Subject:
|
Re: A project suggestion= Let's develop a Theme ourselves....
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad, lugnet.general, lugnet.town
|
Date:
|
Mon, 18 Sep 2000 19:03:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
210 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Frank Filz writes:
> In lugnet.cad, Alex Farlie writes:
> > In lugnet.cad, Frank Filz writes:
> > > In lugnet.cad, Alex Farlie writes:
> > > > Perhaps we could have a lock plate at the upper end of 'canal' built using
> > > > the theme? The problem is then how you suppourt the uuper plates?
> > >
> > > A cool element would be a 16x16x4 part which is intended to support a
> > > baseplate. 4 of them of course would be used to support a 32x32 baseplate. • The
> > > part would have a flat top (but it could be lacy to reduce weight, it just
> > > needs to be strong enough to support a baseplate). The part should be set up
> > > so a bunch of 2x4 bricks to interlock them (4 plate thicknesses below the • top
> > > surface so the studs don't intefere with the baseplate). The bottom should • at
> > > a minimum have 2x2 tube sections at each corner (and probably one in the
> > > middle, in fact, having them at the middle of each side would be good). • There
> > > would be webbing between the 2x2 columns to provide bracing.
> >
> >
> > you mean something like
> >
> > ----------------
> > |00|\ /|00|
> > |00| \ / |OO|
> > |-- |--|
> > ....
> >
> > 00
> > 00 is a 2x2 tubed section...
>
> I'm confused as to whether this is a top view or side view.
Meant to be view from the bottom and I admit it's not very good! I am at
present working on a differnet idea regarding pillar suppourts. L-CADing in
progress.
>
> > Agree with you about needing interlocking. - Actaully perhaps 16X16X3 might • be
> > better. Then you could use it other purposes. But I think this might make the
> > interlocking more difficult to add in?
>
> You're right, 3 high is the correct height to make them. That, or a multiple
> thereof, is the step height on most (all?) of the raised baseplates.
ITSOIDKS (I Think so , I don't know so.)
> Interlocking will still be easy to do. I envision the interlocking being
> between the 2x2 columns.
Perhaps base of corners are at 1 bricj highet. You then lock coloumns
together with 2x4 Bricks?
In fact the idea I am L-CADing is slightly different and uses an 8X8 basplate
with a raised portion. - Incidentally I have a *.DAT for an 8x8 baseplate if
anyone wants it?
The baseplate i have is 8x8. Middle rasied section is esential the central 4x4
section with the middle 2x2 sunk. - (Hey this would be a great base for castle
towers!) - The height of the raised portion is 3 bricks!
I WILL post this one up when it's done.
>
> > > > or produce a workable lock in between easilly?
> > >
> > > An easy way to do it would be to basically build an elevator. The lower lock
> > > gates could be the large wooden doors used in Ninja, or a new part. The • upper
> > > gates would be just a couple bricks high. The elevator unit would have the
> > > lower part of the upper gates simulated, and would of course have the hinge
> > > points for the doors, plus the elevator mechanism. The elevator should be
> > > cranked by a windlass type arangement which sticks up through a hole on the
> > > walkway beside the lock (and of course actually represents the gate • operating
> > > machinery - I think the gates are often opened by some kind of wheel or
> > > windlass, at least on smaller locks if I remember from my childhood).
> >
> > OF course this assume UK or at least european style locks.
>
> Well, this style is used in the US also. My description above is based on what
> I remember of the Songo Lock in Naples Maine. The following web site has a
> good description of how a lock is operated:
>
> http://www.pigpen.demon.co.uk/locks.htm
>
> I was not quite correct in what the windlass operates. It is used to open
> holes in the gates or chanels in the walls to allow water to move into or out
> of the lock.
>
> > A pure design using only exsiting parts might,on a dry system
> > be to use 2 16x1 technic sterring racks to form an incline and mount a
> > platform on axles that rest on the rack? You would still need strings but at
> > least ITIW (I think it would ) not need new parts.
>
> You could use the 1x4 rack pieces with a worm gear. The hard part with
> existing parts might be to hide all the machinery, at least if you want the
> lower level of the lock to be as low as possible.
Another option is to Jr the design and use a single part(NOOOOOOO!!!! Ed.)
Alex
>
> Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
26 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
