(MOC) Liebherr LTM 1050

[Zerobricks]

Milan did you think about worms powering the outriggers, because this way, like i used in my crane is very strong as I discovered.

Also if you would power the outriggers from top, the force of gear created on outrigger when its on max position would push the outrigger down, so it wouldnt bend.

[efferman]

hm, looks a little bit weak, but when you say that the hold the hole crane in air, then it is strong enough.

p.s. i have pics from my final outriggers in my ac40 thread

[Milan]

OK, i made new outriggers again...but this time they are 100 percent in scale, namely, they are 4 STUDS WIDE!!!

I have used some rare elements as a base for their box, of course i am still faithful to the studded bricks!

Two RC functions as well. Even stronger than version before. And much more less friction.

Will post review of them tomorrow.

On the other side Drivetrain is also installed. It took two days to perfectly place two XLs to be in scale, not to stick outside the body. More on that later.

[Milan]

Pictures of the outriggers

I hope everything is clear from the pictures.

So on just 4 wide box, I have managed to put two thick sliding beams, each with its own separated box(so the two beams don't touch/block each other), and aesthetically very nice achievement: Each cylinder is attached to the extending beams at the middle, just like on real crane!

Thickness of the beams are also in scale, both width and height.

If nothing goes wrong with this, I will use this design, it performs great, looks nice and is 100% in scale.

http://postavi.com/hosted/984e2bf5655067d96b145847b6de1988.jpg

http://postavi.com/hosted/feda17d4773f1fc19ac64a30af63d1ff.jpg

Next stop: mounting autovalve compressor on the back of the carrier to power this outriggers, and organizing pneumatic hoses.

Edited August 28, 2010 by Milan

[efferman]

looks nice but have you no fear that the outriggers will be twisted under load?

[Milan]

looks nice but have you no fear that the outriggers will be twisted under load?

Thats the best part...beams are made in SNOT so they can't twist (4 layers of plates), I will have to see how they will cope to the final weight of the model (cca 2.5kg), and that will reveal weak spots.

[efferman]

i hope that you are right with this construction. sorry for my pessimism, but i think with all load (Crane and payload) over one stabilizer, you will have a problem. not specialy with the outriggerbox, but with the connection between the cylinder and the outriggerbox. Did i see right that you use the Hose connection, for the connection to the outriggerbox?

[Milan]

Yes, connection is on Hose (air pipe), but I was thinking a lot about it, and decided to use that solution.

Main force is applied to the top pin.

I think it is pretty strong, the beam itself can hold even more weight, but as you said, the weakest part is the connection between cylinder and beam.

So that weakest part can hold 2kg, maybe more but my fingers started hurting and turning white, as you can see.

each outrigger can hold 2kg x 4 outriggers

Finished crane should be around 3kg max

So outriggers wont have to work with more than 40 percent of their max load.

:classic:

[efferman]

ok, then is it good

[Zerobricks]

Not just good, its great! Still i think if you had racks on the upper side, you might make it even stiffer, because the cog would push the outriggers down.

[Milan]

Thanks guys!

Zblj: The beams are really tightly secured, almost too tight, so they hold pretty good and are very stiff in their boxes.

Thanks for your advices, guys, I really appreciate it.

[Milan]

Outriggers are mounted and they look fantastic!

Two XLs are installed and they fit good too.

I toyed with the chassis simulating weight of the final model and I noticed something bad.

Each AXLE-setups has differential which is driven via worm.

An 12L axle drive that worm, and at the same time axle is pivot point for the whole AXLE.

So the weight of the model is directly resting on that 12L axle.

Axle is slighty bended, and performance is degraded. I mean two XLs can drive it easily, but it just doesn't feel right.

After thinking a bit about it, an idea came to my mind, to use some kind of element that will take away pressure from that axle.

I have seen that on TT races people use big studless vertical mounted turntable for this.

Then this came to my mind:

It has free hole in the middle and it can be fixed to the chassis, and it is just 4x4x1 studs.

I don't know is this idea original, but it works great on "dry" axle.

I think it is very good way of connecting pendular suspension to the chassis because they are strong and they also take the load off the driveshaft, and they have no contact with it so the friction on the driveshaft is greatly reduced.

I will show results tomorrow, if it succeeds it would be really something!

[efferman]

that is a great idea

[Sam42]

nice work so far!

[CP5670]

It has free hole in the middle and it can be fixed to the chassis, and it is just 4x4x1 studs.

I don't know is this idea original, but it works great on "dry" axle.

I think it is very good way of connecting pendular suspension to the chassis because they are strong and they also take the load off the driveshaft, and they have no contact with it so the friction on the driveshaft is greatly reduced.

I've used this method too and it works pretty well. These turntables are more compact than either of the Technic ones and don't have the friction that the newer, studless Technic versions do. There is also another turntable that would be even more compact and useful for this purpose, but it's very obscure and only ever appeared in one set.

Looking forward to seeing the finished model.

Edited August 30, 2010 by CP5670

[Zerobricks]

What about these joints:

[Milan]

Thanks, guys!

Zblj: can you link that part to BL, please. I can't find it there.

It looks even better than 4x4 turntable, and more compact and easier to attach.

[backbone]

NO hard to find. Very easy.

http://www.bricklink.com/search.asp?q=44225

Photo url contains numbers in filename (44225).

[Countdown]

Thanks, guys!

Zblj: can you link that part to BL, please. I can't find it there.

It looks even better than 4x4 turntable, and more compact and easier to attach.

Never had this piece, but it looks like there's some friction on the rotation; doesn't it defy the purpose of having a pendular suspension? Unless I misunderstood where you want to implement it.

[DLuders]

Never had this piece, but it looks like there's some friction on the rotation; doesn't it defy the purpose of having a pendular suspension? Unless I misunderstood where you want to implement it.

Yes, Countdown is correct in that the 44225 "Technic Beam 3 with Rotation Pin" is not freely-rotating, but is a "click hinge" that locks at various angles. I am holding some of them in my hand now. The ridges on the inside of the hub show the number of settings that are possible.

[Milan]

Finality, after full day of tweaking, rebuilding, testing (not counting few days before turntables) my best axle is done!

I decided to use 4x4 turntables, two per axle, and they work excellent.

Here is one finished axle, it looks like it is being made for TrialTruck, not for Mobile Crane, but Liebherr cranes are described as a All-Terrain Mobile Cranes.

It can not be seen good, but that gray axle is driveshaft, and it goes through the turntable, just on one side, and continues to the two back axles.

Steering pivot point is less than a stud from the tire, steering lock is about 35 degrees.

It can be set to 45 degrees, but axles than becomes 1 stud longer, I will see about that yet.

Space between shock absorbers and M motor is where the fat chassis sits.

All 3 axles are exactly the same.

So this axle has

Drive, via worm to 24t diff

Steer, 35 or 45 degrees

Suspension, with 2 gray shock absorbers

Bracing in vertical and longitudinal directions

Two Bearings that take off pressure from drive-shaft,

Motor, so every axle can be operated separately.

Edited September 1, 2010 by Milan

[Zerobricks]

Thats very tight! M motor is steering motor?

[Alasdair Ryan]

is there diff locks on that? of is that only for the steering, am not a fan of that belt is there any sign of it slipping under the wight of the finished model what about using some of the small chin links?

Edited September 1, 2010 by Alasdair Ryan

[Milan]

Thats very tight! M motor is steering motor?

Yes, M is steering motor. two XLs are for drive.

is there diff locks on that? of is that only for the steering, am not a fan of that belt is there any sign of it slipping under the wight of the finished model what about using some of the small chin links?

No there is no diff lock.

Belt is doing great job here.

I tested the whole assembly with a weight on it, and it doesn't slip.

Don't know for the final model, though.

If it start slipping, I will simply add another belt, but it wont.

[Milan]

Ok, next update.

Outriggers are fully functional and installed into the chassis, well secured, both to the chassis and well braced vertically, and they work great.

Quick info: They are fully RC, both extension, and pneumatics extend/retract. Outrigger box is just 4 studs wide, and they extend in length exactly like real LTM1050 (in scale terms)

Here is a small video of outriggers in action:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq_WPL_RKfQ&feature=feedu

Next video will show the CODE Pilot unit installed and how it works (sounds) when the chassis is rolling, with all the acceleration and deceleration truck sounds, 3 different sounds regarding speed of the chassis!

It sounds awesome!