 | | Re: Help needed with cond. lines
|
|
(...) this is good news ... at least for me ;-) (...) this will hopefully become good news. many thx for sorting this out and giving me a helping hand. bye, w. (22 years ago, 28-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed with cond. lines
|
|
(...) Looking at how the geometry is layed out, I think you've hit a limitation in LDView's smoothing algorithm. In other words, the lack of smoothness is caused by a problem with LDView, not by a problem with your layout. The basic cause of the (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed with cond. lines [DAT]
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Travis Cobbs writes: hi travis, (...) thx for the tip. I remodeled the whole thing and were able to fix it, well almost... looking closely in LDView you can see a rough area where the two 2-4ndis meet the rest of the (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Help needed with cond. lines
|
|
(...) I'm not sure the part authors will be able to help you, but my knowledge of LDView probably will. After looking at it in LDView (without actually trying to read your DAT code), I believe the problem is that you have a T-intersection, and the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Help needed with cond. lines [DAT]
|
|
Could some of the senior-authors please have a look at the cond. lines? I'm in trouble with the section around the visor holes. I tried to add some cond. lines but LDView still doesn't show it with a smooth surface. I have no idea what's wrong. Many (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New Primitive Class
|
|
(...) I checked some geometry websites, and the consensus is that these are tori. Just not the common type. (...) Inverse-ratio torus is a better name, but is fairly lengthy. An inverted torus, I think, is still a torus, just with the surfaces (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New Primitive Class
|
|
(...) When Steve and I were working on the format for the torii, I believe we said we would deal with this issue when it arose. Now it has. (...) The spreadsheet I made to create p/16 and p/48 torii also included support for this occurance. (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New Primitive Class
|
|
(...) I'm not terribly surprised. This is a great solution, as then, if for some reason in the future, inverse ratio tori are needed, they can use the same convention, just a different starting letter and inverting the ratio as appropriate in the (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New Primitive Class
|
|
(...) You might be surprised at how close t04o9999.dat would come. I can't see that it's any worse than the current t04o3333.dat file. Actually, I think I'm going to modify LDView to recognize nnnn in the minor fraction (where n is 0-9) to be (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | New Primitive Class
|
|
Actually, it's not a new primitive, but it doesn't fit under the current naming scheme. My current 33089 (in PT) is a rather bulky file (55KB), so to streamline it, I decided to make a few new primitives. One of these was a torus with major radius 1 (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with s/3070bs01.dat?
|
|
(...) I think I agree with that. Actually, I could go either way. (...) Right. (...) I'm opposed to allowing additional comments between INVERTNEXT and the statements it affects -- one program's 'comment' is another program's 'meta-statement'. OTOH, (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Part 892 [DAT]
|
|
Hi, my name is Johan Vettefors and I've been lurking around here for some time. I have a question about the ldraw library. The part 892.dat which the tringle with clip in for example the lego sets speeder bikes and naboo swamp is NOT identical to (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Part 4180
|
|
(...) I thought I remembered a more recent discussion about this, but I can't find it. What I'm seeing is that really instead of the current part 4180 there should be three composite parts: 4180c01--Brick 2 x 4 with Permanent Black Train Wheels (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.db.brictionary, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with s/3070bs01.dat?
|
|
(...) checking. (...) I guess I should have picked this up in the final checking for the 2003-01 parts release. Regardless of the results of this discussion, I have submitted a fixed part to the Parts Tracker. Chris (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with 970s01.dat?
|
|
(...) Actually this is stated in the BFC spec but it wasn't enforced until the PT was created. -Orion (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with s/3070bs01.dat?
|
|
(...) I personally feel that whitespace should be ignored. However, if that is the case, the BFC spec should probably be updated to note this. It might also be argued that further comments after the INVERTNEXT should also be ignored. However, I (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with 970s01.dat?
|
|
(...) Actually, no it wouldn't. It would render incorrectly after the primitive was BFC certified if you guessed wrong about the ultimate orientation of the polygons in the primitive. However, until the primitive is certified, it will not be BFC'd, (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with 970s01.dat?
|
|
(...) No I thin khe meant that only new and updated primitives are required to be BFC compliant to be accepted to the parts tracker. Parts are still accepted that aren't certified though that is preferable. Though I'm not sure I've seen anything (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: BFC problem with s/3070bs01.dat?
|
|
Lars C. Hassing wrote: > Currently L3P complains. It takes the spec literally: 1 > 9 INVERTNEXT 2 > 9 This option inverts a subfile. It may only be used immediately before a 3 > 9 subfile command line, and it only influences the immediately 4 > 9 (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | BFC problem with s/3070bs01.dat? [DAT]
|
|
The file has these lines: 0 BFC INVERTNEXT 1 16 0 8 0 6 0 0 0 -4 0 0 0 6 box5.dat Is an empty line allowed after INVERTNEXT? Currently L3P complains. It takes the spec literally: 9 INVERTNEXT 9 This option inverts a subfile. It may only be used (...) (22 years ago, 20-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
