General Part Discussion

[R0Sch]

This could also be a valid design for a one way clutch gear but needs 3 additional rollers.

 

13 minutes ago, aeh5040 said:

Actually the 64t monster is looking a bit awkward for spacing.  Besides the 16t at exactly 5 studs, the only reasonably good fits in the 1:1 studless technic grid seem to be:

8t at (4,2) (i.e. 4 studs across, 2 studs up), 0.03 studs too tight

24t at (5,2), 0.11 studs too tight

36t at (6,2), 0.07 studs too loose 

I did not investigate using technic bricks and plates yet.

 

Hopefully Sariel will add this gear to his gear calculator soon. There is the tab "gear coupler" for exactly that purpose.

https://gears.sariel.pl/

Alternatively, import this to Studio or 3D print it and experiment with Technic bricks and plates.

https://www.printables.com/model/27084-lego-technic-compatible-64-tooth-gear

Edited 15 hours ago by R0Sch

[aeh5040]

The all important 8t / 64t is the same spacing as 36t / 36t.  I just tried this at the (4.2) grid point and it works nicely - not too tight for most purposes.

Edited 14 hours ago by aeh5040

[R0Sch]

Just now, aeh5040 said:

The all important 8t / 64t is the same spacing as 36t / 36t.  I just tried this at the (4.2) grid point and it works nicely - not too tight.

Of course because (8+64)/2 = (36+36)/2.

[aeh5040]

58 minutes ago, R0Sch said:

Hopefully Sariel will add this gear to his gear calculator soon. There is the tab "gear coupler" for exactly that purpose.

https://gears.sariel.pl/

No need to wait for that - it's just Pythagoras!

Edited 14 hours ago by aeh5040

[R0Sch]

20 minutes ago, aeh5040 said:

No need to wait for that - it's just Pythagoras!

I know, but it's more interactive. There is not just the liftarm vs bricks+plates spacing possibility. Here is a cool guide on different techniques and gear combinations for anyone interested:

https://rebrickable.com/help/gears/

 

[PG52]

Well, the new 64t gear would also work with itself 8 studs apart, which could make for a very efficient two-wheel grasshopper escapement.

[R0Sch]

For now just the standard spacing combinations.
8T, 16T, 28T and 36T work best, 20T kinda works (half tooth engagement) and 24T is way too little engagement, almost slipping. 12T and 40T don't work at all. I didn't try the 56T and 60T turntables.

Edited 10 hours ago by R0Sch

[HydroWorld Outlook]

4 hours ago, R0Sch said:

For now just the standard spacing combinations.
8T, 16T, 28T and 36T work best, 20T kinda works (half tooth engagement) and 24T is way too little engagement, almost slipping. 12T and 40T don't work at all. I didn't try the 56T and 60T turntables.

Oh, I thought the 64-tooth gear would have been able to parallel-mesh with an 8-tooth gear positioned 5 units away, but I suppose that is not the case? That being said, this gear you've used is a 3D-printed stand-in with just a single axle hole, whereas the official new piece has three pin holes radiating on four built-in beams from the central axle hole (in a plus (+) shape, just like the largest Spike Prime wheel piece) out to the 64-toothed ring that forms this gear's circumference. Is there any chance the new piece could be slightly wider than this?

This detail probably won't make much of a difference regardless because all LEGO Technic spur gears in the original spur gear family (with the obvious exceptions of the 12-, 16-, and 20-tooth versions), which all have tooth counts that are factors of 8 (8, 24, 40) mesh with one another in a straight line. This was also the case for the now-retired first version of the LEGO Technic turntable, which had 56 teeth and meshed perfectly inline with an 8-tooth gear, which is why I initially thought an 8-tooth gear might be able to mesh with this new 64-tooth gear just one extra unit away from where it would have previously meshed with a 56-tooth turntable. That being said, it does also make sense how this new 64-tooth gear would mesh perfectly with a 16-tooth gear for a 1:4 or 4:1 ratio because 16 is one quarter of 64, but I am slightly confused as to why an 8-tooth gear must be offset to mesh with this new gear.

If this is true, that means the actual usefulness of this new part may be a lot less than I initially thought, as most applications I was planning to use it for required 64-tooth and 8-tooth gears to operate inline. Unfortunately, that's not possible if the above displayed combinations with the 3D-printed stand-in spur gear are accurate to the newer official 64-tooth spur gear piece. But still, I am curious if the tolerances in this 3D-printed gear might be producing the more awkward results of gears not meshing, because since all of the original spur gears have tooth counts that are factors of 8, I feel like they should all mesh perfectly when positioned in parallel  (aside from the 12-, 16-, and 20-tooth spur gears). I know I am probably wrong but I was just curious.

Edited 5 hours ago by HydroWorld Outlook

[R0Sch]

@HydroWorld Outlook The 64T gear will mesh with 8T but needs 4.5M spacing. I just didn't have time to test and show all combinations. I don't think the 3D printed part is wrong because it meshes perfectly with the 16T at 5M spacing which is logical because the pitch diameter of 1M LEGO gears is nr. of teeth z divided by 8 so the radius is z/16. 64/16+16/16=5M

64/16+ 8/16= 4.5M

Here are the needed stud spaces for meshing 64T gear:

8T - 4.5, 12T - 4.75, 16T - 5, 20T - 5.25, 24 - 5.5, 28 - 5.75, 36T - 6.25, 40T - 6.5, 56T - 7.5, 60T - 7.75, 64T - 8

Internal meshing with 140T banana gear is 4.75

Worm gear meshing is 4.5 for a massive 64:1 gear reduction.

P.S. it's high time for a 32T gear to complete the LEGO gear family.

Edited 3 hours ago by R0Sch

[HydroWorld Outlook]

24 minutes ago, R0Sch said:

The 64T gear will mesh with 8T but needs 4.5M spacing. I just didn't have time to test and show all combinations. I don't think the 3D printed part is wrong because it meshes perfectly with the 16T at 5M spacing which is logical because the pitch diameter of 1M LEGO gears is nr. of teeth z divided by 8 so the radius is z/16. 64/16+16/16=5M

64/16+ 8/16= 4.5M

Here are the needed stud spaces for meshing 64T gear:

8T - 4.5, 12T - 4.75, 16T - 5, 20T - 5.25, 24 - 5.5, 28 - 5.75, 36T - 6.25, 40T - 6.5, 56T - 7.5, 60T - 7.75, 64T - 8

Internal meshing with 140T banana gear is 4.75

Worm gear meshing is 4.5 for a massive 64:1 gear reduction.

Okay, thanks for the explanation. So based on this, the 16-tooth gear is the only known Technic gear that can mesh with the 64-tooth gear in a perfect straight line because its the only one with a spacing that is a whole number (other than the 64-tooth gear's ability to mesh with itself 8 units apart, which is a basically useless combination except for transmitting rotation over longer distances since more gears just add friction). That's really unfortunate, but I agree that you are most likely correct—it is fully logical to assume these calculations are accurate, and that the stand-in 64-tooth gear either nearly or perfectly matches the diameter of the final piece. Therefore, I suppose I'll just have to use special pieces to space out the 64-tooth and 8-tooth gears properly within my construction.

24 minutes ago, R0Sch said:

P.S. it's high time for a 32T gear to complete the LEGO gear family.

Agreed! But hey, who knows, maybe we'll get that in one of next year's sets as a 50th anniversary gift, if we're lucky.

9 hours ago, PG52 said:

Well, the new 64t gear would also work with itself 8 studs apart, which could make for a very efficient two-wheel grasshopper escapement.

Didn't think of it that way, but that's one possibility. I was actually thinking these gears would work well for aviation cyclorotors or perhaps submerged Voith Schneider propellers, since their blades could swivel in the gear's off-center pin holes for adjustment.

Edited 2 hours ago by HydroWorld Outlook

[R0Sch]

Just use a half bush for spacing. No need for special pieces.

[howitzer]

I believe the other worm gear, 27938, will also mesh with the 64T gear with whole stud spacing.

I also don't think the half-stud offset is a huge problem when meshing with 8, 24 and 40T gears, though this obviously depends on what you're building.

[HydroWorld Outlook]

41 minutes ago, R0Sch said:

Just use a half bush for spacing. No need for special pieces.

Perhaps I might not have worded that so well. The reason I was worried about the lack of whole-stud spacing for the compatible gear combinations was because my design requires two gears to be mounted in a straight line along the same beam. In other words, the 64-tooth gear would have to be mounted on axle rotating through a pin hole on the same beam as the other gear, which would've been an 8-tooth gear, but now I know that combination won't work. So, I'd have to use a 16-tooth gear instead, based on the picture you showed, and then transfer the output of that geartrain to another to complete the ratio. Unfortunately, I can't get around this with a half-bush. That is fine, and I can deal with that. It's just very inconvenient for my design. That's all.

38 minutes ago, howitzer said:

I believe the other worm gear, 27938, will also mesh with the 64T gear with whole stud spacing.

I also don't think the half-stud offset is a huge problem when meshing with 8, 24 and 40T gears, though this obviously depends on what you're building.

I'm building a very large futuristic, amphibious spaceplane that will use a combination of hydropneumatics, flywheels, and electric LEGO motors for propulsion. That is why I was previously hyped up about the bicycle wheels because I need a way to build proper, efficient flywheels that are larger than the current banana gear circles and cheaper than the Hailfire Droid Wheels. I am currently planning to use a special LEGO Technic hybrid, compound custom steel ball-bearing design—combining the larger custom steel ball bearing design you created (for your TC28 Metal Lathe) with the smaller ball bearing design that Akiyuki Brick Channel created—to support the large contra-rotating lift-fan proprotor blades, which will be large 20 x 56 wing plate pieces (the ones used in the large, pre-2022 LEGO City Passenger Plane sets)

Once combined, I have theorized and calculated that, if my plan works, both of your bearings will yield a gearless 3:1 ratio (meaning that the output proprotor speed will be thrice the torque and a third the input spindle shaft speed). However, to run and spin the flywheels that will create the inertia needed to spin these blades, I will probably need a smaller, separate geartrain connected to the bearing spindle shaft input to gear-down the output speed of the flywheels since they will be so large, because I don't trust that the tripled torque from the ball bearings alone will be enough for the proprotor blades to turn.

These two giant proprotors will be essentially approaching, if—not outright exceeding—at least one meter in diameter each once construction is completed, so I have to err on the side of caution and estimate high on how much torque will be needed to drive them. Therefore, I will most likely just use the combination suggested here and mesh a 64-tooth spur gear—once it comes out—with one of my existing 16-tooth gears to create a 4:1 reduction ratio, and then I will just have to be prepared to implement additional gear reductions beyond that if the flywheel systems still struggle, but hopefully it won't with my proposed measures in place.

Edited 2 hours ago by HydroWorld Outlook

[R0Sch]

Why not use technic bricks instead of beams? There's a 1x2 brick with 2 holes + 1x4 brick with 3 holes and voila, 4.5 spacing.

[ord]

12 hours ago, aeh5040 said:

The all important 8t / 64t is the same spacing as 36t / 36t.  I just tried this at the (4.2) grid point and it works nicely - not too tight for most purposes.

This is good news. Can now replace 60-tooth turntables coupled with 12-tooth gears at the (4.2) grid point with these for a ratio increase from 5:1 to 8:1. I don't mind the offset because it makes it easy to make parallel gear trains to reduce backlash.

Some nice new parts in this set. Looking forward to what other bike styles people will make from them. The ratchet gear looks particularly useful, though its friction seems quite high based on the video on lego.com where he stops spinning the pedals and the wheel stops almost immediately. 

[R0Sch]

17 minutes ago, howitzer said:

I believe the other worm gear, 27938, will also mesh with the 64T gear with whole stud spacing.

I don't think so. That worm gear has a 0.75 stud spacing so 4.75. The teeth are wider because it was made for double bevel gears.

[HydroWorld Outlook]

1 hour ago, R0Sch said:

Why not use technic bricks instead of beams? There's a 1x2 brick with 2 holes + 1x4 brick with 3 holes and voila, 4.5 spacing.

Unfortunately, Technic Bricks won't be strong enough, especially not for a massive, potentially two-meter-long hydroaerospacecraft (watercraft + aircraft + spacecraft/spaceplane hybrid vehicle) model like the one I'm building that will need to be lifted off the ground (by a robust Technic-built carry handle at the vehicle's center of gravity (COG)). They'd be fine for a ground vehicle always supported by—and operating on—a flat surface, but for a larger, hybrid hydroaerospace vehicle like this capable of operating in multiple environments (land, sea, air, space), I need maximum structural integrity wherever I can afford it or I risk this model breaking apart the minute I try lifting it off the ground. Honestly, it is best that I upgrade and reinforce the whole airframe with Metal Technic Parts next year once I have the money. MTP offers these huge 1-meter-long metal Technic beams that I desperately need, but of course they're a whopping US$42 apiece and I would need at least eight of them, so in the meantime I'll have to make do with the ABS plastic parts I've got. 

53 minutes ago, ord said:

Some nice new parts in this set. Looking forward to what other bike styles people will make from them. The ratchet gear looks particularly useful, though its friction seems quite high based on the video on lego.com where he stops spinning the pedals and the wheel stops almost immediately. 

For sure. I will be considering this new ratcheting freewheel part as well, perhaps for the next model I work on after the hydroaeroshuttlecraft I mentioned above. In fact, I might use this part in an upgraded version of my model, perhaps for the deployable crane arm's rescue winch in the model's underbelly, or a similar alternative function.

51 minutes ago, R0Sch said:

I don't think so. That worm gear has a 0.75 stud spacing so 4.75. The teeth are wider because it was made for double bevel gears.

Can we test this spacing now, perhaps? Do you have this worm gear? Even if we can't, no worries—we can wait for the new 64-tooth gear piece to enter circulation and then verify once reviews for the 11380 Road Bike start going live. I sure hope New Elementary plans to cover all these new pieces. 

Edited 1 hour ago by HydroWorld Outlook

[howitzer]

50 minutes ago, R0Sch said:

I don't think so. That worm gear has a 0.75 stud spacing so 4.75. The teeth are wider because it was made for double bevel gears.

Ah, that might be true. I thought one of the turntables would have 64 teeth and seeing those worm gears mesh with them it should work. But alas, the turntable has 60 teeth so it's different size than the new gear. So yeah, it still seems the only gear to mesh with it in whole number spacing is the 16T gear.

[ord]

I had a closer look at the images and it appears that the pin holes on the rim are 11L from the centre, which would mean (if I'm seeing this correctly) the large 'banana' gear racks would fit snugly inside them, with 12 equispaced holes aligning to all of the holes on the rim but 1L 'in'. Interesting!

 

[HydroWorld Outlook]

40 minutes ago, ord said:

I had a closer look at the images and it appears that the pin holes on the rim are 11L from the centre, which would mean (if I'm seeing this correctly) the large 'banana' gear racks would fit snugly inside them, with 12 equispaced holes aligning to all of the holes on the rim but 1L 'in'. Interesting!

I was suspicious about this, but I couldn't confirm with eyeballs alone. That being said, if you are correct, then that would solve the mounting problem (and my flywheel problem) because now the banana gear can directly drive the larger bike wheel formed by the curved macaroni segments. Hopefully this is true, but I guess we won't be able to physically confirm this in-person until reviews start populating.