Attika

There isn't a single reason that justifies for you to be humble about this.. Such a beauty (I've seen the pics b4 they gone)

Thanks

I see. Sorry it wasn't obvious at first glance. I tend to loose plastic parts. Not the digital ones. :-)

Is the left side of your picture represents your understanding of my concept?

Honestly. I didn't think of that. Probably this is how my brain protests against TLG's very unsystematic part releases. Anyway, now I had the oportunity to do so, I feel it would be way over the limits of the very material we working with. The wheel would be about twice the diameter. In the cubical nature of 3d physics, the weight would be unbeareble for the current setup with the planetary hub. Not to mention the framing in the wheel that has to be bigger, therefore stronger and of course heavier. And this is just the wheel. When we get to the chassis on the same principal requires more material, more motors, more buwizzes and that becomes too heavy for the wheels.....and the cycle starts over. I have a strong feeling that with this first iteration I (accidentally) have found that very fine balance between size and weight that still can get some speed. Not to mention sequels usually ruin things. Just look at Love and Thunder... :-D

I hope to see it in your future builds. :-) If you mean the adjustment to wheelbase, that I refered in the video. using 3x2 rockers gives a more "agressive" ackermann effect, using 4x2 has a milder outcome. So generally the distance between the link and the pivot of the rocker is the key in this question. I've downloaded and built that mechanism since you posted. It is a clever way to get the result in that build indeed. Your suggestion to use the new 3x1 socket pieces would make the offset rim usage practically impossible and since the main principal rely on the very specific placement of the rack between the midline of the axle and the pivotline of the steering link makes it impossible to build an driven front axle at least an elegant one. Beside that it requires fraction of stud lenghts as you rightly pointed out, hence fine tuning it would be a nightmare. Apart from these nuances is very similar. :-) Thanks for pointing on that solution. I own that set, but I did not remember this specific solution in it. Lego had more purpose oriented solutions for ackermann in the set 8880 and 8865 (if I'm not mistaken on the set number)

Impressing you is quite an achievement. One could say it's impossible, but here we are. I'm glad you like it, thanks for the feedback. In case you guys make out something of the records made there, I'll be honored if you post it here.

Not my strongest side, which makes it quite a compliment. Thanks The keyword is the effort. With age, I feel like the treshold what is worthy to manufacture content around is growing. (It's a fancy way to say I'm getting lazier) Anyway, this topic has reached it, the crawler videos are kinda effortless and the algorithms are punishing me harshly for this stance. Deservedly so, I must say. The front side manadgement is something I'm proud to come up with. (last minute of the video) That gives us a new type of freedom in the application of the geometry. But to keep up the hopes, sometime this week I'll tear down the trial truck in the front of the camera as it has a few tricks up in it's sleeves, allthough it will be more divisive due to my edgy use of our beloved plastic.

Hello good people of Eurobricks, I came out of the depth of my offline existence to share an idea. First a disclaimer: It is possible that what you see here is not new, I'm just being a lazy person, did not really dig up the internet to find out before I posted the video and wrote this topic. So as many times, inspiration came from the RC industry, where I discovered a rocker based mechanism being used to create ackermann geometry. The established method which we (I) used to use in our builds (based on wheelhub extension) I find, to put it mildly, flawed. In my case, I like to build with offset rims (defender and 1:8 supercar ones). Unfortunetelly this combo really limits the options how to apply afformentioned method. Hence I've started to chew that rocker based idea and to my pleasure it has shaped to a presentable concept that might be useful in future builds of ours. As one video can say more than a thousand words, let me link it below and if there is any question remains, I'm obliged to discuss it below. Yours sincerely.

Hi Nikola, This is the only version of the wheel. I've built it, it did work, so there wasn't an urge to further optimise it. Strange question. There is 3 different type of answers to that comes into my mind: 1 Smartypants type: The bigger the wheel, the larger obsticle it can clear. 2 Arrogant type: Cos u r a genius and we aren't... 3 statistical typeThe last places were for people like me, who melted the axles b4 get through the finish line. And answering your deleted question: It is nearly 3 kg of abs with substantial speed. I feel like the current setup is very near to he limit where the material and connections still can handle the physics of it. More motors, more buwizzes make it heavier and probably faster, increasing the momentum. And I'm sure that is the point where parts start to break.

I'm busted. Yep, long time ago, but Fluffy never had this problem. The only care it requires is on the side of the body. A connector slips out every now and then. If you watch the video, on some footage its visible. Once you see it, you can't unsee it. It has a cumulative 2-2.5 hours in it, so in lego therms I can call that a long range test period. One thing is sure, it doesn't like snow. Took it out this winter and in 5 second shoved all the snow on the top of the buwizz units. So did I.... The only way to "break" the wheels if I hit a curb, wall, or anything biggy with high speed. Hence there is no off road footage (Imean rocks and bigger obsticles), the grassland is its real home. A golf course would be paradise. Yes. And decided not to do. As you see on the video, on grass it has pretty good traction, but I'm sure due to the size and speed, if there was any more traction, all the sideway forces would come down to the wheelhub. This way it can slip those lateral forces out and no bricks get harmed.

Indeed,it was hard to find a fitting box for trasporting it to and from the exhibition... Heart warming worrds from a living legend... I am humbled. Elephant? If that was the autocorrect, it really knows it's ways it is all black on the real one, so I made a rainbow render, hope it helps.

Hah! Thx! Sure. I remember measuring some 18 cm (the model is on the AMTS show, away from me) , but the studio model info says 20.3. Being abarrel shape can explain this x-file I suppose. Then there are two of us now... I was trying to avoid claiming anything like this, as it felt so obvious after the idea appeared, I was sure it is already out there somewhere. I still hold this belief.. Thanks Sir.

Hello there, it's been a while.... I wasn't entirely inactiv in the last couple of years, but I had a technical difficulty to make videos. Without videos there's no point to post anything, so there it is,a big chunk of can't do attitude... However it has changed. The subject of this topic is on an exhibition now and I was forced to overcome my lazyness and make that camera roll again. To the subject: How did I get this low? I've bought 2 sets of this Audis back in the day as I've found it being a good value for money as a partpack. As a sideproduct I had enough of the curvey panels to get physical on an old idea, the barrel like structure you see on the thumbnail above. Luckily my past granted me an unlimited supply on connectors. As long as it existed only in my head, I was quite sure it is too flimsy and fragile to bare any load, let alone to coop with the centrifugal force that comes with the rolling motion. While rolling around the empty barrel on my desk I figured I could use a somewhat symmetric structure to apply an inward tension on the barrel and that's gonna keep it from falling apart. The fact that the barrel made out of 16 panels made it kinda obvious what symmetry should I use. I put my bet on a 4 spoke solution. The barrel would give a 15.5x15.5 stud square to work with, so I've used a 15x15 structure to reach that inward tension. It is well within the reversible flex of abs, yet enough to keep the circle from pulling apart The next challenge was the attachment of the wheelhub. There is an interlocking frame that holds the sprocket wheel in the center of it.... And so to prove the concept, I had to build a whole chassis around it. For those of you who can benefit from a studio file, here it is: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uX-avOl3x6DPfGcx_IF1nKzRtAwWqvu6/view?usp=sharing As a sidenote, the io model is a simplified version when it comes to the chaos I've built in the mid section of the frame to avoid the twisting of it. Also I took advantage on the natural flex of the connector body which could not be replicated in the rigid studio enviroment. But I can assure you, no parts were harmed. Some of the data: It is about 70 cm long and 50ish wide, has the ready to run mass of 2.7kg. Uses 4 buwizz motors to drive, a PU L motor to steer and 2 buwizz 3units to get the sparks. Originally I've built it using the slow outputs but on the 2nd testrun I had to try the fast outputs on the motors and it took it like a champ. Although it altered the driveshaft geometry slightly, it had next to no effect on the practical usage. I can't emphasise enough that this car is only a tool to prove the concept of the wheel here. To keep the buwizz units from shuting down, the max output is reduced to 92 percent. This setup gave me fun to play dinamics and a very generous 10 minute + runtime. Way more on both than what I've expected at the begining. The chassis I suppose speeks for itself, nothing out of the ordinary. The lower wishbones have a wider base towards the chassis to deal with the frontal forces. No drivetrain -no loss of efficiency on gears. One thing to mention to fellow builders: I had so much room to work with inside the wheel, when I was building the front suspension, I couldn't stop smiling how effortless to do a "proper job". Meaning caster, camber, and ackermann geometry... Nothing else really comes into my mind, but I'm sitting on this for a half a year now,so I might just be numb about otherwise important details. I'm happy to answer your further questions. Thanks for your attention and feel free to give a honest feedback. My psychiatrist prepared me for situations like this. PS: If you find the panels on the wheels looking suspicious, that's the tape I applied on them to save them from the scratches (as much as possible).

Thanks for the video. It certainly sounds like the buwizzes are overloaded. For a start I'd experiment by changing gear ratios to make it slower. In case it solves the problem, there is your answer. 2 kg is quite a weight for the current gear ratios.