z3_2drive

Eurobricks Knights
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    794

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by z3_2drive

  2. Posted

    Well you have to remember that by continuous I meant under high load, when I was forcing my hand on a wheel to slow down the motor significantly, and in a crawler like he has in mind, the motors will be geared down, so it will be harder to even reach this load, such as climbing a hill or obstacle that's so steep that is slows the vehicle to a near stop for no more than 10 seconds, generally less. Of course driving around with the motors regularly under high load is life-shortening, regardless of the voltage :wink:

  3. Posted · Edited by z3_2drive

    Sorry for not being able to do this earlier, but I have results! Using an 11 volt battery, a single L motor consumes 11W (Watt=Volt x Amp) continuously - which means under high load, such as in a crawler. When stalled, it consumes 22W. So there are three main conclusions I came to.

    1) You will be better off buying a 3s battery pack regardless of using RF or IR. It is more efficient and there is less risk of damaging electronics since the DC/DC converter won't be necessary anymore.

    2) I like your idea and I think it will work, but you will have to test it on your own. Any electronics between the battery and the motors is at risk, such as the IR receiver and the converter. The 25W rating on your converter is the absolute maximum, so if it stalls at 22W for more than a couple seconds it could overheat the converter or it will shut itself down, but I don't know if it has this feature.

    3) If you use two motors, then the power doubles, and this is where it's tricky. If it stalls, which would be 44W, the converter or IR receiver will shut down, which one will shut down first, that you will have to test. Also, high load will be 22W, so just watch for overheating.

    Other info:

    • These are the batteries I use in my 3s pack.
    • If you use RF similar in capability to the one in this topic, the converter will be the weakest link. If you also buy a 3s battery, then all of the risks stated above will be avoided, and the strength of the model/the motors themselves will be the limit.

  6. Posted · Edited by z3_2drive

    I tried to incorporate nicjasno's custom hubs to get the most strength, but it was either too bulky or the steering pivot would be too far from the wheel, so I went with his original idea shown in the 'LPEpower episode 3' video as a rough prototype. I reinforced the design a little and I will be using the Super Street Sensation's wheels. This setup will also be a good size to incorporate the pneumatic cylinder into, though it will still be a tight squeeze.

    The top arm will be one of these 98565.jpgmost likely.

    Here are a few photos:

    dscn2461.jpg

    dscn2462.jpg

    dscn2464.jpg

    dscn2466.jpg

    One spacer was necessary:

    dscn2467.jpg

    I think the benefits outweigh the risks when not using the stronger hub piece on the front axle, but I will definitely use them for the rear. I recall my V1 chassis broke some 5.5 axles at high speeds. Now I need to come up with a good setup for the rear, centered around the custom hubs and the pneumatic cylinder. Feel free to offer any better ideas and tips!

  10. Posted · Edited by z3_2drive

    I have a thorough understanding of various suspension geometries, and I'm already figuring out some prototypes, I'm just looking to get people's knowledge of any special parts out there to get these angles without cutting anything. I love nicjasno's videos but I've never seen anyone make a proper A-arm without using glue. About scale, I'll try to find a way to use the 8448 wheels. If not, then the wheel/tire combination of the 42000 grand prix racer. This was my last RC car-

    dscn2259.jpg

    I wasn't able to get any advanced features at the rear other than a swaybar and only used caster at the front to maximize the car's strength/simplicity, but this time I want to get the full package while still being purist (other than the custom electronics). I'll be posting any mock-ups I make in the next few days...constructive criticism is encouraged :wink:

    EDIT: I'll probably end up using the large ball joint pieces because they have the most strength and many mounting options.

  11. Posted · Edited by z3_2drive

    In search of suspension ideas I noticed a couple MOCs that I never put on EB, so I decided to share them with you! These MOCs are from the old 'Technic Challenge' days, both buggies, and one is a large scale RC MOC with unique suspension and a tubular body while the other is a simple blend of studded/studless with suspension and steering.

    MOC #1-large RC offroad buggy

    dscn0288.jpg

    One of my only MOCs which had appealing bodywork. Also one of the few MOCs to have reliable independent trailing arm suspension.

    dscn0285.jpg

    dscn0284.jpg

    dscn0277.jpg

    My second MOC is a small non motorized stadium buggy in which I blended studded and studless constructions. The features included suspension, HOG and wheel steering, and a sealed (no holes for pieces to fall through) open-able trunk where i stored minifig tools.

    dscn0383.jpg

    dscn0378.jpg

    dscn0381.jpg

    dscn0380.jpg

    dscn0377.jpg

    I have a couple more MOCs' photos stored on another computer so, if anything, I'll post them here.

  13. Posted

    AFAIK those shock absorbers are not really usefull, because their mechanism acts like the one in a chemical pen. Once you press them they go together and a second press pushes it back apart.

    Thanks so much for this! I have one and I thought it was defective, you just saved me a lot of trouble :innocent: Is there any reason why they work like this? Well now I will settle for custom large pneumatic cylinders (open them up, remove one of the rubber rings and place a spring inside).

  14. Posted · Edited by z3_2drive

    Hello, I have been busy this summer and haven't done much building, and the offroad project on my desk will most likely be taken apart because of some doubts of the eventual performance.

    After spending some time in Silicon valley with NSLC, I noticed the many Tesla vehicles in the area, and was inspired to make another road-going vehicle. This time I want to focus on making a proper suspension setup based on either the Tesla Roadster or Model S, as well as a slightly different drivetrain in order to make room for the rear axle setup.

    The reason I made this topic is to get some useful info about parts I could use in order to recreate these setups as realistically as possible while still retaining strength, as I hope to use them in an RC MOC capable of 19+ kmh. Here are the photos:

    Lotus/Tesla Roadster front suspension:

    195fddnwghls3jpg.jpg

    frsuspen.jpg

    Model S front suspension:

    fe_9171213_600.jpg

    fe_9171214_600.jpg

    fe_9171216_600.jpg

    It doesn't have to look exactly the same, but rather perform the same functions. As for scale, the shock absorber I plan to use is this one: 48912c01.jpg

  17. Posted · Edited by z3_2drive

    zshelbycobrabybiczzz-p12.jpg

    IMAGE_4408.png

    In comparison, looks like you got all the dimensions right so far (did I miss anything about making a right-hand drive version?). Yes the resemblance is definitely there, especially once you attach the iconic headlights.

    I suggest you try to build the bottom frame next in order to figure out how to replicate the interior, engine, and undersides of the bodywork.

    EDIT: there are some hidden hinges where the windshield is, but I'm no good at reverse engineering model team style models, I wish you luck!

  19. Posted

    Well, what do we define as flight? A glider or a skeleton similar to zblj's which stay in the air for a few seconds (glider is actually stable) is probably as far as we can go. True flight is simply impossible with the array of parts/motors we currently have. Zblj gave a perfect example-when trying to make it more stable, it gained too much weight and couldnt create enough lift. Giving it more power would simply make it less stable again. And this is all with an external power source. What's more interesting is creating small non motorized flying contraptions that could actually have a good amount of stable flight, I think some examples were already mentioned. BUT, I don't discourage builders to try, because it would be interesting to see how long their project could hover uncontrollably before smashing into the ground :sweet: