Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'triangle'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Frontpage, Forum Information and General LEGO Discussion
    • Guest Section - PLEASE READ BEFORE YOU REGISTER!
    • New Member Section - PLEASE READ BEFORE STARTING!
    • Frontpage News
    • Forum Information and Help
    • General LEGO Discussion
  • Themes
    • LEGO Licensed
    • LEGO Star Wars
    • LEGO Historic Themes
    • LEGO Action and Adventure Themes
    • LEGO Pirates
    • LEGO Sci-Fi
    • LEGO Town
    • LEGO Train Tech
    • LEGO Technic, Mindstorms, Model Team and Scale Modeling
    • LEGO Action Figures
    • Special LEGO Themes
  • Special Interests
    • The Military Section
    • Minifig Customisation Workshop
    • Digital LEGO: Tools, Techniques, and Projects
    • Brick Flicks & Comics
    • LEGO Mafia and Role-Play Games
    • LEGO Media and Gaming
  • Eurobricks Community
    • Hello! My name is...
    • LEGO Events and User Groups
    • Buy, Sell, Trade and Finds
    • Community
    • Culture & Multimedia

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)


Which LEGO set did you recently purchase or build?


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Country


Special Tags 1


Special Tags 2


Special Tags 3


Special Tags 4


Special Tags 5


Special Tags 6


Country flag

Found 2 results

  1. Hi, I could use some help working out which triangles built from a mix of technic beams and bricks are actually valid (or at least, not going to damage or strain the parts when they're assembled). For example, if you stack a load of 1x16 technic bricks, then attach a beam at an angle of about 22.6 degrees, every 14th pin hole on the beam lines up with a pin hole in a brick. Are there any other "magic angles" where the rotated beam's pin holes line back up with the grid? And if so, how can you calculate what they are, since 6 vertical bricks = a beam of 7 pin holes, and this seems to throw Pythagoras' law? I'm also interested in calculating more "unusual" triangles - for instance, what if the stack of bricks includes one or two plates, or what if the bricks change to 1x1 technic bricks (i.e. pin holes with a half stud offset). Is there a list of valid triangles, or a way to calculate what will work? And what are the tolerances before such a triangle starts popping the bricks apart? My specific use case is in a scale model of the launch pad for the Apollo moon rocket, one of the lower levels has to be 8 bricks and 2 plates high (plus or preferably minus 1-2 plates), and I'm looking for an angled beam that will produce the sloping side. Unfortunately, it can't be under too much strain, as a ~1m tall tower will sit on top and need a reasonably solid foundation. I'm going crazy with trial and error in LDD and a few rough prototypes in real life - could some kind soul give me some advice?
  2. One for the structural engineers out there... I am building a structure to support my latest GBC module. I have vertical supports, and a horizontal cross-member. I am using a 12-long brick to form a 6-8-10 triangle to maintain the right angle between the support and the cross-member (thank you Pythagoras!). But which is the best way to do it? In the red version (on the left), the 6 side is horizontal, and the 8 side is vertical. In the blue version, it's the other way around. Which one should I use? Or are they equivalent? Under which circumstances should I use one over the other? In this case, the brace will be under compression (holdling something up). Would the answer be any different if it was under tension (holding something down)? Thanks Owen. P.S. The forces involved are not great, so I'm certain that either one would suffice. I'm just curious about whether one is better than the other. I'd settle for which one is more asthetically pleasing.