I used this in 93273:
1 16 -10 24.9719 0 0 1 0 -28.9719 0 -28.9719 40 0 -40 48\1-8chrd.dat
and the arch 92950 have been corrected recently, and is using this:
1 16 0 48.972 -10 -40 0 40 -28.9719 0 -28.9719 0 4 0 48\1-4cylo.dat
I don't know who made the initial calculations, or why the first point is on the front instead of on the top.
I think we should use the same values here.
It looks like "20 24.972 20" gives a better precision than "20 24.9719 20".
0 !LPE VERTEX -20 -16.00016098 20
0 !LPE VERTEX -20 -16.00006098 20
1 16 -10 24.9719 0 0 1 0 -28.9719 0 -28.9719 40 0 -40 48\1-8chrd.dat
and the arch 92950 have been corrected recently, and is using this:
1 16 0 48.972 -10 -40 0 40 -28.9719 0 -28.9719 0 4 0 48\1-4cylo.dat
I don't know who made the initial calculations, or why the first point is on the front instead of on the top.
I think we should use the same values here.
Code:
1 12 -19 24.972 20 0 1 0 -28.9719 0 -28.9719 -40 0 40 48\1-8edge.dat
1 12 21 24.972 20 0 1 0 -28.9719 0 -28.9719 -40 0 40 48\1-8edge.dat
1 12 -19 24.972 20 0 1 0 -28.9719 0 -28.9719 -40 0 40 48\1-8chrd.dat
1 12 21 24.972 20 0 -1 0 -28.9719 0 -28.9719 -40 0 40 48\1-8chrd.dat
It looks like "20 24.972 20" gives a better precision than "20 24.9719 20".
0 !LPE VERTEX -20 -16.00016098 20
0 !LPE VERTEX -20 -16.00006098 20