text:
What are the exact dimensions of a DUPLO brick?
The dimensions of LEGO brick are documented well, but what about DUPLO bricks? If have only found the general statements that DUPLO is twice as large as LEGO but no exact numbers. What about the thickness of walls and the space that must be subtracted at each side (0.2mm for LEGO), is it also just doubled?. If you compare the bottom of a LEGO 2x4 brick and a DUPLO 2x4 brick, there are also additional small walls that I have not found documented.

Update: Some dimensions of a DUPLO brick can be derived from the dimensions of a LEGO brick, which have been documented by Robert Cailliau among
others:
Above and below a DUPLO 2x2 brick one can put two LEGO 2x4 bricks (or four 2x2 LEGO bricks). The outer walls of such stack seem to align perfectly, so the width and length of a DUPLO 2x2 brick is equal to the width of a LEGO 2x4 brick, which is 31.8mm (32mm-0.2mm). By putting DUPLO and LEGO side by side, one can also see that the DUPLO height without studs is twice of the size in LEGO (19.2mm). The LEGO studs below the DUPLO brick touch DUPLO walls, so DUPLO wall thickness is the same as LEGO wall thickness (either before spline walls were introduced to LEGO bricks or LEGO wall thickness plus the length of LEGO splines), which is 1.5mm. The DUPLO tube height is the height of the brick minus the height of a LEGO stud (which is somewhere between 1.6mm and 1.8mm). I'd better use the larger value, so the tubes start 1.8mm above the floor of the brick. From the top, LEGO tubes fit into DUPLO studs, so the stud inner diameter should equal to 6.51mm (8*√2 - 4.8$). But if you carefully look inside a DUPLO stud, this fitting is only achieved by four additional lugs that give a minimal inner diameter around 6mm to facilitate snapping into.
The remaining dimension include:

stud outer diameter
stud height
tube inner diameter (but DUPLO tubes are not fully circular inside
on a closer look!)
tube outer diameter (also occurs at some other elements for instance as stem at #6510)
spline length

Spline length can be derived from wall width and stud outer diameter. Tube
outer diameter and stud outer diameter can also be computed from each other. So basically three dimensions are left to be explained. Comments and insights are welcome how more of the remaning dimensions can be
derived from standard LEGO/DUPLO dimensions.

I can tell you a 2X4 Duplo Brick generated in MLCad is 63.5mm x 31.7mm x 23.4mm. I'm not sure about the space between studs and additional tube walls.

If a lego brick has 11.2mm height incl. knob - how come duplo is not 22.4mm? Looks like the dimension without additional space is 64mm x 32mm x 24mm.

Theoretically you could figure all of it by reading the corresponding LDraw file but that's not going to be easy, as you'll also need to fetch subfiles and so forth. I'll try to contact the part author, that may be faster.

@Joubarc: thanks. I have not managed to used LDraw (with LDCat) on Linux yet. The LDraw download website seems to be broken or outdated.

For the short answer, Duplo studs are indeed taller than twice the height of a Lego stud.  And don't rely too heavily on measurements you get from ldraw (and not just for Duplo).
For a really long-winded history on this...
First, note that when I authored the original Duplo parts I never actually measured them with a ruler or calipers, as there was no need.  The ldraw system assumes "perfect" dimensions in terms of other ldraw parts, so you typically measure parts by comparing them to other Lego pieces.  By this measurement, Duplo in ldraw (not counting the studs) is exactly twice the size of Lego.  In real life, any part is slightly smaller than the nominal measurement so that you can slide two parts next to each other without them hanging up on each other.  Duplo parts seem to be about twice as tolerant in this way, so I'd guess that in real life also the outer dimensions are very close to twice the size.
Some time in the 1990's, Duplo studs were changed.  They were made taller, and the inner hole got larger (making the stud walls thinner).  They also added bumps to the inside of the stud hole.  The ldraw Duplo stud has the taller height of the new stud and the perfect roundness and dimensions of the old stud hole.
Regular Lego bricks used to have smooth internal walls, and the ldraw bricks still look like this.  Duplo bricks always had "splines" that run vertically along the inside walls for Duplo studs to clutch.  Regular Lego studs clutch against the outer wall of the Duplo brick instead.  This is how studs of different sizes can both fit into the underside of a Duplo brick.  Around (2003?) Lego started making the walls of regular Lego look like Duplo bricks.  I assume this is a cost-cutting measure where they now use less plastic to mold the walls, but now have splines like Duplo so that the walls are the old thickness in the places where studs need to clutch.
So... Duplo wall thickness is the same as Lego wall thickness from before 2003 or so.  It's 4 LDU (ldraw units) if that helps.  For reference, a plate is 8 LDU high without the stud, and a 1x1x1 brick is 20x20x24 LDU without the stud.  Studs in ldraw are 4 LDU high, but that is totally inaccurate.  Non-hollow studs are clearly more than half the height of a plate, and the real height of regular studs should be more like 4.25 LDU.
Be very wary of the measurements that you get from parts converted from ldraw format to POV-Ray.  L3P scales each part down just a little bit to let POV-Ray show edge lines.
There is no simple real-world conversion from ldraw units to inches or centimeters.  For more info on that, see my lugnet post from 2001: http://news.lugnet.com/cad/?n=5284.
Primo is another story...

This is not a full answer, but the Free Art and Technology Lab seems to have carefully measured a DUPLO brick as part of the Free Universal Construction Kit. The parts are made available as STL file, for instance

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:15945 - includes DUPLO upper side
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:15924 - includes DUPLO bottom side

Maybe someone knows how to get the precice dimensions from the STL file. There is another DUPLO brick at Thingiverse which seems to be less precise. At least one can get the numbers from the OSCAD file.


text:
Waterproofing LEGO bricks
I have a LEGO ship that I want to photograph as it's sailing along in a pool. Of course the LEGO bricks have cracks in between them so water will leak through.
Does anyone have any ideas as to how to waterproof the hull? Something that won't harm the bricks that can be easily removed. Also I don't want whatever the material is to be visible in a photo.

Are you going to build something like this?

Holy smokes! I've got a Lego pirate ship (it's my brother's actually). It's the Black Sea Barracuda.

I would try liquid latex (liquid frisket) which you can buy in most art supply store.
This will not damage the bricks and is easy to peel off. You can apply it using a cheap throwaway brush, either in between the bricks (like a cement wall) or as a thin transparent layer on the whole hull. I recommend the second method because it's fast, straight forward and the easiest one to clean up.
I use this stuff for all kind of painting and molding jobs. It's a great material.

I use liquid frisket for art too.  It's an excellent suggestion since it is easy to come by and also removable.

I would tend to suggest another non-waterproofing solution - build something to hold your ship from underneath, that will safely rest on the bottom of your pool.
Of course, if you don't want it to show on the picture, you'll have to be extra careful about how you do it, but I think it's the simpliest solution.
What I would do is buy a large plexiglass sheet (or any other transparent material), make sure your ship is secured to it (drill some 8mm holes in the plexiglass and poke studs in them, or Technic Axles, or whatever). Then you can have someone hold the sheet & ship slightly under water so that the ship looks like it's floating, whereas it's actually not. As long as the borders of the sheet are outside of your camera frame, you're in business.
I owe that idea to a Stargate SG-1 episode I rewatched recently, actually. In the making of, they explaing how they make it look like a bullet is floating in mid-air - they just embed it in a plexiglass sheet and film right through it. It's it's good enough for commercial television, it should work for you too.

Maybe you don't need to waterproof it. If you are able to fit a block of foam (eg. extruded polystyrene) inside the hull, that will probably be enough to ensure buoyancy.

I suspect that water leaking through the hull will not be the real problem you need to solve. Granted, I haven't seen a photo of what you have built, so I might be wrong. I think the real problem you might have is that a Lego boat will be quite a bit less massive than a wooden or steel ship with the same proportions.
If you go look up some of the old sectional boats that they made in the mid 1970s, they all came with lead filled keel piece to keep the otherwise light and rather top heavy Lego boats from capsizing. Depending on your weight distribution, you might need to add some ballast to keep it floating correctly. If you aren't up on your boat physics, just keep the center of mass of the boat as low as possible in the water.
I suggest you give it a 'dry run' (ha-ha, get it?) in your bathtub and make sure that you aren't accidentally going to recreate the closing scene of Titanic before you set up your photo shoot.

Try spraying the inside with plasti dip, it goes on like spray paint or you can use a cheap paint brush, then you can peel off as one whole piece. Best of all it comes in many colors!
Get it here www.plastidip.com they also sell it at most home improvement stores.

Maybe clear contact-paper on the inside?

Put tape around it. Make sure to duble layer it.

You could use cling wrap, or plastic wrap might work. Maybe you could use aluminum foil.

Hello Tanners, can you add some more details or photos of your method? This question is quite old and there already are some answers. Personally, I can imagine that the cling wrap could work, but it will be visible, won't it (see question)?

I'd suggest to use clear silicon to seal the underside of the hull then add a weight in the bottom middle to keep balance and also make the ship a bit heavier.
I didn’t try this but it was my best idea.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Why did the dark grey color of bricks change?

Possible Duplicate:
What is the bley (blay) color?

15 years ago there were 2 shades of grey - light and dark grey bricks. Some years ago, hue of new produced dark grey bricks shifted towards blue a little.
Did anyone else noticed the change? Why did it happened? I live in Central Europe, can it be change in distribution (factory changed)?

This was covered in What is the bley (blay) colour

(I can't believe this hasn't been asked yet, so I'm still looking for a duplicate.)
In a nutshell, yes, everybody noticed and it was actually one of the biggest consumer backlash  the LEGO company had to endure. Fans vowed to never play with LEGO again, and so on. The fact that the LEGO company did the change unannounced, and even happily mixed both palettes in some sets, didn't help. Then they said the new colours were there to stay, and nowadays I'm not sure there are many fans left holding a grudge against this (apart from the ones who did really quit the hobby, I suppose, but then they aren't fans anymore, are they?)
And no, it wasn't a matter of factory change but a deliberate change to make the overall palette more satisfying and attractive for children, who are the target consumers of the LEGO company. Case in point, kids nowadays don't know about the old grays, and don't usually care.

You mean this one: What is the bley (blay) color?

Yeah, that's the one, I knew it existed

You forgot to close it :)

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
How to remove scratches from LEGO windshield parts?
I was storing my windshields from cars with other my bricks. Now they are scratched, nearly not transparent just translucent. Is there a way to sanitize transparent parts from scratches?

I'm not so sure if it's as easy as 'cleaning' the windshield. A scratch leaves a lasting physical mark on the brick.

Never tried this on LEGO, but I used to build plastic model kits and you can get a purpose made kit of micro mesh pads which you can use to essentially gently sand the scratches off. This works very well on see through plastic windows, but I'm not sure what would happen if your window was tinted.

peanut butter and toothpaste. rub them onto the windshield, and then wipe of and wash with water and soap. (the soap doesnt really matter, it will just get the smell off) that solution works for most scratches, i think it works for plastic. ;)

You can carefully use a lighter to gently melt the plastic, but I would only use this as a last resort.

Haven't tried this with Lego, but here are the first two things that come to mind.
Novus plastic cleaners (they make 3 solutions for various scratch depths, with Lego I would probably buy the one for the finest scratches) work well on my pinball machine plastics.
About the transparency, I would try the standard headlight cleaning solutions for a car.

While we prefer tested solutions, a brief Google does show that Novus could be a good fit for the polycarbonate plastic that is used in transparent elements :)

You've got three different approaches: 1) products that fill the scratch, 2) products that essentially dissolve the plastic material so that it re-hardens smooth, 3) products that help you polish the scratch away.

A silicon-based lens cleaner can do this and works for small scratches or some "cloudiness", but it won't be perfect. For example Bausch & Lomb or a furniture polish with wax.
It is likely that the Novus and similar products fall into this category, but they rely on polishing for the finish... similar to CD or DVD repair.
Here is a step-by-step method using household toothpaste.


text:
How to sort complete sets from box of unsorted LEGO
My son has thousands of pieces of LEGO, but he has them all dumped in a box. Is there any way to figure out what sets they went to if I don't remember the names of them?

First thing to do would be to get together any building instructions you have and attempt to build those sets one at a time noting any missing elements as you go.
Once this is complete and if you still have unsorted pieces, you could use a website such as Bricklink.com to try to identify the sets and then use Peeron.com to source the building instructions for that set.
To begin this process, try to select an odd looking piece that is uncommon in your collection. Use Bricklink to try to identify the piece and then click through to the catalog entry for that piece to see the list of sets that piece is included in. You can follow the links to get an inventory of the selected set and then see how many of the required pieces you have in the unsorted box.
This is not an exact science and will require a fair amount of trial-and-error, not to mention time, but these two websites are two of the best LEGO resources available for such a task.

In addition of odd-looking pieces, you may want to have a look at the minifigs, too. Some of them are unique to some sets, which should help a lot, but trying to identify them might be a pain.

Before you start:

It can be a big help to sort the parts, at least in some rudimentary way. Sorting by colour is least helpful, by shape much better.
Don't dismantle partial assemblies until you've either (a) identified the sets that they come from or (b) you're sure they won't help you identify particular sets.

To help you identify the sets:

Search through anything that you've got that is made of paper - sticker sheets, instructions, boxes or bits of boxes, etc. These often have set numbers on them, or pictures from which you can identify sets.
If you find a part with a number printed / stickered on to it, that number could well be a set number.
Find other bricks with stickers or designs. These can be a good indication of the kind of sets they are from.
Look for other unusual parts or parts in unusual colours. Minifigs and their accessories are a good starting point.
Look for partially completed models that look like they come from sets. It is usually easy to tell the difference between something that a child's build from something that was designed by LEGO.
Look at the general mix of parts. Lots of bricks that are 2 studs wide suggests that they come from basic building sets, whereas 1-stud wide parts are more likely to be walls for buildings. Lots of grey could indicate Star Wars sets. It is fairly easy to identify Bionicle and Technic parts.
Most collections of LEGO span a decade or so, so you can limit the identification process to the if you can guess the era covered by the collection - either from your child's age, from any sets you can identify, or from individual parts that were only made for a short time. Remember, however, that this is not a hard-and-fast rule - many collections have sets / bricks from outside their core collecting years.
Bare in mind that LEGO often produce several quite similar sets. For example, if you think you're fairly sure you've got a fire engine but can't find half the parts you expect, then you're probably trying to find the parts from the wrong fire engine.

Get to know the following reference sites:

Peeron
Brisklink
Brickset

If all else fails, post pictures of the less common parts here and we'll see if we can help identify the sets that they're from.
Finally:

Don't despair if you can't sort everything out. LEGO is about creativity, not just the sample designs that LEGO supply!

Here's what I did after finding a couple of old LEGO boxes stashed away in my parents' house.

Create a user and log into Rebrickable.com.
Under 'My Parts', create a new part list, and start adding your parts using their catalog. They have a very good search engine and you can quickly find most, if not all, of the exact parts.
Once done, go to the 'Build' section, where you can see which LEGO sets you can build from your part list. It gives you a percentage so e.g. if you have a set with 91% match, then that's probably the original set, and you're just missing a few odd parts.

I did all that (took a while, had over 800 pieces to catalog....), figured out which sets are the most probable ones, and ordered the missing parts (usually from BrickLink.com) to complete them.
It was really an excitement to see some 30-year old lego sets being built again :)

Exactly what I was looking for, cheers

Gonna try this NOW!

The Brick Manager app might be helpful with sorting the sets. It keeps track of all pieces that you've found and which are still missing.
Note: I am the developer of the app, and my post is a genuine attempt to help the topic starter and others facing the same issues.

Here's a description of the app from the app page on the Play store:

You have a huge collection of unsorted bricks and a lot of instructions of all sets that belong to the bricks. It's a huge job to collect all the parts from the unsorted bricks.
This app will help you to keep track of all the parts that you've collected so far and all the remaining parts.
This is how it works:

Enter a set number. The app will collect all set information and will display it in a nice way on the screen
Then the app will present a list of all parts and minifigs that belong to the set in a clear and user-friendly way
In this list you can indicate which parts you've already collected

The app is built using the Rebrickable API and is also listed on Rebrickable.com.

Hi Jasper and welcome to Bricks. If you're the developer, or involved with the Brick Manager app, then please see our help topic on self-promotion to make sure your answer isn't considered spam - you need to disclose your affiliation to the product or service you're promoting.

Hi Jasper and welcome to Bricks.SE! If you are indeed the author of the application, a disclaimer should be added to your post to avoid undue suspicion. In addition, this answer would definitely benefit from expanding it to provide a full answer to OP's question ("How to get from a tub of bricks to a bunch of completed sets?") with some extra steps. Aside from these points of possible improvements, I think you have the core of a great answer and a tool that will be cherished by many fellow LEGO enthusiasts. I, for one, have added it to my wishlist to be able to find it, should the need arise.

I went ahead and added some details to this answer. I can see why some folks view this as spam, especially since Jasper is likely the author of the app and didn't disclose that, but this appears the be an attempt to answer the question using a free app, so I'm leaving this up unless there is consensus to do otherwise.

Thanks for the comments. Note: I am indeed the developer of the app, and although the original post is quite old, this post is an attempt to help people out who are experiencing the same issues as the topic starter and happen to stumble upon this topic.
The app is quite a niche product and thus not meant (and useless) to be promoted to a big audience. Apologies if it looked like this. The app is ad-free and without inapp purchases. It is not my goal to make money from the app, just help out people who face the same problems as I did.

I came across this thread as we have lots of sets mixed together from which we would like to separate a few. I have to saythat the app is fantastic and very cleverly designed... for the first time we feel the task is doable. Our bricks are arranged by colour as this is how our girls like it, additionally we have other invented builds and a box of totallt mixed pieces that they use for their creations, so it's really a difficult task. I particularly like that you can organise the list by different criteria and work on several sets at the same time, it really suits different way of organising (o


text:
Where can I find a list of all LEGO sets ever released
Can I get a full list of every set LEGO has ever come out with?

Brickset.com is an excellent website with an inventory of sets stretching back as far as 1966.
The list is not 100% complete and the site is not an official site of the LEGO groups so it relies on contributions from fans for its updates.
The information below is from the site itself:

What's in the database? The database does not contain everything that LEGO has ever made or that carries a LEGO logo. The completeness of the database is roughly as follows:
1958-1965: No coverage. The era is too complex to cover adequately, and of insufficient interest to justify spending time researching.
1966-1969: Most regular sets, but excluding brick and service packs.
1970-2006: 98% of sets, and also many extended product lines.
2007-date: 99.9% of sets, and most extended product lines sold at shop.LEGO.com.
Although the database contains many non-brick items ('Gear') that are LEGO branded, it does not contain them all: there are too many to keep track of!

The LEGO Collector's guide is very comprehensive and has been made with a lot of collaboration with the LEGO company.
I can't vouch whether it's more complete than brickset (although I'd think so, it's extremely thick), though, and of course you'll have to buy it, but it's a very nice compilation anyway.

Page linked to is showing 'Product not available'

Although Bricklink positions itself as a marketplace for trading LEGO items it is usually used as a reference catalog for large number of items. Some of which does not exist anywhere else.
Rebrickable is another website having a good catalog, despite having focus on MOCs and alternate models.
It is best to cross-check several sources when searching for particular set or other LEGO item. My personal preference would be to use two sources mentioned here as well as Brickset suggested in another answer.


text:
Will Lego repair a bad motor?
I have the Electric Technic Micromotor:
http://www.peeron.com/inv/sets/5119-1
and it simply won't come on. I seem to recall at some point someone telling me a long time ago, that if you sent parts to Lego, they'd repair them. Do they have a warranty or lifetime guarantee? How would I go about getting it repaired?
I also have several of the Electric Technic Mini-Motor 9v, probably about 8-10, and three of them aren't working. Anyone have any success fixing those?

Some you need to take them apart and take out dust and dirt in the gears check out youtube there is some there that's what I'm doing what now

The LEGO customer service does provide replacements for defective parts, but only for parts which are still in production. Sometimes you'll need to send the broken part back to them. They don't repair the parts as such, just replace them.
As for the micromotor, you're out of luck as it's not produced anymore. They might provide another motor as a replacement, but that's not going to help you much.
Your next option is to buy a second-hand one, for example on Bricklink (service pack or motor alone)

Thanks so much! I didn't realize the "still in production" part, appreciate the link.


text:
What are the electrical properties of electric LEGO systems?
Several electric LEGO systems exist:

LEGO Trains
LEGO Technic Power Functions (PF)
LEGO Mindstorms (in several versions)
...?

How do these systems differ in electrical properties and which systems can safely be connected? I am especially interested in the number of wires (2 or more), the Voltage level (V), and the average and maximum current allowed (A).

This is a big question, but here's an overview of the main electric systems.
4.5V (1966 - 1986)

The original 4.5V system worked with 3 x 1.5V C cells. It was produced between 1966 and 1986 and was used to power motors and lights in a wide variety of trains, technic, basic and even DUPLO sets.
12V (1969 - 1993)

Coexisting with this system, a 12V standard for LEGO Trains was introduced in 1969 and produced until 1993. The power was supplied by DC Transformer. There is no electrical compatibility between 12V and 4.5V components, and the higher voltage can damage the lower-rated parts. In addition to motors and lights, an assortment of other 12V accessories were available such as automatic switch points. The 12V system had two wires or three wires for track switches.
9V (1985 - 2008)

9V became the LEGO standard in the early 90s. There were several different power sources, such as a single 9V battery, 6x 1.5V batteries and a DC Transformer (used exclusively for trains). The 9V system is electrically incompatible with either the 4.5V or 12V systems, but as I understand it, 9V components are electrically compatible with each other. 9V was a 2-wire system. Philo's web site provides electrical details of a variety of 9V motors.

The first generation of Mindstorms, the RCX generation, was again based on 9V. The original 1.0 version could be powered using a 10V DC transformer, but later versions took 6xAA batteries. It used standard LEGO 2-wire 9V connectors. When powered, the sensor inputs can supply power (at a bit less than 9V). More details of the electrical characteristics of these ports can be found in Claude Baumann's Making Your Own RCX Sensors. The same sensor interfaces were also used on the earlier and less well-known Lego DACTA Interface B but unlike on the RCX powered and unpowered sensors used different ports on Interface B (this is why powered and unpowered sensors were different colours).
The RC system was introduced in 2006. The RC system uses 9V components but generally includes a remote and a chunky RC brick that peripherals can connect to.
Power Functions (2007-2021)

Power Functions (PF) use a 4-wire system, the outer two wires providing power and the inner two control functions. Once again, it is nominally a 9V system, although it will cope with some variation to accommodate various types of batteries. For example, the 88000 AAA Battery Box uses 6 x AAA to supply up to about 9.6V and up to 800mA current, depending on the batteries used, whereas the 8878 Rechargeable Battery Box delivers 7.4 V at up to 1.1A (?).
Lego sold an extension/adapter cable that can be used to supply old 9V devices from a power functions source. It can also be used to supply ordinary power functions motors from an old 9V source but not to supply power functions IR receivers or server motors. See Does the LEGO "Power Functions Extension Wire" (8886) work in both directions between old 9V and new Power Functions devices? for more details.
Mindstorms NXT and EV3 (2006 - 2021)
The Mindstorms NXT system is a 6-wire system. Two wires retained the 9V motor and sensor systems from the RCX while the other four provided tachometer functionality on the motor ports and a digital sensor interface on the sensor ports. This system was available from 2006 to 2013.
The Mindstorms EV3 uses the same 6-wire connectors as the NXT but additional functionality and an auto-detect system were added. Unfortunately in doing this, they broke compatibility with 2-wire devices. EV3 was available from 2013 to 2021.
Lego sold an adapter cable for going from the NXT to the old 9V connector. This allowed old 9V motors and RCX sensors to be used with the NXT. It also allowed NXT motors to be powered from a 9V source (obviously losing the tachometer functionality) and the NXT touch sensor to be used with RCX or Interface B. Unfortunately, this cable doesn't work correctly with the EV3.
Powered Up (2016 - Present)

Begining in 2016, products across all product lines began using the same electrical standard. This change began with WeDo 2.0 and eventually grew to include Trains, Technic, and Mindstorms.
This system goes by many names, including Powered Up, Control+, LPF2, WeDo 2.0, BOOST, and Robot Inventor. Hubs and peripherals from these systems are generally compatible with one another.
This system includes hubs that can be controlled via Bluetooth, allowing apps to control most sets.
Electrically, this system is still 9 volts, but the connector and signalling are not compatible with any of the previous 9v systems. An adapter has never been produced to connect this system with older components.


text:
Building a full-size lamp using LEGO bricks
On an episode of the TV show 'Home by Novogratz' they featured a real, working lamp that was made out of LEGO bricks. More specifically, the creator surrounded an existing lamp with the bricks, glueing them as he went.
Does anyone know if there are any plans for such items available - lamps, or other furniture items?
And are there any sites etc. out there that could provide guidance?
Any help appreciated. I've used LEGO since I was knee-high, but this is a new project for me.

Do you refer to the lamp including a light emitter (LEGO light brick) or just the stand? For furniture you may better ask another question.

These guys will do it for you... http://www.etsy.com/shop/MRBrickDesigner

I would be careful not to use a bulb that gets very hot. I accidentally warped some of my bricks doing that.

You can find affordable lego built lamps here: http://brickablocks.com/shop/16-lamps Those kenney Lamps are way expensive! These are much more affordable, and are also custom crafted in the USA.

The lamp is made by LEGO artist Sean Kenney. Along with some other items, he sells the lamps on his website. They are available in a range of styles and colours, but they are quite expensive.
Since he is selling the lamps I think it is unlikely the plans are available, although the pictures on his website are quite high resolution so you may be able to replicate the design. (I have no idea about the legality of such though).

Seems when the lamp falls down of your desk, you can't "repair" it manually but need to send it to the customer service ;-)

Here you go. These are the things needed to build a Lego lamp. How to build it? Well......use your imagination......

I really, really would not recommend building something which involves cutting LEGO as the first step...


text:
Frame Rate recommended for Stop Motion?
I do Stop Motion with LEGO, (which is just great for SMA) and I was wondering (because you guys are the pros), what frame rate per second, (fps) you would recommend?
I use 15, and occasionally 33. Also I was wondering, how extreme I should take this Stop Motion Animation? Should it just be my hobby, or should I use to get me money?

IS it good enough to make money from? Would you charge people to watch or just have ads? Take a look at Battle of the Brick.

The ideal frame rate is 24 fps due to the brain holding an image for .051... seconds
However in stop motion animation this can be quite tedious and time consuming.
So with that in mind I'd recommend a frame rate of between 15 and 18.
As for your ideas on making money out of it, I'd say go for it.

The brain holding an image? Not sure I agree with the first sentence - how we experience motion differs a lot from individual to individual and where in our view stuff is actually moving. People in high-speed situations can often tell the difference up to and beyond 100 FPS... not that 100 FPS is a good target for stop-motion though - 15 FPS seems to be the norm.

I believe that minimatt is talking about persistence of vision (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_of_vision)

@OskarDuveborn Film (at least physical film) is typically projected at 24fps, and television broadcasts were typically in 25fps (PAL) or 30fps (NTSC) (albeit interlaced for 50 or 60 half frames pers second). Disney and Warner Brothers animations were typically drawn "on twos", where each frame would be shown twice resulting in 12-15fps.

Today almost all displays your content will be shown on are 60 FPS screens, phones, tablets, laptops and HD TVs. While most TVs can sync to a different refresh rate, this requires support from the device that displays the animation, and this will very seldom be done unless in a properly set up home theatre system. As such, an even multiple of 60 will prevent stuttering due to dropped/inserted frames for a 60 FPS display.

The standard frame rate for most LEGO stop motion animations is 15, although this may vary and will be enforced by the video compiling software you use to put your animation together. Less than 15 will cause some frames to be added, while having more may skip a few. This also extends to 30 FPS, although that many frames is very time consuming, hence the 15 frame standard.

The best frame rate depends on what are you making or if you have started only a few times ago.
If you started now, I recommend 12 FPS to start learning the movements basic.
If you already started months/years ago the best frame rate is 15 FPS. But if you want a really smooth look or something else, use 24.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
What is the difference between the two train motors 8866-1 and 88002-1?
At the Lego store the other day they were talking about a "more powerful" train motor for the Maersk train (I was asking about adding a second motor to the red cargo train so it would go uphill). But I think it's the same motor that already comes with every other train out now. I bought an spare train motor (was on sale online) and I think THAT is the old version.
What is the difference between the two (beside the power cable)?

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?id=84711#T=S&O=

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?id=99046#T=S&O=

Well the power cable is the main difference, as one motor was made for the short-lived 9V RC system while the other is the current PF one.
However, that doesn't mean the internals are the same. From Philo 's motor comparison page, you'll see that the PF motor is better, and that fortunately the performances are much improved [over the RC one], with an efficiency and power even exceeding the old 9V train motors.

Great link! Luckily the older motor isn't the REALLY OLD 9V Train version (seems to be a weaker RC Train version that was sold with only one set according to brinklink). All I know is this is very confusing. Even the new train motors are 9 volts, right?

Yes, the LEGO company has been using 9V for a while now. The RC motor came with two train sets in 2006: 7897 and 7898, but that system was a transition between the old 9V-through-track trains and the new PF ones, the only thing they kept were the plastic-only rails. Note that due to the Technic nature of wheels, you can also use other Technic motors - such as they did for the Emerald Night.

Oh, so to power the Emerald Night you didn't use a regular train motor? Interesting.

Indeed the official way (as in, there are instructions for how to do so) is with a PF XL motor which is lodged in the cabin and powers one set of the big wheels. I suppose how the wheels are arranged would make it difficult to use a regular motor (and I don't think the PF one existed at that time). That said, you could also modify the tender to put a regular motor or two in it, but then you have to push the locomotive itself and it's prone to derailing if the wheels aren't rearranged seriously.

Some useful information I can share from experience.  The PF train motor has much more torque than it's 9V. predecessor.  The old motor typically took around 3 "clicks" on the remote to get the engine moving, while the new motor starts moving the engine on the first "click".  The added torque is much better suited for small loop tracks where the train is constantly pulling into or out of a turn.  The train cars typical in Lego sets with only 2 sets of wheels, instead of bogies with 2 pairs of wheels, really drag through corners since they don't conform to the curve.  This is also why these cars are always so short, if they were too long they would actually derail.
The wire difference is significant because on the early model the wire "plugged" into/onto the motor base.  The new PF motor has a wire permanently attached protruding from the motor base.  These motors and their power supplies are backwards compatible, but require one of the two "Power Functions Extension Wires" to work.  These wires have both a "standard" 9V. connector and a PF style one.  Hooking "Old" to "New" is as simple as replacing the wire with one of these.  Hooking "New" to "Old" requires adding this wire to the permanently attached PF wire, which can be problematic when trying to "stuff" all that wire into your narrow train base.

In my experience the upgrade is totally worth it, most notably our Christmas train which spends most of it's life going around in a small circle.  It doesn't sound like it's constantly straining anymore and the batteries last longer.
It is also worth noting that neither of the motors came with/come with the "decorative" side piece when purchased separately.  If you're replacing one motor for another then it's not an issue since the piece is the same for both "RC" motor types.  If buying one to motorize a previously non-motorized train then you are going to want/need to buy these pieces separately.  This is kind of annoying given the cost of them after shipping given how small they are.

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=2871b&idColor=86#T=S&C=11&O=
I realize this is an old question, but I felt I could add some useful information for anyone who happens upon it in the future.


text:
Getting the IR Tower working with RCX and RobotC

Possible Duplicate:
Lego Mindstorms RCX RIS 2.0 IR tower Windows 7 / Windows XP driver

Trying to get RobotC to work with my old RCX 2.0. I'm running windows 7 64 bit. I've connected the IR tower via a Serial to USB cable. I get the error from RobotC when I go to send the firmware "RCX Controler Failed to Respond"
I'm assuming this is because the drivers are for 64 bit only. Has anyone had success running a WindowsXP virtual machine and trying the drivers? Or any luck getting RobotC and the IR tower running on a Win7 64 bit machine.

Please see this question: Lego Mindstorms RCX RIS 2.0 IR tower Windows 7 / Windows XP driver
Basically there are no 64bit drivers available and the OP on the question I linked to says he had no luck with an XP VM either.


text:
Tools to aid in getting parts from tight spots?
As a builder of some semi large scale projects. I find that I can't always get that dropped part because my arm is either not long enough. Or my hand is too big to reach in and get it. Anyone have any suggestions as to tools one could use to get those lost parts?

Do you mean, parts that fall on the floor, or more likely, parts that fall into your creation and you can't reach?

Parts that fall into the creation itself. My Lego Churches are very tall and are often taller than my arm or hand is long. So it's not easy to reach in to get a stray part. Worse if I happen to have a need for that part.

Yeah, that's what I thought, and shaking the church upside-down is probably not an option either :-)

I use a simple reverse tape at the end of a stick

There are a wide variety of grabbers and pick up tools on the market, primarily aimed at the accessibility, automotive and electronics markets. Some of these would work well with LEGO.
For larger parts, I've had good success with this one:

I've got a small version of something like this. It doesn't work well for larger parts, and I'd be concerned that it might scratch the bricks. However, something similar might work depending on your scenario:

Other tools like long-handled pliers or even scissors can be used - with care - to extend your reach just enough to grab things from awkward places.
Alternatively, some sort of sucking tool could work to pick up rather than swallow up parts: I would be interested to try a hoover with a mesh over the nozzle to see if it could still pick up bricks. You could even try sucking bricks up with a straw as long as you're sure they're too big to actually pass up the straw and become a health hazard (not to mention the potential loss of a precious LEGO brick).
Finally, a true LEGO-head should only consider a proper LEGO solution: you should fashion a grabber from Technic components:

I'd tend to suggest to build your construction in a way that there is no inside spot you can't reach. The easiest way to achieve that would be a modular construction where you can remove parts to reach the inside; also, making it modular helps for the transport should you want to display your creation (and, considering the size of it, you should).
Another solution I can think of is to use a vacuum cleaner, although you'll probably want to dedicate one to LEGO and make sure you can easily retrieve parts which have been captured. I've once seen a "LEGO-friendly" vacuum cleaner which claimed to be able to isolate LEGO parts when vacuuming, presumably for parents with kids such as we've been ourselves. It came with a small free LEGO set, too, but unfortunately I can't find which brand it was.


text:
How do I build a paper feeder with LEGO to transfer a single sheet of paper from a deck robustly?
I want to create an apparatus (which might be called a paper feeder) to take a still image for each paper taken from a deck of 500 sheets robustly. Robustly means that the apparatus must guarantee all sheets of paper get captured by the still camera.
I am new to LEGO but I think creating the apparatus with LEGO can reduce the cost. I will use for processing more than 2 million pieces of paper.
My questions are
What peripherals are needed to pick exactly one piece of paper (from a deck of 500) for a single camera shot?
In essence I want to replace this scanner job.

I think only you can answer your second question, since you're the one building it.

Don't current photocopiers do that kind of job easily? If your company doesn't have one handy, you can probably ask for another company to do the job. I think it's a very interesting question, but since it appears to be for a professional environment, I have some doubts as to the feasibility of it with LEGO - at least with the reliability required.

I am also with the same idea... but not with LEGO.. Did you complete the project? If we can discuss it will be good..

There are many ways you can approach this problem using LEGO. I would recommend the 8547 Mindstorms NXT 2.0 set, as it includes the software required to program a basic paper feeder including a microprocessor (NXT Brick), three motors, four sensors (ultrasonic, two touch and a colour sensor) as well as plenty of other parts which you can use to construct the paper feed.
Set 8547 also comes with four wheels with rubber tyres which can be powered by the motors to feed paper. These tyres will have more enough traction to pull without damaging the paper.
A colour sensor can be used at a fixed point to detect the start of a new page or a motor can be calibrated to perform an X amount of rotations required to feed one sheet of paper. However if you wish to feed the paper, you need to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the method used as well as when and where it is likely to fail.

I am new to LEGO but I think creating the apparatus with LEGO can reduce the cost.

You may be able to reduce the costs by purchasing the essential parts from Bricklink. Although it can't be guaranteed that you'll be able to get all the parts in one purchase and it may be more expensive to buy the parts separately.

I will use for processing more than 2 million pieces of paper.

If you're looking for something reliable that can scan that many sheets of paper, you may find it more economical to have find a professional archival company that can process your documents/images.

Thank you very very very very much for your answer. It is very useful as the starting point to go.

Picking paper sheets from a stack shouldn't be too much of an issue with rubber wheels.
However, One of the problems you may encounter is that multiple sheets stick together. To avoid this, you'll first need to shuffle your stack a little (I only know the french word for this process: déramer, sorry.), but even then it can happen.
I've worked with an offset printing machine when I was a student, and the thing had a tendency to pick two sheets instead of one once in a while. There was a mechanism that would discard such sheets, and the way it worked was based on the thickness of a sheet: as the sheet was conveyed on a flat surface, if it was too thick, it triggered a small kind of lever which was finely tuned to rest just above the thickness of one sheet. It was very sensible, too; if there was one sheet it wouldn't budge, but two or more would make it move, and it would activate a trap to receive the offending sheets instead of feeding them to the machine.
To be honest, picking two sheets instead of one was the machine's less  problematic behavior, and we were lucky if that's the only thing it did. Which means you'll have to be careful too, so that there is no way for a sheet to be somehow eaten - possibly irrecoverably - by the mechanism.


text:
What do the terms "vintage" and "classic" actually mean?
I often see terms like "vintage" and "classic" used to describe LEGO sets (especially on ebay, but I've seen them elsewhere, too). What do these terms mean? How strict is the definition?

The two biggest themes to be called "classic" are "classic space" and "classic castle" and refer to the period when these themes were first introduced.
Brickset subthemes reflect this: Classic Castle covers the first yellow castle and accessories, from 1978 to 1983. I'd tend to include the new series from 1984 myself, since there wasn't much to speak of before that, but maybe I'm just wrong or maybe that only shows that there is no actual definition of "classic" to speak of.
The brickset subtheme for Classic Space covers the period from 1978 to 1987, with one extra set in 1988. Afterwards, they started naming themes, such as Futuron or Space Police, so you could say that the classic period covered the space sets before that. A lot of fans seem to limit themselves to the "blue with gray wings" livery of the first space sets, though, and do a fantastic job of it.
There's also a castle fan community site called Classic-Castle.com and several Classic space fan community sites, such as Neo Classic Space (notice the blue-and-gray again). I think there was once a classic-space.com but that doesn't seem to be operational any longer.
That's for Castle and Space; for more info you can also consult the Brickipedia pages for Classic Castle and Classic Space.
By extension, I suppose all themes from the same period qualify too. Bear in mind that this period (the eighties, in a nutshell) correspond to the period when most of nowadays AFOLs were kids, so they have fond memories of the sets they had or drooled about. But as far as I know, none have devoted fanbases; and there are no corresponding "Classic City" or "Classic Technic" subthemes on brickset.
Saying "Classic Jack Stone" will probably get you very puzzled and/or angry looks.

As for the definition of vintage. I tend to think of early sets like the original town plan with more realistic trees, vehicles that you couldn't put together or take apart and buildings made out of standard white and red bricks.

These words are used to lure in collectors who really want the "exclusive" stuff. It probably means that they don't really use that many new complicated pieces, making it classic. The winter specials, such as the house, post office, toy shop, etc...
The word "vintage" means, of, relating to, or denoting wine of high quality: "vintage claret". Another word for this is "wine". Wine is aged. So are these LEGO sets.  this means that the LEGO set will only be sold for a limited time, while also being a classic LEGO set. It really means "old". If you search "vintage LEGO" it will come up with a bunch of really old LEGO sets that are classics and very old.

I would say that vintage has a slightly wider meaning that just relating to wine: "a period in which something was made or was begun" is another definition, and fits better with the use of "Vintage Clothing" "Vintage LEGO", etc.

I've never heard anyone call the recent winter sets as "classic"


text:
Is there an official LEGO terminology for the features of basic pieces?
When I read this question I remember to regularly ask myself what the features of bricks are called. At the top are there nibbles, knobs, or studs? At the bottom are there tubes? New bricks also have little "support walls" (?) at the bottom, known from DUPLO, how do you call these? Is there an official LEGO terminology at least for the most common types of features shown in this image?

See this question: http://bricks.stackexchange.com/questions/214/how-are-lego-bricks-categorized

@pcantin I agree, this questions title is very similar but Jakob seems to be asking about the specific parts of a standard brick and not the names of individual bricks.

Has the answer changed over the years? Because it looks like "stud" is always on top, "knob" is always on the side (and always a donut shape? See doors with a knob...) If you search the LEGO pick a brick store for "knob" you find SNOT pieces with a knob on the side. If you search for "stud" I get one result and it's on top. https://shop.lego.com/en-US/Pick-a-Brick

For an official position, you may want to check older LEGO catalogues or instructions to see if they're naming things, and how. While you can find some names for complete elements in, for example, service parts catalogues, I don't think you'll find much for specific subparts.
Given the 1958 patent illustration, it's likely the patent itself named subparts, and more specifically studs and tubes. The original Kiddicraft patent called studs "bosses", by the way.
Keep in mind LEGO has, until recently, be very protective of what it's been doing internally; as such, the community as a whole didn't have much info, so that a lot of current nowadays terminology isn't official, but rather derived from public habit.
However, that's changed a lot recently, and LEGO isn't as shy as it was when it comes to publish internal data such as colour names and numrical IDs, design IDs, parts IDs, and even part names. The only problem is that they never bothered to have a truly consistent naming scheme, and the fact that English isn't the main language of Denmark doesn't help.
Yet it does help us find official subpart names, which we can hunt through the online pick-a-brick selection.
The first one is a shocker: the "stud" is, in fact, called "knob" (the fan-nicknamed "jumper plate", or LDraw's "Plate 1 x 2 with 1 Stud", being officially a "Plate 1X2 W. 1 Knob", and there are numerous other examples).
The small pins inside 1xn bricks are "pins" (LDraw's "Brick 1 x 2 without Centre Stud" is a "Brick 1X2 Without Pin"). But as connection point on some elements, they are called "Shaft Ø 3.2" (LDraw's "Minifig Accessory Helmet Viking Horn" is "Horn W. Shaft Ø 3.2")
The clip is a "holder" (LDraw's "Brick 1 x 1 with Clip Vertical" is "Brick 1X1 W. Holder, H0rizontal" (sic) or sometimes a "snap" (LDraw's "Bar 7 x 3 with Double Clips" is "Lattice 1X4x6 W. Snap").
I suppose you could find more, but it's rather time-consuming :-)

Ok, stud (or knob), tube, pin and  wall should name the basic features of a simple brick. The little support walls at the bottom could be called splines.

The bumpy-things on the top of a brick are called studs.
At the bottom of the brick, the holes that the studs go into are called tubes.
As far as I know, there are no parts of a brick called nibbles or knobs.

Thanks, I also read "nibbles" and "knobs" but "studs" seems more common. By the way the studs go between a tube and a wall (or this little additional wall thing for new bricks). I extended my question for more features.

Yes, here is the basic terminology Lego bricks names list.


text:
RobotC for RCX cannot find USB IR Tower
I have looked for similar question but found null. So here I am asking.
I have Win7, a RobotC fo RCX and Mindstorms for RCX (both are old version, but available free). I borrowed an old LEGO kit (9794 Team Challenge) which lacked some parts. It has RCX 1.0 as controller. I borrowed a USB IR Tower from my friend.
After a well installation, I tried RobotC and was asked to download firmware to RCX brick.
But RobotC cannot communicate with it because it cannot find the port which I plugged the IR tower to. Inside the preference, there are two available USB port recognized.
I swithced between them but RobotC still cannot find the tower. I have been googling this around for almost a month now.
Thanks for any enlightement.

Hi, and welcome to LEGO Answers :) Are you running a 64bit version of Windows 7?

hi. no, I'm running 32bit version. sorry for the late reply

If you are you using ROBOTC 2 for RCX you need to install the separate driver for windows 32bit.  This driver is not included in the ROBOTC install (at least not with version 2.03).
It might also be a good thing to start with a fresh install of ROBOTC 2.03.


text:
What can cause programmed NXT 2.0 motors to misfunction when small resistance is applied?
I have robot built per the Alligator tutorial included with Mindstorms NXT 2.0. Everything works correctly if I hold it off the ground and make sure there is no load on the two leg motors. However, if I apply any resistance at all to the motors, then one of the motors will usually (~90% of the time) stop functioning correctly.  Whenever it stops it seems to be braking because it does not turn freely.
In the alligator program, I think it usually happens whenever the two motors are programmed to move simultaneously in the same direction for a certain amount of time.  If resistance is applied, then motor B will usually stop working. Of course, this makes the alligator basically worthless because it never ends up moving as there is always a little load when on the ground. I can typically get it to start working again by applying some manual rotation/resistance to either motor, but what works or not seems random.
I think I've noticed similar issues with other programs in the past, but I can't be sure. I have latest firmware v1.31 and we're using v2.0.f4 of Mindstorms Labview software.
My best guess is that the NXT firmware has issues with the motor control timing when two motors are moving together and one gets slightly off. However if that was the case, I'd expect everyone to have these problems (and the Mindstorms set would be basically useless.)
Are there any known/common issues that might cause a problem like this?  Any advice on how to troubleshoot?

How much power has the motor been programmed to run at?

Programmed for 100% in all blocks.

It turns out that the issue is a faulty/weak motor connector socket.  While randomly trying to troubleshoot, I found that if I did nothing more than press or move the cable, the motor would act bizarrely.  Initially I thought it was a bad cable, but after trying additional cables it seems that it is more likely just a poor connection at the motor. I suppose it could also be a bad motor.  The actual cause is proving very hard to pin point.
And while one motor is definitely more problematic than the others, I noticed that all of them can be made to act randomly just by pulling on the cable ends.  I am now wondering if this is common issue with the NXT and I'm considering posting another question about it.
In answer to my own question, it seems that a faulty motor connection can cause erratic behavior.

Cheers for letting us know :)


text:
Why is my LDD model incomplete after I export it to LDraw?
I have an LDD model that I exported to an LDraw file. When I opened it in LDView, only part of it was displayed.
It looks like some parts were not exported properly. Is it normal? Why does it happen?

This in not a LDView problem, but a conversion issue between LDD and LDraw. Only parts present in both libraries will be displayed. Moreover, the file (ldraw.xml) that defines the correspondance between parts of both systems must be up to date. Latest version of this mapping file is available here.


text:
Apart from the LEGO brick, is there any other hardware that has an NXT firmware written for it?
I am trying to find out if you can upload LEGO NXT byte-code to any other hardware, so I am just checking to see if anyone has ever written the LEGO firmware for any other hardware. Maybe hardware like an Arduino, Raspberry Pi, etc.

I doubt that, and to be honest I'm not sure it has any interest - the NXT firmware is tailor-made for the NXT, and there are enough people replacing it with something else to show that they don't even consider it very good to start with - so why would anyone to port it to something else is a mistery to me.

There is a huge community built around the NXT-programming software. Now imagine if I could code for the NXT using any of the many (robotics oriented) programming tools for the NXT then upload it to cheaper and more extensible hardware? Wouldn't that be a great idea?

The huge community may not be as huge as the programming communities for Arduino/Pi/etc. That said, most of the NXT programming community uses other firmwares to start with. I'll grant you that the idea is intruiging, but I honestly doubt anyone has considered going in that direction yet (feel free to do so, I'm curious ;-)

LEGO itself does not make specific firmware/software to support other devices other than the official NXT brick but...
...you can still use Arduino and Raspberry Pi (and more) with the NXT components including the NXT brick.  Personally, I mix LEGO and electronics all the time.
Arduino & Raspberry Pi are flexible development platforms and they can easily be interfaced with other devices. Also, the NXT devices (i.e. The Brick or peripherals) can be interfaced by something else than the official LEGO hardware & software.
On the other hand, the effort needed to run the LEGO firmware (probably through an emulator...) on a new device is way harder than to interface the systems.  Remember that this is a firmware and it expect to run on the exact device it was built for.
Arduino & NXT:
There is a lot of Arduino-NXT hardware components that you can buy or even make yourself.  For example you could use this Arduino shield called NXShield-D and it's software.
RaspberryPi & NXT:
Pi is still relatively new but, since it's a full computer, it is very easy to use.  To interface with NXT you can use the GPIO pins but thanks to the USB port, somebody already made the NXT-python to control the NXT brick.

But in none of these cases has anyone made an Arduino/Pi firmware which would be compatible with the one on the NXT, right?

Exactly right. There is no LEGO NXT firmware that works on other devices than the original LEGO NXT brick. Since @frazras was also interested in accessing the wealth of hardware available in the generic electronic community,  I've added a couple of alternatives.


text:
Programming the NXT brick using an ipad app
for the past few years, I have been using netbooks to program the NXT. I would like to move into the 21st century and use ipads.  Is there an ipad app for programming the NXT brick?

Not directly or even officially. See How can I wirelessly connect connect the NXT and an iOS device for more details.

Well if you had another computer you could connect it by using a desktop app like LogMeIn or Onlive Desktop , otherwise there are official way to program nxt app on iPad :(

No, you can't, but some apps let you control the motors and read the sensor data; like the NXT Remote.

Search inxtg-lite in apps store

You may want to try these:

nxtBlock
iNXTG-Lite

None of these are offical and you will have to use bluethooth to download and run programs.

There are no programming tools available on the currently available iOS devices, including iPads.
Technically speaking, this is because the iPad lacks support for the correct Bluetooth profiles that would allow a direct connection. iPads also have no USB port that can be used in host mode to directly connect the NXT (the USB to dock adapter from the camera kit does not work!).
Theoretically it should be possible if you take part in the Apple Hardware Development Program and write your own driver. But this is possibly out of scope for the rest of us ;-)
A mentioned workaround is to create an application on the iPad for source code editing and use a Proxy-PC that communicates over WiFi with the app, compiles the source code (e.g. NXC) and sends the binary to the NXT. If someone has done this, please let us know!
With the new EV3, things will change as this brick is able to communicate over WiFi. And Lego announced some kind of iPad and Android IDE for EV3.


text:
What solutions are there to organising a LUGBULK order?
I'm involved in a LUG that's made orders in each of the LUGBULK programs that have run.  Determining what goes into each order has proven to be a nightmare, with all sorts of email-spreadsheet-ad hoc solutions that led to various combinations of huge expended effort, errors, misunderstandings and recriminations.
Given rumours of the commencement of the 2013 LUGBULk program are floating around, now's a great time to find out how my LUG can do better this time. Is there a web site we can use, a program of some kind?  Should we just have one member decide what we'll order?  Some happy halfway between autocracy and democracy?
What solutions are there to organising a LUGBULK order?

FYI, your link to LUGBULK requires additional authentication to access.

For our Lug, we have assigned one person who is the contact for all things LUGBULK and is also responsible for the organization of everything. (He also happens to be the one who will spend the most).  We followed this general format to keep everything organized.

At the most recent club meeting, we agreed on those parts that the club needed for upcoming projects. These get the highest priority.
Once we received notice of LB2013, we asked all of the members to submit their information needed to register and to get an accurate count for Lego.  We gave our members 10 days to get this in.
Within 5 days, each member was allowed to submit up to 10 part requests in order of priority.  Each member is also required to submit the ElementID along with each part in order to make things easier.
The person in charge of LUGBULK for us merged everything together and removed any duplicates.  If we were over our maximum of 100 elements on the wishlist, things get removed that were likely to be declined, or that would be cheaper on BrickLink or PAB.
The wishlist is submitted to Lego.
Once the approved list and prices are returned to us, we create an excel sheet of available elements and add in columns for BrickLink color names and current BrickLink prices and send it to all members.
All members are required to send in their orders within 7 days.
The coordinator merges together the orders and sends to Lego.
Once the LUGBULK order is received (on a pallette :) ), the coordinator pays Lego directly, divvies up the orders (or we have a sort party to do it) and then each member pays the coordinator.

Ultimately, you'll probably have to come up with your own solutions, but I think the main issue is to pick which parts to order, as the number is usually limited and your LUG members all have different views on what to pick.
Here are a few line of thoughts:

Have each member pick one favourite part, or more (so you can attribute the second one if there's a duplicate or something). This will probably be the worst solution, since you'll end up with a set of parts which may be totally unrelated to each other, and in which most members don't recognize their choices.
Do the same with more parts, 5 or 10, then try to reduce the list somehow to what LEGO is willing to accept (asking the members to vote on parts, maybe?). Can be a cumbersome and lengthy process, but at least your LUG members will feel more like they have a say in the process.
Have the persons in charge of the LUG pick the parts themselves. This can lead to a good cohesive set of parts which go well together, but you'll risk that some members don't like your choice. For example, you may want to pick all 1xn tan bricks and plates, all 1xn dark red bricks and plates, a few door/windows and roof tiles. Great for house builders, less great for Technic nuts.
Try to combine the different solutions. Maybe you have members in the club with a different status (we do have regular and "effective" members, for instance, for people who choose to be more involved in the club); or maybe you can attribute points for event participation (we did that once to distribute some free loot we had gotten from somewhere, and it proved to be an interesting system), so that people who are more involved in the club get more points. Then maybe more involved people can pick more parts, or participate ina  global discussion process.
Rotate themes. This time, we'll do houses, next time, Technic parts. Promise, honest. Cross my heart.

Once you have picked up parts, you'll have to pick quantities. There you'll also need to ask members for their input, either committed or not. Our club always buys a bit more on its own money, which members can buy directly afterwards. Handy when the club committee picks up the parts themselves, but your treasury needs to be able to cope with that.
As for the organizational side of things, as you say, excel files may be very cumbersome; but I'd advise to stick with them. You may be tempted to develop a custom web site, for example, but keep in mind it will require maintenance, and that usually means someone has to be devoted to it, and be able to work on it fast enough. If you have such a person, great. If not, don't bother too much.


text:
What is the official term used for building MOC models?
I know that MOC means "my own creation" as noted here.  What I would like to know is do you call the actual act of creating a MOC, "MOC building", or is there another official term?  I wanted to build with my son and called it 'free building' as I did not know any official term, and only just learned the acronym MOC.  I would like to know how to properly say, "Let's go ___________" (build without a plan).
edit: I think where I was confused came from the fact that I've read here and other places that using the term LEGOs is incorrect, that you are supposed to use LEGO bricks and I found that awkward to say so I thought maybe there was also a special term for building official sets versus building a MOC.

I would tend to understand "official" as "given by LEGO itself" - which isn't even the case for "MOC".

Mocking? (Come on people, it's right there!)

By considering a "somehow usual amongst fans" instead of "official" position (see my comment),  I have heard some fans who simply "verbed" the acronym MOC, as in, "I MOC'ed for 3 hours straight yesterday". You could probably do the same with LEGO itself, but that would be frowned upon as LEGO is supposed to be used as an adjective and so on. (When I was a child, my father used "legoter" in French, which was quite clear as to what it meant. I guess you could be "legoing" in English as well).
I'm not saying I do think it's a very good idea, and I haven't even heard that much anyway; so I would tend to agree with Grandpappy and go for a simple "build" (maybe "build something" to imply it's not a set) or even "play" (or more precisely "play with LEGO" if your son happens to sometimes play with something else (I can't fathom why, though)).
So, in short, no real "official" saying, and not even an usual one - especially considering that fans amongst themselves always use LEGO anyway, which means "what did you build recently" is always understood.

I just use "Build".  As in: "I'm going to go build"
I'm unaware of any official term.  Even "MOC" isn't official in any way other than just a term a lot of people use.

I agree with 'build' and 'building' has a general term.  That's what I use even when I'm building an actual Set.

So I guess if there is no official term, than whatever is the most commonly used terminology would be the answer which seems to be just 'build'.  It makes sense, but I'll let this one sit just a little in case something else comes up.

If its a "my own creation" then if one is still building it or it is still unfinished then one simply refers to it as "work in progress" or a WIP and thats how fans post photos on fansites let others know hows its is going... although i have never seen it used with offical lego sets...there are other loose terms floating about i think they where listed on the brickset fansite quite a while ago- i think you would have to do a search for the article- but i was amazed by how many there are...again its not an offical language used by fans but its the most common form of expression.


text:
Set missing all the Minifigures and a few other parts
When I got the Quinjet set, I dug through every bag but the manufacturers forgot a few pieces and my set didn't have any minifigures. How can I get the missing minifigures and the parts I'm missing?

You should check this question http://bricks.stackexchange.com/questions/1486/is-it-possible-to-obtain-a-replacement-part-for-a-collectible-minifigure

Just wondering, was there any indication that the box had been previously opened?

It is unlikely that Lego mispacked all of the minifigures. In the Quinjet set, the figures are spread among several bags, meaning Lego would have had a packing error in multiple bags, and then coincidentally placed all of the mispacked bags into the same box.
More likely is that someone removed them from the box and returned the package to the store. If I were you, I would take the box back to the point of purchase and ask for a replacement. The set is still in production, so they should be able to get you another or refund your money.

+1: It seems very odd that all the figs are missing: assuming this was bought as a new set, this strongly suggests that the set has been tampered with.

The store may help you, but TLG advises stores to direct missing-piece issues to LEGO Customer Service, instead of the store handling the return. Customer Service can usually send out the missing parts, but returned/exchanged items typically end up back on a shelf for someone else to purchase as incomplete.  And yes, the Minifig issue was likely the result of someone else buying the set, taking out the Minifigs for personal use (or lucrative resale), and returning the item. TLG will ask for  info that helps determine if the problem is with manufacturing or at a certain store.

Unlike the Collectable Minifigures question (where LEGO don't offer replacement parts), if this is proper set bought new, then you should definitely try LEGO Customer Services as your first point of contact.
At the original time of writing, the minifigures were still available, but most of the elements are now listed as "out of stock" because that set is a retired product - so I'm not sure what their policy would be now

Contacting the customer service is always the proper way to go in case of incomplete sets. You could also try directly from where you bought the box.

It's very unlikely the TLG will charge you for missing pieces, even if they're are expensive. In fact, if the cost to replace the individual pieces is too high, then they're more likely to just ship you an entire new set from their own local warehouse. Unless a specific customer is constantly having "incomplete" sets and abusing the system, there should never be a risk of being charged for replacement pieces.

@CreationEdge The page has been updated since I last used it properly (some 10 years ago - and this question and my answer are also quite old) and is probably now covering the "I want to buy a piece" but there used to be an upfront disclaimer that there may be charge if certain limits were hit - conceivably ordering over half a set might be considered rather excessive ;). Going through the process now, although most of the figure parts are out of stock there was no indication that I'd be charged for it.

My experience as an employee was in the 2011 through 2012, so what I said would have applied for the timeframe of your answer. Any time I dealt with a set missing an excessive amount of pieces I just express shipped a whole new set. Policy could be different now, as TLG is growing and needs to reduce costs, but their customer service capabilities are likely still outstanding. I just left the comment, since the answer was old but the question still relevant.

Yes, it certainly seems that they do err on the side of believing everyone's honest :) Which is a pleasant and nice thing.

Never thought it would happen but out of the 90+ sets I've gotten the past 4 years I've come across my first set ever with missing components. Ordered through TRU.ca so distribution shouldn't have been the problem since it's probably ware house direct. Set was Baxter Robot Rampage (79105) Came sealed/new yet bag 1 was missing all but one mini figure/skate board/mouser pieces, and bag 2 was missing mini figure, and string piece, and finally I also didn't get stickers with the set. How does one even begin to explain that to customer service. Exchange through TRU would probably have been the simplest but unless this was a return I really don't see them at fault.
Like the Twinjet mentioned guess it does happen.
Agree with customer service being the best answer. Especially if bought new. Didn't call in but did call up the set on the site, selected everything missing (which was abnormally a lot) Waited for an Email from a representative, responded with details/instruction number now waiting to see what happens.

I had a similar situation, though not as drastic, where a helmet did not come with the set.
Customer service said that each set is weighed out and therefore always complete but sent the missing helmet anyway FOC.
I questioned why there were always misc extra pieces if everything was weighed... no response.
It doesn't hurt to be nice and explain how many LEGO sets you own, I suppose.

The miscellaneous extra pieces are always for the lightest pieces that are beneath the resolution of their scale.

I very much doubt that - the extra parts are always very consistent across all instances of a set; if the part was too small for the scale resolution, there would be some variation. And I'm fairly confident LEGO can afford very precise scales anyway. I know this question contradicts me, but I can't agree with its accepted answer.

You should contact LEGO Customer Service. They have web forms or a toll-free phone number you can call. They are willing and trained to speak to children, and can even send out replacement pieces without talking to an adult, as long as the child can recite their full address.
The LEGO Group stands behind their products 100%, even if the problem with the product wasn't their fault. If the pieces are all in stock, they will send them out to you at no charge.
These parts come from their warehouse in Denmark, so they may take a longer time to receive than a regular order. Shipping times are affected by customs and other international shipping issues.
If the total cost to replace the parts is higher than a certain %age of the value of the entire set, then they'll likely just send you an entire new set from their local warehouse. For more expensive sets, they may also have you send back the incomplete set (they'll provide the free shipping). Whether they need the damaged set back first depends on the situation.
Some parts individual parts may be on back order. More complicated pieces (such as Iron Man's helmet) tend to stock-out or end up on back order more quickly than standard pieces. If this happens, Customer Service will work with you to achieve the most satisfying solution. Sometimes this means trying to return the product back to the store you purchased it from, but it's not ideal. Those sets might end up back on the shelf (sometimes clearanced, sometimes not), and then another customer ends up with the same problem. Sometimes it means sending a low-priced "gift" to help alleviate the pain of waiting for you product to arrive.
The LEGO Group understands that you're likely a victim in this situation. You bought a product that someone else essentially stole from. They'll make it right, even though it's not their fault. For manufacturing or other issues that are their fault, they may even go above and beyond in making it right.

The LEGO Group takes several measures to ensure that their boxes are fully-packed. They weigh and scan the elements. However, there can still be issues on this front.
When the issues are on the production end, they're usually related to:

Missing bags or prepacks (the little bags inside of big bags)
Missing large, unusual, or loose pieces (think ship masts, sails, sticker sheets, BURPs)
Missing small elements that don't weigh enough to affect the weight tolerance

However, when pieces are missing from a variety of bags, it's often a sign that the set has been tampered with after production. So, to help narrow down production issues versus tampering issues, The LEGO Group has in recent years starting spreading out "high value" elements between the many bags in the set, or putting them in prepacks that are harder to get into. Then, when an entire Minifigure that's spread out over 4 bags is missing, it's easier to tell that it was a tampering issue rather than a production issue.
Customer Service will ask you some questions to further help narrow down the source of the problem. Every box or package has a manufacturer's code on it somewhere (such as on the tape on the boxes). This code lets them know which facility produced your set, and when the set was made. If enough reports of the same missing pieces from the same lot occur, then TLG can narrow down the problem to a certain time or place.
They may also ask for which store you bought it from. This helps them track local trends. Some stores have a greater problem with returned/exchanged sets that have been tampered with.

Source: Myself. I worked for LEGO Customer Service and I've handled this exact issue many a time.

You can go to this website of LEGO where they give you the parts you're missing.
https://wwwsecure.us.lego.com/en-us/service/replacementparts?domainredir=service.lego.com


text:
Are third party NXT compatible parts safe to use?
I bought the Mindstorms NXT for my son's coming birthday and I noticed that there are several places you can get third party parts to use with it (sensors, connectors, etc).  Are these safe for the NXT brick?  Has anyone had any problems using these?
If they are ok it's a great way to expand our capability but NXT is a big investment and we don't want to risk ruining it.

The majority of sensors manufactured by HiTechnic (a third party company) are certified by The  Lego Group. The company's website lists the following criteria required to be certified:

100% compatible with Mindstorms NXT
Meet the highest LEGO quality standards
Comply with all safety standards
RoHs Compliant (certified lead free)

These sensors are manufactured by HiTechnic and approved by Lego are sold in the Lego.com Shop:

#2852724 Accelerometer
#10285 Compass
#2852726 Gyroscopic
#2855040 IR (Infrared) Receiver
#2852725 IR Seeker
#2853216 IR Link

Sensors and custom parts are generally expensive. The sensors above range from $54.99-$49.99 so it would be worthwhile considering the value of the sensor before you decide to make a purchase.
I would recommend judging the sensor(s) by their expected frequency of use, the potential for sensors to be used in other creations and their level of experience with the Mindstorms NXT system.

Thank you, it's good to know HiTechnic is certified by LEGO. Are they the only third party company certified by LEGO, or is it standardized that if you make NXT compatible parts you have to be certified by LEGO?

@LynneaTaylor As far as I'm aware HiTechnic is the only certified manufacturer for Lego NXT Sensor products.


text:
Are there SNOT models with instructions for beginners?
I would like to introduce SNOT building to my daughter.  I have used this method only a few times myself and when I did, I was just messing around.  I feel it would be simpler and less frustrating for my daughter if we had models and instructions similar to what a regular set would give you.  When teaching children and even for a beginner like myself, it would be great to have step by step tutorials including pictures and an end goal to build confidence using the SNOT method.
I saw that there is a website for learning SNOT techniques but it mainly shows how to put different types of bricks together.  Does anyone know of SNOT models with instructions suitable for beginners?

Chris McVeigh has some nice LEGO projects on his website that use SNOT techniques.  Many of the projects have PDF instruction guides.
I stumbled on his work after seeing his LEGO ornaments a few years back.  Now that the Christmas season is beginning, a few of those ornaments would be a fun way to introduce this technique to your daughter!

There are tools to generate 3D LDraw models which will use SNOT techniques to make sure the overall structure looks nice, most notable:

Bram's Sphere Generator
LSculpt

Depending on her age, your daughter should be able to build the small yellow bunny on that last page, and the result is a very good illustration of why SNOT is useful.
Bram's Flicker page also shows quite a lot of possible SNOT techniques holds a lot of good inspiration as well.

Seeing the other answer so far is about Christmas, and this one is about Easter, I propose the next one should be about, say, Halloween.

While it doesn't have every SNOT technique, and they call it "sideways building", the official LEGO Master Builder Academy series is really quite good and introduces quite a few very good advanced techniques. I felt they were more than worth the money for my nephews.

I just wish they'd be available globally

And, you forgot Halloween.

Didn't realize they have a limited distribution.


text:
Are there any great LEGO designers that are well-known?
I know that many designers work for LEGO but I was wondering if there was some 'Star Designers' that we should know by name.  Of course, I would also like to know what they are famous for.

As there are more and more LEGO fans who become designers, some of them are already well known from the community and are very dedicated to fans, going to events and the like. They are actually just regular people and always have an amused look if you treat them like they have ascended to godhood status or something.
A few of them in no particular order:

Pierre Normandin
Pierre works on CITY and is known among others for 10129 Maersk Train and 3677 Red Cargo Train.
Mark Stafford
Mark works on most fantasy themes and keeps a list of his sets, also on brickset
Melody Caddick
We owe Mel some exlusive sets, including 3300003 LEGO Brand Retail Store, 3300001 Brickley and some (if not all, I'm not sure) Master Builder Academy sets. Mel also finalised the design of the first ever LEGO cuusoo set: 21101 Hayabusa
Megan Rothrock
Megan worked for the ill-fated LEGO Universe MMORPG, but doesn't work for LEGO any longer. She focuses on LEGO fan events and is now publishing her own book.
Jamie Berard, as cited in another answer
Markus Kossman
Markus is responsible for some huge Technic sets, including [8421 Mobile Crane] and the first Power Functions sets, 8275 Motorized Bulldozer

As you can see, LEGO now has online profiles for Technic and Creator designers (maybe others, but I didn't see any), and of course the LEGO Designer Videos Youtube channel.
Also, LEGO has also issued sets designed by fans, which is the closest you can be of being a designer without being actually one. Note that some of the names on that list did eventually become full-fledged designers themselves.
To end, a little piece of trivia: the license plates on some vehicles usually bear the initials of the designer of the set. Have fun hunting them...

The most obvious one I guess is Erling Dideriksen, who was not only a Chief Designer on the LEGO City range, but also designed the element that many refer to as "The Erling Brick".

The LEGO Group have also started recently publishing videos of their designers talking about new sets they've worked on (especially the Lord of the Rings sets), which will bring more of their designers into the public eye.

These videos are definitely worth viewing.

@Joubarc - I think you meant to comment on Kramii's post ;)

Well, you talked about them too, didn't you?

Oh, yes, I suppose I did - I just didn't post any links, and forgot I'd mentioned them ;)

Jamie Berard designed some beautiful sets, including:

10194 Emerald Night
10182 Café Corner
10185 Green Grocer
10197 Fire Brigade
10233 Horizon Express

Not only that, but he's done a lot of promotional work, including some interesting YouTube videos and an excellent presentation called "Stressing the Elements".

10219 is from pierre Normandin

@Joubarc: You're quite right of course. Thanks for picking this up.


text:
Are there LEGO sets designed for adults?
Other than the LEGO Architecture sets are there any other sets or series that were designed principally for an adult audience?

I don't think there's any LEGO set for which the age target goes any further than 16+.
Within the 16+ range, you'll find several sets, mostly in the exclusive sets (series 10xxx): mainly modular houses and some Star Wars UCS sets. Usually these are sets with a high parts count and a price to match.
There's a functionality to filter sets by age on shop.lego.com, but it doesn't seem to work properly. Neither Brickset or Bricklink appear to offer such a functionality (yet).

Yeah, the problem with the filter is that it's aimed at filtering out sets that are too complicated for young kids.  So you set the filter for 14+, and it shows you all the sets that a person 14+ could build: all of them.

Indeed, it seems to work that way, I hadn't noticed that. Makes you wonder what the point of specifying the minimum age, then.

As of 2020 there is now an entire range of "18+" sets targeted at adults. 35 sets by the time of this answer. LEGO has even went to create a web page dedicated to adults promoting these sets.


text:
Fix for monorail sticking at monoswitch?
I recently acquired an old monorail set, and I'm having problems getting it to work properly. It works fine on normal track, and it is able to continue on or stop at a monoswitch when the switch is set accordingly.
However, it isn't always able to reverse directions (it often just stops) at a monoswitch, and once stopped, the switch usually isn't able to get it started again. It seems like the switch on the side of the motor isn't quite getting pushed all the way in. It runs fine again once I push the switch all the way in.
The behavior is somewhat dependent on direction. Although it isn't able to start from a stop at a monoswitch in either direction, it is more often able to reverse direction going one way than the other.
I'm wondering if anyone has experienced this behavior, and if there is a way to fix it.
If it makes any difference, the motor is from 6990 from 1987.

Are you using a fresh, non-rechargeable battery? It could be that the monorail doesn't have enough forward momentum to push the button all the way.

I am using a fresh battery. I've also tried powering the motor with a 9v train controller, and the behavior is the same.

Using a 9V train controller is a better idea than a fresh battery, so we can probably rule out the motor not getting enough power. However, it could still be weak on its own, but it's also true these monorails never went really fast to start with. A mechanical issue maybe? Is it hard too push the motor switch manually? If it hasn't been used much, maybe it needs some wear & tear.

Also, does the problem happen on both sides? If you turn the motor around, I mean? I know these are fairly straightforward questions, but I can't think of anything else at the moment (hey, at least I'm not asking if you turned the switch correctly)

That's a good point. I updated my question to include this information.

Maybe the plastic is worn off just enough that the switch is not pushing the pins completely anymore.
Debug step 1:
When the train pins are in the switch zone there shouldn't be a lot of space between the point of the pins and the face of the switch. If it looks too loose that could be the problem.  A way to test this would be to put some clear scotch tape on the faces of the switch.  The faces are highlighted in red in this picture:

If the problem persist you could add more layer(s) and test again.  After four layers if this doesn't fix the problem I would try something else.

Results: The switch works with four layers of tape. The new question is "Between the motor pins and the switch, which one is worn out? One or both?"

Debug step 2:  Testing the switch with a second motor would be helpful. Do you have a second motor?  In any case let's inspect the motor pins and the switch faces.
The two motor pins are (I assume) made of plastic.  The end point of each pin should not not be worn down. One way to check that is to compare the two.  If one is rounder then the other that gives us important information.
The switch faces (highlighted in red in the previous picture) should be a perfectly flat surface.  Is there a slight groove at the height where the motor pins hit the switch? Again. this would be important information.

Results: The switch faces are not worn but it looks like the motor pins are rounded off.

Debug step 3:  Testing & fixing the motor pins.
Before trying to fix the motor pins I would suggest one last test.  With no tape on the switch, you could add tape layers to the motor pins and try to reproduce the successful test of step 1.  This should work without problems.
As for fixing the motor pins.  I would suggest to use one epoxy glue drop at the tip of each pin. After the epoxy is cured you could test and if necessary sand off any excess thickness.

Results: Epoxy on the motor pins fixed the problem.

Thanks for answer. Four pieces of tape does narrow the gap about the right amount to make the monoswitch function properly. I had actually considered something like this as a solution, but I wanted to make sure that I didn't fix the wrong part. If it's really the switch on the motor that is the problem, I'd hate to narrow the gap on the monoswitch so that a good motor won't even fit through it. I'd love to hear what you would recommend as a permanent fix.

I unfortunately don't have another motor to compare with. The monoswitches don't look visually worn down. I have compared the pins on my motor to pictures of others around the net, and I think they may be somewhat rounded off.

Good.  How about the switch faces? Are they worn?  Is there a groove?

They don't look worn down.

@jncraton There you go. Hopefully the epoxy will do the trick.  Let us know how it turns out.

I put a bit of epoxy on each end of the motor switch and filed it back down to a point. This seems to have resolved the problem. Thanks!


text:
Are there more studs or "antistuds"?
I was reflecting this morning about the recently introduced element Brick 1 x 1 with Stud on One Side and the fact that there is no real counterpart for it; that is, a 1x1 brick with a hollow cavity on one side (like the backside of our beloved Brick 1 x 1 with Headlight), and three other regular, flat, sides.
This led me to think that I've a feeling there are, in general, more studs on parts than there are "antistuds", that is, cavities to receive studs. Is this feeling accurate?
To verify, how should count antistuds? Should we consider, for example that a 2x4 bricks has 11 of them (the 8 standard ones and the 3 tubes)? That each hole of a Technic brick  counts for two? And if we settle on that, how could we get an actual count?

I really like this kind of brain teaser

There are more antistuds based on your description, you have to account for the flat bricks that have no studs and any sloped bricks that have at minimum twice the number of anti studs. While there are the inverted sloped pieces the standard wider bottom are more prevalent and there are more variations in length and width. Also many of the flat wing pieces have more antistuds for overlapping purposes. Even counting those as 1/2 antistuds since they do not cover the entire stud, they still possess enough hold to keep the model together. With the more custom pieces used in the Star Wars and newer space kits to give the starfighters the smooth look there are many more antistuds on those pieces. That is not even counting the technic bricks.

Very valid points in favor of antistuds, I can't believe I completely forgot about tiles and other smooth or partially smooth parts

It seems like the studs have an advantage and here's two reasons why:
1) The base plates have only studs and no antistuds.  So many base plates were made that this is stacking the numbers in favor of the studs. There are a lot of studs on those big grids.
2) There are many pieces with extra-studs like this type:

but I don't remember pieces (other than LEGO Technic beams and rounded beams) with, and only with, extra antistuds.
So this brings me to another question, "Do LEGO Technic beams create more antistuds than the base plates and extra-stud pieces combined?"  I don't think it does.
...on to the next part of the question "how can we count this?"

The pieces you depicted have hollow studs which could also count as antistuds ;-)

"but I don't remember pieces (other than LEGO Technic beams and rounded beams) with, and only with, extra antistuds" - well, there's a direct "complement" of the pieces you are showing in your picture: 6061, which has 16 extra antistuds in addition to the regular 8 antistuds on the bottom (that are matched by the 8 studs on the top).