Please refrain from posting animated GIFs, memes, joke videos and so on in discussions other than those in the off topic area.

Dismiss this message to confirm your acceptance of this additional forum term of use.
You must be 16 or over to participate in the Brickset Forum. Please read the announcements and rules before you join.

How to place rectangular plates at an angle between wedge plates?

dutchlegofan50dutchlegofan50 Zwolle, NetherlandsMember Posts: 138
So in my winter village layout I would like to place various small builds (like the market stalls from #10235) on a not 90 degree angle. I know you can do something with jumper plates but I would really like to have everything at the same level. With a bit of experimenting  I found a couple of not-so-great solutions.
The first one leaves unsightly gaps. (The partly hidden yellow plates are 2 by 3's):



This is a 6x8 plate in a 13x14 square.

Next I came up with this one:



Here I have a tight fit of 7x7 enclosed in a 11x11 square.

A 4x4 plate (with gaps) in a 7x7 square formed by 4 3x3 wedge plates:



A 8x8 plate with too much spaces around it in a 12x12 square.

 

My question is: do you know solutions for putting rectangular plates at an angle in a larger rectangle? The size nor the angle of the enclosed plate doesn't really matter. There must be someone who figured out the possibilities or 'rules'
dougtsmak0137

Comments

  • dutchlegofan50dutchlegofan50 Zwolle, NetherlandsMember Posts: 138
    Wow! this is the most in depth answer possible I think! Thank you very much for your time to explain this. 
    Do you have an example of your alternative solution #1

    ~Martin
    Switchfoot55
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 15,248
    edited November 22
    There is a very simple way of doing it if you don't mind going up by one plate thickness.

    Take a look at these two pairs of cylinders (you can use 1x1 plates too, square or round, it doesn't matter). The distances between the pairs are exactly the same. They are just mirror images of each other.


    So place one plate on top of the cylinders on the other, so that the cylinders are above each other. You don't actually need the studs on the top surface, they are just there to show the alignment.

    The plates are now angled with respect to each other and locked in that angle. For bigger plates you can places more single studs in the right places, or use tiles where they don't match exactly.

    Want a different angle? Use a different diagonal. This

    goes to this angle...


    This clearly lifts the plate up by one brick (or one plate if you use a 1x1 plate) but securely locks in the building on top.

    It is a technique used to build the tree in the Winter Toy Shop (see steps 5-6 here).


    It doesn't have to be that distance apart though. You can choose any pair and it works, and so get almost limitless angles.

    And no worrying about getting exact Pythagorean triples, as the distance between the two points are guaranteed to be the same.
    Switchfoot55kiki180703stluxricecakedougts
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 15,248
    edited November 22
    And if you use a brown plate instead of white for the base of the stall, it just looks like the stall has a wooden floor instead, with the studs underneath acting as feet to keep it up off the snow.
    LittleLori
  • Switchfoot55Switchfoot55 Washington, USAMember Posts: 584
    ^I was going to recommend a similar concept as I just built the Toy Shop tree last night. 

    I like the idea for added stalls at various angles a lot. I may have to follow your lead and give it a shot. 
  • davee123davee123 USAMember Posts: 795
    So, for studding down and lining up flush with the surface (using tiles), you can do this:



    Sorry, I don't have any handy photos of how a finished MOC would look, but I'm sure there are a lot of pictures of this technique out there!

    DaveE

    raygunnricecakedougtsLittleLori
  • GallardoLUGallardoLU USAMember Posts: 609
    Simplest option if you've some thickness to work with is to place a turntable under the section you want angled, and have plates closing the gaps below the turned structures base. 
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 15,248
    edited November 22
    ^^ It doesn't have to be integer pythagorean triple (like 3-4-5). And you don't have to remember any either.

    For example if we wanted to fit this 3x5 stud building shown as orange onto a surface and are going to use the tiles to create a flush surface, then you can place the connection points in many places. Of course, this building doesn't have a way of doing a 3-4-5 triangle (as it is really 2x4 when considering distances between studs). But here you can pick any pair of studs and find a perfect match. For example, here (red) 2x4 studs apart or (purple) 1x4 apart or (blue) 1x3. 2x3 is another possibilty. These are not integer pythagorean (root 20, root 17 and root 10 respectively), but so long as you overlay them on another pair that are the same distance apart (so the hypotenuse is the same length) they will fit. Of course, this is using Pythagoras theorem, just not integer based. Then just remove the conflicting studs underneath replacing with tiles as above.




    Obviously if you are happy to use tiles in the surface and remove the white plates from the bottom of the stalls, then this way will also allow them to sit flush with the surface.
    ricecakedougtsmak0137
  • davee123davee123 USAMember Posts: 795
    Ahh, good point!  I hadn't ever attempted that, but makes perfect sense!

    DaveE
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 15,248
    I think everyone used to be so hung up on the 3-4-5 that it was rarely discussed. Of course the integer method is necessary if you want the connection points to be in specific places on a straight side of a build, for example, if they are visible pillars.
  • datsunrobbiedatsunrobbie West Haven , CTMember Posts: 965
    If you can stand a little gap at the bottom of the stalls, you could add a 1x1 to the bottom of the stall at a couple of spots and use those to attach to the base plate. Really just a variation on suggestions made above by @CCC.
    ricecakemak0137
Sign In or Register to comment.
Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy