Subject:
|
Re: Proportions for a 2001 Monolith in LEGO?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.build
|
Date:
|
Sat, 24 Jan 2004 10:24:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
675 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.build, Scott Lyttle wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> >
> > > Someone check my math... I gotta go to the airport!
> >
> > Dunno about checking--my brain is a little fried today (long week of checking
> > numbers and cross references here).
> >
> > If I recall correctly from reading the book, the 1 x 4 x 9 dimension comes from
> > the squares of "the first three numbers":
> >
> > 1 squared = 1
> > 2 squared = 4
> > 3 squared = 9
>
>
> 1 4 9 ??
>
> where have I heard that before?... I had no idea it was 1 4 9 !
>
> OK, seriously.
>
> What I'm driving at is that if you want to do it in bricks and do it the easy
> way, studs up, the dimensions I gave for bricks of 2x8x15 high convert to 40 ldu
> x 160 ldu x 360 ldu, which, when you take the common factor of 40 ldu (the width
> of a 2x2) out you get... wait for it... 1 4 9 ! It's the ratio that matters not
> the absolute measurement.
Well yeah... but it would be interesting to build one of the correct
_physical_ proportions, if only to say that you did it.
(As has been established, this works out to 2 studs wide, 8 studs
across, and 15 brick-heights high.)
> As for all smooth facings, the easiest thing to do, I would think, is just
> reverse direction somewhere in the middle from upside down to right side up.
Yes... this is what I was thinking.
> Using old style hinge plates lets you do that in the thickness of one plate, but
> does have the disadvantage that you don't have a completely smooth surface,
> there are gaps where the rounded ends of the hinge plates don't fill in.
I think it would be easier to just use technic bricks (inside the
construct, they would be completely concealed by smooth bricks on the
surface, and mounting bricks at 90 degree angles so as to get the bricks
building with the studs facing both up and down. Of course, using
such a construct would mean that it couldn't be just 2 studs wide
anymore because there wouldn't be enough room inside... You *MIGHT* be
able to build it with only 4 studs wide, but I think it would need to be
at least 6 studs wide (with all other dimensions proportionately
increased) in order to be large enough to conceal a working and sturdy
brick reversing mechanism by at least one stud thickness of smooth
bricks for the outside of the monolith.
If I had enough pieces, I'd give it a shot... but I simply don't.
>> Mark
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Proportions for a 2001 Monolith in LEGO?
|
| (...) ...which is the minimum size required to achieve the 1x4x9 dimensional ratio. I have been unable to find any evidence that the actual physical dimensions are known, beyond one person's claim that the physical Cinerama screen (which has an (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jan-04, to lugnet.build)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Proportions for a 2001 Monolith in LEGO?
|
| (...) 1 4 9 ?? where have I heard that before?... I had no idea it was 1 4 9 ! OK, seriously. What I'm driving at is that if you want to do it in bricks and do it the easy way, studs up, the dimensions I gave for bricks of 2x8x15 high convert to 40 (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jan-04, to lugnet.build)
|
20 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
