I’m not entirely sure your strength test is accurate. There was a lot of play in the legos and any moving element is only strongest in it’s intended direction of use. You should build a frame above the scale and have the actuator push straight down on the scale, that will give you the most accurate results.
That was my thought too when I saw the weird frame bending on the scale. Kitchen scales are only accurate in vertical direction. Since the actuator is longer it may apply force at a different angle resulting in apparently less force than the L one. Also if the XL actuator was tested last, the voltage and thus force would be less. For a reliable result it should be repeated backwards from XL to L to S with a new set of batteries.
@@R0Sch88 it would give more accurate results, but the arm itself is ultimately a closed system with only the actuator and the scale (and fulcrum) acting on it. it will read less force than can actually be applied at the actuator, but for comparison between them it works perfectly fine. also there was too little bend to allow for a significant change in angle between the actuator and the fulcrum without the scale end moving, so for all intents and purposes its a fairly accurate test for its goal :)
the XL actuator was not designed to be strong, it was designed to extend further. If they make it stronger, then the part will break/wear more easily. As long as the XL isnt significantly weaker, there is no point in comparing the force
Did the motor strength wasn't enough and it stalled or did the clutch really slipped during the L and XL tests? With these numbers, since the XL has a longer length, when correctly installed on a robotic arm it should produce the same amount of torque as the L version...
Regarding the weight difference, if you assume that most of the part's mass is metal, then based on the change in volume of the metal rod a 50 to 60% increase in mass would be expected. At least that's my back of envelope estimate based on the x-ray photo you show. The thick walled portion of the cylinder also appears to extend about 16 mm more than on the L actuator.
Plus the density of all steels are basically identical no matter the alloy,I doubt they're using steel for one then aluminum or a zinc alloy for the other.
~250g less with the XL actuator? Bit much, I think the test is a bit wrong in it execution. You have two different lenghts of actuators, which means both apply the same force in two different angels(X-/Y-parts of forces)! That is a fatal error when you want to compare these two (or three) actuators. It might be best to redo the last test in an horizontal or vertical direction, if the difference is still this great then it can be a clutch or it might be interessting to look inside both and see if they have different threads, which also could explain a difference in force, when the gap is still this great!
copy of my other comment: it would give more accurate results, but the arm itself is ultimately a closed system with only the actuator and the scale (and fulcrum) acting on it. it will read less force than can actually be applied at the actuator, but for comparison between them it works perfectly fine. also there was too little bend to allow for a significant change in angle between the actuator and the fulcrum without the scale end moving, so for all intents and purposes its a fairly accurate test for its goal :) and to address your point, the L was actually at a very slight disadvantage in terms of its angle when mounted to the beams at fulcrum level. i think it might be ultimately negligible here anyway. but i think the clutch design was what looked different between the xray views
@@joegreenwood6551 speed doesnt matter at all, just the clutch seem to be weaker for no reason cause i dont think any parts are weaker in the XL Motor wich make this necessary
@@mctobi2921 lego trying to protect its bits too conservatively again lol... if i ever get my hands on some ill be popping them open and gluing up the clutches. id rather do that and have to rebuy them at some point down the road than have to deal with clickclickclickclickclick! :/
I'm having issues with my Rough Terran Crane, I'm currently building the gear box that turns the L actuators and I hooked it up to the motor to do a test, but only one of the actuators moves up and down. The other just spins in place, but when I hand twist it, it moves up and down. I'm wondering if it needs the weight of the crane arm to work properly but it still puzzles me why one works freely and the other doesn't. I just don't want to build the whole thing to only have to dissemble it to replace the 1 actuator.
@@FuzzyLittleBastard Yes, the reason was actually pretty simple. The end piece that connects needs to be held stationary (which it will be when connected) so that when you twist the opposite end, it will go up and down. If it's not held stationary, it will just spin in place and not go up and down. So the piece I thought didn't work......actually does. lol Just user error.
Isnt the increased weight of the XL compared to the increased lenght. Just tie square cubed law in effect? Like, every time you make that rod longer, it increases in lenght in one dimension, but the volume and therefore Also mass, increases in 3 dimensions. And no matter how you slice it, 3 dimensions always has more volume and mass than 1 dimension.
That's wrong because you're not proportionally increasing all the dimensions of the rod, just the length. For math purposes, given that the volume of a cylinder is pi R^2 * H, when the rod length is increased that's just a change in H, but not R. So you're only increasing the volume Remember for a cylinder, R counts for two of the three spatial dimensions, since a circle is a two dimensional figure. H is the third dimension for a cylinder, and a rod is just a cylinder. So the mass of the XL actuator over the mass of the L actuator should be proportional to the difference in their lengths, but it's not. I think that the difference could be made up by having much more plastic inside the actuator, because from my understanding of metallurgy most mild steel has around the same density. The only way to significantly change that would be to use a leaded steel, and that stuff has not been produced in a very long time, and would never be used in a kids toy such as Lego.
I don't remember what it's called, but there's a platform that uses 3 pistons or actuators that are used to change the platform angle 180° in any 360° full circle direction... Can you make it, please....
I still have yet to possess even one L actuator because they only come in the really big sets. Great informative video btw, but I will probably not be using any of these except the S.
@@macrowhite2294 I actually was going to buy some at bricklink, but I had higher priorities to spend my money on. I've never heard of BrickOwl though, do they have better prices?
@@onagleanarts7954 Brick Owl have a better website - prices seem okay to me. They probably have fewer clients than Brick Link. Why don't you take a look?
I wonder if the actuators can be washed with water since they are filled with dust since the inner part has a metal rod? thanks whoever will answer my question ! 😉😉🙏🙏🙋♂🙋♂
Because this doesn't work like suspension. There's zero shock absorption, zero cushioning. And if you mean suspension with adjustable ground clearance, it's been done dozens of times already, bro.
that strength test was horrible, the mechanic advantage of the scale is way higher than the actuator. preferably, they should be the same distance away from the pivot
@@searme i mean if i build a offroad car, i have a bigger lego fork connected then i have this pump beside so it looks like its 2 forks you know how i mean? just for looks.
Not, for "we don't need it" and cost reasons. Besides, a lego axle is already pretty weak, and the "bearings" are all journal bearings without any lubrication. So if you get too much torque you start breaking things, and if you get too much speed you start melting things. And that's with just two PF L motors geared together and run off of one battery box. In other words, you don't really need it, because you're already capable of breaking things with the current motors and gears.
wait so is the xl weaker because it has a different clutch mechanism (the different xrays) then? and why would they do that? i get fed up with legos clutches pretty fast and would rather glue them, but im not a kid and it wasnt designed for me lol
A final conclusion sheet/table would have been nice.
I’m not entirely sure your strength test is accurate. There was a lot of play in the legos and any moving element is only strongest in it’s intended direction of use. You should build a frame above the scale and have the actuator push straight down on the scale, that will give you the most accurate results.
That was my thought too when I saw the weird frame bending on the scale. Kitchen scales are only accurate in vertical direction. Since the actuator is longer it may apply force at a different angle resulting in apparently less force than the L one. Also if the XL actuator was tested last, the voltage and thus force would be less. For a reliable result it should be repeated backwards from XL to L to S with a new set of batteries.
and on top of that, the XL actuator was not designed to lift more, it was designed to extend further. So the force isnt very important.
R0Sch You always lose strength when applying force at any angle other then perpendicular to the surface. Physics I
@@R0Sch88 it would give more accurate results, but the arm itself is ultimately a closed system with only the actuator and the scale (and fulcrum) acting on it. it will read less force than can actually be applied at the actuator, but for comparison between them it works perfectly fine. also there was too little bend to allow for a significant change in angle between the actuator and the fulcrum without the scale end moving, so for all intents and purposes its a fairly accurate test for its goal :)
@bcstractor lego is slippery enough on a plastic scale that friction is negligible. and how are the moments different?
Looks like everything in LEGO with size L is the strongest.
the XL actuator was not designed to be strong, it was designed to extend further. If they make it stronger, then the part will break/wear more easily. As long as the XL isnt significantly weaker, there is no point in comparing the force
@@robertr7923 It's a good comparison for the clutch component to highlight their mechanical differences.
Did the motor strength wasn't enough and it stalled or did the clutch really slipped during the L and XL tests? With these numbers, since the XL has a longer length, when correctly installed on a robotic arm it should produce the same amount of torque as the L version...
They purposely made the XL actuator's clutch easier to slip than the L one's
Regarding the weight difference, if you assume that most of the part's mass is metal, then based on the change in volume of the metal rod a 50 to 60% increase in mass would be expected. At least that's my back of envelope estimate based on the x-ray photo you show. The thick walled portion of the cylinder also appears to extend about 16 mm more than on the L actuator.
Plus the density of all steels are basically identical no matter the alloy,I doubt they're using steel for one then aluminum or a zinc alloy for the other.
Next Lego should make a xl pneumatic cylinder
They did. 2:29 in this very video.
~250g less with the XL actuator? Bit much, I think the test is a bit wrong in it execution. You have two different lenghts of actuators, which means both apply the same force in two different angels(X-/Y-parts of forces)! That is a fatal error when you want to compare these two (or three) actuators. It might be best to redo the last test in an horizontal or vertical direction, if the difference is still this great then it can be a clutch or it might be interessting to look inside both and see if they have different threads, which also could explain a difference in force, when the gap is still this great!
copy of my other comment: it would give more accurate results, but the arm itself is ultimately a closed system with only the actuator and the scale (and fulcrum) acting on it. it will read less force than can actually be applied at the actuator, but for comparison between them it works perfectly fine. also there was too little bend to allow for a significant change in angle between the actuator and the fulcrum without the scale end moving, so for all intents and purposes its a fairly accurate test for its goal :)
and to address your point, the L was actually at a very slight disadvantage in terms of its angle when mounted to the beams at fulcrum level. i think it might be ultimately negligible here anyway. but i think the clutch design was what looked different between the xray views
Thx, very useful comparison!
the mouse is so cute!!
Ur hamster is just over cute! 😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍
I'm dying to get this set!😖
Its realy saddens me that the XL actuator is actually even weaker then the L one:(
@@joegreenwood6551 speed doesnt matter at all, just the clutch seem to be weaker for no reason cause i dont think any parts are weaker in the XL Motor wich make this necessary
@@mctobi2921 lego trying to protect its bits too conservatively again lol... if i ever get my hands on some ill be popping them open and gluing up the clutches. id rather do that and have to rebuy them at some point down the road than have to deal with clickclickclickclickclick! :/
@@joegreenwood6551 not true at all, the clutch is the limiting factor, nothing else.
@TheOtherWhiteBread0 who's joe?
@@arendmookhoek4314 joe mama
I'm having issues with my Rough Terran Crane, I'm currently building the gear box that turns the L actuators and I hooked it up to the motor to do a test, but only one of the actuators moves up and down. The other just spins in place, but when I hand twist it, it moves up and down. I'm wondering if it needs the weight of the crane arm to work properly but it still puzzles me why one works freely and the other doesn't.
I just don't want to build the whole thing to only have to dissemble it to replace the 1 actuator.
Did you ever figure it out? I'm having the same problem.
@@FuzzyLittleBastard Yes, the reason was actually pretty simple.
The end piece that connects needs to be held stationary (which it will be when connected) so that when you twist the opposite end, it will go up and down. If it's not held stationary, it will just spin in place and not go up and down.
So the piece I thought didn't work......actually does. lol Just user error.
@@billnye69 oh neat! Thanks!
Isn't That new set is the perfect house for your hamster?
42055 was better since it included a treadwheel ;)
@@searme how about a vacation house🤣
Sariel your a legend !
These longer actuators look handy for your upcoming liebherr mobile crane. You going to use them for that?
Isnt the increased weight of the XL compared to the increased lenght.
Just tie square cubed law in effect?
Like, every time you make that rod longer, it increases in lenght in one dimension, but the volume and therefore Also mass, increases in 3 dimensions.
And no matter how you slice it, 3 dimensions always has more volume and mass than 1 dimension.
That's wrong because you're not proportionally increasing all the dimensions of the rod, just the length.
For math purposes, given that the volume of a cylinder is pi R^2 * H, when the rod length is increased that's just a change in H, but not R. So you're only increasing the volume
Remember for a cylinder, R counts for two of the three spatial dimensions, since a circle is a two dimensional figure. H is the third dimension for a cylinder, and a rod is just a cylinder.
So the mass of the XL actuator over the mass of the L actuator should be proportional to the difference in their lengths, but it's not. I think that the difference could be made up by having much more plastic inside the actuator, because from my understanding of metallurgy most mild steel has around the same density. The only way to significantly change that would be to use a leaded steel, and that stuff has not been produced in a very long time, and would never be used in a kids toy such as Lego.
@@44R0Ndin ah ok then.
Makes sense.
I don't remember what it's called, but there's a platform that uses 3 pistons or actuators that are used to change the platform angle 180° in any 360° full circle direction...
Can you make it, please....
Hi, sorry for dumb question, but how do you extend to range lol. Thank you
I still have yet to possess even one L actuator because they only come in the really big sets. Great informative video btw, but I will probably not be using any of these except the S.
Why don't you buy one at BrickLink or BrickOwl ?
@@macrowhite2294 I actually was going to buy some at bricklink, but I had higher priorities to spend my money on. I've never heard of BrickOwl though, do they have better prices?
@@onagleanarts7954 Brick Owl have a better website - prices seem okay to me. They probably have fewer clients than Brick Link. Why don't you take a look?
@@macrowhite2294 i'll take a look at it, thanks!
nice video !!
What sets did the fixed mound for the L actuator come in
Welcome to Bricklink, I'll be your guide: www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=61905&in=S
42008 for example
homie really xrayed his legos
What was this soundtrack. Very nice
I wonder if the actuators can be washed with water since they are filled with dust since the inner part has a metal rod? thanks whoever will answer my question ! 😉😉🙏🙏🙋♂🙋♂
They surely can. They'll just get rusty after.
its not about the size but how you use it
Hi Pawel, what's the next moc you're likely to release?🙂
KV-1/KV-2 tank.
@@searme i discovered that you can cover up the crankshaft of a v6 for example
I need some. pnematic ones for me please. Where can i get them???
Awesome video!!!
Lego.com or Bricklink.
Same gbc ball pump lift
Bro why is no one making air suspension whit this things??? It would be sick
Because this doesn't work like suspension. There's zero shock absorption, zero cushioning. And if you mean suspension with adjustable ground clearance, it's been done dozens of times already, bro.
Ummm linear actuators definetly cant use for suspension LOL
that strength test was horrible, the mechanic advantage of the scale is way higher than the actuator. preferably, they should be the same distance away from the pivot
What's about the new linear clutch
Why do the grays on these look like the old pre-04 gray?
They dont have an internal clutch. Thats the gears slipping. If you dp this for too long you destroy them
Um yes, they do, I've seen it on X-ray.
Can this thing work like a 2nd spring for a offroad buggy? because it would be perfect!
A spring? Not really.
@@searme i mean if i build a offroad car, i have a bigger lego fork connected then i have this pump beside so it looks like its 2 forks you know how i mean? just for looks.
What pump? The actuator doesn't have any spring inside it, it's completely stiff and can't be used as a shock absorber.
@@searme okay!
Hey sariel, do you use a CAD program to design builds/mocs? So yes, which one?
I don't.
What serial number had the L actuator? Was it the 35X0 or 36X0?
@2:32 : damn it !! Another Lego bricks lover dealing cocaine !!! xDD JUST KIDDING !!! Poland 4ever in my heart xD
the l has aluminum, xl has stainless steel
Do you think lego will release stronger or faster motors in bulk in the future or not for safety purposes?
Not, for "we don't need it" and cost reasons. Besides, a lego axle is already pretty weak, and the "bearings" are all journal bearings without any lubrication. So if you get too much torque you start breaking things, and if you get too much speed you start melting things. And that's with just two PF L motors geared together and run off of one battery box.
In other words, you don't really need it, because you're already capable of breaking things with the current motors and gears.
@@44R0Ndin I might get a traxxas 4x4 then
wait so is the xl weaker because it has a different clutch mechanism (the different xrays) then? and why would they do that?
i get fed up with legos clutches pretty fast and would rather glue them, but im not a kid and it wasnt designed for me lol
Maybe it's more likely to break because it's longer?
@@searme idk. i would imagine the forces would be the same since the speed is the same, but hey! im probably forgetting something :P
@@searme i have a s and a l actuator from my 42008
Baldigamer100 VR 🙈 what are u after?? a blue peter badge 😂😂
Nice
🇨🇾🇲🇧🇦🇱
Oh lets make real hidraulic press now!
...
.....where do I get an xray for use at home?!
No idea, I didn't use it at home. My wife is a vet.
@@searme Gotcha. Gotta have my wife switch careers then
@@searme wow
Te małą wagę to do czego masz przyznaj się ^.- bo chyba nie do ważenia klocków :P
Żona kosmetyki sobie robi :P
@@searme ja czasami robię przyspieszacz z 5 zębatek 8t i 1 24t zębatki
Jak robiłem mechanizm podnoszenia i opuszczania działa w 53tp to użyłem tego najmniejszego siłownika liniowego
you x rayed a lego...
Y E S
This vid has (at the moment)
No views and has 8 likes..
seems legit...
I think there are quite a few who press "Like" before even starting to watch the video, since they know the level of quality from Sariel.
@@johansten7976 yeah
On almost every video i see a comment like this, it's just that youtube doesn't update the views as much as the likes, nothing else!
Lol! Mega fail! L actuator puts out way more force!!!! Nice one Lego!!!