| |
In lugnet.technic, Mark Bellis wrote:
> The thing is though, 8455s have lots of beams without studs, and ones with studs
> generally seem to be declining. Perhaps I should build more with the beams from
> 8455s. The trouble is, using the right angle brackets to make right angles
> introduces too much flexing into the joints. Beams and plates were much more
> rigid. Rigidity is essential for efficiency, and efficiency increases speed.
I've long held the opinion that it is a lot harder to make rigid structures
using studless beams. I have yet to build anything of worth entirely from
studless, despite multiple attempts.
Steve
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Pneumatics book?
|
| (...) Sorry for replying to my own post but I've just had another thought. Has anyone else noticed all the ancillary junk needed to build a studless creation? Compare it with the basic studded version, all you have is beams, of varying lengths, 1xn (...) (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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Pneumatics book?
|
| (...) Yes, I just noticed that it was one of your specialities - obvious due to the picture on the Technic newsgroup page. I also major in trains, which take a lot of time, so I haven't had time to develop pneumatics much for a few years. However, (...) (20 years ago, 9-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.books)
|
38 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
