Technic Parts We Would Find Useful

[efferman]

21 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

Not entirely sure about the 2L

It is really usefull

[2GodBDGlory]

2 minutes ago, msk6003 said:

you can't deny. I'm going to get several and cut some of them for making as your's.

Fore some reason it is double sided but axle on middle part like softaxle. You have axle on those part but can't use it. I don't know why.

You could use it with part 32172, I believe! It's a pretty useless part, but it's the only one I know of that can clip onto axles from the side...

[gyenesvi]

34 minutes ago, msk6003 said:

Fore some reason it is double sided but axle on middle part like softaxle. You have axle on those part but can't use it. I don't know why.

Like this?

That's a bummer :( So it won't be useful in places where a bit of deviation from the length of 5 (+ or -) or some sliding would be required (like drivetrain going to floating axles). Sure, we can still cut them, but it's not the same, not accepted in MOCs. Why can't they make things as if it was.. Lego. Are you sure or just joking? :)

33 minutes ago, efferman said:

It is really usefull

Thanks, I believe you :)

So @2GodBDGlory your reasoning could have been right in the end! Don't make it too similar to Cada..

Edited January 13, 2023 by gyenesvi

[Zerobricks]

1 hour ago, gyenesvi said:

Like this?

That's a bummer :( So it won't be useful in places where a bit of deviation from the length of 5 (+ or -) or some sliding would be required (like drivetrain going to floating axles). Sure, we can still cut them, but it's not the same, not accepted in MOCs. Why can't they make things as if it was.. Lego. Are you sure or just joking? :)

Thanks, I believe you :)

So @2GodBDGlory your reasoning could have been right in the end! Don't make it too similar to Cada..

Imagine cutting it in half and modifying it to have 1,5 L of useful axle length... Oh that sounds familiar and can even be used in 4 stud long liftatms. LEGO, all you had to do was to cut it in half and we'd have a new, robust part! 

Edited January 13, 2023 by Zerobricks

[msk6003]

25 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

Like this?

Remove stop part. I remember like that.

Edited January 13, 2023 by msk6003

[kolbjha]

I would like to have a version of the 4185 (pulley) with pin hole instead of axle hole:

This could be useful for cranes and other hoists. I know that some have made their own version by drilling holes in 4185.

[gyenesvi]

Another area where I miss systematic variation of sizes is flat panels. They are pretty useful for making nice looking surfaces, when they happen to be the right size. But when not, we have to resort to stacking beams on them, which can introduce ugly discontinuities, when applied to the longer sides. Continuing the shorter side with beams works well, though that would be more applicable to shorter panels, which are lacking, especially for width of 5. They would be pretty useful for sides / doors / bonnets / roofs of smaller vehicles for example. Interestingly, the size variability of curved panels is much better, there seems to be a lot more focus on those due to lots of sportscars, especially nowadays with the new small ones, which is really good. I think the flat ones should not be neglected either. It would also be interesting to have a shorter trapezoidal one as well.

Yet another interesting part could be links with pinhole ends. Unfortunately it only exists in 16L size. They would be useful for linkages that need clearance near other parts as they move and hence beams cannot be used; for example a steering tie rod.

Edited January 14, 2023 by gyenesvi

[shroomzofdoom]

Just thinking...if someone from TLG does wander in here it might be good to have a running poll or something so that they could easily see what is the hottest/most requested item.

Not quite sure how this would work but I'm an 'idea' guy...not an 'implementation' guy (I say that all the time at work..)

 

IMHO, this is the one that's most overdue 

Edited January 13, 2023 by shroomzofdoom

[oracid]

6 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

I am not sure what you want to achieve then. You talked about thin liftarms previously as servo arms (isn't that the same as a servo-horn). How do you want to connect that to the gear? I thought you'd want to take off the gear and replace it. If not, how does it connect to lego?

No matter how you call it, arm, servo-horn, rudder. The goal is a piece which is connected at the servo gear to transfer the torque at a mechanism.

Like this, https://fr.aliexpress.com/item/4001226860763.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.main.53.4ac23ccfw8bZHw&algo_pvid=f07a1c27-6cbe-4b6a-9f4f-e530f8fa7fa5&algo_exp_id=f07a1c27-6cbe-4b6a-9f4f-e530f8fa7fa5-26&pdp_ext_f={"sku_id"%3A"10000015497388303"}&pdp_npi=2%40dis!EUR!11.45!11.45!!!!!%402145280e16736410396075747d0708!10000015497388303!sea&curPageLogUid=gnZiQ4duVBJ5

[Zerobricks]

13 minutes ago, shroomzofdoom said:

Just thinking...if someone from TLG does wander in here it might be good to have a running poll or something so that they could easily see what is the hottest/most requested item.

Not quite sure how this would work but I'm an 'idea' guy...not an 'implementation' guy (I say that all the time at work..)

Agreed, I think we have enough ideas now. I would suggest we first focus on a catergory, for example what new connector would you like and vote for a design. Later, we can focus the same way on hubs, joints, panels, gears, liftarms, half beams, links, pins, etc...

Edited January 13, 2023 by Zerobricks

[1gor]

@gyenesvi your proposal of 2+3L universal joint would be ideal to compensate width of LEGO portal axle hub (introduced with Unimog U400), but IMHO you need sution like on male part for CV joint to have  1½ stud long axle, not 2 studs because it could be a weak point ...

If something like that would be produced by Lego, then I could use LEGO portal axle hubs since they are much stronger than my liftarm & connector build and I would not need to use floating differential.

That is my only wish from presented ideas of your's.

[zoo]

10 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

One note about the short axle-to-axle perpendicular connector: in theory it could look like below, nicely round like the axle-pin connectors, but that would be out of the system of existing axle connectors.

Not sure if I understood your comment correctly but the part above would fit the very small family made out of this part below. :)

Edited January 13, 2023 by zoo

[howitzer]

11 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

I managed to do it, hopefully this is what you have been thinking of. However, I am not sure this would fit the system nicely, it feels odd, neither am I sure that this could actually be manufactured (because of the pinholes being closed from the center). Maybe an open center variant, essentially resulting in a 3x3 frame is more of a possibility? Though still can't figure really good use cases that could not be built maybe with short alternating beams instead?

Yes I meant a part like the one on the left in your picture. If 39793 can be manufactured, I don't see why that one couldn't, it would just require similar slots to enable the bores needed by pinholes.

As for the uses, it would be a compact part with many connecting options to reinforce structures in tight spaces, while at the same time offering support for axles etc. going through those spaces. The middle pinhole is important for the latter, in a way that a similar frame couldn't work, as there's no support in the center. It's of course a sort of POOP but then again, there are many highly useful POOPs out there, as they provide rigidity and stability that separate parts never could.

[gyenesvi]

2 hours ago, shroomzofdoom said:

Just thinking...if someone from TLG does wander in here it might be good to have a running poll or something so that they could easily see what is the hottest/most requested item.

Indeed, a poll would be interesting, I think we need @Jim for that. However, it is a bit meaning as long as we are only doing this for ourselves and we don't have any means to communicate it to TLG. Though I only wrote it somewhat jokingly that they would look at this and make any of these parts. I think they have already considered or even prototyped most of these. But it would be quite cool if a part that we vote for would actually be produced. Also, for actually understanding the utility of some parts, example builds would be needed. I was actually thinking of a virtual building contest with all these parts..

1 hour ago, Zerobricks said:

Agreed, I think we have enough ideas now. I would suggest we first focus on a catergory, for example what new connector would you like and vote for a design. Later, we can focus the same way on hubs, joints, panels, gears, liftarms, half beams, links, pins, etc...

I've got a couple more categories to cover, almost done just need to make renders and organize them into the catalog.

Here's another interesting category: steered driven wheel hubs. The first is @keymaker's idea, something like that, right? I had a similar version, but with 3-pin holder, the second one. The third is similar to the currently existing steered one, but the steering arms centered. I often find that better, like on the planetary hub. The last one is an updated variant of the portal hub that fits completely inside the Defender rims (we designed this together with @efferman, btw do you have part file for it?). With Unimog tires, this setup has it's steering pivot 2.5 studs closer to the wheel than the current portal hub! Unfortunately, with large tractor tires some more (half stud) spacing would be required, but even in that case, steering center would be 2 studs better than with the current one. Finally, the planetary hubs could have an ungeared variant too (maybe also with these kind of slimmer steering arms, as that L shape on the planetary I find practically needless for steering, it's just in the way all the time).

@1gor, just look at this beauty :) btw I don't think that U-joint idea would help with the current portal hub, because you cannot move the steering point 1 stud out towards the wheel without moving the whole hub (there's nowhere to build mounting points 1 stud out on the hub frame). Or do you mean you'd use the 3L side in the portal hub, and the 2L side in the diff frame (first I guessed the other way around)?

57 minutes ago, zoo said:

Not sure if I understood your comment correctly but the part above would fit the very small family made out of this part below. :)

That's quite a small family, and that part does not have an actual head. I think that part would be a shorter version of this part, that's why the head should be like that.

55 minutes ago, howitzer said:

Yes I meant a part like the one on the left in your picture. If 39793 can be manufactured, I don't see why that one couldn't, it would just require similar slots to enable the bores needed by pinholes.

As for the uses, it would be a compact part with many connecting options to reinforce structures in tight spaces, while at the same time offering support for axles etc. going through those spaces. The middle pinhole is important for the latter, in a way that a similar frame couldn't work, as there's no support in the center. It's of course a sort of POOP but then again, there are many highly useful POOPs out there, as they provide rigidity and stability that separate parts never could.

Okay, then manufacturing could work :) Now I better understand your motivation about it. But what does POOP mean? I guess it's an abbreviation for something :)

2 hours ago, oracid said:

No matter how you call it, arm, servo-horn, rudder. The goal is a piece which is connected at the servo gear to transfer the torque at a mechanism.

Okay, so then you don't need the gear there, but rather an axle, onto which you can put the liftarms (which already exist). The problem is with the servo not with the lego parts I think.

Edited January 13, 2023 by gyenesvi

[howitzer]

Just now, gyenesvi said:

Okay, then manufacturing could work :) Now I better understand your motivation about it. But what does POOP mean? I guess it's an abbreviation for something :)

Okay, so then you don't need the gear there, but rather an axle, onto which you can put the liftarms (which already exist). The problem is with the servo not with the lego parts I think.

POOP = Part out of other parts. Meaning a part that is essentially a combination of other parts and those parts could in principle replace it in a build.

For example part 18671

is essentially two 2x2 plates and two 1x2 plates combined. But if you try replace 18671 with such a plate combo in a build, you'll end up with structure that is much more fragile than when using 18671.

[keymaker]

11 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

something like that, right?

Well, no :) Options 2, 3 and 4 are for medium and big rims, where there is more support needed besides the axle - pins. And in this category there is I would say some usefull choice of already available parts with great Wheel Hub with Planetary Gear Reduction. And because of that I think there is no chance for such kind of new part in nearest feature (last option is great, but the same thing you can have with mentioned new wheel hub with some sort of small, new, and very usefull also in other places conector with tow ball holder - such parts were already mentioned here).

The first option won't work neither with standard nor with new 30mm rims because of simple reason - steering arm will rub the rim. If you have those parts and rims in hand, check it, you will see. That is why this is my suggestion, great both for small sport and off-road cars:

[gyenesvi]

6 minutes ago, keymaker said:

The first option won't work neither with standard nor with new 30mm rims because of simple reason - steering arm will rub the rim. If you have those parts and rims in hand, check it, you will see.

One thing I may have misunderstood. Do you want this to go inside the deeper end of the rim? I thought you want to put this on the shallow side, then it would not rub. If on the deep side, then only your idea could work on the hub side.

6 minutes ago, keymaker said:

That is why this is my suggestion, great both for small sport and off-road cars:

However, answer me one thing. How on earth will you route your steering links around the differential (or smaller gears instead)? That placement is just too close to the axle center longitudinally I think. It's already quite challenging with the longer steering arms..

15 minutes ago, keymaker said:

last option is great, but the same thing you can have with mentioned new wheel hub with some sort of small, new, and very usefull also in other places conector with tow ball holder

The difference will be in the ground clearance. And the authenticity of the mechanism; portal vs planetary.

[zoo]

1 hour ago, gyenesvi said:

That's quite a small family, and that part does not have an actual head. I think that part would be a shorter version of this part, that's why the head should be like that.

Right. I thought that you put the items below in the same family but going back and looking at your renders it appears I might be mistaken.

[keymaker]

1 hour ago, gyenesvi said:

I thought you want to put this on the shallow side, then it would not rub. If on the deep side, then only your idea could work on the hub side.

I have those parts in my hands at the moment, I know what I am talking about :) 3 studs steering arm just next to standard 30mm rim (56145 or 56904) will rub (and I am talking about "shallow side"). The same goes with new 30mm rim (42716) even with 1 stud distance used between rim and the part.

But to be more clear, the part I proposed, without any offset to the rim, but with 3 studs long steering arm as you proposed - will rub. No question about it. The part you proposed, exactly as showed, with some offset, I think it is one stud there, will not rub when connected to the standard 30mm rim on shallow side. But the whole point, or at least very important aspect of such hub, is to have pivot point as close to the center of the rim as possible. You part, with unremovable offset, is killing this idea.

1 hour ago, gyenesvi said:

However, answer me one thing. How on earth will you route your steering links around the differential (or smaller gears instead)? That placement is just too close to the axle center longitudinally I think. It's already quite challenging with the longer steering arms..

Quite simply, the part which will move steering links will be in  the front of the links, so lets say in that order: 1 line: axle, 2 line: steering links, 3 line: steering rack or whatever you wan to use to move steering links. Second thing is problem of distance of steering links to the diff or gears. The solution here is also simple - shorter steering links :) They ware mentioned here multiple times.

1 hour ago, gyenesvi said:

The difference will be in the ground clearance. And the authenticity of the mechanism; portal vs planetary.

I agree.

Edited January 14, 2023 by keymaker

[DrJB]

19 hours ago, howitzer said:

Not that you're wrong in your assessment from engineering perspective, but there still are many parts which can be used to make half-stud offsets and such offsets are employed also on official sets in many kinds of different ways, so it's obvious that half-stud offsets are supported to some extent by TLG.

Not to beat this to death, but I'm fully aware of the various connectors that enable one to mix full and half-width beams. Some are displayed below:

 

All these connectors are there to connect primarily full-width with half-width parts. What I understood from the discussion thus far is that it seems some EB members, pursuing smaller and more compact cars/builds, are seeking ways to use 'primarily' half-beams ... Hence my comment about needing more half-beam connectors and structural integrity of such thin beams.

 

Let's put this to rest now :)

[SNIPE]

So, currently, to produce  every part in this thread will cost around 6 billion euros 😶

All I have is 45 pence.

[1gor]

@gyenesvi i meant another way; axle through frame 5 x 7 and additional 3L axle with gear through portal axle hubs...

[Jundis]

10 hours ago, howitzer said:

Yes I meant a part like the one on the left in your picture. If 39793 can be manufactured, I don't see why that one couldn't, it would just require similar slots to enable the bores needed by pinholes.

This would also go with the ne liftarm frame very well. Could even be in 3x7 or 3x13 for smaller builts.

[efferman]

I guess this would be usefull as an official part.

edit:

10 hours ago, gyenesvi said:

btw do you have part file for it?)

Seems i have overwritten this version because it would only fit to the defender rim.

 

 

 

Edited January 14, 2023 by efferman

[gyenesvi]

9 hours ago, keymaker said:

I have those parts in my hands at the moment, I know what I am talking about :) 3 studs steering arm just next to standard 30mm rim (56145 or 56904) will rub (and I am talking about "shallow side"). The same goes with new 30mm rim (42716) even with 1 stud distance used between rim and the part.

Okay, I thought you have less ambitious plans regarding the spacing and the steering pivot. But you are right, why not. So indeed, in that case we need to go smaller. I've got these rims and experimented. So here's the updated part. It goes all the way into rims 56145 or 56904 and 42716 from the deep side, and there's basically a 1x1 beam between the female CV joint's head and the rim. In case you are wondering if that half stud sticking out could be removed: with rims 56145 or 56904 it would be pointless, it could not go deeper anyway, only with rim 42716. But even in that case, only a 1x1 half beam would hold the female CV joint, and it would be pretty wobbly I think.

Quote

Quite simply, the part which will move steering links will be in  the front of the links, so lets say in that order: 1 line: axle, 2 line: steering links, 3 line: steering rack or whatever you wan to use to move steering links. Second thing is problem of distance of steering links to the diff or gears. The solution here is also simple - shorter steering links :) They ware mentioned here multiple times.

Yeah, I figured that's the only way, and that is also only possible without proper differential I think. So here's what I built with these, it uses quite a few parts from this catalog (the small hub, 4L towball arms, 4L links, the 4L double headed male CV Joint, and also a female CV joint with a longer 3L axle on one side to be able to connect the two sides).

What do you think?

5 hours ago, SNIPE said:

So, currently, to produce  every part in this thread will cost around 6 billion euros

Don't worry about that, we are just throwing arounds some ideas :) That's TLG's problem, haha. But jokes aside, how many parts do we have so far? 100 maybe? Just look at how many crazy not so generic parts other themes have. Many of these would actually be pretty usable in various contexts.

5 hours ago, 1gor said:

@gyenesvi i meant another way; axle through frame 5 x 7 and additional 3L axle with gear through portal axle hubs...

Okay, got you, then it would work in principle, but as we noted, those U-joints would probably be too fragile (thin material) to bear large load.

1 hour ago, Jundis said:

This would also go with the ne liftarm frame very well. Could even be in 3x7 or 3x13 for smaller builts.

Yes, that's a good idea!

53 minutes ago, efferman said:

I guess this would be usefull as an official part.

Hmm, interesting, is that meant for locking two free spinning gears together (permanently)? And extending that diff housing for more gearing options?

Edited January 14, 2023 by gyenesvi