This is something for you guys/gals to look at!

This puzzle was designed by Adam (Puzzlemaster42).

This puzzle was 3d printed with my SST FDM 3d Printer in one part.

The puzzle is currently in the heated chemical bath to remove the support material which will take many hours to get out of all the cracks.

I feel confident that this will work, but only time will tell!

If all goes well these may be for sale with Adam getting a portion of the sale. Price to TBD but expect somewhere between $200 to $300. (Pending legality of doing so) (I think it should be legal for sale, but I'm sure you guys know if Rubik's patent, etc. is expired)

Check this print I did: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnB8vFc123Y

So is this just a 3x3 mech mod? Does it have to be 3d printed like your impossible bearing? Or is this just showing how sweet your 3d printer is? Looks cool!

This part was designed by Adam to be 3D printed in one part. He has wanted to make one since he learned about the SST 3d print technology.

This design cannot be made any other way, one 3d print ONLY. The internal six way hub is one piece...

Bradley

Wow, this thing was done in one print?! Thats incredible!

Itching to see what happens when the support material has dissolved. Great video too.

Wow, that's unreal! I saw the impossible bearing video, and was blown away. This is great!

I don't understand why this is so great, would someone care to explain?

I guess because it can be made totally unpoppable - because it doesn't have to be assembled?

Is this a different 3x3 mech or is this actually for a new puzzle? I guess I see how it's used for the 3x3 but I still don't see why it's so important.

This puzzle is only a 3x3x3, but the interesting part is that it is printed in the assembled state.

In fact, the puzzle can't be printed in individual pieces because the core is a single part that passes through the centers!

I came up with the idea while watching a demo of the Dimension SST printer. One of the demo parts was a crescent wrench that was printed in a single part. The thumbscrew turned, moving the jaw of the wrench, but there was no way to take the wrench apart. I was inspired to try this after seeing the Impossible Bearings video, and suggested printing it in 2 colors to make it an actual "puzzle", and now we have an "Orange Creamsicle Cube".



For those of you reading ahead, yes it would be possible to make a Megaminx in a single print.

I don't really follow. Anychance of posting an internal picture Adam?

Do you see those cicles in the center? The core in this puzzle is one piece, and those circles are part of the core which hold in the centers. This way it was possible to print a 3x3 cube in one go. It is just a proof of concept, nothing more.

I don't really understand what I'm looking at here. It looks like a 3x3 and I understand that it was printed all at once, but what's different about it compared to a normal 3x3? Can the centers move relative to the core, for instance? Can somsone explain a bit better how the mechanism makes it completely impossible to assemble or disassemble?

It isn't really anything different, it's just a 3x3. It is just that the core is one solid block, and there are no screws. Due to the core being solid, you can only make it this way. It is a proof of concept more than anything.

To pop a piece in a regular rubik's cube, the centers need to flex a bit to get the edge piece out. The core of the single print 3x3x3 does not flex because there are no screws or springs.

It is nothing "new", but puzzles don't always need to be completely new to be interesting...

This is a picture of the core [artist's impression]:



This is a picture of the centerpiece [artist's impression]:



You can see there is no way to assemble those pieces on the core other than to print them assembled (or make the core in multiple pieces, but that is not what this is about).

As the core has no flex (no springs) it is also impossible to pop in/out an edge piece. So you have to print the entire thing at once.

Note that the core probably looks a little different (no solid cube) and the center piece is most likely arced.

Now that I actually understand what this is, I can't wait to see it finished!

Despite the effect currently being achieved by the two colours, it would be very nice to exploit the fixed and non-fixed part of the center by stickering it as a supercube.

That is actually REALLY cool how you can print something like that in one go. I never thought about a dissolving support material.

3x3x3 check!

gigaminx....

to solve the flexing issue so you can dissassemble the puzzle, there is a method whereby you can print with integrated materials. The result is one solid piece, but different sections of the piece are composed of different materials with desired properties for that region. I saw this on a ted video on making more efficient robots by having the legs function as springs. The resulting walk is surprisingly self corrective and requires no sensing of the suroundings to move over obsticals up to 2/3 the hip height.

Using this, you could get a spring like material from a flexible but fairly rigid ruber in the core but still have hard plastic on the exterior

Very good illustrations Tom. I was trying to figure out how to explain it to them, but the picture hit the nail on the head.

I'm thinking they thought there was some sort of mechanical advancement mechanism wise going on, when this isn't meant to be a new mechanism advancement, but is actually a brilliant technological advancement.

Sorry guys I can't post pictures of the internal workings as that is up to Adam.

Here she is:

Very nice. Any chance of a video showing how well it turns?

Eventually I will get a video up on YT. Give me until this weekend most likely.

Excellent report regarding a method with a lot of potential.

I can see this technology being able to help in making
some outrageous puzzle designs.




Pantazis

Ah, I think I get it now. Very interesting idea. Does the puzzle need to be very carefully aligned since the centers don't have any give?

If I understand this correctly, the 3D printing process uses either a plastic powder that it partially melts with a IR laser, or some type of epoxy that hardens when exposed to ultraviolet radiation. I'm pretty sure that the powder version is the method that is currently used in prototyping, whereas the latter is typically used in etching integrated circuits. So, how do you get two surfaces that make contact with each other without being fused? If you heat an area to solidify it, then heat an adjacent area next to it, wouldn't that form a bridge between the two? Also, if there were sufficient spacing so that the regions did not make contact, wouldn't that make for an incredibly loose puzzle? And finally, it is my understanding that prototyped parts have unrefined rough surfaces and require at least minimal sanding to polish them down. I just didn't think believe that the technology was refined enough yet to make that feasible. Your cube surface has a smooth glossy appearance that doesn't seem to fit the description of the coarse parts that are normally produced.

Really, this is amazing that you've pulled it off - I just can't comprehend how, given the technologies current limitations

Stardust, neither of the proccesses you described have been used for this. In this case, FDM was used. Molten plastic is deposited layer by layer, to build up the object. Two types of plastic were extruded, the ABS that makes up the cube, and support material. The material is a softer plastic, which can be removed with some acid and heat. This was used to prevent the pieces from fusing.

The proccesses you described might have been even more suitable for the job. As they too utilize a layer by layer technique, the resin or powder itself could have been used as support. It is certainly not impossible, and once you have seen a video on how one of these works, you'll understand it very well. Technology is precise enough to be able to fuse just 0.1mm (along the Z direction) of material.

I wonder how well it turns. The first thing that comes to mind (besides how cool this looks) is that the printing process leaves rough print lines. For this reason, I would think there will be a good amount of friction. That is, unless it was designed with a bigger than normal tolerance gap, in which case, the cube would be loose.

You asked for it and here it is!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7D9CVvbKB4

ENJOY!

Bradley

Awesome cube! I never thought a 1 part print was doable in FDM. awesome example, even if it is loose!

So the minimum thickness of soluble support is a considerable fraction of the size of the feet of the cubies.
Thanks for this interesting topic, maybe soon the technology will allow a tighter fit.

May I make the following suggestion. All you need is a pint of tunnelling nanobots guided by magnetic pulses. They would eat their way through a solid 57x57x570mm cube of plastic with very close tolerances (doing 10 at once would bring the costs down). They could even hollow out the pieces. A second variety would collect the waste plastic and deposit it in your skip/dumpster then they would go through a lube bath, enter the puzzle once more and stay there till the next service interval - that could be programmed from 1 month to 5 years. I'm fairly sure I can tackle the stl file to pulse generator interface - can anyone help sourcing the nanobots.

Thats incredible that a complete rubik's cube was printed in once shot. Would it be possible though to print the puzzle with a negative tolerance (some how?) with a super thin layer of support material between it to compensate for the looseness?? I think what i just said sounds really stupid now that i'm looking at it... oh well, just a thought.

Awesome video. Absolutely amazing that a 3x3 could be printed in one piece like this.