Answers.Body: <p><strong>Update:</strong>
  Now that I have stud.io installed, I've finally got an upright design for the slope's framework as follows:
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/MTQh3.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/MTQh3.png" alt="39.5 degrees slope (white) with supporting frameworks (green)" /></a>
  This design was based off of @Hugo 's suggestion, but modified to use Technic pegs and Technic bricks for better stability.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-03-17T05:42:39.443Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-03-17T05:42:39.443Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Answers.Body: <p>Could this work in you case? Using snot brick to build it vertically.</p>
  <p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/9mNeE.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/9mNeE.jpg" alt="Slope 45°" /></a></p>
  <p>EDIT 1:</p>
  <p>The only way I managed to get your angle and snap it correctly is like that.
  I used stud.io with collision turned on to be sure it could work.
  I hope this can help you.
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/Nyvem.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/Nyvem.png" alt="39.5" /></a>
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/L6vPG.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/L6vPG.png" alt="39.5°" /></a></p>
  <p>EDIT 2:
  I found another solution using bar and bar with clip. This one is much more modulable but maybe less stable. Let me know what you think.
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/K7UNh.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/K7UNh.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
  <p>EDIT 3:
  Adapted to use technic beam.</p>
  <p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/uJpO7.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/uJpO7.png" alt="beam setup" /></a>
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/2xxMy.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/2xxMy.png" alt="with beam" /></a></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T13:57:46.297Z
Answers.Text: I don't think this could work. Do note that my slope is not at a 45 degree angle, and I very much want to make sure the slope is at the precise angle I've tested with so that the stairs remain leveled.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T14:05:40.033Z
Answers.Text: Do you know the exact angle you're looking for?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hugo
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T14:11:29.650Z
Answers.Text: According to Mecabricks, a 39.5 degree incline.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-10-17T07:17:24.577Z
Answers.Text: Could you try the first iteration again, but with connector pegs and Technic beams?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-10-18T09:01:43.140Z
Answers.Text: Do you want the technic beams to replace the tiles?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hugo
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-10-18T16:31:08.127Z
Answers.Text: Exactly so. I tried it myself on Mecabricks but it didn't go so well, and I can't download Stud.io anytime soon for personal hardware issues.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-10-19T13:19:10.500Z
Answers.Text: How do you want the orientation of the beams? Holes on top (meaning the steps will slide on the holes) or holes on the side?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hugo
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-10-19T14:08:26.977Z
Answers.Text: On the side would be preferable, thanks.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T13:50:48.517Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-10-19T17:38:26.037Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2021-10-19T17:38:26.037Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hugo
Body: <p>I'm currently building a functional Lego escalator that is minifigure-scaled and with staircases transitioning from flat platform to stairwell. Here's my progress so far:
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/OOvDG.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/OOvDG.png" alt="escalator slope design" /></a>
  But with the design of the staircases hopefully out of the way for now, I've come into an issue with the slope as it is seemingly improbable to build. I tried multiple iterations: technic bricks, technic beams, snot, … but there's only so much I can do on Mecabricks. I don't have the necessary bricks available at my disposal, nor does my local area has any retails which offers the Pick-a-Brick service, therefore I couldn't physically test this build out.</p>
  <p>Is there any way of building a framework for this slope to hold up at a precise angle of 39.5 degrees? Preferably one that is legal or at least doesn't cause immense stress on the bricks, due to the technical nature of this build?</p>
  <p>EDIT:
  Extra images for elaboration:
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/gmcxy.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/gmcxy.jpg" alt="Isometric perspective of escalator design" /></a>
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/g30r0.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/g30r0.jpg" alt="Design of stair consists of 2 3M shafts, plate 1x2 with holder (vertical), and plate 1x1 with upright holder" /></a></p>
  <p>I aim to have this escalator to be roughly 4 bricks in width and its height will be dependent on how tall a story might be (probably 9 bricks tall).</p>
  <p>I don't intend to use the new dedicated escalator piece because I want to design an escalator that is flat at the base and transition into a moving stairwell then back into a flat platform at the top (and vice versa). Basically something of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAjFw7v8QhE" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this</a> complexity , but at a minifigure scale.</p>
  <p>EDIT 2:
  These are the results I yielded when I tried hinge pieces for building a slope:
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/WSkiJ.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/WSkiJ.png" alt="Iteration 1" /></a>
  <a href="https://i.sstatic.net/k4Vvq.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/k4Vvq.png" alt="Iteration 2" /></a>
  Connector peg with <a href="https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=18677&amp;name=Plate,%20Modified%201%20x%202%20with%20Pin%20Hole%20on%20Bottom&amp;category=%5BPlate,%20Modified%5D#T=C" rel="nofollow noreferrer">plate 1x2 with pinhole on bottom</a> or any other hinge designs yield the same results. Maybe it could work but since I don't have local access to Bricklink and the likes, I couldn't physically test this out and have only Mecabricks to work with.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T08:19:20.407Z
Comments.Text: Welcome to Bricks.SE! I'm not quite sure what is your actual issue here. Do you need help finding a way to build a structure with specific angle? Specific length/width/height? It would also be nice if you added isometric picture (I have initially thought of your assembly in a different way, but now I see how it is put together).
Comments.UserDisplayName: Alex
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T08:21:29.107Z
Comments.Text: Have you also considered dedicated piece for building escalator: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=69900
Comments.UserDisplayName: Alex
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T09:29:52.340Z
Comments.Text: @Alex I've answered your questions in the newly added EDIT section.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T11:41:44.127Z
Comments.Text: Have you considered the hinge elements? The [1x2 Top Plate](https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3938#T=C) (also available as a 2x2) and [the 1x2 Hinge Base](https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3937) can usually be used to provide many angles up to 90 assuming you're happy to rest the bottom somewhere.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Zhaph - Ben Duguid
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T12:41:05.973Z
Comments.Text: @Zhaph-BenDuguid I've used it but there were misalignment issues. Please see EDIT 2 for further elaboration.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T13:26:11.513Z
Comments.Text: Yeah, that's what I meant about having it "rest at the bottom" - you probably can't have one at the top and the bottom like that, only one at the top.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Zhaph - Ben Duguid
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T14:01:57.520Z
Comments.Text: @Zhaph-BenDuguid Given that I've only got a virtual builder to work with, I'm not sure of the structural integrity of having it "rest at the bottom".
Comments.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-15T19:27:54.923Z
Comments.Text: What if you use Erling/headlamp brick instead of bracket on top? This might bring your bottom right between studs for jumper plate.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Alex
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-16T00:37:50.500Z
Comments.Text: @Alex Same results with brackets, they won't align.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-16T00:44:08.497Z
Comments.Text: I've included the degree of my slope, which is 39.5. This information is also now included in the parent post for newcomers.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-16T20:24:37.260Z
Comments.Text: The angle 39,5 degrees seems close but not correct. The bar centers are vertically offsetted by two plates and horizontally by one brick. One brick is 2.5 plates, so the slope is 4/5. Atan(4/5) gives 38.6598083 degrees...
Comments.UserDisplayName: Michael Verschaeve
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-20T16:04:05.353Z
Comments.Text: and (@MichaelVerschaeve) a ratio like 4:5 should be quite doable with Technic beams  (that was the closest I could get to the stated 39.5° based on doing the trigonometry and assuming a right angled triangle). Technic beams and a non-right-angled triangle should be able to do it, but I don't have time for the mathematical trail and error (we can't simply solve for it as the only other assumed constraint is that every length is a small integer)
Comments.UserDisplayName: Chris H
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-21T14:25:30.203Z
Comments.Text: @Chris, you are mistaken... in an integer sided triangle, the cosine of any angle is rational because of the cosine rule. However, we can calculate the cosine for our desired angle from the given tangent 4/5 and it clearly is not rational (its sqrt(25/41))
Comments.UserDisplayName: Michael Verschaeve
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-21T14:40:47.737Z
Comments.Text: @MichaelVerschaeve good point.  I haven't used the cosine rule in 20+ years, and I assumed (without realising) it that the 3rd side could be any length. Of course there are ways to do that but they're not as rigid.  I may still post an answer based on that method using ancient Technic.  If we want it to be rigid it becomes a matter of finding the closest possible angle anyway
Comments.UserDisplayName: Chris H
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-10-21T14:46:09.270Z
Comments.Text: @ DuyVuongQuang - @Zhaph-BenDuguid's suggestion might also work with resting the vertical column in your last 2 pictures on a tile.  Scaling off the picture the angle would get very close, probably close enough (you won't notice half a degree, probably not 1-2°)
Comments.UserDisplayName: Chris H
Tags: <technic><building><moc>
Title: How can I build a Lego slope of this exact angle with ideally only legal techniques?
UserDisplayName: Duy Vuong Quang
ThreadText: # How can I build a Lego slope of this exact angle with ideally only legal techniques?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-10-15)
  
  I'm currently building a functional Lego escalator that is minifigure-scaled and with staircases transitioning from flat platform to stairwell. Here's my progress so far:
  [![escalator slope design](https://i.sstatic.net/OOvDG.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/OOvDG.png)
  But with the design of the staircases hopefully out of the way for now, I've come into an issue with the slope as it is seemingly improbable to build. I tried multiple iterations: technic bricks, technic beams, snot, … but there's only so much I can do on Mecabricks. I don't have the necessary bricks available at my disposal, nor does my local area has any retails which offers the Pick-a-Brick service, therefore I couldn't physically test this build out.
  
  Is there any way of building a framework for this slope to hold up at a precise angle of 39.5 degrees? Preferably one that is legal or at least doesn't cause immense stress on the bricks, due to the technical nature of this build?
  
  EDIT:
  Extra images for elaboration:
  [![Isometric perspective of escalator design](https://i.sstatic.net/gmcxy.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/gmcxy.jpg)
  [![Design of stair consists of 2 3M shafts, plate 1x2 with holder (vertical), and plate 1x1 with upright holder](https://i.sstatic.net/g30r0.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/g30r0.jpg)
  
  I aim to have this escalator to be roughly 4 bricks in width and its height will be dependent on how tall a story might be (probably 9 bricks tall).
  
  I don't intend to use the new dedicated escalator piece because I want to design an escalator that is flat at the base and transition into a moving stairwell then back into a flat platform at the top (and vice versa). Basically something of [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAjFw7v8QhE) complexity , but at a minifigure scale.
  
  EDIT 2:
  These are the results I yielded when I tried hinge pieces for building a slope:
  [![Iteration 1](https://i.sstatic.net/WSkiJ.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/WSkiJ.png)
  [![Iteration 2](https://i.sstatic.net/k4Vvq.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/k4Vvq.png)
  Connector peg with [plate 1x2 with pinhole on bottom](https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=18677&name=Plate,%20Modified%201%20x%202%20with%20Pin%20Hole%20on%20Bottom&category=%5BPlate,%20Modified%5D#T=C) or any other hinge designs yield the same results. Maybe it could work but since I don't have local access to Bricklink and the likes, I couldn't physically test this out and have only Mecabricks to work with.
  
  **Tags:** technic, building, moc
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Welcome to Bricks.SE! I'm not quite sure what is your actual issue here. Do you need help finding a way to build a structure with specific angle? Specific length/width/height? It would also be nice if you added isometric picture (I have initially thought of your assembly in a different way, but now I see how it is put together).  
  > **username_1**: Have you also considered dedicated piece for building escalator: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=69900  
  > **username_0**: @Alex I've answered your questions in the newly added EDIT section.  
  > **username_2**: Have you considered the hinge elements? The [1x2 Top Plate](https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3938#T=C) (also available as a 2x2) and [the 1x2 Hinge Base](https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3937) can usually be used to provide many angles up to 90 assuming you're happy to rest the bottom somewhere.  
  > **username_0**: @Zhaph-BenDuguid I've used it but there were misalignment issues. Please see EDIT 2 for further elaboration.  
  > **username_2**: Yeah, that's what I meant about having it "rest at the bottom" - you probably can't have one at the top and the bottom like that, only one at the top.  
  > **username_0**: @Zhaph-BenDuguid Given that I've only got a virtual builder to work with, I'm not sure of the structural integrity of having it "rest at the bottom".  
  > **username_1**: What if you use Erling/headlamp brick instead of bracket on top? This might bring your bottom right between studs for jumper plate.  
  > **username_0**: @Alex Same results with brackets, they won't align.  
  > **username_0**: I've included the degree of my slope, which is 39.5. This information is also now included in the parent post for newcomers.  
  > **username_3**: The angle 39,5 degrees seems close but not correct. The bar centers are vertically offsetted by two plates and horizontally by one brick. One brick is 2.5 plates, so the slope is 4/5. Atan(4/5) gives 38.6598083 degrees...  
  > **username_4**: and (@MichaelVerschaeve) a ratio like 4:5 should be quite doable with Technic beams  (that was the closest I could get to the stated 39.5° based on doing the trigonometry and assuming a right angled triangle). Technic beams and a non-right-angled triangle should be able to do it, but I don't have time for the mathematical trail and error (we can't simply solve for it as the only other assumed constraint is that every length is a small integer)  
  > **username_3**: @Chris, you are mistaken... in an integer sided triangle, the cosine of any angle is rational because of the cosine rule. However, we can calculate the cosine for our desired angle from the given tangent 4/5 and it clearly is not rational (its sqrt(25/41))  
  > **username_4**: @MichaelVerschaeve good point.  I haven't used the cosine rule in 20+ years, and I assumed (without realising) it that the 3rd side could be any length. Of course there are ways to do that but they're not as rigid.  I may still post an answer based on that method using ancient Technic.  If we want it to be rigid it becomes a matter of finding the closest possible angle anyway  
  > **username_4**: @ DuyVuongQuang - @Zhaph-BenDuguid's suggestion might also work with resting the vertical column in your last 2 pictures on a tile.  Scaling off the picture the angle would get very close, probably close enough (you won't notice half a degree, probably not 1-2°)  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_0 on 2022-03-17. Score: 1 | Accepted answer
  
  **Update:**
  Now that I have stud.io installed, I've finally got an upright design for the slope's framework as follows:
  [![39.5 degrees slope (white) with supporting frameworks (green)](https://i.sstatic.net/MTQh3.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/MTQh3.png)
  This design was based off of @Hugo 's suggestion, but modified to use Technic pegs and Technic bricks for better stability.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_5 on 2021-10-15. Score: 6
  
  Could this work in you case? Using snot brick to build it vertically.
  
  [![Slope 45°](https://i.sstatic.net/9mNeE.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/9mNeE.jpg)
  
  EDIT 1:
  
  The only way I managed to get your angle and snap it correctly is like that.
  I used stud.io with collision turned on to be sure it could work.
  I hope this can help you.
  [![39.5](https://i.sstatic.net/Nyvem.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/Nyvem.png)
  [![39.5°](https://i.sstatic.net/L6vPG.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/L6vPG.png)
  
  EDIT 2:
  I found another solution using bar and bar with clip. This one is much more modulable but maybe less stable. Let me know what you think.
  [![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/K7UNh.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/K7UNh.png)
  
  EDIT 3:
  Adapted to use technic beam.
  
  [![beam setup](https://i.sstatic.net/uJpO7.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/uJpO7.png)
  [![with beam](https://i.sstatic.net/2xxMy.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/2xxMy.png)
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: I don't think this could work. Do note that my slope is not at a 45 degree angle, and I very much want to make sure the slope is at the precise angle I've tested with so that the stairs remain leveled.  
  > **username_5**: Do you know the exact angle you're looking for?  
  > **username_0**: According to Mecabricks, a 39.5 degree incline.  
  > **username_0**: Could you try the first iteration again, but with connector pegs and Technic beams?  
  > **username_5**: Do you want the technic beams to replace the tiles?  
  > **username_0**: Exactly so. I tried it myself on Mecabricks but it didn't go so well, and I can't download Stud.io anytime soon for personal hardware issues.  
  > **username_5**: How do you want the orientation of the beams? Holes on top (meaning the steps will slide on the holes) or holes on the side?  
  > **username_0**: On the side would be preferable, thanks.  
  
  ---
  
  