SBrick makes your trains smarter - Kickstarter

[UrbanErwin]

I think it will have some great potential, especially with 9V tracks, I have pledged for one receiver to test look if I can power track and switches with it.

@ Pasztorl: I was wondering if it is possible to power a Sbrick through a Pf Extension/Conversion wire and a 9V traincontroller.

[pasztorl]

I think it will have some great potential, especially with 9V tracks, I have pledged for one receiver to test look if I can power track and switches with it.

@ Pasztorl: I was wondering if it is possible to power a Sbrick through a Pf Extension/Conversion wire and a 9V traincontroller.

Thank you for your pledge, you pushed us one step towards our goal. ;)

We will get ASAP a 9V power supply to test the brick properly, and modify the circuitry if it's needed. We'd really like to get it to work with this PS too.

[UrbanErwin]

Thank you for your pledge, you pushed us one step towards our goal. ;)

We will get ASAP a 9V power supply to test the brick properly, and modify the circuitry if it's needed. We'd really like to get it to work with this PS too.

Thanks, if I may ask what is PS?

[pasztorl]

Thanks, if I may ask what is PS?

Sorry, it is the Power Supply.

[UrbanErwin]

Sorry, it is the Power Supply.

Thank you for the clarification

[JopieK]

BLE (Bluetooth Smart / 4.0) is a totally different standard from Bluetooth 1 and/or 2. In Android it depends on what device you have and the distribution. All newer Apple devices have BLE.

[codefox421]

@ Pasztorl: I was wondering if it is possible to power a Sbrick through a Pf Extension/Conversion wire and a 9V traincontroller.

As a LEGO train fan, I made backward compatibility with the 9V system a requirement from the start for BricksTer: http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=87340

I guess you could call my project the competition to SBrick, and there are advantages and disadvantages to both projects.

[pasztorl]

I am preparing for the video.

This is my first proto for a track switch.

The servo motor handle the switch.

Two semaphore signal.

All controlled by 1 SBrick.

You can see the images here: 1 2 3

In the video I will use 2 train and 2 track switch. My custom profile will control 4 SBrick simultaneously.

Edited July 22, 2014 by pasztorl

[pasztorl]

Thanks to Philo we have an LDraw object for SBrick now.

You can download here.

To use it with LDraw you need to uncompress the zip in your parts folder (subparts in s folder must go to parts/s folder).

Edited July 22, 2014 by pasztorl

[T1000]

Hey SBrick,

Is there a way to connect it to a laptop, as my phone doesn't know much about multitouch functions?

Keep up the good work

See you soon

[Conchas]

As a LEGO train fan, I made backward compatibility with the 9V system a requirement from the start for BricksTer: http://www.eurobrick...showtopic=87340

I guess you could call my project the competition to SBrick, and there are advantages and disadvantages to both projects.

IMO this a fair remark, but a tricky topic.

While 9V compatibility is a nice to have feature, PFS compatibility should above all.

And if TLG didn't made the PF IR Receiver directly compatible with older 9V power sources, it was for a reason!

Although it is a decision exclusively from the SBrick team, I'm afraid that making SBrick compatible with old 9V system ouf-of-the-box may compromise PF bus integrity. And consequently compromise the higher aim of achieving TLG certification (might be very unlikely but still a possibility).

There are several methods known to overcome this limitation and I'd prefer to use one of them, than jeopardize with the SBrick design and full PFS compliance.

http://www.technicbr...f-receiver.html

http://www.technicbr...f-receiver.html

http://www.technicbr...f-receiver.html

And you efforts with BricksTer are of course very well appreciated too!

Another approach for those who do not fear to play with the soldering iron themselves.

[codefox421]

IMO this a fair remark, but a tricky topic.

While 9V compatibility is a nice to have feature, PFS compatibility should above all.

And if TLG didn't made the PF IR Receiver directly compatible with older 9V power sources, it was for a reason!

Although it is a decision exclusively from the SBrick team, I'm afraid that making SBrick compatible with old 9V system ouf-of-the-box may compromise PF bus integrity. And consequently compromise the higher aim of achieving TLG certification (might be very unlikely but still a possibility).

Don't get me wrong, BricksTer hasn't neglected Power Functions compatibility for the sake of 9V compatibility. There are reasons LEGO didn't include 9V compatibility. Whatever those may be, 3rd party projects need not follow suit.

There are several methods known to overcome this limitation and I'd prefer to use one of them, than jeopardize with the SBrick design and full PFS compliance.

http://www.technicbr...f-receiver.html

http://www.technicbr...f-receiver.html

http://www.technicbr...f-receiver.html

I'm familiar with the tin foil method, but I hadn't seen the battery method or the output-as-input method before. Good tips.

My biggest issue with the tin foil method is that you can potentially connect the battery backward. I'm not sure if those other two methods have the same issue, but BricksTer ensures proper polarity of 9V input. No more connect and really quickly disconnect if the LED doesn't light up. Instead, BricksTer is plug'n'play 9V compatible.

And you efforts with BricksTer are of course very well appreciated too!

Another approach for those who do not fear to play with the soldering iron themselves.

Thank you! Though my long term goal has always been to have a KickStarter of my own. I simply decided to open-source BricksTer from the start. I didn't want it to go the way of UPCORE: promise of open-source in the furture, but nothing to show at the end of the day. This way, if I get hit by a bus tomorrow, all the information is still there!

By the way, I don't plan on getting hit by a bus, but who does?

Edited July 23, 2014 by codefox421

[HenrikLego]

One question: I understand that my device can run up to 16 SBricks (which each got 4 ports). Okay.

But what if I bring my SBricks to an Lego event? Will my SBrick interfere with other SBricks at the same event?

[pasztorl]

One question: I understand that my device can run up to 16 SBricks (which each got 4 ports). Okay.

But what if I bring my SBricks to an Lego event? Will my SBrick interfere with other SBricks at the same event?

Anyone who has ever dealt with radio technology knows that this is not an exact number, because successful communication depends on a lot of factors. The Bluetooth 4.0 specification doesnt state a limit on the number of devices that can work simultaneously. The number of simultaneously working devices depends on the available and actually used bandwith, on the transmission power and distance of both the communicating parties and the interfering devices. So ultimately this number will depend upon the protocol we use. If we want a lot of devices to be able to coexist, we must use small packet and transmit rarely. However, if we want tight control and low latency, we need higher bandwith. Good news for the train users, that controlling a train set requires much less bandwith, than controlling a fast RC car, and fortunately enough, it's rare to see more than a dozen or two Lego race cars on the same track. :) We don't want to open the protocol just yet, because it is heavily being developed. One of the crucial features will be the ability to control bandwith use, and help making a compromise between latency and interference. Good news is that with our the current "dumb" protocol we saw absolutely no interference problems during the tests and during the filming of our video at Hero's square, Budapest. We did some calculations and estimations, and as far as we can see, about 30 SBricks can coexist in the same small area (about 25 square meters) without any interference, using the maximum bandwidth and minimum latency. Also, the actual impact of the interference, and the available range might depend somewhat on the other device - your phone. We will test the SBrick with a wide range of phones and tablets and we will work hard to ensure the best performance with each one of them. If we receive negative feedback for a device combination, we will investigate and fix the issue. It's our top priority to make SBrick a quality product.

[pasztorl]

I am preparing for the video.

This is my first proto for a track switch.

The servo motor handle the switch.

Two semaphore signal.

All controlled by 1 SBrick.

You can see the images here: 1 2 3

In the video I will use 2 train and 2 track switch. My custom profile will control 4 SBrick simultaneously.

Zsolt just finished the remote controller for this video. You can see the screenshot of the remote control profile what we will use here.

[toxicbananna]

will we be able to build our own layout on our devices and integrate with sbrick for track control? If so that would be ideal!!!

it is, but also very, very difficult!

[BrickDafki]

I've pledged for one, I'm very curious to try this!

[Pop Bumper Pete]

I am excited by this project

I have been thinking about it all day and it will bring a lot more life into running trains

this is the first Kickstarter I have pledged to

good luck with reaching your goal

[Pix]

I found your project very interesting.

But I've some concern about the performance in a big Diorama. For my LUG I'm a Project Manager for our City Diorama. The last Diorama had a dimension of about 75 sqm, with 7-8 trains running at the same time. The 9V tracks are very expensive now and the PF system isn't the best system for a big diorama (IR is terrible for long distance, but it's perfect for a toy, we don't forget LEGO is a toy for children).

According to you, is this brick a good solution for a diorama with the same dimension?

One questions: for a perfect train layout, and a beautiful train automation system, the most important items are the sensors, because with these you can control all the trains, with start, stop, ecc ecc...

What we can do with sbrick for this?

[pasztorl]

I found your project very interesting.

But I've some concern about the performance in a big Diorama. For my LUG I'm a Project Manager for our City Diorama. The last Diorama had a dimension of about 75 sqm, with 7-8 trains running at the same time. The 9V tracks are very expensive now and the PF system isn't the best system for a big diorama (IR is terrible for long distance, but it's perfect for a toy, we don't forget LEGO is a toy for children).

According to you, is this brick a good solution for a diorama with the same dimension?

One questions: for a perfect train layout, and a beautiful train automation system, the most important items are the sensors, because with these you can control all the trains, with start, stop, ecc ecc...

What we can do with sbrick for this?

I found your project very interesting.

But I've some concern about the performance in a big Diorama. For my LUG I'm a Project Manager for our City Diorama. The last Diorama had a dimension of about 75 sqm, with 7-8 trains running at the same time. The 9V tracks are very expensive now and the PF system isn't the best system for a big diorama (IR is terrible for long distance, but it's perfect for a toy, we don't forget LEGO is a toy for children).

According to you, is this brick a good solution for a diorama with the same dimension?

One questions: for a perfect train layout, and a beautiful train automation system, the most important items are the sensors, because with these you can control all the trains, with start, stop, ecc ecc...

What we can do with sbrick for this?

Yes, SBrick can deal with it.

About sensors. We receive many questions about this. Now our first priority to deliver SBrick on time. We see, that SBrick users needs sensors. We have plan to implement it as an addition to SBrick. The sensors will be connect directly to the application. Application will handle the received messages from the sensors and sends the configured/programmed commands to SBrick(s). Now, it is a plan, it can be real in the future.

We want do some survays about addons for SBrick after we delver SBricks to the users.

Edited July 25, 2014 by pasztorl

[zephyr1934]

My first thought about the SBricks is that while it is very cool and looks to be reasonably priced, since I am mostly still 9v I probably cannot justify the extra cost over an IR receiver.

My second thought, however, is can I use bluetooth from an NXT to control the SBrick? If so, that opens up a whole lot of potential applications, e.g., manually starting a train but having an NXT automatically stop it when arrives at a station. Or running two trains on one track with one free running and the other being controlled by the NXT (and wayside sensors) to keep a safe distance.

Is the SBrick NXT controllable? If you've already answered that question, just a link would be sufficient.

[pasztorl]

My first thought about the SBricks is that while it is very cool and looks to be reasonably priced, since I am mostly still 9v I probably cannot justify the extra cost over an IR receiver.

My second thought, however, is can I use bluetooth from an NXT to control the SBrick? If so, that opens up a whole lot of potential applications, e.g., manually starting a train but having an NXT automatically stop it when arrives at a station. Or running two trains on one track with one free running and the other being controlled by the NXT (and wayside sensors) to keep a safe distance.

Is the SBrick NXT controllable? If you've already answered that question, just a link would be sufficient.

We receiving many question about NXT compatibility.

The short answer is no.

The main problem is the NXT uses different BT radio. SBrick uses the newer BLE4 which not backward compatible to EV3.

We see the big advantage in connecting to EV3 and SBrick together.

We have a plan for connecting them using the SBrick mobile/tablet/PC application to acts as a gateway between of them.

We haven't tested this solution yet, so we can't promise anything about that.

If we can do this this can be a very nice feature, because our app can be more complex as receiving signals from NXT sensors and vice-versa.

In the other way, we see the NXT prices.. At now, our very first priority is to take SBrick into production, finish the applications for mobile and PC, then lauch the profile designer service.

Then we will come back to you with a survay about to adjust our priorities to meet SBrick users requirements.

I can imagine a cheap and small touch sensor for the trains. The sensor can be have an internal power source (like 1 AAA battery) and connects wireless to the SBrick application. Then the application can handle the events received from the touch sensor and stop/coach the train, etc.

[zephyr1934]

Oh yes, moving the processing to the tablet would be good and the prospect of bluetooth sensors to do so even better. Indeed you are on to some neat stuff.

[Pix]

I can imagine a cheap and small touch sensor for the trains. The sensor can be have an internal power source (like 1 AAA battery) and connects wireless to the SBrick application. Then the application can handle the events received from the touch sensor and stop/coach the train, etc.

Sooooo good! I like this!

[zephyr1934]

On the topic of sensors for trains, here is another idea for the future wish list. Rather than a touch sensor, it would be great to have a bluetooth reed switch to pick up the train magnets. Sensitive enough so that it would detect trains in the given track, but not so sensitive that it also responds to trains in the adjacent track. That would enable grade crossings, block signals, and a host of other applications.