Powered Up FAQ and Community Wishes

[Toxic43]

What is concerning me is that they say that you can have two motors or one motor with a set of lights. How are we going to be able to run two motors and lights like my modified HE or 7939? No mention of any additional adapter cables only the light set. 

[Mr Hobbles]

1 hour ago, Toxic43 said:

What is concerning me is that they say that you can have two motors or one motor with a set of lights. How are we going to be able to run two motors and lights like my modified HE or 7939? No mention of any additional adapter cables only the light set. 

Well, Lego rarely tells anyone their upcoming products roadmap, so I'd expect a lot more to come shortly. We know of the WeDo 2.0 medium motors getting a general release in the App Powered Batmobile, and the lights will be available sometime soon(tm).

We're still missing x-large motors, servo motors, and a more Technic-appropriate hub, to name but a few. We'll just have to see what else they've got planned. I'm personally hoping for a splitter cable, a PF adapter cable, an extension cable, and a polarity reversing switch.

[legotownlinz]

I doubt there will be splitter cables. They certainly want to prevent children from connecting too many devices to a hub. Another question is if a splitter cable would allow to connect multiple sensors. If no, they would never sell such a splitter cable to avoid confusion.

Edited July 11, 2018 by legotownlinz

[JopieK]

On 7/5/2018 at 11:22 PM, Vilhelm22 said:

Will we get + and - converter cables?  Unlike previously, Boost/WeDo 2.0/PUis more of a socket type thing.

Reading that FAQ probably not, but they mention a new kind of lights: 88005. Promobricks even has an image:

@Toxic43 you could do it the unconventional way, using a soldering iron, connecting two motors and use the other port for the LED. Not sure if the motor controller chip can handle the current from this two motors on one port though.

@legotownlinz: you could with current PF and the light and sound system before that of course... As long as they have protection against too high currents... And they have I'm pretty sure seeing the circuit boards.

[legotownlinz]

Of course they have over-current protection, it's a must-have for toys. Nevertheless I guess they want to keep the system simple - one sensor/motor per port - unless the wire protocol actually supports multiple sensors per port. I didn't study the technical details yet, but I doubt it does.

It's easy to solder a splitter yourself, so it's not a big issue if Lego doesn't sell it.

[Bartosz]

18 hours ago, ZANTHERA said:

Is it possible they mean that two receivers, one with only port A plugged in and one with only port B plugged in, could be run at the same time thus creating the "10 trains with one remote"

That's exactly what FAQ says.

[zephyr1934]

23 hours ago, ZANTHERA said:

They say you can run 10 separate trains at once with one remote, or I suppose 10 different powered items, but then that doesn't seem to make sense as theygo on to say as long as one train in in port A and the other in port B of the same battery box, that seems impossible as it would have to be connected to the train in port A.

Is it possible they mean that two receivers, one with only port A plugged in and one with only port B plugged in, could be run at the same time thus creating the "10 trains with one remote"

In this sense it is just like PF, only now with 5 channels. So one "hub" and motor per train, 5 channels port 1 + 5 channels port 2 = 10. But it looks like now each channel is limited to one motor

"How many motors can be controlled with one Smarthub?
The Smarthub has two ports, A and B, which allow you to plug in and control two motors, or a motor and lights for example."

 

22 hours ago, Toxic43 said:

What is concerning me is that they say that you can have two motors or one motor with a set of lights. How are we going to be able to run two motors and lights like my modified HE or 7939? No mention of any additional adapter cables only the light set. 

 

In this case, with two hubs, one in the front and one in the back, both on the same channel. This bit should work better than PF since they should operate in sync without worry of line of sight.

[Toxic43]

57 minutes ago, zephyr1934 said:

In this case, with two hubs, one in the front and one in the back, both on the same channel. This bit should work better than PF since they should operate in sync without worry of line of sight.

Yes! What great thinking! Retrofitting old locos should be possible when you account for the extra free space once the PF receiver is removed. I mean two hubs in the same loco should be possible. 

Edited July 12, 2018 by Toxic43

[ZANTHERA]

6 hours ago, Bartosz said:

That's exactly what FAQ says.

It's a bit misleading though, to have 10 separate trains would require two receivers on the same channel but with a single motor plugged in on port A on the first box then port B plugged in on the second box in the second train. You'd have to buy twice as many receivers for it to actually do 10 trains with one remote, they make it sound like you can run 10 trains with 5 receivers which isn't possible because the two plugs would be occupying the same receiver which can only mean they're connected to the same train.

Edited July 12, 2018 by ZANTHERA

[Stefaneris]

7 hours ago, zephyr1934 said:

In this case, with two hubs, one in the front and one in the back, both on the same channel. This bit should work better than PF since they should operate in sync without worry of line of sight.

If I understand correctly, you can control two hubs at the same time. So it should be possible to have up to four motors in one train?

Is it also possible to have more? This would require, that I can control more than two hubs at the same time.

[Mr Hobbles]

18 minutes ago, Stefaneris said:

If I understand correctly, you can control two hubs at the same time. So it should be possible to have up to four motors in one train?

Is it also possible to have more? This would require, that I can control more than two hubs at the same time.

When using a remote, looks like no, there is a limit of 2 hubs per channel, according to that FAQ.

[zephyr1934]

In one of the Hispa-bricks videos (I think it was back in this thread) they demonstrated three hubs synchronized on one channel, remote says "go" all three motors go. I bet there is some upper limit to the number of hubs per channel, but I haven't seen anything yet (and no, I have no inside information, I'm just gathering bits from what has been posted). One thing I suppose with distributed power like this your batteries will last longer, but if the hubs are expensive that could get pricey.

[Mr Hobbles]

On 7/13/2018 at 1:08 AM, zephyr1934 said:

In one of the Hispa-bricks videos (I think it was back in this thread) they demonstrated three hubs synchronized on one channel, remote says "go" all three motors go. I bet there is some upper limit to the number of hubs per channel, but I haven't seen anything yet (and no, I have no inside information, I'm just gathering bits from what has been posted). One thing I suppose with distributed power like this your batteries will last longer, but if the hubs are expensive that could get pricey.

I stand corrected! And I even remember watching that video too. Oh dear.

Lego should update their FAQ. :) Speaking of which, I wonder when/if we'll get answers to our earlier questions?

[zephyr1934]

 

1 hour ago, Mr Hobbles said:

I stand corrected! And I even remember watching that video too. Oh dear.

It was not in the video linked in this thread, you had to go in to the facebook folder and there was a whole series of videos.

[Brickster12]

PU is really promising, however related to trains I'm still struggeling with the lights topic. In my trains I usually have front and back lights. The PU hub allows me two power consumers. 88005 provides me two LED. So actually it is impossible to equip a train with a motor, front AND back lights using stock PU components (and only one hub).

Hence I think TLG's FAQ answer on equipping trains with lights falls a bit short. Wich is a bit surprizing as 60198 has the option for lights at both ends.

--

Back to topic. My wishes:

- A programming environment that seamlessly allows using all WeDo 2.0, Boost and PU components. This programming environment should use the known block language to make it easy to use for kids and AFOLs.

- The programming environment should be availabe for mobile and stationary devices including Windows, IOS and Linux. A platform independent approach would be highly appreciated and contemporary!

- Custom code should be easy to share within the Lego community.

- A useful selection of analog PWM motors in the sizes like PF. 

- Adapter connector for the PF motors.

- The selection of digital motors (WeDo/Boost) could be extended by at least one high torque motor for load intense applications.

- A splitter connector allowing multiple motors/lights on a port.

- A hub with AA batteries and 4-6 ports that can be connected to multiple controllers.

- Remote controllers: in addition to the new train controller I would like to see a controller that has analog sticks (with axel holes) providing a smooth range from -100% to +100% with spring loaded center position. Stick orientation schould be rotatable like train controller. This controller would cover all use cases with "linear-centeted" (100% 0 -100%) and "digital-centeted" (1 0 -1) motor speed control while the train controller covers all use cases with "static" motor speed control (+ stop -)

- The next evolution of Mindstorm components and main units should integrate with all this seamlessly. Proprietary product lines are in times of connectivity and smart devices completely old-school. We want to see something modern that integrates seamlessly with the now latest hardware generation (WeDo, Boost, PU) just as we used to have with the bricks!

 

- A dead line for community wishes of just 3 days is way too short. We should have time to make ourselfs familiar with the new system first.

 

Edited August 1, 2018 by Brickster12
Added to wish list

[TinkerBrick]

Just found this:

Powered UP AFOL Community Answers
https://lan.lego.com/news/overview/powered-up-afol-community-answers-r146/

 

[Bartosz]

Got a question regarding stacking of the connectors. Now, I'm not that proficient in electronics, so bear with me:).

My understanding is that stacking only makes sense (in context of train motors), if the motor driver is capable of sourcing more current than the motor draws. Otherwise, stacking more than one motor won't give us more power, because we hit the limit of current it can get, right?

Given that - would using train motor powerful enough to consume whatever it can get from the hub, gives us same benefit as stacking more than one motor? Also - without knowing exact characteristic of those components, we can't say for sure that lacking the ability to stack is really hindering, am I correct?

[Nemo57]

If, in view of the categorical response of the company's representative, it is not possible that there will be no adapters from the new system to the old PF system, can one be asked to provide adapters from the new system to, for example, the 9V system, and then, indirectly, a complete and harmonious connection of all systems , both old and new. Given that the adapters from 9V to PF were from the company itself.  Thank you.
 

[Mr Hobbles]

Well, that's both good news and bad news.

The good news is that they plan to continuously update hubs firmware to bring them all to compatibility. Also more hubs - perhaps a "Smart Hub 4 I/O" at some point in the future, two on each end?

The bad news is that he seems to be adamant there won't be a compatibility cable released. This is extremely disappointing. I still love the 9v micro motor, which was compatible with PF through the conversion cable. Looks like I won't be able to use this anymore. :(

There are lots of hints throughout that they expect the community to step up though. Stuff about "its capable through this, but not officially through Lego yet", sounds like they're aware of some of our reverse engineering efforts. Plus the hint about the two power wires being compatible and expecting third parties to make compatibility options. Which is annoying and triggers my purist sensibilities.

Finally, the news that the PUP range will hit S@H in "early 2019" sounds like it'll be a little while yet before we can buy components separately, but I'm guessing they're also waiting for more products to be released. Perhaps the Technic range will get new models in first half of next year that will use PUP, and they want to release all the components at once.

EDIT: Saying the WeDo 2.0 Smart Hub can't have its firmware updated is incorrect... they've updated it via the official LEGO app quite a few times.

Edited August 7, 2018 by Mr Hobbles

[Carefree_Dude]

One thing I'm heavily considering is using aftermarket LEDs to light up my trains as opposed to using official lego options. 

[dr_spock]

I buy bulk LEDs and resistors and wire up my own.  Sounds like the connectors are patented.  Does that mean 3rd parties will have to license for use with their products?

 

 

[CamelBoy68]

One of the answers I saw is regarding connection issues to the BT controller/phone.  Namely, if the signal is lost the motor automatically stops.  There is no more switch on power and forget about it...

That might be be a pain if you just wander off out of range...

 

[zephyr1934]

On 8/6/2018 at 5:09 PM, TinkerBrick said:

Just found this:

Powered UP AFOL Community Answers
https://lan.lego.com/news/overview/powered-up-afol-community-answers-r146/

 

that looks like it has several of our questions answered (though not all good)

[aawsum]

Understatement in my opinion. All the questions on interchangeable and powering multiple components via 1 cable or via hubs have not been answered or in a professional way ignored. For now I don't see any reason to move to powered up.

[BurkusCircus]

11 hours ago, aawsum said:

Understatement in my opinion. All the questions on interchangeable and powering multiple components via 1 cable or via hubs have not been answered or in a professional way ignored. For now I don't see any reason to move to powered up.

The only thing I can think of using PoweredUp for now is steam engines with a 4-X-X or X-X-4 wheel arrangement, with the 4 being the motor and the Box/Reciever being in the tender.