 | | Re: The Great Ball Contraption
|
|
Steve Hassenplug writes: > (URL) notice that the spec says "Currently, there is no standard for physically connecting modules together." One possibility is for a module to grab onto the two corner studs of the input bin of the module to the right, (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The Great Ball Contraption
|
|
(...) That's a good idea, which I don't think has been suggested, yet. However, that sort of requires a module to have corner studs... :) This module mostly uses liftarms: (URL) it turns out, I suspect 90% of the modules will not require (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The Great Ball Contraption
|
|
Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com> wrote on 01/10/2005 12:03:04 PM: (...) Or specify that the input bin must have a technic beam at the front edge of the input bin to accept technic pins: this is very similar to how the castle walls connect... Tim (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The Great Ball Contraption
|
|
tmassey@obscorp.com writes: > Or specify that the input bin must have a technic beam at the front edge > of the input bin to accept technic pins: this is very similar to how the > castle walls connect... Excellent idea. What do you mean, though, by (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The Great Ball Contraption
|
|
(...) I'm still a bit torn on this. There is NO interconnection type that will work with all the modules we already have (only 10 or 12) but not all need to be interconnected. The connection is only required in a few cases (where modules are moving (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The Great Ball Contraption
|
|
Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com> wrote on 01/11/2005 04:25:15 PM: (...) edge (...) the (...) Yes, yes it would! :) Tim Massey (20 years ago, 11-Jan-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
