Ivan_M

One more thing I would like to get help with - when I put subassembly into buffer exchange I end up with " build 2x" on page with subassembly, because it is in fact used two times. The trick with PLI IGN doesn't work. Any solution for this? Thank you

Thank you for simple yet effective guide. I actualy find it easier to do the buffer exchange later in LPub rather than in LDCad inserting the commands. I have few remarks that might help other people: 1) every part after 0 BUFEXCHG A STORE command is considered as buffered, so place parts that have to disapper at the end of step 2) you have to hide the part from PLI in the step where the part is in final position So the example might look like this: 0 STEP // here are parts that are placed in normal manner 0 BUFEXCHG A STORE // parts below are placed temporary 1 71 260 -40 -200 -1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -1 32054.dat 1 71 -180 -40 -200 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 32054.dat 0 STEP 0 BUFEXCHG A RETRIEVE // hide all parts in buffer 0 !LPUB PLI BEGIN IGN // remove the parts from PLI 1 71 60 -40 -200 -1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 -1 32054.dat 1 71 -60 -40 -200 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 32054.dat 0 !LPUB PLI END

Oh nice, another dragline and in system bricks! What is the scale? I don't like the cabin very much, while the quarter round tiles are nice, they do not suit the original much, they are too thick. How about flex axle or rigid tube? I would also change the mesh at the back, the solid wall behind it is not very appealing.

I didn't mean to use the towball with shaft in your wheel hub, just a general tip, I was fidling with it and realized that it might be useful, sometimes the structure is very small so a pinhole "wasted" for towball is not good, ths part solves that

I like how the suspension arms are locked on the hub. By the way if you will ever need towball that is held in place much firmly try part below inside cross hole, it is esp. strong connection together with pin with axle hole

Thank you for the experience and for the link, we have finaly some more information. 500mA doesn't sound bad, nor superb, it is something I have expected. Of course provided that the batteries are not fake and capable of that capacity.

Never call anything "final", before you test it out throughly. So I had build boom in full length and glory - 6 wide, 7 high, 66 studs long, 4 section, almost direct copy of this boom from Nick Barrett: from this crane: http://www.moc-pages.com/moc.php/443667 It looked like this: Boom 7x6 4-section It works very smooth when short, reasonably smooth when 30 studs long, but impossible to extend when 66 studs long using PF motor ( VERY geared down). The problem is 3rd section made of smaller panels. It bows significantly because it is build from small parts next to each other. It is difficult to describe precisely, but the section is not flat, but curved. This creates a lot of friction when it slides in or out of the 2nd stage, because it have to bend to opposite direction. I have damaged several parts trying to extend the boom by string and finally decided to rebuild it. I would like to see how Nick's boom performed, I don't think that he was able to extend it using string only, without the help. Maybe I'm doing something wrong. I have to say that the fully extended boom looked more than impressive, total height was around 240 studs (~192 cm). So it was clear that I have to do something about that and obvious solution was to a) reduce section to 3, b) remove the section with most friction. I have left the first and second section as is, only reducing width by 1 stud as it wasn't needed. The 3rd section is left out and former 4th section is made bigger to fit into 3 brick high panel. I have also added pulleys to 2nd section end and front and to 1st stage front so the string can slide easily. Final boom is 5 studs wide, 7 high, 66 long, extends to ~180 studs (144 cm). Not as impressive as 4-stage, but still nice. It looks like this: Boom 5x7 - 3 stage I also had to totally change lifting cylinder, the string operated one wasn't strong enough and string tend to "cut" into parts when it slides over them without support of pulley. It is nothing different that good old rack and worm gear, held together by some plates. Works like a charm. It is a little bit too wide compared to 5-wide boom, but that is lego.. 20181029_233900 You can also see some basic structure that will form superstructure, I have three L motors there - one for slewing - worm gear to 20t bewel and 12t bewel to turntable, other one for rising boom - 12t bewel to 20t, then worm on rack, last one for boom extension, with worm to 8t and second seto of worm to 8t. Ther will be 4th motor as well for winch. Video of the boom is here, with some surprise at end: Boom fully extended: Boom 7x5 3-section

Thank you. The air tank will not help, the delay is partly due to various length of tubbing and mainly due to different friction of cylinders, some are more than 20 years old. I have tested the drivetrain with 2kg of load and it driven fine, you can see it on previous page. Oops, thank you, I have to keep that in mind.

Well I of course don't know how much other builders get from selling instructions, but the problem with your builds are that you sell LDD file only, this is always big obstacle because most people cannot build from 3D file and the generator from LDD is rubbish, esp. for complex snot or technic builds. I have 3 mocs for sell and they basicly generate enough cash to cover my BL orders and that is enough for me.

Premium instructions for large builds are of course niche, your models are size-wise and price wise good balance, but I think SW is oversaturated and very difficult to sell as there are many other options of the same model in many different scales, part counts and either for free and paid as well. And such people are target of studio, aren't they? Simple way how to make alternate model easily. Import the parts from certain set into pallet so you don't have to look for anything, build it, make instructions, publish. How can it fall into niche of niche? This is pure mainstream.

I don't think so, just take a look at rebrickable, there are many new creation every day, even very complex ones. I also have 11 models there, each with thousands views and many downloads. As for the rest - it is matter of habit. I have came out of my dark age two years ago, just when the first open beta of studio was fresh. I had made one model in LDD before trying studio and the difference between the two was so huge - LDD seemed to me as the worst program then. I can now make 2000+ parts technic models in studio very quickly, already divied into steps and groups. I agree studio needs polishing, it is still very fresh program, instruction maker is there for 2 months only so it is necessary to take that in mind.

The second pair of racks finally arrived so I could test the whole setup of outridges, see them in action in video: The problem is that the rear outridges are driven from front and the friction is quite high in whole system resulting in jerky movement. A second motor to power them would be better

Weekends are favourable to building so I have some progress of cabin: I have made the front from tiles and slopes because the technic panel is just too rough. It also allowed me to put there screen wipers and front hitch.

Thank you! Outridges are indeed very close to wheels but they do not touch them, I consider that as a major flaw so I take good care about that. The rack from arocs also fit into 2 brick high panel, but it is perhaps too tight and doesn't move smooth enough to use 4 of them hooked on single motor. I'm really happy how the bracing went out. It is impossible to take pictures of it, you have to feel it, it is very robus. I'm sometimes lazy to disassamble some complex builds, but this time I really took care to make every part as best as I can.

I have some progress - the chasis was stripped down to brace it properly. In between the process I have realized that the outridges extension through string would be nightmare to synchronize so I was looking for another solution. After few tries I have found very nice solution using 2x3 old stype panels without support and gear rack from Arocs. Extension is then by 8T gear and works very smoothly yet it can support the weight without problem. The rack housing from arocks is useless in my case as it would be too long (19 studs). I also started with some bodywork: I have not started with superstructure yet but I have final design of boom and lifting cylinder. I'm waiting for parts tho, I hope they will arrive soon to show you more progress.

I did just for fun 23.8. 2017 - first leaked pictures of the 1H sets, including names 27.10. 2017 - official pictures of 1H sets early december - sets on shelves 20.12. 2017 - first leaks of 2H sets, quite early! Might suggest why we are lacking anything this time

I have tried, but I always struggle with color pie and parts bins. What I like about the studio is how easy is to filter colors by selecting "show only available colors" and I also like that I can have custom parts bin with predefined colors of certain parts - I have pins and axles in their most common color in one bin, liftarms in other bin and so on. This is probably doable in ldcad as well, the amount of customization is impressive to the point that it freaks me out. I use it for rubber bands, pneumatic hoses and stuff like that. It is also very usefull when you want to rotate part/subassembly around certain point, studio is picky about that. I also like how easy is to move and rotate parts in studio using keyboard only, clone tool is also easier to use (valid for 1.0.100, newer versions are not that good as mentioned above).

No, but it is not difficult to place them in correct place using fine grid. Unless you want to add hundreds of them of course. I only build technic and the most missing parts were PF for a long time. So I have added them manually and since most models use less then 10 motors it is fine to "play" with it a little. I have checked the movement bug once again in latest V2 version and it is still bugged. No matter the grid selected the keyboard shorcut moves parts at 8LDU units, while "T"-transition function works fine and moves it by 10 LDU no matter the grid. I have tried to point it on Stud.io forum long time ago but no luck..

I cannot answer to mac thingy, but technic is screwed since long time. The problem is that the grid stepping should be selectable as "plate height (ie 8 LDU) or "technic height (ie. 10 LDU), but it isn't working (or am I the only one?). So the movement of parts in Y axis (up/down) by keyboard is virtually not possible at all as it moves in wrong steps. I have "solved" it by staying at old version where everything that I need works fine and I add new parts manually from LDraw library. Some are probably fine without keyboard control as sanpping is very good, but for me that is a dealbreaker. You can also select fine grid (1 LDU) but that is pita to use as you have to press key 10 times instead of one. It is still zilion times better than LDD, I appreciate categories like on BL and how it is working with colors. I never had any issue with performance or stability since beta V1 (on windows). Parts-wise it is complete (technic) and you can always add parts from LDraw library, you don't have to wait for Stud.io developers to add them.

It seems to me that owning a (lego) model of own ship is very popular between seamen. Impressive work, esp. given the short time to finish. Where is it going to be displayed? On board?

that is very clever idea with the rotating racks, works like a charm

IMO the best way to limit such builds is to set maximum size of XX cubic studs. Any custom inventories or parts count are pain to track. I would prefer next competition to be something on "serious" note, we had 3 comps in row with out of the box builds

I guess axle twist is there as well, but not as much as play between two pairs of 16T gears. It is easy to try it, when I lift it and steer by hand it is clearly seen. 12T+20T bewels are much better with slack so I will swap them.

not really, there will be always differential in way that you have to pass somehow. U-joints would be better at that but I don't have space for them. 20T + 12T bewels might have less slack, I can try them.

true, there are two pairs of 16T gears on the way back and this is caused by slack they have. I don't think I can improve it