Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 5,378
» Latest member: Luiz Goncalves
» Forum threads: 6,222
» Forum posts: 52,085

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 304 online users.
» 1 Member(s) | 297 Guest(s)
Applebot, Baidu, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Google, Yandex, Franklin W. Cain

Latest Threads
MPDCenter - Inventory pro...
Forum: All Other Programs.
Last Post: Manfred Schaefer
4 hours ago
» Replies: 6
» Views: 82
Description of parts
Forum: Parts Authoring
Last Post: Magnus Forsberg
5 hours ago
» Replies: 8
» Views: 145
Friends 2015
Forum: Official Models
Last Post: Takeshi Takahashi
7 hours ago
» Replies: 2
» Views: 596
Part 11090 hole depth var...
Forum: Parts Authoring
Last Post: Gerald Lasser
11 hours ago
» Replies: 9
» Views: 323
Part Requet: Windscreen 7...
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Knud Ahrnell Albrechtsen
Today, 3:41
» Replies: 2
» Views: 94
Model Team
Forum: Official Models
Last Post: Chris Böhnke
Today, 1:59
» Replies: 45
» Views: 60,032
Difference between 86644,...
Forum: Parts Authoring
Last Post: Magnus Forsberg
Yesterday, 16:38
» Replies: 1
» Views: 119
Hair and Skirt Request
Forum: Part Requests
Last Post: Will A
Yesterday, 15:41
» Replies: 3
» Views: 107
Does any friend know how ...
Forum: Help
Last Post: Jack
Yesterday, 14:21
» Replies: 4
» Views: 176
[LDPE] 1.8.96 Released (n...
Forum: Parts Author Tools
Last Post: Willy Tschager
2025-10-14, 4:31
» Replies: 8
» Views: 1,285

 
  Technic 1997
Posted by: Philippe Hurbain - 2024-11-08, 16:25 - Forum: Official Models - Replies (1)

Thread for 1997 Technic models

Print this item

  Castle - Dragon Knights
Posted by: Chris Böhnke - 2024-11-07, 22:33 - Forum: Official Models - Replies (5)

6020 Magic Shop (1993)
EDIT (2025-05-23):
Replaced obsolete Wand 6124, minor fixes to better match other models; updated picture. Set Description:

6020 Magic Shop (US) / Merlin the Wizard (UK) - 45 pcs. (box) / 46 pcs. (instructions)
In NA this set wasn't available on it's own until 1994; instead it was only available as part of the "Magical Adventure" Value Pack together with Set 6043 (which was absent till 1994 as well). The second smallest set to feature Majisto/Cerlin/Filikrato VI.


.ldr   6020 - Magic Shop.ldr (Size: 3.86 KB / Downloads: 2)
   


First model upload - MPDCenter claims it's OMR compliant, not sure if it's true.
OMR compliant
Missing items: none.

Print this item

Wink LeoCad
Posted by: BBN - 2024-11-07, 9:52 - Forum: General LDraw.org Discussion - Replies (1)

Ich habe eine Frage an Sie, weiß jemand, wie man die Teile zur Bibliothek der neuen Teile hinzufügt. Denn ich habe es immer wieder versucht, aber irgendwie funktioniert es nicht. Muss ich auf etwas oder etwas achten. Denn im LDraw.org habe ich neue Teile, die ich gerne hinzufügen würde, aber irgendwie funktioniert es nicht. ...

Print this item

  Minimum angle of a quad or triangle
Posted by: Peter Blomberg - 2024-11-07, 1:48 - Forum: Parts Authoring - Replies (2)

I'm working on part 35965 and it has an underside periferal wall of thickness 4 LDU and multiple perpendicular branches. At worst, the 4 LDU side branch is 160 LDU away from the corner, thus making the sharp angle 0.0349 degrees (0.0006 radians). This is larger than the minimum angle of 0.025 degrees specified in the official requirements, but it is really long and narrow triangle!

How accurate/tested is this minimum specification?

What makes something work having the 4 LDU side branch up to 189 LDU away from the corner, but suddenly stops working at 190 LDU from the corner?

Can I as a part author choose to allow T-junctions when the sharp angle is less than 1.43 degrees? This corresponds to a 4 LDU high object 160 LDU away from the corner. Interestingly, that angle is 0.025 radians!

Print this item

  10169p01
Posted by: Sylvain Sauvage - 2024-11-06, 16:36 - Forum: Parts Authoring - Replies (5)

Hi, there’s a problem with the decor on this part: some triangles are in White instead of 16, adding a square in the $.

[Image: dollar.png]

(Sorry, I’m confused with the procedure to correct recent parts….  And the forum doesn’t seem to like my image.)

Print this item

  5-8cyls
Posted by: Philippe Hurbain - 2024-11-06, 13:16 - Forum: Parts Authoring - Replies (4)

For the arm with hand (109866), I have a need for a 5-8cyls primitive (attached). This one renders fine in LDView with primitive substitution. Opinions, objections? Other way to do that with existing prims? 
This is directly related to this discussion:
https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-23917-po...l#pid36070



Attached Files
.dat   5-8cyls.dat (Size: 1.42 KB / Downloads: 4)
Print this item

  Are underside reinforcements relevant?
Posted by: Peter Blomberg - 2024-11-06, 7:25 - Forum: General LDraw.org Discussion - Replies (7)

Dear LDraw community,

Part moulds change over time as LEGO improves their designs. This leads to parts having relatively minor differences in their shapes. Sometimes this affects functionality, but often not.

When it comes to underside reinforcements, is it a detail that can be ignored or would you like to see all individual variants for the same part modeled in LDraw? Is it sufficient for you to have one variant in your digital part library or would you like to have all variants?

Print this item

  Curvature of duplo parts 98252 98224 11169
Posted by: Peter Blomberg - 2024-11-05, 15:56 - Forum: Parts Authoring - Replies (1)

The curvatures of parts 98252, 98224, and 4198 (bottom) should be the same and match perfectly with 11169.

.png   duplo stacked.png (Size: 149.34 KB / Downloads: 41)

The real parts do match, but their digital replicas don't. 98224, 98252, and 4198 (bottom) uses a 40x48 48\1-4edge, while 11169 uses a 47x48.3 48\5-24edge with additional padding.
   

To make things worse, none match the curvatures of parts 2302, 98223, 4198 (top), and 18652 having a 40x48.8 48\1-4edge with padding. However, there is almost no difference between the 47x48.3 48\5-24edge in 11169 and the 40x48.8 48\1-4edge in 2302/98223.

Finally, to prove having done my research this time, I attach two real world test cases, for which I photographed the joined parts and counted pixels. The spread of dots is due to the uncertainty of establishing the exact boundary between two surfaces of equal height. I placed a dot where I thought the main color of the part started to become darker (the real parts have rounding near the edges and that rounding causes darkening of their color in a photo).

.png   case1.png (Size: 6.87 KB / Downloads: 41)
.png   case 2.png (Size: 8.15 KB / Downloads: 41)

Print this item

  Welcome to new parts author Jasper Speelman [JappaWakka]
Posted by: Orion Pobursky - 2024-11-05, 13:52 - Forum: Parts Tracker Discussion - Replies (1)

Join me in welcoming new parts author Jasper Speelman [JappaWakka]

Please support them as they start their LDraw parts author journey.

Print this item

  Castle Cape 1993 (x375px1)
Posted by: Chris Böhnke - 2024-11-05, 13:15 - Forum: Parts Authoring - No Replies

Hello everyone,

I think I am almost done with the shape of this missing cloth cape(s):

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/cat...=3#T=C&C=3
https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/cat...=1#T=C&C=1

   

However, I'd like to know if the formed shape is ok this way:
   
   

I tried to get as close as possible to the depiction in the instructions (sets 6082, 6076, 6090), which all have it so that it does not intersect with a horse (and it's saddle), when a minifig rides on it. That way it also does not interfere with the flag and halberd attached to the saddle clips (as intended for set 6082 & 6076):
   

The only other set containing this cape does not come with instructions (6105), but the box image implies a similar build like in 6082. Bricklink and other sites commonly show the cape hanging up very strictly down towards the minifig's back. However this is neither how it is officially depicted on the sets' boxes nor is this the way a new cape acts when put on a minifig. New ones are very stiff and can (almost) hold up their entire weight, making it appear very flat.

Some questions:
1) Is the curvature ok this way?
2) Are there enough (or too many?) polygons for the curve?
3) I am uncertain about the sub-filing. I currently would make a single subfile for the unprinted bottom+edges, then put the top surface in the main-file for both the unprinted and the 2 printed ones. Is that ok and should the base sub-file be mirrored?
4) Is a single formed version enough?
5) Anything else that should be changed?

Thanks for the feedback!



Attached Files
.dat   castlecape93c01.dat (Size: 17.78 KB / Downloads: 0)
.dat   castlecape93.dat (Size: 12.95 KB / Downloads: 0)
Print this item