 | | 3 new primitives for Technic Link Chain Old [DAT]
|
|
I forgot to include the three new primitives, I created for the Technic Link Chain Old: 3-8ring1.dat 3-8ring5.dat 3-8rin12.dat 0 Ring 1 x 0.375 0 Name: 3-8ring1.dat 0 Author: Niels Karsdorp 0 Unofficial Primitive 0 BFC CERTIFY CW 4 16 1 0 0 0.9239 0 (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | New part: Technic Link Chain Old [DAT]
|
|
0 Technic Link Chain Old 0 Name: x.dat 0 Author: Niels Karsdorp <nkp@dds.nl> 0 Unofficial Element 0 BFC CERTIFY CW 1 16 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 16 rect.dat 1 16 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 stud.dat 1 16 0 0 -10 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 stud.dat 1 16 8.5 7.5 16 (...) (21 years ago, 7-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) By this metric, (URL) not a wing. That's reasonable. If 2413 were a wing, then so would (URL) they are the same shape, essentially. (...) I agree. There are, however, times when that is not possible---for example, (URL) undoubtedly similar (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) Another point to consider in differentiating between a wedge and a wing. IMHO a wing is not symmetrical and has a matching counterpart (left & right) and would be inherently thin. I cant imagine building a plane model with a wing as thick as a (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: curved monorail track
|
|
(...) I know, this is a late reply, but I've finished it. The "Monorail Track Curve Quarter" (2672) is at the tracker now. (URL) Bernd (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) Doh! I posted without reviewing the current conventions. I suppose I could have inferred that the correct orientation puts the narrow (or corner-less) edge toward the front along the long axis of the part? Thanks for the quick answer, though! (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) Then you'd just use "Plate 4 x 8 Without Corner Left" and "Plate 4 x 8 Without Corner Right" -Orion (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) If LEGO were to produce a rectangular plate, say a 4x8, with a missing corner, what would be a good way to describe it? The part could easily have a mirror-image part, so it wouldn't be enough to say "Plate 4 x 8 without corner," since that (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) This one should be Wing 3 x 4 (...) These ones are plates with one corner clipped, I think the 'Without Corner' label is better than Wing. I'd like to add these ones to the list: 2621 2625 I had renamed 2625 while it was on the PT for BFC (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) How about these two: 30033 Plate 2 x 2 with Rod Frame Octagonal (URL) 30094 Bar 4 x 4 with 4 Studs (No entry at LUGNet) I suggest changing the last to: 30094 Plate 2 x 2 with Rod Frame Rectangular Christian (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
