Subject:
|
Re: studless construction practice
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 17 Jan 2006 03:17:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1860 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Matthew Davidson <matthew@blank.org> wrote:
I agree with most of that except this:
> Studless designs are stronger and more rigid. Studded brick are fine
> for normal lego structures, but when things start moving and carrying
> loads, studless wins hands down.
I think 3-d studless constructions are require much more support structure to
reduce twisting. Studded construction can do this with very little extra, thus
making studded construction definitely more rigid per unit weight. At least
that's what I've found.
ROSCO
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: studless construction practice
|
| (...) One advantage is rectified horizontal/vertical hole placement. To have an even ratio vertical hole distance using studded beams, you have to place two plates between each beam. Studless beams do not have this problem, and also provide a hole (...) (18 years ago, 17-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
