Feedback Request: Table of Offests for Related Parts


Re: Feedback Request: Table of Offests for Related Parts
#21
I really have mixed feelings about that, I agree that SR3D does some amazing things with this info, but I also firmly believe if we take the LCD / public / from scratch method instead of this 'easy' route. We could setup something even more amazing.

For example I don't really like all the connection types (also present in LDC though). I would really prefer a more general way of describing 'hotspots' in ways of general shapes. If something fits something else is then deducible by: will this shape fit in this other shape?

For example if you got a cylindrical hole at some place and a cylinder pin somewhere else it will fit if the diameter is smaller or the same and it's length is shorter or equal to the depth of the hole. Same goes is one the 'pin' shape is rectangular it will still go into the other shape if it's general diameter is equal or less (technic axle in beam hole). But you don't have to tell the software connection type axle hole goes into bla bla bla bla bla.

You could also assign friction parameters to these shapes making the way they snap/stick together math based with endless possibilities. And the best thing it's to the implementing software to decide the final behavior / depth of use of this information (e.g. only snap equal diameter stuff, do full blown collision detection etc).

I would greatly prefer this: over here are coordinates and you MUST use them this way.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Messages In This Thread
Re: Feedback Request: Table of Offests for Related Parts - by Roland Melkert - 2013-02-07, 18:14

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)