 | | Re: New Mecha - The Rizmit
|
|
(...) Excellent. I just needed to respond to this message! (...) Cool, thanks, I worked hard on it and I am very proud of the way it looks. (...) Thank you. The frame of this Mecha is where "it" is at. The frame its'self is the very reason I wanted (...) (20 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.build.mecha, lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| |
| | The Clague - Sophie Project
|
|
Kevin, in preparation for our co-build, what sorts of ideas would you like to pursue; ie... what kind of bot would you like to build? Scorpion? Quadra-ped? Pnuemo Asst'd Arm? Hexapod? Cente-Milli-ped? Or, what would the rest of you like to see us (...) (20 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: pneumatic cylinder: why not hydraulic ??
|
|
(...) I class the input as the position of each bank of switches. A bank of switches may be driven by one cylinder (1 or 2 switches), two cylinders (3-5 switches) or more (6 cylinders in the case of 9 switches in my octopus arm logic). The number of (...) (20 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Pneumatics book?
|
|
(...) Restricted as I understand it is not so much a question of how many different parts exist, but what different types of structures you can build from them. And given the great models I have seen in both TLG and MO creations, both studded and (...) (20 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: pneumatic cylinder: why not hydraulic ??
|
|
(...) Hmmmm.... When talking about pneumatic gates in the past, I came to realize that different people defined gate inputs and outputs differently. Mark Tarrabain's single switch AND gate has two individual pressure inputs; one forces the piston to (...) (20 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: pneumatic cylinder: why not hydraulic ??
|
|
(...) A XOR gate has two inputs, one with 1 switch and one with 4 switches. The 4-switch one is a standard reverser and the 1-switch one has the air supply on the middle and the two outer ports go to the input ports of the reverser (the middles of (...) (20 years ago, 10-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Whining about studless parts - Was: Pneumatics book?
|
|
(...) David, I'm not working on this issue because it is a good or bad idea, I'm on personal mission. I agree that that over time the friction would get reduced by wear. In fact though this wear will be a good thing. I have tried using gearboxes and (...) (20 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Whining about studless parts - Was: Pneumatics book?
|
|
(...) I'm not sure how good an idea that is. Not the incorporation of BIONICLE parts thing, but the specific use of the socket joints. They're designed to work with friction, and I'd think that extended use of a motor would tend to wear them out (...) (20 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Pneumatics book?
|
|
(...) I too regret the fact that studded designs are hard to find. There are plenty of situations where studded bricks are the way to go. Kevin (20 years ago, 10-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.books)
|
| |
| | Whining about studless parts - Was: Pneumatics book?
|
|
(...) Can you really blame this on studless parts, given that many others *have* made worthwhile designs? Perhaps your prejudice against studless parts is preventing you from creating a worthwhile design. I have made a few worthwhile (IMHO) designs (...) (20 years ago, 10-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
