42100 - Liebherr R 9800 - MODs and Improvements

[SNIPE]

Hi,

I thought I'd make a thread for the compilation of 42100 Liebherr R 9800 MODs.

The modifications I wanna do to improve this set are:

• Cover up the lower rear better with white Technic beams and panels.
• add two more XL motors for drive and steering (it cannot really steer on rough terrain and it has a spare port on one of the hubs but will need some sort of port multiplexer unless I can cram yet another hub in there (yes so 18 batteries in total ).
• Motorized ladder using a geared down control+ L motor (or is it M-motor ? ).
• Also add an extra bunch of gears per sprocket to distribute the power for drive and steering (so 4 of these complex gear trains in total, two per track)
   

I have dismantled my 42099 so at least  have the electronics to make ALL of my planned MODs work that involve electronics.

I hopefully will see the control+ app improved so that the power does not cut out like in the 42099 (unless that is already fixed now?)

I was also wondering if it would be good play value, especially for kids, to be able to pair one mobile phone to one hub and another to the other hub so that one person can steer and drive and the other person can do the digging.

Regards, Snipe

Edited September 26, 2019 by SNIPE

[JGW3000]

I'm guessing a fully pneumatic version would be challenging, especially as single LA's will need to be replaced by 2-3 pneumatics each, in order to get the same extension. Having all that extra space may provide sufficient room for PF motors, receivers, BB's. etc. and for the necessary pneumatic pumps. Not a project I'd be willing to undertake, though.

[coinoperator]

And to whoever....
Do something at those awfull sprocket wheel covers...

btw
Am I missing the service beam on it?

Edited September 26, 2019 by coinoperator

[Ngoc Nguyen]

3 minutes ago, coinoperator said:

And to whoever....
Do something at those awfull sprocket wheel covers

I think adding 2 36z gears would suffice.

[coinoperator]

Just now, Ngoc Nguyen said:

I think adding 2 36z gears would suffice.

You could be right about that...
maybe with round 1x1 tiles on it, less than 2 weeks and we will know.

[kbalage]

4 hours ago, SNIPE said:

add two more XL motors for drive and steering (it cannot really steer on rough terrain and it has a spare port on one of the hubs but will need some sort of port multiplexer unless I can cram yet another hub in there (yes so 18 batteries in total ).

I don't think there is or there will be any multiplexer for PU unless you're willing to sacrifice a PU light and create a PF converter like I did and use some stacked PF motors.

4 hours ago, SNIPE said:

I hopefully will see the control+ app improved so that the power does not cut out like in the 42099 (unless that is already fixed now?)

There's no exceptional power cut for 42099 so there's nothing to fix. The behaviour is very similar to the PF XL motors, you can check a direction comparison with a PF version of 42099 here.

[rekreK]

Top of my mod list would be to make the bucket a regular scoop type, not the face cut bucket, how are you supposed to load the bucket in stock form?

This is the bucket it should have came with

[coinoperator]

On 9/26/2019 at 10:48 PM, rekreK said:

This is the bucket it should have came with

The R9800 is deliverable as both models.

It will however be a good and realistic mod.
Many expected this to be the B model.

[efferman]

New undercarriage is incoming. The one from the set is in my humbly opinion to fat

 

edit

Edited October 2, 2019 by efferman

[suffocation]

Trying to rework at least the carrier for PF; aiming for 1 XL per sprocket geared down 5:1

[1gor]

Isn't that 40 tooth gear sticking out of tracks? BTW nicer Avatar @suffocation 

At the moment I'll also stick to PF untill there will be flexible app (and smaller BB) with control+

@efferman nice work

Edited October 2, 2019 by I_Igor
Accidentally pressed submit reply to early

[suffocation]

Nope, there's plenty of room for the 40-tooth gear - the new sprocket gears are about 2 studs wider

This is what I've come up with. I focused on the mechanics and making sure the carrier was as rigid as possible, ignoring the model's aesthetics.

Drive with 4 XL motors geared down 5:1; superstructure rotation with 1 M motor geared down 30:1. Powered by BuWizz.

 

[1gor]

My "technique" when rigidity is important is to use as much frames as possible. I see you have 4 XL motors; each for every sprotcket or 2 per side?

Edited October 3, 2019 by I_Igor

[suffocation]

One motor per sprocket, like on my telescopic crawler crane.

The total weight including the BuWizz unit is 1.1 kg; it'd be nice to know how much the original 42100 carrier weighs.

Edited October 3, 2019 by suffocation

[Bartybum]

@suffocation why specifically 4 XL motors?

[1gor]

Perhaps someone who owns Liebherr could find out.... Since you like massive crawler construction XL sprotckets are welcome parts. I'll be in simpler constructions like combine harvester since I have to wait for few servos and L-motors...

IMHO using frames and panels like @efferman on his undercarriage and to strengthen horizontal frame based structure with vertical positioned panels using bent liftarms

[suffocation]

- More speed without losing torque

- More efficient transmission (8-24-40 instead of 12-20-12-20-12-20-12-36-28-36)

- Tried and tested on this beast:

 

 

[efferman]

Small rotation gearbox mod. Same reduction, same direction, less friction and less used Space:

you need a axle 8 with Stop and a 8 tooth gear

Edited October 3, 2019 by efferman

[Ngoc Nguyen]

8 hours ago, efferman said:

Small rotation gearbox mod. Same reduction, same direction, less friction and less used Space:

That's indeed a better design. Dont really get why Markus went for the former.

[1gor]

17 hours ago, suffocation said:

- More speed without losing torque

- More efficient transmission (8-24-40 instead of 12-20-12-20-12-20-12-36-28-36)

Actually it is 1:5 reduction on your crawler

Edited October 3, 2019 by I_Igor

[suffocation]

1 hour ago, I_Igor said:

Actually it is 1:5 reduction on your crawler

I know, I was pointing out HOW the reduction was achieved. Fewer steps = less friction = more efficiency.

2 hours ago, Ngoc Nguyen said:

That's indeed a better design. Dont really get why Markus went for the former.

I find the original design inefficient, too, but then again I guess it was the only way they could:

1) avoid using the 8-tooth gear (which in my experience isn't remotely as fragile as it's made out to be but is arguably the weakest of all regular gears)

2) fit in the linear clutch because, uh, I have no idea.

Edited October 3, 2019 by suffocation

[1gor]

1 minute ago, suffocation said:

I know, I was pointing out HOW the reduction was achieved. More steps = more friction = less efficiency

Question is how to make it as simple as possible with just 2 XL-motors

[suffocation]

Just now, I_Igor said:

Question is how to make it as simple as possible with just 2 XL-motors

I think it's pretty clear that wasn't my aim

An added bonus to my design is that the track module is stiffer thanks to the extra space freed up by the lower number of gears, which enabled me to make the module more structurally sound.

[efferman]

35 minutes ago, suffocation said:

avoid using the 8-tooth gear

This is no valid point. There are already two 8tooth gears in higher torque positions of the drivetrain.

2.) The clutch is still in the same position.

[suffocation]

2 minutes ago, efferman said:

This is no valid point. There are already two 8tooth gears in higher torque positions of the drivetrain.

2.) The clutch is still in the same position.

In the original 42100? I think not - the set's only 2 8-tooth gears are in the superstructure rotation drivetrain.

Edited October 3, 2019 by suffocation