 | | | | | |
I had a little fun last night:
http://www.texbrick.com/creations/tractor/pull.html
I managed to move 94.5 lb (42.9 kg)!
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hello Thomas
"Thomas Avery" <thomas.avery@intec-hou.com> schreef in bericht
news:GqGH48.H6v@lugnet.com...
> I had a little fun last night:
> http://www.texbrick.com/creations/tractor/pull.html
>
> I managed to move 94.5 lb (42.9 kg)!
Quite impressive!
I definitly must try to figure out how much my little tractor would lift
from the ground...( your 2.9 kg)
I think it will be less, since my tractor does not weight that much. so it
will lack the traction it needs
greetings
Maico Arts
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Maico Arts writes:
> Hello Thomas
>
> "Thomas Avery" <thomas.avery@intec-hou.com> schreef in bericht
> news:GqGH48.H6v@lugnet.com...
> > I had a little fun last night:
> > http://www.texbrick.com/creations/tractor/pull.html
> >
> > I managed to move 94.5 lb (42.9 kg)!
>
> Quite impressive!
Thanks!
> I definitly must try to figure out how much my little tractor would lift
> from the ground...( your 2.9 kg)
> I think it will be less, since my tractor does not weight that much. so it
> will lack the traction it needs
> greetings
> Maico Arts
Give it a try! Steve Lane needs more competition for his pulling contest. No
one has beaten his 4.5 kg pull yet.
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Thomas Avery writes:
> I had a little fun last night:
> http://www.texbrick.com/creations/tractor/pull.html
>
> I managed to move 94.5 lb (42.9 kg)!
>
> TJ
Thomas, I wish you would fix it and bring it to the next meeting! I would
love to see it in person! Awesome, just awesome!! Great acheivement...
Tom
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Tom Reed writes:
> In lugnet.technic, Thomas Avery writes:
> > I had a little fun last night:
> > http://www.texbrick.com/creations/tractor/pull.html
> >
> > I managed to move 94.5 lb (42.9 kg)!
> >
> > TJ
> Thomas, I wish you would fix it and bring it to the next meeting! I would
> love to see it in person! Awesome, just awesome!! Great acheivement...
> Tom
Thanks!
Actually, I found the problem when I was messing around with it this
evening. I didn't break a gear last night, but I mashed some teeth so that
the gears wouldn't mesh anymore. That's interesting because it's never
happened to me before. Usually, when a gear gives it up, the whole thing
breaks and splits apart.
Anyway, the problem is fixed. Fortunately the gear replacement wasn't too
involved and I got it done in about 30 minutes. Now, if I can keep my hands
off it for a while, the tractor might make it intact to the next meeting!
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Wow, now that's impressive. Surprised you didn't use the kitchen sink. I
didn't see it on the list.
I was wondering, would you do something for me. A while ago a co-worker
asked me about engineering specs of Lego. It sparked an interest but I
don't have the heart to break my Lego. Would you mind e-mailing me what bit
died and how? No need to get real specific, I'm just looking for any
information.
LMK
Mark Neumann
http://home.attbi.com/~ravenswolfmk/
Home of the Snow Leopard Clan
snowleopard@foxinternet.net
In lugnet.technic, Thomas Avery writes:
> I had a little fun last night:
> http://www.texbrick.com/creations/tractor/pull.html
>
> I managed to move 94.5 lb (42.9 kg)!
>
> TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Mark Neumann writes:
> Wow, now that's impressive. Surprised you didn't use the kitchen sink. I
> didn't see it on the list.
I might have, but I knew that my wife would've killed me. I contemplated
using one of my fattest cats, but I knew he wouldn't sit still and I have
enough cat hair on my desk already :-)
> I was wondering, would you do something for me. A while ago a co-worker
> asked me about engineering specs of Lego. It sparked an interest but I
> don't have the heart to break my Lego. Would you mind e-mailing me what bit
> died and how? No need to get real specific, I'm just looking for any
> information.
Thanks for asking. You've prompted me to update my gears page:
http://www.texbrick.com/ideas/gears/
At the bottom of the page, there is a section on gear breakage. I've listed
the different gears I've broken and the conditions in which failure occured.
Hope this helps.
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Thomas Avery writes:
> Thanks for asking. You've prompted me to update my gears page:
> http://www.texbrick.com/ideas/gears/
>
> At the bottom of the page, there is a section on gear breakage. I've listed
> the different gears I've broken and the conditions in which failure occured.
> Hope this helps.
Wow, very informative page! Can you add to it what KIND of breakage you saw?
(the failure mode) Was it tooth shearing, axle connection point failure, the
axle itself failing, or something else? Thanks!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.technic, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.technic, Thomas Avery writes:
>
> > Thanks for asking. You've prompted me to update my gears page:
> > http://www.texbrick.com/ideas/gears/
> >
> > At the bottom of the page, there is a section on gear breakage. I've listed
> > the different gears I've broken and the conditions in which failure occured.
> > Hope this helps.
>
> Wow, very informative page! Can you add to it what KIND of breakage you saw?
> (the failure mode) Was it tooth shearing, axle connection point failure, the
> axle itself failing, or something else? Thanks!
Thanks! Okay, try it again:
http://www.texbrick.com/ideas/gears/
I've added some pictures to the "breakage" section that show the broken
gears. I'm pretty sure that they break from the axle hole outwards. There's
a high stress concentration at the point of axle connection.
I've never seen teeth shear off, but you'll notice that one 24-tooth gear
has a crack in between the teeth, and one of the 12-tooth bevel gears had
mashed teeth.
The axles hold up during gear failure. I've never noticed any permanent
warping either. At least there's no noticeable warping.
The only time I've ever failed an axle was when I put one in a power drill
(a long time ago). Duh! Oh well, I was a stupid kid.
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Thomas Avery writes:
Thanks for the update!
> The axles hold up during gear failure. I've never noticed any permanent
> warping either. At least there's no noticeable warping.
Long long ago, when I first got into the hobby, I was corresponding with
John Gerlach about lift bridges and he reported axle failures, but it was
due to shear rather than torque.
He had a (lift) bridge so heavy that a single axle at the axis of rotation
could not take the weight, it kept shearing. He used a technique involving a
gear! Rather than the bridge having an axle pivot, the truss was pinned to a
gear and that gear rolled in a number of 8t gears on the abutment that
together, kept it confined around an axis of rotation as it moved.
I copied .trains so he can correct me if I misremembered.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.technic, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Long long ago, when I first got into the hobby, I was corresponding with
> John Gerlach about lift bridges and he reported axle failures, but it was
> due to shear rather than torque.
>
> He had a (lift) bridge so heavy that a single axle at the axis of rotation
> could not take the weight, it kept shearing. He used a technique involving a
> gear! Rather than the bridge having an axle pivot, the truss was pinned to a
> gear and that gear rolled in a number of 8t gears on the abutment that
> together, kept it confined around an axis of rotation as it moved.
>
> I copied .trains so he can correct me if I misremembered.
That sounds like a very good solution.
My solution to preventing axle shear has been to create multiple shear
planes (like the hinges of the boom on my crawler crane). The problem is
that it takes up a lot of room and there can be a lot of friction. When you
put an axle through multiple holes, it's difficult to get the holes to line
up perfectly so that axle spins freely.
I am satisfied with the strength of Lego axles. I just wish the gears were a
little stronger :-)
TJ
http://www.texbrick.com/ideas/gears/
FUT where appropriate
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Thomas Avery wrote:
>
> In lugnet.technic, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Long long ago, when I first got into the hobby, I was corresponding with
> > John Gerlach about lift bridges and he reported axle failures, but it was
> > due to shear rather than torque.
> >
> > He had a (lift) bridge so heavy that a single axle at the axis of rotation
> > could not take the weight, it kept shearing. He used a technique involving a
> > gear! Rather than the bridge having an axle pivot, the truss was pinned to a
> > gear and that gear rolled in a number of 8t gears on the abutment that
> > together, kept it confined around an axis of rotation as it moved.
> >
> > I copied .trains so he can correct me if I misremembered.
>
> That sounds like a very good solution.
>
> My solution to preventing axle shear has been to create multiple shear
> planes (like the hinges of the boom on my crawler crane). The problem is
> that it takes up a lot of room and there can be a lot of friction. When you
> put an axle through multiple holes, it's difficult to get the holes to line
> up perfectly so that axle spins freely.
>
> I am satisfied with the strength of Lego axles. I just wish the gears were a
> little stronger :-)
Has anyone tried making an axle of 2x2 round bricks with bearings made
from 1x4 arch bricks? I just played with it a little and it looks like
the bearing would work ok. You could also make a bearing from macaroni
bricks, but I think it would be harder to get a strong bearing (the
arches can easily be built into a frame which would hold them pretty
good). Of course if you're putting serious load with lots of cycles
you're going to get some pretty worn bricks.
Frank
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.trains, Frank Filz writes:
>
> Has anyone tried making an axle of 2x2 round bricks with bearings made
> from 1x4 arch bricks? I just played with it a little and it looks like
> the bearing would work ok. You could also make a bearing from macaroni
> bricks, but I think it would be harder to get a strong bearing (the
> arches can easily be built into a frame which would hold them pretty
> good). Of course if you're putting serious load with lots of cycles
> you're going to get some pretty worn bricks.
Well, I've been experimenting with macaroni bearings, and had some pretty
good results. You can attach 24 & 40 tooth gears directly to the 2x2 rounds
- this means the axle only has to take all the load at one small point. I
haven't yet tested this arrangement to failure, but it's pretty strong. I've
been making larger "bearing blocks" which can be integrated fairly easily
into non-SNOT chassis.
I'm using these in my next big project.
ROSCO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Ross Crawford" <rcrawford@csi.com> writes:
> In lugnet.trains, Frank Filz writes:
> > Has anyone tried making an axle of 2x2 round bricks with bearings made
> > from 1x4 arch bricks? I just played with it a little and it looks like
> > the bearing would work ok. You could also make a bearing from macaroni
> > bricks, but I think it would be harder to get a strong bearing (the
> > arches can easily be built into a frame which would hold them pretty
> > good). Of course if you're putting serious load with lots of cycles
> > you're going to get some pretty worn bricks.
>
> Well, I've been experimenting with macaroni bearings, and had some pretty
> good results. You can attach 24 & 40 tooth gears directly to the 2x2 rounds
> - this means the axle only has to take all the load at one small point. I
> haven't yet tested this arrangement to failure, but it's pretty strong. I've
> been making larger "bearing blocks" which can be integrated fairly easily
> into non-SNOT chassis.
>
> I'm using these in my next big project.
Another approach that doesn't require the macaroni but should be
almost as good is to simply use the 2x2 rounds as strengtheners.
Since they stick together with the studs and also have an axle hole
down the middle, you could use them to prevent the twisting action
from damaging the axle. You could use regular bearings and gears
without as much risk of damaging the axle.
--Bill.
--
William R Ward bill@wards.net http://www.wards.net/~bill/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
It's not pretty. I've sheared teeth on racks when using them for Z-axis
(up/down) stages that had a fair bit of weight on them. It broke the
pinions too : ( To be fair though, it was bad design on my part to use a
rack and pinion for that. I should have used racks and worms to spread the
load over more teeth...
On your page you mention that some of your high-speed input gear stages
wear out and generate fine dust. That's dry friction grinding away the
tooth profiles. Try some graphite spray or silicone brake lube on them.
The brake lube works well, but does seem to attract dust. Lubrication also
makes the worm gears more useful.
I don't even use my old 4.5 & 9V motors any more. The new 9V motors
(5225?) are much kinder to gears, because they're already geared down and
eliminate a couple of high speed stages in a gear train. Lately I've been
using 3 or 4 of them ganged together and you can generate respectable
torques that way. In fact you can twist an axle up if you're not careful :
( I've never had one completely fail in torsion, but I've made "twizzlers"
out of a few by accident.
Thomas Avery <thomas.avery@intec-hou.com> wrote in message
news:GqIDKD.7E@lugnet.com...
> I've never seen teeth shear off, but you'll notice that one 24-tooth gear
> has a crack in between the teeth, and one of the 12-tooth bevel gears had
> mashed teeth.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.technic, Jason S. Mantor writes:
> It's not pretty. I've sheared teeth on racks when using them for Z-axis
> (up/down) stages that had a fair bit of weight on them. It broke the
> pinions too : ( To be fair though, it was bad design on my part to use a
> rack and pinion for that. I should have used racks and worms to spread the
> load over more teeth...
> On your page you mention that some of your high-speed input gear stages
> wear out and generate fine dust. That's dry friction grinding away the
> tooth profiles. Try some graphite spray or silicone brake lube on them.
> The brake lube works well, but does seem to attract dust. Lubrication also
> makes the worm gears more useful.
Thanks for the advice. I know the subject of lubrication has been discussed
many times before here and I should listen, I've ruined too many gears now!
I'll have to try it next time.
> I don't even use my old 4.5 & 9V motors any more. The new 9V motors
> (5225?) are much kinder to gears, because they're already geared down and
> eliminate a couple of high speed stages in a gear train. Lately I've been
> using 3 or 4 of them ganged together and you can generate respectable
> torques that way. In fact you can twist an axle up if you're not careful :
> ( I've never had one completely fail in torsion, but I've made "twizzlers"
> out of a few by accident.
I agree. After using the new geared 9v motors I'm convinced they are the
best out of all the motors Lego make, or did make. I know some people have
had seizing problems and I think this has been discussed recently in the
.robotics group. But the motors seem to be quite efficient and excellent for
making high torque output gear trains.
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Sorry for digging up an old thread ;)
In the solar car I'm building (see the 'heavily modified 8880 chassis'
thread) I've so far broken 3 old style 24 tooth gears. (among some old style
12 tooth crown gears, but that's no surprise really...)
The first one that broke was used in the gearbox, as the last reduction
before the clutch gears. It was powered by an old style 9v motor that was
being heavily overloaded by a solar panel (16 volts, 0.6 amps, almost 4
times the electrical power it's meant to be using...). The design wasn't
very good as the axles weren't supported properly.(the one with the 24 tooth
and the one with the 8 tooth gear were only supported on one side, so they
could move about a little, causing some badly alligned forces)
I basically replaced it and didn't do anything about the design.(not very
smart...)
Then, when I got a new and far more powerful (non-lego-)electric motor, I
tried it out with a virtually unlimited supply of current, and the
incredible bursts of torque destroyed the same gear after a couple of
minutes. I decided on only using batteries and the solar panel as a power
source from then on, to prevent the motor from going beserk again. :) I also
decided to use 2 couples of 24&8 tooth gears, to devide the torque in two.
That wasn't enough though, because now the stressing point has moved to
another 24 tooth gear; one that meshes with one of the gearbox' clutchgears,
and so that one broke.
It's always the axle support point that fails, never the teeth. I've now
replaced it with a 24tooth crown gear, as these look like they have that
point covered better than the regular gears. Does anyone have any experience
with that? Is the 24tooth crown gear's axle support stronger than the
regular 24 tooth gear's?
I'd like to use 2 24tooth gears connected with with 4 friction pins, but
unfortunately that's not possible there, as the 2nd one would touch the
gearbox's clutch-thingy. (no idea what it's called)
On another point in the drivetrain, that IS possible. I can even use 2 24
tooth gears with partly broken axle supports(!), by putting four friction
pins in them and then putting them together on an axle, with the broken
sides opposite to eachother. Lego reclycling :D
I was also kind of wondering is lego will replace these parts. I must admit
I'm probably putting too much strain on them, so it's not totally surprising
they're breaking down, but still, has anyone ever asked for his broken gears
to be replaced, and what kind of reaction did you get?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.technic, Gillis Hommen writes:
> Sorry for digging up an old thread ;)
Dude, this is old! :-)
> It's always the axle support point that fails, never the teeth.
That's been my experience too. Especially with the old-style 24 tooth gears.
In fact, the axle support kinda warps as the axle rotates out. And then
sometimes it just breaks.
Just use the new style 24t gears. The axle suport is VERY solid and I
haven't broken one yet!
> I'd like to use 2 24tooth gears connected with with 4 friction pins, but
> unfortunately that's not possible there, as the 2nd one would touch the
> gearbox's clutch-thingy. (no idea what it's called)
> On another point in the drivetrain, that IS possible. I can even use 2 24
> tooth gears with partly broken axle supports(!), by putting four friction
> pins in them and then putting them together on an axle, with the broken
> sides opposite to eachother. Lego reclycling :D
That's a good idea. I did something similar a while back, but with axles
instead of pegs. It worked well.
> I was also kind of wondering is lego will replace these parts.
Probably not. The old style 24t gears you've broken aren't made anymore.
They might replace them with newer style ones, but I can't say. It's worth a
try I suppose.
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Just use the new style 24t gears. The axle suport is VERY solid and I
> haven't broken one yet!
I don't have any new style 24t gears. My newest lego set is the 8880
supercar from 1995, that has now been dusted off and mutated to serve as a
school project. :)
> Probably not. The old style 24t gears you've broken aren't made anymore.
> They might replace them with newer style ones, but I can't say. It's worth a
> try I suppose.
New style 24t gears would be fine, as long as they're compatible with the
rest of the gears. :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.technic, Gillis Hommen writes:
>
> > Just use the new style 24t gears. The axle suport is VERY solid and I
> > haven't broken one yet!
>
> I don't have any new style 24t gears. My newest lego set is the 8880
> supercar from 1995, that has now been dusted off and mutated to serve as a
> school project. :)
You could double all the z24 gears and link then togheter with friction pins
and/or cross axles.
Or, you could boil them:
http://news.lugnet.com/technic/?n=6899
But don't blame me if it wont work with the old z24's and it will certainly
ruin any warranty :)
> > Probably not. The old style 24t gears you've broken aren't made anymore.
> > They might replace them with newer style ones, but I can't say. It's worth a
> > try I suppose.
>
> New style 24t gears would be fine, as long as they're compatible with the
> rest of the gears. :)
See this excellent page:
http://w3.one.net/~hughesj/technica/registry/gear/gear_3.php
There you can see both the old and the new z24 gear.
Best regards,
/Tobbe
http://www.lotek.nu
(remove SPAM when e-mailing)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.technic, Tobbe Arnesson writes:
> In lugnet.technic, Gillis Hommen writes:
> >
> > > Just use the new style 24t gears. The axle suport is VERY solid and I
> > > haven't broken one yet!
> >
> > I don't have any new style 24t gears. My newest lego set is the 8880
> > supercar from 1995, that has now been dusted off and mutated to serve as a
> > school project. :)
>
> You could double all the z24 gears and link then togheter with friction pins
> and/or cross axles.
>
> Or, you could boil them:
> http://news.lugnet.com/technic/?n=6899
>
> But don't blame me if it wont work with the old z24's and it will certainly
> ruin any warranty :)
>
> > > Probably not. The old style 24t gears you've broken aren't made anymore.
> > > They might replace them with newer style ones, but I can't say. It's worth a
> > > try I suppose.
> >
> > New style 24t gears would be fine, as long as they're compatible with the
> > rest of the gears. :)
>
> See this excellent page:
> http://w3.one.net/~hughesj/technica/registry/gear/gear_3.php
>
> There you can see both the old and the new z24 gear.
>
> Best regards,
> /Tobbe
> http://www.lotek.nu
> (remove SPAM when e-mailing)
Hey, very informative page!
I see now I didn't brake 12tooth gears, but 14tooth bevel gears. (4143)
These look even flimsier than the current 12 tooth bevel gears...
About the 24t gears, I'm currently using them like this:
http://home.hccnet.nl/gillis.hommen/double_gears.PNG
Of the 2 24t gears next to the center-diff only one meshes with the
differential, but they're connected with friction pins to share the load. In
reality those are actually 2 broken gears working together as one strong and
properly working gear. :)
On the same axle as these two 24t gears is one 24t crown gear that meshes
with the gearbox' clutchgears. It's not possible to use 2 'normal' 24t crown
gears connected by friction pins, as the second one would touch the
gearbox's clutch. The 24t crown gear looks like it has a stronger axle
support so I'm trying that out instead of a regular gear. Before the gearbox
are just 2 pairs of 8&24 tooth gears, sharing the load. Those are not
connected by friction pins because there's no reason to, they both mesh with
another gear.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Another dig up then. ;)
I mailed lego about the 5 'old style' broken z24 gears, and asked them if
they would send me 5 new ones. (preferably at no cost)
Their reaction: because these gears are not available in any service pack,
we will send them to you for free.
Awesome service!
I've recieved them yesterday, and of course sent a 'thank you' mail back to
them. Haven't really tested them yet but I expect they will hold up much
better than the old ones.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Gillis Hommen writes:
> Another dig up then. ;)
>
> I mailed lego about the 5 'old style' broken z24 gears, and asked them if
> they would send me 5 new ones. (preferably at no cost)
> Their reaction: because these gears are not available in any service pack,
> we will send them to you for free.
>
> Awesome service!
Cool. I wish I'd kept all the ones I broke! I think I tossed them out.
Or did you even need the old broken ones?
The only experience I had with parts replacement and Lego was when I asked
for two new mini-motors. Lego promptly sent the new ones, but requested me
to send the old broken ones back to them. They included a pre-paid shipping
envelope.
Is this the standard procedure? Do Lego always ask for the broken ones?
thanks,
TJ
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.technic, Thomas Avery writes:
> In lugnet.technic, Gillis Hommen writes:
> > Another dig up then. ;)
> >
> > I mailed lego about the 5 'old style' broken z24 gears, and asked them if
> > they would send me 5 new ones. (preferably at no cost)
> > Their reaction: because these gears are not available in any service pack,
> > we will send them to you for free.
> >
> > Awesome service!
>
> Cool. I wish I'd kept all the ones I broke! I think I tossed them out.
>
> Or did you even need the old broken ones?
>
> The only experience I had with parts replacement and Lego was when I asked
> for two new mini-motors. Lego promptly sent the new ones, but requested me
> to send the old broken ones back to them. They included a pre-paid shipping
> envelope.
>
> Is this the standard procedure? Do Lego always ask for the broken ones?
>
> thanks,
> TJ
I didn't even have to send the broken ones, I just got the new ones, no
questions asked.
It's the first time I've even contacted lego for me, so I wouldn't know if
this is standard procedure...
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Or did you even need the old broken ones?
Sometimes.
> The only experience I had with parts replacement and Lego was when I asked
> for two new mini-motors. Lego promptly sent the new ones, but requested me
> to send the old broken ones back to them. They included a pre-paid shipping
> envelope.
I've got two motors replaced also but never had to turn in the faulty ones. I
had the misfortunes about a year between each so it was only one motor at
the time.
> Is this the standard procedure? Do Lego always ask for the broken ones?
I think they do if the parts are expensive i.e. motors, RCX, etc. just to make
sure the faulty parts wont be reported broken again with a new replacement and
then again with a new replacement and so forth.
Best regards,
/Tobbe
http://www.lotek.nu
(remove SPAM when e-mailing)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Nice stuff, definitely inspiring.
Here are some related links:
http://www.tractorpulling.com/report/1998/micropulling-anholt98.html
http://www.micro-pulling.de/micro_pulling/reglement/reglement_eng98.htm
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
hey tj,
have you broken any u-joints yet or is the fix with the plate holding up good?
also what is the yellow chasis at the top of your load? is that your
liehberr excavator?
steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.technic, Thomas Avery writes:
> I had a little fun last night:
> http://www.texbrick.com/creations/tractor/pull.html
>
> I managed to move 94.5 lb (42.9 kg)!
>
> TJ
I have loved this tractor design since it was first shown in the LUGNET spot
light. I sure wish you would publish the Ldraw CAD plans for this beast!
-JM
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(the thread that wouldn't die :-)
In lugnet.technic, Jeff McClain writes:
> I have loved this tractor design since it was first shown in the LUGNET spot
> light. I sure wish you would publish the Ldraw CAD plans for this beast!
Thanks! Sorry, though, I didn't CAD this beast. I wish I had the time to do
things like that, but by the time I'm finished with a model, I'm too eager
to tear it down and start on the next one! :-)
-TJ
| | | | | | |
