167 replies to this topic

[vynsane]

Mrcool1804, on 06 December 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

Anyone found a work around? I need to get started on my Winter Village entry

There is no work-around that I know of - it's just a former feature that's been disabled in the OS for whatever reason. Seems par for the course with Apple, unfortunately. I had an externally housed video card that allowed me to hook up four monitors to my 2nd-gen MacBook Pro. When I upgraded to a unibody MBP, it no longer worked because they disabled video output through the expresscard slot for whatever reason. Finally! I can't do this thing that I used to do! Progress?

That said, there's nothing disabling the program itself, it's just disabled adding outlines around bricks. It's off-putting, I'll admit, because I've gotten used to seeing them, but the program still works as it did before.

Edited by vynsane, 06 December 2012 - 06:40 PM.

[PeabodySam]

I don't know if this one has been previously reported or not, but two 2626 Stem Brick 6X6 bricks cannot be placed adjacent to one another, as shown in the screenshot below:

[legolijntje]

That's a funny bug

[hrontos]

legolijntje, on 06 December 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

That's a funny bug

It is really funny bug, because there is no obvious collision boxes conflict and all other adjacent positions work. When one of those 2 parts is shifted one or more studs to sideways so they touch only partialy, it works, full touch does not.

[legoboy3998]

While working on my SOO 1003 Mikado 2-8-2 steam locomotive, I noticed if you lay a headlight brick on its back, than connect a 2x2 flat tile centered horizontally on the now sideways stud, the sideways stud disappears.  I didn't even know you could connect a 2x2 round tile this way.


Sal
WFB, WI

[Superkalle]

legoboy3998, on 07 December 2012 - 03:06 AM, said:

While working on my SOO 1003 Mikado 2-8-2 steam locomotive, I noticed if you lay a headlight brick on its back, than connect a 2x2 flat tile centered horizontally on the now sideways stud, the sideways stud disappears.

It's an optimization feature. By hiding surfaces that are not seen (i.e. hidden by other bricks), the rendering will be faster. This is mostly effective if you have built a large model with a lot of bricks and surfaces hidden from view. For small models it doesn't effect performance much. However (as you noticed), the optimization sometimes is not 100% tuned and then you get the result you see. So yes, this is a bug, albeit a cosmetic one

[legoboy3998]

Superkalle, on 07 December 2012 - 01:29 PM, said:

It's an optimization feature. By hiding surfaces that are not seen (i.e. hidden by other bricks), the rendering will be faster. This is mostly effective if you have built a large model with a lot of bricks and surfaces hidden from view. For small models it doesn't effect performance much. However (as you noticed), the optimization sometimes is not 100% tuned and then you get the result you see. So yes, this is a bug, albeit a cosmetic one

Interesting Superkalle, I was not aware of this feature.  Thanks for clearing it up.  So the stud does "disappear" LOL.

Sal
WFB, WI

[Zarkan]

Something just came to light as I was making a correction to my model of 2259 Skull Motorbike: it turns out that the chain link piece in LDD has small gaps between the connections of each two links, meaning that the part is not as long and thus can sometimes not be used the same way as in real life.

Edited by Zarkan, 08 December 2012 - 11:13 PM.

[Myshkin]

I was working on vehicle and was using 88517 as a wheel when I noticed that the LDD model does not have the cross axle aligned properly to the 6 holes.  They look to be ~15 degrees offset from one another.  I am able to align it up with 4158 wedge belt wheel in real life but not in LDD.


 88517.jpg   35.68K   1 downloads
 88517_ldd.jpg   28.59K   2 downloads

[Superkalle]

Myshkin, on 31 December 2012 - 10:03 PM, said:

I was working on vehicle and was using 88517 as a wheel when I noticed that the LDD model does not have the cross axle aligned properly to the 6 holes.  They look to be ~15 degrees offset from one another.  I am able to align it up with 4158 wedge belt wheel in real life but not in LDD.

That is a really interesting find.

I'll send in a question to the LDD Team about this. My guess is that internally at TLG there are two versions of the mold design, and the one we see in LDD is based on an earlier version that was never put into production (or was only produced for a brief time). In either case, the one in LDD should definitely be the one that is most commonly produced, so in that sense it's a bug.

[donut2k]

I think I found a bug, there is no way to attach this piece: 90540 SKI STICK 3M, W/SHAFT...  to a 3794 PLATE 1x2 W 1. KNOB, it works perfectly, you can see a photo here:

[NitroX infinity]

I've found two bugs that bug me;

1) It is possible to fit a 1x1 plate into a hole of a Lego technic brick, but not a 1x2 or longer plate. In real life though, this should very much be possible.



2) From experience I know it is possible to put a 1x1 round brick onto a peg, doesn't matter what the peg is attached to. However, in LDD it is not possible, only the really short sides of a peg and the axle with a stub on it;

[Aanchir]

NitroX infinity, on 02 January 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

I've found two bugs that bug me;

1) It is possible to fit a 1x1 plate into a hole of a Lego technic brick, but not a 1x2 or longer plate. In real life though, this should very much be possible.

2) From experience I know it is possible to put a 1x1 round brick onto a peg, doesn't matter what the peg is attached to. However, in LDD it is not possible, only the really short sides of a peg and the axle with a stub on it;

1) Technically, this is an illegal connection. LEGO set designers are advised not to attach any piece to a Technic beam by more than one stud, as it becomes difficult to remove (Technic pin holes are slightly smaller than the diameter of a typical anti-stud). However, the way of prohibiting this on LDD (making it so that only one-stud pieces can attach to Technic pin holes at all) is somewhat restrictive, as there's nothing illegal about connecting a larger piece to a Technic pin hole as long as it's only connected by a single stud.

2) Attaching a 1x1 round brick to Technic pins of this sort is indeed an illegal connection. It forces the flared end of the pin into compression, and thus over time will weaken the connection the pin would have with an actual Technic pin hole.

[NitroX infinity]

Ah, so I'm not supposed to do that then

Maybe TLG should make a book with all those 'illegal' things in them

Edited by NitroX infinity, 02 January 2013 - 07:56 PM.

[Aanchir]

NitroX infinity, on 02 January 2013 - 07:56 PM, said:

Ah, so I'm not supposed to do that then

Maybe TLG should make a book with all those 'illegal' things in them

It'd be neat, but for one thing, illegal connections are mostly a factor in set design. I don't think TLG is too concerned with what fans do with their own parts, and I imagine the illegal connection controls in LDD are probably in part a throwback to when Design byME was still a service connected to LDD and TLG was essentially releasing things you built with the software as actual sets. Which isn't to say I want those controls to be removed (encouraging legal connections is always good), but it's not necessarily something TLG would go to great lengths to prevent if they hadn't started by offering an actual product/service related to the software.

The other reason I don't think a book on illegal connections would be likely is that TLG has more incentive to release things like Master Builder Academy that tell builders what they can do with their parts than publish a rulebook that might stifle creativity.

There is a useful PDF on legal/illegal connections here. It was put together by Jamie Berard for a presentation at Brickfest in 2006.

[pbat]

Hello. I'm not quite sure if it is a bug or not, as I have no physical bricks at hand to test if it's possible in 'real life', but shouldn't the flat tiles and plates like 2412, 59489, 3069, 3794, 87580,  63864, 2431, 6636, 4162, 3068, 2460, 6881 or 10202 slide into the slot of 2653? Currently only the plate 32028 and the lamellas 4218 and 4219 seem to attach properly to that slot.

Although you can workaround it by using some helper constructions with 3794 and/or 87580, all flat tiles and plates should fit into 2653, shouldn't they? Can anyone confirm this to be a bug?

(Sorry, as a newbie I'm apparently not yet allowed to attach images or LXF files to make this issue more obvious, but I hope you get the point nevertheless.)

[colmoore]

Small point but the HTML building guide still says Lego Digital Designer 4.2 at the top.

[Superkalle]

pbat, on 03 January 2013 - 12:03 AM, said:

Although you can workaround it by using some helper constructions with 3794 and/or 87580, all flat tiles and plates should fit into 2653, shouldn't they? Can anyone confirm this to be a bug?

I'm not sure if it's a bug per se. I think it's not supported in LDD, since it's not a "designed" connection. At least, I haven't seen any official sets using the technique with tiles in 2653. On the other hand, today's designers at TLG are using more and more innovative techniques, so who knows.

If anyone has seen the technique in an official set, it would definitely make it easier to propose it as a new features in LDD.

[pbat]

Superkalle, on 04 January 2013 - 09:19 PM, said:

At least, I haven't seen any official sets using the technique with tiles in 2653. On the other hand, today's designers at TLG are using more and more innovative techniques, so who knows.

If anyone has seen the technique in an official set, it would definitely make it easier to propose it as a new features in LDD.

Four brownish flat tiles 4162 put into the slots of two opposing 2653 bricks make some wonderful planks, quays, wooden walkways and so on. I personally use this technique quite a lot for themes dealing with nautical or western settings, but I have to admit that I haven't encounterd any offical set with it.

I did however do some research and found out that I was not totally wrong. Well, it's actually none of the tiles I mentioned before, but the Armada Flagship 6280 from 1996 and its replica 6291 from 2004 both use some hinge plates 4315 put into the slots of 2653. You may see it at page 10 figure 17 of the official instruction. While the '96 one is not online, the almost identical '04 instruction luckily is available from Lego.com.

So yes, out there exists at least one official set with parts put into the slot of 2653 that LDD currently doesn't support.

However, due to the fact that this issue might be easily circumvented, I'd rather rate it a "nice-to-have"-feature than an actual bug. Most sets use the 2653 slot in conjunction with the 1x8 plate with rail 4510 or the 1x2 plate with slide 32028 anyway. And these work fine in LDD.

Jabbas Palace 9516 from 2012 on the other hand uses some 30586 gliding groove plates put into the 2653 slots (instruction 1 page 41 figure 18). This isn't supported by LDD either. And it needs a bit more effort to be circumvented, as the lip of 30586 and its groove together are a bit higher than the 2653 slot. But as the lip on its own is low enough to fit in, you can put a 30586 into a 2653 slot, too. It's a pity I'm not yet allowed to upload files to prove it.

Anyway, we here have the second official set where a brick is put into 2653's slot in a manner LDD currently doesn't support. As there's enough space and no pressure put on any part, I can't see that we might have some illegal building techniques here. But by now I am increasingly uncertain, if it qualifies for a real bug. I guess you should rather file it as a feature request with a somehow low priority.

[Superkalle]

pbat, on 05 January 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

It's a pity I'm not yet allowed to upload files to prove it.

I fixed that now. But please be aware you only have 100kb of storage, so it's only good for quickly sharing files. If you want to store/show larger files such as images etc, I suggest you get an account at Brickshelf.com, which can store both LXF-files and image files.

pbat, on 05 January 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

Jabbas Palace 9516 from 2012 on the other hand uses some 30586 gliding groove plates put into the 2653 slots (instruction 1 page 41 figure 18). This isn't supported by LDD either. And it needs a bit more effort to be circumvented, as the lip of 30586 and its groove together are a bit higher than the 2653 slot. But as the lip on its own is low enough to fit in, you can put a 30586 into a 2653 slot, too. It's a pity I'm not yet allowed to upload files to prove it.

That is a good catch, and a brick bug in my book.
I'll report it (as I do all bugs) and we can fingers crossed it gets fixed.

The technique used in the Armada Flagship I'm not sure will get fixed, since it's an old brick.

[pbat]

Superkalle, on 05 January 2013 - 01:53 AM, said:

But please be aware you only have 100kb of storage,

100kb are about 20 A4 sheets of paper with 63 rows à 80 characters. That's quite a bunch.

Superkalle, on 05 January 2013 - 01:53 AM, said:

That is a good catch, and a brick bug in my book.

OK, here's another possible one: Round Plate 3960 should fit as a cap ontop of Barrel 4x4 30139. At least it was used thus in set 2126 from 1997 (http://peeron.com/scans/2126-1/9). But maybe it's illegal nowadays. In set 4194 Whitecap Bay from 2011 this combination occures once more (http://www.bricklink...SL/4194-1.jpg), and also in the LOTR set 79004 Barrel Escape from 2012 (http://www.bricklink...L/79004-1.jpg). So we either have three illegal sets or one LDD bug.

[Superkalle]

pbat, on 05 January 2013 - 04:01 AM, said:

OK, here's another possible one: Round Plate 3960 should fit as a cap ontop of Barrel 4x4 30139. At least it was used thus in set 2126 from 1997 (http://peeron.com/scans/2126-1/9). But maybe it's illegal nowadays. In set 4194 Whitecap Bay from 2011 this combination occures once more (http://www.bricklink...SL/4194-1.jpg), and also in the LOTR set 79004 Barrel Escape from 2012 (http://www.bricklink...L/79004-1.jpg). So we either have three illegal sets or one LDD bug.

That bug has actually been reported earlier, but a good find anyway.

[pbat]

Superkalle, on 05 January 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

That bug has actually been reported earlier, but a good find anyway.

Oh, really? I'm sorry to double-post it. I had deliberately browsed this thread before posting and looked for the string '3960' and did not find anything and thus thought it was a new issue. I'm really sorry.

Maybe this one is new? 2350 and 2351 won't slide correctly into each other unless you scaffold them manually.

[Superkalle]

pbat, on 05 January 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

Oh, really? I'm sorry to double-post it. I had deliberately browsed this thread before posting and looked for the string '3960' and did not find anything and thus thought it was a new issue. I'm really sorry.

Absolutely no problem, I didn't mean it like that
I can also mention that many bugs have been reported in threads pertaining to older version of LDD.
And to add to that, sometimes when people report bugs, they just post a screenshot without writing the part numbers in the post.

Quote

Maybe this one is new? 2350 and 2351 won't slide correctly into each other unless you scaffold them manually.

I can't remember reporting it. Thanks.

[Stephan]

Part 10113 Mask, Batman can not attach to a minifig head nor a 1x1 round brick/plate.

Edited by Stephan, 07 January 2013 - 08:28 PM.