|
|
| |
In lugnet.ambassadors, Jean-Marc Nimal wrote:
> Straight from Steve Witt, the list of Cycle 7 ambassadors - congrats to all!
>
>
> Announcing the members of the LEGO Ambassadors for Cycle 7
>
> This was a great year for nominations for the LEGO Ambassador Program. We
> received a total of 86 nominations and settled on 45 members who will be
> participating for the coming year.
>
> The new cycle represents 27 different nationalities and 50 different groups
> across the globe. Please congratulate the Cycle 7 LEGO Ambassadors.
>
> The following list gives the name of the Ambassador, what group(s) they
> represent, and what country they live in.
>
> SNIP!
>
> Congratulations to the LEGO Ambassador Group for Cycle 7!!!
>
> Steve Witt
> LEGO Ambassador Lead
>
> Tormod, Jan, Jim & Phil
> LEGO Community Team
Congratulations to all that were selected! It looks like we have a great and
very diverse group of people. I am sure that they will all do a great job
representing the community and I am very interested to see what they can
accomplish over the next year.
I find it interesting, however, that we have nobody representing LUGNET. Was anyone even nominated? I know there was a thread on here regarding ambassador nominations, but I don't think it ever gathered any steam. Not to beat a dead horse...but is this another sign that LUGNET is dying?
-Dave
|
|
| |
Straight from Steve Witt, the list of Cycle 7 ambassadors - congrats to all!
Announcing the members of the LEGO Ambassadors for Cycle 7
This was a great year for nominations for the LEGO Ambassador Program. We
received a total of 86 nominations and settled on 45 members who will be
participating for the coming year.
The new cycle represents 27 different nationalities and 50 different groups
across the globe. Please congratulate the Cycle 7 LEGO Ambassadors.
The following list gives the name of the Ambassador, what group(s) they
represent, and what country they live in.
Sebastion Arts – De Bouwsteen – The Netherlands
Sue Ann Barber – MUGs – Australia
Patrick Begin – QueLUG – Canada
Heiner Berg – MBFR – Germany
Norbert Black – ParLUGment – Canada
Pitsanu Boonyarit – Thai Brick Club – Thailand
Andrew Bulthaupt – BZPower – USA
Pijarn Charoensri – T-LUG - Thailand
Marco Chiappa – ItLUG – Italy
Ben Coifman – Railbricks, ILTCO & COLTC – USA
Fernando Correia – PLUG – Portugal
Yvonne Doyle – Brickish Association – the United Kingdom
Ben Ellermann – Classic-Castle.com, GatewayLUG & ForbiddenCove.com – USA
Adrian Florea – RoLUG – Romania
David Furphy – CALG – Australia
Lluis Gibert – HispaLUG – Spain
Tim Gould – Brothers-Brick.com – Australia
Matija Grguric – Klub Kockice – Croatia
Philip Heinrich – Bricksinmotion.com – USA
Tom Jacobs – Classic-Pirates.com – Belgium
Tsang Yiu Keung – HKLUG – Hong Kong
Sung-Wan Kim – BrickInside – South Korea
Christian Krutzfeldt – 1000Steine – Germany
Tuomas Kukkamaa – Palikkatakomo – Finland
John Langrish – VicLUG – Canada
Igor Makarov – DoubleBrick & Phantoms – Russia
Lino Martins – LUGNUTS & SeaLUG – USA
Matija Puzar – Brikkelauget – Norway
Don Reitz – FBTB.net – USA
Wagner Cavalli – LUG Brasil – Brazil
Harald Roossien – LowLUG – The Netherlands
Dan Rubin – Classic-Space.com – USA
Kazuyoshi Saito – AFOL Japan – Japan
Svend Erik Saksun – Byggepladen – Denmark
Verena Schaden – LCOe – Austria
James Shields – Brick.IE – Ireland
Josephine Shih – TWLUG – Taiwan
Mikael Sjostedt – Eurobricks & SweLUG – Sweden
Pedro Silva – Comunidade 0937 – Portugal
Ludo Soete – BeLUG – Belgium
Stacy Sterling – MOCpages & TwinLUG – USA
Saso Tomat – Slobricks – Slovenia
Jenn Wagner – BrickLink – Canada
Marcin Witkiewicz – LugPol – Poland
Cagri Yuz – TurkLUG – Turkey
Congratulations to the LEGO Ambassador Group for Cycle 7!!!
Steve Witt
LEGO Ambassador Lead
Tormod, Jan, Jim & Phil
LEGO Community Team
|
|
| |
In lugnet.mediawatch, Abner Finley wrote:
| |
Indianapolis, IN
April 6, 2009
Indianapolis Museum Exhibits LEGO: Castle Adventure
Hear ye, hear ye, calling builders of all ages... join The Children’s Museum
of Indianapolis as they debut the opening of LEGO Castle Adventure. The new
traveling museum exhibit begins at The Children’s Museum of Indianapolis and
will visit 12 major markets in North America through 2013, reaching more than
2 million children and families.
|
SNIP
Can we get a list of proposed dates and locations so hte LUGs can start working
on partnering plans with the local hosting venues?
Paul Sinasohn
BAYLUG
LUGNET #115
|
|
| |
To all:
I made a Lego Marble Run - made entirely out of Legos (acutally my
children and I did). You can view the results here:
search Youtube for:
"Lego - Marble Run - 100% Lego - Final - Wistuk"
or try this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRTnFnTA0zQ
Nothing was cut, all peices can be reused and are available anywhere. The run is
highly flexible, easy to build and expand on.
I would be very happy to answer any questions you may have, as a ton of thought
has gone into this and I would love to share how it is done. It would have been
larger, but my wife started to complain.
Bart Wistuk
b5612@optonline.net
|
|
| |
In lugnet.dear-lego, Chris Marx wrote:
(Last things first here...)
> So what do you think LUGNET? Is there any interest out there for
> this kind of thing from TLG, or am I all alone out here?
Given the the rise of the GBCs has been one of the most amazing things I've seen
in the AFoL community, I'd say you're far from alone. I'd love to see TLG come
out with some LEGO-based marble runs (or rolling ball sculptures, or any of the
numerous other names). I'm not sure why they've not done it already. With the PF
motors, there's a system to power lifts. Just package it up. They even have a
ready-made design study in the numerous GBC modules that are out there.
> 1. LEGO parts can be used to build almost anything imaginable.
> If we want to build ball tracks with LEGO it can certainly be
> done... That being said, specialized parts would be a huge
> advantage.
Also a huge (cost) disadvantage. Remember LEGO has tried to reduce the parts
pallet, so anything that expands it needs to really prove its worth. And since
it's quite possible to build GBCs/RBSs out of the currently existing LEGO parts,
I'm not sure I see a strong reason for expanding. The most difficult part is
building a reliable lift, and even that can certainly be done without new molds.
> 3. We know that there is some market for this type of toy.
That actually what puzzles me - there seems to be a strong market for this sort
of set, and it's one exploited by many of LEGOs direct competitors. Do they just
not wish to compete there?
> ...have special pieces to allow for the creation of custom shaped
> track geometries. I'm imagining some kind of bracket that would
> hold two rails for the marbles to run on, with the rails being made
> out of those hard plastic tubes that came with some of the technic
> sets.
It might be tough to join those very thin tubes with supports in a strong enough
way. The larger diameter "ribbed" tubing works quite well in this regard, with
normal parts (cross-blocks and similar) making for adjustable spaced brackets.
Would I buy these sorts of sets? Probably in a heartbeat, and I'll bet we could
sell them out anywhere a group GBC is displayed. The single most common question
being "where can I buy this?". 'Course, we've seen how well this sort of
argument worked for 9V trains...
--
Brian Davis
|
|
| |
I would love to see TLG develop a marble run/ball track theme. Marble run toys
are my favorites next to LEGO and it would be great if I could bring the two
together. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. LEGO parts can be used to build almost anything imaginable. If we want to
build ball tracks with LEGO it can certainly be done. For examples just look at
http://www.baylug.org/zonker/ZMarble.html or any of the Great Ball Contraptions
that people assemble at LEGO conventions. That being said, specialized parts
would be a huge advantage. Think of how difficult it would be to create LEGO
model railroad layouts without special track and wheel pieces.
2. I think that marble tracks and complex looking rube goldberg machines have
the same kind of universal appeal as LEGO bricks. When you present someone with
LEGO bricks they just naturally want to pick them up and play with them.
Similarly, when you put someone in front of a marble track, they almost cant
help but drop at least one or two marbles in to see what happens. This sense of
kinesthetic curiosity is what drives folks to drop coins into those parabolic
funnels where the coins go around and around.
3. We know that there is some market for this type of toy. Every time I go into
Toys R Us I am tempted to pick up one of the marble tracks that are produced by
other companies. K'Nex has a set called "Motorized Madness Ball Machine" that is
very impressive, Magnetix makes the iCoaster set, and there are various other
ball tracks that are not part of a formalized building system, like the Skyrail
sets. There is even a toy called "Block and Roll Marble Maze" that is compatible
with Duplo bricks. At the higher price end of the scale there are some excellent
wooden ball tracks. The best in the world IMHO are the Cuboro sets made of 5cm
cubes. The next best is the Klimba system which adds specially designed track so
that the marble plays a melody by striking xylophone pieces on the way down.
Other great lines are the Quadrilla ball runs and HABA marble tracks. For the
truly old school, look up the Spacewarp 5000. A quick Google search can turn up
info and pictures on any of these for those who are not familiar with them.
4. So, knowing there are all these other types of marble run toys out there, why
am I so interested in having LEGO come out with their own system?
Well, the first reason is that I think there is some room for creative
innovation in marble track building systems. Cuboro is brilliantly designed but
limited by the fact that all the pieces are made of kiln dried 5cm beechwood
cubes. There are no long bridge type structures or spirals or even large curves.
Klimba is very specifically musical in nature and doesn't lend itself to
flexibility. All of the wooden tracks are a great value IMHO, but they are very
expensive, even for small sets. The K'Nex and Magnetix sets are neat but limited
in the ways the track can fit together. I think TLG could design a few new
pieces that would leverage the existing building system to create something more
open to creativity than any of the other sets.
The second reason is I could leverage my existing collection of bricks to make
bigger and cooler runs. :)
5. A marble track theme could be explored across multiple age groups. There
could be simple Duplo sets with large marbles, System sets with smaller marbles
and more complex tracks, Technic sets with motorized elevators, conveyor belts,
NXT marble sorters, etc...
6. Some of the challenges: A LEGO marble run should be well made, tightly
integrated with the current building system, and highly flexible. It should
allow for reuse of the pieces (some marble runs have you cut the rails to fit a
certain track layout), and have special pieces to allow for the creation of
custom shaped track geometries. I'm imagining some kind of bracket that would
hold two rails for the marbles to run on, with the rails being made out of those
hard plastic tubes that came with some of the technic sets. I'm sure we can come
up with something excitingly awesome if we put our minds to it.
So what do you think LUGNET? Is there any interest out there for this kind of
thing from TLG, or am I all alone out here? Thanks for reading this far, and
happy building.
|
|
| |
Hey all, this is Andrew, one of the 2008/2009 Lego Ambassadors and Administrator
over at BZPower. Lego Community Development Manager Jan Beyer recently contacted
me with a task that I need everyone's help on. LEGO and their community team
would like a list of the various upcoming events for the rest of 2008 and 2009
so they know how to allot their resources. Other goals include getting more LEGO
employees involved, spreading the word about these events to other AFOLs, and
better marketing and planning through LEGO channels.
So what I need from you all is information about any Lego events you and your
LUGs and communities are planning. In addition, if you have contact with other
LUGs or groups, pass the word on to them. Let as many AFOLs know as possible so
we can generate a complete and thorough list.
Here's what I need:
- Name of the Event
- Date
+ If the event is still in the planning stages, at least give a month
+ Differentiate here between public days and closed days for set up
- Place
+ Country and city
+ Venue/address if possible as well
- Contact Person/Organizer including contact details
- Expected number of AFOLs
- Expected number of public visitors
- Webpage
- Any other relevant info
+ Theme based event
+ Part of a bigger show (e.g. NMRA)
+ How many times this event has been done or if it is a completely new event
+ Public or private
+ Etc
- (Optional) A very short description of the event - one or two sentences
Details can be emailed to me at andrew@bzpower.com (make the subject "LEGO Event
Listing").
Thanks everyone for your help and cooperation. Hopefully I'll see some of you at
these events next year!
-Andrew
|
|
| |
About 3 months ago I posted an announcement for LEGO Ambassadors about getting
the new 1,500 page Unofficial LEGO Sets/Parts Collectors Guide on CD. I got
quite a few EMAILs, but due to a near death experience in the family, I didn't
reply (mom is doing well now, even though she wasn't expected to survive cancer
surgery complications).
So I'm asking again... if there are any Ambassadors who don't already have my
LEGO CD and are interested in an "Ambassador's Special", to please contact me.
The expanded version 2 CD has a lot of historic information such as....
1) Yearly LEGO catalogs going back to 1950.
2) A country by country history of LEGO sales and sales offices.
3) A history of the evolution of LEGO instructions (from catalogs-to boxtops-to
paper instructions) from 1950 until the advent of the modern instructions in the
1980's.
4) A history of the evolution of LEGO box top designs and artwork going back to
1949, as well as ALL the LEGO boxes that have Christiansen family members on the
box tops.
5) LEGO parts that were only produced in certain countries.(EU/UK/AUS/USA/CAN)
6) From 1950-65... color image of all the LEGO parts produced by TLG that
year... pictured in colorful diarama's together in 1-3 pages per year.
7) A LEGO Insurance Price List in either EUROs or Dollars for all sets from
1949-1980's. Each list has nearly 11,000 prices.
8) A history of many LEGO sets and parts that were produced as prototypes, but
just never made it into production (this section has doubled since the Version 1
CD).
9) A history of LEGO model shops, toy fairs and display models.
10) Over 1,800 colorful and black/white historic photos and artwork that spans
40 years.
11) Everything you ever wanted to know about LEGO trees/bushes, flags, road
signs, street lights, lighting devices, gas station accessories and garages
going from 1955-85.
12) An exhaustive list of promotional sets that spans 35 years and includes
Worlds Fair items.
13) A discussion of LEGO bricks that includes stud fonts, pat. pend, brick type,
plastic type and brick sizes.
14) The evolution of the beginning of many LEGO systems... Trains, Space,
Castle, Technic, Duplo, Dacta, spare parts packs and service packs, as well as
minifigs.
15) LEGO errors... catalog errors, set errors, set packing variations (and
errors).
Several Ambassadors already have the first CD, now the 2nd version (at 1,100
pages or 250,000 words of text plus a 400 page dollar and 400 page EURO price
guide), is the most comprehensive repository of LEGO information available.
If you're a LEGO Ambassador (or not), and might be interested in learning more
about TLG than even the folks at TLG...
Then send me an EMAIL at.... istokg@earthlink.net
Also to download some free chapters...
http://www.geminisystems.net/bricklink/
Sorry to post this here first (followups go elsewhere), but I never did get a
chance to respond to many of the Ambassadors who EMAILed me back in June.
Cheers
Gary Istok
P.S Fernando Correia, I've got you taken care of! :-D
|
|
| |
The other day I got another "You still play with LEGO?". I replied with: "No, I
design and build models made from LEGO." That didn't seem to help much.
I'd like to start a list of ideas and suggestions on how we might improve how
other adults view LEGO as a hobby. Any ideas?
Something that I think would help is LEGO or LEGO branded items in the work
place. Nothing cooky or over-done, but something that is detailed enough to
have people ask "Wow, is that really made of LEGO?" I thought about making nice
looking book ends for my text books or a business card holder.
Of course, I'd also like to see some other things like a leather note pad with a
subtle LEGO logo and other items used or worn in the work place.
Thoughts? Any other ways to improve the hobby image of LEGO?
Thanks,
Scott
|
|
| |
| |
| |
Perfection with anything that has to do with color is simply not possible,
|
It is if you’re dealing with black.
Black trumps everything, at least in ABS.
|
Actually it really does not. I have polished literally thousands of black bricks
and when one brings the to a high polish variations are very evident to me. One
can tell which have red or blue or green regrind in them. It is true that black
does mask --but only if mixing with dark colors. At the Inside Tour that is
exactly what they said they did with much of their regrind--put it back into the
black and add enough to mask it. But there is actually another problem with this
approach. The Red, Yellow, Blue, and Green pigments are on an order of 10 times
more expensive than black.At least in the paint pigment market. And I am sure
the same in ABS as they use the same pigments. Especially lead free pigments.
It is actually much more economical to reuse red and those expensive colors back
into red than wasting it into the black. Years ago, for example dry toluidine
red was on the order of $10/lb--the color to make pure Coke red- whereas carbon
black was on the order of 50 cents to 1.00/lb depending on the grade.And one did
not have to use much black poundage wise to achieve hiding. One would never
waste say off color red paint into black but would use its tinting strength to
augment or at least not detract from another batch of red, orange or clear
brown. Of course we also then “finished off” each and every batch making slight
modifications to bring it up to standard before packaging. Something I am not
sure can be done in a contiuous manufacturing scenario.
| |
The pigment they use for black ABS is carbon, which is strong enough to
overpower every color you might throw in for regrind (provided you don’t
throw in too much off-color regrind, that is, or you actually could get color
streaks). In the case of a rarely-used color that they have trouble keeping
consistent, my first suggestion would be to suck up the cost difference and
recycle the special regrind into black bricks.
|
| |
The obvious choice was black, because all that anyone had
to do was make sure that it was sufficiently mixed in with the black regrind.
|
It would seem that you would also have to increase the amount of black pigment
to overcome the white that would make it grey.
| |
I believe we later experimented with having our extruder recycle it into OSHA
yellow and OSHA orange sheet, since their system was supposed to be
sophisticated enough to compensate for the difference (and we could afford to
have some noticable variation in color from one batch to the next.
|
That is really making a better use of the expensive white color for TiO2 is not
cheap.
| |
unlike
The LEGO Company). Thing is, for all the slight variation we had with
yellow, orange, and even sometimes with white (like white LEGO bricks, our
white stock would yellow with age). There was never any variation in the
black sheet,
|
I bet there was if one looked closely. The eye can discern over 10,000 shades of
black and still call it black.
| |
and we used a lot more of that than all other colors combined.
I would especially urge that they consider this possibility if it would
straighten things out enough that they could repeal this alleged ban on
purple parts.
|
As I said, they said at the factory in Billund that that is exactly what they
did with a lot of their dark regrind--dumped into black and overwelmed it.
I still contend except for blatant lapses, that LEGO does a pretty outstanding
job considering their enormity. Not nearly as good as a small shop paint
manufacture can obtain--but we are talking toys here--not automotive and
decorative finishes. We could always take business away from the big paint
companies because our constistency was so much better--because of lower volume
and higher personal attention.
It is an interesting topic. And the in this particualar industry, there is as
much an art to producing consistancy it as there is science, engineering, and
technology.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.ambassadors, Tommy Armstrong wrote:
| |
I actually had a pretty long and very interesting discussion with Bjarke
Schønwandt at BrickFair about the whole color issue. I am pretty much of an
expert in color quality control-it was my job for many many years to make
sure batch to batch color cosistancy of color in the paint we produced was
good. And our small factory achieved some very excellent results. In paint,
it is much more important than in say a plastic toy and thousands of hours of
paid labor are involved when colors drift and are inconsistant.
From what I gather, and this has been discussed before-probably by me, but
the general gist of the problem occurred when a paradigm shift in the
coloration of the parts was made. The way it was explained to me, and this is
from a bit muddled memory, was that now LEGO essentially mixes the colorant
at the machine. There are, if I understood him correctly, three hoppers --one
with the clear “base” ABS, one with ABS infused with concentrated colorant,
and the third hopper is composed of the scrap that occurs when the pieces are
cut from the molded piece. Essentially plastic necessary to create the piece
but not part of it.
Color variation can creep into the process from all these places. The ABS
base can have slightly different color dispersion characteristics, the
concentrated colored plastic will vary and because of the huge quantities TLG
uses they are bought from multiple vendors. If one did not do that, you would
have all your eggs in one basket and if one of the supplier’s factories went
down, your entire production would be compromised. The “scrap” will of course
will be only as consistant as the batches that produced it. One then weighs
an appropriate amount of base, concentrated colored plastic, and “scrap”.
There is a word for the “scrap” that I cannot recall. One needs to add enough
colorant to insure opacity and saturation of color. But the colorant portion
is the expensive part of the mix.So one needs to add just enough but not too
much. If one adds too much the strength and stability of the molded part is
compromised. This is very analogous to paint--one wants to add enough
colorant to achieve good coverage in the paint--but too much will weaken the
film because of the plasticizers and dispersants in the colorant.
In the past TLG bought huge quantities of pre-mixed ABS of a certain color.
The new system is much more flexible in that one only has to stock much
smaller quantites of the colored component and has only huge quantities of
the base. Again analogous to the paint store in which one has a base and can
mix an almost unlimited number of colors from that base.
I did ask him if they mixed various colors at the site of production to
achieve the desired color like is done in paint and he said no. In other
words they do not take a certain weight of one pellet say red, and a certain
weight of another pellet, say yellow and come out with orange. In their
process this is not possible and therefore the concentrate is one hue made
for one specific end color. But from multiple vendors.
The human eye can discern millions of different colors--it being far more
sensitive than the finest machine. And very small changes in any step of the
process will be detected by an observing eye.
To make matters even more conplicated, parts in kits come from many different
factories made from different supplier’s feed stocks so coordination of
quality across the entire company is necessary. They must all be on the same
page and having the same qc standards, etc. etc.
He insured me that they are acutely aware of this and have made great strides
addressing all these problems. But I know,there will always be problems in an
enterprise this large and with a process that is this critical and more
importantly easily discernable. The variables simply cannot be turned into
constants. He also insured me that when the fiasco of translucent pieces
became apparrent they went back and lookd at the whole broad range of
problems inherrent in this very difficult production process and reaccessed
what LEGO quality was.
I myself applaud TLC for achieving the quality that they do acheive in the
vast quantities that they deal with and with the thousands of parts that they
produce. I dare say few other companies do as good a job--and for sure no
other toy company of thier scale does.
Perfection with anything that has to do with color is simply not possible,
and one just strives to achieve a level of quality that in a great percentage
of situations is sufficient to achieve the goal. I really honestly think TLG
has done this for many, many years and has no intention sucumbing to lesser
standards. They did screw up a while back, but part of that is attributable
to a completely different way of production and perhaps the temptation to try
and cut a few colorant costs when economic times were dire. They know they
screwed up and are IMO well on the way to avoiding them in the future.
This whole color thing is really an incredibly complex task and most people
simply do not know how truly complex it is. Especially on the scale of TLG.
tommy Armstrong
|
Tommy,
The term for the scrap is more or less known as “regrind”. I’ve got some
injection molding plastics manufacturing in my background. When molding at the
machine, the material that’s not in the mold cavity that consists of the part
itself is known as the Sprue. In most operations, it’s commonplace to take the
sprue, toss it in a grinder, resulting in the sprue being ground to bits. Those
bits are called “regrind”. These bits can then be re-mixed in with new
material, usually at up to some percentage. The reason for the limit percentage
is that adding regrind essentially increases the material base for the color.
Being that the regrind already has some color in it, there can be potential for
some color variability, as you’ve stated. It’s a science with a huge amount of
variability, and a good chunk of it cannot be calculated beforehand. You’ve got
to run batches to see how the quality looks. Sometimes, a bad decision can be
made, due in part to local misunderstanding, or a lack of
communication/coordination from higher up. The only good thing to come out of
that is to fix the problem, and move on.
I liked the comment about the transparent parts becoming apparent problems..if
you think about that line, it’s kinda funny.
As with any venture--trying something doesn’t always guarantee a 100% success
rate. All you can do is try, try, again until you succeed. Unfortunately, the
toy market worldwide is very cutthroat and experiences low overall margins
(usually no more than 10%). Also interesting is that so much of TLG’s
sales/profits are heavily skewed to the fourth quarter, primarily due to
Christmas shopping season.
Scott
|
|
| |
In lugnet.ambassadors, Tommy Armstrong wrote:
| |
From what I gather, and this has been discussed before-probably by me, but
the general gist of the problem occurred when a paradigm shift in the
coloration of the parts was made. The way it was explained to me, and this is
from a bit muddled memory, was that now LEGO essentially mixes the colorant
at the machine.
|
Yes, that was what they announced sometime in the past couple years. I can’t
remember when the change took place, but I do know that they had inconsistent
shading in the dark-purple bricks that they used to make the Knight Bus in 2004.
There were similar problems with dark-red bricks around the same time as well,
judging by the dark-red 1x10 bricks that I bought through Bricklink.
| |
There is a word for the “scrap” that I cannot recall.
|
It’s a sprue if it’s the plastic frame that small parts are molded into (like
the round thing that the 6-piece tool set ships attached to), I can’t recall the
specific term for plastic that’s ejected without being formed (but there is a
term for it), and everything that’s been reclaimed and chopped up into pellets
that are small enough to be put back through the process is called regrind (I
used to work for a vacuum-forming/fabrication company that primarily worked with
ABS).
| |
Perfection with anything that has to do with color is simply not possible,
|
It is if you’re dealing with black. Black trumps everything, at least in ABS.
The pigment they use for black ABS is carbon, which is strong enough to
overpower every color you might throw in for regrind (provided you don’t throw
in too much off-color regrind, that is, or you actually could get color
streaks). In the case of a rarely-used color that they have trouble keeping
consistent, my first suggestion would be to suck up the cost difference and
recycle the special regrind into black bricks. That eliminates the biggest
problem with ironing out the color consistency (that being that any past errors
will continue to taint future batches), while still making sure that the scrap
isn’t wasted. I can guarantee that it works, because the company I used to work
for made white parts in FDA-grade plastic. That certification requires that no
post-consumer regrind makes it back into the new plastic, so in order to reclaim
our white scrap we had to recycle it into a different color of plastic. The
obvious choice was black, because all that anyone had to do was make sure that
it was sufficiently mixed in with the black regrind. I believe we later
experimented with having our extruder recycle it into OSHA yellow and OSHA
orange sheet, since their system was supposed to be sophisticated enough to
compensate for the difference (and we could afford to have some noticable
variation in color from one batch to the next...unlike The LEGO Company). Thing
is, for all the slight variation we had with yellow, orange, and even sometimes
with white (like white LEGO bricks, our white stock would yellow with age).
There was never any variation in the black sheet, and we used a lot more of that
than all other colors combined. I would especially urge that they consider this
possibility if it would straighten things out enough that they could repeal this
alleged ban on purple parts.
|
|
| |
I actually had a pretty long and very interesting discussion with Bjarke
Schønwandt at BrickFair about the whole color issue. I am pretty much of an
expert in color quality control-it was my job for many many years to make sure
batch to batch color cosistancy of color in the paint we produced was good. And
our small factory achieved some very excellent results. In paint, it is much
more important than in say a plastic toy and thousands of hours of paid labor
are involved when colors drift and are inconsistant.
From what I gather, and this has been discussed before-probably by me, but the
general gist of the problem occurred when a paradigm shift in the coloration of
the parts was made. The way it was explained to me, and this is from a bit
muddled memory, was that now LEGO essentially mixes the colorant at the machine.
There are, if I understood him correctly, three hoppers --one with the clear
“base” ABS, one with ABS infused with concentrated colorant, and the third
hopper is composed of the scrap that occurs when the pieces are cut from the
molded piece. Essentially plastic necessary to create the piece but not part of
it.
Color variation can creep into the process from all these places. The ABS base
can have slightly different color dispersion characteristics, the concentrated
colored plastic will vary and because of the huge quantities TLG uses they are
bought from multiple vendors. If one did not do that, you would have all your
eggs in one basket and if one of the supplier’s factories went down, your entire
production would be compromised. The “scrap” will of course will be only as
consistant as the batches that produced it. One then weighs an appropriate
amount of base, concentrated colored plastic, and “scrap”. There is a word for
the “scrap” that I cannot recall. One needs to add enough colorant to insure
opacity and saturation of color. But the colorant portion is the expensive part
of the mix.So one needs to add just enough but not too much. If one adds too
much the strength and stability of the molded part is compromised. This is very
analogous to paint--one wants to add enough colorant to achieve good coverage in
the paint--but too much will weaken the film because of the plasticizers and
dispersants in the colorant.
In the past TLG bought huge quantities of pre-mixed ABS of a certain color. The
new system is much more flexible in that one only has to stock much smaller
quantites of the colored component and has only huge quantities of the base.
Again analogous to the paint store in which one has a base and can mix an almost
unlimited number of colors from that base.
I did ask him if they mixed various colors at the site of production to achieve
the desired color like is done in paint and he said no. In other words they do
not take a certain weight of one pellet say red, and a certain weight of another
pellet, say yellow and come out with orange. In their process this is not
possible and therefore the concentrate is one hue made for one specific end
color. But from multiple vendors.
The human eye can discern millions of different colors--it being far more
sensitive than the finest machine. And very small changes in any step of the
process will be detected by an observing eye.
To make matters even more conplicated, parts in kits come from many different
factories made from different supplier’s feed stocks so coordination of quality
across the entire company is necessary. They must all be on the same page and
having the same qc standards, etc. etc.
He insured me that they are acutely aware of this and have made great strides
addressing all these problems. But I know,there will always be problems in an
enterprise this large and with a process that is this critical and more
importantly easily discernable. The variables simply cannot be turned into
constants. He also insured me that when the fiasco of translucent pieces became
apparrent they went back and lookd at the whole broad range of problems
inherrent in this very difficult production process and reaccessed what LEGO
quality was.
I myself applaud TLC for achieving the quality that they do acheive in the vast
quantities that they deal with and with the thousands of parts that they
produce. I dare say few other companies do as good a job--and for sure no other
toy company of thier scale does.
Perfection with anything that has to do with color is simply not possible, and
one just strives to achieve a level of quality that in a great percentage of
situations is sufficient to achieve the goal. I really honestly think TLG has
done this for many, many years and has no intention sucumbing to lesser
standards. They did screw up a while back, but part of that is attributable to a
completely different way of production and perhaps the temptation to try and cut
a few colorant costs when economic times were dire. They know they screwed up
and are IMO well on the way to avoiding them in the future.
This whole color thing is really an incredibly complex task and most people
simply do not know how truly complex it is. Especially on the scale of TLG.
tommy Armstrong
|
|
| |
In lugnet.ambassadors, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
In lugnet.events, David Laswell wrote:
--snip--
| |
In lugnet.events, Timothy Gould wrote: I’ve heard about unspecified
physical quality issues, inconsistent coloration of parts, and how they were
unhappy with the whole Flextronics deal, but not a single word about the
possibility of sloppy mold allignment. So, since the LEGO Ambassadors are
supposed to be representing the fan community at large, I hereby request
that someone represent me on this issue, or point me to a place where it has
been made public (which I have been unable to find).
|
Passed on. I’ll be sure to pass any answer back as soon as I have access to
one.
Tim
|
Very kind of you!
John P
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events, David Laswell wrote:
--snip--
| |
In lugnet.events, Timothy Gould wrote: I’ve heard about unspecified
physical quality issues, inconsistent coloration of parts, and how they were
unhappy with the whole Flextronics deal, but not a single word about the
possibility of sloppy mold allignment. So, since the LEGO Ambassadors are
supposed to be representing the fan community at large, I hereby request that
someone represent me on this issue, or point me to a place where it has been
made public (which I have been unable to find).
|
Passed on. I’ll be sure to pass any answer back as soon as I have access to one.
Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.events, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
I’m not sure why you think any LEGO Ambassadors will see questions in a
thread which has nothing to do with LEGO Ambassadors but since I’ve spotted
it I’ll respond with my LA hat planted firmly on my head.
The quality control issue has been brought to LEGO’s attention through the LA
programme on many occasions and there have been many responses from LEGO to
these queries. I’m really not sure what you want added. It’s on repeated
public record that LEGO weren’t happy with Flextronic and that they’ve had
quality control issues over the past few years.
I’m not going to waste my or TLGs time taking it over there again. It’s
already been answered.
|
Here’s my thing. The Flextronics deal was
announced just over two years ago, in
2006. Jake responded to issues raised
over part quality just over four years ago, in 2004. That says to me that while
Flextronics might be largely responsible for the inconsistent colors, and part
breakages over the last two years (I’ve had a few black cheese wedges crack at
the base of the sloped surface recently, so I’ve seen some of that), there’s
still an underlying issue in mold allignment, and it’s been around at least
twice as long as Flextronics was involved in the process. If you build a stack
of bricks and look at it from the end, you will see that some of the bricks look
like they’ve been pushed over to one side. If you look at the bottom of some
bricks, you will see that one wall might be twice as thick as the opposite wall.
The cited allowable part variance is supposed to be no more than 1/10mm, which
should not be visible to the naked eye. While the interior dimension and
exterior dimension might both fall within that range, it is evident that the
wall thickness does not. The only way those could both be true is if the mold
halves were not properly alligned, and I’d like to know if this is an issue that
they are aware of, and if they are doing anything to address it.
As for the history of this specific problem, I believe I posed it to Steve Witt
at NMRA-07, and I also believe that he had not heard of that possibility before
(it’s been over a year now, the discussion happened at a bar, he’d had a few
drinks, I was tired from a long day, and I could be mistaking this discussion
with the one I know we had over my theory on the reason behind the infamous
color change). What I do know is that I have never heard any sort of official
comment on mold allignment. I’ve heard about unspecified physical quality
issues, inconsistent coloration of parts, and how they were unhappy with the
whole Flextronics deal, but not a single word about the possibility of sloppy
mold allignment. So, since the LEGO Ambassadors are supposed to be representing
the fan community at large, I hereby request that someone represent me on this
issue, or point me to a place where it has been made public (which I have been
unable to find).
|
|
| |
In lugnet.ambassadors, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
Although I can’t find a copy right now I know TLG have released a press
release or two on this type of issue. There were quality issues caused in
part by Flextronic (hinted at on the release and now by the end of the deal)
and in part by new and cheaper ways of dyeing the bricks (openly admitted in
the release).
Tim
|
Hey Tim,
Thanks for the reply! I’m very glad to hear that TLG is aware of these issues
and taking steps to address them. I’ve made my peace with the color change
(although I haven’t adopted them yet!), but this variance in the other colors in
the spectrum (as well as the smoother texture on slope bricks) was very likely
going to seal my decision to never purchase new sets! What a bummer that would
be!
I’m thrilled to know that I’ll just have to wait a little while TLG takes a
firmer hand in their production facilities so that they continue to maintain the
superior standards that we’ve all come to respect and admire!
Cheers!
Dave S.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.ambassadors, David Simmons wrote:
| |
Hey all,
I recently bought the SpongeBob Rocket Ride #3831 and was quite pleased with
the design and functions. However, I noticed that the tan plate has a
brighter, slightly more translucent quality to it. I noticed the same thing
with orange when I bought Bikini Bottom.
The older orange (on top) has a stronger and richer color. My question is
whether this less opaque appearance is going to be the standard in the future
or is Flextronics still working on matching the TLG-manufactured colors.
Dave S.
|
Although I can’t find a copy right now I know TLG have released a press release
or two on this type of issue. There were quality issues caused in part by
Flextronic (hinted at on the release and now by the end of the deal) and in part
by new and cheaper ways of dyeing the bricks (openly admitted in the release).
Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.ambassadors, Dave Sterling wrote:
| |
Hey Dave S.! There’s a great old thread on this where some of us plastics
techies get our info. on postulating about what this issues could be.
Lugnet Thread Here
My speculation is that it’s an issue with liquid color since liquid color
usually does not quite offer the opacity that standard pigment does. They
also may have dropped the TiO2 loading to save $. Whatever it is, it might
not matter any longer as LEGO has decided to step away from Flextronics in
recent weeks.
LEGO to end Flextronics Deal
Hope this helps.
-Dave
ToT-LUG
|
Hey Dave! :-)
I remember that first thread, but hadn’t heard that TLG was going to return to a
more directly involved management of parts production. I’m greatly relieved to
hear it! I was worried that I might have to stop buying new product altogether!
Here’s hoping they get this all sorted out soon!
Dave S.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.ambassadors, David Simmons wrote:
| |
Hey all,
I recently bought the SpongeBob Rocket Ride #3831 and was quite pleased with
the design and functions. However, I noticed that the tan plate has a
brighter, slightly more translucent quality to it. I noticed the same thing
with orange when I bought Bikini Bottom.
The older orange (on top) has a stronger and richer color. My question is
whether this less opaque appearance is going to be the standard in the future
or is Flextronics still working on matching the TLG-manufactured colors.
Dave S.
|
Hey Dave S.! There’s a great old thread on this where some of us plastics
techies get our info. on postulating about what this issues could be.
Lugnet Thread Here
My speculation is that it’s an issue with liquid color since liquid color
usually does not quite offer the opacity that standard pigment does. They also
may have dropped the TiO2 loading to save $. Whatever it is, it might not
matter any longer as LEGO has decided to step away from Flextronics in recent
weeks.
LEGO to end Flextronics Deal
Hope this helps.
-Dave
ToT-LUG
|
|
|
