Speculations about 2h 2012 sets

[Conchas]

Don't think there is a separate holder. The DBG part should just part of the motor case, with pin-holes to give support for the motor.

I really like this motor has a lot of pin-holes around, to help fixing the motor.

If it is an high-speed motor, it really needs to have multiple and versatile fixing options.

[allanp]

Yeah, I think it is also just part of the motor, but just doing some quick sketches i've found it is easily possible to have that as a separate piece and (even with it's tiny size and pin holes in the front) have muliple stages of sturdy planetary gear reduction inside. Now that would be waaaaaay cool because you could have it as a really fast, completely ungeared motor, or a slow motor just by adding this gearbox, or you could use the gearbox on it's own to add planetary gear reduction in other tiny places, like inside a wheel hub. There does seem to be enough mounting points on both parts of the motor for them to be separate and for each to still be left with enough mounting points each. But whilst it is easily possible, very plausible and awesome if it is a separate removeable gearbox, it probably isn't.

[Brickthus]

Looks like the L-motor has a flat DBG fascia like the other PF motors, but with just 2 round pin holes (above and below the output shaft in Crawler use) compared to the M-motor's 4-in-a-cross. A separate 2x3x3 bracket provides 4-in-a-cross holes axially and 2 pin holes to each side in Crawler use. It looks like the DBG bracket might wrap around the sides of the fascia at 45 degrees or so - I'm not definite on that but it might not be necessary and would reduce breadth of use if it were so. The bracket side holes align with the rear motor side holes. The Crawler uses 2 grey bush pegs to hold the lower side hole on each side. I don't think it's a gearbox but it might facilitate more gears inside the motor casing by reducing the motor case volume used up by holes.

It is still not known whether the L-motor definitely has the recessed orange axle slot like the other motors, or whether a 1M protruding axle (with an axle extender in the middle of the bracket) would leave more room for internal gearing. The tan top axle might be just a tan 6M axle, or a new 6M with bezel. 4M, 6M and 8M axles tend to be picked out together from a mixed bag unless one looks carefully whilst picking.

Despite the reverse engineered MOCs, it is still not known whether the pre-diff ratios are 12:20 and 12:20:28 or 12:20:12 and 20:28. A low front view should reveal this because if it the latter set, there should be a 12-tooth cog visible between the light bley angle beams, protruding below the 3x3 4-pin cross block. There is a factor of 2 difference in gear ratio between the 2 options.

I checked Philo's motor page to look at the required speed and torque characteristics of previous motors to see where the L-motor has to fit into the range. Given the performance of the reverse-engineered MOCs with PF M-motors, I would say the requirement for the L-motor, assuming 3 12:20 ratios and 1 12:28 for the diff, is 300rpm at 7.5Ncm of torque at 9V, giving a power factor (speed/60 x torque/100) of 0.375Nmrps. This compares with previous motors at 9V:

275rpm at 3.63Ncm for the PF M-motor = 0.166Nmrps

146rpm at 14.5Ncm for the PF XL motor = 0.353Nmprs

117rpm at 16.7Ncm for the NXT motor = 0.326Nmrps (same motor as XL)

920rpm at 2.48Ncm for the RC 5292 motor = 0.380Nmrps

Looks like a motor similar to 5292, geared down by another 3:1, fits the bill. It has the highest power factor at 9V.

Gearing of 6:1 instead of 3:1 would work if the first 2 gear ratios after the motor are 12:20:12 and 20:28.

Coincidentally the L-motor case size is similar the the motor part of 5292's case!

However, Philo also reported that the 5292 motor needed a lot of current. This would not be surprising for a 4x4 vehicle!

The limit for a PF IR receiver motor driver chip is 600mA total or 400mA per channel. Philo said the 5292 motor could draw 780mA.

I hope the IR receiver will be up to the job, otherwise I see Truck Trial vehicles needing multiple motor drivers, just like my heavy trains do!

Other pictures seem to show that the Servo motor is either 3M or 4M wide, 4M high including brackets at the bottom, and 6M long. The motor casing shows signs of inheritance from the XL motor in clip design but I don't think the servo motor is as wide as that. It is probable that there is a gear ratio from the servo motor shaft onto a shaft below it, aligned with the centres of the uni-joints to the steering racks, with the gears located in the plane between the front edges of the 5x7 brackets, to which the suspension links are attached. It is the 9M studless beams between these brackets that provide the benchmark for the gap to the motor and hence the motor case width. This is illustrated well by dokludi's MOC. Whilst a servo motor with lots of torque (like the XL motor) might be desirable, that would need a 5-wide case so it looks like the servo motor is based on a smaller motor unit, maybe the M-motor one. This should be compared with RC servos, whose power is not great. It would still be enough for its 4x4 steering role, and enough to move train points.

Mark

[sama]

About 9396, watching the video several times, all I can conclude is there is going to be retracting landing gear via mLa, opening/closing cargo door via mLa, opening/closing side doors maybe by hand (push/pull door that slide on an axle going through holes in beam), and rotating rotors via knob. All these functions are controlled through a four functions gearbox (1 for gear, 1 for cargo door, 1 for rotors, and maybe 1 for side doors). About the rotors, I'm beginning to think there will be no pitch because looking at the first picture below, there is no beam or link that goes up to interact with the swash plate to change the pitch. Also, the two controls in the cockpit seem to be right up against the blue seats, preventing them from going backwards. This means they could only go forward or back to its original spot (making cyclic pitch unlikely, the control has to go in all four direction to have it). Also, the rotors connected to the links, which are connected to two thin 1 by 2 liftarms, which are connected to an axle and pin connector perpendicular 3L with center pin hole seems to have a pin through the center and a axle down the bottom, making it immobile. That means the links cant move, making the pitch fixed. For the second picture, I just wanted to point out that there is a beam inside the body, maybe used to open the side doors or maybe, just maybe something to do with pitch for the rotors. But, I could be totally wrong with my interpretations and the helicopter has pitch and everything. Just one point to back up pitch for the rotors, the axle(s) that are circled in the first photo really shouldn't be there. If the gearbox is up top, then the gears used to rotate the blade should also be up top, making he axles needed up top. Maybe, this could a way to control pitch somehow, controlled by the lever. looking at the third photo, you can see how linear motion is turned into circular motion with the rod sliding back and forth, making the beveled gear (or knob) to turn. Then the gear could interact with another beveled gear (or knob), leading an axle up to the top to do something. Well this is my thought, and congratulations to anybody who made it this far!

First

Second

Third

[tduby]

I think the driveshaft you have circled is to operate the linear actuator that raises the nose gear. I'm starting to have doubts about there being any control for the rotor blades. I kind of doubt Lego would keep such a cool feature hidden so maybe the rotor blades are just fixed at the angle. but if they are fixed lego sure put a lot of exra pieces up there just to make it look more realistic.

[Dutch_EE]

What I can see are 2 or 3 levers. One on one or both sides of the cabine, I think they are used for the sidedoor(s) of the model. I also see a lever INSIDE the cabin. I would wonder what it would be used for if it wasn't used for pitch control.

[dhc6twinotter]

I think the levers on the sides of the cockpit are used to control the collective. It looks like there may be a joystick in front of the seat too, and if this is the case, then it may be to control cyclic. This is the control layout of real helicopters, plus real ones have "rudder" pedals to control the pitch of the tail rotor. Seeing the lever on the side and inside the cockpit gives me renewed hope that we will have both collective and cyclic control. But, then again, maybe the lever in the cockpit is just for appearance purposes.

[DLuders]

Using from Nico71's Helicopter as an example, are you looking for joystick control like this?

[Technic Gearhead]

That helicopter looks fantastic! I'm very much looking forward to that one.

[dhc6twinotter]

Using from Nico71's Helicopter as an example, are you looking for joystick control like this?

Yup, that's what I'd like to see for cyclic control, although it wouldn't tilt the entire rotor head. It would just change blade pitch.

Edited February 12, 2012 by dhc6twinotter