|
|
Unofficial File parts/32283c01.dat
Next File |
Prev File |
Download |
Review |
Edit |
CA Header Edit |
Events
| 32283 Composite parts
File Header:
0 Motor Pull Back 4 x 9 x 2.333 Type 1 with Black Base
0 Name: 32283c01.dat
0 Author: Santeri Piippo [arezey]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Shortcut
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt
0 BFC CERTIFY CCW
0 !CATEGORY Vehicle
0 !KEYWORDS engine, Racers, race, racing
0 !HISTORY 2012-05-18 [cwdee] Use top part instead of half subparts
Status:
 Certified! (ACCX)
Size: 505 bytes
Reviewers' certifications:
MagFors=certify
Steffen=certify
cwdee=certify
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
Related (unofficial) files:
(none)
File reviews and updates:
At Mon Mar 2 21:35:04 2009, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: arezey
Comments:
Peeron's motor classification is confusing me... the one without front studs is the one not a composite.
======================================================================
At Wed Mar 4 16:00:18 2009, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: arezey
Comments:
Reduced ridge depth from 14 to 13, removed extra back ridges, added keywords.
======================================================================
At Thu Mar 12 19:30:39 2009, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: arezey
Comments:
Fixed dimensions, moved origin to the back stud plane.
======================================================================
At Fri Mar 13 13:14:04 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
Looks good. But to be homogenous with other parts, origin should be located on center of _top_ surface (translate the whole part by x=0, y=+32, z=+60).
======================================================================
At Sat Mar 14 07:58:03 2009, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: arezey
Comments:
Moved origin.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
======================================================================
At Sat Mar 14 08:08:02 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Thu Apr 2 16:34:03 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: tcobbs
Certification: hold
Comments:
The white ring around the rotating axle has its BFC winding reversed on one side.
======================================================================
At Thu Apr 2 16:38:04 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: tcobbs
Certification: hold
Comments:
In addition to the BFC problem, there are quite a few edge lines using color 8 instead of color 24.
======================================================================
At Thu Apr 2 17:26:03 2009, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: arezey
Comments:
Fixed BFC problem by deleting a cylinder.
I can't recolor the Dark-Gray lines, because they are part of a shape I can't subfile without redundancy, see its counterpart http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/32283c01.dat
Does this cylinder deletion fix the BFC problem? If so, I shall fix the other version too.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
======================================================================
At Thu Apr 2 20:32:21 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: hold
Comments:
"Does this cylinder deletion fix the BFC problem?"
No, the problem is the ring line 13 that should be:
1 3 40 42 30 0 -1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 4-4ring6.dat
About the line color, you should create an (uncolored) part for bottom part and one for the top, and assemble them (colored) for the complete shortcut.
======================================================================
At Fri Apr 3 02:38:02 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: tcobbs
Certification: hold
Comments:
Philo's right. You need to put all the black parts into a subfile using color 16/color 24, and then use color 0 in this file when referring to that subfile. The other file needs to be updated to not use color 8 lines as well. Color 8 lines are fundamentally different from color 24 lines. LDView, for example, shows color 8 lines even when edge lines are disabled, because they aren't edge lines. And while being the author of LDView biases me about this, it's still my belief that color 8 should never be used in a part for an edge line. (For that matter, I think all part geometry should generally use color 16 and color 24, and getting other colors should always be via sub-files, but I'm not sure that's written down anywhere.)
======================================================================
At Fri Apr 3 05:46:01 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Hmm.. so what should I do about it then? Make a 32283s04.dat (and 32283s05.dat) which are all the things coloured as black into one subpart?
======================================================================
At Fri Apr 3 13:06:01 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: mikeheide
Certification: novote
Comments:
"but I'm not sure that's written down anywhere."
It is not written because it is very difficult to define what should have what color. In general I agree fully. But I feel also unable to put our knowlegde into words that would fit to any existing part. Maybe we could say never use a specific color for basic elements (linetype 2-5) except for pattern.
======================================================================
At Fri Apr 3 15:18:20 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: certify
Comments:
"Maybe we could say never use a specific color for basic elements (linetype 2-5) except for pattern"
Actually the problem occurs only for lines (type 2 and 5).
For example, for a composite part. I generally create a part for each color, but some small things that can be modelled directly from primitives and surfaces (eg. a round button) are included directly in the composite with the right color. If I need separated lines, I create a part.
======================================================================
At Fri Apr 3 15:34:03 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: tcobbs
Certification: hold
Comments:
(First of all, this hold isn't providing new reasons to hold; it's just that if I vote "no vote" it will override my hold.)
Based on other colored composite parts I've seen, my understanding was that the "right" way to build these was to have a separate sub-part for each separate piece of plastic, and to use sub-parts for everything that's not in the default color (except patterns). Having said that, my hold was specifically for the use of color 8 as highlight lines. Unless other people convince me otherwise (which will take a lot), I'm going to stand firm on that not being acceptable. The rest of what I say below isn't enough to cause a hold, it's just my understanding of how things are normally done.
I would expect this part to have a sub-part for the bottom section, another sub-part for the top section, and a third for the white section. Given that the bottom section is modeled as half, then mirrored, it's not quite that simple, but you get the idea. Also, the white section appears to be all primitives, so not having a sub-part for that is OK. My advice would be to create two new sub-parts: one for use with this part, which called out to the current 32283s01 as a sub-part, and another to be used on the bottom of 32283c01.
One last question. Does this part exist on Peeron? I couldn't find it, only the ones with the studs in the front.
======================================================================
At Fri Apr 3 16:06:02 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Travis, it's this one here: http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/32283
Though I'm confused, could somebody suggest a part layout for this? I'm clueless here...
======================================================================
At Fri Apr 3 21:44:14 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: mikeheide
Certification: hold
Comments:
Please see the construction of this part http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/px536c01.dat.
The part you have modelled is build very similar. Top, Base and Axle. Only three subparts would be enough!
If you decide to model one of those subpart only half, that would be ok, but in my opinion in the main part file (this file) there should be only that three mentions subparts are referenced.
======================================================================
At Sat Apr 4 06:20:25 2009, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: arezey
Comments:
Created three new subfiles: s04 for axle, s05 for bottom case of this part and s06 for the bottom case of the other. The top remains unchanged, as it'd be redundant to have a subfile just containing two halves IMO.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
======================================================================
At Sat Apr 4 19:58:01 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: tcobbs
Certification: novote
Comments:
It looks good to me now.
The following link (given above) points to the version of this part with studs on the front:
http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/32283
I'm guessing that this version (without the studs on the front) really does exist, but I can't find it on Peeron, and I want to be sure that it really does exist before voting to certify.
======================================================================
At Sat Apr 4 21:34:11 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Hrm... the peeron pages are a bit messed up in my opinion anyway.
See http://www.majhost.com/gallery/arezey/ldraw/32283-1.png and http://www.majhost.com/gallery/arezey/ldraw/32283-2.png , they are blurry but they'll have to do, me being the lousy photographer that I am... also http://www.peeron.com/scans/5223-1/2 .
======================================================================
At Sat Apr 4 22:56:14 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: tcobbs
Certification: certify
Comments:
Good enough. Since I obviously don't have the part, I just wanted to be sure it seemed to be the right shape. As far as I can tell, it matches the shape from the instructions scan.
======================================================================
At Sun Apr 5 10:34:02 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: mikeheide
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Fri May 22 12:06:01 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
checking with l3p reports "unknown color" errors
======================================================================
At Fri May 22 12:10:56 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
l3p doesn't know of the Translucent-White colour (and thus gives unknown colour errors) as it's one of the more recent colours. It is official, however, just look at ldconfig.ldr (near the end).
======================================================================
At Wed May 27 08:08:01 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: hold
Comments:
Gah. The part has an incorrect category, and IMO should be !CATEGORY Car.
However, I'm kind of reluctant of submitting this file once more as it already has two certify votes...
======================================================================
At Wed May 27 20:04:01 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
can easily be added by Admin header edit, you may ask Holly to do it
======================================================================
At Thu May 28 10:06:02 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Holly-Wood
Certification: novote
Comments:
Edited header
======================================================================
At Thu May 28 12:52:00 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Thank you a lot, Willy.
======================================================================
At Tue Nov 24 16:04:49 2009, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: hold
Comments:
Gah. I have made quite a goof with this part's structure. This part is a composite. 32283.dat is the bottom as a whole, while the top has a design ID of 32282. The 'axle' is a full pull-back motor though I think it can be left being just an axle, but should be assigned an x???.dat number. I can't find the design ID of it. The part has to be changed but as I tried, all I got was a headache so I'll leave it to you guys.
======================================================================
At Sat Feb 6 18:08:09 2010, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: mikeheide
Certification: novote
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Sat Feb 6 20:27:07 2010, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
as mentioned, this part needs refacturing.
the separate portions need to become own parts.
======================================================================
At Mon Apr 5 21:35:32 2010, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: mikeheide
Certification: novote
Comments:
I understand 'so I'll leave it to you guys' so that anybody is free to improve. So I will in near future.
======================================================================
At Fri Feb 3 00:40:04 2012, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
(keeping hold)
!CATEGORY Car nowadays has become !CATEGORY Vehicle
======================================================================
At Fri May 18 12:17:22 2012 part 'parts/32283.dat' was renamed to 'parts/32283c01.dat'.
======================================================================
At Fri May 18 12:25:04 2012 a Parts Tracker Admin edited the header.
======================================================================
At Fri May 18 12:25:04 2012 a Parts Tracker Admin edited the header.
======================================================================
At Fri May 18 12:55:09 2012, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: cwdee
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
======================================================================
At Sun May 20 21:35:03 2012, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Fri Jun 29 12:10:03 2012, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Sun Jan 13 17:25:14 2013, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: cwdee
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
|
