Carsten Svendsen

Wow, I can't believe this. This is basically the one thing that's pounded into your face in every instruction

Have you tried installing a plate to raise the clearance between crank axle and engine block?

I have so much worse mate, I quite like it actually

Do a test and connect 2l axles in connectors/joiners vs a 10L axle. the axle on its own is twisting less than the connected axle

wow that was an extremely good deal! Good idea with the operator controls :)

Any reason you're using 14 tooth gears instead of more robust 12t? The servo option was basically made for steering, does it really have to go in the glove box? How much space have you got? Normally the servo is put in line with the chassis and either a gear rack+pinion or just direct drive. I'm sure you could figure out a way to get the steering wheel hooked up to it somehow.

That was going to be my first question, is how you programmed the darned thing. Through countless hours of research and trial and error it seems. Is the robot calibrated on the fly as well or does it not go out of alignment much? I'm thinking of slack in gears and axles here. Great job indeed. This is one of my favorite projects so far, definitely worth remembering!

3: 107: 66: 44: 35: 21: 1 Voted based on functionality first and aesthetics second.

That is exactly what I mean. I didn't mean for you to actually press your pieces, but just to include a hydraulic ram (actuator) that pushes a plate towards the back or something. For the motor thing, as I said, you can get two outputs, but it would only be in one direction.

Finally something different than cars and trial trucks. I actually really like this moc, it's fairly complex and aesthetically pleasing. I am only disappointed that you didn't manage to incorporate a crushing function. With 4 functions, drive, steer, bin and empty it is understandable. I know it is possible to get two functions out of one motor by using direction alone, but that would require engineering of a, probably, complicated return mechanism for two functions. Good job though!

This is quite cool! A way to practice table tennis without a partner But I must say, maybe you should watch your video first before you upload - there's about a minute where you have two audio tracks going at the same time. I think you can fix it post upload with youtubes editor

I wanted to put this angle bracket to keep the assembly as rigid as possible. It seems like it didn't matter too much anyway that you used the straight connector. The biggest change, which I knew, was replacing the single pinholes as they can rotate freely. I've been there myself many times, trying to find solutions to glide across uneven surfaces. In the end, the best solution is the bulkiest one and that might not work for your application. I see why the 55615 and 15100 was gripping and bumping, something that can only be solved by using even more pieces or a complete redesign overhaul. In any case, if you're happy with it, then that is all that matters. It does look better though doesn't it? Looks good. Merry christmas to you!

Hmmm, I see what you mean after countless looks and building exercises. I know for a fact though, that you could substitute the 15100 Pin + hole with a couple of 55615 Perpendicular for extra strength, though still not enough to nullify the flex of the big plate. Something like this maybe? I assumed there was no wires as it looks like Bluetooth comms anyway. You could add a triangular leverage arm underneath the assembly to keep it upright? I don't know how that would affect ground clearance though, but a small angle is better than nothing at all. Also, I don't know what the structure looks like inside the tower, but do you have wheels on the opposite side of the lift for leverage as well?

That looks very good! I can't believe the amount of EV3's you have, that must have been expensive. One thing that really bugs me is that the picker platform is on the piss. Is there a way to straighten it up?

Looks good, but techniques like these are definitely not allowed if you ask me

Some things I found and have reported on the Studio forum:

I checked out his videos just now and there is some useful information there for sure, it's quite dated though, so I'm not sure if it's still as valid. But I learnt something for sure. And tutorials would be great yes, it seems technic is a big minority when it comes to digital modeling. I appreciate your feedback. I have already tried using MLCAD more than a handful of times and every time I try it out it frustrates me to no end. I don't know if it's the old as interface or the work area or what, but it is not for me, however powerful it might be unfortunately.

I have model that I would like to digitise (see signature) and it will be a lot of work. I will have to take the model apart to create the 3D model, and thus, I would like to make subsections as I go along of which I can create instructions for later. Is this easy enough to do post build, or do I have to do this from the beginning..? Which in turn would be extremely time consuming if not impossible. My concern is that there's so many specific connections that are random angles and how easy is it to model something like this? How about flexible hoses? Pneumatic hoses? Wires? Even chain links, are all of these easy enough to work with or do I need to wait a few more years before this program is usable? Are there any experts out there who might want to give me a crash course in using this program? I have used it a little bit a few years ago, but found it quite tricky to align anything on axles, there was no snap, and also anything that goes in a hole in a multi-layer MOC was super frustrating as the pin/axle would jump between the holes depending on the view orientation. I found Sariels SR3D Builder so much more user friendly to work with technic models.

I see, it just doesn't feel right, like something's missing. It is so satisfying to hear it click every time it goes together. Now it kinda takes the joy away. It's alright though, I have tens of thousands of the older style pins, so I don't think I'll be keeping these new ones when I disassemble my models again.

Thank you, I promptly went and bought the Heavy-duty Tow Truck 42128 and I there is something I have to ask. Is it me, or is the plastic different? The pins don't seem to "snap" and they look physically different as well when I compare them. I'd rather not mix them in with my existing pins if they are indeed different. The liftarms seem to be extremely shiny as well which is strange. Is this a result of LEGO switching to plant based materials?

Sorry, I've been out of the loop for a while, what's a flip flop beam?

I have no idea of what you're talking about

No matter how it is built or programmed, building will take so immensely long as you have to find the part on the HMI first, then wait for it to be fetched. And that's just for one part. Machines like these are often just used for bulk storage, not frequently accessed items. Regardless, it's amazing to see it in action now, there's a few things that could be smoothed out, but I am very impressed so far!

Wow, amazing! What does the angle of attack do?

I see, very interesting! It's amazing to see how things work to a detailed level. While the physical construction is key, it's nothing without a functional program. Keep at it!