 | | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) I'm only alright with hard-coded colors, IF they are somehow marked as not being primary parts. I would not want them all listed in as being available for building, just because it would eventually lead to parts-overload. You'd get about a (...) (26 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) I'll look into it. The main problems are (1) I'm not sure it can be done without rewriting the existing code, which I don't *really* feel like doing. And (2) I'm not planning on cutting a dinghy open to see what the inside looks like. So any (...) (26 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic Axles - go rounded?
|
|
(...) Yes, having new axle primitives would make the process go much easier. Perhaps the axle.dat file could be separated into two files: one with the end-lines, and the other with everything else. the "everything else" file would be one of the (...) (26 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Vote 99-02: Page 3900
|
|
I was looking at this part some more, and wondering: are there two different versions of this piece, are does this part-file contain some serious design errors? All the RL examples of this element in my possession have a technic-stud on one side and (...) (26 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic Axles - go rounded?
|
|
(...) I like it. Are you suggesting we add two new axle primitives? The axle end and an axle segment without the end edges? This will surely make the process of reworking all the old axle-related parts easier. Introducing this much details will make (...) (26 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) I do. The parts I use the most (Technic axles, cross blocks, bushings, pins and so on), I also remember the number for. But I'm helpless without a list which can be used to look up the ones I can't remember, obviously. Fredrik (26 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: More parts feedback
|
|
(...) Me too. If we stick to "3873.DAT Technic Chain Tread" now, we can always add "0.6 x 2.6" later if there appears a new tread link later, can we not? (...) Out of the three, I prefer 2637.DAT Technic Axle 16 with End Connectors because the part (...) (26 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Bezier Curves/Surfaces
|
|
Hi, This might be a little off-topic but I'm working on a terrain generator for LeoCAD so this still has to do with Lego and CAD. I'd like to know if anyone here have experience with bezier curves because I'd like to improve the way I'm calculating (...) (26 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | technic threaded axles
|
|
according to the parts tracker page the technic threaded axle parts are done. can i please have them? (26 years ago, 7-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
onyx skrev i meddelandet ... (...) organize/search (...) If we didn't have to have compatibility with the original programs, LDRAW/LEDIT, the obvious step would be to make a database of all the parts, which would mean more effective use of the hard (...) (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: More parts feedback
|
|
Terry K wrote in message <36e0b4c1.2353492@lu...et.com>... (...) The problem with "Holes" is that it is used for many things and is only marginally descriptive. How about something like one of the following: 2637.DAT Technic Axle 16 with End Pin (...) (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: More parts feedback
|
|
(...) I agree with that. It would be a lot more sensible. And I like the original names for the Link Chain/Tread pieces. So, what do we like? with End Links / Holes / End Connectors? Or is there a nomenclature even more apt out there? -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) For now, that would be a good solution. Of course, Steve would need to split the pieces first. (...) I finally just released it as 104.dat in color 16. A compromise of sorts. The problem is, other pieces will (do) have the same problem. The (...) (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
onyx wrote in message ... (...) library (...) possible... a (...) organize/search (...) Here you miss the point that some of us don't care a flip for TLG's nomemclature. TLG has its own reason for using it that doesn't make any sense for what we (...) (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts] Plate 1x1 Round with Towball
|
|
(...) Grey came in (at least): Segmented Arm 'Hand', Ball Joint, M Set U.S. Set Name Year Theme ---- ---...--- ---- ---...--- 6901 Mobile Lab 1980 LEGOLAND Space 6339 Shuttle Launch Pad 1995 Launch Command 6544 Shuttle Transcon 2 1995 Launch Command (...) (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts] Plate 1x1 Round with Towball
|
|
(...) have (...) slim (...) That's interesting -- the one I found was grey, and no towball-hole. I don't have any bendy-arm people, and I don't think they had grey hands. Steve (26 years ago, 6-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
(...) i agree completely... i say we handle our parts/sub parts in the same way TLG does... if glued-parts have 2 separate numbers, then lets model both halves separately, then use any conglomerate numbers for complete elements.. if they are (...) (26 years ago, 5-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [Parts] Plate 1x1 Round with Towball
|
|
(...) I have two different versions of this part... one is (in my collection) always molded in yellow, and was used as hands in the large bendy-arm figures. This one does not have a hole in the towball. The second is always molded in grey, and does (...) (26 years ago, 5-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: More parts feedback
|
|
(...) Ah, I understand :) (...) In this case, it seems that a use-specific name such as: "Technic Tie Rod" might be appropriate, since even if one doesn't use this part as a steering linkage, the "specific" term "tie-rod" is actually generic enough (...) (26 years ago, 5-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Part Numbering Crisis in LDraw
|
|
Terry K (legoverse@geocities.com) comments Karim's "30086.dat" and "30087.dat" in colour 16, and "4106548.dat" in yellow/yellow suggestion (which I support): (...) Yes. The problem is that this is a multi-mold part which is likely to appear in (...) (26 years ago, 5-Mar-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
