I went to SKF to learn how to design a proper bearing arrangement and share their knowledge with you all. Thank you to Roger and the team at SKF for supporting the Marble Machine :) Download the Roller Bearing pdf here: cdn.skfmediahub.skf.com/api/public/0901d196802809de/pdf_preview_medium/0901d196802809de_pdf_preview_medium.pdf#cid-121486 Download the SKF SIMPRO QUICK Simulation Software here: www.skf.com/group/support/engineering-tools/simpro-quick These are powerful tools from SKF, hopefully they can guide your own projects forward.
Can I add one extra suggestion for your third marble machine? Built the "music machine" first then focus on the power input (for a next world tour or for last in case you still have energy to spend on that). Why? 1- because if you just use an electric motor as power input (as all current church organs use), then you reduce "the fail chance" to complete a third machine. 2- because in order to design a manual power input that can play tight music, first you need to know what is the power loss by friction that you will have, which you can not know until you complete the music aspect of the machine. 3- The tight music mechanism that you want to use, like gravity, inertia and drag, all of them behave and scale different with the size, some of them depends on density (cube), others on area (square). At the end you can have a mechanism that requires so much weight and parts that could be unpractical to a world tour, or maybe they may require a lot of energy from your part to keep the machine moving, that would not allow you to concentrate in the other aspects of the machine while you play. Final, trying to reach the final design would be like chasing your own tail, because the first parameter that you need to know to design the power input, would be designed for last.
As a fellow tinkerer, I LOVE your bearing design! And it's very affirming to hear an expert say that yes there are questions that it can answer. Some of the world's most famous inventions happened as a failure to solve the intended problem. Some just need a little time to become more than an "ugly baby." I found a Time Magazine article from 2017 that lists QR codes as a "failure" at the time. Ha! Still, I applaud your willingness to learn and grow! You're doing great!
Don’t be discouraged about creativity in engineering. It’s just that as we find out more and more ways to do things, it becomes harder to find new ways as effective as the ones already found and people need more expertise on the subject
Having faced this conundrum myself, I smile to see Martin grapple with his bearing design from an emotional perspective masquerading as an engineering one. (not dissimilarly to the emotional reaction of many viewers to his staunch defense of his design). A good way to avoid emotional attachment to a mechanical problem is to fall in love with the desired outcome as a whole, not the pieces of the process.
I think the not-getting-emotional is key, especially when collaborating with others on a team. It’s important to not lab a design “Martin’s bearing housing design” instead you call it the “Version 1 bearing housing design”. Then if it needs to get revised or scrapped, the individual doesn’t feel personally attached.
The engineering mindset needs to be divorced from the artistic one for the purposes of creating a functional object. Artists, by their nature, are perverse & contrary. Engineers are hegemonic and 'by the book': oil and water, without an emulsifier, for the most part.
In writing this process is called "killing your darlings." You obsess over some phrase or paragraph or metaphor so much the writing piece is worse for the labor you put in to keep it.
Iteration on a design. The important part is for each design to be better than the last. It’s only a problem if you don’t improve it after many attempts.
No he did fail, and that's fine. He had a goal for the MMX and was unable to meet that goal. He failed in completing that project to a satisfactory level. Now he is starting over with a different perspective, hoping that this time he will succeed.
@@rudie2902I want to second that. Martin has not failed, he has learned a lot on his journey and has shared that knowledge and passion with millions of people. He also has significantly boosted the maker community and made it more connected. And I wouldn't be surprised if he has enspire lots of young people get Into it. Plus, he has probably introduced many more engineering focused people to music and art and how it connects to tech.
Martin, Love the character growth. Just a friendly reminder that the art of the marble machine is in the entirety of the project. You could make this entire machine out of off the shelf parts and not custom design a single thing and yet it still would be incredibly artistic in what it is. We know you want to have this machine be a part of you but don't forget that it always will be no matter if someone else designed the bearing housing. There are so many ways you will yet express your art within this piece you just don't see it yet
When somebody praises a 5-star Michelin chef for their dish, even if they've followed a recipe, they don't say, "oh it wasn't me, I did nothing, it was all from ingredients." And that's not entirely an ego thing, either. It's about _how_ you combine things, _which_ things, in _what_ way. Look at music - there's nothing original under the sun in terms of base elements, but there's still an infinite amount of ways to combine them.
So much wisdom in this thread, I couldn't agree with both of you more! The proof of the pudding is in the eating, until then it's just ingredient's waiting to go off.
And the bearing housing will be almost invisible on the MM3, so using off the shelf parts for critical parts like holding the flywheel is not a compromise from an artistic point of view. The art lies in the overall appearance and concept.
My favorite part is when he tells Martin "Better to be approximately right, than exactly wrong." I have felt this was an issue from the start of the new machine. If "tight" is the ultimate deciding measure, there needs to be a clear definition of "tight." Start by defining how tight is tight enough, then build towards that goal. Then any approximations/variations can be measured against an actual goal.
True, but it's hard to know what "tight" is when you don't have a machine yet. For the power system, "as tight as possible" is a good goal, because the rest of the machine is going to introduce inconsistencies, but you want to start with a power system that is very constant and easy to operate. Martin's current approach of "how tight can I get it?" is a good first start to prototype and test out different designs and compare them. Step 2 should be: "How tight do I need it?" and step 3 "Is it feasible to get it as tight as I need it without getting overly expensive or complicated?"
@@EaglePicking He has a level of tightness in mind or the MMX wouldn't be considered a failure. His reluctance to define "tight" is leading to a rabbit hole of prototyping without ever knowing when it's good enough. There's wasted effort in trying to go tighter in all areas if it's not necessary. Including the power system. If a power system is easier to use but isn't as tight, he won't know if it will work better vs the tighter/harder to use system. It would disregard any benefits from alternate systems if they aren't the tightest. Currently, no matter what they build, they won't know if it's tight enough to use or not. Martin knows how tight he wants it. It just needs to be translated into a measurable goal.
@@EaglePicking It is a number though. Martin measures the standard deviation whenever he tests the timing. What is the minimum/maximum allowable deviation? Determine that number and compare the parts of the build against that number. To better know when to adjust the design if it's not tight enough. Or we can accept it will never be complete or go on tour. They're not the only options. But since MMX "died" it's all just channel content, not a tangible goal. Why do the goalposts keep moving? The first step in the process is no longer defined. It's a philosophical idea of "tight." Look, I just want him to keep it real. Either build it with intent, or quit leading everyone on and just admit it's all for the channel now.
@@MisterBrickalew We're still in the initial prototyping phase of the MM3. A time in which various things can be tested and major decisions can be made. For now, a relative "tightness" is enough to continue. Once the design gets more concrete, surely Martin will get more specific with requirements.
About the bearing housing, I compare it to electronics: There is a case for rapid prototyping, here we would maybe use a breadboard, a combination of vero-boards and evaluation boards. This is a perfectly valid method to get to results quickly, to find out conepts etc. You would never go into production like this, with a complex enough circuit not even for a single device. You would not meet environmental requirements etc. The design process starts with an idea. The validation of requirements is the key to success. Sometimes it's better to try a "stupid" design idea to discover potentials and problems. The thing about "stupid" designs is, you never know that they are stupid from the beginning. Sometimes you find it out yourself, sometimes you get someone who tells you, and sometimes you learn it the hard way.
It helps to review the project at certain points with trustet experts which can be designer, engeneers or operator. The imput you get from all needs to be take in acount.
Honestly this reminds me of the marble gates on the MMX. So much was tried, and what ended up working the best was a simple clock escapement mechanism that had been used for centuries. Not only did they end up functioning better, they even ended up looking better with a bit of an artistic touch. Sometimes you just have to use the thing other people figured out for you already. There is no reason to keep reinventing the wheel.
That's true, but if you look at it from a certain way, we only know that for sure because we (or Martin) went through all the process of trying all the different ways beforehand. Hindsight is 20/20
@@faithful451 Absolutely this! It's not as though there's a wealth of existing knowledge on the timing consistency of different ball drop mechanisms. Besides, the various testing and experimentation are what keep this series so interesting. If it boiled down to _"I hired an engineering firm and this is what they designed"_ I'm not sure I'd bother to watch.
As an engineer having worked at SKF in my younger years, this is so nice to see! And it really brings out nostalgia around living in Gothenburg (Kviberg), the early morning walks to the SKF factory (wearing rainproof clothes since there is always rain in Gothenburg). Thanks for this episode!
This was such a wholesome video. Excellent show of expertise from Roger and excellent show of humility from Martin, whilst also allowing us all to learn in the process. Also I do agree some people's responses to the bearing was a bit OTT but it probably comes from a place of frustration in one's own projects. Can't speak for everyone but i've definitely been burned many times when I think I can do better than the tried and true methods.
More like, a lot of people put time and money into supporting his second machine and he didn't even play a song on it. Now he's doing it a third time and seeing him cut corners in random ways is frustrating to say the least. Kinda wish he'd go back to making music with slide projectors and legos and such.
I kind of have the exact opposite experience, where I so often do DIY solutions because I can service my own specific needs so much better than professionals can offer at reasonable prices or even at all. _But,_ that's generally in the context of prosumer-grade end products and/or professional labor - not components. Finding components that perfectly fit into my DIY solutions is deeply satisfying and actually happens semi-regularly.
@@CzarinaHarris I don't know about the Lego's but he is talking about the huge and unexpected U turn he did by cancelling MMX. People who trusted his commitment were let down... So, having been burnt once, are varying degrees of impatient and sensitive (IMO rightly so). Picture this if you will: you've been following someone walking across the desert with the promise of great reward at journeys end. After many many miles of enduring the path you start to see something in the distance and it looks so good! Then this person suddenly stops and says, "oh sorry but I went the wrong way...", turns around and walks back the way we just came. Just imagine your thoughts; are you going to want to follow this person anymore? Do you have the same feeling of confidence and hope? At what point do you say, "I've had enough!"? Is he committed to the destination or just the journey??? If Martin is committed to the destination then there is hope but if he is just leading us around going nowhere then I would feel frustrated and annoyed...
Martin, a failure that you learn from is actually a success! I live in an engineering world and I love being wrong because every time I find out that I'm wrong I learn something new. This leads to more knowledge and understanding which makes us better engineers. If you look at how much you've progressed you'll probably find that the lessons you understand the most are direct results of failing initially, celebrate these moments because they are far more valuable than the times you get it right the first time. As always, I love what you do and appreciate you taking us along for the ride with you!
what I love most about what you're doing Martin is creating the most interesting educational content. I did mechanical engineering and definitely fell asleep during a lecture on bearing design but everything in this video had my focus. Keep up the good work, the world needs more content like this. And also like Roger alluded to mistakes are just learning opportunities.
this whole episode feels so much like an infomercial all the way down to the tracking ticket at the bottom. What a fantastic organization this appears to be. so smart
@@josseman omg... a rabbit hole I feel i could get amazed within... As I think about it how many of us became mesmerized by the little silver sphere because of the original Marble Machine (blessed be the... hail ma... ... oh sorry that was meant to remain in my head 🤦🏼♂️) lol anyway this was a former engineering student's (me) most inspiring video of the week; yay - hope yours is good too
I appreciate you being vulnerable and explaining more about why the criticism against that design was a sticky issue for you. I find myself as having the soul more of an 'artist' where non linear thinking, and bringing new perspectives to things is kind of required to make meaningful art. Weirdly enough I learnt a pretty similar lesson to you in my pursuit to get better at fighting games. I was trying to bring an artistic approach to learning these games. One of my friends put it pretty bluntly but it clicked with me. "In a lot of situations you just have to learn to do the right things, you don't have to be a special butterfly, you just need to block here or grab here or wait to attack, and when you attack you need to use these moves that actually get you a reward. And don't worry, doing things this way wont take away your special unique flavor, you just need to learn how to play the game" In a broader sense my life has been learning how to 'play the game' and not always outright reject a lot of systems like I naturally want to do. And to my surprise, there is a world of unique expression and individuality to be had when 'drawing inside the lines' so to speak. I hope this understanding gives you hope and encouragement to complete your wonderful machine :)
As a mechanical engineer with many years of industry experience, I know first hand what it feels like to feel in love with a design that may not be entirely practical. I applaud Martin for his willingness to reevaluate his design choices. This has been quite an emotional rollercoaster from when he first announced his bearing housings, I'm glad that the safety factor and the engineering design factor is being considered when the new bearing housings are being ordered. I'm certain that these new bearings as supplied by SKF will be the right choice going forward.
Yes indeed. I had no idea of the issues of mounting a shaft that's not going very fast and would expect that such a simple analysis would do. It was enjoyable for me.
I once had a uni class from the guys at SKF and they showcased their handbook for bearing selection. Having studied it thoroughly I can say its a wonderfull resource and it can be very useful for anyone interested in learning more about bearings.
Don't forget the 4th reason to watch this video - we love the journey with you Martin, to Marble Machine Magnificence! You are walking out such an amazing journey of engineering and musical excellence 😀
One point not touched on enough is that you were right in the sense that *creativity should never be discounted.* There is a reason that there is a Patent office because new ideas and new ways of doing things are being invented daily. But it also makes sense that before implementing a new creative idea that you check with experts first. *So, there is a place for Tried and True, but if it was only that then we never would have had a Marble Machine!*
Music Machine Mondays showcased some of the most elite engineering to make exquisite music. Too bad they didn't have video to document their journey from concept to application.
Function over form! We keep learning this lesson... engineering before esthetics. You want this machine to absolutely kick ass? Engineer it! And thanks for bringing us along on this ride... looking forward to a prosperous collaboration with SKF, you couldn't have picked a better partner.
This was fun and good to show. One thing I learnt from another youtuber - Robin Renzetti, "Everything is like rubber" The idea behind that is that with every force, there is a measurable deflection. When you think about bearing races as if they are rubber, you can see why your idea of trapping them between bolts might not be such a great idea. But keep it up, you never stop learning :)
Me: Has no need nor likely ever will to purchase industrial grade bearings. Also me: I'm gonna spend my whole afternoon modeling things in this bearing software.
I didn't finish my bachelor in mechanical engineering, but i learned so much from it. It gives you a different way of thinking, an appreciation for precision, an understanding of the supply chain and so much more. Seeing all these tables from SKF made me nostalgic.
I'm Thrilled that you went to SKF to have this conversation about bearings! This is the kind of input that's vital for the longevity of a mechanical creation. Surround yourself with intelligent people. You'll be surprised what you learn in your interactions with them.
Fascinating how you can see the artist and the engineer fighting within the same person of Martin here! The open-mindedness and pride of the artist and the conservatism (and also pride) of the engineer. Both are important qualities.
@@thomasbecker9676 Well, he certainly is on the way of becoming one. He already has more engineering skills than some people employed as engineers I have met.
Personally, I love the simplicity of your design! As you said many of the commenters are very knowledgeable with the engineering conventions, and they're conventions for a reason--I more watch your videos for the art _in_ the engineering rather than the engineering itself. But no matter how beautiful your bearing housing was, there's still beauty in following the conventions.
Martin, you're on a path where you learn a tremendous amount of knowledge. You must and should make mistakes because learning also involves making errors. A bearing housing made from screws is not a negative thing, as it was one of the countless things that helped you learn something. Don't feel bad about the criticism you received. Feel proud that you dare to try different solutions and build prototypes. If you're lucky, you might accidentally invent something completely new.
I'm so glad you had this journey of understanding with the bearing housing. I very nearly used a similar design to your bolt cage for an application that would have been stupidly dangerous
In a century or so, I'd imagine that industrial suppliers will actually have things like that in their calculators, when we have an industrial base in space, on the Moon and Mars :)
In 1965 a Tasmanian scientist, R. Foster, went on Australian news and proclaimed the moon to not be a physical rock but a plasma based phenomenon. Nobody landed on the moon because it is not something that can be landed on. If the American government's lips are moving they are lying to you.
@@lambertstarr1218 Do also consider that industrial production would be *far* cheaper, both monetarily and in terms of waste, if gravity wasn't a concern. Especially if the materials used are collected/processed on-site
I love how you accept the rejection of your invention by somebody who is expert in his field. It is definitely hurting yet you have provided the best info to newbies either students, technician and engineers at the moment when selecting an appropriate bearing
I see your point Martin in experimenting and finding novel solutions to problems, that does happen a lot in the R&D divisions of companies like SKF. I think the issue is that they do have over 100 years of advantage in this particular problem space.
I know it's not a popular thought but part of the reason I enjoyed the first marble machine was its jankyness. Hearing the rattle of the marbles and the vibrations of the machine is enjoyable.
It is refreshing to be humbled. I too have been emotional and bias to my 'original' design which only faced redicule due to tried methods. I learnt so much through debate and ultimately switched sides against myself. But without doing so I wouldn't have learnt, been humbled and importantly made better designs through following norms right from the get go.
I spent many years working in an industrial environment. A good portion of that time was spent in plant maintenance and, since it was a small company, I did the maintenance purchasing as well. I learned very early on in my career that SKF bearings should be used in any situation where failure was too costly. I hesitated to buy anything else. If I sound like a fanboy, so be it. Martin - ask any mechanic walking onto a shop floor at the start of the shift “what is the first sign that something is not quite right” and they will tell you that “it sounds different today.” I had that same experience many times despite the complexity of the environment. Even the most subtle change evoked a response - my version of the difference between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ music. When you can’t track down exactly what the problem is, consult those who have been thinking about it a lot longer. Another way say that is “if you can’t fix it with a bandage, an aspirin, or a good night’s rest, call the doctor! I’m glad you listened to that advice and I can’t wait to hear your next ‘failure.’
My forehead hurts now because as I've watched your videos, my eyes are wide ooen and my eyebrows raised high in absolute awe at your machines! Oh. My. God! Genius, pure genius! Bravissimo, Sir! Your machines are museum pieces, and I hope there some in musical instrument museums (and engineering museums) now, today! Brilliant doesn't describe what you've done!
Your approach was very understandable and very common for junior, less experienced, but eager engineers. They enjoy reinventing the wheel, even if it doesn't make sense. This vision will change over time when you will focus on the end result rather than the individuals. Even if software engineering lots of people reinvent existing solutions, some work, some don't.
Martin should do a mini concert for the folks at SKF when his machine is finally finished. I think the employees there would love to see an innovative use of their bearings.
Alpha worked. But made a mess. Beta worked well. But we found flaws in marble management which would have limited music production. Which was deemed unacceptable and set aside. Now working on Delta. Almost put an experimental bearing on a high speed flywheel. Thankfully the support team pointed out that might be a point of critical existence failure, and received outside consultation to be secure in our decisions. Continuing development. None of these machines are a failure. Failure would imply they never accomplished your primary design objective. Entertaining the public, making music, and sharing with the world. You already know Success Martin. You are complaining you aren't winning harder, because you didn't work smarter when you didn't stand a chance to understand the scope of your task at the outset. In engineering we call that learning the job by doing. Marble Machine 3 may still have defects. But 4 will improve upon those flaws. Perfection is only needed for mass production, as that will introduce its own imperfections, so ironing out the ones you expect needs to be done up front! If you don't believe me? Look up C&Rsenal. Firearms were produced in their millions, and yet they bring them in for repairs or even redesigns every few years as they worked out the kinks of FINISHED DESIGNS.
I love the idea of that tapered locking system. I do factory Maintenance and repair and used to do electromechanical repair and refurbishment. I can't tell you how many shafts I've seen damaged due to set screws slipping. Not to mention damage from heavy vibration. Also the reason some engineers will tell you to stay away from friction fits is because of several reasons. It's requires a high level of accuracy to achieve a good friction fit. Which increases cost. It needs to be tight enough for your application but not so tight parts are damaged by the fit. And it increases the difficulty of assembly and repair.
The process that SKF went through to design their bearings is also a form of tinkering. Every innovation is. I believe it helps to accept that others have a lot of experience in what they did for so long. And to be able to stand on the shoulders of other tinkerers can be very helpful. In the end, it comes from one tinkerer with quite a bit of experience in their field … and goes to another tinkerer to benefit from that. Of course, challenging existing designs is sometimes necessary. But going through the process with Roger and SKF helps to find out if that is the case here or not. And Martin, there is so much of you in the Marble Machine. It is not necessary to (re-)invent every single part and material.
First of all, very interesting video which funnily enough coincides with me having to change bearings on my moped later today. Second, I can't say much about the homemade solution for the bearing as I haven't been around watching it all, but from comments I've seen here I get the feeling alot of people are around just to see a final product. I get people expect to get something out of this all, we've been brought up to expect our investments to pay out be it time, money or whatever. But that's not what art is about, and this project with the marble machine is art, not some commercial thing being made to please everyone. As for tried and true things working well I do agree to a point, sometimes you just gotta do your own thing no matter what people say. It may work out and it may not, only time and experience will tell. Like I said earlier I can't vouch for the bearing housing, but this is Martins journey to create his machine the way he visualizes it, not anyone else, doesn't matter what I, you, or anyone else thinks about it in the end.
Fantastic, thank you. This was more helpful to me than you could know. Great move by SKF to get involved. They should give whoever reached out to you a raise.
Thanks so much Martin for doing this and sharing it with us. Remember that some of us are learning with you, and this is a wonderful help. Thank you so much for giving us these tools we can use, not just to hang up on the wall. Best wishes to you and your success.
Awesome Martin! Productions like this are why I hope the marble machine project always finds new assemblies to add, and new improvements to existing ones, because the usefulness of the work you are doing spans far beyond just musical devices, and are very inspirational for helping us understand practical engineering. Thanks again!!!
If this video was filmed during thursday-friday last week imma be sad. I was sick then. And i am going at SKF's industrial school. I eat in the same house as this video is filmed in everyday "götaholm". If i had the opportunity to meet martin and missed it i am just sad (I noticed this was when a roller coaster crashed. It was during summer vacation. So not really a missed opportunity. Whould still be fun to meet martin)
I'm pretty sure this was filmed in June, judging by the flags outside. And martin has already used the lessons he learnt here in his last video, too, so it's been weeks at least either way.
@@Arkios64 they had those flags the whole last week to. they circulate between different countrys where skf has factorys and sometimes they have pride flags. Like the whole pride moth. But allso on random occasions. And sometimes they have blue skf branded flags. Once they had a ukrainian flag on half pole since the skf factory had been bombed in ukraine. They circulate flags like daily
@@Arkios64 The roller coaster accident that Martin mentions happened on 25 June, and he says that was one week ago. I'd guess it was filmed in late June or early July
Hey Martin, your bearing housing is proof that you are creative. If everyone always used proven and trusted methods, then we wouldn't invent new things. Your housing was perfect for a prototype build, where you can test whatever design you want. Then using the proven methods for the real design unless yours exceeds those methods in their functionality. :)
What an awesome community Martin has built, that we can all become so emotionally invested in a bearing housing design 😂 I love it. I also love that we were right lol
Lovely video. I’m working on my own synthesizers, and I’ve also seen the grey area that comes when you’re between art and engineering. and you make a good point that this divide is exactly why people love your projects. Keep being awesome!
I think another argument on Martin’s side is if we ALWAYS use the “tried and true” method then there will never be innovation. I like that Martin tried something new and different. Was it a good idea in the end? Not really, but he learned from it in a rather big way. I think the soul of the marble machine is trying something new whether it’s the whole idea, or the parts that make it up. If we want everything off the shelf, might as well say go buy a few “tried and true” music instruments and make the music the old fashioned way. So Martin, keep trying new things and if they’re not great ideas the internet will clearly let you know, but hopefully next time we will all consider the nuance and have a reasonable conversation about why something isn’t a great idea (ex: bearing raceway roller coaster) rather than jumping all over you and saying just stick to the “tried and true” method.
I'm very happy you decided to go with the "tried and tested" solution. Not because I think your design would not work (I think it probably would.) But "probably will" is still far worse than "almost certainly will". I really want to see you succeed with the MM3! So I feel reducing possible sources for issues is great. As not needing to tweak diy solutions will keep your recources free to continue your progress.
24:31 Martin learns his bearing housing was not good for the final product, maybe prototype only. And why. But a final solution will be needed at some point, likely a tried and tested method.
I stopped watching for a while because I was finding things frustrating, but damn, you've really grown. Proud of you, and I get how hard it must be to balance between the artist and the engineer.
thats a brilliant video for the hobbyist/amateur to understand one a very crucial part of buillding simple syszems with rotating parts. Thank you very much Wintergatan and SKF !!!
I think if people hadn't reacted so emotionally to your first bearing housing you wouldn't have been as adamant about it; sure it wasn't the best long-term solution, but like I said in my first comment, it's part of the process, which is necessary to go through, and then at the end of the day you would make the best decision for your application. If people really want to unsubscribe for something as simple as a few metal rings with some balls in them, they really ought to; one less thing to worry about. I'll still be here tho, I've loved seeing the process this entire time, regardless of the bumps along the way 💛💚
Real friends are honest (and friendly at the same time of course 😉). From 100 ideas, maybe just one is finally a really good idea. And thinking against all standards is the only way to find totally new approaches. So head up and keep on rocking the engineering business! Br from an automotive engineer with over 30 years experience 😊
SKF is definitely a World leader in design and innovation that results in products that, while they are expensive, the quality, design, and precision create immense value. If SKF reads this I would like you to offer a solution to the pedal concept that allows the pedal to freewheel on the up stroke and only power on the down stroke. A roller clutch and spring would allow this and make it much easier to correct timing because he could use small strokes to correct timing.
Great video! I never noticed that SKF is a Swedish manufacturer even though I've intentionally selected SKF bearings for some tasks thanks to their high quality reputation.
I believe there is no other RUclipsr like Martin who has contributed to the world of engineering. I say this because he really did fail hard with his previous machines, and yet he still keeps on uploading thorough videos for us. As a result we, his followers are getting to experience the journey of engineering and lessons that costed martin so much for free.
A bearing is not just a bearing. A friend of mine did have some issue with a machinery and did start to look into the bearings failure and made up his mind to have another type of bearings just to try. The load, speed and angel of attack was considered and he got out of the trouble with some help from the man at the shop counter. At this moment the machine is running for over two years and did not cope up with more the one before.... nice.
I was racing manager for a motorcycle manufacturer's race team and later a PWC manufacture's team, world championships were at stake. These were extremely high output engines and high load transmissions or jet pumps that would be the equivalent of F-1 or NASCAR equipment. In both applications I always specified SKF bearings and can honestly say I never experienced a bearing failure.
Martin, I don’t know if you read the messages since there are so many, but I wanted to say something because I feel bad about bashing your original bearing housing idea. I was trying to be as kind as I possibly could at the time, but I can see how hurt you are about the whole thing so I still feel bad. Anyway, I did want to say that I absolutely accept that there are nuances to design. I work with software and I have been in similar situations where my beautiful solution was not good enough for the problem at hand. No one needed to tell me this. My own testing revealed it. And it huuuuurts! I know it does. What I have learned is that there is a time and a place. There are critical points where there is no room for nuance. You take the safe/stable/proven option no matter if you like it or not. I wasn’t thinking about it in that way at the time, but the flywheel is critical in many ways: safety, base performance, if it breaks it may be so difficult to change/repair that it puts the viability of the machine as world-tour-capable at risk, etc. I think that’s why the response was so aggressive. I think that many of us have taken such a risk because we really liked how elegant our solution was for our priorities at the time to eventually have it fail catastrophically later to more or less dire consequences. And a lot of us felt that familiar feeling when looking at what you were planning. I will one hundred percent grant that I do not know if your solution would have been good enough or not. I will also admit that I like it for many reasons. Specially aesthetically. It really does look super cool! But it is in such a critical spot that I couldn’t help myself and was perhaps too harsh in communicating my feelings. Or at least added to a pile that didn’t need adding to. Either way, I hope you accept my apology. I’m sorry if the way I communicated it was hurtful. Right now it is impossible to know if it was warranted without investing a significant amount of time on something that will not improve the machine. Which is something that I have to say I find admirable. You took the advise without proving to yourself if it was warranted or not. Like I have said, I have been in a position where people have told me that something was not good enough and not once have I taken the advise without testing both options. Some times spending way too much time to do it. I feel like you and I are similar in some ways and, for people like us, it takes a special kind of strength and maturity to not do things the way we think it’s right because it is not worth risking it. And I really respect you being able to make that decision. Anyway, you probably don’t read all the comments and, even if you do, this ended up being so long that I wouldn’t blame you if you “nope” away from it 😂 but I think it was worth it to put this down either way.
I fully understand Martin's point of view. I think something that wasn't mentioned is that sometimes it's just more fun to design something yourself. As a programmer I do this a lot, too. I can spend the time learning how to use an existing solution, or I can just try to build it myself and in the process learn about why the existing solutions are the way they are. There are times for either approach, but yeah, a safety-critical part is probably not the best place for such experimentation.
When I was younger, we would sometimes drive by the SKF offices along the freeway in Toronto. I had no idea what the company was about, but the old logo looked like a rotary phone dial to me. Cool to find out what the company is actually about. :)
What I love that I think Martin is trying to say is, if we always go with the tried and tested solutions, we may be missing out on a better solution somewhere down the line. And what Roger responded with was, it all depends on your requirements. I'm with Martin. I think given his requirements, his bearing housing was viable as a temporary solution. But for a permanent solution, there are better methods that take into account all of the requirements instead of the limited ones for the prototype.
As a creative, who also pretends he’s an engineer, I completely empathize with Martin. The prototyping phase needs to be kept loose, directed, but open to innovation. Which is often the result of mistakes, lack of resources and misinterpretations of design criteria. Most tinkerers need to just bodge together with available materials. It does help us gain insight and experience. Yes, using something that is tried and true is the best route. The problem is that waiting for the perfect part slows down the prototyping and innovation process. I work with high school students in a robotics lab. I see when we are prototyping that their pursuit of perfection too early derails their ability to move forward fluidly towards the next iteration. After they have designed, tested and failed repeatedly then they can tighten the tolerances to create a better system. Stay creative Martin!
Eliminating the extra bearing lock, in excess to the locking bearing gets easier to accept when you think about how, a bearing can be a bearing without locking. So a locking bearing is like 2 different mechnisms in one unit. It IS the locking mechanism. It's what it was desgined to do. To solve that exact problem, in an improvement over an old system.
I think the Art versus Engineering question is reasonable if all other requirements are of equal importance. The modern piano is clearly a work of art, but it has a ton of engineering in it in order for it to perform the function it's designed for, which is to play music loud enough to be heard from every seat in a modern concert hall without external amplification, and give the player the ability to control the volume of the sound. The piano's ancestor instruments-the pianoforte and the harpsichord-could not do all of those things, and you couldn't make them do those things just by making them bigger or have more strings. When Martin put up the list of requirements for the MM3, it looked like a spec for an engineered piece of equipment. The first Marble Machine had enough engineering just to get it to work consistently enough to play one song once or twice without breaking or hurting anybody. The MMX started out life as a "better" version of the MM1, without a complete list of what Martin wanted or needed at the start of that project. We all watched Martin happily build the MMX by just copying MM1 and switching to lots more metal parts, and then came the additional instruments and functions, as well as running into issues that Martin didn't foresee (magnetized marbles) because he couldn't test out his design until he built it. As for saying that the Engineering solutions don't allow for anything new, I don't agree with that at all. What Roger didn't also say when he mentioned the well tested solutions is that much of that testing comes out of failure. A good example is bridge design. The reason that bridges tend to be one of a limited number of forms is that almost all novel forms of bridges fell down under load. That's how we knew those bridges were not right for those applications. Art wasn't the problem, it was engineering. The MM3 is supposed to make art. The choice of instrumentation on the MM3 is an artistic one. The choice of bearing housing isn't artistic, in exactly the same way that the choice of materials for the frame or shafts isn't artistic. If they were, we should be seeing you try to build the MM3 out of bamboo, or into a living tree, and that device would not be able to go on a world tour with Wintergatan, let alone easily reparable. All this is to say that the MM3 has to be a reliable machine first, or else we are back to the MMX again.
![Quando Rondo - Grow Up [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8zFnCg3BO4Q/mqdefault.jpg)
I went to SKF to learn how to design a proper bearing arrangement and share their knowledge with you all. Thank you to Roger and the team at SKF for supporting the Marble Machine :)
Download the Roller Bearing pdf here:
cdn.skfmediahub.skf.com/api/public/0901d196802809de/pdf_preview_medium/0901d196802809de_pdf_preview_medium.pdf#cid-121486
Download the SKF SIMPRO QUICK Simulation Software here:
www.skf.com/group/support/engineering-tools/simpro-quick
These are powerful tools from SKF, hopefully they can guide your own projects forward.
Can I add one extra suggestion for your third marble machine?
Built the "music machine" first then focus on the power input (for a next world tour or for last in case you still have energy to spend on that).
Why? 1- because if you just use an electric motor as power input (as all current church organs use), then you reduce "the fail chance" to complete a third machine.
2- because in order to design a manual power input that can play tight music, first you need to know what is the power loss by friction that you will have, which you can not know until you complete the music aspect of the machine.
3- The tight music mechanism that you want to use, like gravity, inertia and drag, all of them behave and scale different with the size, some of them depends on density (cube), others on area (square).
At the end you can have a mechanism that requires so much weight and parts that could be unpractical to a world tour, or maybe they may require a lot of energy from your part to keep the machine moving, that would not allow you to concentrate in the other aspects of the machine while you play.
Final, trying to reach the final design would be like chasing your own tail, because the first parameter that you need to know to design the power input, would be designed for last.
As a fellow tinkerer, I LOVE your bearing design! And it's very affirming to hear an expert say that yes there are questions that it can answer. Some of the world's most famous inventions happened as a failure to solve the intended problem. Some just need a little time to become more than an "ugly baby." I found a Time Magazine article from 2017 that lists QR codes as a "failure" at the time. Ha!
Still, I applaud your willingness to learn and grow! You're doing great!
Will the MM3 be a piece of art or a showcase for professional engineering?
Don’t be discouraged about creativity in engineering. It’s just that as we find out more and more ways to do things, it becomes harder to find new ways as effective as the ones already found and people need more expertise on the subject
can i go too?
Having faced this conundrum myself, I smile to see Martin grapple with his bearing design from an emotional perspective masquerading as an engineering one. (not dissimilarly to the emotional reaction of many viewers to his staunch defense of his design). A good way to avoid emotional attachment to a mechanical problem is to fall in love with the desired outcome as a whole, not the pieces of the process.
An important principle, which I encounter often in software engineering. 😂
I think the not-getting-emotional is key, especially when collaborating with others on a team. It’s important to not lab a design “Martin’s bearing housing design” instead you call it the “Version 1 bearing housing design”. Then if it needs to get revised or scrapped, the individual doesn’t feel personally attached.
@@atorrance That's a great point.
The engineering mindset needs to be divorced from the artistic one for the purposes of creating a functional object. Artists, by their nature, are perverse & contrary. Engineers are hegemonic and 'by the book': oil and water, without an emulsifier, for the most part.
In writing this process is called "killing your darlings." You obsess over some phrase or paragraph or metaphor so much the writing piece is worse for the labor you put in to keep it.
You havent failed with the 2 previous machines, you have gained valuable data and experience. Now it's up to you yo use that to it's full effect.
On top of that you have entertained millions of people with your Marble machine journey and music
Iteration on a design. The important part is for each design to be better than the last.
It’s only a problem if you don’t improve it after many attempts.
yep, success is paved on the bumpy cobbles of failure. I hope you have good suspension and tires.
No he did fail, and that's fine. He had a goal for the MMX and was unable to meet that goal. He failed in completing that project to a satisfactory level. Now he is starting over with a different perspective, hoping that this time he will succeed.
@@rudie2902I want to second that. Martin has not failed, he has learned a lot on his journey and has shared that knowledge and passion with millions of people. He also has significantly boosted the maker community and made it more connected. And I wouldn't be surprised if he has enspire lots of young people get Into it. Plus, he has probably introduced many more engineering focused people to music and art and how it connects to tech.
Martin,
Love the character growth. Just a friendly reminder that the art of the marble machine is in the entirety of the project. You could make this entire machine out of off the shelf parts and not custom design a single thing and yet it still would be incredibly artistic in what it is. We know you want to have this machine be a part of you but don't forget that it always will be no matter if someone else designed the bearing housing. There are so many ways you will yet express your art within this piece you just don't see it yet
When somebody praises a 5-star Michelin chef for their dish, even if they've followed a recipe, they don't say, "oh it wasn't me, I did nothing, it was all from ingredients."
And that's not entirely an ego thing, either. It's about _how_ you combine things, _which_ things, in _what_ way.
Look at music - there's nothing original under the sun in terms of base elements, but there's still an infinite amount of ways to combine them.
So much wisdom in this thread, I couldn't agree with both of you more! The proof of the pudding is in the eating, until then it's just ingredient's waiting to go off.
And the bearing housing will be almost invisible on the MM3, so using off the shelf parts for critical parts like holding the flywheel is not a compromise from an artistic point of view. The art lies in the overall appearance and concept.
My favorite part is when he tells Martin "Better to be approximately right, than exactly wrong." I have felt this was an issue from the start of the new machine. If "tight" is the ultimate deciding measure, there needs to be a clear definition of "tight." Start by defining how tight is tight enough, then build towards that goal. Then any approximations/variations can be measured against an actual goal.
True, but it's hard to know what "tight" is when you don't have a machine yet.
For the power system, "as tight as possible" is a good goal, because the rest of the machine is going to introduce inconsistencies, but you want to start with a power system that is very constant and easy to operate.
Martin's current approach of "how tight can I get it?" is a good first start to prototype and test out different designs and compare them.
Step 2 should be: "How tight do I need it?" and step 3 "Is it feasible to get it as tight as I need it without getting overly expensive or complicated?"
@@EaglePicking He has a level of tightness in mind or the MMX wouldn't be considered a failure. His reluctance to define "tight" is leading to a rabbit hole of prototyping without ever knowing when it's good enough. There's wasted effort in trying to go tighter in all areas if it's not necessary.
Including the power system. If a power system is easier to use but isn't as tight, he won't know if it will work better vs the tighter/harder to use system. It would disregard any benefits from alternate systems if they aren't the tightest. Currently, no matter what they build, they won't know if it's tight enough to use or not.
Martin knows how tight he wants it. It just needs to be translated into a measurable goal.
@@hundredfireify Tightness is not in exact numbers though. Nobody cares whether it's 60bpm or 61, as long as it's a nice constant bpm.
@@EaglePicking It is a number though. Martin measures the standard deviation whenever he tests the timing. What is the minimum/maximum allowable deviation? Determine that number and compare the parts of the build against that number. To better know when to adjust the design if it's not tight enough.
Or we can accept it will never be complete or go on tour. They're not the only options. But since MMX "died" it's all just channel content, not a tangible goal. Why do the goalposts keep moving? The first step in the process is no longer defined. It's a philosophical idea of "tight."
Look, I just want him to keep it real. Either build it with intent, or quit leading everyone on and just admit it's all for the channel now.
@@MisterBrickalew
We're still in the initial prototyping phase of the MM3. A time in which various things can be tested and major decisions can be made. For now, a relative "tightness" is enough to continue. Once the design gets more concrete, surely Martin will get more specific with requirements.
About the bearing housing, I compare it to electronics: There is a case for rapid prototyping, here we would maybe use a breadboard, a combination of vero-boards and evaluation boards. This is a perfectly valid method to get to results quickly, to find out conepts etc. You would never go into production like this, with a complex enough circuit not even for a single device. You would not meet environmental requirements etc. The design process starts with an idea. The validation of requirements is the key to success. Sometimes it's better to try a "stupid" design idea to discover potentials and problems. The thing about "stupid" designs is, you never know that they are stupid from the beginning. Sometimes you find it out yourself, sometimes you get someone who tells you, and sometimes you learn it the hard way.
You can learn more from failures than you can from successes.
@@petercolquhoun2086for me the goal is to learn. Ether way, you learn. 😊
It helps to review the project at certain points with trustet experts which can be designer, engeneers or operator. The imput you get from all needs to be take in acount.
@@petercolquhoun2086 Fail early, fail cheaply. That's the way.
Indeed, the made works fine till you can get the right size, but sometimes you don’t know what size to get till you make it
Honestly this reminds me of the marble gates on the MMX. So much was tried, and what ended up working the best was a simple clock escapement mechanism that had been used for centuries. Not only did they end up functioning better, they even ended up looking better with a bit of an artistic touch. Sometimes you just have to use the thing other people figured out for you already. There is no reason to keep reinventing the wheel.
That's true, but if you look at it from a certain way, we only know that for sure because we (or Martin) went through all the process of trying all the different ways beforehand. Hindsight is 20/20
@@faithful451 Absolutely this! It's not as though there's a wealth of existing knowledge on the timing consistency of different ball drop mechanisms. Besides, the various testing and experimentation are what keep this series so interesting. If it boiled down to _"I hired an engineering firm and this is what they designed"_ I'm not sure I'd bother to watch.
As an engineer having worked at SKF in my younger years, this is so nice to see! And it really brings out nostalgia around living in Gothenburg (Kviberg), the early morning walks to the SKF factory (wearing rainproof clothes since there is always rain in Gothenburg).
Thanks for this episode!
Facts. It rained a little bit even today 😅
This was such a wholesome video. Excellent show of expertise from Roger and excellent show of humility from Martin, whilst also allowing us all to learn in the process. Also I do agree some people's responses to the bearing was a bit OTT but it probably comes from a place of frustration in one's own projects. Can't speak for everyone but i've definitely been burned many times when I think I can do better than the tried and true methods.
More like, a lot of people put time and money into supporting his second machine and he didn't even play a song on it. Now he's doing it a third time and seeing him cut corners in random ways is frustrating to say the least. Kinda wish he'd go back to making music with slide projectors and legos and such.
I kind of have the exact opposite experience, where I so often do DIY solutions because I can service my own specific needs so much better than professionals can offer at reasonable prices or even at all.
_But,_ that's generally in the context of prosumer-grade end products and/or professional labor - not components. Finding components that perfectly fit into my DIY solutions is deeply satisfying and actually happens semi-regularly.
@@ssl3546This comment makes no sense. People who supported him were frustrated… so he needs to go back to Legos??
@@CzarinaHarris I don't know about the Lego's but he is talking about the huge and unexpected U turn he did by cancelling MMX. People who trusted his commitment were let down... So, having been burnt once, are varying degrees of impatient and sensitive (IMO rightly so).
Picture this if you will: you've been following someone walking across the desert with the promise of great reward at journeys end. After many many miles of enduring the path you start to see something in the distance and it looks so good! Then this person suddenly stops and says, "oh sorry but I went the wrong way...", turns around and walks back the way we just came. Just imagine your thoughts; are you going to want to follow this person anymore? Do you have the same feeling of confidence and hope? At what point do you say, "I've had enough!"? Is he committed to the destination or just the journey???
If Martin is committed to the destination then there is hope but if he is just leading us around going nowhere then I would feel frustrated and annoyed...
@@musicbro8225This is (his) life, not a Disney movie. To me, his journey now is more real, deep and interesting than ever before.
"Better to be approx right than precisely wrong"... I´m keeping that one
As a machine designer I have an hard copy of the SKF manual on the desk since early 2000.
It's still useful to get inspired even after so many years.
...butbutbut... how do you CTRL-F with a hardcopy?
>doing a whole video about correctly explaining bearing execution
This is the most nordic video ever and I'm here for it
Martin, a failure that you learn from is actually a success! I live in an engineering world and I love being wrong because every time I find out that I'm wrong I learn something new. This leads to more knowledge and understanding which makes us better engineers. If you look at how much you've progressed you'll probably find that the lessons you understand the most are direct results of failing initially, celebrate these moments because they are far more valuable than the times you get it right the first time. As always, I love what you do and appreciate you taking us along for the ride with you!
what I love most about what you're doing Martin is creating the most interesting educational content. I did mechanical engineering and definitely fell asleep during a lecture on bearing design but everything in this video had my focus. Keep up the good work, the world needs more content like this.
And also like Roger alluded to mistakes are just learning opportunities.
this whole episode feels so much like an infomercial all the way down to the tracking ticket at the bottom. What a fantastic organization this appears to be. so smart
Yes, and I must admit I have scrolled through their 1152 page pdf for quite a bit longer than I’d like to admit.
1152 pages on bearings! Amazing.
It's very interesting and universally informative.
@@josseman omg... a rabbit hole I feel i could get amazed within... As I think about it how many of us became mesmerized by the little silver sphere because of the original Marble Machine (blessed be the... hail ma... ... oh sorry that was meant to remain in my head 🤦🏼♂️)
lol anyway this was a former engineering student's (me) most inspiring video of the week; yay - hope yours is good too
@@henryD9363 loved it, it was very well orchestrated and interesting indeed - cheers
The collet locking system on the bearing is neat.
I appreciate you being vulnerable and explaining more about why the criticism against that design was a sticky issue for you. I find myself as having the soul more of an 'artist' where non linear thinking, and bringing new perspectives to things is kind of required to make meaningful art.
Weirdly enough I learnt a pretty similar lesson to you in my pursuit to get better at fighting games. I was trying to bring an artistic approach to learning these games.
One of my friends put it pretty bluntly but it clicked with me. "In a lot of situations you just have to learn to do the right things, you don't have to be a special butterfly, you just need to block here or grab here or wait to attack, and when you attack you need to use these moves that actually get you a reward. And don't worry, doing things this way wont take away your special unique flavor, you just need to learn how to play the game"
In a broader sense my life has been learning how to 'play the game' and not always outright reject a lot of systems like I naturally want to do. And to my surprise, there is a world of unique expression and individuality to be had when 'drawing inside the lines' so to speak.
I hope this understanding gives you hope and encouragement to complete your wonderful machine :)
As a mechanical engineer with many years of industry experience, I know first hand what it feels like to feel in love with a design that may not be entirely practical. I applaud Martin for his willingness to reevaluate his design choices. This has been quite an emotional rollercoaster from when he first announced his bearing housings, I'm glad that the safety factor and the engineering design factor is being considered when the new bearing housings are being ordered. I'm certain that these new bearings as supplied by SKF will be the right choice going forward.
It is very interesting to see the process in such depth, including looking into the manufacturers of the individual parts
Yes indeed. I had no idea of the issues of mounting a shaft that's not going very fast and would expect that such a simple analysis would do.
It was enjoyable for me.
I once had a uni class from the guys at SKF and they showcased their handbook for bearing selection. Having studied it thoroughly I can say its a wonderfull resource and it can be very useful for anyone interested in learning more about bearings.
Incredible to see SKF spending time and supporting this project. Huge shout out to them. I enjoyed every second of this video
Huge shout out for SKF for wasting their very valuable time to pre-elementary educate, without success, a half crazy musician.
Don't forget the 4th reason to watch this video - we love the journey with you Martin, to Marble Machine Magnificence! You are walking out such an amazing journey of engineering and musical excellence 😀
One point not touched on enough is that you were right in the sense that *creativity should never be discounted.*
There is a reason that there is a Patent office because new ideas and new ways of doing things are being invented daily.
But it also makes sense that before implementing a new creative idea that you check with experts first.
*So, there is a place for Tried and True, but if it was only that then we never would have had a Marble Machine!*
Forget the marble machine. This whole series has become an engineering master class. I love it. 🙂
Music Machine Mondays showcased some of the most elite engineering to make exquisite music. Too bad they didn't have video to document their journey from concept to application.
I don't know a single engineer who sees these videos and thinks they've gained an education.
Function over form! We keep learning this lesson... engineering before esthetics. You want this machine to absolutely kick ass? Engineer it! And thanks for bringing us along on this ride... looking forward to a prosperous collaboration with SKF, you couldn't have picked a better partner.
This was fun and good to show. One thing I learnt from another youtuber - Robin Renzetti, "Everything is like rubber"
The idea behind that is that with every force, there is a measurable deflection.
When you think about bearing races as if they are rubber, you can see why your idea of trapping them between bolts might not be such a great idea.
But keep it up, you never stop learning :)
It’s fascinating to watch Martin’s journey from musician to engineer/PM.
Me: Has no need nor likely ever will to purchase industrial grade bearings.
Also me: I'm gonna spend my whole afternoon modeling things in this bearing software.
I didn't finish my bachelor in mechanical engineering, but i learned so much from it. It gives you a different way of thinking, an appreciation for precision, an understanding of the supply chain and so much more. Seeing all these tables from SKF made me nostalgic.
I'm Thrilled that you went to SKF to have this conversation about bearings! This is the kind of input that's vital for the longevity of a mechanical creation. Surround yourself with intelligent people. You'll be surprised what you learn in your interactions with them.
Fascinating how you can see the artist and the engineer fighting within the same person of Martin here! The open-mindedness and pride of the artist and the conservatism (and also pride) of the engineer. Both are important qualities.
Martin isn't an engineer.
Maybe the pride of the engineer can a bit much sometimes 😂
@@thomasbecker9676 Well, he certainly is on the way of becoming one. He already has more engineering skills than some people employed as engineers I have met.
@@EdwinSteiner Trust me, he's not. He's a tinkerer, aping at sticking things together without understanding why things are designed the way they are.
@@EdwinSteiner He's not even close to becoming an engineer.
Personally, I love the simplicity of your design! As you said many of the commenters are very knowledgeable with the engineering conventions, and they're conventions for a reason--I more watch your videos for the art _in_ the engineering rather than the engineering itself. But no matter how beautiful your bearing housing was, there's still beauty in following the conventions.
i love the idea of you getting to talk to the actual manufacturers of the very parts you'll be using, its great to hear from an expert in their field
Martin, you're on a path where you learn a tremendous amount of knowledge. You must and should make mistakes because learning also involves making errors. A bearing housing made from screws is not a negative thing, as it was one of the countless things that helped you learn something. Don't feel bad about the criticism you received. Feel proud that you dare to try different solutions and build prototypes. If you're lucky, you might accidentally invent something completely new.
I'm so glad you had this journey of understanding with the bearing housing. I very nearly used a similar design to your bolt cage for an application that would have been stupidly dangerous
9:03 - "do you have gravity for other planets like the moon and mars?"
martin being martin, as always 😅
In a century or so, I'd imagine that industrial suppliers will actually have things like that in their calculators, when we have an industrial base in space, on the Moon and Mars :)
@@Robinlarsson83 moving our industries and pollution to mars and the moon is such a "human species" way to deal with our problems lol.
In 1965 a Tasmanian scientist, R. Foster, went on Australian news and proclaimed the moon to not be a physical rock but a plasma based phenomenon. Nobody landed on the moon because it is not something that can be landed on. If the American government's lips are moving they are lying to you.
@@lambertstarr1218 Do also consider that industrial production would be *far* cheaper, both monetarily and in terms of waste, if gravity wasn't a concern. Especially if the materials used are collected/processed on-site
@@Roger44477 i'm all for hiding all our industries, garbage and pollution in the dark side of the moon.
I love how you accept the rejection of your invention by somebody who is expert in his field. It is definitely hurting yet you have provided the best info to newbies either students, technician and engineers at the moment when selecting an appropriate bearing
I see your point Martin in experimenting and finding novel solutions to problems, that does happen a lot in the R&D divisions of companies like SKF. I think the issue is that they do have over 100 years of advantage in this particular problem space.
This adds value to so many people's work all over the world. Massive KUDOS!!!
I know it's not a popular thought but part of the reason I enjoyed the first marble machine was its jankyness. Hearing the rattle of the marbles and the vibrations of the machine is enjoyable.
It is refreshing to be humbled. I too have been emotional and bias to my 'original' design which only faced redicule due to tried methods. I learnt so much through debate and ultimately switched sides against myself. But without doing so I wouldn't have learnt, been humbled and importantly made better designs through following norms right from the get go.
I spent many years working in an industrial environment. A good portion of that time was spent in plant maintenance and, since it was a small company, I did the maintenance purchasing as well. I learned very early on in my career that SKF bearings should be used in any situation where failure was too costly. I hesitated to buy anything else. If I sound like a fanboy, so be it.
Martin - ask any mechanic walking onto a shop floor at the start of the shift “what is the first sign that something is not quite right” and they will tell you that “it sounds different today.” I had that same experience many times despite the complexity of the environment. Even the most subtle change evoked a response - my version of the difference between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ music. When you can’t track down exactly what the problem is, consult those who have been thinking about it a lot longer. Another way say that is “if you can’t fix it with a bandage, an aspirin, or a good night’s rest, call the doctor! I’m glad you listened to that advice and I can’t wait to hear your next ‘failure.’
My forehead hurts now because as I've watched your videos, my eyes are wide ooen and my eyebrows raised high in absolute awe at your machines! Oh. My. God! Genius, pure genius! Bravissimo, Sir! Your machines are museum pieces, and I hope there some in musical instrument museums (and engineering museums) now, today! Brilliant doesn't describe what you've done!
I'm amazed what an appropriate to your project connection you found so close to home, so to speak
This is a fantastic discussion! Plus, Martin's willingness to face his failures like this is an incredible show of growth and I love it.
Your approach was very understandable and very common for junior, less experienced, but eager engineers. They enjoy reinventing the wheel, even if it doesn't make sense. This vision will change over time when you will focus on the end result rather than the individuals. Even if software engineering lots of people reinvent existing solutions, some work, some don't.
Great Presentation! Thanks to SKF of Sweden and Roger for his knowledgeable explanation!
Wow This was so interesting! Thank you and thank Roger! Perfect mix of personalities an smart people talking about things they are competent about!
Martin should do a mini concert for the folks at SKF when his machine is finally finished. I think the employees there would love to see an innovative use of their bearings.
Only an artist would say the past 2 machines were failures. Engineers call that prototyping
We don't. We call them failures.
Such a good way to put it.
@@thomasbecker9676 It's only a failure if you give up. They were unsuccessful prototypes, not failures.
Alpha worked. But made a mess.
Beta worked well. But we found flaws in marble management which would have limited music production. Which was deemed unacceptable and set aside.
Now working on Delta. Almost put an experimental bearing on a high speed flywheel. Thankfully the support team pointed out that might be a point of critical existence failure, and received outside consultation to be secure in our decisions. Continuing development.
None of these machines are a failure.
Failure would imply they never accomplished your primary design objective. Entertaining the public, making music, and sharing with the world.
You already know Success Martin. You are complaining you aren't winning harder, because you didn't work smarter when you didn't stand a chance to understand the scope of your task at the outset.
In engineering we call that learning the job by doing.
Marble Machine 3 may still have defects. But 4 will improve upon those flaws.
Perfection is only needed for mass production, as that will introduce its own imperfections, so ironing out the ones you expect needs to be done up front!
If you don't believe me? Look up C&Rsenal. Firearms were produced in their millions, and yet they bring them in for repairs or even redesigns every few years as they worked out the kinks of FINISHED DESIGNS.
@@MorningDusk7734 No, in *real* engineering design, prototypes are defined as prototypes early-on.
I love the idea of that tapered locking system. I do factory Maintenance and repair and used to do electromechanical repair and refurbishment. I can't tell you how many shafts I've seen damaged due to set screws slipping. Not to mention damage from heavy vibration. Also the reason some engineers will tell you to stay away from friction fits is because of several reasons. It's requires a high level of accuracy to achieve a good friction fit. Which increases cost. It needs to be tight enough for your application but not so tight parts are damaged by the fit. And it increases the difficulty of assembly and repair.
from amazed by your work to proud of your mind Martin.
The process that SKF went through to design their bearings is also a form of tinkering. Every innovation is. I believe it helps to accept that others have a lot of experience in what they did for so long. And to be able to stand on the shoulders of other tinkerers can be very helpful. In the end, it comes from one tinkerer with quite a bit of experience in their field … and goes to another tinkerer to benefit from that.
Of course, challenging existing designs is sometimes necessary. But going through the process with Roger and SKF helps to find out if that is the case here or not.
And Martin, there is so much of you in the Marble Machine. It is not necessary to (re-)invent every single part and material.
Sometimes it's hard to accept help from someone you're really familiar with but I'm glad you overcame that barrier and checked with SKF.
First of all, very interesting video which funnily enough coincides with me having to change bearings on my moped later today.
Second, I can't say much about the homemade solution for the bearing as I haven't been around watching it all, but from comments I've seen here I get the feeling alot of people are around just to see a final product. I get people expect to get something out of this all, we've been brought up to expect our investments to pay out be it time, money or whatever. But that's not what art is about, and this project with the marble machine is art, not some commercial thing being made to please everyone.
As for tried and true things working well I do agree to a point, sometimes you just gotta do your own thing no matter what people say. It may work out and it may not, only time and experience will tell. Like I said earlier I can't vouch for the bearing housing, but this is Martins journey to create his machine the way he visualizes it, not anyone else, doesn't matter what I, you, or anyone else thinks about it in the end.
Fantastic, thank you. This was more helpful to me than you could know.
Great move by SKF to get involved. They should give whoever reached out to you a raise.
Tackar SKF för att dela med er av kunskap !!
Lär många med 1 klipp.
Thanks so much Martin for doing this and sharing it with us. Remember that some of us are learning with you, and this is a wonderful help. Thank you so much for giving us these tools we can use, not just to hang up on the wall. Best wishes to you and your success.
Awesome Martin!
Productions like this are why I hope the marble machine project always finds new assemblies to add, and new improvements to existing ones, because the usefulness of the work you are doing spans far beyond just musical devices, and are very inspirational for helping us understand practical engineering. Thanks again!!!
Watching you build a whole career from one crazy contraption never fails to make me smile well done bro.
You forgot the fourth reason why I would want to watch this video. It's a Wintergatan video!
I'm elated to see your continued companionship with SKF! 😀
For whatever reason, I think a Wintergatan + Stuff Made Here colab could be something beautiful.
Wintergatan has REALLY jumped the shark here
If this video was filmed during thursday-friday last week imma be sad. I was sick then. And i am going at SKF's industrial school. I eat in the same house as this video is filmed in everyday "götaholm". If i had the opportunity to meet martin and missed it i am just sad
(I noticed this was when a roller coaster crashed. It was during summer vacation. So not really a missed opportunity. Whould still be fun to meet martin)
I'm pretty sure this was filmed in June, judging by the flags outside.
And martin has already used the lessons he learnt here in his last video, too, so it's been weeks at least either way.
@@Arkios64 they had those flags the whole last week to. they circulate between different countrys where skf has factorys and sometimes they have pride flags. Like the whole pride moth. But allso on random occasions. And sometimes they have blue skf branded flags. Once they had a ukrainian flag on half pole since the skf factory had been bombed in ukraine. They circulate flags like daily
Wonder who they pay just to take up and down flags every day
@@Arkios64 The roller coaster accident that Martin mentions happened on 25 June, and he says that was one week ago. I'd guess it was filmed in late June or early July
Hey Martin, your bearing housing is proof that you are creative. If everyone always used proven and trusted methods, then we wouldn't invent new things. Your housing was perfect for a prototype build, where you can test whatever design you want. Then using the proven methods for the real design unless yours exceeds those methods in their functionality. :)
What an awesome community Martin has built, that we can all become so emotionally invested in a bearing housing design 😂 I love it. I also love that we were right lol
Keep consooming and don't question his "progress."
@@thomasbecker9676 I’m here for the journey and for what I may learn along the way.
@@thomasbecker9676 Says the man with the mental age of 7 that spends hours replying to comments under all of Martin's videos.
@@justsomeredspy Okay, kiddo.
This man can keep us entertained for nearly 30 minutes by just talking about bearings.
Lovely video. I’m working on my own synthesizers, and I’ve also seen the grey area that comes when you’re between art and engineering. and you make a good point that this divide is exactly why people love your projects. Keep being awesome!
I think another argument on Martin’s side is if we ALWAYS use the “tried and true” method then there will never be innovation. I like that Martin tried something new and different. Was it a good idea in the end? Not really, but he learned from it in a rather big way. I think the soul of the marble machine is trying something new whether it’s the whole idea, or the parts that make it up. If we want everything off the shelf, might as well say go buy a few “tried and true” music instruments and make the music the old fashioned way.
So Martin, keep trying new things and if they’re not great ideas the internet will clearly let you know, but hopefully next time we will all consider the nuance and have a reasonable conversation about why something isn’t a great idea (ex: bearing raceway roller coaster) rather than jumping all over you and saying just stick to the “tried and true” method.
The grand conclusion to the brearing housing arc. This video it's actually amazing, i love it! Can't wait to see more progress con the MMXT
I'm very happy you decided to go with the "tried and tested" solution.
Not because I think your design would not work (I think it probably would.)
But "probably will" is still far worse than "almost certainly will".
I really want to see you succeed with the MM3!
So I feel reducing possible sources for issues is great.
As not needing to tweak diy solutions will keep your recources free to continue your progress.
24:31 Martin learns his bearing housing was not good for the final product, maybe prototype only. And why. But a final solution will be needed at some point, likely a tried and tested method.
I stopped watching for a while because I was finding things frustrating, but damn, you've really grown. Proud of you, and I get how hard it must be to balance between the artist and the engineer.
Love the opening shot - standing inside an "artistic" bearing!
thats a brilliant video for the hobbyist/amateur to understand one a very crucial part of buillding simple syszems with rotating parts.
Thank you very much Wintergatan and SKF !!!
I think if people hadn't reacted so emotionally to your first bearing housing you wouldn't have been as adamant about it; sure it wasn't the best long-term solution, but like I said in my first comment, it's part of the process, which is necessary to go through, and then at the end of the day you would make the best decision for your application. If people really want to unsubscribe for something as simple as a few metal rings with some balls in them, they really ought to; one less thing to worry about. I'll still be here tho, I've loved seeing the process this entire time, regardless of the bumps along the way 💛💚
Real friends are honest (and friendly at the same time of course 😉). From 100 ideas, maybe just one is finally a really good idea. And thinking against all standards is the only way to find totally new approaches. So head up and keep on rocking the engineering business! Br from an automotive engineer with over 30 years experience 😊
SKF is definitely a World leader in design and innovation that results in products that, while they are expensive, the quality, design, and precision create immense value.
If SKF reads this I would like you to offer a solution to the pedal concept that allows the pedal to freewheel on the up stroke and only power on the down stroke. A roller clutch and spring would allow this and make it much easier to correct timing because he could use small strokes to correct timing.
Good to see that you have not lost your bearing on reality, Martin!
As an engineering student, I find this very entertaining and helpful.
Great video! I never noticed that SKF is a Swedish manufacturer even though I've intentionally selected SKF bearings for some tasks thanks to their high quality reputation.
I believe there is no other RUclipsr like Martin who has contributed to the world of engineering. I say this because he really did fail hard with his previous machines, and yet he still keeps on uploading thorough videos for us. As a result we, his followers are getting to experience the journey of engineering and lessons that costed martin so much for free.
A bearing is not just a bearing.
A friend of mine did have some issue with a machinery and did start to look into the bearings failure and made up his mind to have another type of bearings just to try. The load, speed and angel of attack was considered and he got out of the trouble with some help from the man at the shop counter. At this moment the machine is running for over two years and did not cope up with more the one before.... nice.
I was racing manager for a motorcycle manufacturer's race team and later a PWC manufacture's team, world championships were at stake. These were extremely high output engines and high load transmissions or jet pumps that would be the equivalent of F-1 or NASCAR equipment. In both applications I always specified SKF bearings and can honestly say I never experienced a bearing failure.
Martin, I don’t know if you read the messages since there are so many, but I wanted to say something because I feel bad about bashing your original bearing housing idea.
I was trying to be as kind as I possibly could at the time, but I can see how hurt you are about the whole thing so I still feel bad.
Anyway, I did want to say that I absolutely accept that there are nuances to design. I work with software and I have been in similar situations where my beautiful solution was not good enough for the problem at hand. No one needed to tell me this. My own testing revealed it. And it huuuuurts! I know it does.
What I have learned is that there is a time and a place. There are critical points where there is no room for nuance. You take the safe/stable/proven option no matter if you like it or not.
I wasn’t thinking about it in that way at the time, but the flywheel is critical in many ways: safety, base performance, if it breaks it may be so difficult to change/repair that it puts the viability of the machine as world-tour-capable at risk, etc.
I think that’s why the response was so aggressive. I think that many of us have taken such a risk because we really liked how elegant our solution was for our priorities at the time to eventually have it fail catastrophically later to more or less dire consequences. And a lot of us felt that familiar feeling when looking at what you were planning.
I will one hundred percent grant that I do not know if your solution would have been good enough or not. I will also admit that I like it for many reasons. Specially aesthetically. It really does look super cool!
But it is in such a critical spot that I couldn’t help myself and was perhaps too harsh in communicating my feelings. Or at least added to a pile that didn’t need adding to.
Either way, I hope you accept my apology. I’m sorry if the way I communicated it was hurtful.
Right now it is impossible to know if it was warranted without investing a significant amount of time on something that will not improve the machine.
Which is something that I have to say I find admirable. You took the advise without proving to yourself if it was warranted or not.
Like I have said, I have been in a position where people have told me that something was not good enough and not once have I taken the advise without testing both options. Some times spending way too much time to do it.
I feel like you and I are similar in some ways and, for people like us, it takes a special kind of strength and maturity to not do things the way we think it’s right because it is not worth risking it. And I really respect you being able to make that decision.
Anyway, you probably don’t read all the comments and, even if you do, this ended up being so long that I wouldn’t blame you if you “nope” away from it 😂 but I think it was worth it to put this down either way.
I fully understand Martin's point of view. I think something that wasn't mentioned is that sometimes it's just more fun to design something yourself. As a programmer I do this a lot, too. I can spend the time learning how to use an existing solution, or I can just try to build it myself and in the process learn about why the existing solutions are the way they are. There are times for either approach, but yeah, a safety-critical part is probably not the best place for such experimentation.
When I was younger, we would sometimes drive by the SKF offices along the freeway in Toronto. I had no idea what the company was about, but the old logo looked like a rotary phone dial to me. Cool to find out what the company is actually about. :)
What I love that I think Martin is trying to say is, if we always go with the tried and tested solutions, we may be missing out on a better solution somewhere down the line. And what Roger responded with was, it all depends on your requirements. I'm with Martin. I think given his requirements, his bearing housing was viable as a temporary solution. But for a permanent solution, there are better methods that take into account all of the requirements instead of the limited ones for the prototype.
I loved this video! So fun to learn along side you!
This was good to know. And it is nice to be more Familiar with Skf
Oh Martin, you just love your bearing housing design so much. This was pretty funny.
So glad to see Martin getting professional help :)
Thanks for this.
Superb video, love the chemistry between you guys.
Excellent video! Very formal and informative. I completely agree with everything Roger explained here
As a creative, who also pretends he’s an engineer, I completely empathize with Martin. The prototyping phase needs to be kept loose, directed, but open to innovation. Which is often the result of mistakes, lack of resources and misinterpretations of design criteria. Most tinkerers need to just bodge together with available materials. It does help us gain insight and experience. Yes, using something that is tried and true is the best route. The problem is that waiting for the perfect part slows down the prototyping and innovation process. I work with high school students in a robotics lab. I see when we are prototyping that their pursuit of perfection too early derails their ability to move forward fluidly towards the next iteration. After they have designed, tested and failed repeatedly then they can tighten the tolerances to create a better system. Stay creative Martin!
This would be such a cool location for a stop on the World Tour, so many connections to the marble machine project and Martin.
Eliminating the extra bearing lock, in excess to the locking bearing gets easier to accept when you think about how, a bearing can be a bearing without locking. So a locking bearing is like 2 different mechnisms in one unit. It IS the locking mechanism. It's what it was desgined to do. To solve that exact problem, in an improvement over an old system.
This made me learn a lot! Thanks Roger. Very good representation of skf!
I love SKF! I used their online tool to find bearings for a university project 😄
I think the Art versus Engineering question is reasonable if all other requirements are of equal importance.
The modern piano is clearly a work of art, but it has a ton of engineering in it in order for it to perform the function it's designed for, which is to play music loud enough to be heard from every seat in a modern concert hall without external amplification, and give the player the ability to control the volume of the sound. The piano's ancestor instruments-the pianoforte and the harpsichord-could not do all of those things, and you couldn't make them do those things just by making them bigger or have more strings.
When Martin put up the list of requirements for the MM3, it looked like a spec for an engineered piece of equipment. The first Marble Machine had enough engineering just to get it to work consistently enough to play one song once or twice without breaking or hurting anybody. The MMX started out life as a "better" version of the MM1, without a complete list of what Martin wanted or needed at the start of that project. We all watched Martin happily build the MMX by just copying MM1 and switching to lots more metal parts, and then came the additional instruments and functions, as well as running into issues that Martin didn't foresee (magnetized marbles) because he couldn't test out his design until he built it.
As for saying that the Engineering solutions don't allow for anything new, I don't agree with that at all. What Roger didn't also say when he mentioned the well tested solutions is that much of that testing comes out of failure. A good example is bridge design. The reason that bridges tend to be one of a limited number of forms is that almost all novel forms of bridges fell down under load. That's how we knew those bridges were not right for those applications. Art wasn't the problem, it was engineering. The MM3 is supposed to make art. The choice of instrumentation on the MM3 is an artistic one. The choice of bearing housing isn't artistic, in exactly the same way that the choice of materials for the frame or shafts isn't artistic. If they were, we should be seeing you try to build the MM3 out of bamboo, or into a living tree, and that device would not be able to go on a world tour with Wintergatan, let alone easily reparable.
All this is to say that the MM3 has to be a reliable machine first, or else we are back to the MMX again.