Powered Up FAQ and Community Wishes

[CopMike]

TLG wants your questions about Powered Up! System

Quote

We've noticed a need in the community for more information on the Powered Up! System.

Therefore I had a meeting today with members of the technology team behind the system and I've agreed with them the following actions:

• Collect any questions the community has on the new system, for example compability with WeDo, number of items which can be connected and so forth.
• Collect any wishes the community has on the new system, for example access to software, schematics and so forth.

So start posting then here in the point form of:

• Why .....
• How .......

Deadline for you guys are: 

Quote

until 13.00 CEST June 21st

Bring your A-game!

[JopieK]

So TLG what about back to the future options for Train enthusiasts? Are you going to allow for a way of implementing barriers / signals point controllers with a 'PUre' LEGO solution? Are you planning to make over the air updates possible? If the answer is yes, how about making the controller software Open Source under some conditions? 

[Glenn Holland]

Are there plans in progress/being implemented for reverse compatibility to PF? A conversion wire? ETC?

Will we have components like M, L, and XL motors for the new system?

 

[legotownlinz]

Will it be possible to pair a controller with two receivers for multi-engine trains?

[zux]

I have a few items to raise:

PF allows you to attach multiple elements (motors and lights) to the same power source simply by stacking their connections. This allows building monsters such this Feller-Buncher, which has 8 elements stacked (there are more with lower elements stacked, but this is the most). New system has a different type of connector, which by design doesn't allow stacking. Introduced systems, might work well with Wedo, Boost and Trains since they do not require many elements to be connected to the same power source. However this system may not be suitable with Technic, where 2 ports are far from being enough. Given the unique connector, the option of 4 connectors would look insufficient in the world of Technic (which can be used by lights alone, not speaking about motors). In short - how can we make multiple elements to be used with PowerUp?

Each new system brought a compatibility with older system in a form of cable adapters. How can we attach and control existing PF elements with PowerUp?

Motors used for PowerUp system look to be similar to PF ones. Are there any improvements of similar type motors compared with PF?

How did power consumption changed since switching from Infrared to Bluetooth?

We had micromotors at some point in past and there haven't been any real alternatives since then. Will there be a motor of smaller than M-Motor size we have now?

Same with so called "RC motor". These were the most powerfull motors LEGO has ever produced. They are quite power hungry and LEGO battery boxes couldn't deliver the full potential of these. Will there be a compatibility option with older 9V system? Will there be a new more powerful motors we have now with PF system? How good are new power boxes/control units in terms of higher load required by RC motors?

Is it possible to control Mindstorm motors with new system?

I might add a few more if think of something else.

[Mr Hobbles]

1. Release documentation for the BLE protocol and wire definition. :)
2. WeDo 2.0 compatibility information (I still can’t get the Boost color/distance sensor fully working on the WeDo Smart Hub, only color information)
3. If possible, information on whether there’ll be converter wires for PF/9V, and if there’ll be a LPF2 splitter wire.
4. What other motors/sensors will be coming? LED’s?

App feedback:

1. For trains, an ability to control motors attached to both ports of the hub with a single up/down button (Allows for trains with multiple motors).
2. Similarly, control multiple Hubs with the same buttons (with options for reversing certain motors)
3. A combination of the two! :) For example make the first set of up/down buttons operate motor A on hub 1 and motor B on hub 2 in reverse.

[TrainDragon]

The old PF system had the extension cables which were fairly inexpensive and easy to cut apart and splice into for those of us who had an interest in interfacing PF with non-Lego systems (Arduino, etc).

Will you be releasing some sort of corresponding product (extension cable, Y cable, etc) with both Male and Female ends for the PoweredUp system?

This system looks significantly more complex (and interesting), really looking forward to hacking on it!

 

[dr_spock]

Will the protocol specifications be released like with the Power Function IR?

 

[sed6]

Can we control to separate trains with a single controller?

[cptkent]

Where was the original thread? The OP quote seems to have originated elsewhere.

Do you want replies here, or under the original thread?

[ScotNick]

• Wouldn't it have been possible to incorporate more than 2 outlets in the battery box? For many applications more than 2 options would've been great (especially technic, eg cranes where you need one motor each for rotating the crane, raising/lowering the hook and moving the hook)
• Is it possible to make the power outlet load-depending ?(don't know if that's the right term - the idea is that an engine with one coach driving speed level 4 has the same speed as an engine with 5 coaches and speed level 4)

 

 

[mdbz]

How much is the maximum output current ? (one/both output(s) utilized)

[Digger of Bricks]

Seeing that this new system has also been incorporated into the App-Controlled Batmobile set for the DC Comics SuperHeroes theme upon its debut, has Powered Up been designed in mind in any way to be more easily utilized by many other themes than before with Power Functions?

[Man with a hat]

For me looking at how I use my current trains:

How can I use two motors at the same time from the same controller where one motor needs its polarity reversed. (Old PF: putting two motors on the IR receiver was no problem and we have a polarity switch available)

[JopieK]

27 minutes ago, Man with a hat said:

For me looking at how I use my current trains:

How can I use two motors at the same time from the same controller where one motor needs its polarity reversed. (Old PF: putting two motors on the IR receiver was no problem and we have a polarity switch available)

You can do that with custom apps, as soon as I get my hands on a second train I'll try that.

[Dav1d]

Looking at the video of the system is shows different sounds - that is disappointing as they get annoying after a few minutes - is this all that LEGO could think of? The old Duplo inteli system was more exciting. Maybe we need different functions to be controlled by different coloured bricks on the track.  

Also it showed the train coming off the track at full speed. From my 16 years experience of children with LEGO trains at exhibitions, there are two speeds - fast forwards & fast reverse. There needs to be a way to limit the maximum speed.

Also my experience with the current system is that young children do not know what to do with a hand held controller. Currently every one understands a dial - the more you turn it the faster it goes. I noticed recently that the digital display for better new cars are still including a dial for the volume control. Maybe when all children are given an I-phone at birth then they will be able to use it.

You want a train to be able to go, stop at a station and go again, maybe in reverse. There wants to be control of signals, points and level crossings.

The cost is too high, including everything in one box and charging £180 is beyond many parents - especially if they are not sure if their child will like a LEGO train - this is the feedback I received at the week-end.        

[sed6]

1 hour ago, Dav1d said:

Also it showed the train coming off the track at full speed. From my 16 years experience of children with LEGO trains at exhibitions, there are two speeds - fast forwards & fast reverse. There needs to be a way to limit the maximum speed.

All lego trains fly off the track at full speed, nothing new there (it's a feature not a flaw). Three suggestions; longer (heavier) trains, half drained batteries (or a dummy battery) or...adult supervision.

[Toastie]

On ‎6‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 9:03 PM, CopMike said:

TLG wants your questions about Powered Up! System

Oh … I "love" it after products have been released to ask potential customers about their wishes/expectations for that product. As if it would matter … From experience that means a) wow, we have created so many options with this, how do we proceed? b) Thing is out b/c headquarters told us "no product, no further funding". So get "it" the hell out.  

How about TLG telling us first:

• What is the intent of doing PU (translate "intent" to "business case" if you like): Example: Unify things - and spread the product all over themes?
• As others have already asked: Will there be a sound and detailed documentation on PU? As there was for e.g. PF, old PBricks, VPBrick etc. etc.? Or will this be a closed case and we need to wait for magical things to appear? As it was for VLL?

Once this is clarified, the wishes, expectations, and hopes may become more focused.

Best
Thorsten  

[zephyr1934]

From what I have seen of the stand alone PU controller, it recognizes a train motor and uses the "set and forget" control style of the PF train controller, but if I recall correctly then it recognizes a non-train motor (Boost?) and uses the "only run while lever is pressed" control style of the standard PF controller. Can this default control be overridden? There are many excellent train designs that use M, L, and XL motors that would need the "set and forget" style of control.

It sounds like the hand controller has a range of about 5m and then the motors stop of the connection is lost. Could this be overridden and operate like PF, where the train will keep going even when it is out of communication range?

Will there be a rechargeable option of the battery box/receiver that could be built in to a model and have a charging port like the LiPo battery, so that it can be charged without having to disassemble the entire model?

Will there be dumb battery boxes so that you can simply run a motor without a controller (e.g., for GBC, windmill, etc.)?

How long will the old PF system be available? Will we have warning to stock up on specific components? Or will they simply disappear suddenly?

Currently we have the M, L, XL, servo, and train motors from PF, will there be comparable motors in PU?

Will there be extension cables, so that motors can be placed further from the receiver?

If there are splitter cables, will there be polarity switches (e.g., to have two train motors oriented in opposite directions under a locomotive, with both power cords coming from the center of the train baseplate)?

If one dial can control both output ports on the receiver, can the outputs run in opposite directions (e.g., for two train motors under a locomotive with both sets of wires coming from the center of the train baseplate)?

 

=============

echoing questions I've already seen

-what is the max current that can be delivered

-is there an ability to power two motors off of one port (e.g., a splitter cable)

-is there an ability to control multiple receivers with a single controller or the App

-Will there be PU to PF converter cables so that we can use legacy PF motors?

[Digger of Bricks]

14 hours ago, Toastie said:

What is the intent of doing PU (translate "intent" to "business case" if you like): Example: Unify things - and spread the product all over themes?

That's pretty much what I'm primarily wondering, but you phrased this question better than I did.

[cgarison]

Will we get a release of the source code for PU (as well as Boost) so that people can create better apps that can work with the broad product range (MindStorm/Boost/WeDo/PoweredUp)?  The lack of a a true programming sandbox and a developer SDK for Boost took away most of its value for me.  Likewise, I see a similar issue with Powered Up, although my expectations are not as high with this product.

[AndyC]

What are the limits of PoweredUP (number of motors connected etc)?

What compatibility options will be available for those of us with a large amount of existing Power Functions parts?

Are there plans for motors similar to the current Technic offerings (M, L, XL, Servo etc)?

Will the communications protocol details be shared, as they were with PF?

The current app seems very kid-focused and geared around pre-existing sets. Will there be any other offerings, perhaps similar to the Mindstorms software, that will be more suitable for AFOL use and for use with custom designs?

[Phoxtane]

Was there any community discussion/consultation prior to developing PU, as there was with Power Functions?

[Jedi Bert]

Does PU have the 2 hour time limit as LiPo and standard battery packs - I know that standard battery time limit can be disabled.

[Mr Hobbles]

I think I have a couple of more requests. ;)

1. Can a new firmware be released for the WeDo 2.0 Hub that brings it up to date? ie. Speak the new Boost/Powered Up wire protocol, properly report values on newer sensors (Boost color and distance, interactive motor), enable rotation by amount on interactive motor, report port conflict information?

As its the only LPF2 hub with an AC adapter at the moment it's really useful for things like track switch motors and track sensors.

2. Are there plans to release rechargeable battery packs and AC adapters for the Boost Move Hub and/or Powered Up Hub?

Edited June 21, 2018 by Mr Hobbles