General Part Discussion

[Zerobricks]

This turntable change came out already in the 42144 and I think 75313. I think the reasons for redesigns and reinforcment are material change, though I also think that 42146 also played a big part.

[R0Sch]

10 minutes ago, Zerobricks said:

This turntable change came out already in the 42144 and I think 75313. I think the reasons for redesigns and reinforcment are material change, though I also think that 42146 also played a big part.

Yes, it came out early 2022 and is used in 10 sets currently including the new orrery. Some sets like the Tow Truck and Mindstorms 51515 even got an inventory update with newer turntables, so the old one was definitely phased out beginning of 2022.

[SNIPE]

I just discovered that if you put two 1L bushes inside of the yamaha gear selector clutch, you can use any axles now, where as if you used an axle joiner you can't always do that.

For example lets say if I wanted x.5L on one side and just y on the other side

 Where x and y are whole numbers. But that doesnt always mean using a 5.5L axle, you could put 1.5L of a normal axle inside of the two bushes (which equals 2L) and then just 0.5L of the other axle in the other side.

But even cooler that that is you can have two indepentant axles insisde of one clutch ring where as before they had to be meshed.

You can still selecet the gears in the same way as before but only one axle is meshed with the clutch ring.

only trouble is that the way I figured out to do it has a little friction when rotating indepentantly. Perhaps someone will figure out another way in future, but on the other hand maybe it acting like a linear clutch is more useful anyhow.

LDR file

 

[gyenesvi]

19 hours ago, SNIPE said:

I just discovered that if you put two 1L bushes inside of the yamaha gear selector clutch, you can use any axles now, where as if you used an axle joiner you can't always do that.

I don't clearly get what you are trying to show here, you explain two innovative use cases, but your graphics seems to showcase neither, instead some weird irregular spacing width that ring that you don't even mention. So what's that supposed to mean?

About using the 1L bushes instead of a connector, not sure how that's supposed to work, how would the ring fit onto that? One side of the 1L bush is circular and does not have the cutouts required to allow the ring to slide on it I think. But if it had, then the ring would rotate both bushes with itself at the same time. Even if the whole thing worked, it would mean that the axle would not be secured on one side, it would be very wobbly. Or I misunderstood what you mean..

[SNIPE]

On 12/25/2023 at 11:59 AM, gyenesvi said:

I don't clearly get what you are trying to show here, you explain two innovative use cases, but your graphics seems to showcase neither, instead some weird irregular spacing width that ring that you don't even mention. So what's that supposed to mean?

About using the 1L bushes instead of a connector, not sure how that's supposed to work, how would the ring fit onto that? One side of the 1L bush is circular and does not have the cutouts required to allow the ring to slide on it I think. But if it had, then the ring would rotate both bushes with itself at the same time. Even if the whole thing worked, it would mean that the axle would not be secured on one side, it would be very wobbly. Or I misunderstood what you mean..

you use 2 bushes but with the notched sides (where they can connect between a 2x2 array of studs) facing each other and towards the middle. now you have a thru axle hole but the clutch ring can still slide along and mesh with gears on either side.

[Carsten Svendsen]

25 minutes ago, SNIPE said:

you use 2 bushes but with the notched sides (where they can connect between a 2x2 array of studs) facing each other and towards the middle. now you have a thru axle hole but the clutch ring can still slide along and mesh with gears on either side.

Oh, I understand now. The ridges on the 1L bush is the same as the ridges on the axle joiners. But, using this method, now your gearbox is not stable, and will be unable to transmit any torque at all.

[2GodBDGlory]

Are you sure that works in practice? I've tried using that technique with 3L driving rings, and I was only ever able to engage about halfway into the gear, because the non-notched side of the bush would limit the travel of the driving ring. Maybe the new 2L ones are different, but I don't see why they would be.

I like the idea, though! I always like interesting gearbox solutions

[SNIPE]

52 minutes ago, 2GodBDGlory said:

Are you sure that works in practice? I've tried using that technique with 3L driving rings, and I was only ever able to engage about halfway into the gear, because the non-notched side of the bush would limit the travel of the driving ring. Maybe the new 2L ones are different, but I don't see why they would be.

I like the idea, though! I always like interesting gearbox solutions

yes i know what you mean, but this does work in practise unlike the 3L version.

[shroomzofdoom]

 

2 hours ago, SNIPE said:

yes i know what you mean, but this does work in practise unlike the 3L version.

I'm gonna try this out today. Thanks!

Not sure if you guys are experiencing the same thing, but my experience is that the new 2L shifters seem to hang up more often than the older 3L ones during shifts. It seems to happen with all the current clutch gears (16T, 24T, 20T).

I've been working this week to shorten a 4 speed transmission design I have and actually considering giving up on the 2L shift rings for now.

 

Edit- I suspect this has to do with the fact that the 2L axle connectors have a slight taper to them.

Edited January 5, 2024 by shroomzofdoom

[gyenesvi]

3 hours ago, SNIPE said:

yes i know what you mean, but this does work in practise unlike the 3L version.

50 minutes ago, shroomzofdoom said:

I'm gonna try this out today. Thanks!

Just tried it; it does not seem to work for me.

In more detail, the 2L ring can successfully slide on the bush a bit, into the clutch gear. However, there are two problems. Ones is that the ring does not fully engage the gear, because the non-ridged end of the bush is stopping it too soon. Second, is that at that end position, the other end of the ring is still engaging the other bush a little. If it could slide a bit more, than it could work.. Even than, as the two axles are not connected, they are kind of wobbly, just as the ring on them, definitely not something I'd trust to transmit torque.

On 12/24/2023 at 5:13 PM, SNIPE said:

only trouble is that the way I figured out to do it has a little friction when rotating indepentantly.

Maybe that little friction comes from the ring still engaging the other bush

On 12/24/2023 at 5:13 PM, SNIPE said:

Is that why you experimented with some weird spacing here?

Anyway, even if it would work, I still don't get how you would use it. The only usage I could imagine is some linear axle-coupling switch, but you don't really need gears for that. Do you have any more well-defined example in mind @SNIPE?

[shroomzofdoom]

1 minute ago, gyenesvi said:

Just tried it; it does not seem to work for me. 

Me neither 

[SNIPE]

21 minutes ago, shroomzofdoom said:

Me neither 

Yes, it doesnt mesh all the way, but it still meshes.

I don't get why people are so afraid to try stuff like this, thats what LEGO is all about and even LEGO do it themselves in official sets

I'll try and find a better way soon but it might involve using retired/legacy parts!.

[gyenesvi]

2 minutes ago, SNIPE said:

I don't get why people are so afraid to try stuff like this, thats what LEGO is all about and

Because we know that it breaks under load :) Many people would want to use such things in motorized builds. May fly in manual ones though..

2 minutes ago, SNIPE said:

even LEGO do it themselves in official sets

Less and less..

But we still don't get what you are trying to achieve.. ?? Is it the linear coupling? Because then the gear mesh does not matter, but the other problems above still exist.

[SNIPE]

I doub't it breaks, I very rarley break parts, sometimes the ends on thin liftarms get cracked but other than that, nothing.

The idea is simply to have a selector clutch that allows an axle to pass all the way thru, rathern than having an axle joiner which does not.

The weird spacing thing is a different story, thats to besically have 2 independant axles inside of the clutch ring that can still slide to engage the gears. (sounds useless, but people have no imagination until in like 10 years where theyll want it all of a sudden)

[2GodBDGlory]

1 hour ago, SNIPE said:

I doub't it breaks, I very rarley break parts, sometimes the ends on thin liftarms get cracked but other than that, nothing.

The idea is simply to have a selector clutch that allows an axle to pass all the way thru, rathern than having an axle joiner which does not.

The weird spacing thing is a different story, thats to besically have 2 independant axles inside of the clutch ring that can still slide to engage the gears. (sounds useless, but people have no imagination until in like 10 years where theyll want it all of a sudden)

I hope you can figure something out!

The last time I tried something like this was when I was making an RC manual-transmission-style transmission, where my 3L driving rings had to have enough friction to keep them from sliding into gear when not selected, but less than the full force of the white extenders. I wanted to use a 2L ring and a bush to make it work, but it wouldn't engage with enough torque to make it work, so instead I used this strange construction with a 2L axle+pin part, a 3L bar, and a stud pin:

(The top two are what I did; the bottom is what didn't work)

This is a different situation and solution than what you're working on, though!

[shroomzofdoom]

3 hours ago, SNIPE said:

I don't get why people are so afraid to try stuff like this

I'll try anything once and I sure appreciate you trying and sharing! Under higher torque applications I could see this disengaging and stripping clutch gears though.

 

I was able to get a picture of the taper.

Under high load, the new 2L rings wobble and definitely have more engagement issues when compared with the 3L ones. I hope this gets addressed in the future...especially because these 2L rings are very expensive. The taper is the only thing I can think of but I can't prove it.

[SNIPE]

3 hours ago, 2GodBDGlory said:

Ah, I see what you did, nice solution. I also tried the bottom solution before but no luck, and i don't think I thought to use those axle pins.

 

1 hour ago, shroomzofdoom said:

I'll try anything once and I sure appreciate you trying and sharing! Under higher torque applications I could see this disengaging

Thx. Yes under "high" high load it won't be very reliable I guess

[gyenesvi]

20 hours ago, SNIPE said:

I doub't it breaks, I very rarley break parts, sometimes the ends on thin liftarms get cracked but other than that, nothing.

By breaking I did not actually mean parts breaking, but the drivetrain disengaging / skipping / bending, etc.

One other problem with the ring not meshing the gear properly: you won't be able to actuate the ring with something that wants to move it exactly by half a stud for a proper mesh, such as a wave selector.

20 hours ago, SNIPE said:

The idea is simply to have a selector clutch that allows an axle to pass all the way thru, rathern than having an axle joiner which does not.

Oh, so do you mean two axles inserted into a bush half-way, to get half axle lengths? A bush won't hold two half axles properly, so that will be flimsy I guess.

Here's the linear engaging mechanism (clutch?) that could be built. The red and yellow axles are independent, not connected in the middle.

A 2L ring could connect or disconnect the two halves, actuated by a wave selector for example.

However, it does not work reliably in practise; when trying to engage, the ring can get blocked by the bush if the two halves are not in sync in rotation. This only gets worse, as the two halves are not connected and can wobble a bit, becoming misaligned, and get blocked with higher probability. Longer support for the axles, or maybe a different mechanism to move the ring would result in less jamming, but I doubt it would become reliable (the synchronization is still a problem).

EDIT: I tried it with more axle support, better, but can still jam when trying to engage while stationary, needs slow rotation to click in.

Note that this is nothing really new, as this technique has been used in old MOCs with the old 2L connector and 2L ring (for example Sheepo's Jeep Wrangler uses this for RWD/AWD selector if I remember well). However, I have seen comments about that not being reliable and jamming as well.

Edited January 6, 2024 by gyenesvi

[SNIPE]

20 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

By breaking I did not actually mean parts breaking, but the drivetrain disengaging / skipping / bending, etc.

I see

21 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

Oh, so do you mean two axles inserted into a bush half-way, to get half axle lengths? A bush won't hold two half axles properly, so that will be flimsy I guess.

Yeah, that's what I meant

[2GodBDGlory]

58 minutes ago, gyenesvi said:

Here's the linear engaging mechanism (clutch?) that could be built. The red and yellow axles are independent, not connected in the middle.

 

A 2L ring could connect or disconnect the two halves, actuated by a wave selector for example.

 

However, it does not work reliably in practise; when trying to engage, the ring can get blocked by the bush if the two halves are not in sync in rotation. This only gets worse, as the two halves are not connected and can wobble a bit, becoming misaligned, and get blocked with higher probability. Longer support for the axles, or maybe a different mechanism to move the ring would result in less jamming, but I doubt it would become reliable (the synchronization is still a problem).

Note that this is nothing really new, as this technique has been used in old MOCs with the old 2L connector and 2L ring (for example Sheepo's Jeep Wrangler uses this for RWD/AWD selector if I remember well). However, I have seen comments about that not being reliable and jamming as well.

I like that idea, but you're right, it probably wouldn't work well in practice.

Cool that Sheepo used it! I've always been curious about the crazy engineering going on in his MOCs, but I could never learn as much as I wanted without buying his instructions.

This is always my go-to for a linear disconnect:

It's certainly not going to be a "legal" connection with the old TDR extender jammed in there, but I've found it to be fairly reliable when properly braced

[gyenesvi]

7 minutes ago, 2GodBDGlory said:

It's certainly not going to be a "legal" connection with the old TDR extender jammed in there, but I've found it to be fairly reliable when properly braced

Oh that looks like a nice one! It seems solid enough because even when disconnected, the axles themselves still have a (pinhole) connection, and it seems robust for engagement as well. This shows that the concept could be turned into a solid legal solution if there existed a special part for that assembly on the left. And the whole package could be made 4 units long.

[Bluehose]

1 hour ago, 2GodBDGlory said:

I like that idea, but you're right, it probably wouldn't work well in practice.

Cool that Sheepo used it! I've always been curious about the crazy engineering going on in his MOCs, but I could never learn as much as I wanted without buying his instructions.

This is always my go-to for a linear disconnect:

It's certainly not going to be a "legal" connection with the old TDR extender jammed in there, but I've found it to be fairly reliable when properly braced

Thank you for that, I needed it for a project in the past, I will give it a shot when I will finish the current one.

[msk6003]

Finally TLG bring back double bent liftarm in green. Last release is 2002 but it is education set so actual last release is 1998.

Included set

8x in 8479(1997)

2x in 9780(1998)

2x in 970676(2002)

2x in 8217(1998)

9780 and 970676 is education set.

And angle connector #6 in green is also very rare parts. Last release is 1999.

[TechnicRCRacer]

1 hour ago, msk6003 said:

Finally TLG bring back double bent liftarm in green.

Nice spot! The green double bent liftarm has been pretty hard to find outside of BrickLink, I wonder what other parts are hiding inside.

[Jurss]

That windscreen is new?