62Bricks

I built a "wireframe" to hold the elements of the solar/battery power source and get the weight and some basic dimensions. It weighs 489g and will move under solar input of a 250-Watt incandescent bulb. Next task is to load it up and see how much it can carry. That may set some limits on the power train, steering and differential. I'm planning some other functions, but they may end up being manual or pneumatic depending on how much I can eke out of the solar cell. It's geared very low, but speed is not the goal.

Ooh - a winch! That's an idea...

Thanks - My original idea was to use the storage battery from the solar set, but it weighs more than twice the rechargeable battery box. I'm going to do some tests to see what kind of load it can move and maybe go back to that if it looks like it can handle the weight. Ideally, I'd like to be able to have three modes - direct solar power to the motor, battery power to the motor, and solar power to the storage battery.

I want to make a solar-powered vehicle that has battery backup. I connected two PF switches to switch between power sources. It's a pretty simple mechanical solution - turning one switch on turns the other one off. If anyone has other ideas, I'm interested in hearing them. One of the design goals is to keep it lightweight so it can be driven directly by the solar cell, so the fewer parts the better.

Bear in mind that the dates Bricklink uses for parts are the release dates for the sets in which the part is inventoried. So it relies on the accuracy of the inventories. Many older parts are not in any inventories. The inventories are pretty accurate, and there are a few people who are actively tracking down old sealed sets to verify parts, but it is not uncommon to see a modern variant inventoried incorrectly in a set released before the variant existed (and vice versa - old variants inventoried in newer sets).

The bromine compound fire retardants used up until the mid- to late-1970s were polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs). After concern grew about toxicity, they were largely replaced by polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). These I believe were what LEGO used in the 1980s and 1990s. When they stopped using them (As I believe they have) I do not know. One could isolate bricks from certain time periods by the mold variation. For example, the old 2x4 bricks without cross supports were largely out of production by the mid '80s. Any yellowed white bricks of this variation would probably date to before 1985. The mold pip began appearing on the studs in the mid- to late-70s, so a white 3001 brick without cross supports and a stud pip would date within that approximate 1975-85 range. One with cross supports would be from the mid-80s or later. Here, one could possibly use the mold markings to narrow down the range, as they changed over time. In the early 2000s, LEGO included a copyright notice with the year on some bricks.

Interesting. No choking hazard warning, either. Incidentally, the "US" version includes labeling in French because of Canadian laws that require it.

I assume you are asking about modern sets, however it is interesting to note that Lego has changed the way it counts pieces over the years. Although I believe Lego now puts piece counts on all its boxes, this was not always the case. Only some markets required it (like the US) and for many places for many years there was no "official" count printed on the box or instructions. For a period in the 1970s, Lego sets sold in North America printed the number of "interlocking parts" on the box. As far as I have been able to determine, parts that did not connect with a standard knob or tube were not included in the count - flowers, for example. Also, minifigs often came partly assembled with just the legs detached. The head/torso assembly was counted as one part for the purposes of the part count on the box.

The atmosphere is thinner, yes, but not too thin to use. https://www.space.com/41023-mars-wind-power-landers-experiment.html

I have seen the streaking with light gray as well. And I recall seeing images from someone else who noticed that the streaks were actually in the brick before the treatment, but the difference in colors was so subtle it was not noticeable under normal light. So it may be that the chemicals causing the yellowing are not evenly distributed on the surface? Or not evenly mixed into the plastic? I wonder if it also happens to white pieces but just is not noticeable because they are white?

Thank you! Here is a draft of a new geometry for the walker leg:

Yep - I thought it was pretty clear from my posts that these are ideas, not submissions.

Another possibility is to adapt my Windwalker strandbeest model

I may use a walker mechanism like this wind-up version I made.

For the Mission to Mars contest I plan to build a vehicle specially suited for operation on the Martian surface. Some first thoughts: Use local energy sources, potentially Wind Solar Gravity Adaptable to the Martian terrain sandy/dusty surface scattered rocks slopes and hills Modular/configurable for different tasks and conditions

All good reasons why a simpler, consistent definition is needed. Sellers of used sets might not like it, but the simplest solution would seem to be that a complete set includes everything that was in the box, whether it was "left over" or not. Unfortunately, the approach of the Bricklink admins is mostly in the direction of making things more complex, not more simple. It should surprise nobody that the Lego hobby attracts people who are really into complex systems. But sometimes simple is best.

Actually, they are not considered part of a complete used set. That's the problem - Bricklink now has contradictory definitions of what an "extra" part is. As for why they made the change, I think it's because they want to encourage the growth of the big sellers who part out new sets in large numbers, so they want the regular item section to match the actual contents of the box as it comes off the shelf. So they decided that parts on sprues and multi-packs (the little separate bags with tools or accessories) should be considered "regular" parts so the part-out sellers don't have to split them up. And either they did not realize the effect this would have on the sellers of used sets, or they knew and didn't care. Either way, it's pretty clear that Bricklink is prioritizing the large sellers of new bricks over collectors and sellers of vintage parts.

A real-world issue has arisen because of Bricklink's change in inventory policy. https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1141811 As a response, Bricklink is now claiming that the set inventories have always only been "guides" and were never meant to be used for buying and selling complete used sets. It just gets weirder and weirder there. For years, both buyers and sellers have referred to the "regular items" section of the inventory when listing a used set as complete. Now that section includes extra parts that are not necessary to consider a set complete, but which buyers might reasonably expect to be included because they are listed in the regular inventory - like the expensive extra plumes and feathers in classic castle sets. So basically, the set inventories are now useless as any kind of reference for buyers and sellers. What's weirder is that Bricklink says it has always been that way: https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1141828

The slots on the underside of the older bricks are more squared off, where the newer ones are rounded. It's difficult to describe, but I'll see if I can add a photo later. One quick way to tell the difference is the axle hole in the oldest version was flush with the top of the brick, where later ones have a somewhat recessed hole.

I don't have one of the engine pieces handy to play with, but there are a few things you might try: Substitute three 2x2 round plates for the round brick. The extra surface contact with the studs might be enough to keep it secure. The 2x2 round brick has been redesigned a couple times. The original version had a different design on the underside. It may give you a stronger connection. Try one of the transparent colors, too. They sometimes grip more strongly. You could try inserting a Technic bush in between the four studs inside the engine and using a longer bar inserted into it. You would not be able to attach anything to the studs because the bush would be in the way, but they fit very snugly, usually, and it might be strong enough to hold the cone assembly.

Interesting spin that China is putting on the story (and the BBC apparently is just repeating without checking?) "Police in China have uncovered a gang accused of manufacturing and selling $30m (£23m) worth of counterfeit Lego." A "gang?" Really? Makes it sound like a few thugs molding fake bricks in a secret back room. They're a big manufacturing plant. "In October 2018, the Shanghai police found that Lepin building blocks available on the market were extremely similar to that of Lego," police said. October 2018? Really? Wasn't it about three of four years ago when they started flooding Alibaba? And they just "discovered" it?

psst... LEGO education

Single-use disposable plastic is where the regulation is starting, because that is the low hanging fruit. The plastics that are polluting the oceans are not only straws and grocery sacks, however. It is also plastic from many long-life products like buckets, fishing nets and floats, etc. as well as microplastics that break down elsewhere and make their way into the ocean. We used to use all kinds of materials that were once thought to be ideal for long-life applications - like lead, asbestos and mercury. Health and environmental standards changed, however, and the products using these materials had to change. Regulation of plastic has already started. It's hard to imagine what Lego would be made of other than plastic.

Any challenge to Lego's existence is probably not going to come from betting on the wrong IP license. It is probably much more fundamental than that - they sell plastic. Most plastic is made with petroleum, a finite resource with a volatile market heavily entwined in world politics with some shady players - Venezuela, the US, Saudi Arabia, etc. And yes - Lego says it will one day switch over to plant-based plastic that does not use petroleum, but it will still be plastic. Plastic itself is being recognized as a pollutant, because it breaks down into tiny particles and floats forever in large patches in the oceans. Some places are now banning some plastic items, like grocery sacks and drinking straws. Will we ever ban plastic entirely? Seems unlikely, but it might be taxed heavily, or its production limited or regulated to the point that it becomes very expensive for non-essential products. Like toys.

I believe minifig hands are made from nylon, which is a more flexible material. Some of the older clip plates were also made from nylon.