Parts Tracker :: Parts List :: Activity :: Submit :: PT Tools :: PT Reference :: LDraw Specifications :: Lookup

Unofficial File parts/53992c02.dat

Next File | Prev File | Download | Review | Edit | CA Header Edit | Events | 53992 Composite parts

part image

File Header:

0 Technic Tread with 36 Ridges (Triangle Shaped)
0 Name: 53992c02.dat
0 Author: Philippe Hurbain [Philo]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Part
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

0 !HELP Uncomment the first lines for hubs and structure
0 !HELP This is triangular configuration used in set 7706
0 !HELP Note the use of box4o8a.dat to adjust tread length

0 BFC CERTIFY CCW

0 !HISTORY 2008-12-31 [Philo] Creation

0 // 1 0 92 -96 35 -0.8 0 -0.6 -0.6 0 0.8 0 1 0 32271.dat
0 // 1 0 -60 0 55 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 1 0 40490.dat
0 // 1 7 -140 0 0 0.999 -0.0439 0 0.0439 0.999 0 0 0 1 54087.dat
0 // 1 7 0 0 0 0.9989 -0.0471 0 0.0471 0.9989 0 0 0 1 54087.dat
0 // 1 7 80 -80 0 0.6543 0.7562 0 -0.7562 0.6543 0 0 0 1 54087.dat

Status:
Needs more votes. (CX)
Size: 3653 bytes

Reviewers' certifications:

MagFors=certify

Required (unofficial) subfiles:
(none)

Related (unofficial) files:
(none)

File reviews and updates:

At Wed Dec 31 11:04:34 2008, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: Philo
======================================================================
At Sun May 24 10:50:07 2009, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
- should theme-specific prefix "Technic..." be removed from part name?
- isn't this a "belt", not a "tread"?
(cf. discussion at 71965.dat)

======================================================================
At Mon Apr 1 03:55:05 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
I think type "Shortcut" is wrong here.
This is a formed part, so I would expect type "Part".

======================================================================
At Mon Apr 1 04:05:02 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
downgrading to novote

======================================================================
At Thu Jun 13 21:25:02 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.

======================================================================
At Fri Jun 14 07:50:02 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MMR1988
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.

======================================================================
At Fri Jun 14 07:55:02 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MMR1988
Certification: novote
Comments:
Sorry, downgrading again.
I'm a bit curious about the 3rd comment line. The scaling seems a bit strange to me. Is the track not long enough or is it the angle of the track which makes problems there?

======================================================================
At Fri Jun 14 08:20:09 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
It's just that rubber is extensible!. Depending on models and exact wheels configuration, you need to adjust length a bit. Here I added box primitives, it could be done also by scaling rubber tread elements.

======================================================================
At Fri Jun 14 11:15:03 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MMR1988
Certification: novote
Comments:
I know the properties of rubber ;-)
And I just didn't realize that the rim is only rotated and not scaled (I thought this first)
Nevertheless I would prefer a version without rotated rims at Y = 0.
So that the boxes should be moved to another area of the track.


======================================================================
At Fri Jun 14 12:55:03 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
Using rotated rims helps get the tangent points in (more or less) the right place. It's all a matter of compromizes between the fixed number of segments of rim and tread curved section...

======================================================================
At Fri Jun 14 15:25:01 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
If 751.dat is a part, then these treads must also be parts, not shortcuts. Right?

======================================================================
At Fri Jun 14 15:55:01 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MMR1988
Certification: novote
Comments:
Magfors, you are right, that should be done by admin edit.
Philo, I thought about this problem, but wasn't motivated to put it in a calculation programm.
Btw: there is a step between the segments of line #20 and line #50.

======================================================================
At Sun Jun 16 18:15:02 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
"Btw: there is a step between the segments of line #20 and line #50."
Yeah, could be improved ;)
As for shortcut vs part, I am OK with this. Question is: 53992cxx are all the same part (53992) but with different shapes. Shouldn't this be somehow reflected by part type?


======================================================================
At Mon Jun 17 08:10:02 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
to me, that relationship is expressed enough by the part number
...c01, c02 etc.
to me, the ldraw type "part" would express correctly here that this file
is a single part, ie, not an assembly of multiple such.
rendering software therefire may conclude not to add gaps between the
constituents of this file.
however, i have to admit that we use "shortcut" within the library
currently for formed stickers, so why not for formed treads as well?
however, doing so will create the unpleasant asymmetry that
a part in its default position, like a tread, will be a "part",
whereas in some other formed variant will be a "shortcut".
maybe we need a special code in the ldraw type line that says
"this is still a part, but it has been formed"

======================================================================
At Mon Jun 17 08:10:04 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: novote
Comments:
(please excuse the typos etc in the above post, i was using an android client to post it, and the javascript of this pt text input box isn't working properly with the default android keyboard.... you for example cannot position the cursor at the end of the text, which means you cannot correct typos atvthe front because after doing so you cannot continue writing, waaaaaaaah)

======================================================================
At Mon Jun 17 09:05:03 2013, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Philo
Comments:
Corrected the "step", made it a part, changed a bit description.

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
======================================================================
At Fri Jun 21 19:35:02 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.


© 2001-2014 LDraw.org, see Legal Info for details. This website is powered by Peeron.com.

LEGO® is a registered trademark of the LEGO Group, which does not sponsor, endorse, or authorize this site. Visit the official Lego website at http://www.lego.com/.
The LDraw system is a completely unofficial, community run free CAD system which represents official parts produced by the LEGO company.
The LDraw Parts Tracker is maintained and developed by voluntary members of the LDraw organisation.