Jump to content

codefox421

Eurobricks Citizen
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    198

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by codefox421

  1. codefox421
    Hi alainneke, I'm trying to create some custom pickups based on yours. My NWSL wheels finally arrived yesterday (wow, it takes a long time to get them, they were ordered Sept 12), but they don't seem to fit well in LEGO wheel holder piece. The flange is rubbing against the LEGO housing, keeping the wheels from rotating freely. On closer inspection, the NWSL flange diameter is larger than that of the LEGO flange. I ordered the O-scale 33"/210 variety. Did you have this problem as well? If so, what was your solution? Here's hoping I don't need a lathe, and some pictures of the wheels: LEGO wheel on top, NWSL wheel on bottom, slip that came with NWSL wheels on right LEGO wheel stacked atop NWSL wheel, showing flange difference Edit: I measured the NWSL flange diameter to be 23.75mm
  2. codefox421
    Check out this forum thread: http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=674441 I haven't tried any methods personally, but this one looks very promising and lowest cost.
  3. codefox421
    It does sound like some members of the LUG are being rather unreasonable. I can also understand how they would want to run 9v through your contribution to the layout (just as much as you probably want to run PF through their sections). Also, have you considered electrifying your PF track with some kind of metal tape (copper, aluminum, and stainless steal are known to work) for the display? You wouldn't need to borrow 9v track all the time, nor shell out lots of cash for 9v track.
  4. codefox421
    I designed a corner tunnel in LDD a few years back and built it, but never posted it anywhere. It's rather simple, but still fairly brick-intensive. I lack the LXF file currently, but this time lapse build video (featuring my family and me) should give some insight into how it's put together: I too would enjoy hearing suggestions for what to put on top. One way to reduce the weight/part count is to build the slopes with plates turned sideways. Another is to build only the forward facing side, and leave the back mostly open. I used both of these techniques in my tunnel to great success.
  5. codefox421
    You could always use a sliding middle wheel solution. .ldr This has worked for me in the past, even with longer wheelbases. On topic: I'm hoping the HE is successful enough for LEGO to produce more sets like it in the future. I've lately been trying to focus solely on usefulness for MOCing when considering to buy a new set. I also like the look of 7-wide and am trying to keep my future builds exclusively in this scale. The HE seriously tempts me to go against these resolutions.
  6. codefox421
    Hey pacc, thanks for reminding me I needed a BOM. It's true; any phone, computer, tablet, etc could fill the role of the remote control as long as it sends commands the receiver is expecting. I didn't know there exist phones that are IR capable. Cool info JopieK!
  7. codefox421
    The PF wires have GND, C2, C1, and 9V lines. The PF IR receiver only takes power from the 9V and GND lines, but the backward compatible connector on a PF extension wire only supplies power to C1 and C2. Therefore, something non-standard must always be done to power an IR receiver from a legacy battery box. If you're willing to do some custom electronics, there's an open-source implementation of the PF IR receiver, which could be made to pull power from the C1/C2 lines, and I'm working on an open-source PF bluetooth receiver, which I've designed to take power from both 9V/GND and C1/C2.
  8. codefox421
    Looking closely at the bottom-most section of straights in the top image, it looks like there are 6 straight tracks when there should be only 4. The extra two are overlaying the switch tracks and could be causing the software bug. Electrically, I see nothing wrong here.
  9. codefox421
    You might look into using a differential with Technic-axle train wheels. By inverting the rotation of one wheel before it enters the differential, the differential will remain stationary when both wheels turn at the same rate. Monitoring the rotation of the differential will therefore tell you if the train is in a curve. Check out "Using Gears to Go Straight" from this Mindstorms book: http://goo.gl/mzfNZ0
  10. codefox421
    Thanks, matthewclso! A seal of approval like that from LEGO would be awesome! That said, an app is already underway, for Android devices at least. The must-have features still needing implementation are the little motor reversing switches and a way to swap between the two controllers (it's currently hard-coded). I lack the tools and skills necessary for iOS development, so there probably won't be an iOS app. That is unless someone else feels up to the task. This is an open source project after all.
  11. codefox421
    Quite a good point. I just realized D2 is intersecting the Bluetooth module, so I will need open the file back up anyhow. Will be a good time to make some other edits too.
  12. codefox421
    Wow, there were more components to place in less space than I was really conceptualizing! I still managed to fit the components onto a 3x4 sized PCB. Fitting mounting holes in that space with the components was out of the question, so I came up with an alternative: one mounting hole on a tab in the back. It provides a direct mounting point for the PCB, can be removed for a true 3x4 PCB, and doesn't get in the way if I later make a housing with technic pin holes to mimic the IR receiver. What do you think?
  13. codefox421
    Thanks Jim! I haven't gotten around to laying out the board yet as I have to create some component profiles from scratch. I'm aiming to have a PCB of 2x4 or 3x4 size, which would definitely fit into the 3x5 opening of that piece. I'm not sure what the height will be like; worst case you might have to stack 2 of them to fully enclose the electronics. The real challenge will be mounting it to that piece! I was reading up on a thread last night regarding 3D printed parts, which you had been testing. I may have some questions for you in the future... This definitely seems like a great solution to the mounting problem, especially now that I know it's been a success in the past. Do you know if it works with studs as well as axle pins? My use-case in particular involves more studs than Technic. I could just give it a try myself, no harm in that. I would like to test with NXT, but I won't be able to do that until the end of the year. The board layout will undoubtedly be finished before then (even within a week if I can find the time). Maybe someone else will be able to give it a rundown with NXT/EV3 earlier than I can.
  14. codefox421
    Thanks for the tip about Mouser, 1974! And I agree, a custom fabbed case would be supurb if I can make it work. That might take a while however, so quick (temporary?) options are nice to have as well. Thanks, JopieK! Have you posted about your BLE or XBee project anywhere? I would love to learn more. I was looking into XBee at first. The pin compatibility between modules is nice, but I found them to be rather expensive. I'm striving to keep the finished device around $30. I've been prototyping with an RN-42, but I'm waiting on an HC-06. The smaller sizes of these modules are a huge plus, and the HC-06 goes for about $5.50/each. The downside is their pin-outs differ, and unlike the RN-42 the HC-06 doesn't have a Class 1 counterpart. (The 100m range of an RN-41 would be killer! but probably unnecessary ) That is also a great idea you have, Phoxtane! Have you ever tried it before? I'm wondering if the PCB thickness would give a proper click for the .5L half of the pin? In other news, I've put together an Android version of the 8879 Speed Remote Control:
  15. codefox421
    That's an excellent idea Philo! I hadn't thought of taking that route. It would be an easy solution to get things going once I get some PCBs fabbed. D3K, you also have a lot of good suggestions, and I think I will incorporate them if I end up 3d printing the enclosure. The technic-beam on top is especially superb, since using a few pins-with-stud would turn it into a normal brick.
  16. codefox421
    I've put together an open source solution for controlling Power Functions using Bluetooth. Back when I started this, I had heard of the upcore, but it promised to be expensive and do a lot more than necessary. (Now that project doesn't even seem to exist anymore.) I've designed more of a 1:1 replacement for the standard PF IR receiver. Go here to find all the delicious source files: https://github.com/Btbricks Reading the readme can help in getting started: https://github.com/BTbricks/brickster-bluetooth-receiver/blob/master/README.md Here is a video of a very early prototype: I've built an Android app that looks just like the Power Functions remotes: I'd love to hear your thoughts about different app designs that could be useful. The cost per device is about $26. Everything squeezes into the inside of a theoretical 3x4 brick. I'm working on designing an enclosure (read: flashy plastic box), so please tell me what you would be looking for in terms of how it integrates with other LEGO bricks. Thanks! P.S. I'm trying to keep things licensed under an MIT license as much as possible. It is the most open of open source licenses! P.P.S. This topic is maybe inadequately named now.
  17. codefox421
    Ah yeah, should stay on topic. I don't have any of my trains here yet (moved recently), so I haven't been able to test it out. I come from a 9v train background, and I've been in the "midst" of motorizing my emerald night to work with my legacy track for the past 2 years. College. I finally have a PF XL motor and a spare wire to cut up, plus metal wheels on the way. I'll see if I can't get my EN out here in a few weeks to test; that would be great. Elsewhere I've seen talk that copper and aluminum don't hold up very well. I've used aluminum in the past and had no problems, but I largely used the converted pieces on sidings, so they didn't see much operation time. I'm trying copper this time because of its convenient dimensions. Stainless steel supposedly holds up the best, but I can't seem to find adhesive-backed versions of it (would love to know where I can get some if it exists). A roll of copper tape goes for about $7-$8 in retail shops. I got mine for ~$11 with free shipping (cheaper than retail store's shipping), since there is nowhere nearby that seems to carry the right stuff. I've barely put a dent in the roll, so you could say it's an inexpensive option. I'll definitely post my findings on durability once I do some proper tests. P.S. I hadn't heard BBB was getting into the rail market as well. Good to know there will be some healthy competition.
  18. codefox421
    That's awesome! Thanks for the heads up! Will you be using the LiPo battery like Thorsten did? I was thinking of running the 9v track supply straight to the IR receiver (after a bridge rectifier of course ). Those rechargeable battery boxes are a hell of an investment, and I'm sure they can be tough to hide as well.
  19. codefox421
    Hm... do you know if anyone has tried powering PF from 9v rails? I'm thinking of trying a system with custom power pickups (kind of like these), pulling the 9v for PF from the rails instead of a battery box.
  20. codefox421
    Hello, I always wondered if this was possible after reading about Chris Meyer's 9v backward compatibility for new plastic track. I haven't seen other posts about this; am I really the first to have tried it? I can't believe that. Nothing fancy, just copper tape on the rails: It's only a rudimentary test (having moved, I don't have a 9v train motor on hand right now), but it seems quite promising. Wide curves, anyone?
  21. codefox421
    Do the small cylinders and pumps (x189c01 and x191c01) have any metal components in them? I would guess not based on pictures of them, but I don't own any, so I can't check. If they don't, it would make sense that they can't be damaged by corrosion.
  22. codefox421
    Let's assume we don't need to worry about the lines popping off (it's been said using tubing with a smaller inner diameter could solve that). Would a closed system work well enough? It is obvious a closed system works. See this video of one (at ~1min): However, my thoughts are along the lines of using only one hydraulic line between the cylinders, like so: It's clear that this setup does actually work... ...but I wonder if this would solve the corrosion issue and perform well enough to suffice. Any thoughts?
  23. codefox421
    Has there been any more research done on LEGO hydraulics? I'm wondering if Timo's mobile crane avoided corrosion by exposing only the lower half of the cylinder (away from the piston rod) to the liquid. If forced to use only one inlet, would such a system perform well enough for the intended applications? (I mainly wonder this because it would rely on negative pressure to retract the remote cylinder.) Would love to hear further thoughts on this topic or try it out myself, but I'm afraid to lose the only cylinders I own. They also happen to be of the leaky variety, which is a bummer, but might be solved by only introducing liquid to the bottom halves.
×
×
  • Create New...