Subject:
|
Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:45:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1711 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Simon Bennett writes:
> that steel structures are generally welded or riveted together
Large steel structures (i.e. buildings and bridges) are welded and BOLTED
together. Rivets are rarely used anymore in these structures.
> friction pin system is a better analogue for this than Meccano’s bolts.
Friction pins are an excellent connector because they are easy and
convenient to use, but they lack the ability to provide any axial
compression (i.e. tightening of a bolt "squeezes" the parts together). While
this may not be necessary for most applications, it can be a problem.
Although Lego does make (or has made) threaded axles, they are rare and it
is unfeasible to plan a large structure using many of these axles.
I wouldn't leave out using axles as connectors. They are much stronger in
shear than pins are. If you're creating a structure like a truss and have
eccentric connections, axles can be better.
> Pictures of Lego structures can be found at
> www.lugnet.com/~469/projects/archbr (Ross Crawford’s arch truss bridge) and
Large impressive structure, yes; truss, no. This bridge is technically not a
truss and therefore doesn't have the strength that a true truss would.
Without going into too much detail, the members in a truss must intersect at
a common point. The diagonals on the example bridge are not continously
connected end-to-end along the structure. If you want to know what I'm
talking about, go here:
http://tanyatj.home.texas.net/tjscreations/ideas/truss/
If you want good examples of large trusses build with Lego bricks, go here:
http://tanyatj.home.texas.net/tjscreations/creations/bridge_arch/
http://tanyatj.home.texas.net/tjscreations/creations/bridge_straight/
In recent times, the trend in bridge building is moving towards large plate
girders and box girder sections. I'm not familiar with Meccano at all, but
Lego is excellent for building these structures. It can take a lot of
plates, but it works well:
http://tanyatj.home.texas.net/tjscreations/ideas/beam/
> As far as mechanical engineering is concerned Meccano may have had an
> advantage prior to the late 1970s but these days Lego has a much wider range
> of gears and other mechanical elements than Meccano, including
> differentials, shock absorbers, pneumatic pumps and cylinders, gearboxes,
> cams and flexible drive shafts. Examples of models which show good use of
> mechanical principles are Jennifer Clark’s trucks and construction machinery
> (www.telepresence.strath.ac.uk/jen/lego/) and Dennis Bosman’s mobile cranes:
> (www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Highway/2290/bmnr04.html).
Yes, excellent, good!!! Examples are the best way to defend our argument
that Lego is far superior. There are many other sites out there with good
MOC's that are worthy of mentioning.
Also, if you're going to present the benefits of Lego and Technic to someone
who is not familiar with Lego, mention Jim Hughes' site: Technica,
http://w3.one.net/~hughesj/technica/technica.html
it is an excellent reference for Technic parts.
> Lego also has an educational theme called Dacta, which is only available to
> educational establishments (though if anyone is interested it can be bought
> at Legoland or by mail order from www.pitsco-legodacta.com). Dacta includes
> solar cells, capacitors and other electronic and mechanical parts along with
> teaching guides and other support to use Lego in the classroom. I do not
> believe anything so comprehensive has ever been provided by Meccano.
Don't forget about Mindstorms and all the Lego robotics stuff. How does
Meccano compare against that? (if at all)
T. J.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| (...) Noted. You're absolutely right. It's been a while since my degree and I'm a railway engineer now, sorry about that slip up. I must go back and review my notes on egg-sucking too!! (...) So should I leave the part about Lego being no worse for (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| Okay. Now I know how FTP works (i.e seamlessly, it wasn't like that in 1994 when I was at University!) As Gael says that is a cool article, just one question. Did the Constructopedia ever go online? I have never seen any reference to it on Lugnet. (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
51 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
|
|
|
|
