Subject:
|
Re: Using parts in p\48\ (was: part 2951, more questions, nearly done)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Mon, 17 Jan 2000 00:29:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
560 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Fredrik Glöckner writes:
> "John Jensen" <skurt@vip.cybercity.dk> writes:
>
> > BUT, there's one large problem (well to me it is:)). I've never been good
> > friends with matrices, so I use LEdit to rotate subparts with (works quite
> > painlessly) but when I tried to load a dat file containing:
> > 1 5 0 0 0 0 -192 0 0 0 40 40 0 0 48\1-4cyli.dat
> > nothing happened, in fact LEdit converted 48\1-4cyli.dat to 48\1-4cyli.d • (or
> > something very similar, the path and name got truncated).
> > Now, how to avoid that? Am I just using the part wrongly?
>
> You could just replace 48\1-4cyli.dat with 1-4cyli.dat before doing the
> rotation, and then replace back again afterwards. That should work,
> shouldn't it?
Hmmm wouldn't that be postponing the problems? If LEdit doesn't want to load
it from a regular dat file, why should it load it from a dat file within a dat
file? (hopefully you know what I mean)
> so I'm going to take two hi-res 1-4cyli's and slide them into each other by
> > 7.5 degrees increments, and use a type 4 line for the last 7 degrees.
> > Is this okay?
>
> This sounds ok to me. But then agian, I've been wrong before! ;-)
Awaiting others opinion then:)
> (The technic seat would be really useful to have, BTW.)
Surprised that no one has made it yet, is it really that difficult, just took
a look at it connected to a beam in various ways, the measures and angles
looks straight forward to get at, or am I pulling a JW here (sorry JW).
Speaking off .... Has just been reviewing some old postings, which got me
concerned about the quality of my work.
Would anyone please let me know if what I've done so far is good enough? I'm a
bit concerned about having to redo a lot (am getting a bit bored with the
2951:)) it is quite cumbercome:)
I'll gladly admit that some of the measures are guessed, simply because I
don't have the right tools to get in to the nooks of this parts, but as I see
it, if the bucket is a degree of in angle to the pegholes, that is not of
great importance here, since the only possible way to connect anything to the
piece (could've made a joke here, but I'm a bit tired now:) is through the
pegholes.
One issue that I am concerned with however is the tiny "roundings" where the
pegholes connect to the bucket, they're probably there due to molding issues.
Should they be modeled as well?
Sincerely John.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
21 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
|
|
|
|
