Subject:
|
Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:45:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1768 times
|
| |
|
|
"Simon Bennett" <simon.bennett@ntlworld.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:GFwFDH.8JM@lugnet.com...
>
> So should I leave the part about Lego being no worse for modelling steel
> out? Actually I need to research Meccano but I think it only consists of
> plates so if you want to form a member (I-beam or box section) you have to
> bolt it together first. A technic beam is already a decent member.
As far as I know, Meccano has 'L'-beams, and perhaps 'U' too? At least there
are large plates, with folded sides, which is effectively a 'U'.
(I only have the Swedish clone of Meccano (Teknik) at hand, and this includes
L-beams, L-plates, Z-plates and U-plates, even a LUL plate)
--
Anders Isaksson, Sweden
BlockCAD: http://user.tninet.se/~hbh828t/proglego.htm
Gallery: http://user.tninet.se/~hbh828t/gallery/index.htm
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
51 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
