 | | Re: Pneumatics book? —Steven Lane
|
| | | (...) 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 (21 years ago, 10-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.books)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Pneumatics book? —Steven Lane
|
| | | | | (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 10-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.books)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Pneumatics book? —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | (...) Has anyone noticed all of the rich variety of parts available to the modern stud-free system that have no comparable equivalent in the old stud-dependant system? Take, for instance, these parts: (URL) triple liftarm> (URL) 1x2 flat liftarm> (...) (21 years ago, 10-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.books, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Pneumatics book? —Horst Lehner
|
| | | | | | (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Whining about studless parts: was Pneumatics book? —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | | | (...) (21 years ago, 10-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.books)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Whining about studless parts - Was: Pneumatics book? —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 10-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Whining about studless parts - Was: Pneumatics book? —David Laswell
|
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Whining about studless parts - Was: Pneumatics book? —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | | (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
