Subject:
|
Re: Adrian's door
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Fri, 29 Aug 2003 17:33:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
562 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Aaron Sneary wrote:
| |
Adrian or anyone else familiar with this type of door:
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/tremor/Ground/asimov/dcp01580.jpg
Does that 1x1 open space almost hidden by the wall eliminate the hideous bind
you get creating doors with squared ends? This seems like a much simpler
method than my recent exercises in building doors with rounded ends, using
the old technic steering mechanism plates.
|
Theoretically, (heavy emphasis on the “theoretically” part, so don’t yell at me
if it’s not true) the doors should not bind at all as long as the hinge points
are on the opposite side from where the door swings. When the hinges are put on
the inside face, you will always bind horribly against a flat door frame as the
diagonal between the hinge point and the far corner is greater than the distance
across the opening (this is why people-sized doors always have a bit of a gap
between the door edge and the frame). Having that hidden gap there wouldn’t
help at all with clearing the gap-concealing wall if it wasn’t for the fact that
the hinge points are inset into the main wall. But again, that hidden gap
shouldn’t really be necessary in this case because the hinges are inset into the
door frame.
I should point out that I have no recent practical experience with doors of this
type, but I have had lots of experience with geometry, both theoretical and
practical.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Adrian's door
|
| Adrian or anyone else familiar with this type of door: (URL) Does that 1x1 open space almost hidden by the wall eliminate the hideous bind you get creating doors with squared ends? This seems like a much simpler method than my recent exercises in (...) (21 years ago, 29-Aug-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
