Jump to content

gyenesvi

Eurobricks Dukes
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,396

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by gyenesvi

  1. gyenesvi
    Well not exactly, no need to jailbrake, rather you have to be able to download and compile the code and install to your iPad as a developer / test version. And I am not sure if you need an iOS developer account for that or not, maybe your iCloud account is enough. I used to have a paid developer account, now I don't but I can still use it for installing test software on my phone.. So the short answer is that this mostly works for software engineers who know what they need to do, at least on iPhone / iPad. Maybe on Android some precompiled version could be made, which could be easier to install..
  2. gyenesvi
    Interesting questions, but I also have the feeling that we are not informed enough to answer this properly, especially the size of the chinese market. I agree that probably most original Lego PF electronics was sold in sets, but that may not be true for 3rd party stuff, which is probably experiencing a sales boom after PF was discontinued, and that's ongoing, so time is on its side. Unfortunately, much of that potential was not really taken advantage of, at least not in Technic. It's a good question whether PU just made it somewhat more complicated to design technic sets without having much advantage besides the better communication. For example whether having fancy controls of construction machinery is worth it against calibration complexities. I think they created a software hell for themselves, underestimating the complexities of software and its support compared to making plastic parts and distributing them, I would not be surprised if they had regretted that one. I think a configurable communication with a physical remote could have been a simpler and cheaper solution on the long run than app control wrt maintenance (at least for Technic, but they shot down Mindstorms anyways, so that's probably a regret too).
  3. gyenesvi
    Yeah, in the bulldozer the yellow is more dominant and there's no 4th color, I guess that makes a difference. If the paneling would be yellow on this one as well, then it would be similar. Otherwise, I'd just try a DBG bucket and undercarriage. But anyways, it feels a bit too much nit picking about colors :) The contrast with 42215 feels more important!
  4. gyenesvi
    I understand the criticism of @Jundis a bit about the colors. I'd say that there are a bit of conflicting colors as there are two dark and two light colors which is a bit too much. In pairs, they would be okay, but 4 creates a bit of a confusion. For me, yellow sticks out the most here, for example the usage of yellow in the undercarriage is a bit weird, it draws attention to where it shouldn't maybe. But I guess it's parts availability; the sprocket, the bucket, may only come in yellow? Also agree a bit on the thinness of the arm, which is also enhanced by the fact that the paneling is a different color than the liftarms, creating a visual split, not perceiving them as one thicker unit.
  5. gyenesvi
    That's good to know, thanks! I understand, but that's what I turned off.
  6. gyenesvi
    Wow that looks really neatly packed with electronics again, maxing out the two hubs, nice job :) Also it seems just the right size for lego motors. Does it have good playable speed? I like the simple but nice looks as well.
  7. gyenesvi
    Well, I saw that option but it sounds like it should have nothing to do with startup, only with braking. I tried how it works, and indeed as the description suggests, when it's checked then pushing/pulling the trigger in the other direction than it was does not reverse immediately but first it brakes and only second push/pull reverses direction. However, your observation is right that it does change the startup as well, which I would not expect, so it may be a bug? So essentially if this is checked we loose the sine mode startup. I understand that with models with more down-gearing the sine startup would be useless anyway because it would be unnoticeably slow. But still, I don't think this is how it should work, and also I don't like this double-tap setting, it is really irritating when I need to go back and forth. Also, I tried all combinations of the brake settings, and no matter how I set it it always seem to brake, at least the gearing is enough to stop it immediately, I also tried it with a bare motor (no gearing), and with all braking turned off, and maybe then I see a little bit of coasting, like half a second. Maybe it would be more visible with a heavier model. A weird thing that I managed to reproduce consistently is that if I set the Running break level to 1, then the sine startup does not work (only cogs). However, for values 2 and higher it does start up smoothly. That is weird and definitely looks like a bug. Also, for some settings, the sound of the ESC goes away. Weird again..
  8. gyenesvi
    The image does not load for me (on two devices) so I don't know what you are referring to, and on the input tab I don't see anything that could be related to that. What's the exact name of this option?
  9. gyenesvi
    Did you read the response two comments before yours?
  10. gyenesvi
    That's what I tried, but then it's acting weirdly. It completely ruins smooth startup (basically it just keeps cogging in the sine range, and then moves when I get out of sine range), even though it seems completely unrelated to that.
  11. gyenesvi
    I managed to get a Windows PC and connect to the ESC config tool. Even though some settings have weird effects (somehow lowering throttle matching brake seems to ruin the smooth startup for example, even though it seems unrelated), and others don't seem to have effect when they should (sine startup power does not seem to have much effect on the transition to normal mode), I played around a bit and somehow now the transition between sine startup and normal mode seems to be smoother, not that much of a jump, which is good. The cogging is still there, but I realized that it starts cogging after it transitions to slow normal mode, in the range where probably the back-EMF signal is still weak. And even the AM32 tuning tutorial says that more down-gearing might be needed in this case. It's doable in this model at the cost of having a 16T gear sticking out at the bottom :( might try to play around with that a bit though..
  12. gyenesvi
    Good to hear that there's improvement!
  13. gyenesvi
    Thanks! Well I only bought the Bronco this year, and I am kind of struggling with a good idea as most have already been done..
  14. gyenesvi
    Yeah, indeed, most shots were using just a little throttle, I had a similar feeling, that I'm used to less speed and hence less control problems with my Lego models. And the bigger difficulty is keeping the model within the view of the camera for a long enough period of time. When going fast, or just trying to maneuver precisely, I either wander out of the view, or if I look at the camera, I soon crash the model into some rocks.. It takes some practice, but I realized that if I'm at a good distance, and point the camera generally in the right direction and avoid moving my hand too much, then it comes out okay. And of course when it does not, I cut the scene :)
  15. gyenesvi
    Thank you! True, and I believe a slower gearing would help with the cogging (actually the current gearing is 20:12, so even a 16:16 would be enough I guess, but then I'd have a large gear sticking out at the bottom in the middle, limiting passability) and also, with slower gearing the slow startup mode of the motor would become too slow and useless. But maybe it would not even be needed, don't knwo, needs more experimentation. Sure, so this is the piece I printed to attach to the bottom of the transmitter and create a 'tunnel' for the stick: And it looks like this when put together. My selfie stick is not very long, a bit longer one would be more comfortable, but it's good enough. At least it has a button on the stick to start/stop recording..
  16. gyenesvi
    So I had time to shoot a video in the weekend, it was a lot of fun, here it is! Also, due to the magic of 3d printing, I managed to fix my selfie stick and phone to the bottom of my transmitter, hence taking low shots while driving became super easy :) Hope it shows! A few take-aways: It's fast for this kind of terrain, and this kind of suspension; it can easily flip over in sharp turns.. I probably flipped it over more than I would have liked to, also on the rocks while climbing.. I think soft live axles don't help much with stability at high speed A bit of a negative of the motor is that it can cog sometimes when moving slowly and getting stuck a bit, it can be seen occasionally on the video. Often a bit of throttle helps. But I find the transition between slow speed sinusoidal motor control, and normal motor control a bit abrupt, and it often starts moving faster when I'd need a bit more slow speed; I miss kind of the sweet spot. Maybe this transition is tunable in the ESCs software, which I could not yet try because it requires a Windows PC, will try to test later. Does anybody have experience, understanding of this phenomenon, and cogging in general? Is it natural to brushless motors? By the way, do you think I should make a new thread for final presentation?
  17. gyenesvi
    Wow, now that's a surprise, a pleasant one! When I saw the thread first, I thought somebody has revived an old thread, but I was wondering why I haven't seen this model yet. I didn't expect it would be a new one :) But it's great to see you and the new model. As all, I really like the suspension, the solution to connect the two ends. Also, the amount of articulation and the balance it would have. And a really nice property if the setup is that it does not need springs at the front, so there's a lot of space for all the motors without the springs intruding or limiting articulation. I also like the two-tone body, adds a really nice touch. I was wondering though, if you'd build it all in red, would you rather use the flat fenders of the new Bronco? I have also been entertaining the idea of building a Chevy Blazer for a while. It's quite boxy, so it has a lot of space inside for stuff :)
  18. gyenesvi
    Exactly, that's the key here! And I don't think it's actually due to the power of the motor, but rather the control electronics, that's able to control it at such a low speed with such good torque. Yes, that's the idea, 5mm wide and 2mm deep holes have a firm grip on studs or half pins, and in the flat orientation they get printed perfectly. Here every box is fixed with 2 half pins to the chassis, and now all is really stable and tidy, easy to turn it on or plug cables in and out.
  19. gyenesvi
    Glad you like it, indeed, I was happy how simple the roof turned out! Thanks a lot for the kind words :) Pushing the limits is actually inspiring! Thanks! Have you checked the preliminary videos up there? (not embedded links) It may be worth giving it a try, I wanted to convert the Bronco to 4x4 and motorize it anyway :) As a next step, I worked out a way to put the electronics components (battery, receiver, ESC) into a simple and versatile lego compatible casing. The general pattern looks like this, the base area and height varies according to the component. The bottom is 2mm thick and has 5mm inverse stud holes in it. This way, it is possible to attach them to plates or half studs or attach plates/bricks with pinholes to them for mounting. It's a fairly generic and space efficient solution. My ESC and receiver both (separately) fit into a 3x4 area with thin walls. My small 450mAh battery (which got fixed and now is back and functional) fits into a 3x7x4 box. Aaaand luckily I was able to pick up my parts order today in person (I ordered it 2 days ago, super fast), so I could finish the build! Here it is in all its glory, I even went all in and added quite some Injora stickers that came with the electronics :) I like the best the one on the top that says "Just one more part", as if it was meant for Lego :D Here's a better view of how all the control electronics is packed into the trunk, it's neat and stable, everything attached to the 5x7 frame underneath with half pins. I'll try to print a top for the battery box but the cable is so short both on the battery and the ESC that it's a bit hard to connect them and let the cable be routed where I want it to be not where it wants to go.. Sooo, I'll go out and test and make some videos as soon as I can!
  20. gyenesvi
    You don't need to buy sets, you could just buy the individual parts then from lego.com. You won't be able to print them anyway. And I don't understand why CNC machining could be any useful here..
  21. gyenesvi
    As others have said, this looks amazingly clean and well polished, and really nicely functional at the same time. I love the inner camera footage :)
  22. gyenesvi
    @keepbricking you will be better off if you learn 3d design yourself. 3d printing does not work so simply, you often have to adjust your design to your printer and material, so other people cannot really do that for you. I suggest using Onshape free online 3d designer tool, and this tutorial for learning: I have learned to design stuff in about 2 days just recently :) I am using Bambu PLA with that printer. But not sure if any material can survive a 6s setup, including original lego parts.. Why would you print those? They exist in lego, and they would be really hard to print. Also, you can buy cheap clones of those on AliExpress.
  23. gyenesvi
    Again, this is not necessarily true. If the motor does not have enough torque, it could just stall, without skipping the gears. Depends on whether it's easier to skip the gears or stall the motor. I think the weakest link is the linear clutch you introduced, and the LAs have a stronger clutch (they have to lift heavy weights, so a weak clutch would make them useless). They should perform better, the question is how do you know that? If the single motor was struggling with the boom, the two motors should be able to lift it with no (or less) struggle. But if the single motor was not struggling, only slow, then you won't see the difference.
  24. gyenesvi
    I don't think this is true. Imagine you have very strong motor, and a very heavy boom. What will happen? The clutch will click. But it's not because the motor torque is not enough. It's because the boom is too heavy, and you introduced a weak link in the drivetrain, the clutch, so it's natural that it 'breaks' there. So clicking / not clicking depends on the boom's weight, so with this technique you cannot measure motor power. This may be explained by the two motors having more momentum and hence more continuous power delivery, so the clicking decreases somewhat, but would not disappear, which is what I would expect as explained.
  25. gyenesvi
    What do you expect to see? How do you measure the improvement? The speed won't change probably. One thing you could see is that it is not struggling with a weight that it was struggling before. But if it wasn't visibly struggling to begin with, then you won't see an improvement. The only thing I'd expect is more smooth boom lift if it wasn't smooth with 1 motor.
×
×
  • Create New...