Control+ General Discussion

[Sleepy]

Has someone been able to control the hub with a RaspberryPi?

[doug72]

9 minutes ago, Gimmick said:

When you save your record and give it a name and symbol -> there is on top a second menu, where you can assign the recorded movement to the numbered buttons 1-4 on the main control page.

Thanks for that info. I'm slowly getting there. I may have accidentaly done that before but didn't undersatnd its purpose.

Will start again, delete all data, re-calibrate and the record a set of movements once I get frsh batteries.

 

[kbalage]

Finally there's a nice improvement in the app, they fixed one of the biggest annoyances that was present since the first profile was introduced. If you have a motor connected to the wrong port previously there was a totally useless and misleading connection progress bar reaching about 50% then starting over and over again. Now it is replaced with an informative screen that shows you which motor is plugged in incorrectly, with the Liebherr it even asks you first which hub you would like to connect to and then shows you the appropriate port layout. 

[MP LEGO Technic creations]

Hello everybody. I'd like to ask is it possible to turn off the Control+ hub? I haven't found the solution yet (I turn it off by taking out batteries). Thank you.

[kbalage]

Just now, MP LEGO Technic creations said:

Hello everybody. I'd like to ask is it possible to turn off the Control+ hub? I haven't found the solution yet (I turn it off by taking out batteries). Thank you.

There're a couple of solutions:

• Kill the Control+ app, that'll disconnect the hub and it'll turn off
• If you use the Powered Up app you can disconnect it from the app by sliding left the hub on the connection screen and tapping on the X, then the hub will turn off
• If you press and hold the green button on the hub for ~7 seconds that'll disconnect it from the app and it'll turn off

[jaxxreal]

5 hours ago, MP LEGO Technic creations said:

Hello everybody. I'd like to ask is it possible to turn off the Control+ hub? I haven't found the solution yet (I turn it off by taking out batteries). Thank you.

You can just turn off, then turn on Bluetooth on your phone. That’s what I usually do.

[MinusAndy]

Forgive my ignorance on this but is there an app available for the iPhone to use control+ on MOC builds. I got 42099 for Christmas and the hub and motors are sat gathering dust.

[kbalage]

8 minutes ago, MinusAndy said:

Forgive my ignorance on this but is there an app available for the iPhone to use control+ on MOC builds. I got 42099 for Christmas and the hub and motors are sat gathering dust.

You need to use the Powered Up app's free coding area, you need to use Boost-style coding blocks. I have an unofficial code block guide that might be helpful and a couple of videos to get you started. As an alternative you can use BrickController 2 with a gamepad.

[jaxxreal]

24 minutes ago, MinusAndy said:

Forgive my ignorance on this but is there an app available for the iPhone to use control+ on MOC builds. I got 42099 for Christmas and the hub and motors are sat gathering dust.

You can control it with BuWizz app, look at the video below

 

[kbalage]

3 minutes ago, jaxxreal said:

You can control it with BuWizz app, look at the video below

Just make sure you are aware of the limitations - it only connects to the Technic hub and there's no return to center Servo control

[MinusAndy]

Great! Thanks for that.

[jaxxreal]

3 hours ago, kbalage said:

Just make sure you are aware of the limitations - it only connects to the Technic hub and there's no return to center Servo control

Yeah, thanks for adding this note! I forgot to mention that.

Also, @MinusAndy you could use 42109 connection scheme, just in case you need just one XL-motor.

[kbalage]

I guess it's better to continue here.

5 hours ago, Bartybum said:

God the C+ hubs infuriate me to no end. There’s no reason they should be so huge, ESPECIALLY the simple hub.

 

20 minutes ago, kbalage said:

I have similar feelings about such comments... how would you want to house 6 AA batteries? Oh I know, "but why can't they give us small powerful rechargeable batteries like BuWizz?!" Well, a couple of reasons:

- Price - people complain about LEGO prices all the time, imagine the sh$tstorm if TLG wanted to release a $130 battery box...
- Shipping - Adding a rechargeable battery to LEGO sets would make logistics much more complicated, special regulations, etc.
- Safety - RC batteries like the one in BuWizz are not exactly kids' toys, again a whole bunch of safety regulations come in the picture
- Removable/not removable - you can make it small if the battery is built-in, but then if its dead you can throw away your hub. If you want to be able to replace it then you need to add a cartridge, it needs to be again safe enough to be handled by kids, your small hub will become bigger etc. A whole bunch of potential issues. 
- Compared to all this, AAs are available all around the world, you are free to use rechargeable ones, and you don't have to pay the extra $ for it in the set. 

Sorry for the off-topic, back to the Lambo.

 

5 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

Who said anything about AA batteries? The train PF battery box used AAAs

You said "C+ hubs", that includes the AA and the AAA hubs as well. Btw I see 2 reasons why they used the Technic hub for the standalone version instead of the City hub. First, they want to use it mostly in Technic sets and the design of the AA hub fits in that system. Second, that one has 4 ports instead of 2 so there are more connection possibilities. 

[Bartybum]

19 minutes ago, kbalage said:

You said "C+ hubs", that includes the AA and the AAA hubs as well. Btw I see 2 reasons why they used the Technic hub for the standalone version instead of the City hub. First, they want to use it mostly in Technic sets and the design of the AA hub fits in that system. Second, that one has 4 ports instead of 2 so there are more connection possibilities.  

I can respect wanting to maintain consistency within a theme, but then all that does is shift the question to this:

Why on earth was the smart hub designed for AA and not AAA? MOCcers have repetitively shown to make perfectly good use out of AAA batteries.

Edited May 8, 2020 by Bartybum

[kbalage]

4 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

That's not an excuse though. As far as I'm aware, there's no reason the smart hub couldn't have been designed to house AAA batteries to begin with.

The AA smart hub singularly kills compact MOCing. By shoving everything together into one package along with six AA batteries, you have this giant block whose volume can't be distributed over an entire set like it could with PF. For a company that pushes creativity and building so hard, it was a frankly moronic decision to move to a hub design that's even bigger than its predecessor.

Do you realize that from a volume perspective the Control+ battery box is not significantly bigger than the PF AA battery box? Additionally if you mounted the PF AA battery box with the pin holes then you had half stud overhang on the top and the bottom, so that space was difficult to use anyway. 

On the other hand, thanks to the increased amount of mounting points you can use the hub as a structural part of the build, like 42109 did (probably the single positive feature of the set). That's a fairly compact car but still manages to house the AA hub. 

1 minute ago, Bartybum said:

I can respect wanting to maintain consistency within a theme, but then all that does is shift the question to this:

Why on earth was the smart hub designed for AA and not AAA? MOCcers have repetitively shown to make perfectly good use out of AAA batteries.

There is a smart hub with AAA batteries, nothing prevents you to use it in a small build. You can even use 2 or more of them and control from a single interface.

[Bartybum]

1 hour ago, kbalage said:

Do you realize that from a volume perspective the Control+ battery box is not significantly bigger than the PF AA battery box?

It might not be significantly bigger, but it is bigger. That's the issue I have - the PF battery box was already big enough as it was. I can't tell you the amount of times I wanted to build a MOC on Rebrickable, only to discover that it needed the AAA PF battery box. People used the AAA hub because it was compact and therefore more useful.

1 hour ago, kbalage said:

On the other hand, thanks to the increased amount of mounting points you can use the hub as a structural part of the build

Mounting points are totally irrelevant. They could've given Technic its own AAA hub design with plenty of mounting points.

1 hour ago, kbalage said:

There is a smart hub with AAA batteries, nothing prevents you to use it in a small build. You can even use 2 or more of them and control from a single interface.

But I don't want to use the system-based smart hub. I want my own Technic smart hub. I might have to shift the question again, because it probably wasn't clear enough. What I'm really asking is this:

Why was the Technic theme not provided with its own AAA smart hub (with four ports, good mounting points, etc)? Why, instead, were we handed a large hub that uses AA batteries?

Because now, we're stuck with this enormous iceberg battery box for the next ten years.

Edited May 8, 2020 by Bartybum

[AVCampos]

9 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

Why was the Technic theme not provided with its own AAA smart hub (with four ports, good mounting points, etc)? Why, instead, were we handed a large hub that uses AA batteries?

Most likely for the same reason AA, C and D batteries exist instead of only AAA (or, for that matter, button cells like CR2032): bigger batteries have more capacity and last longer. And motorised Technic models tend to be bigger and heavier than System models, so a hub with puny AAAs wouldn't last long powering the monsters we build.

[Bartybum]

54 minutes ago, AVCampos said:

so a hub with puny AAAs wouldn't last long powering the monsters we build.

6 AA batteries last quite a long time though don't they? Does anyone here have kids that have drained a full 6-set of AA batteries? If so, how long did it take?

[AVCampos]

It depends on the usage: large numbers of strained motors (common in Technic, uncommon in System) drain batteries faster.

The 8043 is notorious for working very poorly as soon as its batteries get a little discharged. I don't think it'd provide any meaningful play time if it was powered by AAA batteries, especially rechargeable ones (which provide 1.2 instead of 1.5 V).

[howitzer]

2 minutes ago, Bartybum said:

6 AA batteries last quite a long time though don't they? Does anyone here have kids that have drained a full 6-set of AA batteries? If so, how long did it take?

AA batteries have typically a bit over double the capacity of AAA yet the cost is nearly the same. Even if you use rechargeable batteries, the charging is a hassle so personally I prefer AA more often than AAA simply because the latter has to be replaced/recharged at least twice as often.

And yeah, integrated Li-ion battery with USB charger plugin would be nice, but I totally get why TLG avoids them, with all the extra cost and safety considerations that inevitably comes with them, as kbalage said already. If you are annoyed by large battery boxes, why not just get a BuWizz?

[kbalage]

1 hour ago, Bartybum said:

It might not be significantly bigger, but it is bigger. That's the issue I have - the PF battery box was already big enough as it was. I can't tell you the amount of times I wanted to build a MOC on Rebrickable, only to discover that it needed the AAA PF battery box. People used the AAA hub because it was compact and therefore more useful.

It is bigger, but fits better in studless Technic builds due to the logical mounting points and the dimensions. The PF battery box is probably smaller, but as I said due to the 4-stud height and the cable attachment point & the switch the volume you need for it in a build is similar to the Technic hub.

1 hour ago, Bartybum said:

Mounting points are totally irrelevant. They could've given Technic its own AAA hub design with plenty of mounting points.

1 hour ago, Bartybum said:

But I don't want to use the system-based smart hub. I want my own Technic smart hub.

So you don't want to use the existing AAA hub because it is not Technic and you don't care about the mounting points. Maybe I'm the stupid one but I don't see what would differentiate then a Technic hub from a System hub. 

But I get it, you want a small Technic AAA hub with 4 ports. So let's see, the AAA hub to fit in the Technic world should be 5 stud wide instead of 4. The height of the 2 hubs is the same (5 studs). The length is 8 studs versus 9, but if you'd have the 4 cable ports on both ends then it'd actually need an 10 stud long space. So, what if we put the ports on the sides like the AA hub? Then there's 1 stud gain length-wise, but we need 1-1 stud extra space on the sides for the cables and let's not forget about the mounting points, so suddenly we are again close to the dimensions of the AA hub...

Sorry but I still don't see that earth shattering difference that supposed to be a total deal-breaker between the 2 hubs based on your description. 

 

[Bartybum]

@kbalage Hmm, I might concede in that case; cable routing with a 5-stud wide block does seem to be a major issue here. The optimal solution would be to have a 2x2 array of cables pointing upwards at one end of the battery box, but that would lengthen it by two studs. Having cables sticking out the sides makes them awkward to deal with in tight spaces, so you need a 1 stud gap on either side anyway. I see I hadn't considered that at all.

I can't say that I agree with Lego's philosophy that everything needed to be lumped into one big block, rather than separate components that can be scattered throughout more efficiently like with PF. However, after looking at photos of the smart hub internals, I'm happy to accept that what we got is probably the most optimal solution for that philosophy.

Edited May 8, 2020 by Bartybum

[kbalage]

@Bartybum I hope we'll see a separate small "control unit" one day with only the electronics and the ports that can be separated from the power source, like an intelligent port replicator. 

[Bartybum]

4 hours ago, kbalage said:

@Bartybum I hope we'll see a separate small "control unit" one day with only the electronics and the ports that can be separated from the power source, like an intelligent port replicator. 

Same here. Basically a smart replacement for the IR receiver from PF. I’m not sure that’s likely to happen unfortunately, since it would probably require a smaller simple hub, otherwise we’d just be using the smart one.

Edited May 9, 2020 by Bartybum

[mahjqa]

Does anyone know why Lego's control+ app requires location? At least with the top gear car, the damn thing asks for it to be turned on. I can see absolutely no reason for the app to require it. Are they afraid folks are using their set in the wrong place? Which place?

(Aside from that, it doesn't seem to accept it even if I turn it on... damn shame.)