Subject:
|
Whining about studless parts - Was: Pneumatics book?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Sat, 10 Apr 2004 23:14:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3341 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Steven Lane wrote:
> 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.
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 using completely studless parts. It
was not my goal to make them without studs, I just never needed aany studded
parts in these designs:
http://www.kclague.net/hex363/index.htm
http://www.kclague.net/Inchworm/index.htm
I have plenty other worthwhile (IMHO) designs that intermix studded and studless
parts:
http://www.kclague.net
http://www.kclague.net/pedmatic/index.htm
http://www.kclague.net/mm-walker/P5100053.JPG
http://www.kclague.net/PneumADDic%20II/index.htm
http://www.kclague.net/Go-Rilla/index.htm
http://www.kclague.net/at-st/index.htm
I noticed that I don't have any designs that are only studded parts.
One of the things I like to make are bipeds, and it helps a lot if the bipeds
are light, becaause this leaves less mass to wrangle and manage.
Light designs are not something that Technic bricks and plates are good at.
My prejudice is against Bionicles, because I've not (yet) figured out how to
articulate those ball and socket joints using motors. I'm working on it though,
and hope to eliminate that prejudice soon.
Kevin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Pneumatics book?
|
| (...) 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 (20 years ago, 10-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
|
|
|
|
