 | | Re: Discussion-Large Technic Shock 2909c01.dat
|
|
-----Original message----- From: Terry K <legoverse@geocities.com> To: lugnet.cad.dev@lugnet.com <lugnet.cad.dev@lugnet.com> Date: maandag 10 mei 1999 13:09 Subject: Re: Discussion-Large Technic Shock 2909c01.dat (...) Terry answered: (...) If we (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Discussion-Large Technic Shock 2909c01.dat
|
|
So much for trying to be funny without reading all previous posts. -John Van Adviesbureau Noord/Zuidlijn <nzlijn@euronet.nl> wrote in message news:004901be9ae4$32...0@n0079... (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Discussion-Large Technic Shock 2909c01.dat
|
|
(...) It took me a while to bend my mind around this one, but now I see Terry's point. Think of a cross-section of the metal of the spring itself what you would see if you snipped it with wire-cutters (perish the thought). You would see a circle on (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Discussion-Large Technic Shock 2909c01.dat
|
|
(...) The inputs for such a program should be the x,y,z coordinates of both end points of the shock. That way, since you are using a seperate proggy to generate the shock, it might as well generate the whole shock, including rotation. It would be (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Discussion-Large Technic Shock 2909c01.dat
|
|
(...) I am glad we have all you deep-thinkers working on this. I Jeff is willing, I think we should do some testing of the various methods. Find out which one is best overall. As John said, having several pre-made lengths that are properly modeled, (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
