| |
Hi Steve,
I disagree with your reasoning.
> I just looked at the file. It seems to be OK. There's one 1 conditional
> line for each quad, which is right.
>
> Notice that this setup gives a conditional line on one edge of the
> half-cylinder, but not on the other.
>
> With one side edged, and the other not edge, when you use two • 2-4cyli.dat's
> together, you won't get double-edges at the seam. As long as you join the
> half-cylinders by rotating, not inverting.
If I use 2-4cyli as the 'edge' of a part, such as a window shutter, then on
one side I would have an edge line with an optional line over it, and on the
other side I would just have an edge line. With optional lines on both
sides you would have double lines (which I can't see any difference between
single) and you would still be able to cover all the bases.
Also, if you want to combine 2 2-4cyli's then you might as well use a
4-4cyli. And if you wanted to orient two 2-4cyli's with an offset or like
an s then you would still want the optional line for the other side of which
ever one is hanging in midair.
Just my 2cents worth,
Thanks,
Adam
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Mistake in 2-4cyli? [DAT]
|
| (...) I just looked at the file. It seems to be OK. There's one 1 conditional line for each quad, which is right. Notice that this setup gives a conditional line on one edge of the half-cylinder, but not on the other. With one side edged, and the (...) (25 years ago, 27-May-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
