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!

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



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

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

  5-8cyls.dat (Size: 1.42 KB / Downloads: 4)

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?

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

  duplo stacked.png (Size: 149.34 KB / Downloads: 42)

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).

  case1.png (Size: 6.87 KB / Downloads: 42)
  case 2.png (Size: 8.15 KB / Downloads: 42)

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

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

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

  castlecape93c01.dat (Size: 17.78 KB / Downloads: 0)
  castlecape93.dat (Size: 12.95 KB / Downloads: 0)

  x351.png (Size: 36.1 KB / Downloads: 560)
Hiya! I made a model of part x351 (or 41850 on other sites than bricklink), imported it into Bricklink's Part Designer and exported it to LDRAW format.
I read on the website I needed to write an e-mail to Orion Pobursky but was unable to find his e-mail address.
Feel free to let me know if there's something I need to fix, because I'm not sure what stuff is required and what is not.

- Jasper "JappaWakka" Speelman

Attached Files

  x351.dat (Size: 169 KB / Downloads: 4)

Greetings!  So, went to request these parts for Stud.io, and was told there was no 3D Model file for these parts....  So, while I am still waiting on the Zeppelin Container parts, and seeing as how I need the above parts of a Narrow Gauge Locomotive Project, I figured I'd ask here for help with the 3D model files.  Thanks, have a great day!  Rockatoa, Brickticks out!

Hi,

Can I get the new 2x2 round curved corner brick by any chance

It's from set 77002 - Metal Sonic v Cyclone

The height is 1 brick tall (but no studs) and the inner diameter if you put 4 together is 2L

There are 4 in yellow, on the front of the robot which makes a 4x4 ring.


  sonic.png (Size: 257.96 KB / Downloads: 305)