 | | Nick and Jens Bought!
|
|
Got Nick and Jens today. First impression is hmm... . Ok bubble box type deal. Back is usual ad/stuff in series graphic. Looks like they use the new click ball joints. (Am I parroting anybody?) I got to say toy Nick looks as cute as his live (...) (22 years ago, 5-Jul-02, to lugnet.galidor, lugnet.general, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Where's the Technic???
|
|
(...) (Anyone else ready for a rant party?) No kidding!!! I'm starting to get offended! Isn't it AFOLs that have the $$ to buy the (real) Technic and Mindstorm kits anyway? And the margin should be higher since they don't have to pay for royalties (...) (22 years ago, 5-Jul-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Large arch bridge geometry - help!
|
|
(...) Like I said in a different message, I can't make large scale experimentation in the present (not enough parts). I must therefore restrict to details, and that is why the theoretical approach is so important to me. (...) That is partially the (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Large arch bridge geometry - help!
|
|
(...) You are absolutely right - LEGO is about trial and error. And I will use the method, but on a limited basis (to test triangles' sequences, for instance). The reason is I currently own very few technic parts, and I'll only buy the rest *after* (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Large arch bridge geometry - help!
|
|
(...) It helps A LOT!!! Thanks, TJ. I'll be working with this during the holidays, to see what I can design. Now I must find the actual measurements of the bridges, to be more accurate with my project - but that is the easy bit :-) Fantastic page, (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Large arch bridge geometry - help!
|
|
(...) I'll try this method now - it seems easy enough. The reason I had not tried it before was because I wanted to find a more "general" fashion to design the arch, and then apply to my planned bridge. It is better in theory, but failed in practice (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Large arch bridge geometry - help!
|
|
(...) Although this advice will result in getting something built, it's very time consuming, and getting the desired result is difficult. My first large truss bridges: (URL) built by trial and error. It took me quite a bit of time to determine the (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Large arch bridge geometry - help!
|
|
Pedro, John's advise is very good. Experiment! Sure, you might make something that at first you might not like but examine what you've made and ask yourself "How can I change it?" Then again, you'll make something you'll love one moment, come up (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Large arch bridge geometry - help!
|
|
(...) Pedro- This may or may not be any help, but when I built my 4' swing bridge ((URL) I had never built a technic bridge before. All I did was employ a little trial and error. So I guess my comment would be that a prior command of beam-geometry (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Large arch bridge geometry - help!
|
|
(...) ROSCO is right, you should think in terms of beam lengths. Your thought process should be similar to how it's actually built. In other words, you build your beams in certain lengths first and then put them together to form the bridge. The (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
