Lego technic electric function switch - max. 24 motors to control

[Tamas Juhasz]

Hello!

I had an idea nowadays how to control a lot of PF motors without very complex and space requiring mechanical switch:

http://www.brickshel...ry.cgi?f=537994

The conception is simple: I used only electric components to switch between the motors. There is two receiver blocks, each contains 3 receivers. The fourth receiver has the swicthing motor, and the 13th motor can be connected to the other output. So the system in the pictures can be control easily 12 + 1 motors. One advantage is that the switching itself is very fast. If you connect two switching motors to the 4th receiver, you can use 24 motors. Indicator LEDs are recommended, so you always can see, which block (=which functions) are switched on. The blocks can be switched on individually, because the controller motor(s) pushes the battery box's on/off button.

To control 13 motors, you need 7 receivers, 3 battery boxes, and 1 M motors.

To control 24 motors, you need 13 receivers, 5 battery boxes and 2 M motors.

I don't think the amount of PF parts is a problem. If somebody makes a huge moc with so many motors and functions, then 7 or 13 receivers and 3-5 battery boxes aren't so much in money and requiring space. A lot of builders are still have these.

More pictures:

Video:

Hope you like it.

Edit1:

I forget to say, you can't switch off the receivers through PF switches. At the beginning, I thought at switches and one BB, but it's simply doesn't works. Each block needs a battery box, the receivers can only switched off with them.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Mbmc

[LTC]

Got the almost the same idea some time ago. You could also use only one batterybox and several switches to contol the receivers power supply.

But I quite like the idea, yes.

Thanks for sharing it.

Edit: Reality prooved me wrong :D

Edited December 29, 2013 by LTC

[Technyk32231]

Good idea. I would love to try that sometime, but I only have two receivers.

[Tamas Juhasz]

Thanks.

You could also use only one batterybox and several switches to contol the recievers power supply.

Maybe it's surprising, but this doesn't works. You can't power the receivers through PF switches. At the beginning, I thought also at switches and one BB, but it's simply doesn't works. Each block needs a battery box.

Edited December 29, 2013 by Mbmc

[Technyk32231]

Thanks.

Maybe it's surprising, but this doesn't works. You can't power the receivers through PF switches. At the beginning, I thought also at switches and one BB, but it's simply doesn't works. Each block needs a battery box.

I wonder why that is.

[Tamas Juhasz]

I wondered too, maybe the switch has no output (even it can be seen on the connector) for receivers, only two, for motors, like the old 9V system.

Edited December 29, 2013 by Mbmc

[LTC]

I had to test it myself. Astonishingly It seems like the switch acts as a simple extension wire when connected to a receiver; you simply can't switch the receiver off.

[Lakop]

I thought the idea of this was to switch power on and off to each function/motor. For mass control you would need mindstorms.

H

Edited December 29, 2013 by Horace T

[Tamas Juhasz]

Mindstorms for mass control? My system can control 24 motors, that can be called mass.

I had to test it myself. Astonishingly It seems like the switch acts as a simple extension wire when connected to a receiver; you simply can't switch the receiver off.

Here are pictures about internals: http://s186.photobuc...9?sort=3&page=1

It seems to me that only two channel can be switched on:

http://s186.photobucket.com/user/NXTLiftBoy/media/Internals%20of%20LEGO%20Power%20Functions%20Switch%208869/IMG_2056.jpg.html?sort=3&o=6

Edited December 29, 2013 by Mbmc

[Lakop]

Mindstorms for mass control? My system can control 24 motors, that can be called mass.

Here are pictures about internals: http://s186.photobuc...9?sort=3&page=1

It seems to me that only two channel can be switched on:

http://s186.photobuc...html?sort=3&o=6

What I meant was that mindstorms, with it's sensors and programming it should have the ability to do what Mbmc is trying to achieve. Which is the ability to control many functions, or allow some automation, with minimal human input.

I hope that makes sense. I am however a believer in pushing the boundries and making the most of what we've got.

H

[Tamas Juhasz]

I wrote something wrong about the PF receivers and switches yesterday. You CAN power them thorugh a PF switch, all of my switches give current to them (and the green led lights), but you can't switch off the receivers with PF switches. And for my system, the switching off is indispensable. That's the rason, why I use more than one BB, and no PF switches.

LTC has right, the PF switch with a receiver works only as an extension wire between the receiver and the BB.

So we can turn back to the original theme. Would you use it in a moc?

Edited December 30, 2013 by Mbmc

[LTC]

So we can turn back to the original theme. Would you use it in a moc?

Well, definitley!

I allready have something in mind where I have to use it for proper function of the moc. But it will take me some more years to gain experience until i can build such a machine.

To make it clearer, I am attempting to build a walking excavator.

Edited December 30, 2013 by LTC

[S.I]

You should be able to use the old switches, if you use PF extension cable/adaptor -> old style switch -> PF extension cable/adaptor -> IR receivers.

It doesn't work with the new style cables because they have a 9V bus wire as well as the motor function wire.

[Tamas Juhasz]

You should be able to use the old switches, if you use PF extension cable/adaptor -> old style switch -> PF extension cable/adaptor -> IR receivers.

This simply doesn't works. A motor can be controlled in this way, but a receiver can't. The old 9V system is unable to work with PF receivers (except after the receiver).

[S.I]

Does the adaptor cable not power the bus wire pair? :(