Cargomaster Crane

March 29, 2013 Leave a comment


We all have our favorite LEGO sets.  Then we also have sets that we think were pretty cool.  Set 6352 from 1991, the Cargomaster Crane was one of these sets for me.  It was a set simple set, it was perfect for a growing child.  Small, playable, yellow, and it could lift things.

Recently, I decided I wanted to make a little Technic crane.  I researched a number of designs, none of which really struck me as something I wanted to pursue.  I kept coming back to 6352. Why not make a crane like that?  Perfect.  I wanted it to be a nice homage to this classic set.  I was going to make is just like 6352.  Double the size, same shape, complete with containor and tractor, and of course a driver.  The full gallery may be found here.

6352 Technic

I stared with a simple frame built for the outriggers at both ends.  I knew I was not going to be able to add a more complex outrigger system at this scale that would reflect the original crane, so I made manual outrigigers just like the original.  I added two steering axles so the crane could drive to and from the site, then I placed a turntable right on top of the chassis.

As I started the superstructure, it become very clear very early, that having an offset crane boom like the original model, was not going to be a good idea.  My model was going to look off, and the balance of the offset boom was going to make stability, both for the superstructure, and the crane as a whole, a problem.  I knew the size of the boom, and decided to place it in the center of the crane.  I then placed the cabin, and set it up for the little technic figure.

The boom was relatively simple; two stage, and 23 studs long.  The outside was simple and straightforward, meant to be sturdy and strong.  The pivot was at the rear on top of the winch, and the elevation ram was connected forward under the front of the boom.  There was a simple worm gear under the front that would drive a set of gear racks, to drive the inner boom.  The inner boom would hold the final boom which was only a series of plates.  Each stage was connect by a two cables to make sure all the booms moved together in unison.  It worked well, even under load, as you can see in the video.

The model worked well, and had perfect balance.  The simple boom extension worked well, as did the winch.  The outriggers gave appropriate stability through all positions.  And it looked very similar to the original model, even with the little tractor.

Filed under Construction Tagged with , , , ,

Mini Feller

November 18, 2012 5 Comments


Building with Lego is a continuous formation of compromise.  While my ideal of what my Mini Feller would include was significant, what I could actually accomplish was a compromise of space, function, realism, and frankly the amount of frustration I was willing to tolerate.  So while the final result is a watered down version of what I would have liked, it was the result of me compromising amidst the situation.

Instructions can be found here.

I wanted to make a small model go with my Mini Skidder.  The MOC had to be the same scale, have a decent level of fuctions, and work with my Skidder.  A feller seemed like a good option.  As I looked at what function this MOC would have, I ambitiously stated it must have a working blade, working steering, working grapper, and a working tilt function.  All these functions would be controllable on the back or on top of the cab.

The steering was simple enough.  I added a small turntable at the bottom of the chassis to give the frame some support.  The HOG steering axle would come out at the top of the cab, and join the front and the rear with a small link arm.  Simple enough.  Likewise, I added a differential in the rear part of the chassis, geared up the rotation, sent it though a couple of universal joints to the front of the Feller, connected it through a pair of 12z bevel gears, and attached a saw blade.  Again, simple enough I had steering and a working blade.

It got complicated as I tried to add the arm features.  The lifting of the arm would be done with a 8z gear with a worm gear.  Because there was a driveshaft to the front blade, the 8z gear needed to be placed on the axis of the arm, but out of the way of the driveshaft.  The required a 1 stud offset that also needed to be directed back through the steering axis to the rear of the Feller.  I used a CV joint to allow the axle to slip as the feller would steer.

The tilt feature would require a parallel control that would allow the elevation happen while keeping the feller blade parallel to the ground.  This would require another 8z worm gear connection at the lower rear pivot point of the arms.  I was running out of space.  Of the 7 studs to work with, one was used for the universal joint, one was used for the lifting gear, one for the mounting liftarm, and one for the lifting arm.  I could not add another worm gear system, while being able to actually lift the feller blade.  Additionally, adding a link for the gathering arms would also have to work through this pivot point if I wanted to isolate the movement from the lifting and tilting feature.  I had to give.  A compromise was necessary.  I felt the stability of the feller blade had to be paramount, so I added another support arm.  I also felt gathering arms must remain as they are essential to a feller.  Sorry, but the tilt feature got the ax.  It was the correct decision, but it still tasted a little sour.

It was a great little MOC, and I had a good time creating it.  I hope you enjoy building your own.  The full gallery can be viewed here and the instructions can be viewed here.

Thanks for reading.

Filed under Construction Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Kenworth T55

April 28, 2012 6 Comments


Traction.  It’s all about traction when designing a trial truck.  Because of this, many builders have tried a number of different solutions in designing their own trucks: differentials, gearboxes, various numbers of wheels, various gears ratios, countless suspension designs, and on and on.  So why would it be any different for my trucks?  Every truck I make is a reaction to some set of problems I have encountered with a previous truck.  This is my current solution.

The full gallery is here.

The Kenworth T55 started as a proof of concept, and turned into a design of a fictional truck.  I wanted to somehow see if there was a way to use differentials in a successful trial truck.  For this to work, two things had to be accomplished.  First, there had to be a way to keep the tires from spinning uncontrollably when they lost contact with the ground.  And second, the torque going through the differential had to be low enough that it would not shred the gears inside the differential when the truck encountered an obstacle.   Could I make axles that had a limited slip differential while having all of the gear reduction at the hub?

Enter turntables.  I have seen some ideas before, most sigificantly from Borec, including this truck, so I went to work.  I designed a mount for the wheels and tires, and placed the universal joint as close the wheels as I could.  Then I used a limited slip differentail design, and sent the driveshaft back to the body.  A simple steering design was used, and the two fuctions passed through the common design of using a differental body through a turntable.

The chassis was designed to keep the weight low, both is mass and location.  As is common, I used the Power Functions XL motor for drive, and I decided to use the 8878 Battery box as it was significally lighter than the other design.  In addition, I would have a drive shaft and a steering shaft running the length of the truck, so the motor and power pack needed to set on both sided of the truck.  Also, because I used the turntables, the drive shaft was very high.  This gave great ground clearance, but I needed to keep the heavy components low.  By having both large components on the side, I was able to keep a short wheelbase of 30 studs, and keep the mass centered and low.  The driveline was complete.

Ever since my GMC 2500, I have held to the belief that a linked suspension is the most efective setup for four wheel trial trucks.  The design keeps all four wheels firmly planned, and does not have the wobbling feel of many pendular suspension designs.  But as is often the case, I ran out of room to place a link rod between the two wheels so I opted with useing the rubber connectors to keep the axles level.    I added a body, and a steering motor, wired everything together, and I was done.

So how did it work.  As you can see in the video, the suspension was effected by the steering and drive shafts.  This further confirms my thoughts on the linked suspension.  Second, the turntables did not really add much.  They added a lot of friction to the driveline, and though they kept the differentials safe because of the tall final gear they did not really isolate the forces on the differential as much as I would have liked.  Third, the limited slip differentials worked well, but still allowed for too much wheel slip.  I ended up replacing the rear with a locked axle, which seemed to work well.  So, for the next truck, bring back the linked suspension, and find a better differential solution.  Maybe then I can find some more traction.

 

Filed under Trial Truck Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.