Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
Online Users |
There are currently 345 online users. » 0 Member(s) | 341 Guest(s) Applebot, Bing, Google, Yandex
|
Latest Threads |
Pirate Themed Parts
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Chris Böhnke
6 hours ago
» Replies: 31
» Views: 2,840
|
Part Request for 87621pb0...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Matthew
7 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 35
|
Part Request for 74188pb0...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Jeff Jones
7 hours ago
» Replies: 1
» Views: 40
|
Town and Trains 1994
Forum: Official Models
Last Post: Takeshi Takahashi
Yesterday, 15:11
» Replies: 5
» Views: 1,269
|
Part Request: LEGO LION
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: 3CFigs
2025-01-11, 23:59
» Replies: 2
» Views: 184
|
Part request Duplo Item N...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Lawford
2025-01-11, 16:17
» Replies: 5
» Views: 251
|
Most Common Parts that re...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Gerald Lasser
2025-01-10, 20:55
» Replies: 11
» Views: 625
|
6278pb01 - Mario Kart Whe...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Javier Orquera
2025-01-10, 17:16
» Replies: 3
» Views: 203
|
Parts Request: NINJAGO ON...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: 3CFigs
2025-01-09, 22:57
» Replies: 4
» Views: 406
|
[LDPatternCreator] Releas...
Forum: Parts Author Tools
Last Post: Nils Schmidt
2025-01-09, 21:41
» Replies: 2
» Views: 1,060
|
|
|
The Case for Underside Fillet Primitives |
Posted by: Jude Parrill - 2013-08-11, 1:55 - Forum: Parts Authoring
- Replies (16)
|
|
As some of you may have seen, I recently added some underside stud fillet primitives (Here is one such file, where discussion has occurred). Some are wondering whether these parts should exist, and if so, where they should be located (P or S). Here is the thread I promised with my arguments.
The Problem (As I See It):
There are a number of parts in our library which have underside fillets. I recently uploaded some new 4xM and 8xM parts, but more exist. There are more as well. However, there is actually a bit of variety to them. Some are 2 ldu in width, while others (like the ones I worked on) are 3 ldu in width. There are also some medium height ones as well as ones which are full length except at the edges where they are medium height. Some are detailed while others are pretty basic.
Here's a picture which shows some of that variety:
However, there is currently no system for naming or re-using these parts. In fact, most of relevent parts are located in the S directory, and I found no less than 3 sets of these, two of which could probably be combined:
- 6161.dat and 6162.dat use s/6161s01.dat and s/6161s02.dat
- 30072.dat uses s/30072s01.dat and s/30072s02.dat
- 47116.dat uses s/47116s02-05.dat (4 files)
And the question becomes, the next time LEGO releases a new large Brick, will the person who creates the part be able to find and use the correct subparts/primitives for this? Will they simply create another set for their given part? How is one expected to know these parts even exist when there is no mention of them on the primitive reference page?
Why not just put these parts in the S folder?
Because it makes re-using them harder, especially for newer authors who may not know they exist. Really, the S folder should be for part specific subparts which don't and probably never will have any use elsewhere. The P folder is for primitives which either can be used for many parts, or have the potential to be used by many parts.
The Solution (As I See It):
I believe we need to create a new set primitives for underside fillets. When I created mine, I used stud naming convention based on an assumption that later proved to be false. And as Chris has pointed out, these are much more than studs. As such, I believe a new name should be used, and I'm currently favoring "Fillet" although I'm open to suggestions on this. However, assuming we used "Fillet", the naming scheme would proceed as such:
FilletS[h][d]-[optional-identifier].dat
where
S is the width of fillets in ldu. Currently both 2 and 3 ldu width fillets exist, and it leaves the option for further sizes should they come along.
h is used for half-height fillets (I believe 33230.dat on the PT could use these).
d is used for detailed parts (like the ones I currently have on the PT).
optional-identifiers can be used for different variants based on wall collisions. A meaningful naming convention is preferred.
So that's it. I don't think I'm that far out of line on this, but you can let me know what you think.
|
|
|
User Avatars now available |
Posted by: Orion Pobursky - 2013-08-10, 13:49 - Forum: LDraw.org Announcements
- Replies (1)
|
|
I've enable the use of user avatars. You can upload a 100px by 100px image of your choices at Control Center -> Avatars. As always, avatars must conform to the usage guidelines (i.e. be in good taste). You can also turn off the viewing of avatars at the same location list above.
Side notes:
- I think 100 by 100 might be to big for my taste but I go with it for now.
- Don't ask me to enable gif images. I turned them off on purpose to preclude animated images.
|
|
|
forum search does not find old articles anymore |
Posted by: Steffen - 2013-08-10, 2:34 - Forum: Website Suggestions/Requests/Discussion
- Replies (4)
|
|
Hi,
I just noticed that old articles are no longer properly found when searching for keywords in them.
In my case, I was looking for the old "which color to use for silver" thread.
Reason was that the default of the search function currently adds a constraint
"only search posts which are not older than 1 year".
I find this silent default addition confusing and would like to ask to drop it.
A user wanting to add a time constraint can still do that in the "advanced search" function.
- Steffen
|
|
|
Parts Tracker now supports long descriptions |
Posted by: Chris Dee - 2013-08-08, 16:49 - Forum: LDraw.org Announcements
- Replies (4)
|
|
The LDraw Parts Tracker has been updated to allow up to 200 characters in the line 1 part description.
There may be some knock-on impact on the display of the Parts List and Activity pages and I'll deal with those if they become a problem. If anyone sees any other problems, please let me know by posting here.
|
|
|
Misunderstanding transform (line type 1) |
Posted by: Robert Baruch - 2013-08-07, 0:53 - Forum: LDraw File Processing and Conversion
- Replies (2)
|
|
I think I'm misunderstanding something about the transform matrix for line type 1. Long story short, I've written a program to convert LDRAW files into something that threejs (3D library for JavaScript) can use, but I'm getting surfaces with the wrong normals, and it's not obvious what's going on.
So take a look at this line in p/stud.dat:
Code: 1 16 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 -4 0 0 0 6 4-4cyli.dat
And now p/4-4cyli, just the first quad:
Code: 4 16 1 1 0 0.9239 1 0.3827 0.9239 0 0.3827 1 0 0
So the vertices are (1,1,0) (0.9239,1,0.3827) (0.9239,0,0.3827) and (1,0,0). Plotting these out and assuming CCW winding shows that the normal faces outwards, as expected.
Proof for those who care: the first two vectors formed by the first three vertices are (-0.0761,0,0.3827) and (0,-1,0). Crossing the first vector by the second yields (0.3827,0,0.0761), a vector pointing positive along x and z.
Now, the transformation matrix in stud.dat transforms the vertices in 4-4cyli by scaling the x-axis by 6, the y-axis by -4, and the z-axis by 6. Unfortunately, scaling the y-axis by -4 reverses the sense of the face, and now its normal points inward.
Again, proof for those who care: the transformation matrix is
Code: 6 0 0 0
0 -4 0 0
0 0 6 0
0 0 0 1
Applying this to the first vertex:
Code: 6 0 0 0 1 6
0 -4 0 0 x 1 = -4 = (6,-4,0)
0 0 6 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 1
So the first three vertices transformed are (6,-4,0) (5.5434,-4,2.2962) and (5.5434,0,2.2962).
The vectors formed by these vertices are (-0.4566,0,2.2962) and (0,4,0). Crossing the first by the second yields (-9.1848,0,-1.8264): a vector pointing along the negative x and z axes.
The order of the vertices has not changed, but since y was inverted, the orientation of the face has changed. This means that stud.dat has an inward-facing cylinder, but a disc pointing in the -y direction, which is weird. But is this correct? If so, I'm not sure how stud.dat is supposed to display anything properly...
|
|
|
LDview and batch processing ldraw parts |
Posted by: Petter Lerdahl - 2013-08-05, 20:32 - Forum: LDraw Editors and Viewers
- Replies (4)
|
|
I trying to create some part pictures with a batch file i found on holly-wood.it
This is my second attept and it got a bit better. First i did not get any result but now i got a few pictures before it poped up with an old friend "Ldview need to close". This on my best computer (12 GB memory 3,2 quad core Intel running win 7 64 bit, ATI radon HD 68xx ) with the setting in Ldview on memory usage to low.
The batch was all parts from 3001.dat to 3089.dat. Since i got the same problem with Ldview need to close on my first attemt also, so i shorted the number off parts it needed to process. When it had processed 3004pt6.dat it stopped with the message and pressing cansel let it go on but did not create any pictures and it poped up on and on.
|
|
|
|