Illegal connections

[Off the wall]

It's probably out there somewhere, but I did a couple of searches and could not get an answer to this:

What's an illegal connection and who says its illegal? Seriously, my uncle in the union back in the day in Detroit had a lot of illegal connections, buy you could do time in prison for those. I'm assuming a lego illegal connection is something quite different.

Thanks

[Mutant Orc]

Yes I'm pretty sure that those illegal connections are something entirely different. (!!!)

I'm quite new so my definition might be off- it's just when two pieces are connected in a way that goes against their design, therefore Lego would never use it.

I just went and looked it up and I think I'm on the right track, as according to The Brothers Brick it is -

"LEGO building techniques that break the “rules” for connections between LEGO elements used by official LEGO set designers — particularly connections that stress the LEGO elements. For example, inserting a plate between the studs on a brick."

I'm sure you'll know what we mean when you see it.

I hope I've been of some help, and here's a link to a list of other terms- http://www.brothers-brick.com/lego-glossary/

[Off the wall]

Thanks, Mutant Orc. Appreciate it!

[Lego Spy]

First of all, you're not going to get thrown in jail for using one.

And to follow up on Mutant Orc's explanation, here's an example I made in LDD:

As you can see on the left, there's one 2X2 plate with two 4654582 Angular Plates attached. On the right however, if you put any plate on the inside (between the two angular pieces) it only connects with one of the two pieces.

I hope this gave a helpful visual example.

This is a screenshot of the Lego Digital Designer software uploaded to my Flickr page.

Edited October 13, 2013 by Lego Spy

[Off the wall]

Lego Spy

Well, that's a load off my mind! Thanks much, that is a great example that even I can understand.

[zux]

Please check this PDF for detailed explanations and examples.

Edited October 13, 2013 by zux

[Off the wall]

Please check this PDF for detailed explanations and examples.

Wow, thanks, great stuff. They really have their rules down pat.

[Lego Otaku]

Here's another one: http://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=auditt-1

The 2 curved chrome tube bricks connected together using illegal connection. After that set was released, LEGO started clamping down on any 3rd party design so no more illegal design would escape.

LEGO themselves have used a few illegal designs. Often it's in older sets that "got away" with it before LEGO added the method to illegal list. Because of this, people have had trouble recreating old set using LEGO Digital Designer because LDD program sticks to illegal build restriction (but LDD itself have allowed impossible build before :D )

[AndyC]

Strictly speaking the term "illegal connection" is an AFOL one. TLG themselves refer to builds that contain disallowed building techniques as being "out of system"

[Aanchir]

First of all, you're not going to get thrown in jail for using one.

And to follow up on Mutant Orc's explanation, here's an example I made in LDD:

As you can see on the left, there's one 2X2 plate with two 4654582 Angular Plates attached. On the right however, if you put any plate on the inside (between the two angular pieces) it only connects with one of the two pieces.

I hope this gave a helpful visual example.

This is a screenshot of the Lego Digital Designer software uploaded to my Flickr page.

This is not technically an illegal connection. Illegal connections are specifically connections that could cause damage to the parts (i.e. deform them or make them lose clutch power) or could be exceedingly difficult for a child to disassemble. The connection you illustrated is neither — although it wouldn't be very tight, since the plate is only attached to one of the two bricks, none of the parts are in compression or difficult to disassemble.

Sticking a Technic pin in the bottom of a 1x1 round brick is a good example of an illegal connection. Although the ends of a Technic pin are designed to flex so they can snap in and out of a Technic hole, putting one inside a 1x1 round brick forces them to remain compressed, and as a result this can (in the long term) warp the end so it will not snap tightly into a Technic hole in the future.

[eurotrash]

I think the first one we ever used as kids would be the vertical plate stuffed in between the studs - it was certainly my first SNOT! I've moved onto other more sophisticated, mostly legal, techniques, but my LUG had a quick FB post about only using minifig plates and I immediately went with that oldest of old school methods.

Yay for illegals!

[Lego Spy]

This is not technically an illegal connection. Illegal connections are specifically connections that could cause damage to the parts (i.e. deform them or make them lose clutch power) or could be exceedingly difficult for a child to disassemble. The connection you illustrated is neither — although it wouldn't be very tight, since the plate is only attached to one of the two bricks, none of the parts are in compression or difficult to disassemble.

Sticking a Technic pin in the bottom of a 1x1 round brick is a good example of an illegal connection. Although the ends of a Technic pin are designed to flex so they can snap in and out of a Technic hole, putting one inside a 1x1 round brick forces them to remain compressed, and as a result this can (in the long term) warp the end so it will not snap tightly into a Technic hole in the future.

It's close enough!

[LiamM32]

Surpised that no one has explained it so specifically by now. Illegal connections generally break the rules of Lego geometry. They could be considered "illegal" if pieces are connected in a way that is slightly off of how they are supposed to fit by a very small distance, often holding the parts in a bent position.

For a while I used to think that Lego geometry was made of spaces multiples of 0.8mm, or 1/10 of an L (with the possible exception of flexible parts and Technic parts in various angles). But now I have realized that there are a few parts that go into multiples of 1/20 of an L. I wish it was kept at multiples of 1/10 to keep the geometry simple. Many illegal connections seem to be off by 1/20 L.

[Artanis I]

I'm sure we all agree here that any joining of Lego & Megabloks parts should definitely be an "illegal connection".

As in against the law.

[parksroad]

Please check this PDF for detailed explanations and examples.

Wow, that's really interesting. I had no idea...

[caperberry]

It's close enough!

There's no 'close' when it comes to a connection being illegal or legal - a connection either places stress on the elements, or it doesn't. Your example doesn't, so isn't illegal. But it is a good example of a weak connection, which is something else TLG would not include in a set.

[Rick]

I think the first one we ever used as kids would be the vertical plate stuffed in between the studs - it was certainly my first SNOT!

As indicated in Jamie's presentation, TLG frequently used that technique. Another example is set 608.

Much more recently, in 7990, I encountered an example of a stud on the side of a system brick being connected to the hole of a technic brick, which is also illegal as shown in the presentation. I also have a feeling the stud "inside" the panels on the side of the truck isn't a legal connection as it doesn't seem to fit that well.

[Mutant Orc]

I'm sure we all agree here that any joining of Lego & Megabloks parts should definitely be an "illegal connection".

As in against the law.

Agreed!!

Edited October 14, 2013 by Mutant Orc

[LEGO Historian]

I was reading this thread with interest... and it suddenly hit me... I was just posting on the Norway... Sweden... Finland thread about a 1236 Garage Set that used slotted LEGO bricks of the 1949-56 era... and because windows and doors fit in between the slots of 2 stud wide bricks... this garage set only had 1stud thick walls. So the 2 windows were forced into a position that exerted a force onto the bricks, since the window was forced into place in a connection that it was not really intended for....

This is actually the first known example of the Illegal Connection... and it dates to 1955-56.

In 1956 TLG remodeled the old slotted bricks so that they no longer had slots to fit windows/doors into... and they changed the windows/doors to have studs on top... and no longer had "wings" on the sides to fit within the slotted bricks.

I just posted about this set 2 days ago... and more information can be found here...

http://www.youblisher.com/p/729414-236-1236-LEGO-Garage-Set-of-1955-70/

From my LEGO Collectors Guide DVD/download...

[alois]

Strictly speaking the term "illegal connection" is an AFOL one. TLG themselves refer to builds that contain disallowed building techniques as being "out of system"

This is not true. If you read the aforementioned PDF, you'll see that Lego also uses the word illegal for those connections which put parts under stress, and uses the words 'out of system' for those connections which result in a position outside of the normal grid of bricks. Jamie calls this 'possibly legal... but not recommended'.

[Lego Spy]

OK, I've got a good one! This is one I used in my Shadows of Nar Eurbrikka entry:

"Technically" this one is Illegal because the two antenna pieces get worn down after being put together, making the antenna lose "clutch power".

But, seriously that's what happens.

[WaysofSorting]

Wow - thanks all for the wealth of useful links and ideas. Great thread, thanks for starting it @Off the Wall.

I remember figuring out the "plates between studs" thing when I was a kid. A cheap way to make walls when I didn't have many bricks. So that's illegal because it causes stress on the pieces? More on the Plate side (the vertical piece) or the studs (the "horizontal" piece)? Just curious.

Gah. Bad language - I hope that question makes sense - just wondering what point receives the most damage over time, if one is stronger than the other. I'm assuming the studs pinch the sides of the plate over time?

[Junpei]

It's the receiving plate- in your case the floor. The side of a the plate that is the wall (between the studs) is strong enough to not get permanently damaged. However, the floor plate bends from the studs being pushed apart and can be permanently be damaged.

I hope that made any sense at all.

[LEGO Historian]

Question about illegal connections.... is it just "illegal" if it causes stress to the parts? What I'm getting at is this... when building the Leaning Tower of Pisa... there has to be some plates/tiles underneatht he structure to cause the lean... such as using some plates as a sloped ramp of sorts. Wouldn't these parts be also somewhat (at least) illegal? And what about the tower itself... isn't a 5 sided tower (using round bricks and other parts to make the non-90 degree anges) in a sense an illegal use of LEGO??

I see all of those attempts at making a multi-sided Roman Coliseum with round bricks used for the curvature of the sides... aren't they also an illegal use? Or am I mistaking not being on the the baseplate stud "grid plan"... as an illegal use?

Edited October 14, 2013 by LEGO Historian

[Aanchir]

Question about illegal connections.... is it just "illegal" if it causes stress to the parts? What I'm getting at is this... when building the Leaning Tower of Pisa... there has to be some plates/tiles underneatht he structure to cause the lean... such as using some plates as a sloped ramp of sorts. Wouldn't these parts be also somewhat (at least) illegal? And what about the tower itself... isn't a 5 sided tower (using round bricks and other parts to make the non-90 degree anges) in a sense an illegal use of LEGO??

I see all of those attempts at making a multi-sided Roman Coliseum with round bricks used for the curvature of the sides... aren't they also an illegal use? Or am I mistaking not being on the the baseplate stud "grid plan"... as an illegal use?

The Leaning Tower of Pisa is not illegal because it uses hinges for all of its non-90-degree angles. In fact, any stud to anti-stud connection can be used as a hinge, so even two 1x2 plates stacked on top of each other at a 135 degree angle are not connected illegally unless they're pushing up against adjacent parts too tightly. Illegal connections have nothing to do with whether a model adheres to a strict grid design, and there are hundreds of sets that use hinges to deviate from a rectangular grid.

Additionally, every brick has certain tolerances of stress it's designed to withstand (after all, if there weren't ANY forces being exerted between connecting pieces, there'd be nothing to keep them connected tightly). So not everything that has parts in compression is "illegal". But there are a handful of connections that you don't have to be an engineering major to tell that they stress the part excessively, like the "Technic pin inside 1x1 round brick" example I mentioned above.