Jump to content

PeterF

Eurobricks Citizen
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    100

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by PeterF

  1. PeterF
    We built the layout I posted in #174 some time ago. It was all raised on duplo plates (of which you need a lot). The play in the layout is reduced by this, but there is enough left to make it fit without too much strain. We almost ran out of both straight and curved track pieces, but the layout is certainly worth the trouble. Really fun to watch! The longer link below worked quite well. There is a little bit more friction, but not too much. The longer links are useful I think, because the alternative uses more track pieces again. We would not have been able to build it. I like your solution too, Guy. And a great layout too. I might try to get some of the older black pieces at some point. What would happen if a motorized train comes onto the converger from the other side (a diverger I guess). Would that give us a random binary number or would it derail?
  2. PeterF
    I made something similar a while ago. It also was very difficult to control, so I ended up using the nxt brick and motors, with small pc program for remote control.
  3. PeterF
    Very impressive! Does it really work that reliably, or did you select the best parts for the movie?
  4. PeterF
    Oh yes I see, thanks. From the instructions it seems it's not actually used as a ball-joint though. Maybe a lever of some kind? I did decide to keep a few of these btw, as I would like to try them out sometime.
  5. PeterF
    So it has an automatic clutch mechanism :-)
  6. PeterF
    Very cool so far! Doesn't that saw blade have a pinhole in the middle? How do you transfer power to rotate it? Just friction from a pin with friction ridges? If the body works out as well, this will be a very nice model indeed!
  7. PeterF
    This picture is also much better. That's also progress ;-) Actually it looks to me almost like it has a face. This friendly fella could be in the cars movie. I like it!
  8. PeterF
    The image at 20 seconds (showing the drive train) had me laughing out loud. And this was also the first time ever that my wife showed interest in a LEGO forum post. :-) BTW, the comment above about grinding teeth is for me a close second to the Best. Comment. Ever.
  9. PeterF
    Hello Robert, Thanks for your input. I saw some of your webpages before, but they keep improving . Using wheels from a dismantled duplo loc would work better for sure, but the design by zarli actually works very well for bridges. (not my picture) However, (in my case, and only if I use front wheel drive) there is not enough weight on the front wheels to drive up the bridge. Rear wheel drive or four wheel drive works like a charm. Problems I am having are at the switches. When the train comes from the forking side, it just wants to continue straight on and sometimes derails. I think it might have to do with a lack of a differential or conical wheels. The performance also suffers a lot on the curved tracks. I see now (on your site) that the modern switches have traction ridges on both sides, which is another indication that this might be the problem. Btw, I should mention that derailing occurs more frequently at higher speeds (not surprising).
  10. PeterF
    Hi Guy, The link shown seems reliable. I did not have any problems with a duplo train running over it quite a number of times. Different story with the PF train, but a second version of the latter also behaves much better. I replaced the AA battery box by an AAA battery box which I also could place much lower. I'm still not sure whether I should make it 4 wheel drive, back wheel drive (front wheel drive gives problems going up the bridge) or even right wheel drive (no diffs needed). Any ideas? I'll try to build the max run layout next time the duplo train and track comes out of the box. I had a quick look at how to build it out of (a finite number of) duplo tracks. I think we have enough track to build this: As you can see, it doesn't really fit everywhere, but I think there will be enough play. Curious to see if the longer link will work as well.
  11. PeterF
    I just supported this great model choosing $100-$199. Is that realistic you think? You know what I would like? For LEGO to sell a separate "remote control PF set" (much like 8293). Then they could sell more models without these components at much better prices. And those interested could fit the model out with such a remote control set. What would a stripped down Volvo set go for? Sorry for going off-topic. Again your model is stunning and I would buy it instantly.
  12. PeterF
    Not quite yet ;-) I made this alternative. I did not think it would be that easy, but it turns out that 2 round bricks and a few technic pieces are all you need. The forces are so low that no further bracing is needed. http://imgur.com/rob7yvv http://imgur.com/iKF0aev http://imgur.com/5pFRezP That's what I'm doing :-) Still some problems though. Mostly derailing at the points.
  13. PeterF
    Oh, duh I should have gotten that.
  14. PeterF
    Very unique build, nice. I also recognized the tune from a commercial, but did not know the song itself. I don't quite understand the function of the axles and bevel gears, could you explain?
  15. PeterF
    Great stuff! How reliable is it? I mean does it ever get stuck or derail? Not a trains guy myself, but slowly turned into one by the duplo trains of my son and trying to think of ways to make it more fun for both of us. :-)
  16. PeterF
    Yes, that's what I was afraid of, but I just wanted to check. Thanks!
  17. PeterF
    Hi Guy, The max run layout is certainly entertaining, and your animations are great! As for the equivalent circuit, I'm affraid I was not very clear. I was actually wondering whether it is possible to create a circuit using only lazy points and sprung points (i.e. Duplo points without kragle ;-) that is equivalent to, or at least acts as, two linked lazy points. I also had a first try building a power functions locomotive for duplo tracks. The wedge-belt crown gear design by zarli (linked above) works very well. The wedge-belts provide enough traction on the flat pieces and the gears take over on the bridge. However, on the curved tracks the performance suffers a lot (I guess that is to be expected without connical wheels or differentials), and worse, it derails quite easilly at the points. Not only if it goes too fast, but also if it goes too slow. My locomotive does need a redesign though, so maybe that will improve. For now I kept the wheel base equal to the duplo locomotive. The width also, but that is a bit more tricky. But the biggest problem is the AA battery box mounted 5 studs or so above the axles. So it is very top heavy.
  18. PeterF
    Hi Guy, I like your suggestion for the double-backed two stage counter a few pages ago. I've also been looking at your website to see if some of the computational layouts can also make fun layouts for play or display. The inverted lazy point seems fun. With three destinations and a central switch hub the train will visit ABACABAC... It might also solve all points visited problems, which are created by lazy points. Also, the dual bypassed lazy point effectively acts as a sprung point right? I probably won't be connecting any points for now, but I was wondering whether there is an equivalent circuit for this?
  19. PeterF
    Hi Jim, Thanks for your reply. I think I'll follow your advice and leave them for now. Better than gathering a whole bunch of parts that I will never use. After some looking around rebrickable, I also found that the ball joints are not really used in technic MOCs. I was a bit surprised by that actually. I know we also have the small ones for the steering links, and the big one that can hold a universal joint. But still...
  20. PeterF
    Hello everyone, I'm a new member to the forum (although I have been reading it for a while), and in need of some advice. A few years ago studless technic drew me back to LEGO after a long dark age. First just to try it out, but I was sold pretty quickly and since then I have collected all flagships since 2007. So I have quite a lot of lift arms, gears, axles, power functions, pins etc. but little else. I really enjoy building MOCs, but mostly just functional models with limited visual modeling. However, I have been thinking about starting that too (seeing all the TC6 entries does inspire). Via a good friend and fellow AFOL (but not into technic) I got the opportunity to go through a large batch of LEGO he is looking to sell. First of all I collected all the longer (studded) technic beams, since I don't have enough of those, and cool tires, you can never have too many ;-), that was easy. But about a lot of other parts I'm not sure, and I don't just want to take everything. So here come the questions. Which LEGO parts that generally do not appear in recent technic sets are most useful for MOCing? First some functional parts: Large ball joints (attached to both studded and studless parts). These seem quite useful, but are they strong enough? And is the friction not a problem? That obviously depends on the exact use, but if you can share any experience would be very helpful. This other type of joint, I did not see before: This round piece (maybe for a huge universal joint ;-) Very short studded technic beams (1L, 2L) with 1 or 2 pin holes or an axle hole. I have not used the studded building technique enough to know how often you need these. Then some parts that seem useful for modeling, but are they really? E.g. this bracket or hinge. And finally, purely visual parts Is it useful to stock those up, or is the probability of having the right one too small anyway, and should you only find them when you know you need them. Are there other parts I should be on the lookout for? Both very specific and/or general advice would be much appreciated. Thanks a lot! Peter
  21. PeterF
    Exactly and all of this with one motor. And no cheating with a nxt brick or anything. Just amazing.
  22. PeterF
    Akiyuki really is in a leage of his own isn't he? So inventive and so precise ... Nice to see the digital model.
  23. PeterF
    Hi Guy, The layout was functionally identical to your suggestion as replicated by Peter Nolan. From memory I think it was like this: But I realize now that the following uses the same amount of track: both use less then your suggestion, but it is not related to the 'flower' pattern. Also, whether the right-most point is new or old doesn't really matter I think. - As well as flags and balls you can make the point position more ‘visible’ by adding stickers with a ‘0’ and a ‘1’ onto the flat red part so each is revealed or hidden as the lever is moved. Yes that would be much easier, I just didn't realize that connection yet. Also, I really like GBCs :-) I will also let you know if the wedge-belt + crown gear is a good solution. But I don't have any of them yet, so it might take a while. BTW, I really like your solution to the linked duplo points. Even though I usually cringe when lego and glue are mixed ;-)
  24. PeterF
    Hello guys, Some time ago, while building a duplo layout for my son (then 1.5 years old; mostly destroying whatever I made ;-), I also realized that I could make a binary counter by combining old and new points. With the train visiting part of the track each round, part only once every 2 rounds, and part once every 4 rounds. At first I also thought that it could be a clock of sorts, but the problem there is that it takes the train much less time to go from 000 to 001 than from 011 to 100. So it would not count evenly. Also, even though my layout used fewer tracks than the one shown, by curling round in a kind of flower shape, the train kept stopping before completing the count to 7 (or actually 8). Before reading this thread (thanks to all contributors!), I did not realize that the new points themselves already show the current count (doh!!), so I thought about somehow making it visible. I came up with the idea of having a bridge with one or more wagons lined up, and a switch direction brick (intelli-train) on top. The locomotive would then push the wagon over the bridge and return to the computations. Or maybe something with balls or flags, but I never sorted that part out. My son is now 6 years old, ... no just kidding he will be 2 in a couple of months. And although he still really enjoys destroying everything, he is also beginning to put tracks together for the first time :-) So, we have been playing with the trains again, and I have had a few more ideas. Although my son is still way too young, I would like to make some of the train and/or track remote controlled. I was thinking of using technic and power functions to make the lazy points remote controlled, and maybe also make a locomotive (either with power functions or mindstorms). First attempts show that it is quite difficult to find wheels that have enough traction (for the bridge and for pulling) without being too wide (for the points and bridge). These gears work reasonably well http://www.bricklink...tem.asp?P=32498, but not great. I found this picture while searching around for good wheels: http://www.youbrick....oduplo/p7270231. Does anyone have experience and/or suggestions? Regards, Peter
  25. PeterF
    I Hope I won't be 'banned' from voting, since this is my first post :-) I've been following the contest for a while, but as a visitor. 38: 10 21: 6 26: 4 1: 3 23: 2 37: 1 Top 3 was quite clear to me (although not the order). I could only choose 3 others though, while I wanted to give points to at least 9 others. What a great list of MOCs!
×
×
  • Create New...