Good morning,

Here is a fresh LPC 1.5.1 release with more features and less bugs

Change log:

New features:

• The usability of the image, view-preferences and colour forms is improved.
  
• SlicerPro is now used for slicing
  
• You can update the program by clicking on "Help -> Install Updates". A internet connection is required to update the program.
  
  

• Fixed an error within the template editor (occurs on renaming).
  
• Fixed several translation errors and improved the French translation (thanks J.C. Tchang!)
  
• ...and a few other small bugs.
  

Hi, I could need some helping thoughts, hands or calipers in solving the remaining geometry problems
I spotted with the electric plugs

Please download the accompanying small demonstration file electric_plugs_geometry_problem.ldr
(which uses unofficial parts currently on the PT). It contains the simple assembly

1 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 4169.dat
1 2 0 -122 -1 0 0 -1 1 0 0 0 -1 0 512p01.dat
1 47 0 -122 23 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 -1 0 266bc02.dat
1 4 0 -102 10.5 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 -1 0 766ac01.dat
1 1 0 -94.5 18 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 766ac01.dat

This assembly is taken from set 7866, where it occurs in this form.

The following geometry problems can be seen here:
1. The central pin of the blue plug is smaller than the hole of the red plug where it should fit in.
2. The thickness of the red plug is so large that it collides with the green part: You can see the 2 parts intersecting each other.

I am not sure how to solve these problems.

Solving problem 1: this can be solved by either
(a) enlarging the pin of the blue plug
(b) reducing the size of the hole in the red plug
Solution (a) would require to touch ALL official parts having a hole for that pin, and that are MANY parts.
Solution (b) can easily be applied, as just the hole in this plug file needs to be adjusted.
So deciding between (a) and (b) is not only influenced by the real world diameter which can be measured,
but also by the amount of official parts that would need correction then.

Solving problem 2: this can be solved by either
(a) Making the plug a little thinner to remove the object intersection. In real life, it just snugly sits there touching the 512p01.
(b) Repositioning the plug sockets in the light brick 266bc02. Doing so will require adjusting all light bricks the same way (repositioning the plug sockets).
Remark: it could be that the plug sockets at the light brick really are misplaced in all official lightbricks.
This can be concluded from the fact that all have the same position for them, but just 266ac01 uses a different position.
Checkout the attached Electric.ldr.

I am a little lost and desperate here.
Folks, can you provide help or share thoughts?

Attached Files

  Electric.ldr (Size: 1.24 KB / Downloads: 0)
  electric_plugs_geometry_problem.ldr (Size: 309 bytes / Downloads: 0)

At part
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg.../85977.dat
some questions arose about where to put the origin of train track parts.

The X and Z choice usually is not a problem, both for curved or straight parts:
we there can simply follow the principles of our usual practice, i.e. "part center".
This is also what existing parts do, e.g. 3229a.dat, 3229ac01.dat, 3229ac04.dat.

Regarding the Y origin, there is the question
"Should the origin be (A) at the top of the studded sleepers or (B) at the top of the rails?"
The current status in the library needs to be explained historically:
The rail parts e.g. 3229a.dat existed in the library long time already.
As usual for parts, they had their origin at the top.
This origin was kept when 3229ac01.dat was created, an assembly of two curved rails.
This origin was kept when 3228ac02.dat was created, an assembly of two straight rails.
This origin was kept when 3228bc02.dat was created, an assembly of two straight rails plus sleeper.
This origin was kept when 948ac02.dat was created, a point.
This is the 4.5V blue and grey rails story.
The same origin was applied to the analogous 12V blue and grey rails, e.g. 73696c04.dat.

So to make a long story short: carrying over the origin choice of the single rail part to the rails assemblies
led to the effect that the vertical origin of all 4.5V and 12V train track parts and assemblies is at the top of the rails.

The origin question now again arises for the 9V train track.
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptreviewsum...aintrack9v
(with or without metal top), and for other train tracks where the rails are firmly attached to the sleepers.
There the question is if the vertical origin should be
(A) at the top of the sleepers or
(B) at the top of the rails.
Both solutions have advantages and disadvantages:
Solution (A) would make the new train track parts better match plates.
Solution (A) would be the intuitive one if one did not know about existing train track parts.
Solution (B) would make the new train track parts better match existing train track parts.
Both solutions are no problem for train track layout software like BlueBrick.

So what to do now? Current situation:
- Official train track parts out in the wild have "origin at rail top".
- *SOME* of newer train track parts with "origin at sleeper top" already "sneaked" out, e.g. 32087.dat
- all newer train track parts currently on the PT like 74746.dat or 53401.dat or 85976.dat follow the "origin at sleeper top" strategy

I have no real strong opinion here. We could opt for one of these solutions:
(i) make all train track parts have origin at rail top
(ii) make all train track parts have origin at sleeper top
(iii) let some have it this way, others the other way

Solution (i) would require to re-position official file 32087.dat.
Solution (ii) would require to re-position many official 4.5V and 12V files
Solution (iii) would create inconsistency but would minimize current trouble

After having written this, I slightly tend to solution (iii)...

I get this error when I try to convert the attached model using L3P 1.4 beta.

Attached Files

  building_001_jessimanmemorial.mpd (Size: 19.19 KB / Downloads: 1)
  3024.dat (Size: 45 bytes / Downloads: 2)

Right now the Minifig Ski Pole is found as 90514.dat. But at Bricklink and in LDD it has the number 90540.
I assume that LDD and Bricklink can not be both wrong- sometimes Bricklink has wrong numbers - But Bricklink and LDD at the same time with the same number - I doubt it. So this official part needs renumbering.

Bricklink

I'm in the middle of addressing Philo's comment on the lastest version of one of my parts, dealing with overlapping primtives/quads

Right now, I'm a bit stumped on how to deal with the front and back without any major proportional reworkings, if at all

Attached Files

  32577.dat (Size: 28.07 KB / Downloads: 0)
  32577s01.dat (Size: 9.35 KB / Downloads: 0)

So this part is interesting:

4860 @ peeron

4860 @ bricklink

it also appear in the part library as 4860.dat as moveto 4870.
But these part are not the same:

4860 @ peeron

4870 @ bricklink


Or are they?!

At least at bricklink they look diffrent....
and peeron don't list a 4870 part.


PS: Maybe the part request section isn't the right place for this topic, but when they are two diffrent part this is a part request for the missing one.

Hey,

Here is the new stable LPC 1.5.0 release with more improvements in usability and precision, and finally, reference lines.

Please uninstall older versions of this software before installing a new version.

Change log:

New features:

• You can draw and delete reference lines.
  
• You can adjust the size / radius of ovals and circles.
  
• The projection accuracy is improved.
  
• Minor improvements on the LPC data integrity.
  

• The dimensions of the generated sticker templates are twice too big
  
• Small primitive/group issues
  

There seems to be a missing backside or bfc error in 973pdb.dat