Dudley Combination Locks

[Orange_Crusader]

Glad to have to aboard, jim.

I hope the ID numbers can tell us a bit more about the lock than just which one it is out of a batch. Surely Dudley would've made enough locks by now to surpass the 6 digits, but maybe not enough to exceed the 2 letter plus number one, if the numbers are also used as ID.

Here's the ID number of the non-opened lock I have:

AK 379631

I'll get the opened lock's one tonight, or tomorrow, If I'm not too busy.

When the dial it turned, and the disks collected, all the moving nubs are all at the dial, approximately, and move with it. The gates, on the other hand, are all at the spots that the moving nubs would be when the combo is put in (when the dial is at 0). When we see the differences in the numbers, we're looking at the gate lining up with the shackle, and the moving nub, along with the dial, being in the right position (a number in the combo). The real differences in the numbers (the 0.5 or 1 digit difference) are really, really small, but are "amplified" by the amounf of space between the dial point and tiny disks. So, a 0.01" difference (wear and tear, or what have you) would like much larger, such as 0.1", which is a lot more noticable. The difference probably isn't that big, but it's a definite help. We otherwise wouldn't really be able to see the differences without a micrometer (I have one around here, I'll take a look as well). If the disks were larger compared to the dial, with the shacle further out, there would similarily be almost no way to see the difference without proper tools. Another unintended flaw, I suppose. It makes this easier, comparably.

rayman, no pics yet, but I'll see what I can do. I'd prefer to scan it in, but the edges are very sharp, and I don't want to scratch the scanner. I'll either sand the edges or cover them to scan.

This Dudley group is getting quite substantial, with occasional and frequent participants, and supporters. For the record, has anyone had such a group for a single task before on LP101? I't would be kinda cool if we were the first, or the biggest.

[Tom304]

hey guys, i just got my sticky points from my dudley lock, it has a black nob, and has a blue background, the sticky's are :
1-4
7-11
13-16
19-21
25-28
30-33
36-39
42-45
48-52
55-58

[WhiteHat]

hey all - just went through and cleaned up the recent spot of newbie bashing - regardless of intentions, I don't think it's worth turning a good 12 page thread like this into mush if we can avoid it.

Cheers,
WH.

[digital_blue]

Now purge will never get his Pepsi.

db

[WhiteHat]

give it to him in this thread: viewtopic.php?t=7516

[jim912]

Using a hacksaw I made a round cut parallel to the base of the cylinder of an old lock, chopping off it's face. (It's a lock that some rat attached on to my bicycle as a prank last year, so I'd be the last one to care about it)

Its guts were mostly what I expected them to be and know of already, except for an additional flat lever at the back where the spring's force controls the pulling of the shackle, and small numbers carved onto all three disks.

Front disk: 28
Back two disks (Not sure of the order): 3, 22

It was logical to assume that those numbers correspond to the actual respective numbers in the combination for the disks. Although I trivially confirmed this to be true in the case of the front dial (28), the other two remains puzzling to me. It's partly my fault, for when I first sawed the lock open, one of the free disks flew out, and as for the other, I'd forgotten its front/back orientation by now. I built a little contraption using Lego, that emulated the locations of the disks with a shaft that fit quite snugly.




The dial turning worked just like in a real lock, and I could see in front of me how the disks were spinning with each turn of the dial. I tried a backwards test to see where the dial would land provided the gates were aligned correctly (pointing in approximately the 57-59 position). However, no matter which way I flipped or rearranged those two back disks, I could not produce a 3 for any of the numbers. The closest I got was either 28,50,20 or 28,20,20 (Where I guess the 20 would approximately be the 22).

Nor do I know which order the two are in now, except that I heard somewhere that combinations don't have all three numbers in an increasing or decreasing sequence. I'm sure this particular theory can be easily proved one way or the other, since the more combinations one can gather the better the Bayesian probability that can be determined. Another possibility is that, for the back numbers anyway, they don't represent the combinations themselves but perhaps some soft of difference from its neighbour to the front.

[digital_blue]

Two things.

1. That is well done! Nice work!

2. Lego has apparenlty gotten much cooler since I was a kid.

db

[pyroman]

Hi, i've been reading through this forum and am intregued by the concept of these locks. I have information on the couple dudley locks i have, but i don't understand how i can possibally get so many different readings for the stick points. I will get the numbers 1-3 as a point, then il chack it again and maybe only get 1-2, then ill get 1-5. This occurs on both locks of mine; one of them new and one about a a year old. Any advice would be appreachiated. Thanks in advance.

[Sabin37]

pyroman, if you get 1-3 for a sticking point and then get 1-5 after wiggling the dial a few times, just use 1-5 for that point. Sometimes for me it would do that on a sticking point that contained one of my combination numbers, so I would guess that one of your numbers might be about 3. Am I right?

Also, there are two different sets of sticking points. 10 points when you turn the dial clockwise and 10 points when you turn the dial counter-clockwise. Some points won't change from CW to CCW, but some will. When you're finding the sticking points for a cetain direction, make sure you collect all the wheels by turning the dial at least twice around before finding any sticking points.

[rayman452]

, thats a nice lego dudley lock. I wish I had one in my hands, so I could play around with it. Jim912, try playing around with this lock more, considering you can see whats happening on the inside, and may find something intersting. I managed to get my hands on a dudley lock , but it was stolen by these girls... . When I get it back, can you get a few more angled shots of the wheels, so I know how to cut it? Sabin37, you can add a little tag to your siggy, saying Dudley Cracking Team...

[pyroman]

ok, heres the points i get from the 2 lcoks i could find. i only know the combination to one of them however. The one lock is about 1.5 years old and the other quite new.


Blue dial, "A" AL162509 (combo NOT known)

CW CCW

2-5 2.5-5.5
8-11 8-11
14-17 14-17
20-23 20-23.5
26-29 27-29
32-35 32.5-35
38-41 39-41
44-47 44-47.5
50-53 51-53.5
56-59 56.5-59.5

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blue dial, "I" AK761462 (combo known)

CW CCW

1-4 2-5
7-9.5 7-11
13-16 13-17
18-22 19-22
24-27 24-28
30-34 30-35
36-40 37-41
43-46 42.5-46.5
49-53 49-52.5
55-57 55-58.5

I have a feeling these pojnts arn'y accurate, but if they can help at all im glad... i plan to read more on these locks and hopefully make a contribution to the project. I have an extencive background in computer security and defeating every security sustem my school has implemented, but ive never worked with physical locks. Sabin37, about the number "3" in the combo, im not sure as that was the lock i dont have the combo for!

[rayman452]

Ok guys, I have a geography ISU essay due this week, so Im going to be spending more time on that. Im only getting a 80-85% in that subject, so I want to raise it. Im going to get these combinations out soon, after I recover from this flying dudley lock which I tried taking to my drill press flew off and almost killed me.

Recovering from my near death experience, and am waiting to use the school dremel instead.

Rayman452

[TOWCH]

I'm having a hard time following the theory behind using the sticking points for anything. Didn't someone measure the false notches and find they were the same width as the real gate? I think your energy would be better invested coming up with a device to accurately measure give in the shackle.

[neopran]

Hey I'm new to this forum. But I have been following this thread for a while. I want to add something about the ID number in the bottom of a Dudley lock. I remember when I started high school 3 years ago, I got my lock from the school. I had an older friend going there and he forgot his combo so we went to the vice principal to get me a lock and to get his combo(he also got his lock from the school). My point is that the VP pulled out a book that said Dudley on it and lo' and behold it had lots of ID numbers in it. We found my friend's ID and his combo. To my surprise it worked.

I don't know if this might help but there is a MASTER BOOK out there that has ID numbers and combos in it.

Anyways I also have a Dudley lock and so does at least 75% of my school so there's lots of them. I will try to get my hands on some sticky points tomorrow.

Oh I also want to help you guys as much as I can.

[Orange_Crusader]

I'm not sure whether the gates on the 2 "loose" disks were measured yet. The ones of the last disk were measured, and yes, they are the same. That's partially why I'm still a bit confused about why there's a difference in the sticking points I'll take a pair of calipers to my lock sometime and find out. The false gates don't look like the real ones at all, they're more of a notch, the shape is different. Check out page 8 for the scans d_b took.

Rayman, a drill press? I used a metal file on mine, a screwdriver, and Vice-Grips. It took about 15 min, and it sort of lacks the cleanliness of a Dremel job, but it works just fine, no damage to the important parts of the lock. A bit of exercise, and about 10 "tabs" from the lip around the dial face, so I can temporarily re-attach it, to get the exact points and whatnot.