 | | Re: Suggested New Primitive: 4-4cyl12.dat (was: More cylinder primitives wanted)
|
|
[Lotsa snipping] (...) I'm fine with that. Taking up the issues Chris raised (but out of order): (...) I think we need to allow for partial rods. (...) It seems fair to limit rods to single-digit denominators. Since these are primarily convenience (...) (18 years ago, 17-May-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Suggested New Primitive: 4-4cyl12.dat (was: More cylinder primitives wanted)
|
|
(...) We could use "rod" as a short base name for these. Do we need to allow for non-360 degree versions? I didn't see any requirements for partial cylinders in the thread so far. Was that implicit in the request? 1) If not, one would be to use a (...) (18 years ago, 17-May-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Suggested New Primitive: 4-4cyl12.dat (was: More cylinder primitives wanted)
|
|
(...) Since we've already got primitives like '5-24cyli.dat', I think it would be a good idea to restrict the suffix of the file name to 4 characters. I wouldn't want to start right out making specialized cylinders-with-edges for every single (...) (18 years ago, 16-May-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Suggested New Primitive: 4-4cyl12.dat (was: More cylinder primitives wanted)
|
|
(...) I thought of that, but liked the idea of more descriptive names, like the rect*.dat series. The '1' would in this case stand for number of discs, and '2' for number of edges. But I could definifly live with cyla, cylb etc too. (...) Same here. (...) (18 years ago, 15-May-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Suggested New Primitive: 4-4cyl12.dat (was: More cylinder primitives wanted)
|
|
(...) How about N-4cyla.dat, N-4cylb.dat, etc? Although I have to admit -- I'm not a huge fan of saving a few lines of code here and there. When two such primitives are adjacent, I always have to double-check which one includes the edge(s). (...) (...) (18 years ago, 15-May-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Suggested New Primitive: 4-4cyl12.dat (was: More cylinder primitives wanted) [DAT]
|
|
(...) There is no rule against primitive files calling to other \P files. I didn't have to look very long to find one. And if we inlined them, I suspect the primitive substitution in L3P will not work until L3P is updated to support the new ones. (...) (18 years ago, 14-May-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Solid or hollow centerstuds?
|
|
(...) Thanks for the quick answer. When going through some existing parts to make these BFC certified, I came across part 2428, which seems to be created with hollow centerstuds, but the inside is missing. I'll change these to stud3's instead of (...) (19 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Solid or hollow centerstuds?
|
|
(...) Since there is no difference in functionality, LDraw should stay with only solid stud3's. If we introduce a hollow version, that will lead to confusion. Steve (19 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Solid or hollow centerstuds?
|
|
A few years ago TLC changed the design of the small centerstuds at the bottom of many bricks to hollow (to save material). (See 1xN plates and bricks, but also many other parts) For parts that exist with both the hollow and the solid centerstuds the (...) (19 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: "odd" rings
|
|
(...) Yes, use 2 rings. Rings and cones are one of the few exceptions we make regarding overlapping quads/triangles. Check out this Excel spreadsheet that will show you the scaling you need to use for the rings: (URL) (19 years ago, 28-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | "odd" rings
|
|
Erm... I need to do a ring with an inner radius of 10 and an outer of 14. My reckoning means I need a factor of 4 and a ring with an inner diameter of 2.5. Which doesn't exist. Can anyone think of a way of doing this with a single ring or do I have (...) (19 years ago, 27-Aug-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: 1-8tang.dat?
|
|
(...) (URL) (...) Thanx :-) Niels (19 years ago, 1-Jun-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 1-8tang.dat?
|
|
(...) but the current 1-8tang on the PT has 3 hold votes. This part (...) changed since december last year. Is someone willing to correct (...) It would be rather handy to give us a direct link to this primitive. And then, nice (URL) retro (...) (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
| |
| | 1-8tang.dat?
|
|
I am working on a part and I actually need something like a 1-8tang primitive, but the current 1-8tang on the PT has 3 hold votes. This part hasn't been changed since december last year. Is someone willing to correct this primitive? Niels (19 years ago, 31-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: CCW vs CW
|
|
(...) If it's not a whole lot of trouble, I would recommend it. (The conversion can be made automatic, as long as the individual files clearly state CW or CCW correctly.) Speaking as a computer graphics professional, I can say for sure that being (...) (19 years ago, 13-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
| |
| | CCW vs CW
|
|
The (URL) Language Extension for Clipping (BFC)> states in the Parts Library Guidelines section that Primitives should always use CCW winding. However some of the primitives use CW, for example (URL) rect.dat>. Should these be rewritten? Would it be (...) (19 years ago, 12-May-05, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: stud3 -- hollow vs filled
|
|
(...) Since this question crops up at regular intervals, I've added an explanatory note to the Primitives Reference : (URL) Chris (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: stud3 -- hollow vs filled
|
|
(...) Note that FWIW, BrickLink and Peeron and other inventory resources tend not to get to this level of detail either, they typically do not differentiate this. (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: stud3 -- hollow vs filled
|
|
(...) Hello, James! [snip description of situation leading up to the question] (...) The standard in the LDraw library is to use stud3.dat for all stud3-type anti-studs, regardless of whether they are actually hollow or solid. The reason is that (...) (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | stud3 -- hollow vs filled
|
|
Hello, everyone. When I was working on 71427 (expect a post on l.c.d.parts soon), I noticed that the two small underside studs were modeled with a pair of cyli4-4s and a disk1. When looking for the proper primitive to replace that with, I noticed (...) (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
|
