How do the LEGO bricks connect together? I’ve always wondered about how this works.
Are the sides of the studs vertical, and if so why do they stay in the anti-studs?
Also, does LEGO wear out? How many connections can you expect to make before it doesn’t work anymore?
Curious yellow,
Marc
Well I have lego that still works, even though it’s 20 years old (well it has been a long time since I played with it, but I was up in the attic the other day and it looked fine).
I assume it works by elastically deforming the ‘antistuds’ which then apply pressure to the studs holding it in place.
The whole thing relies on interference fit tolerances (lugs that are just a little too large to fit in the holes) and the flexibility/elasticity of the materials. Some pieces do tend to lose their ‘grip’ a little after extended play (years and years) and new pieces can often be uncomfortably tight-fitting.
BTW, I am so glad you didn’t call it ‘legos’
OMG! Whenever I DON’T call it “legos” my friends look at me like I’m crazy!
Me: I wish I still had my Lego.
Them: Your what?
Me: My Lego.
Them: Don’t you mean you’re “legos”?
Me: Uh… no. My Lego. There’s no “s” in it.
Them: What planet are you from?
Me: You suck!
(Violence ensues. Exeunt severally.)
Glad to know I was right, as usual. Now if I could just convince them about the words in “The Streak.”
I call it “legos.” I’ve never heard anyone in real life say “lego” except as an adjective. The company’s insisting on calling it “Lego” is not as much correcting our grammar as it is trying to protect their trademark. Sorry, but the cow’s already out of the barn - “legos” is standard.
I fear, however, that we are outnumbered on this board by Americans who quite legitimately call it ‘legos’ (because usage defines the word) and that this thread will spiral downward into an argument that ultimately lands it in the pit.
In the interests of internation amity, brothers of the plastic construction blocks, let us cast aside our petty differences and accept that diversity makes us strong (i.e. please, lets not hijack ashre’s thread with another argument about who is right or wrong)
I’ve never heard anyone (until now) use lego in the plural. Lego is the standard here.
Well, I refer to the blocks as “legos” when I’m speaking of them in the plural sense as in an entire set of them, and as “a” lego when I’m speaking of a single block.
I’ll be darned. If you go to the LEGO site, there are tons and tons of anectdotes in which people refer to them in the plural. However, the site itself says the word should be used as an adjective at all times, and always in the singular:
Just to state the facts then, this is almost a totally different usage to that with which UK/Europeans are familiar; ‘Lego’ is the normal term for the collection of items (it doesn’t need to be plural because it isn’t actually referring to the bricks themselves) and ‘Block’, ‘piece’ or ‘brick’ is the term used for the individual element.
In much the same way, one might refer to a collection of plasticine - ownership of more than one piece/colour not necessary to pluralise it to ‘plasticines’.
Please note that I am not insisting that this is any more correct than what anyone else uses, I’m just telling it like it is (HERE).
I see the Lego statement mentioned by dantheman rails against the cheap rip-off lego bricks:
I just love that - I can imagine the Scandinavian accent of the Lego head honchos. But it does make me feel a bit guilty, as I distinctly remember having a big bucket of these knock-off bricks, marketed with the ingenious (not to say euphonious) slogan “Fits with the leading building bricks”.
I still called them “Lego” though. I’ve also never heard “Legos” before now. Vive la différence, and all that…
Mangetout, good explanation, but using plasticine to explain anything to us 'Mericans will leave most of us saying, "Huh? 
Over here, we call it modeling clay.
First LEGO, then IKEA… I tell you, Scandinavia is up to something…
I think the sides of the LEGO pieces are curved slightly inwards. When you push another piece into it, the sides bulge out slightly and this acts as a spring to hold the stud in place.
Fair 'nuff - how about Play-doh then? You’d never say ‘Play-Dohs’ even if you were referring to a collection comprising several different colours.
If you were able to see them more closely you’d see that the sides of the lugs are not curved. MC Master of Cermonies and Mangetout have given the best technical explanations so far. Some alternative construction blocks use plastic of a different formula and the ones that use harder plastic don’t fit together (because they don’t deform enough) or fall apart too easily (because they aren’t elastic enough to grip).
But not modeling clays if you have more than one piece? 
That’s because modeling clay is fluid. Lego bricks are distinct and countable.
I have to admit, I love those giant Lego-ripoffs that you can build entire rooms kids can fit in.
OK, maybe Meccano would be a better example (if you have that in the USA) - ‘Meccano’ is the name of the system or concept; you wouldn’t describe each individual nut, bolt and panel as ‘a Meccano’, neither would you describe a finished model as being made of ‘Meccanos’ (or would you?)
I say this only to illustrate how alien it seems (to me) when I hear ‘Legos’, not to assert any authority.
(On preview) I did a bit of surfing and it seems that Meccano might be called ‘Erector’ in the US, but the point still stands.
From the manufacturer’s point of view, the bottom line is one of trademark protection. As I had it explained to me at one time, if the trademark is used commonly as a noun, it runs the risk of becoming a generic term rather than a trademark.
Thus, the trademark owners always get uptight when you ask for a Kleenex, instead of a “Kleenex brand tissue,” or if you take a handful of Oreos.
Never heard it used in the singular before, you can say “lego bricks”, but when I was a kid playing with my sizeable lego collection with a friend I’d always say: “pass us the lego!” not “pass us the legos!”.