Subject:
|
Re: Duplo parts?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Fri, 5 Jan 2001 01:34:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1289 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Steve Bliss writes:
> > 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.
No, it's correct. If they were thicker, you wouldn't be able to put Duplo
bricks on top of System bricks.
> > > 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?
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.
> > > 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.
A doubled System bottom stud is much too thick. The outside diameter is
fine, but the inside diameter is way too small and the wall is twice as
thick as it should be. If it were simply doubled, a Duplo stud would bind
inside a Duplo bottom stud. But it doesn't.
> > > 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)
The side ribs can be modeled using 4-sided boxes, and the inner ribs can be
done with 3-sided boxes and a mess of lines.
> > > 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.
Yes, and kind of overkill anyway. System bricks are very slightly curved
anyway, and that issue was solved long ago by using lines.
--
Tony Hafner
www.hafhead.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Duplo parts?
|
| [this should go to either lugnet.cad.dat.parts...rimitives, or lugnet.cad.dev, but tight is the grip of inertia...] (...) That seems a bit thin for the walls. I'll dig out some DUPLO bricks, and look at them more closely. (...) Hmm. That's a height (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
