Subject:
|
Re: Duplo parts?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Tue, 2 Jan 2001 21:55:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
924 times
|
| |
|
|
[this should go to either lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, or
lugnet.cad.dev, but tight is the grip of inertia...]
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Don Rogerson wrote:
> I made up a 2x2 Duplo trial last night. I used the same wall thickness as Lego
> bricks (4 units) and everything seemed to fit correctly
That seems a bit thin for the walls. I'll dig out some DUPLO bricks, and
look at them more closely.
> > Top stud (hollow with logo inside)
>
> I made one if these following Steve's suggestion. the primitive file simply
> points to the stud2 primitive, doubling the x and z and multiplying the y by 2.4
Hmm. That's a height of 9.6LDU. Could we round that to 10, or would that
be way off?
> > Bottom tube
> > (and it would be nice if it had the "flattened corners" on the inside)
>
> I did the same for this, but simply doubled the regular bottom stud. The
> flattened portions are newer, and are not on the older Duplo bricks. I left them
> off.
If we simply want to scale existing p-files, then I'd prefer not to make
new p-files, but simply do the scaling in the parts files. Unless there's
some compelling reason to do otherwise.
> > Big stud (for seats)
>
> > "rib" between tube and side and between tubes
> > "rib" along wall to bind to studs
>
> These I modeled using the box.dat primitive as a 3x4x43 box with edges. Would
> there be an advantage to having a separate primitive? (actually, would there
> need to be two each? The inner ribs have two orientations)
Orientation doesn't matter.
> > 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?
>
> Modeling the curved edges would be possible, but it would mean that the current
> box*.dat primitive couldn't be used. A new one would be needed that draws a cube
> with rounded edges and corners.
Which wouldn't work within the limits of LDraw, because scaling the box
would scale and distort the curved edges.
Steve
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: Duplo parts?
|
| ... (...) Regarding this and the wall thickness, I don't have an instrument to accurately measure. I actually scaled the model up on my computer screen until the body matched, then compared the stud height,holding a brick to the screen. I'd love it (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | Re: Duplo parts?
|
| (...) Take a 3001 (Brick 4x2) and put a 3437 (Duplo Brick 2 x 2) on top. The 3001's studs end at 4 LDU from the edge, and The Duplo brick fits perfectly well on top, and it ends where the 3001 ends. So the Duplo wall must be exactly 4 LDU. Also note (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | Re: Duplo parts?
|
| (...) No, it's correct. If they were thicker, you wouldn't be able to put Duplo bricks on top of System bricks. (...) The stud height has changed over the years. The newer ones are quite close to 11. I haven't checked the older ones that closely. (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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)
|
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
|
|
|
|
