 | | Re: Australian Roll Call
|
|
"Santosh" <santosh@student.unsw.edu.au> wrote in message news:FuzvHu.B20@lugnet.com... (...) Actually, technic would be more along the lines of AS1170 (minus the moving parts of course) due to the beams and pin connectors. :) David Drew. (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Australian Standards for LEGO
|
|
(...) Guys, guys. C'mon! Concrete? Loadings? I'd at least put it in as a suppliment to AS4100, since perhaps Parts 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 are directly applicable. Structural LEGO is more akin to steel than concrete, and the loading code is only used to (...) (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Australian Standards for LEGO
|
|
(...) What say we at loc.au develop the first lego Structural code, we call it (Australian Lego Stadard) ALS2000. And Yes the first appendix can be Appendix L < Engineering Geek Discussion mode> Hmm See I'd have to disagree with the Lego being akin (...) (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Australian Standards for LEGO
|
|
"Peter Callaway" <pcallaway@bmcl.com.au> wrote in message news:Fv098q.Lxp@lugnet.com... (...) moving (...) suppliment (...) Argh! I got 4100 and 1170 confused *starts self-flagelation with birch sticks* Bah, I've been studying too much mining (...) (25 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Australian Standards for LEGO
|
|
(...) L (...) Depends on what you're building, doesn't it, and a member in compression or tension doesn't automatically dictate it's material component. Houses, sure (although the bricks are behaving more like bricks and not a homogenous concrete (...) (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
| |
| | Re: Australian Standards for LEGO
|
|
David Drew wrote in message ... (...) Ah, but you see I have actually been lucky enough to meet Peter's wife, and I have to say she is amazingly cool about the staggering proportion of the house that his Lego occupies. Man, those bonus marks would (...) (25 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
