Online since 2002. Over 3300 puzzles, 2600 worldwide members, and 270,000 messages.

TwistyPuzzles.com Forum

It is currently Wed Apr 23, 2014 4:18 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 157 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2013 2:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Yes, I mean "making", as in getting my proverbial hands dirty. This one is well over due. All said while my left hand is half white as its covered in dried up superglue from sealing my latest Multi Gear Cube Kit.

The plan for tomorrow is to start with the core. I.e. this part:
Image

Here is the original thread:
http://twistypuzzles.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19622

First the above image is too simple. The core will need screws to tension the 3x3x3 AND it will need screws to properly tension the 5x5x5. So the plan is to split the core not into the 7 parts shown but into 19 parts. There will be the central spider (or ball) core, six 3x3x3 arms, six 5x5x5 arms, and six caps to cover the outer screws.

The inner 3x3x3 arms will be screwed into the central core using M3 allen screws/bolts. However the top of the 3x3x3 arm needs to contain a hole to receive the screw/bolt which attaches the 5x5x5 arm. To accomplish this, the plan is to include a cutout on the side of the 3x3x3 arm just big enough to allows the M3 allen bolts to be inserted. It will then be tightened by inserting an allen wrench in through the screw hole that is there waiting for the bolt which attaches the 5x5x5 arm. The M3 bolts screw into a hole that is 2.5mm in diameter. The ones I have on hand are tightened with a 2.5mm allen wrench. A 2.5mm allen wrench does NOT fit into a 2.5mm hole, though a 2mm allen wrench does. I tested this today. So I see a couple options:

(1) I could use a larger bolt for the 5x5x5 arms. One which screws into a hole large enough to accommodate a 2.5mm allen wrench. Looking at the above table I think a M3.5 would be large enough. Though I'm not sure how common this size is. Maybe I'd need to go to M4.
(2) I could find M3 bolts which are tightened with a 2mm allen wrench, if such a thing exists.

This table tells me M3 takes a 2.5mm allen wrench and I was under the impression that was pretty universal. However I found this.

Image

Which seems to imply that "s" the allen wrench size for these M3 screws is 2mm. Am I reading things correctly?

For a M3 screws I use the following:

- 2.5mm diameter hole which is screwed into.
- 3.5mm diameter hole in the part which is attached via the screw. This lets the threads pass through freely but not the head of the screw.
- 6.0mm diameter hole to hold the head of the screw.

I believe I have enough information here to work out the sizes I'd need if I used something other then an M3 screw but I'm certainly open to any advice anyone has on this subject if they have experience with a larger screw size.

And I'm very tempted to order a few of these:
http://blobjector.com/product/m3-x-8mm-button-head-bolt-black/
I'm just highly skeptical that they actually use a 2mm allen wrench. Thoughts?

Thanks,
Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2013 3:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
wwwmwww wrote:
And I'm very tempted to order a few of these:
http://blobjector.com/product/m3-x-8mm-button-head-bolt-black/
I'm just highly skeptical that they actually use a 2mm allen wrench. Thoughts?

In your image, the "d" value (diameter of shaft) is less than 3mm per other threads on this topic. If you look at the inset allen wrench inset compared to the shaft, it's definitely even smaller. 2mm sounds pretty reasonable to me.

I'm not sure what you have available easily but I much prefer Torx screws to Phillips and Allen head screws because they don't cam out.


Perhaps it's a bit off-topic but how'd the part sealing go?

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2013 3:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:21 pm
Location: Marin, CA
Carl, I cannot wait to see this progress.

Are you saying you'll be getting your hands dirty in CAD, or have you printed parts already??

_________________
Jason Smith posted here as 'io' through 2012.
Visit Jason Smith's PuzzleForge on Shapeways!
Jason Smith's Puzzles - YouTube Channel.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2013 4:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
bmenrigh wrote:
In your image, the "d" value (diameter of shaft) is less than 3mm per other threads on this topic.
I thought "d" was 3mm for M3. See this table. Not sure where you see it listed as "less then 3mm".
bmenrigh wrote:
If you look at the inset allen wrench inset compared to the shaft, it's definitely even smaller. 2mm sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Oh I agree it looks like its drawn to be 2mm. I just personally haven't seen any M3 screws that didn't use a 2.5mm allen wrench so this struck me as odd. I'm more then willing to order a few to play with.
bmenrigh wrote:
I'm not sure what you have available easily but I much prefer Torx screws to Phillips and Allen head screws because they don't cam out.
I generally go to the internet for screws as most hardware stores I've been in have a rather limited selection of M3 screws. Can you point me to a M3 Torx bolt (or something similar in size) where the tool used for tightening will fit through the hole which the bolt is screwed into? An M3 bolt driven by a 2mm allen wrench seems to fit that bill but I'm game to trying other options. I did a quick peek at Torx on line and I think the Torx Screw driver would likely be too big in the cases I saw.
bmenrigh wrote:
Perhaps it's a bit off-topic but how'd the part sealing go?
Well for the most part. I should have worn gloves as my hands are a mess and I shouldn't have tried to clean the container out in the sink afterwards. It too is a mess. Fortunately it was my "puzzle room" and not my wife's kitchen. So I'll have to think for a bit how to clean things up. I sealed my copy of The Tetrarhons first. Here is what they look like after they were sealed:
Attachment:
Tetrarhons.png
Tetrarhons.png [ 447.2 KiB | Viewed 4433 times ]

I did sort of screw up one of them. I felt that it had too much glue on it so I sat it in acetone by itself for a while. The glue that was on it didn't want to re-dissolve and became very jelly-like. I rubbed it off as best I could and then re-dipped the part and no mater what I did when it dried the jellied glue just turned very white... not clear. So I have one part that has what is sort of a tie-dye pattern. The deep blue dye is still there and can been seen when the part soaks in acetone but this is the best I can get it now. It doesn't hurt the function any.
Attachment:
Blue.png
Blue.png [ 449.13 KiB | Viewed 4433 times ]

So when I moved on to the Multi Gear Cube Kit I had learned to not dip anything more then once. They all look fine. I also didn't dip the core or any of the gears as I was afraid the glue would interfere with function. So just the parts with tiles were dipped and I tried to just dip the parts of those pieces that had tiles. Still some of the glue got onto the feet of these pieces and I can tell it makes a bit tighter fit. Still I think once I break it in all will be fine but it makes me very happy I didn't dip the gears. I also have some sprayable clear automotive lacquer which I think I'll try on version 3.0 once I have that printed. I think it may work just as well or better and maybe less prone to making a mess. The only negative with regard to the sealing that I could see on the Multi Gear Cube Kit was the black parts did release a very small amount of dye into the acetone after a while. Its not noticeable enough that I think it would show in pictures but I can tell the colors were dulled just a bit by the sealing process. I haven't taken any more picture of the cube yet as I quit after I broke the core. But over all I'd still say it looks 100 times better then my first one.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Last edited by wwwmwww on Sun Nov 10, 2013 5:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2013 4:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
JasonSmith wrote:
Are you saying you'll be getting your hands dirty in CAD, or have you printed parts already??
In CAD... the "hands dirty" comment was made as I was a bit heated due to another thread. I've had sore thumbs for weeks before and my hands are currently covered in white scales made up of dry super glue. So someone's opinion of Shapeways really rubbed me the wrong way. Let's not bring that into this thread.

I intend to share the CAD process here and once I have parts the cleaning, dying, assembly, and stickering process as well.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2013 4:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
wwwmwww wrote:
bmenrigh wrote:
In your image, the "d" value (diameter of shaft) is less than 3mm per other threads on this topic.
I thought "d" was 3mm for M3. See this table. Not sure where you see it listed as "less then 3mm".
For M3 screws 3mm is the size of the metal shaft before threads are cut. Calipers will show the width of an M3 screw to be somewhat less than 3mm.

We discussed this a bit here: http://twistypuzzles.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=303423#p303423

I'm glad the sealing wasn't a complete failure :-)

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2013 4:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:21 pm
Location: Marin, CA
wwwmwww wrote:
JasonSmith wrote:
Are you saying you'll be getting your hands dirty in CAD, or have you printed parts already??
In CAD... the "hands dirty" comment was made as I was a bit heated due to another thread. I've had sore thumbs for weeks before and my hands are currently covered in white scales made up of dry super glue. So someone's opinion of Shapeways really rubbed me the wrong way. Let's not bring that into this thread.

I intend to share the CAD process here and once I have parts the cleaning, dying, assembly, and stickering process as well.

Carl


I will definitely be following this, and I think it's a great idea to bring everyone along on a difficult design and build like this.

_________________
Jason Smith posted here as 'io' through 2012.
Visit Jason Smith's PuzzleForge on Shapeways!
Jason Smith's Puzzles - YouTube Channel.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 12:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
I didn't get as far as I planned but I did at least get started. Here is what I have so far. Here is the ball core.
Attachment:
BallCore.png
BallCore.png [ 119.33 KiB | Viewed 4345 times ]


Here it is with 4 of the 3x3x3 arms attached.
Attachment:
333Arms.png
333Arms.png [ 66.99 KiB | Viewed 4345 times ]


This is being designed to be 80mm x 80mm x 80mm and to use 12 of these bolts.
http://blobjector.com/product/m3-x-8mm-button-head-bolt-black/

You'll also need a 2mm allen wrench. You slide the bolt in though the side of the arms (see the cut out). It then slides down a cylinder cut inside the part and is screwed into the core by inserting the allen wrench though the 2.5mm hole in the top of the part. These very same holes will later receive bolts themselves which will be used to attach the 5x5x5 arms. So you'd want to assemble the 3x3x3 break it in and tension it properly before you attach the 5x5x5 parts because once the 5x5x5 parts are in place you won't have access to the inner bolts any longer without taking the puzzle apart again.

I had hoped to finish the 5x5x5 arms and the caps today but I'll try to work on them this week. I'll hold off adding fillets unto I have all the parts "sketched" out. But I'm pulling the critical dimensions off of my POV-Ray model so I shouldn't have to do much in the way of back tracking as I go.

Enjoy,
Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 12:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
wwwmwww wrote:
But I'm pulling the critical dimensions off of my POV-Ray model so I shouldn't have to do much in the way of back tracking as I go.
Shouldn't have spoke so soon. When I look ahead a few parts, I see a conflict with the 3x3x3 face centers. Both of these parts will need to be tweaked. I'll take core of both another day.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 1:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
wwwmwww wrote:
You slide the bolt in though the side of the arms (see the cut out). It then slides down a cylinder cut inside the part and is screwed into the core by inserting the allen wrench though the 2.5mm hole in the top of the part. These very same holes will later receive bolts themselves which will be used to attach the 5x5x5 arms.
Interesting screw accommodation design! Once the 3x3x3 screws are inserted and tightened, is there a nylon insert that goes on top of them for the second screw to thread into?

Also, I looked up Torx machine screws. For anything specialty my go-to is always McMaster-Carr.

The have button-head Torx M3 screws from 4mm to 16mm in length. The head diameter is the same 5.7mm as what you picked out:
http://www.mcmaster.com/#torx-socket-head-cap-screws/=pbtgqw

Allen screws will be almost as good though.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 12:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Brandon Enright wrote:
Interesting screw accommodation design!
Thanks. I may have just made it more interesting. Certainly more complicated to model. See below.
Brandon Enright wrote:
Once the 3x3x3 screws are inserted and tightened, is there a nylon insert that goes on top of them for the second screw to thread into?
No, that wasn't the plan. The screw threads directly into the hole that the allen wrench fits through. That is why I need a M3 screw which is tightened with a 2mm allen wrench. In the design above there are 2 and a fraction mm of material to thread into. Your comment made be question rather that was enough. So I've now come up with a new method to get the screw in that leaves nearly 7 mm of material. So now all of the 8mm screw can be used. Keep in mind there will be 1mm of material that it must pass through in the 5x5x5 arm yet to be designed.
Brandon Enright wrote:
Also, I looked up Torx machine screws. For anything specialty my go-to is always McMaster-Carr.

The have button-head Torx M3 screws from 4mm to 16mm in length. The head diameter is the same 5.7mm as what you picked out:
http://www.mcmaster.com/#torx-socket-head-cap-screws/=pbtgqw
I haven't ordered screws yet and these appear identical in size... however what is the diameter of the Torx Driver that is needed. Will it fit through the 2.5mm hole and allow the screw to be tightened? If yes... then I'd be happy to use these. If no... things get more complicated.

So I've now corrected the issues I spotted after I finished yesterday. Those being...

(1) I only left enough room for the 3x3x3 face center shell layer under the 3x3x3 arm. The feet of the 3x3x3 edges and 3x3x3 corners also needs to fit under the 3x3x3 face centers. I didn't spot this as my POV-Ray model didn't have a ball core. This was fixed by making the ball smaller.

(2) The square foot on the bottom of the 3x3x3 arms wouldn't have fit though the hole in the 3x3x3 face centers. Again I didn't see this at first as I had a different design for locking the arms on the POV-Ray model. I changed to the square foot as I had more room to play with a ball core and I believe the square foot will be more robust then the original design. This is fixed by using a smaller square foot.

Here is the current ball core:
Attachment:
BallCore2.png
BallCore2.png [ 91.82 KiB | Viewed 4246 times ]


Here is the new 3x3x3 arm:
Attachment:
333Arms2.png
333Arms2.png [ 62.71 KiB | Viewed 4246 times ]


The screw is now inserted at an angle and then rotated into position about its tip. Here is the cut out that I created to remove material from the 3x3x3 arm. The top cylinder traces the path of the screw head as it is inserted into the part at an angle. The head will then hit a stop and from there it is rotated up into the central screw shaft of the part.
Attachment:
ScrewCutOut.png
ScrewCutOut.png [ 77.41 KiB | Viewed 4246 times ]


Here is a cross section of the two parts so far.
Attachment:
CrossSection1.png
CrossSection1.png [ 73.29 KiB | Viewed 4246 times ]


And the total assembly so far.
Attachment:
Puzzle2.png
Puzzle2.png [ 118.47 KiB | Viewed 4246 times ]


With any luck tomorrow night I'll work on the 5x5x5 arm.

Goodnight,
Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 4:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:19 am
I've got a question regarding those virtually "hidden" 3x3x3 parts. While solving 3x3x3 circle cube LU, RU, FU and BU inner (circle) edges give us information about U central piece orientation. Same thing happens with Crazy 4x4x4 II parts, circle edges gives us information about 4x4x4 center pieces.

So in other words we can have super-stickered cube without actually using different set of stickers. In case of your puzzle, will we be able to see somehow orientation of both type of centers just by looking at rest of the puzzle or will it require different set of stickers?

Krystian


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Let me reverse the order of your questions...
madartilect wrote:
In case of your puzzle, will we be able to see somehow orientation of both type of centers just by looking at rest of the puzzle or will it require different set of stickers?
Both types of face centers reveal their orientation without super stickers on this puzzle. Note both pieces types have 4 exposed surfaces that will be stickered. Here is the 3x3x3 face center:
Image
And here is the 5x5x5 face center:
Image
madartilect wrote:
So in other words we can have super-stickered cube without actually using different set of stickers.
Not quite... there is a problem (issue might be a better word) with the 3x3x3 edges. Seen here:
Image
We have 2 opposite faces which are stickered. This is enough information to tell you which slice layer the edge belongs to and even enough information to allow you to place the piece in the slice layer with the correct orientation. However all 4 of those edges are now identical so you can't tell which one is which. So while the piece has a single correct orientation in the solved state it doesn't have a single correct position. This can be fixed with super stickers. I have another solution in mind which is effectively the same thing.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2013 12:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Some more parts finished. These are the 5x5x5 arms:
Attachment:
555Arms1.png
555Arms1.png [ 85.5 KiB | Viewed 4113 times ]

These are the caps:
Attachment:
Cap1.png
Cap1.png [ 38.86 KiB | Viewed 4113 times ]


A cross section to check the parts together:
Attachment:
CrossSection2.png
CrossSection2.png [ 90.26 KiB | Viewed 4113 times ]

And the finished assembly of these parts:
Attachment:
Puzzle3.png
Puzzle3.png [ 140.46 KiB | Viewed 4113 times ]


This is one of the 10 pieces types (the core) of the Multi-5x5x5 finished (well aside from filleting). This amounts to the most complex 1x1x1 that I have yet seen. It contains 19 parts and 12 screws and nothing even turns yet. Just my kind of madness. *Big Grin*

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2013 10:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:16 pm
Location: Somewhere Else
I'm not sure why you need two screws in each arm. Can you explain?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2013 1:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Jared wrote:
I'm not sure why you need two screws in each arm. Can you explain?
The original POV-Ray model just had one. Though I knew that one would never be printed... it was made simply to prove the concept. It is entirely possible that one screw in each arm may produce a functioning puzzle. Keep in mind these things aren't inexpensive to print so I certainly want to maximize my chances I get a working puzzle out of the gate. With 1 screw, I can tension the inner 3x3x3 layer but many of the outer face pieces wouldn't be able to be adjusted if they were too loose or too tight after the inner adjustment was made. With 2 screws, I design in some added flexibility and at this stage that added flexibility costs me nothing. To me the cost of 6 extra screws is nothing. In short the goal now is different then it was when I made the first design. Now the intent is to maximize my chances that I end up with not just a functional puzzle... but one that functions as well as possible. You already see that the pieces I'm designing are NOT exact copies of the POV-Ray pieces. There will be other design changes along the way that currently exist only in my head. The process I'm going through here sort of feels like a core dump to me. I have all the "stuff" taking up resources in my head and until I dump all of it into SolidWorks and save the STL files those resources are tied up. The weak part is the link between my brain and SolidWorks as all that info must be conveyed through mouse clicks and pressing keys on a keyboard. I'm still waiting for the day I can just stick a USB drive in and say "save".

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Thu Nov 14, 2013 12:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
No new SolidWorks today. However I did play around with my POV-Ray model. I was trying to work out one of the cuts I want to change and realized there are really quite a few changes to make. I've learned alot since I made that model and I took numerous short cuts (i.e. I was lazy) and I'm going to fix all those "weaknesses" this time around. I just realized one of the short cuts I took with the 3x3x3 edges leaves an unnecessary void inside the puzzle which I can now fill. But that means another change to the 3x3x3 arms which are already made. So yes there will be some back tracking. I'm going to make the 3x3x3 Face Centers and 3x3x3 Edges next before I go back and change what I've already done as that may reveal other changes.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Thu Nov 14, 2013 1:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
wwwmwww wrote:
[...]I just realized one of the short cuts I took with the 3x3x3 edges leaves an unnecessary void inside the puzzle which I can now fill. But that means another change to the 3x3x3 arms which are already made. So yes there will be some back tracking. I'm going to make the 3x3x3 Face Centers and 3x3x3 Edges next before I go back and change what I've already done as that may reveal other changes.

Hey Carl, I don't know SolidWorks so I may be completely wrong here but... I'm pretty sure SolidWorks allows parametric modeling in a way that allows you to adjust parameters really early in the the design and in real-time see how that change affects the rest of the puzzle. Eitan shows this a bit in his Twisty Puzzles à la Vi video -- especially starting at 3:25 where he's able to adjust the angle of a cut in the 2D sketch and SolidWorks is able to carry that parameter through all subsequent steps and show the part getting updated immediately.

I too tend to take a linear approach to things, getting everything right and finished and perfect before moving on. For the Real5x5x5 though I think you're going to have to do a lot of fine tuning and seeing your changes in real-time could really help you spot gotchas and possible issues. Have you thought about building the whole puzzle parametrically similar to your POV-Ray design and then adjusting from there?

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
wwwmwww wrote:
I just realized one of the short cuts I took with the 3x3x3 edges leaves an unnecessary void inside the puzzle which I can now fill.
Actually no I can't. I was thinking I could fill this space (indicated by arrow) by making the 3x3x3 arm cylindrical further up. Now I see why I shouldn't do that. Do you?
Attachment:
Gap.png
Gap.png [ 47.42 KiB | Viewed 3908 times ]
Brandon Enright wrote:
Hey Carl, I don't know SolidWorks so I may be completely wrong here but... I'm pretty sure SolidWorks allows parametric modeling in a way that allows you to adjust parameters really early in the the design and in real-time see how that change affects the rest of the puzzle. Eitan shows this a bit in his Twisty Puzzles à la Vi video -- especially starting at 3:25 where he's able to adjust the angle of a cut in the 2D sketch and SolidWorks is able to carry that parameter through all subsequent steps and show the part getting updated immediately.

I too tend to take a linear approach to things, getting everything right and finished and perfect before moving on. For the Real5x5x5 though I think you're going to have to do a lot of fine tuning and seeing your changes in real-time could really help you spot gotchas and possible issues. Have you thought about building the whole puzzle parametrically similar to your POV-Ray design and then adjusting from there?
Great suggestion. POV-Ray is basically a programming language and it forces one to parametize just about everything. I believe what Eitan shows at 3:25 though is some crafty editing and not really a real-time feature of SolidWorks. Still SolidWorks does allow alot of parameterization that I simply haven't used and I don't think I know how to use some of it. Actually I'm sure I've just scratched the surface of what the program is capable of. 99% of the features simply aren't needed for puzzle making and I'm learning about new features all the time. Ideally I think one could parametize all the cuts and put all the cuts in a single file. Then you could use a split function to pull out any given part to fine tune... say add fillets to, hollow, etc. This may actually be doable. But I'm afraid the file would get very large and it could be really slow to do much with it. I typically build each part in its own file and have many fewer cuts in each so they are easier to play with and generally much faster. I believe it is possible to make general parameters that are shared between separate part files but at least at the moment I don't know how to do that. I really should learn but I'm not sure I'll learn in time to help much here. Much of the really hard trial and error has already been done making the POV-Ray file. Granted some of the tweaks I want to make may need to be undone as I discover new problems or maybe those tweaks will need to be taken in the opposite direction but I'll get there one way or the other. There are only 10 piece types and most of those aren't that complicated by themselves. The hardest part to design and the piece that is most likely affected by tweaking other parts is the 3x3x3 corner. So I should be able to test design changes without too much pain.

In Eitan's video at the 5:17 mark he states each new puzzle takes upwards of 4 to 5 hours to design. Clearly I'm doing something wrong. I suspect most of my puzzles have taken me 10x that amount of time. And I've easily spent twice that already on just the first piece type of this puzzle. I find the process fun and I enjoy it so that isn't a complaint. Its just an observation that I'm slow.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Jarrow, England
Parametrisation in 3D design programs like SolidWorks and Inventor is immensely powerful. If you use names for dimensions, and formulae linking them together, then you can do "what if" tests at any time during the model design. For example, when I was doing my design of the Decaphobic, I can easily change the curvature of the "tetrahedron", the sizes of the donor cubies, the sizes of the holes in them, the shell thickness etc. Since these are mostly all liked by formulae, changing one does not break something else. It's fascinating just to play around with these parameter to see how it all fits together.

It does not always work however, as it you push one dimension too far, it may cause an error when the program tries to re-calculate something like a shell or a bevel.

_________________
My Shapeways Shop: http://www.shapeways.com/shops/gus_shop

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 4:50 am
Location: The Netherlands
wwwmwww wrote:
wwwmwww wrote:
(...) lot's of blah blah :wink: (...)

In Eitan's video at the 5:17 mark he states each new puzzle takes upwards of 4 to 5 hours to design. Clearly I'm doing something wrong. I suspect most of my puzzles have taken me 10x that amount of time. And I've easily spent twice that already on just the first piece type of this puzzle. I find the process fun and I enjoy it so that isn't a complaint. Its just an observation that I'm slow.

Carl


Obviously, you're a perfectionist. You'll have to figure out for yourself if that's a gift or a curse...

_________________
- Eric


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Gus wrote:
Parametrisation in 3D design programs like SolidWorks and Inventor is immensely powerful.
Oh I agree 100%. I'm just saying I'm still learning SolidWorks. I've had no formal training and I haven't purchased any SolidWorks for dummy books so I'm not certain how to take advantage of all of these capabilities. I know how to use some of it and I'll continue to play and hopefully get better.
1NSAN3 wrote:
wwwmwww wrote:
(...) lot's of blah blah :wink: (...)

Obviously, you're a perfectionist. You'll have to figure out for yourself if that's a gift or a curse...
Thanks... I think. Though I'm 44 years old, I think I've figured out just about all I'm going to figure out on that front. LOL!!! Not that I'm a perfectionist. I just like to consider myself a problem solver and for some reason I seem to enjoy torturing myself with problems most simply have enough sense to walk away from. I think the lot's of blah blah is FAR more accurate. I find it difficult to watch my own YouTube videos for example. I simply TALK way too much.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
wwwmwww wrote:
I think the lot's of blah blah is FAR more accurate. I find it difficult to watch my own YouTube videos for example. I simply TALK way too much.
I find it very hard to watch my Youtube videos too. I talk too much and end up annoying myself. I wonder if this is common?

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 3:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:21 pm
Location: Marin, CA
Brandon and Carl, I enjoy the talking. Remember some people want to follow your thought process more completely.

_________________
Jason Smith posted here as 'io' through 2012.
Visit Jason Smith's PuzzleForge on Shapeways!
Jason Smith's Puzzles - YouTube Channel.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 11:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Got back to SolidWorks today. I now have the 3x3x3 face centers designed.
Attachment:
333Face1.png
333Face1.png [ 183.32 KiB | Viewed 3675 times ]


And the puzzle so far. 2 of the 10 piece types complete.
Attachment:
Puzzle4.png
Puzzle4.png [ 285.76 KiB | Viewed 3675 times ]


Yes, I've also gone back and added fillets, chamers on the screw holes, and started hollowing parts. I should be able to get the 3x3x3 edge done tomorrow.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 12:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:54 am
Hey Carl

I understand pretty much nothing about all your updates. But I want to encourage you by saying that I'm really really really looking forward to seeing this come to reality and hopefully to one day play with one of these. Please...continue :lol:

_________________
Youtube Twisty Puzzling
Blogger Twisty Puzzling - Simple Solutions for Puzzling Twisties
Tutorials: Pitcher Octo-Star Cube | GERANIUM | Wheel of Wisdom


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 12:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
rline wrote:
I understand pretty much nothing about all your updates.
Well that is why I'm trying to post mostly pictures. They say a picture is worth a 1000 words so I was hoping it would be fairly obvious what I was doing. As for why the pieces look the way they do see my earlier thread. And if you still have questions PLEASE ask. The point of this thread is to share the process of making this in a way that I am hoping most can follow.
rline wrote:
But I want to encourage you by saying that I'm really really really looking forward to seeing this come to reality and hopefully to one day play with one of these. Please...continue :lol:
Thanks... We'll get there... slowly but surely.

I didn't get as much done today as I had hoped. I finished the black and white set of Tetrarhons today and I also assembled one of my Doctor Skewb version 2.0 puzzles today. The assembly process is a bit more difficult then the version 1.0 puzzle but its breaking in MUCH MUCH easier. So I think there will be significant improvement in the turning after its fully broken in.

So after I had done the above, I did get this far modeling one part of the 3x3x3 Edge piece.
Attachment:
333Edge1.PNG
333Edge1.PNG [ 125.04 KiB | Viewed 3591 times ]


I'll try to finish it up tomorrow. Here is the POV-Ray original so you can see how far I got.
Image

Good night,
Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 11:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 4:50 am
Location: The Netherlands
This is such an awesome idea, and as far as a "dummy" as myself can see, you're a very talented designer as well!
I'm a definite follower of this thread.

Cheers

_________________
- Eric


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
1NSAN3 wrote:
This is such an awesome idea, and as far as a "dummy" as myself can see, you're a very talented designer as well!
I'm a definite follower of this thread.
Thanks!!! No update today. I got tied up with a shipment from Shapeways. See here.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
wwwmwww wrote:
wwwmwww wrote:
I just realized one of the short cuts I took with the 3x3x3 edges leaves an unnecessary void inside the puzzle which I can now fill.
Actually no I can't. I was thinking I could fill this space (indicated by arrow) by making the 3x3x3 arm cylindrical further up. Now I see why I shouldn't do that. Do you?

I don't :?

As a square shaft, that gap would be filled by pieces that you've deleted because they aren't really needed. If instead you make the shaft a cylinder it seems like you wouldn't run into any problems or pieces you have to delete. Can you discuss what made you go with the square shafts and what issue(s) it avoids?

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 2:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:52 am
Brandon Enright wrote:
wwwmwww wrote:
wwwmwww wrote:
I just realized one of the short cuts I took with the 3x3x3 edges leaves an unnecessary void inside the puzzle which I can now fill.
Actually no I can't. I was thinking I could fill this space (indicated by arrow) by making the 3x3x3 arm cylindrical further up. Now I see why I shouldn't do that. Do you?

I don't :?

As a square shaft, that gap would be filled by pieces that you've deleted because they aren't really needed. If instead you make the shaft a cylinder it seems like you wouldn't run into any problems or pieces you have to delete. Can you discuss what made you go with the square shafts and what issue(s) it avoids?


Maybe I know what he means. Filling this will not inhibit that shaft from turning. But turning the pieces around the other shaft 90┬░ next to it would be blocked. So turning one of the 5x5x5 slices or in other words a face of the inner 3x3x3 will not work anymore.
Well this gap is so small and slim that probably it would work. But it would result in a hard to turn puzzle if you were really to produce/print this.

_________________
Life is simple.
eat. sleep. train. repeat.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 7:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
First, apologizes for the slow progress this week. Most week days, I'm beat by the time I get home from work.
Brandon Enright wrote:
I don't :?

As a square shaft, that gap would be filled by pieces that you've deleted because they aren't really needed. If instead you make the shaft a cylinder it seems like you wouldn't run into any problems or pieces you have to delete. Can you discuss what made you go with the square shafts and what issue(s) it avoids?
Excellent question...

Let's start with what we have at the moment:
Attachment:
Gap1.png
Gap1.png [ 122.26 KiB | Viewed 3248 times ]

Here you see a curved gap between the square shaft and the 3x3x3 edge piece. If you expand the closest shaft out to fill this void, it will become cylindrical. This would allow the edge piece to rotate with the green face center but would block rotation about the red face center. You can make the shaft cylindrical but then the curved portion of the 3x3x3 edge needs to become flat so that both types of rotation are allowed. In fact this is exactly what is done with the foot of the 3x3x3 edge piece as seen here:
Attachment:
Gap2.png
Gap2.png [ 142.7 KiB | Viewed 3248 times ]


In BOTH cases there are gaps. And in BOTH cases those gaps can be filled. Let's look at the cylindrical shaft / flat 3x3x3 edge case first.
Attachment:
Gap3.png
Gap3.png [ 166.2 KiB | Viewed 3248 times ]

Here is what it would look like if I filled that gap.
Attachment:
Gap4.png
Gap4.png [ 165.14 KiB | Viewed 3248 times ]

There are now 4 very small parts which are technically part of the 3x3x3 face center directly below them. I can't connect them physically to this part or I wouldn't have any way I could assemble the puzzle. The 3x3x3 arm needs to be inserted down though the center of the 3x3x3 face center. There are other problems with this design. Those new small pieces move over the hole I made to insert the screw into the 3x3x3 arm. They could easily fall in, or worse partially fall in and jam the rotation. And even without these small pieces the surface of the 3x3x3 edge piece now rotates directly against the screw cut out. This could create an unevenness to the rotational friction as the pieces rotate that could feel like a clicking mechanism built into the puzzle. I'd prefer the puzzle feel like it rotated smoothly. The other issue I see with this design, I've removed material from the 3x3x3 arm piece which has already been partially compromised by the insertion of that screw cut out. This is going to be a bigger then normal puzzle and I want the core to be as strong as possible. So, I'd rather have the extra material that the square shaft offers.

Now let's look at the square shaft / curced 3x3x3 edge case.
Attachment:
Gap5.png
Gap5.png [ 159.73 KiB | Viewed 3248 times ]

The gap between the shaft and the 3x3x3 edge piece still belongs to a face center. However in this case its a different face center. The gap above the red face center belongs to the green face center and vice versa. And remember the 3x3x3 face center in this Real 5x5x5 is actually 5 disconnected pieces. There is one directly above this gap that it could be connected to if filled. Here is a closer shot showing that connection.
Attachment:
Gap6.png
Gap6.png [ 164.08 KiB | Viewed 3248 times ]

I could in principle add a foot on this extension that cut into the 3x3x3 edge piece to help hold the upper part in place but again I'm not sure I'd be able to assemble the puzzle if I did that. I probably could assemble it though if I made it just as I have it drawn. But then I see no value added by having this extension. It will move over the screw cut out and again could create perceived rotational friction differences as it did so. And it would also simply increase the total over all friction of rotating the 3x3x3 layers. You want the cut between layers to have enough teeth that the puzzle is held together but you also want to minimize the over all surface area of the cut that needs to come into contact with other parts to keep friction down. With nice smooth injection molded plastic that isn't usually too big of a concern but with the rough surface of Shapeway's SW&F it becomes a bigger concern. As a result I'm inclined to leave this extension off all together. These are areas that could be revisited if the first version of the puzzle didn't function as well as desired. This also showcases what I think may be some of the weaknesses of using parameterization. Its good for changing the dimensions of a feature you've designed but I'm not sure its flexible enough to easily allow one to simply change from a square shaft to a cylindrical shaft by simply changing one parameter.
alaskajoe wrote:
Maybe I know what he means. Filling this will not inhibit that shaft from turning. But turning the pieces around the other shaft 90┬░ next to it would be blocked. So turning one of the 5x5x5 slices or in other words a face of the inner 3x3x3 will not work anymore.
Yes. I believe you understand why the gap is there.
alaskajoe wrote:
Well this gap is so small and slim that probably it would work. But it would result in a hard to turn puzzle if you were really to produce/print this.
I agree that it should work. I disagree that the gap would make things hard to turn. Keep in mind the foot of the 3x3x3 is in contact with the cylindrical portion of the shaft under the 3x3x3 face center at all times. This gap shouldn't result in any play in the puzzle and I think it should reduce the over all friction needed to make the turn and it keeps any part from coming in contact with the screw cut out. This is all educated guesses at this stage but I don't think this gap will hurt anything. It's also not the only gap in the puzzle, there are others.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:52 am
Wow great post and great pictures.
Also there aren't any apologies due as far as progress is concerned. :)

wwwmwww wrote:
alaskajoe wrote:
Well this gap is so small and slim that probably it would work. But it would result in a hard to turn puzzle if you were really to produce/print this.
I agree that it should work. I disagree that the gap would make things hard to turn.




What I meant was that the puzzle would still turn if you just filled that gap with non moving material, i.e. if you did just make the arms cylindrical, creating a bump for the pieces. Of course I am not saying that I would recommend it.
Also I just noticed that all the turning parts of the puzzle would have to cross that bump.
It was a really silly statement so sorry for that.

_________________
Life is simple.
eat. sleep. train. repeat.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 8:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Jarrow, England
wwwmwww wrote:
This also showcases what I think may be some of the weaknesses of using parameterization. Its good for changing the dimensions of a feature you've designed but I'm not sure its flexible enough to easily allow one to simply change from a square shaft to a cylindrical shaft by simply changing one parameter.
Well, you would have to know in advance that this shape may provide a problem area, then you could draw it like this:
Attachment:
File comment: Rounded rectangle
Rounded Rectangle.png
Rounded Rectangle.png [ 17.07 KiB | Viewed 3202 times ]

This rounded rectangle shape can be changed from a circle to a (nearly) square by changing just X if you use R = L - X. If X (nearly)= 0 then you have a circle, if X (nearly)= L then you have a square.

_________________
My Shapeways Shop: http://www.shapeways.com/shops/gus_shop

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 2:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
alaskajoe wrote:
What I meant was that the puzzle would still turn if you just filled that gap with non moving material, i.e. if you did just make the arms cylindrical, creating a bump for the pieces. Of course I am not saying that I would recommend it.
Ahhh... thanks for that clarification. I had misunderstood.
Gus wrote:
Well, you would have to know in advance that this shape may provide a problem area, then you could draw it like this:
Ok... thinking about this more. Yes this could in principle be handled with parameterization. However that isn't the way I would handle it. The edge rounding (or filleting) I would leave to the post processing after the basic shapes were defined. So I wouldn't start with a rounded square. I would define each of the 4 faces of the shaft with a radius of curvature. The center of that curvature could be offset from the center of the shaft by some distance... lets call it x. Here is what things would look like if x=2mm:
Attachment:
Para1.png
Para1.png [ 110.2 KiB | Viewed 3164 times ]

The red and the green areas correspond to the two face types that are seen above. Except now we are creating both types of gap fillers. I had to think about the yellow area for a bit but I now see this volume could be added back to the shaft part. So none of the radius of curvature which you are varying actually survives this process as its consumed back into the shaft. If I make x=12 here is what I get:
Attachment:
Para2.png
Para2.png [ 114.27 KiB | Viewed 3164 times ]

So yes it can be done. This images in my post above would then correspond to x=0 (round shaft) and x=infinite (square shaft). The effect of this change needs to be examined while looking at all 3 parts together. But in this case I just don't see much value gained from considering a value for x which isn't 0 or infinity so why go to the trouble to parameterize it? In this particular case I'm just taking those green and red volumes and throwing them away anyways.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 10:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Ok... I realized the tongue that I added to the 3x3x3 face centers that wasn't in the original POV-Ray model isn't going to work. It will cut the foot off of a part of the 5x5x5 T-Centers. So I've now redone the 3x3x3 face centers. The tongue has been turned into a shallow grove. The grove cuts into the 3x3x3 corners which I have yet to build and real estate on the 3x3x3 corners is hard to give up so that is why its so shallow. Here are the current 3x3x3 face centers:
Attachment:
333Face3.png
333Face3.png [ 160.4 KiB | Viewed 3094 times ]

I now also have the 3x3x3 edges finished.
Attachment:
333Edge3.png
333Edge3.png [ 154.25 KiB | Viewed 3094 times ]

And the puzzles with all the designed pieces added.
Attachment:
Puzzle5.png
Puzzle5.png [ 491.64 KiB | Viewed 3094 times ]


See how I've added some extra surfaces to the face of the 3x3x3 pieces? This will allow those new surfaces to be stickered and this will actually be a Super-Multi 5x5x5 cube when it is finished.

I was on call this weekend so I didn't get as much done as I had hoped but the good news is I've only got to work Monday and Tuesday this coming week so there is a chance I may finish this (or come close) by this time next weekend.

Enjoy,
Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 12:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2013 3:53 pm
Wow this is looking incredible! I can't wait to see how the final product turns out!

Edit: Have fun assembling this :shock:

_________________
Image

http://www.shapeways.com/shops/ZemPuzzles


Last edited by Zem on Mon Nov 25, 2013 1:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 12:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:56 am
Location: The Netherlands
Wow indeed.. I am impatiently waiting as well hehe, wonderful work!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 12:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
wwwmwww wrote:
The tongue has been turned into a shallow grove. The grove cuts into the 3x3x3 corners which I have yet to build and real estate on the 3x3x3 corners is hard to give up so that is why its so shallow.
Well I've now made some head way on the 3x3x3 corners and here you can see why its so hard to give up real estate on these corners. That shallow grove that I added has nearly cut off the extensions that protrude to the surface of the puzzle.

Attachment:
333Corner1.png
333Corner1.png [ 165.01 KiB | Viewed 2961 times ]


One edge of that thin triangular section is 1.75mm wide and I'm really concerned that is too thin. There are actually 2 groves that cut into it here so I may have to do away with one or make them both shallower. This whole puzzle is a ton of compromises. I think I'm now remembering why I let the POV-Ray model sit for so long. This feels like something that is just barely possible at this scale. But I believe this corner is the trickiest part and maybe the most critical part in the entire puzzle. I'm likely NOT to hollow this part as I want it to have has much strength as it can have. From here the rest of the pieces will feel easy.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 12:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:50 pm
Location: Near Las Vegas, NV
wwwmwww wrote:
One edge of that thin triangular section is 1.75mm wide and I'm really concerned that is too thin.

If I have really thin necks on parts, I first try to make them as large as possible without affecting other areas, and then adding some concave fillets to the top and bottom of the neck to increase its strength.
Here's something that shows what I mean:
Attachment:
part.jpg
part.jpg [ 100.21 KiB | Viewed 2960 times ]

Remember that it's important to do this AFTER all of the shells, otherwise it will make the walls thinner and become counter-productive.

_________________
My Youtube channel
My Shapeways Shop


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
benpuzzles wrote:
If I have really thin necks on parts, I first try to make them as large as possible without affecting other areas, and then adding some concave fillets to the top and bottom of the neck to increase its strength.
Good advice. Thanks. But the width of that neck is directly related to the depth of a tongue/grove that affects many parts. But it is a parameter I'll tweak some more.

Interesting part... Can you say anything about the cross-sectional area of that neck? Is this from a puzzle you have shown? Can you tell how well this worked in the finished puzzle?
benpuzzles wrote:
Remember that it's important to do this AFTER all of the shells, otherwise it will make the walls thinner and become counter-productive.
Agreed... like I said I'm very tempted not to shell this part at all.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:50 pm
Location: Near Las Vegas, NV
wwwmwww wrote:
Interesting part... Can you say anything about the cross-sectional area of that neck? Is this from a puzzle you have shown? Can you tell how well this worked in the finished puzzle?

Not yet...this part is from my "series" of puzzles that I have started, specifically the second one in that series. I'm having a very hard time designing the third one though so that will take me awhile to finish.
wwwmwww wrote:
benpuzzles wrote:
Remember that it's important to do this AFTER all of the shells, otherwise it will make the walls thinner and become counter-productive.
Agreed... like I said I'm very tempted not to shell this part at all.

Yea, I forgot to mention that you really want to avoid shelling those necks if you can.

_________________
My Youtube channel
My Shapeways Shop


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 6:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Ok, the 3x3x3 Corners are designed.
Attachment:
333Corner2.png
333Corner2.png [ 249.69 KiB | Viewed 2848 times ]

And I've made minor tweaks to the 3x3x3 face centers and 3x3x3 edges as well. Here is what the puzzle looks like at the moment.
Attachment:
Puzzle6.png
Puzzle6.png [ 484.11 KiB | Viewed 2848 times ]


And I also stopped to think a bit about the puzzle. A 5x5x5 has 4 planar cuts per axis. This Real5x5x5 actually has 2 planar cuts and 6 conical cuts per axis. So in many ways this feels like designing a 9x9x9. So I got to thinking... the Complex 3x3x3 can be modeled using a Multi-5x5x5 using a special set of turning rules. Can the Multi-5x5x5 be modeled using a similar set or rules applied to a normal 9x9x9? If it can be... I was thinking it may actually be far easier to design that "bandaged" 9x9x9 puzzle then this one. Let's number the layers on each axis 1 through 9 in progression across that axis. Now bandaged the layers 1, 5, and 9 together on all axis. A turn of this grouping equates to a slice turn on the Multi-5x5x5. Now group the layers 2 and 4 together. This grouping would be like a L turn on the 3x3x3 inside the Multi-5x5x5. Similarly layers 6 and 8 should be tied together and this set matches the corresponding R turn on the 3x3x3 inside the Multi-5x5x5. Layers 3 and 7 are free and these equate to the 5x5x5 face turns. All this I believe is easily doable but here is where I think this approach fails... I don't think it has all the parts of the Multi-5x5x5 exposed on the surface. Someone want to double check? I think you'd need a Multi-9x9x9 bandaged this way to see them all. So making a Multi-9x9x9 in order to have a Multi-5x5x5 sort of defeats the purpose. Oh well... for a second there I thought I was on to something. I also noticed that if the 9x9x9 idea had worked I think it would have been much easier to turn into the Complex 3x3x3 then this puzzle.

Now moving on to the 5x5x5 pieces...
Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 6:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Deep in the Heart of Texas
I can't wait for this to be finished! It's gonna be great! Keep up the good work!

_________________
For all of you that bought a KO 8x8x8: You should have bought a V8!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Finished the 5x5x5 Face center:
Attachment:
555Face1.png
555Face1.png [ 134.7 KiB | Viewed 2802 times ]


And the puzzle with this part added:
Attachment:
Puzzle7.png
Puzzle7.png [ 508.81 KiB | Viewed 2802 times ]


Enjoy,
Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 12:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:54 pm
Location: Bay Area, California
Getting close! I'm very excited for this puzzle. I like how you've made the cuts into the 3x3x3 edges to make them unique.

_________________
Prior to using my real name I posted under the account named bmenrigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 3:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 12:00 am
Location: Jarrow, England
What madness is this:
Attachment:
File comment: TEOTW
TEOFW.png
TEOFW.png [ 243.16 KiB | Viewed 2764 times ]
Are you sure that you are not making some sort of end-of-the-world doomsday device:
Attachment:
File comment: Doomsday
Doomsday.png
Doomsday.png [ 208.8 KiB | Viewed 2764 times ]
Or perhaps worse, an unintentional portal to hell? :shock:
Attachment:
File comment: Hellraiser
hellraiser_cube.png
hellraiser_cube.png [ 239.37 KiB | Viewed 2764 times ]

_________________
My Shapeways Shop: http://www.shapeways.com/shops/gus_shop

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:52 am
Hey Carl,

have you ever thought about i.materialize? unlike shapeways, they produce clear resign. Making a 5x5x5 with inside 3x3x3 could be done without additional parts on the surface or any holes.
although it would look confusing.

_________________
Life is simple.
eat. sleep. train. repeat.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
Gus wrote:
What madness is this:
Actually I've already answered that one...
wwwmwww wrote:
Just my kind of madness. *Big Grin*
LOL!!! Yes, this is getting to be crazy. It is easily the most complex model I have yet built and I'm not done yet. What scares me is I'm honestly not 100% sure this thing will even work. I can just see a big chunk of pieces falling out mid turn if things aren't just perfect.

And to think this started from 5x5x5=125 and the realization that on a normal 5x5x5 you only get to solve 98 cubies. The 27 on the inside that belong to a 3x3x3 aren't seen. However to make these 27 cubies solvable I'm making a puzzle which at the end of the day has nearly 300 parts. That is a far cry from 125.

Attachment:
Calc.PNG
Calc.PNG [ 8.18 KiB | Viewed 2688 times ]


Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Making the Real5x5x5 ┬ęCarl Hoff October 23, 2010
PostPosted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 4:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:09 pm
Location: Missouri
alaskajoe wrote:
have you ever thought about i.materialize? unlike shapeways, they produce clear resign. Making a 5x5x5 with inside 3x3x3 could be done without additional parts on the surface or any holes.
I believe I've heard of i.materialize but no I'm not that familiar with them. I just checked out their website and I'll have to look more into them. But I have thought about building a 3x3x3 inside a 5x5x5 before as you suggest. Its still not trivial but its likely easier then what I am doing. The trickiest part is getting the 3x3x3 to turn with the outer 5x5x5 as its supposed to but I'm sure it can be done. But the ability to see and solve the inner 3x3x3 as well as the outer 5x5x5 makes things much more complex. Oskar's Framed Cube is a great solution for the Multi-4x4x4 and something like this may very well be doable for the 5x5x5.

Carl

_________________
-
Image

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 157 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Forum powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group