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

Unofficial File parts/889c01.dat

Next File | Prev File | Download | View Diff | Review | Edit | CA Header Edit | Events | 889 Composite parts

part image

File Header:

0 ~Moved to 74948
0 Name: 889c01.dat
0 Author: [PTadmin]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Shortcut
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

0 BFC CERTIFY CCW
0 !CATEGORY Minifig Accessory

0 !HISTORY 2010-07-05 [PTadmin] Official Update 2010-02
0 !HISTORY 2013-04-23 [MagFors] Changed colour 383 to 494 (real metal)
0 !HISTORY 2018-06-04 [MagFors] Moved to 74948

0 // Minifig Compass (Complete)

Status:
1 subfile isn't certified. (SF)
Size: 469 bytes

Reviewers' certifications:
(no current reviews for this file)

Required (unofficial) subfiles:

parts/74948.dat

Minifig Compass

4 subfiles aren't certified. (SSSSX)

Events

Related (unofficial) files:
(none)

File reviews and updates:

At Mon May 13 05:00:10 2013, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: MagFors
======================================================================
At Tue Aug 6 01:15:07 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
s\889s01.dat needs to be converted from subpart to ~part

======================================================================
At Tue Aug 6 08:40:02 2013, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
Bottom part is 6094
Clear top is 6095
Magnet "needle" disc is 70926 (slightly less sure about this one)
Complete assembly with this pattern http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/x404c02 is 74948
Complete assembly with this pattern http://www.peeron.com/inv/parts/x404c01 is 75171

======================================================================
At Sat Jun 2 03:30:00 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: dulcaoin
Certification: novote
Comments:
Concur with everything Philo wrote (including the needle, which he was not entirely sure about).

Also:

Create discs with the decoration for the background of each compass style.

For x404c02 (the earlier, pirate style compass), the disc should be 70925.dat

For x404c01 (the later, aquazone compass), the disc is 71099.dat

======================================================================
At Sat Jun 2 11:15:01 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
If I'm reading this correct, we still don't know the correct number of the metallic pin, subfile 889s01.dat.
Or am I misunderstanding it?

old file:
889c01 = 887+888+889+s\889s01

new files:
887 => 6094
888 => 6095
889 => 70926
s\889s01 => u9???
889c01 => 6094c01

Unpatterned
6094c01=(6094+6095+70926+u9???)
Patterned
74948 = 6094c02=(6094+6095+70925(alias of 70926p01)+u9???)
75171 = 6094c03=(6094+6095+71099(alias of 70926p02)+u9???)


======================================================================
At Sat Jun 2 14:55:00 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: dulcaoin
Certification: novote
Comments:
My guess would be that 70962 is the metal base pin, official name is
70962 COMPASS NEEDLE VERSION 2

70925 is COMPASS CARD VERSION 2, and I would guess that that is an asembly: the "cap" portion that goes on the pin, plus the decorated "card" that holds the graphics for the original (pirate) compass decoration.

71099 is COMPASS CARD FOR AQUA, and would be the assembly of that cap, plus a decorated "card" (disc) with the aquazone decoration.

We don't have an ID for a blank "card" to add the LCAD "p" printed index to, nor an ID for the conical cap that rides on that needle.

I haven't destroyed a compass to find out, but I'd also bet that there's a magnetized bar attached to the bottom of the "card" so that it actually acts like a compass. That COULD be 70926, but that would still leave the pin unknown, and still, 70926 is not the generic "card" at all.

======================================================================
At Sat Jun 2 16:40:00 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
So ldraw s\889s01.dat could be the same as LEGOID 70926?
It looks like 70962 is a a typo. The correct number is 70926. Right?

I'm still wondering and confused about how to rearrange the current ldraw files...
What ldraw number should the patterned part have?

======================================================================
At Tue Jun 5 21:45:01 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
OK then, Is ldraw s\889s01 equal to LEGOID 70926?
And 70625 is a complete design and we can't use that number on only the cap.

I have all the needed files ready and want to recyle them, but I need to know a partnumber.
I think it would be wrong to not use the regular ???p01 and ???p02 on the patterned parts.
How do I number the generic unpatterned "cap"?

======================================================================
At Wed Jun 6 16:50:01 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: dulcaoin
Certification: novote
Comments:
I was hoping Philo would give more perspective, so I held off responding again too quickly. Yes, there was a typo in the number (I'll leave off from retyping anything to avoid further issues -- SIDE NOTE that I wish I could see what I was responding to when I leave a review :) -- the number for the needle VERSION 2 and the card VERSION 2 are indeed one apart).

If I were modeling this:
I'd make the cone a separate subpart, from the disc. The fact that they are 70000 range numbers means they are assemblies. You'll have to use uXXXX style numbers for those. One of the uXXXX numbers would then take Pxx for the two decorations.

Also, it is my perspective (again, based on visual inspection + use of a caliper from OUTSIDE the compass) that the current cone is too small. I believe the diameters, both top and bottom, should be larger than they are now. I think this is true both from the LDUs used to model it and from a visual of the part as rendered (I did a rename of several of the primitive files and started to TEXMAP the Aquazone version of the compass this past weekend). I think I'll be able to support this assertion better once my TEXMAP work is done.

======================================================================
At Wed Jun 6 17:35:01 2018, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: MagFors
Comments:
I'll upload all my new files.
The old files have been sent to Admin.

Existing certification-votes were deleted.
======================================================================
At Thu Jun 7 15:40:01 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: dulcaoin
Certification: hold
Comments:
Number for compass as assembly should be 74948, not a C number

======================================================================
At Thu Jun 7 16:05:00 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
I don't understand. Please explain.
You've said that 74948 is the number on one of the printed compass.

======================================================================
At Sat Jun 9 03:25:00 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: dulcaoin
Certification: novote
Comments:
[Chris may countermand this, I operate on my understanding of the rules, and they change when I'm not looking because I've just been the Numbers Guy since James, I don't really track how new decisions are made]

Elements in the LEGO Group database have an ITEM ID and a DESIGN ID. LCAD numbering usually follows most closely the DESIGN ID (a DESIGN ID + a COLOR ID = an ITEM ID in the LEGO database).

In the past, each ITEM ID might be unique, even when the elements might be part of a family (such as the compass, or -- as a better example -- each DUPLO GIRL assembly might have a different ITEM ID because of different decorations). Around 1993, TLG started to use a new numbering system, with an SAP database as the underpinings. When they did that, they started to group elements in a "family" with a common design id (DUPLO GIRL = 74760, with 74858 being the ITEM for DUPLO BASIC GIRL COLLAR, 74861 being DUPLO BASIC LADY W. SCARF, etc.).

Sometimes (not always, but quite often), the design ID would be the lowest DESIGN ID of a class of parts. Which means, you can have a part with the same ITEM ID and DESIGN ID (73200 is the MINI LEGS assembly as a DESIGN, but also the MINI BODY LOWER PART YEL (yellow) as an ITEM ID. (Note that 73200 was not the lowest numbered MINI BODY LOWER PART design, it's just the one they chose).

I am suggesting 74948 as the Compass DESIGN ID because it came first (1992) before 75171 because it was the first compass assembly ITEM.

The "C" nomenclature was created for those assemblies (C stands for "composite" -- I know this because it was my personal suggestion and solution to the issue of what to number assemblies we didn't know the official numbering for, back when Steve Bliss had Chris Dee's position) where we were confusing a PRIMITIVE id (because it was printed on the bottom of the visible sub-assembly primitive where it could be seen by the user).

In this case, we know all possible DESIGN IDs, so my suggestion as the Numbers Guy is to use 74948 as the LCAD number for the "generic" assembly.

Again, I've been known to state what we should do -- in my 20 years of doing this opinion -- only to be told it's not done that way anymore.

For reasons that might be obvious, I've been fairly low-key and guarded about this sort of detail, because it's allowed me to collect a wide variety of varied database details quietly and accurately in the past.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I will admit that 74948 is both the ITEM ID and DESIGN ID for "COMPASS" (1992) and 75171 is both the ITEM ID and DESIGN ID for "COMPASS FOR AQUA" (1995). It fell through the cracks of getting a common DESIGN ID between the two assemblies (because the 1992 element had been discontinued by the time the SAP database was put into place). But if we follow the pattern that TLG uses, then you should make 74948p01 be the decorated pirate compass, and 74948p02 the aquazone compass, so they have a common (and as accurate as possible base LCAD ID).

I feel much more strongly that the cone size should be increased, and THAT is the only reason I additionally went "HOLD" over "COMMENT" on that last entry.

======================================================================
At Sat Jun 9 11:45:00 2018, the following review was posted:

Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
OK,
Now I get it. It makes more sence. I think...

If I'm reading you right, you say that we should not use 6094c01 for the assembly of the generic, (and maybe nonexistent) unprinted parts.
Change 6094c01 to 74948
Change my file 74948 to 74948p02 (aqua)
Change my file 75171 to 74948p01 (pirate)
(Yes, I know. It looks like I accidently mixed up the numbers.)

The issue of the same numbers used of both item and design ID's affect more parts than this part, and must be handled differently. Somehow.

When you say "LCAD" you mean "Ldraw". Right?

How should I make the cone larger? Is the height OK and it only needs to be larger? Is the slope OK? Double in diameter?
I don't have the part, and I can't find any good pictures of the slope.


======================================================================
At Sun Jun 10 21:05:01 2018, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: MagFors
Comments:
Removed Author.
Now same as other recycled parts.

Existing certification-votes were deleted.

© 2001-2018 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.