 | | Re[2]: Movement and friction
|
|
Earlier on Mon, 28 Jan 2002 23:28:01 GMT on lugnet.cad.dev Ross Crawford<rcrawford@csi.com> wrote: ---...--- RC> I can see one limitation - the fact that technic axles are actually RC> significantly smaller than the holes in the bricks (round holes, (...) (24 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Movement and friction
|
|
I haven't commented substantially on LCD, so maybe I should. I am contemplating an algorithm that will find all of the possible stud-insertion points on a part. The obvious way to do this is to recognize the tube or enclosing box with their (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Movement and friction
|
|
(...) I think it probably is. The situations I'm thinking about are: 1. axles in technic bricks, which fit your "no friction" model; 2. the light grey low-friction pins, which could also fit the "no friction" model (with regard rotation); 3. the (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Movement and friction
|
|
(...) I think it probably is. The situations I'm thinking about are: 1. axles in technic bricks, which fit your "no friction" model; 2. the light grey low-friction pins, which could also fit the "no friction" model (with regard rotation); 3. the (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
| |
| | Re: Movement and friction
|
|
(...) Welcome in my brain, Barney: I was writing about gravity and inertia in this very hour. The approach you describe may be usable, but as for myself, I'm talking in the LMPL proposal about a tensile strength instead. I see some difference. (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
