Me again. :-)

Any way to get the bezier curves tighter in the string template? The current limit of 5 isn't quite enough to tie this not:    

It looks okay from above, but in the front view, you can see the loop doesn't draw in snugly. (I tried adding an extra path point on the bottom of the loop, but it just made all the corners square off.) I should also add that I'm using the Studio workaround, so the donor parts are 4-4cyli's rather than LDCad's donor parts. (It actually seems to curve more tightly this way.)

I'd like to revise the Library guideline to require the Bricklink patterned part ID in the keywords. This is already (mostly) standard practice, I'd just like to codify it. This will also make it easier for sites like Rebrickable to automate pattern cross referencing.

Hello,

I am looking for part 36762, Harry Potter hair.  If someone is able to do this, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks!

Hi there,

attached is the Lego Technic 8845 dune buggy of 1981.

Done with LDCad 1.6c / Linux64.

Edit: wheels are rubber-black instead of brick-black as suggested. Thanks to Philippe!
Edit2: sub-parts did not have " - " between number and name, please find updated file below.

Have fun
Stefan

Attached Files

Thumbnail(s)
   

  8845-1 Dune Buggy.mpd (Size: 492.33 KB / Downloads: 11)

Official Mindstorms models

Hi there,

as my next contribution I'd like to share several official sets of the Kings Castle 6080 with some extensions: 6022 Horse Cart, 6041 Armor Shop, 6049 Viking Voyager, 6061 Siege Tower, 6067 Guarded Inn, and of course the 6102 Mini Figures Set. I hope the files are all correctly OMRized, thanks again to Philippe and Johann. For simplicity reasons I will upload them in separated posts in this thread.

Any comment or suggestion is highly welcome, best regards
Stefan

[Edit: previous title was: "Kings Castle of mid-1980s"]

Attached Files

Thumbnail(s)
   

Copied from the review of this part: 3818s03

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
At Wed Nov 6 08:40:01 2019, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
I start to wonder about the use cyli/cyls primitives within the arm parts: when they are rendered with primitive substitution, this result in gaps in the arms, very noticeable. Maybe we should inline them...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
At Wed Nov 6 16:25:02 2019, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
Yes, I was looking at them yesterday. Don't like them.

And maybe we could also remove that kink inside the elbow? It looks like it has been "forced" to fit the primitives.
I was planing to use your knob in all minifig arm parts. Maybe it is time for a reshape, before we start making patterned arms. Gerald, any opinion?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
At Wed Nov 6 16:35:01 2019, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
"And maybe we could also remove that kink inside the elbow?" Yes!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
At Wed Nov 6 23:35:02 2019, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: GeraldLasser
Certification: novote
Comments:
I must agree with Philo, due to the primitive substitution visible gaps appear when rendering the arms., Inlining some of the prims would for sure benefit the final result

What do you mean with that: that kink inside the elbow
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
At Thu Nov 7 12:40:01 2019, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
See the kink on left image: http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/Philo/misc2/3818.png
I'd prefer to see the surfaces spared from the kink into a smoother outer elbow surface

Looking around the forum at other posts and threads discussing improvements to the LDraw file standards etc made me start thinking about individual part behaviours.

Some of these have been discussed and even implemented already but I wonder if they could be grouped and streamlined somehow?

Each part clearly has its "Physical" characteristics. (sorry if i use the incorrect modelling vocabulary)

1. Physical Part - including 
     1a. - Complete Frame
     1b. - Primitives
     1c. - Texture
     1d. - Color
     1e. - Pattern

After hitting some modelling limitations across various platforms, I'm imagining a file standard that could natively describe the various "behaviour" characteristics of each part. Some behaviours are already handled through different methods whilst others seem to be undefined yet.

2. Part Behaviours - including
     2a. - Connectivity (Snapping)
     2b. - Hinge Points (Hinge points, rotation angles, etc)
     2c. - Length (Parts clearly fixed in length, though would allow application to string lengths, pipe lengths, and rubber band type applications. Could this be applied to ideas of elasticity by using open limits for strings etc but defined limits for compression and elasticity?)
     2d. - Flexibility (already being progressively applied to various parts across platforms.)
     2e. - Gravity (to describe how a part behaves with gravity, ie chains and loose string)
     2f. - Elasticity (not sure if this is the best word but the intent to describe a parts ability to stretch (+) or hold tension (-). Intended for use with technic rubber bands etc)
     2g. - Compression (used to  describe the parts ability to compress, imagined for springs in shock absorbers in this instance, could be merged with Elasticity as a negative value.)

Just thoughts.
Cheers
Adam

Hi there,

this is my third OMR-model: 854 Go Kart of 1978.

Known issues:
- The hoses are not symmetrical.
- The steering universal joint does not fit exactly.
- The sticker "9" across multiple bricks is missing.

Thank you Philippe and Johann for the feedback to my other two models - I hope this file is nearly OMR compliant already.

Any feedback is welcome, thank you very much.

Edit: changed wheel color from brick-black to rubber-black as suggested for the 8845 by Philippe.

Regards
Stefan

Attached Files

Thumbnail(s)
   

  854-1 - Go Kart.mpd (Size: 658.21 KB / Downloads: 13)

Hi,
I have tried the tools I use：
stl2dat
LDForge
LDPE/LDPC
txt2dat...etc
These tools are good, but it takes a long time to learn them or use them.
stl2dat needs to make a model that is as accurate as possible to get good parts after conversion.
It is also difficult for LDForge to draw a small part with it.
I want to have a tool like the Cinema 4d. It's easy to draw and easily adjust.
Of course, this is not easy, but I am still looking forward to it coming soon.