Answers.Body: <p>It's an illegal brick technique due to you breaking the bricks and it makes the bricks wear away faster and the technique was never in offical Lego sets.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-05T08:57:48.753Z
Answers.Text: Do you have any sources (studies, expert opinion, experiments, etc.) for these statements? I know the last one ("The technique was never in official Lego sets") is not possible to prove, but the "it makes the bricks wear away faster" should be citable.
Answers.UserDisplayName: zovits
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-05T10:43:57.040Z
Answers.Text: I think my question is clear enough about damaging the bricks - using part 6143 will dent plates (and is therefore clearly illegal), but I'm asking about part 3941 *et al*, as pictured.
Answers.UserDisplayName: IvanSanchez
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-12-03T04:27:00.447Z
Answers.Text: When I asked a similar question in an FB group, in a MOC where I wedged one plate by its edge, on another at its edge at a right angle to each other, I was told an unusual move that doesn't damage pieces is called 'unorthodox'.
Answers.UserDisplayName: MocBird
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2022-10-05T05:00:43.383Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2022-10-05T08:54:15.313Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2022-10-05T08:54:15.313Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: link3
Body: <p>I've played enough with 2x2 round plates and 1-stud-wide plates to know that it's possible to attach a plate underneath a 2x2 plate and perpendicular to it, like so:</p>
  <p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/K7B5A.jpg" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/K7B5A.jpg" alt="round plate connected to 1-wide plate" /></a></p>
  <p>The same connection is possible using 2x2 round bricks instead, or using 1-stud-wide tiles.</p>
  <p>An observation: each of the 4 wall sections of a 2x2 round brick/plate can flex slightly. This does not happen with the continuous walls in a square brick/plate.</p>
  <p>So:</p>
  <ul>
  <li><p>Is this connection &quot;legal&quot;? (i.e.: Does this connection stress the parts involved?)</p>
  </li>
  <li><p>Has this type of connection been used in any official sets?</p>
  </li>
  </ul>
  <hr />
  <p>A word of warning: Do not attempt this technique on part <a href="https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3941" rel="noreferrer">6143 &quot;2x2 round brick <em>reinforced</em>&quot;</a>: it won't work, and you risk denting your plates (as I just did). Do look for a flat wall section at the bottom of the round plate/brick.</p>
  <p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/Ql6pf.png" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/Ql6pf.png" alt="comparison between similar round parts" /></a></p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-08-05T08:15:42.563Z
Comments.Text: Nice find! I have yet never seen this connection style, neither in an official model nor in a collection of illegal techniques - but my lack of experience doesn't mean anything conclusive.
Comments.UserDisplayName: zovits
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-08-05T08:34:14.060Z
Comments.Text: TBH I "discovered" this during the 90s (with the supports from [6930-1](https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?S=6930-1)); but it was only yesterday, while trying to reverse-engineer the SNOT technique used in [this other question](https://bricks.stackexchange.com/q/17332/13403), when I realized I haven't seen this technique documented anywhere.
Comments.UserDisplayName: IvanSanchez
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-08-05T08:56:25.250Z
Comments.Text: Does the receiving plate/brick have to be round? Seems to me that a plate fits between any center tube and the element wall...
Comments.UserDisplayName: Michael Verschaeve
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-08-05T09:37:36.970Z
Comments.Text: The fit between a plate and a pre-2004 brick is way too tight IIRC - tiles can easily get stuck inside and require pincers to get removed - so I suspect that would stress the wall of the brick. Post-2004 bricks have thinned walls (to save on plastic, AFAIK) so the wall-tube gap is larger than the thickness of a plate/tile. In other words: the connection is loose. Also, an observation: the "wall" in a round 2x2 plate/brick can slightly bend "outwards" without being supported by other walls; this intuitively tells me that the connection is flexible.
Comments.UserDisplayName: IvanSanchez
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-08-05T10:10:06.400Z
Comments.Text: Thx for the clarification, however "to save on plastic" is in my opinion not the reason walls were thinned... The thinning was done to have a more uniform thickness of injected ABS in the mold. Non-uniform thickness causes warping because different parts of the element cool down at different rates...
Comments.UserDisplayName: Michael Verschaeve
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-08-05T10:43:12.043Z
Comments.Text: I was hoping to see a question here on bricks stackexchange about the thinning of walls, but I can only find information about the great bley schism. :-/
Comments.UserDisplayName: IvanSanchez
Tags: <building><connections>
Title: Plate perpendicular to bottom of 2x2 round: is this connection legal?
UserDisplayName: IvanSanchez
ThreadText: # Plate perpendicular to bottom of 2x2 round: is this connection legal?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2022-08-04)
  
  I've played enough with 2x2 round plates and 1-stud-wide plates to know that it's possible to attach a plate underneath a 2x2 plate and perpendicular to it, like so:
  
  [![round plate connected to 1-wide plate](https://i.sstatic.net/K7B5A.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/K7B5A.jpg)
  
  The same connection is possible using 2x2 round bricks instead, or using 1-stud-wide tiles.
  
  An observation: each of the 4 wall sections of a 2x2 round brick/plate can flex slightly. This does not happen with the continuous walls in a square brick/plate.
  
  So:
  
  * Is this connection "legal"? (i.e.: Does this connection stress the parts involved?)
  * Has this type of connection been used in any official sets?
  
  ---
  
  A word of warning: Do not attempt this technique on part [6143 "2x2 round brick *reinforced*"](https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=3941): it won't work, and you risk denting your plates (as I just did). Do look for a flat wall section at the bottom of the round plate/brick.
  
  [![comparison between similar round parts](https://i.sstatic.net/Ql6pf.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/Ql6pf.png)
  
  **Tags:** building, connections
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Nice find! I have yet never seen this connection style, neither in an official model nor in a collection of illegal techniques - but my lack of experience doesn't mean anything conclusive.  
  > **username_0**: TBH I "discovered" this during the 90s (with the supports from [6930-1](https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?S=6930-1)); but it was only yesterday, while trying to reverse-engineer the SNOT technique used in [this other question](https://bricks.stackexchange.com/q/17332/13403), when I realized I haven't seen this technique documented anywhere.  
  > **username_2**: Does the receiving plate/brick have to be round? Seems to me that a plate fits between any center tube and the element wall...  
  > **username_0**: The fit between a plate and a pre-2004 brick is way too tight IIRC - tiles can easily get stuck inside and require pincers to get removed - so I suspect that would stress the wall of the brick. Post-2004 bricks have thinned walls (to save on plastic, AFAIK) so the wall-tube gap is larger than the thickness of a plate/tile. In other words: the connection is loose. Also, an observation: the "wall" in a round 2x2 plate/brick can slightly bend "outwards" without being supported by other walls; this intuitively tells me that the connection is flexible.  
  > **username_2**: Thx for the clarification, however "to save on plastic" is in my opinion not the reason walls were thinned... The thinning was done to have a more uniform thickness of injected ABS in the mold. Non-uniform thickness causes warping because different parts of the element cool down at different rates...  
  > **username_0**: I was hoping to see a question here on bricks stackexchange about the thinning of walls, but I can only find information about the great bley schism. :-/  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2022-10-05. Score: 0
  
  It's an illegal brick technique due to you breaking the bricks and it makes the bricks wear away faster and the technique was never in offical Lego sets.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Do you have any sources (studies, expert opinion, experiments, etc.) for these statements? I know the last one ("The technique was never in official Lego sets") is not possible to prove, but the "it makes the bricks wear away faster" should be citable.  
  > **username_0**: I think my question is clear enough about damaging the bricks - using part 6143 will dent plates (and is therefore clearly illegal), but I'm asking about part 3941 *et al*, as pictured.  
  > **username_4**: When I asked a similar question in an FB group, in a MOC where I wedged one plate by its edge, on another at its edge at a right angle to each other, I was told an unusual move that doesn't damage pieces is called 'unorthodox'.  
  
  ---
  
  