Subject:
|
Re: "33" Slope Shocker... Possible name change?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Sat, 14 Apr 2001 15:27:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
471 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
>
> Yes, I am planning on doing a mass name-change, but after the automated
> Parts-Tracker is up and running.
>
> And the angle is precisely arctan(0.5), or about
> 26.565051177077989351572193720453[1] degrees.
>
> For the part names, 27 is accurate enough, I think.
Steve, I'm thinking it would be of more use to name the parts
using a "Rise/Run" method, like in architecture. When using
the LEGO pieces the important thing is not the actual angle on
the sloped face, anymore than it is the actual height, length,
or whatever in mm or something. Since we already reference
all of the linear dims in terms of "LEGO units", should we not
do the same for angular dims, for consistency?
I would also argue beyond consistency to say it's more practical.
I don't need to know the actual angle on the face of a sloped brick.
I need to know what horizontal and vertical distances it will cover
when building. So to me:
"Slope Brick 1/2 3x2 Inverted"
would be more consistent and meaningful than today's:
"Slope Brick 33 3x2 Inverted"
where "1/2" above means "Rise of 1 to Run of 2".
Additionally there is the whole deal where (if I understand
correctly) the actual linear dimensions used in .DAT files is
not the same as those on actual LEGO parts. Therefore if you
reference an angular dimension in the part name, it either has
to match the real part or the .DAT, and that causes confusion.
Keeping things in "LEGO units" by using Rise/Run values
eliminates this confusion. And of course there's the bit where
the slope of the actual brick face is not the same as the slope
made by a stack of those bricks, due to the little "step" at
the "sharpest point" of each sloped brick.
With today's names, I admit that I have become quite comfortable
with things like "Slope 45" and "Slope 33". But where this becomes
meaningless to me is with all the specialty slopes now where
the angles are things like Slope 10, 18, 53, 65, and 75.
"Slope Brick 10 6x8" doesn't mean much to me, but
"Slope Brick 1/6 6x8" does. It tells me the brick is 1-high,
and there are no studs on top.
Comments?
KDJ
_______________________________________
LUGNETer #203, Windsor, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: "33" Slope Shocker... Possible name change?
|
| (...) Hmmm, interesting thought. I'll have to think it through some more. This would give us figures like: Angle Rise:Run 10 1:6 18 1:3 33/27 1:2 45 1:1 45 2:2 53 3&1/3:3 55 6:4 (not yet released) 65 2:1 75 3:1 Hmmm. Off the cuff, there are two (...) (23 years ago, 17-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: "33" Slope Shocker... Possible name change?
|
| This problem has (probably) been realized by a number of people in the last few years; I figured it out (or was it pointed out to me?) a few months ago. Yes, I am planning on doing a mass name-change, but after the automated Parts-Tracker is up and (...) (23 years ago, 9-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
9 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
|
|
|
|
