LDraw.org Discussion Forums

Full Version: Technic 2015
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
2015 Technic models...
[Image: 42034.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing stickers
Done with LDCad 1.4.
[Image: 42032.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing stickers
Done with LDCad 1.4.
Added to AIOI, thanks for sharing.

w.
[Image: 42031.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: None
Done with LDCad 1.4.
[Image: 42036.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.4.
Minor bug/problem: the chain uses the unof 14696 part which is included in the mpd. But only the generated LDraw lines have been corrected (probably by mpdcenter) for this, so when the chain is regenerated it will once again use 14696 instead of 42036 - 14696 for the links resulting in a missing part.

You also need to correct the "donPart=14696.dat" part of the PATH_SKIN line using e.g. notepad or the skin properties dialog.
Indeed... file corrected now. Mpdcenter also breaks groups in LDD (it changes top of file 0 !LDCAD into 0 // !LDCAD)
You need to add new meta commands ("!LDCAD") to the file "BodyMetaCommandsLDR.txt".
Wouldn't it be better if MPDCenter by default treated all 0 ! meta-commands as valid in an LDR file? The whole point behind the 0 !<whatever> syntax was to make it obvious that the line was intended to be a meta-command, and not a comment.
That does not solve the problem in MPDCenter. MPDCenter needs to know which line belongs to the body and which line to the header. So it needs to be stated anywhere.
Quote:MPDCenter needs to know which line belongs to the body and which line to the header

In that case it's even more fun as "0 !LDCAD GROUP_NXT" is only part of the header if it's followed by an "0 !LDCAD GROUP_DEF" or "0 !LDCAD GROUP_OBJ" Smile

All the others are ether in or out, I can send you a list if you want, just let me know by email.
Changing 0 !LDCAD line to say 0 // !LDCAD (like Philo said) means that MPDCenter is looking at 0 !LDCAD and deciding that it is a malformed comment, and then changing to be a "proper" comment. I would argue strongly that such behavior is pretty much always wrong. Now, header-recognition may indeed require more finesse, but "auto-correcting" valid meta-commands that use the 0 ! syntax to instead be comments doesn't seem like it should ever be desired behavior.

I don't personally use MPDCenter, so it could well be that I'm misunderstanding what's going on. All I'm going by is Philo's statement that his file was messed up by MPDCenter when a !LDCAD meta-command was corrupted by being turned into a comment.
Your arguments are strong. I try to update MPDCenter this way. Thanks for your comment.
I understand your point of view, but MPDCenter can not handle any custom meta command completely correct.
MPDCenter just needs this information for header/body to show the mostly correct data if you change the header data. Otherwise this information is not used in MPDCenter. But I need to stop to treat 0 !xx lines as malformed comments.
[Image: 42039.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.4.
...I like many features of LDCad, but probably the one I prefer is its management of flex parts!
Very nice.

Side question, do you think the file size is to big? Some people indicated things like the flexible axle and springs might be a bit 'bloated'.

Maybe I should add a LQ version (more LSynth like, like the ribbed hose)
With modern bandwidth/HD size, a 2or 3 Mb is still rather small. I used LQ version of ribbed hose because I didn't notice a significant quality degradation compared to the HQ one. On the smooth (and less complex) flex axles, visual quality will be lower and size decrease not so big... The trade-off you choose seems OK to me!
Added to the AIOI. Thanks for sharing.

w.
[Image: 42035.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.4.
Added to AIOI. Thanks for sharing.

w.
[Image: 42038.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.4.
Added to AIOI. Thanks for sharing.
[Image: 42037.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.4.
Added to AIOI. Thanks for sharing.

w.
[Image: 42033.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.4.
[Image: 42041.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.4.
As far as I can tell, this concludes 1H2015 Technic models...
I have the sticker sheet for 42041 scanned. Since the set is just a re-release of 8041.
HI Im newbe here, may I ask Philippe Hurbain or some kind guy, for contacting me I need advanced helping tips, I started with LDcad 1.4b and I love this editor and started to do some simple technic sets, but I need some extra help with implementing missing parts, and adding pneumatic hoses for example. Thank you in advance hope I will provide and share some official sets soon. Regards. Sry for lame english Im from Slovakia.

my email: [email protected]
You probably better of starting a new topic in http://forums.ldraw.org/list.php?11

In the meantime you could try the following:

Install the unofficial library
http://www.melkert.net/LDCad/faq#faq_unoflib

And generic info on working with dynamic (pneumatic) parts.
http://www.melkert.net/LDCad/docs/advEdit
[Image: 42040.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.5 Alpha 4.
[Image: 42042.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.5 Beta 1.
Added to AIOI. Thanks for sharing.

w.
MPD file updated to correct the swapped colors of the turntable...
[Image: 42042b.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.5 Beta 1.
Wow. I see now why you were having some angle troubles - it hadn't been clear to me from the box photo exactly what was going on up on the top support.

What a great set. If I was 10 years old again this would be on my wishlist - and a great way to stock up on blue beams.

Out of curiosity, I notice on these 2 models sometimes you go to the effort of ensuring gear phasing doesn't lead to clashing gears and other times you don't, like drivegear1&2. Any particular reason for that?
Agreed, both models are great... As for gear phasing or not, let's say it's natural lazzyness... Even if LDCad nested mode makes it relatively easy, selecting everything that belong to one axle remains tedious. I _should_ make multilevel groups from them, then it would be easier.
Then there are deformable structures depending on gearing, here you have to recalculate quite a lot of angles... SR3D limited mechanical simulator was great for that - when it worked Wink
And finally, bevel gear meshing is generally difficult to eyeball...
Yeah, understood. I've done some POV-Ray animation of non-simple gearing before so I tend to naturally build now with each separately rotatable entity encompassed within its own independent subpart, hence making it easier to fix gear phasing and produce animations.
[Image: 42043.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.5 Beta 1b.
[Image: 42043b.png]
Download MPD (OMR compliant)
Known errors: Missing Stickers
Done with LDCad 1.5 Beta 1b.

This concludes 2015 Technic models... just in time, 2016 models are just becoming available!

Bonus image:
[Image: 42043a_b.png]
Added to AIOI. Thank for sharing.

w.
Added to AIOI. Thank for sharing.

w.
I made a high-quality render of the Arocs, in case anyone needs one:

[Image: 24661150752_75c212f671_c.jpg]LEGO 42043 - Mercedes-Benz Arocs 3245 by Niklas-B, auf Flickr
Very nice!
Nice indeed. Done with? Settings used?

w.
I used POV-Ray with Radiosity preset "Outdoor HQ", LGEO parts and my own modified color settings.

The background is simply a large (like 20,000,000 diameter) white, slightly reflective hollow sphere. This gives me a nice background no matter what angle I use and good ambient light.
42032 - Snow Groomer
B model

[attachment=4987]
[attachment=4986]

OMR compliant
Known error : None