Unofficial File parts/44810.dat
File Header:
0 Constraction Block 3 x 5 with Partial Gear 28 Tooth Double Bevel
0 Name: 44810.dat
0 Author: Kevin Roach [KROACH]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Part
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt
0 BFC CERTIFY CCW
0 !KEYWORDS Technic, Bionicle, Matoran, Torso,
0 !HISTORY 2014-03-13 [KROACH] Added Technic to title
0 !HISTORY 2014-03-13 [KROACH] Changed description
0 !HISTORY 2014-03-13 [KROACH] Fixed long quad
0 !HISTORY 2021-04-03 [Sirio] Subparted and fixed description
0 // Subparts
Status:
2 subfiles aren't certified. (CSSN)
Size: 4644 bytes
Reviewers' certifications:
MagFors=certify
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
Needs more votes. (CF)Related (unofficial) subfiles:
(none)
File reviews and updates:
At Thu Mar 13 16:30:03 2014, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
I just had a quick look - great work! The only thing I noticed that can be improved: on top side, the beam front quad is too long and bleeds through the gear ring.
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
I just had a quick look - great work! The only thing I noticed that can be improved: on top side, the beam front quad is too long and bleeds through the gear ring.
At Thu Mar 13 17:40:08 2014, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Thu Mar 13 17:55:03 2014, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: hold
Comments:
Sorry... one of the quads is now backwards!
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: hold
Comments:
Sorry... one of the quads is now backwards!
At Thu Mar 13 19:25:03 2014, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
I welcome the second eyes. There are things i should catch, but I don't.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
I welcome the second eyes. There are things i should catch, but I don't.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Thu Mar 13 20:00:06 2014, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
"There are things i should catch, but I don't."
Same thing for me ;)
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
"There are things i should catch, but I don't."
Same thing for me ;)
At Thu Mar 13 20:35:02 2014, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
That kind of is the entire point of this review and certification process anyway. :P
Looks like I was beaten to this one, I've been intending to model it for a while now. Will come back to review in full later, I'm in the middle of finalizing my own part.
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
That kind of is the entire point of this review and certification process anyway. :P
Looks like I was beaten to this one, I've been intending to model it for a while now. Will come back to review in full later, I'm in the middle of finalizing my own part.
At Thu Mar 13 20:35:03 2014, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
This *definitely* is not an Arch though. I strongly believe this belongs in Technic.
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
This *definitely* is not an Arch though. I strongly believe this belongs in Technic.
At Thu Mar 13 21:05:05 2014, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
That was not suppose to be there.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
That was not suppose to be there.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Thu Mar 13 21:35:08 2014, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Technic is still missing from the part title, there is no Gear category. :)
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Technic is still missing from the part title, there is no Gear category. :)
At Thu Mar 13 22:20:03 2014, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
Added Technic to title.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
Added Technic to title.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Fri Mar 14 00:15:02 2014, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
Corrected another error I found.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
Corrected another error I found.
At Fri Mar 14 11:50:03 2014, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: hold
Comments:
Okay, took a closer look now. It otherwise looks good to me, but the center axlehole should have a stop of some sort inside it. An axle does not pass through it. There's a stop inside of it.
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: hold
Comments:
Okay, took a closer look now. It otherwise looks good to me, but the center axlehole should have a stop of some sort inside it. An axle does not pass through it. There's a stop inside of it.
At Sat Mar 15 02:35:02 2014, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
Added axle stop.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: KROACH
Comments:
Added axle stop.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Sun Mar 16 02:40:04 2014, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Part looks good to me now. I still find the name rather dubious.. this isn't really primarily a gear.
"Technic Connector Block 5 x 3(?) x 3 with Gear 9 Tooth Double Bevel"?
Either that or the good ol' peeron name with "Technic Bionicle Matoran Torso". This part never saw use outside Bionicle (though calling it strictly a matoran torso is a bit wrong...). And if we go by that logic, perhaps this part could be re-oriented to have the gear in the back?
Or is it really a gear first off? I really don't know here. Thoughts, people?
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Part looks good to me now. I still find the name rather dubious.. this isn't really primarily a gear.
"Technic Connector Block 5 x 3(?) x 3 with Gear 9 Tooth Double Bevel"?
Either that or the good ol' peeron name with "Technic Bionicle Matoran Torso". This part never saw use outside Bionicle (though calling it strictly a matoran torso is a bit wrong...). And if we go by that logic, perhaps this part could be re-oriented to have the gear in the back?
Or is it really a gear first off? I really don't know here. Thoughts, people?
At Sun Apr 6 17:30:11 2014, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
Maybe something similar to these?
41666.dat "Technic Arm 1 x 6 with Gear 12 Tooth Double Bevel Ends"
41667.dat "Technic Arm 3 x 2 with Gear 36 Tooth Double Bevel Quarter"
How about: "Technic Arm 3 x 5 with Gear 24 Tooth Double Bevel Half" ?
IMO, it should have the same orientation as those two too.
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: novote
Comments:
Maybe something similar to these?
41666.dat "Technic Arm 1 x 6 with Gear 12 Tooth Double Bevel Ends"
41667.dat "Technic Arm 3 x 2 with Gear 36 Tooth Double Bevel Quarter"
How about: "Technic Arm 3 x 5 with Gear 24 Tooth Double Bevel Half" ?
IMO, it should have the same orientation as those two too.
At Mon Jan 30 01:30:00 2017, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: technog
Certification: novote
Comments:
I'm curious you didn't use primitive toothb12.dat like all other double bevel gear parts instead of creating your own primitive?
Is there that much different to require a new tooth primitive?
Reviewer: technog
Certification: novote
Comments:
I'm curious you didn't use primitive toothb12.dat like all other double bevel gear parts instead of creating your own primitive?
Is there that much different to require a new tooth primitive?
At Fri Jun 8 17:55:00 2018, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Now that the Constraction is a thing, this should go into it. As a torso, it should be oriented as one.
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: novote
Comments:
Now that the Constraction is a thing, this should go into it. As a torso, it should be oriented as one.
At Mon Apr 5 08:55:01 2021, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
Subparted, added details and improved geometry.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
Subparted, added details and improved geometry.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Sun May 23 08:30:01 2021, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
I think this part is wrong.
https://www.bricklink.com/PL/44810.jpg?0
First of all it looks very thin. Many sections are only 2 ldu thick. I think it must be 3, or 4 ldu.
The inner diameter of the wheel is now 28 ldu. I think it could be 26-27.
The 3 cutouts on the bottom is only 0,1 ldu deep. I think it's at least 2 ldu.
Missing a vertical box on top of the centre axle hole.
But the main issue is that the pitch between the coggs is wrong. IMO it must be the same as a gear 28.
1 12 0 -40 -20 0.258819 -0.965926 0 0 0 -1 0.965926 0.258819 0 32270.dat
1 15 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 46372.dat
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
I think this part is wrong.
https://www.bricklink.com/PL/44810.jpg?0
First of all it looks very thin. Many sections are only 2 ldu thick. I think it must be 3, or 4 ldu.
The inner diameter of the wheel is now 28 ldu. I think it could be 26-27.
The 3 cutouts on the bottom is only 0,1 ldu deep. I think it's at least 2 ldu.
Missing a vertical box on top of the centre axle hole.
But the main issue is that the pitch between the coggs is wrong. IMO it must be the same as a gear 28.
1 12 0 -40 -20 0.258819 -0.965926 0 0 0 -1 0.965926 0.258819 0 32270.dat
1 15 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 46372.dat
At Thu Jun 17 23:40:02 2021, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
I fixed what was required apart from the depth of the lower cutouts. 2 LDU is not possible, maybe did you mean 0.2 LDU?
I had to modify the primitive toothb28d so as not to have a visible edgeline in the curved toothless section. since the primitive is not symmetrical, in that area the shape is a bit particular, it is not the classic cylindrical, but I think it can work anyway (it is ready as if you were to add another tooth).
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
I fixed what was required apart from the depth of the lower cutouts. 2 LDU is not possible, maybe did you mean 0.2 LDU?
I had to modify the primitive toothb28d so as not to have a visible edgeline in the curved toothless section. since the primitive is not symmetrical, in that area the shape is a bit particular, it is not the classic cylindrical, but I think it can work anyway (it is ready as if you were to add another tooth).
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Fri Jun 18 15:55:01 2021, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
What about description, shouldn't it be
"Constraction Block 3 x 5 with Partial Gear 2**8** Tooth Double Bevel"?
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
What about description, shouldn't it be
"Constraction Block 3 x 5 with Partial Gear 2**8** Tooth Double Bevel"?
At Fri Jun 18 22:25:02 2021, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
Yes, why?
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
Yes, why?
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Tue Aug 3 20:55:01 2021, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
Missing some edge lines inside the centre axlehole.
The inside surface of the big arch should be hi-res.
The cutouts should be deeper than 0.1 ldu. That's only 0.04 mm and they look deeper in this image.
https://img.bricklink.com/ItemImage/PL/44810.png
And I think that wall is thicker than 2 ldu.
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
Missing some edge lines inside the centre axlehole.
The inside surface of the big arch should be hi-res.
The cutouts should be deeper than 0.1 ldu. That's only 0.04 mm and they look deeper in this image.
https://img.bricklink.com/ItemImage/PL/44810.png
And I think that wall is thicker than 2 ldu.
At Tue Aug 3 23:00:01 2021, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
Increased depth to 0.5 LDU.
Added the missing edge lines in the subpart.
Wasn't it said for the thickness of the walls that they were 2 or 4 LDUs? Do I make it from 3 LDUs?
For the cylindrical surface inside the gear, I thought of leaving it at 16 sides, to reduce the number of faces and leave the replacement to LDView.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
Increased depth to 0.5 LDU.
Added the missing edge lines in the subpart.
Wasn't it said for the thickness of the walls that they were 2 or 4 LDUs? Do I make it from 3 LDUs?
For the cylindrical surface inside the gear, I thought of leaving it at 16 sides, to reduce the number of faces and leave the replacement to LDView.
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Thu Aug 5 16:10:01 2021, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
This one is big enough to use the hi-res prim. The difference between the inner and outer lines hurts the eye.
When I look at the image of this part I think the thickness of all walls is uniform.
Now they vary between 2 and 3.45 ldu.
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 -46 0 10 -49 0 10
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 13 30 0 15 30
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 -26.5 10 0 -29.95 10
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 -14 10 0 -12 10
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 29 12 10 27 12 10.2759
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: hold
Comments:
This one is big enough to use the hi-res prim. The difference between the inner and outer lines hurts the eye.
When I look at the image of this part I think the thickness of all walls is uniform.
Now they vary between 2 and 3.45 ldu.
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 -46 0 10 -49 0 10
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 13 30 0 15 30
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 -26.5 10 0 -29.95 10
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 -14 10 0 -12 10
0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 29 12 10 27 12 10.2759
At Mon Sep 27 23:30:02 2021, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
I measured the distances you indicated on the real piece and I reduced them to the value of 2 LDU.
Only the first dimension remains out of the modification due to the incorrect shape of the aclehole leading to a thickness of 3 LDU,
1.25 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 -46 0 10 -49 0 10
1.39 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 13 30 0 15 30
1.37 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 -26.5 10 0 -29.95 10
1.39 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 -14 10 0 -12 10
1.39 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 29 12 10 27 12 10.2759
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
Submitted by: Sirio
Comments:
I measured the distances you indicated on the real piece and I reduced them to the value of 2 LDU.
Only the first dimension remains out of the modification due to the incorrect shape of the aclehole leading to a thickness of 3 LDU,
1.25 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 -46 0 10 -49 0 10
1.39 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 13 30 0 15 30
1.37 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 -26.5 10 0 -29.95 10
1.39 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 0 -14 10 0 -12 10
1.39 mm 0 !LPE DISTANCE 4 29 12 10 27 12 10.2759
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
At Tue Sep 28 15:25:01 2021, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
Comments:
Excellent. It immediately looks more "right".
Thank you.
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
Comments:
Excellent. It immediately looks more "right".
Thank you.
3D View