Subject:
|
Re: Duplo parts?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Thu, 28 Dec 2000 16:04:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
874 times
|
| |
|
|
> > Actually, AFAIK, the regular stud*.dat files should work fine -- they just
> > need to be scaled up by a factor of two. Instead of writing:
> > 1 16 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 stud.dat
> > you'd do:
> > 1 16 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 stud.dat
> Comparing relative sizes with some of my son's Duplo bricks last night,
> it looks like the Duplo studs are a little shorter in height than two
> Lego studs.
And the walls of the bottom tubes are certainly not twice as thick as on
System parts. Note that the studs fit great between the bottom tubes, but
they don't bind *at all* when placed inside the tubes. There is another
type of stud that fits into a bottom tube (typically found where a figure
would sit, like on a chair or horse).
> A couple questions about detail - Duplo bricks all have a circular
> depression on the top center with a little point in the middle. I guess
> this is something left over from the manufacturing process. Is it an
> important enough visual feature that it should be included in the models?
> What do people think?
I personally don't think it's important, and it seems like it would
unnecessarily complicate parts that should be very simple.
> Also, what about the "DUPLO" printed inside the hollow studs? (actually, older
> Duplo bricks have "LEGO" printed in the studs, with the word Duplo printed
> inside the brick).
For legal reasons, isn't it bad to use either? I'd be happy with the
LDraw-ized logo.
I actually worked up a couple of sample Duplo parts last week, and found out
how to work with primitives. The primitives I see as necessary are:
Top stud (hollow with logo inside)
Bottom tube
(and it would be nice if it had the "flattened corners" on the inside)
Big stud (for seats)
"rib" between tube and side and between tubes
"rib" along wall to bind to studs
And another question: What about the edges? System parts have pretty crisp
corners, but Duplo parts are very noticeably curved on the edges. Is this a
reasonable thing to model?
--
Tony Hafner
www.hafhead.com
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Duplo parts?
|
| (...) I should have said the Duplo studs are a little _taller_ than two Lego studs. The number I came up with is 2.4 times the height of a lego stud. (...) I made up a 2x2 Duplo trial last night. I used the same wall thickness as Lego bricks (4 (...) (24 years ago, 28-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | Re: Duplo parts?
|
| (...) As you noted, the logo should not be included (in LDraw). (...) So far, the flattened corners have been skipped on System-scale parts. Do the flattened corners deviate from a true circle by more than 1 LDU? If they do, then that adds weight to (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Duplo parts?
|
| (...) Comparing relative sizes with some of my son's Duplo bricks last night, it looks like the Duplo studs are a little shorter in height than two Lego studs. A couple questions about detail - Duplo bricks all have a circular depression on the top (...) (24 years ago, 27-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
16 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
|
|
|
|
