| |
Thanks all!
I'll answer you one by one.
Geoffrey, I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean *blush*. Are
you refering to the 1x4 plate with a hole in each end with "notches"
around the hole and some half-bushings? This solution would make the
depth of the propeller 6 studs and the different blades rather offset?
Selçuk, I'm not that used to the CAD softwares availible, I tried to
find the model where it was used though and had no luck. But I'm
afraid this is a "one piece" propeller that can't be customized, eg.
no studs?
Andy, your idea is a great solution except the fact that I need to
build four of these and I don't own that many 3 blade rotors :(
I have done some thinking of my own and made up a quick CAD-file of my
thought, please take a look of it and let me know what you think.
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=15512
I then equip it with cross-axles as blades and perhaps custmize them a
tad or two. My biggest worry will be that the cross-axle can come
loose from the center when I motorize it. I'd better find me some good
"Technic Connector Toggle Joint Toothed".
I also need to replace the number three cross-axles in the CAD-drawing
with number four. When I realized my mistake I was to lazy to replace
them ;)
TGIF!
/Tobbe
|
|
| |
Tobbe Arnesson wrote:
>
>
> Selçuk, I'm not that used to the CAD softwares availible, I tried to
> find the model where it was used though and had no luck. But I'm
> afraid this is a "one piece" propeller that can't be customized, eg.
> no studs?
No no... It's built from the basic parts like 6-hole small technic
pulleys, 1/2 pins and regular plates. This simple design dated from
early 1980's, there was no such propellers exist at that time. Look at
the picture
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=2081 for a fuzzy and
blurry picture. It's tail rotor of the helicopter
Actually, I think it could be converted to a 6-blade one by the help of
newly introduced rounded-end 1x5 plates with axle hole (new versions of
the old 2-blade technic rotor, with holes and teeth removed) but I think
yours is much more sturdy, although thicker.
Selçuk
|
|
| |
Tobbe Arnesson wrote:
> I have done some thinking of my own and made up a quick CAD-file of my
> thought, please take a look of it and let me know what you think.
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=15512
I think that looks really good, very like the real thing in fact. A 2x2
cone such as the yellow one found on the exhaust (?) of the 8860 supercar
could make a good spinner as well - although it would be better in black
or grey, of course.
Jennifer Clark
|
|
| |
> > I have done some thinking of my own and made up a quick CAD-file of my
> > thought, please take a look of it and let me know what you think.
> >
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=15512
>
> I think that looks really good, very like the real thing in fact. A 2x2
> cone such as the yellow one found on the exhaust (?) of the 8860 supercar
> could make a good spinner as well - although it would be better in black
> or grey, of course.
Thanks!
Taken out of my mind I think the spinner was supposed to be around
32mm in diameter and the cone is a little to pointy, I have to look
into this, thanks for the idea Jennifer!
Thank God I can go home now, work has been terrible, as usual when an
ISP looses it's Internet connection ;)
CU!
/Tobbe
|
|
| |
> No no... It's built from the basic parts like 6-hole small technic
> pulleys, 1/2 pins and regular plates. This simple design dated from
> early 1980's, there was no such propellers exist at that time. Look at
> the picture
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=2081 for a fuzzy and
> blurry picture. It's tail rotor of the helicopter
That is an blurry picture indeed! It's impossible for me to make
things out of it... Dang...
> Actually, I think it could be converted to a 6-blade one by the help of
> newly introduced rounded-end 1x5 plates with axle hole (new versions of
> the old 2-blade technic rotor, with holes and teeth removed) but I think
> yours is much more sturdy, although thicker.
Well, the thickness should not be a problem. The propeller blade will
have a length of 96mm or 12 studs, that's the radius for the prop
folks ;)
Well see monday if I made something up, won't check in here 'til then!
CU!
/Tobbe
|
|
| |
"Tobbe Arnesson" <tnt@arnesson.nu> wrote in message
news:39cb09b1.90191258@lugnet.com...
> Thanks all!
>
> I have done some thinking of my own and made up a quick CAD-file of my
> thought, please take a look of it and let me know what you think.
>
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=15512
One thing you can do with this also is replace the 6 outward stubs with a
technic liftarm--either the 1x3 one (part 6632), or the 1x4 one (part 2825).
This has a few consequences. One, it makes the structure slightly more
compact vertically (assuming that this is axis of the prop is vertical).
Second it changes the connection points to something that I feel is more
conducive to propeller blades. Instead of having axles radiating outward,
you have liftarms, to which it is easy to attach plates.
I found that it also allows for additional structural support, if you choose
to add it. I took a few pictures with my digital camera of a prop that I
put together. You can kind of see the extra support I added (the black
pieces) in the last two pictures. Sorry about the use of black, which
doesn't photograph well, but I didn't have anything else handy. The
pictures can be found here:
http://home.san.rr.com/tcobbs/Misc/Prop.html
--Travis Cobbs (tcobbs@san.REMOVE.rr.com)
|
|
| |
> One thing you can do with this also is replace the 6 outward stubs with a
> technic liftarm--either the 1x3 one (part 6632), or the 1x4 one (part 2825).
*bonk*
Now why didn't I think of that? Thanks :)
/Tobbe
|
|
|
