 | | Re: Set 622 (1978) Tipper Truck
|
|
Don't you mean part 3010p20c ? greetings! jan folkersma (20 years ago, 6-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.models.sets, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Set 622 (1978) Tipper Truck
|
|
Hi all, I think one brick in the inventory on Peeron of this set is wrong. See (URL) is this brick: 3010p08 Yellow Brick 1 x 4 with Basic Car Headlights Pattern shown here: (URL) you can see on the building instructions scan here: (URL) looking at (...) (20 years ago, 6-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.models.sets, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | 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: 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: 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: 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)
|
| |
| | cylinders missing conditional lines?
|
|
When using the 2-4cyli primitive I noticed one conditional line missing, so I compared all different cyli primitives. Some have conditional lines at both ends, some have not. 1-4cyli: conditional lines at both ends 1-8cyli: conditional line at one (...) (20 years ago, 4-Nov-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Click-Rotation Parts - Somebody else can finish my 48169.dat
|
|
(...) I see somebody else is working on these parts. I'll give my part into anybodies hands. I haven't the time and the liveliness to have more than three parts unfinished. So sombody else can finish my 48169.dat. CU Bernd (20 years ago, 28-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Click-Rotation Parts
|
|
(...) Maybe the following parts will help you, they are on the parts tracker: x587.dat 41681.dat 41679.dat cu Michael (20 years ago, 27-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Sir Bugge's lego page finally gone public! - Space, parts, sculpture and techniques!
|
|
After a long delay while fighting my father’s webhost to get them to support statistics on subdomains (since January), here it is with crappy statistics from nedstat instead. At last! It’s a page about all the models, I’ve made since the early (...) (20 years ago, 27-Oct-04, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.space, lugnet.build.schleim, lugnet.build.sculpture, lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.loc.dk, FTX) !
|
| |
| | Re: Click-Rotation Parts
|
|
(...) Because there are 24 cogs. So a 48-segmented primitive is easier to modify than a 16-segmented one. (...) OK, I'll try that. CU Bernd (20 years ago, 27-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Click-Rotation Parts
|
|
(...) Why do high-res primitives make it easier to realize? Considering the size of this object, I'd lean toward needing to reduce it. Steve (20 years ago, 26-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Click-Rotation Parts [DAT]
|
|
And here is the primitive: CU Bernd 0 Click Rotation Socket Cogwheel Quarter 0 Name: 1-4crs.dat 0 Author: Bernd Broich 0 Unofficial Primitive 0 BFC CERTIFY CW 0 Inner Ring R = 11 LDU 0 Outer Ring R = 12 LDU 0 Upper Ring 2 24 0 0 11.2 0.5 0 11.35 2 (...) (20 years ago, 26-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Click-Rotation Parts [DAT]
|
|
(...) Sorry but there is no finished part yet. (...) I could send you a nearly finished part (48169) where the bottom is open. But else it's finished. To Steve Bliss or Chris Dee: I've made the cylinder-thing with high-res- primitives because it was (...) (20 years ago, 26-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
|
(...) Yeah, they'd be just the studs. (...) I'm not opposed to that; I don't see a compelling choice between stug* and stus*. Because I had files that used them, I went ahead and submitted stug3, stug4, stug6 and stug8 to the PT. If people want (...) (20 years ago, 26-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
|
(...) Just to clarify, would these include the surface between the studs, or just the studs? I think logically they should include just the studs but just wanted to make sure. (...) Maybe, if that is a future possibility, the square ones should be (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Click-Rotation Parts
|
|
(...) Are there any further news on the knight parts? I wanted to start building them and found this discussion. So it would be interesting how far the proceeding is come up to now. Michael Heidemann (mikeheide) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New Part: 3036p01.dat - Plate 6 x 8 with Red Side
|
|
(...) There have to be more parts like this for the set 310. I tried to model it in MLCad, but this both parts are not enought. Also why is this part not on the parts tracker? I cant find it there Michael Heidemann (mikeheide) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
|
(...) ... Whoops; you're right. --Travis (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
|
(...) From the way Steve explained it, it sounds like stug4 would be a 4x4 square, not a 2x2 square, in which case going from stugN to stugN+1 actually does give you another 2N+1 studs. When you think about it, by your reasoning, you'd never (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
