 | | | | | | |
| |
|
In article <FuAtvD.Cqw@lugnet.com>, Lorbaat <eric@nospam.thirteen.net> wrote:
> line too many of them up, but I have had little problem with them as a
> structral element. I used some of them here:
While I don't woosh castles, I do manipulate them-- for example, my current
version has levels that one can lift off one another.
I find that when one goes with a design like that, it looks a lot better,
much, much better. But some fool (usually me) is going to make lots of
little pieces at some point.
A design like that yields effectively large sections:
------ ------ ------
| || || |
| || || |
| || || |
| || || |
------ ------ ------
Where the only places the sections can be locked together are on the
tops and bottoms.
I really like the looks of it, and it yields a quite modular design,
but I can't make it stay together.
Which brings me to yet another question:
What's the trick to relatively durable buildings built in that style?
(sorry, lotsa meta-castle design questions, little in the way of
photographs. I'll try to fix that soon...)
-JDF
--
J.D. Forinash ,-.
foxtrot@cc.gatech.edu ( <
The more you learn, the better your luck gets. `-'
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.castle, John D. Forinash writes:
> I really like the looks of it, and it yields a quite modular design,
> but I can't make it stay together.
>
> Which brings me to yet another question:
>
> What's the trick to relatively durable buildings built in that style?
I've found the best way is layers of bricks or plates on top and bottom
strengthen it enough. This is one of the reasons I don't really use it; it
gobbles up plates, and bricks make it too tall... :) (I had forgotten about
this use of those bricks in my original post, sorry.)
Jeff
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
J.D. Forinash <foxtrot@cc.gatech.edu> wrote in message
news:8f9nuj$72q$1@cc731244-b.chmbl1.cc.ga.home.com...
> In article <FuAtvD.Cqw@lugnet.com>, Lorbaat <eric@nospam.thirteen.net> • wrote:
> > line too many of them up, but I have had little problem with them as a
> > structral element. I used some of them here:
>
> While I don't woosh castles, I do manipulate them-- for example, my • current
> version has levels that one can lift off one another.
I also have built castles with the "lift off" design. I prefer them to ones
that hinge (although some of the hinged creations I have seen are very
impressive - i.e. Ed Boxer's AMAZING white castle).
[snip]
> Where the only places the sections can be locked together are on the
> tops and bottoms.
>
> I really like the looks of it, and it yields a quite modular design,
> but I can't make it stay together.
>
> Which brings me to yet another question:
>
> What's the trick to relatively durable buildings built in that style?
What I have done is to not have the sections lock together with studs at
all. Instead I have the upper section rest on a row of tiles and place
corresponding bricks on the underside of the upper section which slide down
immediately to the inside of the lower section walls. This, in effect,
"locks" the upper section in place. Unless you tip the castle to 90
degrees, this will provide a sturdy construction.
Tim
| | | | | | |
