Ability to toggle flanges on M-Beam 650 I-Beam

[KotDemopan]

That... is a long title, but, anyway...

This Thing!

I don't like the bitsflanges that it has on the side! Or in the image's case, the top and the bottom.

I like to create the exterior of cars(because why not?) out of the 650, because M-1x1s are too tall, and the M-beam 200 would make the craft have a ton of parts!

I would like to choose when i want the bitsflanges on one side, or on the other side(mirrored if used with symmetry, of course), or have half of said bitsflanges only in the back or only in the front, or just outright remove said bitsflanges!

And im pretty sure that alot of others would, too.

Im also sure that the 650 wouldn't take long to remodel, considering said I-beam is made up of square polygons.

Point is, these side-bitsflanges restrict from making clean streamline crafts, and having some control over them would be nice.

Edit: Noticed the rating of this thread.

....

I am not amused.

Edited May 3, 2015 by KotDemopan

[Thomas988]

That's actually a really good idea. Their shape is so weird.

[klgraham1013]

I just want more flat panels of various sizes. Building appropriately small rovers for Kerbals is somewhat difficult with the parts we have.

[KotDemopan]

I just want more flat panels of various sizes. Building appropriately small rovers for Kerbals is somewhat difficult with the parts we have.

You know, yeah, a Square M-beam 650 shorter on the sides than the current one would also be good, just call it a 325 I-beam.

Or how about a panel 1/4th the size of the M-1x1?

Edited May 3, 2015 by KotDemopan

[Whirligig Girl]

I would just like to mention that it wouldn't be an I-beam if it werent for the "thingys". Those make it look like an uppercase I. Without them, it's not an I-beam, it's just a structural pane So yes, I think we should have a half-size structural panel.

[Wayfare]

I just want more flat panels of various sizes. Building appropriately small rovers for Kerbals is somewhat difficult with the parts we have.

Funny enough, I actually use the I-beam part as the core of my generic small rover design:

[KotDemopan]

I would just like to mention that it wouldn't be an I-beam if it werent for the "thingys". Those make it look like an uppercase I. Without them, it's not an I-beam, it's just a structural pane So yes, I think we should have a half-size structural panel.

It would still look like a lowercase I without said thingys or half of them, though!

....Depending on the font in your mind, but it would still be an I-beam, just more of an i-beam... which would be more like an l-beam

And a name change could be possible, remember the Inline cockpit when it was called the Mk2 cockpit?

But still, some people don't want rectangle things the size of a European license plate on their bigger rectangles.

[klgraham1013]

Funny enough, I actually use the I-beam part as the core of my generic small rover design:

http://i.imgur.com/oCvUbb7.png

I like to build replica semi trucks, buses, and other such things. It gets really difficult with the stock parts. Not that Squad should cater to me, but having more construction parts would help everyone I think.

Notice how big that light is compared to the Kerbals? Everything is rocket sized, with very few parts being Kerbal sized.

[Wjolcz]

Please no. Its great as it is for wheel axes in rovers

[pincushionman]

I would just like to mention that it wouldn't be an I-beam if it werent for the "thingys"…

This. These "thingies" are called flanges, and they make the beam stiff and strong in bending in the "tall" (for lack of a better word) direction. The center part of the cross section (the web) carries shear loads and keeps the flanges separated. They're extremely important, and without them your beam would, at best, crumple like a piece of cardboard under load. And, as stated, they'd cease to be "I"-beams.

Okay, now that that structural endineering primer is over, the game doesn't go into that kind of detail in the loads simulation. We're better off with a better choice of panels.

[KotDemopan]

Please no. Its great as it is for wheel axes in rovers

But choosing to edit the Beam =/= Removing the flanges entirely

[Wayfare]

I like to build replica semi trucks, buses, and other such things. It gets really difficult with the stock parts. Not that Squad should cater to me, but having more construction parts would help everyone I think.

Yeah don't get me wrong, I'm all for more structural panels and parts Just found it funny.

[Brotoro]

I want a triangular structural plate.

[katateochi]

I want a triangular structural plate.

omg so much yes! (we do really need some more variety in stock parts like this).

Re OP's question, I find the I-beam useful as it is with the thingies/flanges but I'd also agree it would have other uses without them. Are you suggesting having something like some of the mods have with one part with a number of different forms? cos that would seem like the way to go for this.

[sumghai]

[MOD - Renamed thread title for clarity]

As has been mentioned, the flanges on I-beams are crucial in order for them to retain their strength, so whilst having more structural panels in general to choose from would be nice, providing users with the ability to hide the I-beam flanges is not the right way to go about this.