Aaron

Eurobricks Citizen
  • Content Count

    185
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Aaron

  • Birthday 11/14/1990

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)
    Trains

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Pennsylvania

Extra

  • Country
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The problem with ME Models track was that the tolerances were way off. I don't know who they hired to do their calculations, but they failed to take into consideration that with longer pieces, you have to actually reduce the clutch power in order to prevent warping. I was an early backer of their Kickstarter, and despite the delays and setbacks, had high hopes for them. In the end I got hundreds of pieces of track, including my first loop of R104 and R88 curves, but every single one of them was warped to hell and back. I had never intended on using them with their default 2x8 plate ties, but instead used this ballast design: While they were functional, I still had to use glue on nearly every curved track segment. Even then, there was a lot of popping and crackling in the plates as the trains moved across the tracks. I knew that it wasn't a matter of the rails being too loose, but rather too tight and warped. if the rails would have just been flat with the proper tolerances to begin with, this wouldn't have been an issue. Eventually, I ended up replacing my ME Models R104 and R88 curves with Brick Tracks R120 and R104 curves: These proved to be more solid and reliable than the ME Models track design, and I used them up until I got my new house with a larger, expanded basement layout. I then replaced the Brick Tracks curves with a full loop of 9V R120 and R104 BTD curves. I also had a quarter loop of R216 and R200 curves that I tested out, but since I moved my layout from the basement to an upstairs room, I no longer have the space for that, and decided to go with R152 and R136 for this new setup. I had actually been contemplating designing my own track for years now, and what I came up with was the result of having tested and used track from every manufacturer out there. I always thought the ME Models track was great in concept, but poorly executed, and wondered what it would be like to take that concept and correct on its flaws. Right off the bat I knew I'd have to correct the warping and clutch power issues. The nice thing about 3D printers is that I could rapid prototype my track design, making adjustments as small as 0.005 MM with each succeeding version until the tolerances were just right. The result is something that isn't too tight, but isn't too loose either. Here's a side profile comparison between a 32L straight segment of ME Models track vs a 32L straight segment of my track: Overhead comparison, with ME Models rails on the left and my rails on the right: Over time I learned the importance of reducing clutch power while building, and came to appreciate the way Lego sets are designed using gaps, tiles, and spacing in order to reduce clutch power. In the end, it actually contributes to a more sturdy build, and this is something I also took into account with my MILS module construction. With these rails, having that space between each tie helps to give it enough slack so that stays level while maintaining just the right amount of clutch power across the entire piece. From the very beginning I intended these to be strictly for ballasting, and not to be used with the vanilla 2x8 plates as crossties. Lateral forces around curves segments would only be problematic if these were to be used that way, with just 2x8 plates, but that's just not what I had in mind with these. Curves and switches will have their own dedicated ballast plates, with tolerances adjusted to compensate for lateral forces. Filing the metal rails is a tedious, time consuming process that doesn't always produce clean results. It's a skill that takes patience and experience to get it right, and my first few pieces were a total disaster. But you learn what to do and what not to do along the way, and each succeeding rail will become more flush and smooth. While the ME Models metal rails were a disaster, the BTD ones work just fine, so I approached my metal rails with the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality. The nice thing about having my own rails is that I can make constant, gradual refinements as needed, and create any track geometry I want, including curved turnouts and things that aren't available from anyone on the market. I also want to make my designs open source, and enable anyone with a 3D printer to be able to print them. Print times are also significantly reduced compared to the bulkier 9V/PF Lego style track, which means that there's less opportunity for things to go wrong while printing them, and less post-cleanup needed afterward. They're also an aesthetic improvement over everything else out there, eliminating the awkward gaps between rails and ties on 9V/PF track, and having a thinner, more prototypical profile than the ME Models rails. Early on I contemplated making the rails more "rail shaped" and adding small details such as spikes, but I abandoned those ideas as I felt that they'd stray too far from making these look like legitimate Lego elements. I wanted to strike a perfect balance between real world aesthetics and Lego aesthetics, if that makes sense.
  2. All the 16x16 plates are in place now. I left out a section at the far end where I'm going to put a slight grade change that goes into a section of a lake. Also, some of the tables have a 1 plate height difference for some reason, so l need to figure out a way to level them out before I can connect everything with Technic pins. On the track side of things, I've been experimenting with my own custom 3D printed designs. Here's a little something I whipped up in Fusion 360: Here they are in printed form, with code 100 HO rail inserted into the grooves: I went with a PLA filament that closely matches Lego's dark bluish grey. In the future I might print these in ABS, but for now this is good enough for my own personal use. Here's a comparison between my old ballast design using standard 9V track, vs my new design: The skeletal design of my track makes it easier to do light bluish grey ballast without having to cover up the dark grey parts of the track. While that problem was initially solved with ME Models track, I always preferred the thinner profile of Lego 9V and PF track. I wanted something that was the best of both worlds, and designed specifically with ballasting in mind. Since the track sections are being directly attached to MILS modules, I didn't feel the need to design connectors just yet. Eventually I'll design my own 2x8 connector plates, but for now I can just reuse some of my leftover ME Models connectors wherever needed. Eventually, though, I plan to do away with the connectors entirely and use this new track design for the entire layout. For the curves, I was initially going to go with either TrixBrix or FX Bricks R136 and R152, but now I think I'll actually just print my own. I think I may be on to something here...
  3. Yes. I should be on track to finishing all of the MILS modules sometime later today. After that will come the curved track segments.
  4. Got everything I need now. More pictures of the track and rolling stock will come later. Time to get to work!
  5. This is a thread documenting the construction progress of my layout. I had previously built a layout in my basement that I ended up having to tear down in order to proceed with renovations, so I decided to move it into an unused room upstairs. Here's what it looked like prior to being dismantled: There was a lot of experimentation going on with different ballast designs, and unfinished landscape, as I was in the gradual process of replacing all of my 4 x 4 green plates with 16 x 16 dark tan plates. Due to financial constraints, I had to throw all of my resources at having a complete circuit of track, which translated to a lot of unfilled space on the tables. Since my old layout had a chaotic mix of 16 x 16, 16 x 32, and 32 x 32 MILS baseplates, it also took forever to set up and tear down. I decided that I'd take it all apart and start over from scratch, this time using 48 x 48 baseplates. I started by assembling 7 30" x 60" folding tables, then laid down 8 48 x 48 XL baseplates per table, for a total of 56. Then, I built them up as MILS modules, and covered them with as many 16 x 16 dark tan plates as I had, which ended up being enough for about 1/4 of the layout. Since it's a smaller space, the layout has to be more compact, and there's less straight track overall, but it's more than enough to be able to test out a lot of the concepts and experiments that I have planned. The curves will be an outer loop of R152, and an inner loop of R136. There are 10 sections of straight track per side, with enough room to expand to 12 in the future if I make table extensions. Most of the straight sections are to be occupied by crossovers and switches that lead into sidings and industrial spurs. I have yet to decide which supplier to go with for the curves, but before I even get to that, I need to finish filling in the rest of the layout with dark tan 16 x 16 plates.
  6. Aaron

    [MOC] Droideka

    My droideka is about 20% taller than a super battle droid figure, when they should be roughly the same height (1.83 and 1.91 meters) if it were perfectly to scale. I did the best I could to come up what I felt was a fair compromise between scale and detail while I acknowledging that my designs aren't for everyone, and that some will be disappointed by the end result. I thank you for your feedback and accept any criticism with an open mind.
  7. Aaron

    [MOC] Droideka

    I came up with a shorter version that may or may not look better and be closer to minifig scale. It's a tough call. Side view: Front view: Better repositioning with the front bent downward and the arms forward also shaves some height off the bigger version and makes it look more movie accurate:
  8. Aaron

    [MOC] Droideka

    I could try shortening/repositioning it if it looks too tall. Photographs make them look slightly larger when in person they're actually not much taller than a minifig. I'll look into replacing the headlight brick tomorrow since it's a remnant of my previous design where I had it attached to the back curved slope, and feels a bit underdeveloped and out of place now. I could probably go a stud shorter and curve the head down/forward slightly more.
  9. Aaron

    Trains forum banner

    @Duq Your banner gets my stamp of approval for sure. You did a very nice job!
  10. Aaron

    [MOC] Droideka

    I had actually built these over a year ago, but it just hit me today that I never posted them online. I was aiming to find a balance between something that's close to minifig scale, albeit without sacrificing detail and functionality. It was the advent of part 26047 Plate, Modified 1 x 1 Rounded with Handle that enabled me to build these so that the front legs can rotate inward when switching to the rolling mode. I have six completed droidekas that I decided to pose at different angles alongside a B1 and B2 battle droid for reference. I will provide a parts list and breakdown if requested.
  11. I decided from the onset that I'd break away from the majority and forge my own path. When I started building in 10-wide, there was nobody else (that I knew of) doing it at the time. I had nobody to look to for influence, and had to start from scratch, spending countless days visiting railroad museums, studying engineering diagrams, and collecting detailed HO scale models to use as references. It took tons of tinkering around with bricks, and tons of trial-and-error to try to make everything work at this scale. The major breakthrough for me was the release of third-party wide radius curves. It has taken years upon years to get to this stage, and only within the past few months have I begun to wrap things up in the design and building stage to finally move on to stage two: presentation and operation.
  12. The average global height of humans is between 5'2" and 5'6". With hairpieces, minifigures fall into that height range at 1:38. While they are proportionately a bit wider than most real people, building at smaller scales such as 1:48 only increases the width impact. I've been building all of my trains in 10-wide for the better part of the past decade and can definitely assure you from experience that minifigures are in no way undersized or out of scale in comparison, and I've spent enough time in railroad museums and excursion trains to have a photographic memory that can automatically detect when something is out of scale. The main reasons most people build in 8-wide (or smaller) are practical ones, such as the ability to pack more in smaller/limited space, to have tighter curve and switch radii, to be able to utililize O scale components interchangeably and to be able to build more on a budget. If scale is really important to someone, and space/budget constraints are of little to no issue, it should be understood that anything other than 10-wide is a compromise.
  13. The track gauge is 37.5mm. If we assume 1 stud to the foot is approximately 1:38 scale (1:38.1 to be more accurate) and we compare these figures to Standard Gauge, which is 4' 8.5", we come up with an almost exact match. 37.5mm x 38.1 is 1428.75mm. Convert 1428.75mm to feet and inches, and you get 4' 8.25". It is what it is. Now if, for example, one were to build an 80' Budd streamliner coach to scale going by our calculations above, we can apply the 1 stud to the foot figure to an engineering diagram to get a width of 10 studs (10') and an overall coupler length of approximately 80 studs (80'). At this scale, a bald minifigure is approximately 5' tall, while a minifigure with hair is slightly taller, at roughly the same height as the average adult human. When placed next to or inside of trains built to 1:38.1, one will find that it is a highly proportionate visual representation of the human scale.
  14. I build my trains in 10-wide simply because 1:38 scale matches the gauge of the track. 1 stud to the foot almost miraculously seems to match up all the windows on passenger coaches to the prototypes and makes aligning details on diesels and freight cars simple as well. Everything looks "just right" and functions very well at that scale as long as you're using BrickTracks wide radius curves. Nevertheless, 1:38 scale isn't for everyone, and though I doubt it'll ever catch on and gain widespread popularity, it'll continue to be my primary scale of choice when it comes to all things LEGO.
  15. Aaron

    [MOC] 1:38 scale PRR 2-bay Hopper Car

    Absolutely! Here's a video demonstration.