LDD 4.3.6 bugs

[pbat]

LDD shows an inconsistent behaviour regarding shafts/sticks and technical snaps.

Parts with shafts/sticks are for example 87994, 30374, 63965, 4095, 3957, 61184, 76302, 55668, 87618, 4623, 88072, 30043, 2921, 2540, 99021, 4697, 3839, 98284, 2566, 98397, 92099, 48729, 99249, 48723, 85940, 30375, 87617, 71137, [edit: 4599,] 4466 & 4467 and a lot of minifig tools and decoration such as 90540, 3852, 96480, 3900, 3835, 95330, 10050, 58176, 90508, 4528, 3899, 4522, 55295, 55296, 55297, 55298, 55299, 55300, 10187, 58367, 60849, 30035 but also some hero factory parts like 92235 or 92218.

These shafts and sticks can be put into some technical snaps but not into others:

The parts 2780, 3673, 6562, 43093, 6628, 32002, 4274, 32556, 2714, 30362, 32138, 32069, 30390, 30592, 30526 [edit: ,33299, 6047, 6048] allow shafts/sticks to attach into their technical snaps smoothly.

But with parts like 30000, 6232, 2458, 4729, 2460, 2476, 92909, 47455, 48496, 48989, 55615, 47994, 47973, 6558, 32054, 2920, 48724, 40620, 4025, 47501, 30632, [edit: 41532, 30076] or 90630 no shaft/stick can be put into their technical snap, not even using scaffolding.

Do the technical snaps really differ that much? Or is LDD a bit buggy here?

Edited April 10, 2013 by pbat

[Aanchir]

LDD shows an inconsistent behaviour regarding shafts/sticks and technical snaps.

Parts with shafts/sticks are for example 87994, 30374, 63965, 4095, 3957, 61184, 76302, 55668, 87618, 4623, 88072, 30043, 2921, 2540, 99021, 4697, 3839, 98284, 2566, 98397, 92099, 48729, 99249, 48723, 85940, 30375, 87617, 71137, [edit: 4599,] 4466 & 4467 and a lot of minifig tools and decoration such as 90540, 3852, 96480, 3900, 3835, 95330, 10050, 58176, 90508, 4528, 3899, 4522, 55295, 55296, 55297, 55298, 55299, 55300, 10187, 58367, 60849, 30035 but also some hero factory parts like 92235 or 92218.

These shafts and sticks can be put into some technical snaps but not into others:

The parts 2780, 3673, 6562, 43093, 6628, 32002, 4274, 32556, 2714, 30362, 32138, 32069, 30390, 30592, 30526 [edit: ,33299, 6047, 6048] allow shafts/sticks to attach into their technical snaps smoothly.

But with parts like 30000, 6232, 2458, 4729, 2460, 2476, 92909, 47455, 48496, 48989, 55615, 47994, 47973, 6558, 32054, 2920, 48724, 40620, 4025, 47501, 30632, [edit: 41532, 30076] or 90630 no shaft/stick can be put into their technical snap, not even using scaffolding.

Do the technical snaps really differ that much? Or is LDD a bit buggy here?

Yes, Technic snaps differ. Just as an example, a 2M Technic friction pin has a circular hole through it, while a 3M Technic friction pin's hole is more rectangular due to to varied thicknesses. This can be seen on the parts on LDD (if you zoom in on these parts) or in real life.

[Mr_Geef]

From this pick and another reply (which seems to have disappeared) I think I see what is going on. I was basing my observation only on the description in LDD and after failing with 6656, I didn't double check for another part with the same description.

Superkalle, 10226 (Sopwith Camel) uses the described connection.

[Mr_Geef]

Door 60607 and 60608 will connect to frame 60594 (left in image).

Door 2529 will connect to frame 6556

Does that answer the question?

But what I do find strange is that the 60607 doors have a wider gap between them then 60608. Is it really supposed to be like that?

BTW: where did you find the use with the 3794. Now you got me curios.

Superkalle, 10226 (Sopwith Camel) uses the described connection.

From your screenshot and another reply (which seems to have disappeared) I think I see what is going on. I was basing my observation only on the description in LDD and after failing with 6656, I didn't double check for another part with the same description.

Update: So I got home and found my error then proceeded to create a helper. I actually had another assembly that achieved nearly the same result, but this is pretty much what I had to do and its final not quite there result.. oh well Thank you!

[Banjo]

(returning to LDD after a long absence!)

Is the railway track bug not fixed?

I remember several people mentioning it a few versions ago, but I updated to LDD 4.3.6 today and noticed that I still can't get pieces to join to the underside of railway tracks (part #85976, for example).

To see this technique in "real" action, Alien Conquest set 7065 is a great example, so it should be possible in LDD, right?

[Superkalle]

(returning to LDD after a long absence!)

Is the railway track bug not fixed?

I remember several people mentioning it a few versions ago, but I updated to LDD 4.3.6 today and noticed that I still can't get pieces to join to the underside of railway tracks (part #85976, for example).

To see this technique in "real" action, Alien Conquest set 7065 is a great example, so it should be possible in LDD, right?

I didn't note myself that it wasn't fixed. And yes, it should be possible in LDD.

[Banjo]

I didn't note myself that it wasn't fixed. And yes, it should be possible in LDD.

After more testing today, I can confirm this bug still exists. Hopefully it will be fixed next update!

[pbat]

According to bricklink (https://www.bricklin...Item.asp?P=6016), the lattice plate 6016 should fit into the window frames 4033 (which is by the way missing in LDD and should be included, too), 3853 and 6556 (LDD calls the last one "container frame"). In LDD 4.3.6 it does however only attach to the window frame 60594, but to neither of the frames mentioned on bricklink.

You can put the lattice 6016 in place via scaffolding by first putting the lattice into frame 60594, deleting this frame and placing either 6556 or 3853 at its position.

But as there is at least one official set (the 2003er Police HQ World City 7035), where the lattice plate 6016 is put into the frame 6556 (http://cache.lego.co...9791.pdf#page=6), I assume this to be a LDD bug.

[EDIT: older examples are

• 1998er Stadium Security 3314 http://cache.lego.co...8009.pdf#page=5
  
• 1997er Dragon Vessel Time Cruiser 6496 http://cache.lego.co...790.pdf#page=12
  

/EDIT]

Having a closer look at the images on page 6 of the instruction, 6016 seems not to have the correct mold in LDD, too: The LDD mold of 6016 does not have these round corners and is missing the bumps in the middle of the left and right side. Please compare the image at https://www.bricklin...mPic.asp?P=6016 to the piece actually included in LDD. Or is this issue similar to the shield box 2578, where two molds share the same number? Has anyone the physical bricks at hand to determine how 6016 actually looks like? The LDD version of 6016 rather looks like 62113 (http://www.bricklink...Pic.asp?P=62113).

Another annoying thing is the fact that although 6016 and 62113 are both included in LDD and of quite similar shape, they have different categories: Enter "lattice plate" into LDDs search box and you see what I mean...

Edited April 12, 2013 by pbat

[Superkalle]

You got some good points there pbat. I'm for example also wondering if the mold of 6016 is really correct in LDD or what the problem is.

About the fact that the two lattices are in different categories; LDD uses the internal TLG categorisation (i.e. the one that their designer have to use as well). Sometimes bricks get moved into new categories, which is all OK I suppose. But unfortunately only active bricks are moved. Old bricks remain in the old category, and thus similar bricks get separated. It's a known problem for the LDD Team, and from what I understand there is a debate on how to create a long term solution. Naturally it would be easy to just in LDD manually move old bricks into new categories, but that would mean maintaining a separate lookup table that need to be tracked and followed, and this isn't optimal with thousands of bricks in the database.

[Banjo]

Just encountered another "can't do it in LDD but can do it in reality" bug, while trying to make Heroica's "Fortaan" set (3860).

When making the fireplace in the castle kitchen piece, you are supposed to be able to place 87087 (brick 1x1 w/knob) beside 2412 (radiator grille), with the right-angle knob/hole facing the grate, then insert 64647 (feather) into the knob/hole to simulate the "fire" over the grate.

This works fine physically, for real, but in LDD you cannot insert the feather ("fire") into the knob because it collides with the grate next to it, even though it *should* be just low enough to the to allow this.

Hopefully the attached images from the Fortaan instructions make this tricky-to-explain issue clearer. I've also attached an lxf of the piece fully constructed, but with 64647 "angled" to fit the hole. Play with it and you'll see with the "fire" pointing straight up (as it is in the instructions and real model), it refuses to insert, due to the proximity of the grate below.

I'm not sure if this can be fixed, but hopefully it can!

EDIT: images and lxf deleted due to forum attachment limitation.

Edited April 14, 2013 by Banjo

[Superkalle]

(returning to LDD after a long absence!)

Is the railway track bug not fixed?

I remember several people mentioning it a few versions ago, but I updated to LDD 4.3.6 today and noticed that I still can't get pieces to join to the underside of railway tracks (part #85976, for example).

To see this technique in "real" action, Alien Conquest set 7065 is a great example, so it should be possible in LDD, right?

I had a look at this today again with 85976, and it does actually work to connect to the underside so to re-create the 7065. So now I'm a little confused what you meant.

Just encountered another "can't do it in LDD but can do it in reality" bug, while trying to make Heroica's "Fortaan" set (3860).

That seems to be a possible illegal build by TLG. But just moving the pieces a bit you can see that the fire intersects with the 2412 Radiator Grille.

IRL, you can probably rotate the fire slightly to get it to fit, but in LDD I think the 2412 has been modelled with solid collision box (i.e. you can stick anything down into the slits).

[Sjuip]

I had a look at this today again with 85976, and it does actually work to connect to the underside so to re-create the 7065. So now I'm a little confused what you meant.

[/size]

That seems to be a possible illegal build by TLG. But just moving the pieces a bit you can see that the fire intersects with the 2412 Radiator Grille.

IRL, you can probably rotate the fire slightly to get it to fit, but in LDD I think the 2412 has been modelled with solid collision box (i.e. you can stick anything down into the slits).

@Banjo/@Superkalle: On the firepiece: same construction is used in the 10218 Pet Shop (first floor above the Shop), although there they use a 4865 Wall Element instead of the Grille. In real life, it fits so I do not think it is an illegal build. I think 64647 is modelled too large.

On the train tracks: Nothing has been changed on them since the last couple of years. You can only attach bricks to the underside of the RC Tracks (53400/53401), to straight rail 3228 and to small gauge track 85977. Therefore you can attach these to base plates, for instance.

Other train tracks still have a 'blind' underside which does not allow attaching: '9V' tracks 74746/74747, '9V' switch/points 75541/75542 and curved small gauge track 85976.

[Saberwing40k]

How's this for a bug?

Apparently, LDD will let you do this with old ball sockets, but not new ones.

[Superkalle]

and curved small gauge track 85976.

Doesn't it allow to put a 2x2 plate under the sleepers. Can you double check?

And with all the electric tracks you can attach a brick/plate on the outskirts of the brick (underside). Isn't that how the physcial tracks work? (I don't have any to try with).

Apparently, LDD will let you do this with old ball sockets, but not new ones.

Which old/new ones do you refer too?

Note that the new ball sockets does not allow an x-axle through (the hole is smaller), so that may be the simple explanation.

@Banjo/@Superkalle: On the firepiece: same construction is used in the 10218 Pet Shop (first floor above the Shop), although there they use a 4865 Wall Element instead of the Grille. In real life, it fits so I do not think it is an illegal build. I think 64647 is modelled too large.

I'll be damned. Just tried IRL and you're right.

I wonder if it's an old revision of the mold in LDD?

[Banjo]

Thanks for confirming, Sjuip! Thought there might have been a brick update I've not received for a moment there!

See attached image for what Sjuip and I are talking about. I only have real 85976 on hand to check that this isn't the case IRL, but I'm assuming if that part has underside connections, the other track pieces should too?

I can definitely confirm that set 7065 can't be built in LDD due to the lack of connection underneath 85976. :(

(an aside... why can I only attach tiny files to this post, when I could attach larger ones yesterday?)

EDIT: images deleted due to forum attachment limitation

Edited April 14, 2013 by Banjo

[Superkalle]

About the train tracks, I had a chance to test myself now.

1) Yes, there are no details on the underside of all tracks (except 85977), but that is not a major problem as I see it.

2) For connectivity, the only track that doesn't have it is (85976), so that was correct (I didn't know that).

@Banjo - About attaching files to posts, you are only allowed to attach up to 100kb in total to all posts. The attach file function is actually only there to attach tiny files for "quick" purposes. So you need to delete attachments to previous posts to be able to post larger attachments again. But on the other hand, that's not recommended, because then others won't be able to read/follow your older posts since they will have been "reduced". I would suggest you create an account at brickshelf.com. It's better then Flickr and such, because it allows you to upload not only images but also LXF-files (etc).

[Sjuip]

About the train tracks, I had a chance to test myself now.

1) Yes, there are no details on the underside of all tracks (except 85977), but that is not a major problem as I see it.

2) For connectivity, the only track that doesn't have it is (85976), so that was correct (I didn't know that).

(1) Firstly, there is a difference in what you can actually see of the undersides of the tracks and whether or not they allow other bricks to be attached. Both the RC tracks 53400/53401 and the 9V tracks 74746/74747 do not show detailed undersides, but there is a difference in the way they allow other bricks to be attached.

(2) I beg to differ with you, Superkalle, about it not being a major problem. It is a problem, because with the way it is now, you cannot attach 9V Straight Track 74746 onto a 32x32 or 16x32 baseplate, like they do IRL. For example, see set 4553 Train Wash. Ideally, the undersides of 9V tracks tracks should not only look the same, but also act identical to those of the RC tracks.

Edited April 14, 2013 by Sjuip

[Banjo]

About the train tracks, I had a chance to test myself now.

2) For connectivity, the only track that doesn't have it is (85976), so that was correct (I didn't know that).

Which is especially a problem since there's a set that explicitly uses that piece in that way! :)

I'm sure there are others, too, but I don't own any modern Lego train sets, so I can only confirm the Alien Conquest one.

@Banjo - About attaching files to posts, you are only allowed to attach up to 100kb in total to all posts. The attach file function is actually only there to attach tiny files for "quick" purposes. So you need to delete attachments to previous posts to be able to post larger attachments again. But on the other hand, that's not recommended, because then others won't be able to read/follow your older posts since they will have been "reduced". I would suggest you create an account at brickshelf.com. It's better then Flickr and such, because it allows you to upload not only images but also LXF-files (etc).

Thanks for the info. A shame it's such a tiny limitation; I can understand the reasoning, but it makes it pretty much useless unless you delete attachments after posting (and as you said, that's not very helpful to others).

[Superkalle]

(2) I beg to differ with you, Superkalle, about it not being a major problem. It is a problem, because with the way it is now, you cannot attach 9V Straight Track 74746 onto a 32x32 or 16x32 baseplate, like they do IRL. For example, see set 4553 Train Wash. Ideally, the undersides of 9V tracks tracks should not only look the same, but also act identical to those of the RC tracks.

I stand corrected. The 9v straight track should connect to a base plate. And the 9v bent track should connect in more places then it does today.

[Banjo]

Not sure if it's classed as a bug, but I just noticed that part 93225 (utensil spray gun) has no flexibility at all to the "hose" part.

[Superkalle]

Not sure if it's classed as a bug, but I just noticed that part 93225 (utensil spray gun) has no flexibility at all to the "hose" part.

No, I wouldn't concider that a bug. But if I remember correctly, there has been a few issues in the past with builds being impossible to do in LDD because in real life they rely on "soft" parts being able to bend a small bit.

[Aanchir]

No, I wouldn't concider that a bug. But if I remember correctly, there has been a few issues in the past with builds being impossible to do in LDD because in real life they rely on "soft" parts being able to bend a small bit.

I'd consider it at least a part that needs to be improved, if not an outright bug, since that part is supposed to bend much more than a "small bit". The minifigure is supposed to be able to point the nozzle forward while the hose is plugged into the stud on the back of his helmet.

[Superkalle]

@Banjo and Aanchir

Sorry guys, to be very honest, I thought you meant 55296 (oil can). So, OK, yes the 93225 should be bendable, that's right.

But I guess I was partly right anyway (but more my mistake I suppose): it isn't a "bug" bug since it was intentionally released like this. But let's agree to call it a "limitation"

[Lyichir]

I found a couple of boundary errors involving part 98102. Firstly, parts ought to fit directly to the left and right of the hinge; they currently don't. Secondly, at the cockpit's widest point, parts ought to fit directly to either side provided that they are six modules apart (since the cockpit is only six modules wide). However, these don't fit either. The part render is fine, but the boundaries are apparently too big, at least at these points.

[Saberwing40k]

That is all.

Or not, I've also found a bug that allows you to take turntables apart.

By the way, I did not cheat, or edit the .lxf file in any way. All you need is the flex tool and the hinge tool. Oddly, the old variant turntable has all of it's internal detail modeled, but not the new one.