Technic 1977

[aefferen]

1. Here's a screenshot from LDCad showing what I mean:

I've displayed a grid at a 5 LDU resolution (and hidden one 1x8 beam for clarity). Looking down from above, the tractor itself is visible at bottom, and the attachment (your submodel "equipment1") is at top. The vertical white grid line shows the center of the model; notice that the main tractor is properly centered, but "equipment1" is one grid square too far to the left. Since its current position is <-320 16 1625>, all that's necessary is to add 5 to the X coordinate, so: <-315 16 1625>.

2. Not sure how it's done in MLCad since I don't have the program, but it should be quick and easy, and worth doing. Depending on what program others use to view your model, it might give strange results when we try to rotate the view, if it's set to rotate around the model's origin. (I personally like to set the Y-origin at the lowest physical point of the model, so it sits on the "floor" and doesn't appear to be floating when I go to render the model, but that's not the only way to do it.)

3. Meshing gears isn't necessary for OMR purposes, it's really just your own discretion as a modeler. While I always mesh everything when building Technic models in LDraw, it was a presumption on my part that most other modelers do as well, but perhaps the practice isn't as widespread as I guessed. (It seems many of the good folks here put their considerable skills into tackling behind-the-scenes issues, allowing less accomplished LDraw-ers like me to focus on things like meshing gears.) :-)

4. Yes, MPDCenter won't know if you're building a set that has alternate builds, but there are specific guidelines for naming those files. However, I'm not actually sure how that would apply here—most Technic sets have 2 or more totally different models you can build, but in this case it's one model with a variety of alternate attachments (and then I think the set has a couple of fully standalone alternate builds as well).

So I'd open that question to the community as to what's the most appropriate naming scheme for this set. I think my personal solution would be to have all the attachments included as submodels in the final building step, at the appropriate positions, and then to "comment out" all but the one currently being displayed. All of that together would then be named "851 - Tractor - Main model.mpd". Then if you decided to build the two standalone models, they would be named "851 - Tractor - Power saw.mpd" and "851 - Tractor - Wood splitter.mpd"—or whatever you determine those models to actually represent! 

Hello N. W. Perry,
Thanks again for your elaborate reply much appreciated.
point 1. After some investigation I understood what you meant. This is fixed now. Further more I am going through the model now part by part and do find several omissions. So lot op corrections to do.
Point 2. Still didn't find in MLcad how to solve that issue. I discovered now what you mean. I did find a function to sow the center point and it is way outside the model. Problem is I don't know how that happened. More work to do.
Point 3. Currently busy to mesh the gears, just to do that for once.
Point 4. I found the guidelines but these are pretty elaborate so need to find a quiet moment to read them.
All in all again a well appreciated feedback.
Best regards Allard