To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.generalOpen lugnet.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 General / 49438
49437  |  49439
Subject: 
Re: Most redundant Lego part
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general
Date: 
Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:07:53 GMT
Viewed: 
786 times
  
In lugnet.general, Ronald Borchert wrote:
   In lugnet.general, Gerhard R. Istok wrote:

   Any other redundancies folks can think of? (Except of course for those 1x1x5 and 1x2x5 bricks.)

Hi Gary, if you stack 5 bricks together it will not be quite stably, so the 5 high bricks make a sence for me.

I used to think the same, until I came to build the drawbridge mechanism.

http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/whoward69/Castle/RandomTownPlanning/Keep/entrancefirstfloor1.jpg

A stack of five 1x2 bricks has 4 more “ridges” than a single 1x2x5 brick which puts just enough extra friction on the beam that it will not fall under gravity. So the 1x2x5 bricks that make up sides of the slot for the each beam arm are essential. As are the ones inside beside the doors (that you can’t see) that the coupling bars slide up on.

William



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Most redundant Lego part
 
(...) Hi Gary, if you stack 5 bricks together it will not be quite stably, so the 5 high bricks make a sence for me. But i cannot see any sence in this two bricks: (URL) and (URL) Specially if you stack 3 2x2 bricks together it will be very stably, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Oct-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)

19 Messages in This Thread:






Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR