| |
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, Travis Cobbs wrote:
> Since I haven't authored any parts, I'm not going to go into this too deeply,
> but I think that square groups is a good idea. One minor note. Going from
> one group size to the next gives you 2 * sqrt(N) + 1 new studs, not 2N + 1.
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
actually be able to go from stugN to stugN+1, unless you were going from stug0
(0x0) to stug1 (1x1), and there's not much point in having a file for a 0x0 stud
pattern, since that would technically be just a mathematical (non-dimensional)
point (maybe stug0 would be a 10x10?).
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| Since I haven't authored any parts, I'm not going to go into this too deeply, but I think that square groups is a good idea. One minor note. Going from one group size to the next gives you 2 * sqrt(N) + 1 new studs, not 2N + 1. --Travis (20 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
27 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
|
|
|
|
