To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.roboticsOpen lugnet.robotics in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / 23306
23305  |  23307
Subject: 
Re: The Great Ball Contraption
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:32:07 GMT
Viewed: 
7952 times
  
In lugnet.robotics, tmassey@obscorp.com wrote:
news-gateway@lugnet.com wrote on 01/10/2005 10:01:48 AM:

Is there something that a module builder can not do because the
standard is too simple?

Not to oversimplify, but I mean if the 'standard' for the ball
contraption is 32
studs from the front of the hopper to the back edge of the
baseplate, and thus I
personally would probably grab a 32 x 32 stud baseplate to build on, thus the
'in' hopper would be in the bottom left hand corner anyway, wouldn'tmy module,
by its very nature, be able to be placed 'in line' with the other ones, or 90
degrees, placing the hopper in the same location?

That assumes that there is nothing in front of the hopper.  There is
nothing to say that you are limited to a module 32 studs deep.  If you
choose to build it that way, great, but there is nothing that says you
can't build a 3-foot-deep module (and according to the spec, that *should*
be longer than deep, so it would have to be at *least* 3 feet long!).  In
that case, it could not turn the corner as you've described.

However, to me, that's even more reason to leave the spec alone.  You have
described a simple way to make a spec-compliant module that makes right
corners.  Therefore, there is no reason to define corner pieces!  They're
already defined!  :)

Tim Massey

I completely agree with that assessment.  However, the premise is that I'm using
a 32x32 baseplate with the hopper in the bottom left hand corner--using that
premise, the module can be used either in-line, or 90 degrees.  If one does not
use the 32x32 baseplate with the hooper in the bottom left-hand corner, then all
bets are off ;)

Dave K



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: The Great Ball Contraption
 
news-gateway@lugnet.com wrote on 01/10/2005 10:01:48 AM: (...) thus the (...) module, (...) or 90 (...) That assumes that there is nothing in front of the hopper. There is nothing to say that you are limited to a module 32 studs deep. If you choose (...) (19 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)

94 Messages in This Thread:



































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR