Subject:
|
Re: How accurate need bricks to be?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Sat, 21 Sep 2002 20:57:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
842 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Orion Pobursky writes:
> In lugnet.cad, Niels Karsdorp writes:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a couple of questions about the accuracy of bricks for LDraw.
> > I have put my questions along with images to make clear what I mean
> > on my website:
> >
> > http://home.hetnet.nl/~niels-karsdorp/ldraw/question.htm
> >
> > Also an overvieuw of the bricks I am working on:
> >
> > http://home.hetnet.nl/~niels-karsdorp/ldraw/ldraw.htm
> >
> > Is there anyone that can answer my questions?
> >
> > Niels Karsdorp
>
> I'll defer to Steve for final ruling but here are my thoughts:
>
> Ask yourself the following question:
> Does the portion I'm leaving out detract from functionality of the part?
>
> This question applies especially to the "fins" that you show concern about.
> Some "fins" are on LEGO pieces simply to add rigidity to the piece (e.g.
> part 700) and really don't need to be modelled. Other "fins" act to align
> pieces inside of an area (e.g. the underside of 2618.dat, the "Plate 1 x 2
> with Steamtrain Cylinder Box" listed on your web page), these need to be
> added as they contribute to the functionality of the part.
>
> There is a fine line to draw for this issue. Remember that were're trying
> to make the LDraw library as close to 100% accurate to LEGO piece in real
> life as we can get with out taxing our ability to model a part. When in
> doubt ask the community and go with the general concensus.
Yes, this is the "rule" we try to apply - if the detail is functional, then it
should be included, if decorative or an artifact of the moulding process then
it may be ignored.
So in your two examples, I would expect to see the small lugs on the "Plate 1 x
2 with Steamtrain Cylinder Box", bit would not be _too_ concerned about the rib
on the underside of the train base.
Historically we have been even less concerned about the detail on the underside
of bricks (such as 700). There are so many variants on 1x and 2x bricks, none
of which have any (known) impact on their functionality, that the parts library
would be enlarged without enhancing its utility as a CAD building resource [1].
One exception to this is the existance of separate LDraw files for the 1x2
brick with and without the central pillar - which has visual impact when used
for clear parts.
[1] However, its secondary (IMHO) purpose as a catalogue for precise part
identification would be enhanced !
Chris
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: How accurate need bricks to be?
|
| I asked about the accuracy at the bottom of the bricks (URL) answered: (...) In the case of brick 700, I know that the old versions did NOT have any tubes at the bottom. Is that something that should be modeled? I don't have any of those olde 700s, (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad)
| | | Re: How accurate need bricks to be?
|
| (...) Another problem: by standards, LDraw bricks are modeled with the walls being 4LDU thick. Most stud-hugging ribs on current versions of bricks would not protrude outside of a 4LDU wall. So the ribs won't show unless we make the walls thinner. (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: How accurate need bricks and patterns to be?
|
| (...) I'll defer to Steve for final ruling but here are my thoughts: Ask yourself the following question: Does the portion I'm leaving out detract from functionality of the part? This question applies especially to the "fins" that you show concern (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
