Erik Leppen

Pretty cool. I like the simplicity. I know such designs exist in real Battlebots, so it's certainly a valid strategy. I doubt about the force of each hit, but if hit count is of any relevance, you're going great. Also, nice how it's almost indestructible :)

Wow, I'm glad this is in the other category! Anyhow, pretty impressive 'bot. Nice how filled-up everything is, and nice that it works upside down. The way you filled everything up makes it look like the innards of modern electronics I don't like the wobbly motion, I think with normal wheels your bot could have been a lot faster. The wheels are a nice technical achievement though, so nice job on that. Also the lifters seem stronger than I expected. That said, I think the bot is a bit of everything, and doesn't really focus on doing one thing really well. I think the spinner on the arm is a wonderful idea and it seems to be one of the most deadly weapons I encountered in the contest so far. Maybe if you just focused on that, and just built a bot with only that weapon, and ditched all the lifters on the sides (and used regular wheels), the bot could have been a lot smaller, faster and more agile, and I think I would have liked it more. But it's certainly some quite impressive work!

I just posted my entry in the entry topic. Here're the latest images, and the entry video. The final bottom shot shows that I added a dummy wheel in the back, which works like a charm (the bot looks perfectly horizontal, and runs very smooth) Also I decided to just keep the name, I liked it, even thought it has doesn't mean anything at all anymore.

29. Entry name: Wimbledoom Category: Cat B: PF IR Signature move name: Dual horizontal hammers Short summary of the functions: Control: 1 battery box, 2 receivers, 2 remotes, 4 M motors Drive: M motor for left wheel; M motor for right wheel Weapon: M motor for releasing the hammers; M motor for returning the hammers Images: Video: Discussion topic: Wimbledoom - Discussion topic

I think this is the funniest entry. It's like a small child that doesn't get its way. It's wonderful, when I saw the images I thought, wow this is complex, but it's actually rather simple, and seems very effective. If the number of hits is any judging criterium in a battle, then you're a serious candidate :)

I did some work on the body. I think it turned out quite cool. It's now almost finished. I think I will be changing the ends of the hammers a bit, and I want to add a dummy wheel in the back. That's it.

You surpassed my expectations. I really like this one, we haven't seen many flippers yet, and I like how compact it is :) And indeed, what does it do when it's upside down? :)

I don't think this is true. I often think: small models, small problems; big models, big problems. Now this holds especially for cranes, but I think it's true for all models. I think a good big model is just as much a challenge to build as a good small model. The keyword here is "good". The problem is that building a very large good model takes a huge lot of time. Larger costs more time than smaller, and as a result, the "good" is often sacrificed. For me personally, 2000 parts is about the maximum. If I build much bigger, I usually lose patience before it's done. Maybe for a competition I would have a bit more dedication, but still. My favorite size is about 1200 to 1500 parts.

I like how simple this looks, but it's probably not as simple as it looks :) I like how the weapon is "hidden" until you see it in action. I really didn't see what the weapon was before I saw the videos. Nice! One thing though. Comparing your drive system to mine: your bot is a lot smaller (and therefore lighter) than mine, yet you use more powerful motors than I do. So your bot should be able to go faster. You're using XL motors, where I use M (which are faster, but less powerful), we use the same gearing, and I use bigger wheels. So I think you're not getting using full capacity of your drive motors. What would happen if you would switch the gearing for the drive, from 12/20 to 20/12, so gearing up instead of down? Will your bot become faster, or will the motors struggle? I expect it to become faster. XL motors are strong, and your bot is quite light.

Good news! It was not the clutch that was the problem. The problem was that the hammers were too far back, so the spring worked in the opposite direction, and therefore the motor couldn't push them out. So the issue has been solved without having to rebuild the switcher module. Bad news: it turned out that a few parts were under quite some stress because of the release mechanism, and the axlehole of a yellow 2x4 beam didn't survive the force of the weapon. As you can see in previous pictures, the link near the 40t gears consisting of two yellow 7 beams and one 2x4 L beam suffered too much bending force. So I rebuilt that link and reinforced it with plates, and used only beams with round holes. But the best news is that I have videos to show! Here you see only the weapon. So this finally answers the question by msk6003 early on. It also shows the weapon is unfortunately quite slow, and the M motor struggles, but I'm so glad everything seems to work. It's a bit hard to operate though :) This also shows the drive. I think the concerns by PKW about the center of gravity turn out to be irrelevant: the center of mass is almost exactly at the wheels when the hammers are extended. In normal mode, when the hammers are folded, the center of gravity is slightly behind the wheels (no more than 2 studs), which is good, because I have space in the back for a dummy wheel (which is much better than sliding over the floor). Also, the speed is decent. It's not super fast, but it can turn quite fast and for two M motors I'm more than happy. So, I think the techniques are almost done. I also added a bit more lime. The body will be very sparse, because I don't want to add too much weight. So I will probably only cover the 5x11 frames and the back with some plates and tiles. And of course, add the hammer's ends.

Using the old ones sounds like a good plan. I didn't think of that. The problem with this is that the whole things moves a half stud, but maybe this can work out. Thanks for the suggestion, will try tomorrow!

There's a little problem. I was gonna post about the switcher module that would tie everything together. The problem is: it doesn't work. Apparently, the M motor can't flip the two clutches reliably, at least not when the springs are "loaded" (compressed). I tried 12:20, 12:36 and worm:8, but for some reason, even with a worm it doesn't work. So something might be locking the mechanism somewhere, and I haven't found out what. Anyhow, here's the module itself. I know it's hard to see with all the black, but this is the 12:36 geared version. The two changeover catches are connected with the long axles with the blue 1x2 beams you saw in earlier posts. So this module will go on top of the bot. These will be all the pictures for today, because I ran out of daylight ;) Anyhow, as PKW suggested I moved the battery box two studs forward (and half a stud down), and found another way to mount it. The on-off switch is gone, and the bump on the back with the two green panels is also gone, so it's 3 studs shorter now. But now there's a small empty space in the back. I might put a guide wheel there, but I might also leave it empty.

I like how robust this looks. Curious to see what you will do with the weapons.

What this shows, is that the staff are, above all, reasonable people who go lengths to give all of us a fun time, even a bunch of bickering grown-ups like us My metaphorical hat goes off to them

I'd be not fully against a "modernize set X" type contest, but the rulings proposed by step77 are so strict that almost all forms of personal flavour in a model get lost. What I like in a contest is a way to bring my own take to it, and being surprised by what others take to it. If everyone's building the same model and we must respect all ins and outs of the example model, it feels like a homework assignment, rather than a playful competition. Edit: and agree to what Jim and agrof are saying. I agree that all the WIP topics are a load of fun. We're all working to the same goal, but we're all having such different views on it that there's so much to learn, and such a variety of new and original models coming to the forums.

Have you also discussed the option of this being a main board in the Themes index; not a subforum of anything? The reason I'm asking is because I hope for more exposure, so that all the great scale models can be collected here, not only technical ones. I don't know if this would be the right way, I'm just thinking out loud.

Appie, You're interpreting. You came to a certain conclusion, and you're now telling us "it's that freaking simple". But given all the discussion by various people, it's apparently not simple. Where your thinking goes wrong is this: Your way of thinking isn't the only possible way of thinking. You interpreted the post on page 2 differently than I did. Why are you right and I wrong? I can elaborate more on this, but I don't want to derail the topic further than I already did. Sorry to all for disrupting the topic. Let this be my last post on this subject. Anyone who wants to know more or discuss size limits with me, please send me a PM (you can do so in Dutch if you want).

I had the one from 8421, but I rarely used it, exspecially with the advent of PF, so I sold it one or two years back and switched to PF only.

A few days ago, I suddenly had a cool idea for a competition: unusual/funny/weird vehicles. Build a fantasy vehicle, something weird, something wicked, but that could be made in reality. (For inspiration of what I mean, do a google image search on "strange vehicles". I think this could be a lot of fun - people get to build something they usually don't, and there're a lot of options so there's plenty to choose from for everyone's likes.

The reason I'm so wound up about this is NOT that I think the box is too small, or that I want to "stop limiting", or that I "complain" or whatever. (Brushing off critique as "complaints" is just not correct, really. Do whatever you want with it, but it's not a complaint. It's feedback.) If you look at my own bot, its body is about 35x35, so I have no problems of even coming close to the limit, and if the box were 35x35, I would have probably made something smaller. I certainly know that contests are for fun and rules are there to follow by everyone. So that's not the point (so please don't accuse me of doing that). The problem - the only problem - I have with the size rule - and only the size rule - is that it is simply not consistent with itself. That's all I said, and if I read through the topic, that's what most of the discussion about this rule is about. I don't care if it's 35 or 45 or 20 or 90. I care that it's a cube in one position, and suddenly a diagonal in another. A 40x40 square is allowed, but its own diagonal isn't. That's just not logical. And the main problem with a rule that isn't logical, is that people can't know for sure whether their own construction is allowed, and they'll have to ask. As a result, you get all those seemingly stupid questions - from people wanting to follow the rules, but not knowing their details. If the rule is simple and consistent, people can judge for themselves and no one has to ask. To be honest, I was already surprised on page 2 when I asked about the diagonal when the answer was no, because I thought: of course it's allowed. It fits! Apparently, suddently there was an additional rule, that I thought I understood until many weeks later when what I thought was obviously allowed, suddenly wasn't, again. See what happens? I make a mental model of a rule and it turns out to be wrong multiple times. The problem is: the rule is not consitent with itself. That's not me being a dickhead, that's a rule that contradicts itself. And yes, I'm a mathematician, so I am likely to spot inconsistencies. And yes, I'm autistic, so I have an urge to make things consistent. If you want to prevent discussion, make a rule that's unambiguous. Most of the rules are unambiguous, so good job on those, but this one single rule isn't (at least, not in its execution), so I'm making a point on this rule hoping that staff will clear things out and formulate a consistent rule next time. If you (Jim) don't want to do this, let someone else work this out. It's really not hard, and it's really not more work. The rule is "it fits a 45x45x45 cube with the front facing a side", and as a logical consequence, diagonals are allowed. That's a logical conclusion. If you don't want that, reformulate the rule to say it must fit in a circle, and you would have been done with it with a single line of text. I understand you get tired of this discussion, but be glad that I'm posting this now, before the deadline, and you don't have to disqualify contestants that interpreted the rule as "fits a 45x45x45 cube" withouts ifs and buts, and made something with a 53L diagonal, and then have to have a discussion after they posted their finished work, about this allegedly being disallowed. And, if you read my post on the previous page again, you will see that I said "next time". I don't expect you to change the rules for this compo, I simply urge you to think about this really carefully for upcoming competitions, so that this discussion doesn't have to be repeated again. So, my offer still stands that I can post examples of why this rule isn't logical. (But Rennuh has done that already, I see). But I hope I have explained myself well enough now. The silent, and false, assumption I sense in Jims post just above thise one seems to be that you can't discuss this and at the same time still have fun. Because i'm having a lot of fun building my 'bot and following all the others. If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right. I think this has been a magnificent contest so far, with a great theme (!), some really cool entries already, and will be great all the way to the end, and I'm really curious to what's coming and what the votes will do. So I say: rock on, and happy building everyone, in the last, but most exciting, days of the battle!

The shocks from 8466 are fine by themselves. If I compare them by those of 8110, I feel no difference. I don't know if the 9398's are different than the 8110's, but I suspect they are the same. If so, they are also almost the same as those of 8466, except the color.

Progress! I added a gear system to drive the hammers. The idea will be that the clutch will be coupled, the hammers will return backwards, then at the right moment the clutch will be decoupled and the hammers slam forward. This vertical axle will be used as a trigger. I'm so happy it just fits in between all the rest! Turning it slightly will push the blue 1x2 beams against the hammers just enough for force to build up. Unfortunately, right now they are very close from turning over center, so without friction, the hammers will always release. The clutch chould prevent that. The idea is that the clutch will be connected to the trigger, so that at the exact time of decoupling, the hammers are also pushed outwards. The backdrive mechanism will be driven by a third M motor that will fit right there (again, on the brown axle). The gearing is 12/20 * 12/20 * 12/20 * 12/16 * 8/40 = 81/2500, which is about 0.032 This is the complete image, in starting mode, and after release. The normal mode right now is 44 x 37 x 13 studs. The ends of the hammers are very thin because this makes the hammers lighter, and they will require much less momentum to accelerate, so they become much faster. I don't have L motors, unfortunately. When, in the end, there's space left between the motors and the battery, I can move it forward a bit. But there will be some more weight in the front for the switch mechanism (which will be quite large), so I think the center of mass will end up pretty close to the wheels. But yes, 2 M motors is a bit light for this size. It will have to do - XL won't fit and I don't have L.

Good initiative, this new board! One little question: why is it in Technic? I think scale modeling is not just part of Technic. I think there are quite a few great scale models in the Special themes forum, and undoubtedly also in other boards. For example, does architecture count as scale modeling? For example, buildings such as these ones?

I was waiting for a bot that could right itself. Yours does so beautifully. Great job on that! For the rest, it just looks like a very robust and realistic bot. Nice work.

I like how "batte-bot-y" this looks. The shapes are really nice and well thought-out. The gray color scheme works quite well too, I think. Also the picture from below makes it look quite densely packed. Nice! I do agree it's a bit slow though. Both in movement and in weapon. This may also be caused by the wheels being at the far back. It might work better if the driven wheels are a bit more near the center, because then they are closer to the center of gravity, so 1. they carry more weight and 2. there's less "sway" when turning.