Subject:
|
Re: "33" Slope Shocker... Possible name change?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2001 06:16:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
562 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> > ... And of course there's the bit where
> > the slope of the actual brick face is not the same as the slope
> > made by a stack of those bricks, due to the little "step" at
> > the "sharpest point" of each sloped brick.
>
> That's true. But it's a slight difference.
And it's a problem no matter which notation you use - the step is usually
around 1/2 a plate high, so do you take that off the rise value? I also noticed
for the first time recently that this step is a different height for different
slope angles 8?(
ROSCO
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: "33" Slope Shocker... Possible name change?
|
| (...) Hmmm, interesting thought. I'll have to think it through some more. This would give us figures like: Angle Rise:Run 10 1:6 18 1:3 33/27 1:2 45 1:1 45 2:2 53 3&1/3:3 55 6:4 (not yet released) 65 2:1 75 3:1 Hmmm. Off the cuff, there are two (...) (24 years ago, 17-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
