from x192.dat to x194.dat I substituted the inlined stud with the stud2.dat primitive. (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: does PT FAQ cover "CMDLINE"?...
|
|
Huzzah! (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) I don't think that it matters either. My Naval Nuclear Power eye for detail kicked in and I felt compelled to comment. -Orion (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) The ring primitives are being worked on, I believe. Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) Hi Steve, May be I have missed something, but I need "RingX.dat" BFC-ed primitives, otherwise I can not review these studs: p/stud2 p/stud2a p/stud4 p/stud4a p/studp01 p/stu2p01 Damien (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Numbers Report
|
|
(...) I don't feel so bad that so many of your parts are waiting for admin review. ;) (...) Yeah, but those files are split between Bernd and Sascha. Who I'm *assuming* are different people. Steve (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) (URL) (...) I think the only way it would matter for performance is if we decided that the *entire* library would be CW or CCW, and so rendering programs wouldn't have to check the winding direction at all. And that would be a very small (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts Tracker] More BFC Primitives
|
|
(...) For starters, I recently tried to track down the BFC specification but couldn't find it (on ldraw.org or on Steve's site). Could someone post the link please? (...) If it doesn't matter from a performance perspective, I vote you kill the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
