Eurobricks Citizen
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About 896gerard

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Lego Technic, modelling


  • Country
    The Netherlands

Recent Profile Visitors

1825 profile views
  1. For long, I've wanted a small strong mini Lego Technic motor, smaller than an M-motor. As I recently learnt how to draw Lego parts and had the opportunity to use 3D printed nylon (using laser sintering) , I decided to try a small motor as well. As the PU motor stuff is getting big and heavy, this is my response: a small easy-mountable motor with a case of only 5 by 2 by 2 studs. 70% of the motors in Lego Technic models don't have to be large. Only the mount of this tiny motor is 2x3 studs. The mount is tailor made for Technic applications: if you build often with M-motors you will know that an M-motor always must be connected to a 1L beam to ensure that the gears won't slip and to mount the M motor securely. The mount design of this new motor eliminates the need for the beam, so that's one stud saved already. Because the motor is only 2 studs wide, 3 mini motors can be in the space of 2 M-motors. Also, 3 mini motors take up the space of one XL motor.. The exterior design is derived from a PF M-motor, because I like the design and want to keep using the PF looks. This is still a work in progress as I need to mount a 9V connector and insert the inner electric motor(already in stock here). I also need to do some more painting and sanding. Nonetheless, the printed parts are quite accurate. I will give an update soon when the motor is working. The motor gets internal electrics that work up to 12V so also third party remote control bricks will be allowed to use their boost modes. My big hope is that TLG understands that we need small motors and remotes, not big ones. The length of 5 studs makes this motor very easy to put in all kinds of leftover spaces. Thanks for reading. I'm open to design improvements!
  2. Interesting to see this concept here, in 2015 I got this exact same idea and printed it on a home 3D printer. You can watch it in action below. Now, in 2020, print quality of 3D printers has massively improved and nylon is stronger than PLA. Based on my own PLA gear, think this nylon setup will handle your specified torque.
  3. Hi Konstrakt, I really appreciate your attempt at this theme. Your solution used complicated machinery. It seems that 'great' minds think alike, or not? I used a relatively 'simple' system as I had a car-like bodyshape in mind and with my wheel size, there wasn't much space left as the 90 degree swinging wheels take up a LOT of space. (roughly a car, back in 2014 my building skills were not that refined ;)
  4. Ehm they are currently handcrafted by me in my spare time. My brother does some of the metal work. It's a very small workshop I have with low production numbers. Do you think there is a real market for these guys? These are not Lego parts!
  5. It is very hard to do the printing yourself. A normal 'home' 3D printer is not accurate enough. This cilinder is made using SLS (selective laser sintering) printing techniques. This makes it very expensive. Cilinders start at €50 a piece, which is due to low numbers. When you make 10, the price will halve, but not much lower than that. After all, a cilinder with full metal inner workings is very strong but also.. expensive.
  6. I tested it with three motors and I tested it in the same direction as the cilinder movement. The fact that I find a higher strength in three cases and tested the force in the direction that the cilinder can exert most of its force gives me confidence that the XL actuator is really stronger than the L actuator. Sariels setup was different.. My XL actuators were also new, as I just ordered them on Bricklink. There's lots of factors that cause differences and if you measure in a different way, you can not always compare the results. In my day job I also have to do research and we always give a lot of attention to our measurement setup. That's why I spend so much time on the measurement setup in the video. In some measurements, setup is everything. But I invite everyone to do this measurement for him/herself and verifiy.
  7. Finally, after quite some hours of work, my video review I tried to learn some about sharp macro pics as well. The cilinders tested are listed below Here it is, the all-important result sheet: I put my conclusions in the video. There's a lot to think about when this table is considered. Driveshaft torque seems to be very important for the max. load before the internal clutch starts slipping. It might be also a good time to find out whether you have <2010 or >2010 actuators and where you used them in your MOCs..
  8. Does anyone know how the current linear actuators are coded? I learnt that 36x0 was week 36, 2010. But now, it's 2020. A crispy new actuator can come from 2019, week 20 so be called '20x9' while it is still a new actuator. Can someone who has a Technic set with recent actuators check the coding? That would be great help!
  9. Thanks a lot. This is exactly why I asked this on Eurobricks before I started. I think Sariels pneumatic measurement is setup correctly, with the cilinder pointing straight down. This saves me a lot of filming and editing.. However, it might be interesting to measure again and find out whether I get the same values with my relatively unused pneumatic parts, here in Holland .
  10. Very good suggestions! The goal of my current measurement is to measure mechanical linear actuators and use one large pneumatic cilinder to take a reference from another world. But as I see suggestions to rather measure pneumatic actuators, I might make a separate video for them. Hmm I never thought of that difference. But I guess this setup will work.
  11. Scroll down for video You all will know that new XL linear actuators are on sale for some time now. To my knowledge, there is no video or result that directly measures the exact weight that they can push away. So here we are, this is my measurement setup. It is a basically a Technic tower that can support more than 15 kgs in either Z direction. Should be plenty. A weighing scale of 5 kgs is below the pushing rods. As we speak, I'm doing the measurements. The photo below is very fresh.. I'm going to measure five types of actuators: The 'old' linear actuator sold before the 8043 fiasco. The improved linear actuator that was sold after 8043. The new XL linear actuator The large pneumatic actuator SURPRISE This is the first time my homebuilt Laser Sintered 3D printed linear actuator will be shown to the public. It features an inboard electric motor and all-steel inner workings. Should be more reliable and MUCH stronger than the old actuator. But will it be stronger than the XL actuator? Let's see. My question to you: can you think of more measurements to do on this setup? Because I have the setup now built and ready, any comparison will be best if it's measured with this exact setup. I'm open to suggestions!
  12. 896gerard

    Stud.io Noob Questions

    How to adjust the size of the 1:1 size guide of e.g. axles? Currently, the goal of my new building instruction is to print it on A5. But the only way to get correct size guides is to select a recommended format and A5 is not in the list. Is there a way around this?
  13. I fully agree. It seems like The Lego Group is listening to our needs. Look at the development of Power Functions models. At first, they only made tracked vehicles because the powertrain is more rubust, which fits TLG's requirements for child use. Then, when they saw that the adult community made motorized vehicles using differentials, they came up with the 9398 and 42030. Both had 4WD, a robust powertrain for child use. Then, when they saw the adult community makes a lot of rear wheel drive vehicles, it got them thinking. Maybe 2WD is buildable in a small Technic set. But... how to make it more robust for child (ab)use?? Hmmm... throw in a stronger differential. The same theory holds for gearboxes. We have seen some amazing sequential gearboxes (Sheepo .. ) but it got TLG thinking: "we need to do something with this. Let's design a new part that revolutionizes gearboxes". And they did. This intention to overengineer parts for child use gives us, the AFOL community, a lot of much stronger parts than before. But it only started when we built things that TLG thought were impossible before. So as a general message: when we are pushing the boundaries of our parts, LEGO is watching. When it becomes popular enough, they will come up with a way of implementing it in Technic sets and they will make stronger parts for it. How nice!
  14. Lastly, I did some thinking on custom Lego Technic parts. I tried to think of 7 rules or guidelines for new Lego Technic parts: The Seven Golden Criteria of custom Lego Technic parts: The part must have a general Lego Technic look -> OK The part must be fully compatible with Lego Technic -> OK The part should enable something in Lego Technic that was not achievable before with combining pure-Lego parts -> 2.4 GHz control with physical remote, WOW! The part must be connected to other parts with only Lego parts -> OK The look and strength of the part must adhere to the same high-quality standards as general Technic parts -> OK (but not yet sure of long term quality) Possible electronics must work with Lego Technic electronics and adhere to the same safety standards as pure-Lego parts. -> OK The part may not be a slight alteration of an existing Lego part -> OK So to answer all naysayers: when looked at seven very important criteria for a new Lego Technic part, it flies past all of them. I think we should welcome these remote control parts. They can be a great addition to an existing line of S-brick and BuWizz products while TLG gets some time to clear the mess they made by introducting the Control+ system..
  15. Thank you. I also get the pure vs not pure, meaning that building with Lego should be some kind of a challenge: you don't have the shape or parts you need but build it with Lego. Using a custom part can remove the challenge of building, i.e. a suspension can be fully 3D printed OR carefully engineered from pure Technic parts. This is kind of unfair, because designing parts for a specific function is much easier than using general non-specific parts for a specific function. To make it 'fair' again, I created this list. This pushes the challenge back into making 3rd party parts! Maybe then the name should not be 'rules', but 'guidelines'. Whatever. Thanks for your opinion! I'm planning a full length comparison video with the new XL type linear actuator. Stay tuned!