Technic Parts We Would Find Useful

[howitzer]

1 hour ago, oracid said:

Thank you for this very interesting topic.
To get into, here are my first proposals:
- thick beams of all lengths, from 1L to 50L.
- thin beams of all lengths, from 1L to 50L.
- pins from 1L to 6L, without any stopper.
- all pins, with friction, and without friction.

I doubt TLG will ever make longer beams than current 15, perhaps 17 is doable but beyond that they will get too fragile. Thin beams much longer than current 7 are even more fragile. Very long beams such as those you suggest would also be really hard to use (both in design and actual insertion/removal) and to store and I see very little practical usefulness for parts like that, considering they are so fragile they couldn't bear no meaningful loads. You'd have to reinforce them and in that case you're fine with current beams anyway.

Even length beams in shorter (4, 6, 8) lengths could actually be useful though.

What function would 1L pins serve beyond the current half and 3/4 pins? 4L pins would probably be feasible but beyond that, I don't think longer ones are either necessary nor practical either, and most of their purpose is covered by axles anyway. They be would be fragile and very hard to insert and even harder to remove and open many new opportunities for impossible to disassemble builds, especially if they came without stoppers. Stoppers are also necessary to prevent them from drifting as the joint is stressed, with no stoppers the pins could eventually move out of their intended position and the build would fall apart.

As for 2L/3L pins, very few variants don't exist already, and even those could be replaced by axles, except maybe in some very rare circumstances.

[1gor]

@gyenesvi that is what I thought about it; you are correct 

32 tooth ordinary gear (like 40 tooth) is also desired...

For my situation i can live perfectly with current parts, but ideal would be to have 120mm tractor tire then I could make everything I ever wanted in 1:16.5 scale

Edited January 12, 2023 by 1gor

[Mikdun]

3 hours ago, kolbjha said:

Pinhole instead of axle hole?

OK, but for me there will be no difference in practice.

[howitzer]

35 minutes ago, Mikdun said:

OK, but for me there will be no difference in practice.

Bush can't be inserted on a pin, while axle can't hold on to a pinhole. Sometimes when working with halfbeams it would be useful to have a counterpart to bushing with pinhole.

 This can be used, but it's slightly thinner than a bush, and coloured metallic gold, which makes it a bit too conspicuous.

[Zerobricks]

3 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

I don't think that would work. On one hand, in case of a 5L, it would have only half stud of connection, which is weak. In case of a 4L, as you'd join the current male part with the 1.5L axle male part by sliding the axle all the way in, the edge of the current male part would get too close to the female part where the 1.5 axle male part needs to connect (when articulated beyond 20 degrees). Let me know if it's clear what I'm trying to say.

You are right, there is simply not enough space for axle block or any kind of angular movement with 1,5 axls stud length. I think your render in the General Part topic is close to what we will be getting.

[oracid]

@howitzer Thanks for your comments.

The 1L beam already exists, it is the ref.18654, BrickLink Reference Catalog - Parts - Category Technic, Liftarm

In my opinion a 50L beam will not be fragile. I have an ABS 50cm ruler, and I can say it is not fragile at all.

Anyway, it is up to everyone to decide what he want to do with its parts.

If the section is too small for a large piece, then it is enough to increase its area.
The problem is that Lego does not offer the minimum number of parts that can be found in the assembly section of a DIY store.
It is true that Lego offers a multitude of parts that cannot be found elsewhere, but not all the basic parts for doing mechanics.
If you go to a big DIY store, you'll find screws of all sizes and diameters. This is what I would like to find in the Lego catalog.

[2GodBDGlory]

5 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

In that case, I wonder why you said that it aligns better with the currently available other parts. I thinks it's usage is a bit more limited than the composable ones.

Oh, I'd definitely agree that the axle-based one would be more flexible and more desirable to have; I just meant that the double-ended one seemed more like TLG's style. I guess my reasons are:

1. TLG tends to make parts along established lines, it seems. They've never done a female CV joint with an axle, and so I think it a bit less likely that they would break that tradition.

2. CADA already has a very similar part to the axle one. I think it would be a bit humiliating for TLG to follow a competitor again, so even if it's a worse Idea they might try to do something a little different.

3. The axle-based part has the potential to be weaker, which TLG might conservatively try to avoid.

[shroomzofdoom]

 

5 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

 it can be done in a couple of ways, I have come up with 3 at least.

Pics?   I'd love to see some 

 

5 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Something similar could be built with the existing 28T bevel gear no? The gear ratio would be different though, as it meshes with a 12T gear instead. it can be done in a couple of ways, I have come up with 3 at least.

Similar, yes. But the 28T/12T combo can jump teeth too easily under high torque. The 22T/14T (Daytona) gears NEVER jump-they'll twist up steel axles

 

I know that both @gyenesvi and @Zerobricks posted in other forums about the fact that the cardan options are limited and wind up resulting in really wide MOCs. But a simple cut to reduce the length of cardan axles solves alot of problems and allows them to work in many more applications.

[gyenesvi]

1 hour ago, 2GodBDGlory said:

Oh, I'd definitely agree that the axle-based one would be more flexible and more desirable to have; I just meant that the double-ended one seemed more like TLG's style. I guess my reasons are:

Yeah, I guess I have to agree with your reasoning, it could totally happen too.

36 minutes ago, shroomzofdoom said:

Pics?   I'd love to see some 

I have some pics using the 24T differential instead of the 24T clutch gear, but you can imagine it being replaced, the essence is the same.

Here's one from this MOC, that uses planetary axles in the end, so the 24T clutch gear is used for gearing up the drivetrain to compensate the gearing down of the planetary:

And here's one from this MOC, that uses the 24T clutch for gearing down, but in this case the placement of the chageover catch(es) is more tricky.

The third version is essentially like the first one laid out sideways, and going down to the bottom of the drivetrain only at one gear-mesh instead of two the points as in the first image.

36 minutes ago, shroomzofdoom said:

Similar, yes. But the 28T/12T combo can jump teeth too easily under high torque. The 22T/14T (Daytona) gears NEVER jump-they'll twist up steel axles

Hmm, interesting, I have never managed to make a 12T, 28T combo jump, maybe I never used that much torque..

36 minutes ago, shroomzofdoom said:

But a simple cut to reduce the length of cardan axles solves alot of problems and allows them to work in many more applications.

Yes, that's what I also want to do for now :) That is why that part is on my wanted list in the catalog, to have that one officially. BTW, I think the name cardan is used for universal joints but not for CV joints (not sure though).

[howitzer]

3 hours ago, oracid said:

@howitzer Thanks for your comments.

The 1L beam already exists, it is the ref.18654, BrickLink Reference Catalog - Parts - Category Technic, Liftarm

In my opinion a 50L beam will not be fragile. I have an ABS 50cm ruler, and I can say it is not fragile at all.

Anyway, it is up to everyone to decide what he want to do with its parts.

If the section is too small for a large piece, then it is enough to increase its area.
The problem is that Lego does not offer the minimum number of parts that can be found in the assembly section of a DIY store.
It is true that Lego offers a multitude of parts that cannot be found elsewhere, but not all the basic parts for doing mechanics.
If you go to a big DIY store, you'll find screws of all sizes and diameters. This is what I would like to find in the Lego catalog.

I know, and I don't think I mentioned 1L beam at all in my post?

I don't mean fragile in the sense that it would fall apart at slightest touch, but more like in the sense that people would attempt to use those beams as a load-bearing elements in heavy builds and they would get bent and twisted. I'm also not sure what problem such a long beams would solve, that can't be solved with current parts. As for your ruler, I would venture to guess that it has a much larger cross section than the thinnest part of a liftarm, and that you haven't attempted to use it as a load bearing element in your builds so it hasn't been exposed to too high stresses.

Screws and nuts btw. did exist, at least in a sense, long ago as threaded axles and corresponding nuts. They were discontinued more than 30 years ago though and I assume the reason is, again, their fragility.

[gyenesvi]

4 minutes ago, howitzer said:

Screws and nuts btw. did exist, at least in a sense, long ago as threaded axles and corresponding nuts. They were discontinued more than 30 years ago though and I assume the reason is, again, their fragility.

I think he mentioned screws and nuts just to explain the systematicity of basic building blocks in a DIY store.

3 hours ago, oracid said:

It is true that Lego offers a multitude of parts that cannot be found elsewhere, but not all the basic parts for doing mechanics.
If you go to a big DIY store, you'll find screws of all sizes and diameters. This is what I would like to find in the Lego catalog.

I actually pretty much agree with this. For basic structural building blocks (like beams, half beams, junctions, certain connectors, pins, axles, etc.) it would be essential to have them in most reasonable sizes under a certain limit to be able to build efficiently and compactly. Otherwise, if some parts are missing, an otherwise simple structure often needs to be worked around in awkward ways. It often happens that in one size it's easy to build something but in one bigger size it's much more convoluted. Such seemingly little local changes often have far reaching consequences in a build, which is not a good property of a system of parts (say I want to change one small section and have to redesign a much bigger section around the existing part sizes).

I'm soon going to post the ones I find missing from the basics.

[dhc6twinotter]

Parts I’d like to see:

-12t clutch gear with built in extender (so overall part is 2 studs thick)
-4 or 5L links
-6.5L shocks with built in tow balls on ends or a female + end to add a tow ball (like the 9.5 shocks)
-9L steering rack
-Some sort of small tow ball receivers.  
-Part “[Part 32184] Technic, Axle and Pin Connector Perpendicular 3L with Center Pin Hole” with pin and axle holes swapped.  So many times when I could’ve used this.
-PU extension wires
-PU hub with at least eight ports
-PU micro motor

Edited January 12, 2023 by dhc6twinotter

[DrJB]

 

8 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

While I agree that it would be nice to have, I believe that's a bit unreasonable to expect, and would be hard to differentiate between the various angle. I think an alternate way to go is rather using two of connected by the recently introduced friction half pins. That results in a reasonable connection with adjustable angle. Have you tried something like that?

I agree that such parts offer 'infinite' possibilities for vertex angle. I've used them a while back but back then the friction 1L pin was not available. Still, for chemical molecules, it is good to have FIXED angles. The way to differentiate the angles would be to simply make those parts in some 'limited' colors as TLG has done many times for axle lengths and small parts that are easy to confuse. Imagine all Chemistry classrooms adopting lego parts in their education ... waow!!!

On a different note, I'd like to see axle connectors, or axles, whose cross-section is rotated by 45 degrees. This would enable us to build holonomic wheels and even more chemical molecules.

Something like the one below, but where both ends are rotated by 45 degrees relative to one another. Yes I might be able to cut/glue few of those ... but that would not be too clean/efficient.

Also, and as an option for the above, we could make the two axle ends 'indexable' by using a smaller and more compact version of this connector.

 

Edited January 12, 2023 by DrJB

[2GodBDGlory]

1 hour ago, DrJB said:

On a different note, I'd like to see axle connectors, or axles, whose cross-section is rotated by 45 degrees

Yeah, that would be great! There've been a few times where I've needed to get that 45 degree offset; which I have solved using old toothed half bushes and, (I believe more interestingly) by inserting an old ridged 2L axle extender in one side of a transmission driving ring and a new unridged extender in the other side, because the two designs had the axle hole 45 degrees different relative to the grooves for the driving ring.

 

One other part I'd love that I haven't seen mentioned is a 1L axle. I know it'll never be produced because there's an endless number of parts it could be jammed into, never to be removed, but it would be extremely useful in compact builds involving half-beams.

Of course, it'd be super easy to make a custom one...

This thread makes me wish that the Technic community were more open to using modified parts. Not that we're consciously exclusive or anything; just that when people build impressive things using modified parts, we see it as impressive, but built to a different set of "rules." Maybe by using modified parts I could make, say, a super functional 1:12 supercar that would blow everything else made away (I couldn't--certainly not aesthetically; probably not mechanically). However, if I did, the achievement would be somewhat meaningless because I'm playing a different, easier, "game" than all the other Technic builders.

I think, though, that it would be pretty cool if a segment of the community could come up with some kind of "modified standard," in which builders can use certain simple modified or 3D printed parts, like cut-off HD CV joints, or 1L axles, or 24T clutch gears, or shorter links. It would have to be a fairly restrictive list in order to maintain the interest of actually using Lego (which is a restrictive medium), but if enough people were interested in building according to some well-known standard for key modified parts, I think it could have enough respectability that people might actually use those parts.

Well! I didn't have that in mind when I started typing...

[gyenesvi]

So let's go back to the beginning and start from the most basic structural parts: Beams. As @oracid noted.

Here are the missing ones up to 8L. I think lengths above that are neither realistic to ever expect, nor are they that much necessary, as they can be worked around more easily. The Short thin ones would be useful as spacers in half stud builds. The 4L full beam is like the Unicorn of lego technic. So many times it would be useful, and in many cases neither the 4x2 L shape, nor the 1x4 thin one with axle holes at the end can be used.

On the same note; flip-flop beams.

Luckily we have slow progress on this one, as the 7L is coming. I included it to make the .part file available if somebody wants to use that in Studio (for example for alt builds), as it's going to take a while to include it. Again, the shorter ones would be the most useful. Real game changers, they function as very useful connectors. Luckily Cada has them (excluding the 8L and the 13L), and can be bought in large packages quite cheap on AliExpress :) Tested them, quite usable (pin friction is a bit stronger, but that's no problem).

And finally, L-shaped beams and some thin O-frames.

These would also be game changers for me. When I came back to Lego as an adult, I was baffled how little it has to offer on this front, the lack of these parts makes some simple structures quite clumsy and counter-intuitive to build (for example, connect two parallel beams that are 1 stud apart). These parts would make a lot of structures quite a bit more compact and sturdy. The smaller 2x2 and 2x3 L-beams can actually be bought on webrick.com!

Let me know what else you think would fit the system. T-beams maybe?

Edited January 12, 2023 by gyenesvi

[howitzer]

29 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

So let's go back to the beginning and start from the most basic structural parts: Beams. As @oracid noted.

Here are the missing ones up to 8L. I think lengths above that are neither realistic to ever expect, nor are they that much necessary, as they can be worked around more easily. The Short thin ones would be useful as spacers in half stud builds. The 4L full beam is like the Unicorn of lego technic. So many times it would be useful, and in many cases neither the 4x2 L shape, nor the 1x4 thin one with axle holes at the end can be used.

 

On the same note; flip-flop beams.

 

Luckily we have slow progress on this one, as the 7L is coming. I included it to make the .part file available if somebody wants to use that in Studio (for example for alt builds), as it's going to take a while to include it. Again, the shorter ones would be the most useful. Real game changers, they function as very useful connectors. Luckily Cada has them (excluding the 8L and the 13L), and can be bought in large packages quite cheap on AliExpress :) Tested them, quite usable (pin friction is a bit stronger, but that's no problem).

And finally, L-shaped beams and some thin O-frames.

 

These would also be game changers for me. When I came back to Lego as an adult, I was baffled how little it has to offer on this front, the lack of these parts makes some simple structures quite clumsy and counter-intuitive to build (for example, connect two parallel beams that are 1 stud apart). These parts would make a lot of structures quite a bit more compact and sturdy. The smaller 2x2 and 2x3 L-beams can actually be bought on webrick.com!

Let me know what else you think would fit the system. T-beams maybe?

All of these I would gladly see released. It's especially frustrating that half-beams in shorter lengths are only available with axleholes at ends, all-pinhole variants would be great. I believe the flip-flop beams are coming, at least in every odd length of 5 and above, up to current 15L, but it may take a while before the designers can find an excuse to demand one for an upcoming model release.

The 2x3 panel extender part can often be used as a 2x3 L-beam but obviously there are situations where the curved surface is in the way.

Another part I've been dreaming of:

But with perpendicular pinholes at corners (in addition to center) and parallel pinholes at sides.

[TechnicRCRacer]

Surprisingly I have found in more than one instance wanting a 2x5 L-shape liftarm. That would be useful for me. 

[gyenesvi]

Many people (@dhc6twinotter, @1gor) would like to see more parts with towball sockets, so here are my ideas. The obvious ones are shorter liftamrs, the shortest one with an axle hole. Also, two variants for L-shapes; those would be very useful for building solid axles with planetary hubs. The wide one has a pinhole on the back.

I imagine it would also be possible and useful to have something more like

  

but I could not make it in Studio. Let me know if you have any more ideas for this!

19 minutes ago, howitzer said:

The 2x3 panel extender part can often be used as a 2x3 L-beam but obviously there are situations where the curved surface is in the way.

Indeed, I use that a lot, but as you say, the curve is often in the way.

19 minutes ago, howitzer said:

Another part I've been dreaming of:

But with perpendicular pinholes at corners (in addition to center) and parallel pinholes at sides.

Hmm, I think I get what you mean.. Let's see if I can make something up. You'll have to show me how you'd use it in a build then!

6 minutes ago, TechnicRCRacer said:

Surprisingly I have found in more than one instance wanting a 2x5 L-shape liftarm. That would be useful for me. 

How about the new curved 2x5 panel extender? Would that work in some situations? Or would the curve be often in the way?

[DrJB]

4 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

These would also be game changers for me. When I came back to Lego as an adult, I was baffled how little it has to offer on this front, the lack of these parts makes some simple structures quite clumsy and counter-intuitive to build (for example, connect two parallel beams that are 1 stud apart). These parts would make a lot of structures quite a bit more compact and sturdy. The smaller 2x2 and 2x3 L-beams can actually be bought on webrick.com!

Let me know what else you think would fit the system. T-beams maybe?

The one thing we're missing here is that most parts (Connectors/Gears/...) are 1M/L thick. It's nice to have all of these 1/2 thick parts but their use will be most likely very limited (again, due to the majority of the available connectors). Plus, once you go half-thick in one direction, you loose the 'uniform' spatial resolution of 1L in any of the 3 directions. Such 'resolution' was a big step going from system/studs to technic beams ... but challenging it with half-whatever in any directions is poised to create many more issues and problematic builds.

IN all the connections and parts they have developed, TLG has been very religious about respecting the 1M/L resolution/grid. Even the oddly looking Bionicle parts obey such rule. I saw a paper recently about the working of the CCS connections (articulated science) and there is some 'science' behind it, not just "I wish" I had such feature. Again, maybe I'm talking more like an engineer and less like a Lego enthusiast.

Another thought: How about planetary hubs? The only option today is with the PowerMiner parts shown below, but those are not very usable in any realistic/compact Technic build (besides PowerMiners).

 

 

[gyenesvi]

10 minutes ago, DrJB said:

The one thing we're missing here is that most parts (Connectors/Gears/...) are 1M/L thick. It's nice to have all of these 1/2 thick parts but their use will be most likely very limited (again, due to the majority of the available connectors). Plus, once you go half-thick in one direction, you loose the 'uniform' spatial resolution of 1L in any of the 3 directions. Such 'resolution' was a big step going from system/studs to technic beams ... but challenging it with half-whatever in any directions is poised to create many more issues and problematic builds.

I don't agree with this, as I have seen a lot of examples for builds with existing half beams. The key is that you don't add just one half beam somewhere, but two, so you use them rather for half stud offsetting of sub-structures that themselves often remain multiples of 1 stud. Imagine as a simple case for example a beam with some half beams on both sides, connected by 2L (or longer) axles. Everything adds up nicely without the need for half length connectors. I think such techniques are used quite often.

Edited January 13, 2023 by gyenesvi

[dhc6twinotter]

6 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

Many people (@dhc6twinotter, @1gor) would like to see more parts with towball sockets, so here are my ideas. The obvious ones are shorter liftamrs, the shortest one with an axle hole. Also, two variants for L-shapes; those would be very useful for building solid axles with planetary hubs. The wide one has a pinhole on the back.

 

The wide one is exactly what I was thinking.  The other option would be to have a 3L liftarm with a tow ball socket on the side, facing either the same direction or perpendicular to the pin holes (not sure if that makes sense).

[shroomzofdoom]

12 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

here's one from this MOC, that uses the 24T clutch for gearing down, but in this case the placement of the chageover catch(es) is more tricky.

I'm a huge fan of your 42129 C model - Ultra 4 Buggy. It's one of the most thoughtfully laid C models... Ever! Have you tried replacing the 8M long 3:1 transmission with the 5M long variant with just the 24T clutch gear? For some reason, it gets much harder to squeeze in the shift selector with a shorter variant. I've tried a few times and it's not easy. 

[DrJB]

4 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

I don't agree with this, as I have seen a lot of examples for builds with existing half beams. The key is that you don't add just one half beam somewhere, but two, so you use them rather for half stud offsetting of sub-structures that themselves often remain multiples of 1 stud. Imagine as a simple case for example a beam with some half beams on both sides, connected by 2L (or longer) axles. Everything adds up nicely without the need for half length connectors. I think such techniques are used quite often.

You're missing my point, and my experience is a bit different than yours. Not to lecture, but I have seen Lego Technic 'evolve' over the past many years and some things are either not doable, or structurally weak (I'm wearing my engineer's hat here).

Here is an example to illustrate my point: Imagine you want to stack 1 regular beam between 2 half-beams, one on each side. There is no 2L connector that will hold this assembly together as all 2L connectors have a ridge in the middle.

You also need to consider that when Lego Technic started (see pics below), it was all about replicating mechanical functions (The first engine cylinders were square). Nowadays everyone wants to motorize their MOC and turn it into an RC vehicle. Not all parts can sustain such abuse.

You might disagree, and that is fine, but my point remains: half beams are very restrictive in their use, simply because the 'resolution' for most other parts is full-width.

In the end though, these are YOUR parts, and you're free to do with them as YOU please. *cheers*

Edited January 13, 2023 by DrJB

[oracid]

As you know, I don't use anymore Lego servos but standard RC servos. 
One thing should be great is a few RC standard servo arms. Let say thin beams from 3L to 9L.
Of course, I know the output RC standard servo gears are not all the same, but the 25T is the most usual.

Thanks again for this thread !

[Jurss]

10 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

thin O-frames.

Frames are used mostly, to make some rigid constructions. But half stud parts are pretty weak. So I don't think, it would be good thing. OK, we would be able to make some more compact supercar :) , but if Lego will make some set, they need to care about that kid, who will play with that set. If it will brake easyali, they won't get bonus points from customers.