 | | Re: Technic/Mindstorms at BrickFest 2005
|
|
On Fri, July 1, 2005 12:36 pm, John Barnes said: (...) John, I plan on bring at least one of everthing on your list. However, unlike in previous years, winning all the competitions is not my primary goal. I have several interesting entries, so it (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.events.brickfest, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: 8421 first impressions
|
|
(...) Hi Vineet. In what way did you atached the extra tubes (there were a few cm of back and blue tubing left over after I cut the size I needed - I assume you are referring to those). Thanks, Gyl (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Technic/Mindstorms at BrickFest 2005
|
|
BrickFest 2005 event planning and space allocation is in process. It would really help the planning process to get some idea of what competitions you might be planning on entering, and what Technic, Mindstorms or Great Ball Contraption MOCs you be (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.announce, lugnet.events.brickfest, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: 8421 first impressions
|
|
(...) As far as I understand it, having had a chance to chat with the set designer in Billund during the inside tour, the "buggy" motor is cheaper than the smaller one you are referring to. The buggy motor uses a conventional iron cored armature (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: 8421 first impressions
|
|
On Fri, July 1, 2005 10:17 am, Gyl said: (...) I replaced the single pair of pneumatic cylinders with two pair of pneumatic cylinders. It's a very easy change (except for securing the two cylinders end-to-end) That allows the boom to hold much more (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: 8421 first impressions
|
|
Yes. When I built the crane, I had the same problem. This can be fixed however. All you have to do is attach the extra tubes. (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: 8421 first impressions
|
|
(...) Thanks for the info. Still, I don't see the need to use this motor in the 8421. It only uses one motor, and it is not a very demanding application. They could have used the minimotor easily. It would have been smaller and less expensive, and (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: 8421 first impressions
|
|
(...) Hmm - not a lot more torque, but a huge amoutn of additional consumption, and fairly highly reduced efficiency. The 5292 appears to definately be the American SUV of the Lego motor range. I take it that for heavier torque - it is still better (...) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: 8421 first impressions
|
|
(...) Indeed... more torque, but lower efficiency: (URL) (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: 8421 first impressions
|
|
(...) I think it is supposed to deliver more torque than the standard motor. Anyone care to verify that for me? (19 years ago, 1-Jul-05, to lugnet.technic)
|
