 | | Interoperability: Conversion from LDRAW to ProE or Inventor 7
|
|
Greetings! We are trying to build a trophy part. We will build it using rapid prototyping. To do this we have designed a trophy in ProE (and in Inventor 7). We want a 1x2 brick with a flat plate on top of the brick and the trophy on top of the (...) (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Not a good fit?
|
|
(...) Isn't it great! ;-) (...) I noticed this. I think my display is 16 bit color, but I am not sure. I just used Save snapshot from the menu. Why do you ask? Jaco P.S. I finished the model with tracks. See: (URL) (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: Not a good fit?
|
|
(...) Hi, I now understand that the geometry not a perfect fit is, so we cannot expect LDraw to fit the part correct. It did occur to me to adjust the connector so that it does fit, but thought the picture looked good enough. Jaco (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: Not a good fit?
|
|
(...) question, but I do have a side comment and some questions. My side comment is that I always like it when people post nice snapshots from LDView. It helps give me a sense of accomplishment. Second, my questions. Did you take that snapshot while (...) (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGlite and LPub
|
|
(...) My humble apologies. I did further research and found them to be exactly the same. Kevin (...) (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: LDGlite and LPub
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) I don't think so. Can you provide the full list of arguments to l3p? /Lars (20 years ago, 5-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Howto on : BFC "Hold" on 47457.dat
|
|
(...) Well, L3Lab is from the days where there wasn't an official header in parts files. So L3Lab assumes you are looking at a model file. When viewing part files you must turn off BFC in the View menu. I'm embarrassed to admit that I have already (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Not a good fit?
|
|
(...) Basic geometry - the arrangements are only approximately matching. 1. The triangle has perpendicular sides 5 plates (2 studs) and 14 plates, giving a hypotenuse length of 14.87 plates, or slightly less than 6 studs, so as you've found, the 1x8 (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: Not a good fit?
|
|
(...) Hi Jaco, I run into this often when I'm using rotation to get things into place. With MLCad you have a grid (course, medium, fine). All things that are placed are snapped to the grid. For nice rectangular designs, this grid works well. When (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Not a good fit?
|
|
Hi all, Take a look at this! (URL) you can see I have been modelling Technic set 856 and came across this: (URL) this: (URL) bricks and connectors are exactly fit to the blue pins and ought to fit exactly on the green one, but it is not a perfect (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: cylinders missing conditional lines?
|
|
(...) I don't get that last thing with tangent lines (probably because english is not my native language). At the moment the official library contains 25 partial cylinder and cone primitives, out of which 21 have conditional lines at both ends and 4 (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: I want to become a reviewer
|
|
(...) Not a reason for a hold. If you have the energy to correctly orientate the studs, that's great, but we won't prevent a file being released for this reason alone. Chris (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I want to become a reviewer
|
|
(...) Yes - check out 3821.dat and 3822.dat issued in the 2003-03 update - they both use s3822s01.dat but include the stud reference in the main file. I'm not looking for a mass of existing parts to be re-submitted just to implement this technique, (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I want to become a reviewer
|
|
(...) Is this true? I've been out of the "official update" loop for a while, but when I suggested this method a year or so ago it was rejected due to "sub-part clutter" and the fears of an unreasonable burden upon parts-authors. Has this changed (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: cylinders missing conditional lines?
|
|
(...) Actually, if you use conditional lines that follow the red tangent lines, as in Travis' diagram, then you want them to overlap. You get partial coverage from each of them that adds up to the total coverage you'd get from the original style of (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: I want to become a reviewer
|
|
(...) So I understand that studlogos may face any direction as long as they are not mirrored? How about a mix of rotated studlogos on one single part instead of all studslogos facing the same direction? E.g. some studlogos readable when the part is (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: cylinders missing conditional lines?
|
|
(...) I checked a few official parts that use the 2-4cyli primitive. And all the parts I have checked so far are missing the conditional line at one end of the cylinder. So I suspect that part authors expect that all partial cylinder primitives have (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: I want to become a reviewer
|
|
(...) Yes - these kind of errors are not a cause for a hold. I'm with Orion on stud rotation, but I'd prefer not to have parts/subparts designed in a way that causes mirrored studs. We have set a precedent with car doors, by moving the stud from the (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: half size 3004
|
|
(...) Ok, Thank you :) I'd be happy to beta test 3.0 when you make it available. Thanks again. (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: cylinders missing conditional lines?
|
|
(...) This thread pops up from time to time and never seems to get resolved. (URL) think the problem is this: If you fix the all the primitives, then you really must check all the parts that use them. So we end up ignoring it and moving on. If (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
