The hinges does not need to stop by the circles, the triangles are the base for the connections, the circles are just a reference for where on triangle edges the hinges should be. The hinges will be long enough to connect the circles.
So it’s basically the triangle based one without the midpoint but rather proximity from the circles. That’s what I’m trying to achieve
On the picture you posted this looks ok, but the hinges can only be 3mm wide and will all be the same, they are a bit like a hook that reaches underneath. If there was just a way to move the hinge along the line closee to where the intersection line is, that would solve it
This is a crude, brute force way to combine two versions (orange group). The hinges at left and bottom right show the minimal overlap with widely separated incircles.
Yes you are right i’m afraid, the moving the triangle connection to the intersection point creates some problems with the placement, the one where the connection is slightly skewed but points in the right connection works better.
The physical sample does provide some wiggle room and bending it seems, as long as its minimal. Maybe by creating a joined intersection with the feb 3a boxes that is extruded into a planar surface would work better.
I didn’t “discover” the error by observation. I stepped away from the computer for awhile, quieted my mind and realized my error through deep understanding of the code I wrote.
I believe you need to understand this code to the same degree, otherwise I’m just unpaid labor.
I believe this version fixes the problem? Again, this is a crude, brute force way to combine two versions. If I were to start over, I might do it differently - but I don’t want to think about that
Hi, yeah I think this will do, I can solve the problems with the hinge holes by cutting the circle in a different way. Thank you for your help, I will study the mechanics of this to understand it better