agrof

It will be stable horizontally, only the drive-, and manouverability is open.

Looks like motorization overkill on it's best! I am wondering about: if You can feed all the motors at once, without kicking on the safety circuit of the BB's or Sbricks (I guess), how will the angular momentum of the blade influence the stability and the driveability of the bot. Please keep us updated, it is an interesting entry and also experiment!

This dolly meant for the next usage: For phones only, that's why it is rather small, that any part should hang into the camera's view spectrum, whatever angle it is set. For smooth surfaces only - as mentioned. For that, it does the job. For manual operation, I wanted to have a quick solution for a simple, handy tool, without big investment. Available on Rebrickable too.

Cool, I like the speed of the cake functions!

Hello All, I am preparing myself to improve my video creating skills, hopefully something to notice already for TC11. As first step I created a camera dolly, which can be steered to make nice all-round pictures (inspired by Charbel). The steering angle is adjustable by replacing the 3L axle in the steering rod (pivot point), in case it is needed. So, the turning diameter is ~880 mm or ~550 mm. By replacing the 6L axles on the turntable support, the height and the grip of the liftarms is also adjustable according to the phone is used. LDD file is available here. Hopefully useable - of course on smooth surfaces only -, enjoy!

I can not add more, just: beautiful, and great mechanism as usual!

Just an idea, which popped in my mind in the morning, maybe useful for someone. Instead of BB boxes, there is a way to build rotating blades weight with Ninjago spinners, which are actually quite heavy for their size. http://brickset.com/parts/design-92547 Combined with this part: http://brickset.com/parts/6066952 You can build something like this, multiplied. The two spinners can be attached together by liftarms (LDD allows to place 1x1 beam only), or with Bionicle weapons, which have 2 pin holes connections. If all the studs of the spinners are connected that way, it will result a very massive unit.

Without giving you proper mechanical explanation, shortly: Compared to single direct axle drive, u-joint connection points have less material and connection surfaces to provide forces. Look at this animation, the green part. It already "feels" weak, right? The angled drivetrain creates drive loss, as forces are diveded in let's say X and Y directions, and also due additional friction (more moving components and connections). Due to the structure of the u-joint, it has a non-linear movement (vibrates), which is also an additinal loss. More detailed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_joint

Looks good, I like the new upper structure. If you don't have the place to build back the crone, there is still one legitime solution by using this part: http://brickset.com/parts/4100457 Maybe with a skeleton minifig...

Looks even better, but if you are that close to the limitation, you must proove well that it really fits (f.e.: picture beside a wall, which gives clear indication at least for one side). Will You use wheel hubs, or just the single axles? If axles only, than your wheels are not very secured from falling off, and also not very stable for these size. I would reposition the XL motor as well, the u-joints just make that drivetrain unnecessarily weaker. Try with direct drive, so lifting power will be multiplied for sure, whith which you can even roll opponents over.

It looks sleek as a concept, my advice is to build a chassis with motors first, and test the skid steering. I assume this will weight about 2,5-3 kgs(?), so put some books on it accordingly. I see this as most critical, big wheels with big surface + big weight might kill the maneuverability. If You find a way to solve this, the rest is peanuts.

@Thirdwigg Before we loose a great MOCer, I found use of my Bionicle bin for fun... Actually I might keep them.

They have several usage. Psychological: to scare the enemy by kicking all the time. Wedge & Flipper: they are not super strong due to the friction gear drivetrain, but together with the powerfull drive, Bison is capable to get underneath of another bots by lifting them, and in case to tip them over. Successfully tested with my 42037 MOD (576 gramms), just like described. It needs some practice to control it though, as the continuous movement of the heels needs precise attack timing. Therefore are 2 motors only, for intuitive operation, as described in the first post. Blocking: as the heels are pretty robust, they can block rotating blades, wheels, tracks, whatever, and thus confuse the opponent. And the best: ability to imitate the noise of a gallopping bison! It is OK (not perfect, just OK), the video will explain properly. I keep IR, I like physical controllers, no plan for Sbrick for me at all. The top of the receiver - where it cathes the signal - is not covered, but still well protected, check the last picture in my previous post. The control distance is more-less the usual. Opponent's and my IR channel should be set differently, and that's it. Correct, I don't fear to being flipped, grabbed, smashed, etc... After excessive shaking and dropping, I am confident in it's thoughness. I will try to present this in the video. Also it is fast enough to escape - I think. LDD file will be shared (close to the deadline, as things always might change), so anyone can analyse. As a battle bot: this is the point, there is no front/back, there is no top/bottom. There is only the question, which tool do You want to use: dozer blade, or the heels? @ColletArrow If You consider it as a Bison, than You are correct.

Very original entry and well thought structure, despite the disadvantages I like it a lot! How much does it weight? Also a good example, that You can build real monsters in 45x45x45. p.s.: I am super envy for Your woodshop, and the artistic products You make... I must quit...

Looks good, but I can not justify the third party tires here, they are too balloony and thus a bit off. In my opinion the Unimog tires are better choice for your UTE. Congratulation for the price, well deserved!

During the "Grab N' Shake" test I figured out, that the heels can disconnect from the pushrods (Achilles syndrome), so I had to create some reinforcement for it. The solution doesn't look very smooth if the bot is upside-down, but now everything is secured, as required. The heels touch smoothly the ground in both end positions, the geometry turned out just perfect. The goal is reached: keep it simple, and thus super reliable. This was the most instinctual design process I have ever had (including my professional experiences), so this little beast has a very special place in my heart. Some garage pics:

Woohooo, this thing looks massive and mean! Lucky situation, that we use LEGO parts, those blades would show no mercy for tires in the metal reality. Or alternative:

I also don't own a ton of parts (just like many of us), I was lucky enough to have a local BL store with all the necessary missing parts for my entry. We don't want to make another sub-categories for "Built with already owned parts" and "Built with additionally bought parts", do we? Let's don't go on this line further, it has nothing to do with the contest in my opinion. I just repeat myself: constrains - whatever if size, part count or part availability - are accelerants for creativity, and for thinking out of the box. History shows countless examples for this. And also: it is LEGO.

Despite I brought the volume theme on the table, personally I find the original rules perfect here, we don't need to build monsters, but cute toys. This was the case of the Mini contest too (http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?/forums/topic/96430-mini-technic-mini-build-contest-information-topic/), 200 pcs was very-very limited, still excellent entries were born. So instead adjusting the rules, I suggest adjust solutions. Speaking from experience: there is always a way to achieve the same goal. If a robot is bigger than it would fit, than scale it down for example. Yes, it can hurt to get rid-off from some nice detail solutions, which with we are already in love, but the final result will be even more satisfying.

I don't find it fair. Seriously: I think it is a pretty good constraint to increase creativity! IF size change should be done - there is not too many complaint about it though -, I would say maybe, but volume constraint must be the same: 91125 L³ (45x45x45). In this case longer/wider but lower robots can be built, like these (Bite Force - wider; Tombstone - longer) below. What about voting in this topic (1 week long open)? Another thought: the structural stability should be considered at final voting too, for example it is really hard to realize Tombstone's flat rotating blade in LEGO, without falling into pieces at the first hit. Maybe a roll-over demonstration (made by hand) in the video should represent the durability of a bot. We have seen lot nice MOCs already, which are pretty as static models, but as You touch or move them, turns out, that parts are filmsy, connections get loose, etc... wouldn't survive too long. This is what I mean:

Efferman, the updated build looks really gorgeous , I especially like the cabin - except the mirrors, they look a bit off with that many cheese. Maybe You can find a more sleek part to use, like the slopes from 42054. Although I don't consider myself as purist, I like the original suction arm better. Don't get me wrong, the 3D printed parts look very accurate and LEGOish, but a bit much for me. Is it possible to build this version with the "old" solution?

Beautiful, really captured all the details, with lot of NPU! Truly a masterpiece.

Wow, LOVE IT! Great idea, the details and the BAT style of the sewing machine is just gorgeous.

Thanks All! The drivetrain looks reliable to me (within LEGO constraints, it is plastic after all). These wheel hubs give very strong support for the wheels: If the wheels get disconnected from these, than my robot will have bigger troubles, than just loosing one crankshaft. Probably I could add separate motors to the heel side, but I purposely wanted to keep everything this compact. Yes, the steering is not that fluent as could be, but also not bad as the cluth function of the friction gears helps a lot. I believe it can be used in the battle arena fine. It is small, but the 90% of the volume is ABS material. Much bigger bots, with much higher center of gravity? Bison says: YES, please! I love the engineering perspective, some driving is just extra fun. Maybe a deep buried primal instict of destruction is also involved... @Didumos69 Thanks Sir!

Thanks Guys! @ColletArrow The best part: even the heels have the same functionality (to pick up), whatever side is looking upwards. And this makes the challenge really interesting.