Subject:
|
Re: The Great Ball Contraption
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:45:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4814 times
|
| |
|
|
> 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 "front edge"? Do you
> mean the beam which is 10 studs long and which is 10 bricks off the
> tabletop? That would impose a requirement on the next-door module to
> build up and reinforce a wall 10 bricks high. Many of the prototype
> GBC modules either throw or dump the ball into the input bin, with
> nothing abutting its front edge.
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 enough mass to slide on the table).
One idea is to use a couple 2x4 plates to connect baseplates together. But not all
modules have baseplates.
With Tim's idea, the modules would need to be connected by adding a beam to the
"front", not connecting "between" the modules, otherwise if you need to remove a
module from the middle, it will take a great deal of work to get them apart.
We're having another gathering this weekend, so I'll have more info after that.
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
94 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
