Subject:
|
Re: Motorized Switch using Monkey Motor
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Thu, 9 Sep 2004 21:57:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1839 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Ed McGlynn wrote:
| |
Hi Mark -
Great design, and the DCC stuff pointed out later in this thread is exciting.
I’m curious - your switch designs seem to be updated from time to time to get
a better base connection between the switch track itself and the motor, so
does the monkey motor allow for a more rigid design? I’m guessing that since
the base of the monkey motor has more inverted studs than the other new style
Technic motors, you’re able to get more grip from it in your design. Also,
you point out that the stiffness of the thin-walls helps out to maintain
integrity of the design. Can you comment on those two items please?
Also, what happens (dare I ask...) if you use full power from a 9v controller
on the device?
|
Hi Ed,
Thanks, glad you like the design. If you count the number of posts I’ve made
about DCC in the forums, you’ll see I’m pretty excited, too! :-)
It’s hit-or-miss when using the full 9V when operating the switches. Sometimes
it holds together just fine, no matter how many times you throw the switch.
Other times, you’ll build one and after a few dozen throws, it just self
destructs. Usually the roof pops off, one or more of the side panels go flying,
the yellow switch lever sometimes gets disconnected or sometimes the base
disconnects and the whole unit flys up and back and just lays there pathetically
where it happened to land. So far, no breakage of anything, though.
But, that’s with the full 9V. Chris Masi, in this
post, originally had the idea to reduce
the voltage going to the motor. Ever since using the lower voltage, I haven’t
encountered any problems.
As to the side panels, I found using the transparent panels worked better since
they flexed less when absorbing the impact. When using the opaque panels, the
flex would tend to work the roof loose. Since using lower voltage, I really
haven’t tested the units with opaque panels, so it may turn out that it’s OK to
use them in that case.
Also, it’s true I have changed the base attachment a bit. The
TSwitch2 just didn’t
have enough grip. TSwitch4 and TSwitch5
introduce an extra row of studs that grips the switch better - probably because
the switch base plate is straddled on both sides, unlike the earlier design.
Cheers,
Mark
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Motorized Switch using Monkey Motor
|
| (...) Excellent insights and explanations, Mark -thank you. "...the whole unit flys up and back and just lays there pathetically where it happened to land." LOL Man, I've been there. It's sad, but funny at the same time. It's like these contraptions (...) (20 years ago, 10-Sep-04, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Motorized Switch using Monkey Motor
|
| (...) Hi Mark - Great design, and the DCC stuff pointed out later in this thread is exciting. I'm curious - your switch designs seem to be updated from time to time to get a better base connection between the switch track itself and the motor, so (...) (20 years ago, 9-Sep-04, to lugnet.trains, FTX)
|
13 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
