tri-hubs and quad-hubs ?

["Steve Waterman" <swaterman117 at hotmail dot com>]

jmr,

you wrote...

> I designed an easily-fabricated hub that has no net offset. It's a
> single metal piece that can be stamped and folded; fit six of them together
> to make a hex hub; fit five of them together to make a pent hub. They will
> accommodate any incidental angle, therefore any frequency spherical geodesic
> or non-spherical shape. They can be used to connect pipes or dimensional
> lumber, or, I assume, anything in between. The hub connection is rigid.

          How about the hubs to make a rhombic dodecahedron ?
          This would require 8 tri-pod hubs and 6 quad-pod hubs...
          per structure.
          And the angles are fixed and therefore it should be logical to
          assume, that will be capable to be made stronger than those 
          of variability to incidental angle.

          Several advantages may be imagined as well...

          Same edge length for construction throughout.
          Same face shape for all faces.

          Even though the same edge is used throughout, 
          any starting length can be used.

          A modular approach may be applied. For instance,
          they could be built into a structure containing four rhombic 
          dodecahedrons that support a fifth....
          like four spheres that support a fifth ?

steve