|
Mark Nuemann sent me a message, he is in the middle of a new posting setup,
so while he can't personnaly reply to your question at this time, this is
his message to you:
From the King of "Chicken Walker Mecha"
==========================================
From Mark Nuemann:
yep, It can be done. Some notes for ya,
Gear boxes and the neccessary structure to hold a mech up needs to be pretty
big. Thunderbird is the biggest most posable mech I built. Gearboxes in
ankes, knees and hips. And because the weight is coming down at an angle,
it's gonna need to be strong. I'm personally fooling with technic
turntables for knee joints myself.
Now I'm going to mention something I learned. Traditional chicken walkers,
like Battletech/Mechwarrior, are pretty but don't work so good. Things
bind, the knees don't bend nearly enough to make the thing walk in any
realistic manner. What works better, add a leg bone! Really, check out
your dog or cat. The Rear legs is what you want to imitate. Allows for
much more articulation and makes a more realistic walking motion. (hips
don't bind, legs can move forward so it can walk, so on.) I've got a couple
of mechs that use this (gunslinger, Orc and Beast) Take a good look at Orc,
particuarily pic o11.
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=21100
He's double jointed in the hip, makes it so that he can traverse terrain,
and keep the body level. The extra knee makes it so the leg can bend
without binding, and the extra joint in the hip takes care of foot tipping.
(on chicken walkers if you splay out the legs, unless you compensate at the
ankle the foot will tilt up on end slightly)
The smaller guys are held together with friction pins and friction
axle-pins. The big guys are mostly leg static, with the exception of
Thunderbird:
http://home.attbi.com/~ravenswolfmk/mech/tbird.htm
Who, can be articulated, but you barely notice because of the two lenght
legs. Also, he was so big and heavy the brick wasn't doing so good at it.
My next big one will have three jointed legs and should be significantly
stronger.
Hope that helps
Mark Neumann
In lugnet.build.mecha, Eric Sophie writes:
> For the best and most tasty finger lick'n good Chicken Walkers around , you
> must check out the Snow Leopard Clan - The Mechs of Mark Nuemann:
>
> http://home.attbi.com/~ravenswolfmk/
>
> You can also find him in the Lego Mecha Hall of Fame.
> Follow the links on the Mecha side bar.
>
> Legomaster
> LMHoF
>
> www.mylegomaster.com
|
|
|
Thank you, Mark, for all those tips. I hadn't thought of gearboxes in the
legs--I'll have to try some experiments with that, I think. Your thunderbird
mech was very impressive. I was surprised that something do large could have
functional legs.:-)
I have an idea for "parking" the mech I'm working on. I was thinking that in
the gearbox I could have one of the gear holes line up with a technic hole
(in a certain position) so I could insert a Technic pin. This would hold the
legs in place for more stability. Do think it'll work?
Thanks,
Curt
|
|
|
Sure, give it a shot. I know the tricky part will be getting the holes to
line up, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. Be sure to let us know how
it goes.
Mark
In lugnet.build.mecha, Curt Tigges writes:
> Thank you, Mark, for all those tips. I hadn't thought of gearboxes in the
> legs--I'll have to try some experiments with that, I think. Your thunderbird
> mech was very impressive. I was surprised that something do large could have
> functional legs.:-)
>
> I have an idea for "parking" the mech I'm working on. I was thinking that in
> the gearbox I could have one of the gear holes line up with a technic hole
> (in a certain position) so I could insert a Technic pin. This would hold the
> legs in place for more stability. Do think it'll work?
>
> Thanks,
> Curt
|
|
|
Wow... where do you get the "hazard stripe" and 2x1 double ended click
hinges from? I've been toying around with click hinges myself, and have
realized that I often get stuck due to a lack of small pieces such at those.
And... wow again. The tbird's kinda scary, in that you managed to pull it
off. Most of my attempts are in making transformable mecha (without popping
off any pieces, at that) so I usually don't have the luxury of working at
such a large scale, due to the potential for joint stress.
Raptor
"Mark" <snowleopard@foxinternet.net> wrote in message
news:GzI3v9.2CL@lugnet.com...
> Sure, give it a shot. I know the tricky part will be getting the holes to
> line up, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. Be sure to let us know how
> it goes.
>
> Mark
>
> In lugnet.build.mecha, Curt Tigges writes:
> > Thank you, Mark, for all those tips. I hadn't thought of gearboxes in the
> > legs--I'll have to try some experiments with that, I think. Your thunderbird
> > mech was very impressive. I was surprised that something do large could have
> > functional legs.:-)
> >
> > I have an idea for "parking" the mech I'm working on. I was thinking that in
> > the gearbox I could have one of the gear holes line up with a technic hole
> > (in a certain position) so I could insert a Technic pin. This would hold the
> > legs in place for more stability. Do think it'll work?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Curt
|
|
|
In lugnet.build.mecha, Christopher Kalos writes:
> Wow... where do you get the "hazard stripe" and 2x1 double ended click
> hinges from?
There was (is?) a town set. It's a powerloader type thing, set number 6474.
I'd call Lego Shop at home if you're interested, they probably still have some.
>
> And... wow again. The tbird's kinda scary, in that you managed to pull it
> off. Most of my attempts are in making transformable mecha (without popping
> off any pieces, at that) so I usually don't have the luxury of working at
> such a large scale, due to the potential for joint stress.
>
> Raptor
T-birt was a little wobbly, that's why I took it apart rather quickly. But
I got to try again. Maybe I'll call it T-birdII.
You should see Mark Sandlin's transforming spiffcraft for ideas for
transforming mecha. It looks good, not too big, and works very well.
http://www.nwlink.com/~sandlin/lego/spiffco/spiffdx/
Build on
Mark
|
|
|