<p>I would remove last two plates since they ruin the geometry here. And instead I can suggest using any modified brick with two studs facing towards hinged brick (white colored bricks). <a href="https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=18654#T=C" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Technic, Pin Connector Round 2/3 L</a> (seen in red) could then be used to attach studs on both sides. Orange plate below confirms all of this fit in required space.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/fA3Un.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/fA3Un.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p>A bit of background on the logic with my solution. With cases like this it is helpful when you measure everything in standard units. Here, brick height is 6 units, plate height is 2 units and stud is 5 units. From here you can clearly see you have a gap of 3 studs=15 units and your assembly is 14 units. The difference in 1 unit makes things more complicated. So my suggestion is to simplify it and make use of more common pieces.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-12T20:49:59.553Z
the assembly is 7 plates (14 units) + stud height (1 unit) is 15 units
qwr
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-12T20:58:25.243Z
@qwr stud height is tiny bit more than 1 unit. And it is also irrelevant here.
Alex
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-12T21:15:07.913Z
How is it irrelevant? I want it to fit in the 3 stud space. I also found that a technic liftarm is the right width (8 units)
qwr
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-12T21:21:21.097Z
For example, you don't count stud height into geometry when building a wall. Stud is just here for connection. And Technic liftarm is square in cross-section, which means it is 5 units wide/high - same width as a 1x1 brick
Alex
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-12T21:39:31.530Z
Are you sure it's square? It seems slightly narrower in width than height.
qwr
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-13T05:57:18.933Z
@qwr Modern Technic is build around cube shape dimensions - so single bushing, or 1L connector suggested in the answer is same size in all dimensions. Technic brick isn't though since it is a based on the usual brick with 5*5*6 units in size.
Alex
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-12T11:58:48.000Z
2020-08-13T05:53:45.220Z
2020-08-13T05:53:45.220Z
Alex
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/cXV4n.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/cXV4n.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p>In this construction, I want the vertical hinge to be in this location, centered in a 3 brick wide area. On top of it is two plates and layer of studs that match the 5:2 ratio, so in theory the hinge would be secure in this 3 brick wide gap. Is there a more elegant way of securing both sides of the hinge? I've looked at some bracket pieces but the issue is that they all have studs on top rather than stud-holes.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-12T11:49:55.507Z
FYI, "stud-hole" is better know as "anti-stud"
Alex
<building><snot>
Securing vertical hinge
qwr
# Securing vertical hinge

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-08-12)

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/cXV4n.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/cXV4n.png)

In this construction, I want the vertical hinge to be in this location, centered in a 3 brick wide area. On top of it is two plates and layer of studs that match the 5:2 ratio, so in theory the hinge would be secure in this 3 brick wide gap. Is there a more elegant way of securing both sides of the hinge? I've looked at some bracket pieces but the issue is that they all have studs on top rather than stud-holes.

**Tags:** building, snot

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: FYI, "stud-hole" is better know as "anti-stud"  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2020-08-12. Score: 2

I would remove last two plates since they ruin the geometry here. And instead I can suggest using any modified brick with two studs facing towards hinged brick (white colored bricks). [Technic, Pin Connector Round 2/3 L](https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=18654#T=C) (seen in red) could then be used to attach studs on both sides. Orange plate below confirms all of this fit in required space.

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/fA3Un.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/fA3Un.png)

A bit of background on the logic with my solution. With cases like this it is helpful when you measure everything in standard units. Here, brick height is 6 units, plate height is 2 units and stud is 5 units. From here you can clearly see you have a gap of 3 studs=15 units and your assembly is 14 units. The difference in 1 unit makes things more complicated. So my suggestion is to simplify it and make use of more common pieces.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: the assembly is 7 plates (14 units) + stud height (1 unit) is 15 units  
> **username_1**: @username_0 stud height is tiny bit more than 1 unit. And it is also irrelevant here.  
> **username_0**: How is it irrelevant? I want it to fit in the 3 stud space. I also found that a technic liftarm is the right width (8 units)  
> **username_1**: For example, you don't count stud height into geometry when building a wall. Stud is just here for connection. And Technic liftarm is square in cross-section, which means it is 5 units wide/high - same width as a 1x1 brick  
> **username_0**: Are you sure it's square? It seems slightly narrower in width than height.  
> **username_1**: @username_0 Modern Technic is build around cube shape dimensions - so single bushing, or 1L connector suggested in the answer is same size in all dimensions. Technic brick isn't though since it is a based on the usual brick with 5*5*6 units in size.  

---

