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

TwistyPuzzles.com Forum
 It is currently Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:26 am

 All times are UTC - 5 hours

 Page 1 of 1 [ 35 posts ]
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Tony Fisher's fully functional correctly proportioned 2x2x7Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:05 pm

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
As you will know, many years ago I designed several cuboids. Most I made but one I never got round to making was the 2x2x5. I based the design around a 5x5x5 and it would have been absolutely enormous. Some years later Geert Hellings came up with a clever way of making a 2x2x6 from a Master Cube. I adapted this technique to make a fully functional correctly proportioned 2x2x6 and 4x4x6. For some reason I never thought of using Geert's technique to make a 2x2x5. That is until recent discussions on the forum. Last Friday (11th Jan) I started to make a 2x2x5. However after a couple of hours I realised I could make a 2x2x7, So I did.
I am not going into details about how I made it but you can pretty much work it out from the photos. There is one trick I will share though. It is well known that with 2x2xN cuboids you don't have the same "corner will fall out" problem to solve as you do with a 7x7x7 for example. However you can see in my last photo that I have not extended certain parts far enough into the core to prevent them from falling out. What I have done instead is use ball bearings and springs to hold them in place. If you think about a Skewb for a moment, the moves click nicely into place. To start a move you have to apply just that little bit extra force to get it going. On my 2x2x7 those parts you would expect to fall out aren't going to slide anywhere without additional force. You may have noticed how similiar this sounds to my "clip and slide" description of how my fake 9x9x9 'worked'. It's not as fancy but I guess it's a similar simpler variation. Most of the time (90% approx) it is not possible for the parts to fall out anyway so the ball bearings only have to do their work very briefly.
So how well does it work? The answer to that is not great. It does work but the second and sixth rows are often difficult to turn. I think the design is OK and if made accurately it would be fine. I made it with a veiw to make more but currently it is not good enough to produce for other people. I may come back to it though at a later date.
Dimensions are 6.5 x 6.5 x 23cm or 2.5 x 2.5 x 9 inches. Cubies are slightly smaller than those on my 2x2x6.

VIDEO

[img]http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/8654/1001tonyfishers2x2x7nz6.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/>

[img]http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/2327/1002tonyfishers2x2x7vo8.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/>

[img]http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/8003/1003tonyfishers2x2x7nu4.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/>

[img]http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/6068/1004tonyfishers2x2x7eb5.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/>

[img]http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/770/1005tonyfishers2x2x7jm9.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/>

[img]http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4802/1006tonyfishers2x2x7ir3.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/>

[img]http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/1592/1007tonyfishers2x2x6andpc6.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/>

[img]http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/1994/1008tonyfishers2x2x7ky7.jpg" border="0" alt="Image Hosted by ImageShack.us"/>

Last edited by Tony Fisher on Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:13 pm

Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 1:30 pm
Location: bay area, california
Tony,
you continue to amaze us with your wonderful designs!

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:21 pm

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:42 pm
Location: Missouri, USA
That is phenominal. I think that 90% of the time the peices staying in is good enogh to still cube with. Keep up the incredible designs.

_________________

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:53 pm

Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:44 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
this could be fake, last year he "made" a 9x9x9 cube, but it was an early april fools joke

i think that its real though and great job

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:57 pm

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
TheAtarian1 wrote:
I think that 90% of the time the peices staying in is good enogh to still cube with.

The pieces stay in 100% of the time but 10% is due to the ball bearings and springs.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Tony Fisher's fully functional correctly proportioned 2xPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:01 pm

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am
Location: Greece, Australia, Thailand, India, Singapore.
Tony Fisher wrote:
Most of the time (90% approx) it is not possible for the parts to fall out anyway so the ball bearings only have to do their work very briefly.

So in other words, for certain parts of the cuboid, we don't need to take off the stickers, or take the entire puzzle apart. A brief swapping of some of the "clicked" pieces is sufficient.

Amazing design once again!

Pantazis

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:09 pm

Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:17 am
Location: DÃ¼sseldorf, Germany
Tony,

an ingenious idea to use ball bearings to fix the location of the pieces.
Congrats to this new idea and to your new puzzle. I hope, that sooner
or later the first technical problems get solved to allow a larger production.

- Frank -

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:13 pm

Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:05 am
Location: Eastern Michigan University (Minnesota at heart)
Amazing! Any chance of a video?

I'm emailing this to Speedcubing.com right now.

_________________
Fridrich
3x3 PB 22.63
3x3 Av 30.57

20, Male
Started cubing Oct 15 '05

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:54 pm

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
I have now added a video to the original post.
Having watched it again I see that one of the "loose" pieces does start to fall. It was tricky to get the tensions right on the ball bearings and springs. As the whole puzzle is a little loose in places there was a danger of the ball bearings popping out in between the pieces. For this reason I sunk them deeper than normal and actually glued them to the tops of the springs. On the whole they seem to work but occasionally there is the odd slip. Ideally I should have made them enclosed like a Skewb instead of open like a Puck. I think this was as much about discovering a different way of doing things as it was creating a good puzzle. Kind of a learning experience you might say.
Magnets may be an option Frank though I think the main problem was the Master Cube centres. Instead of just rounding them off I think additional work is required so they rotate smoothly instead of just rattling around.
Yes kastellorizo you could easily slide parts out and swap them round.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Tony Fisher's fully functional correctly proportioned 2xPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:59 pm

Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:34 pm
Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands
No Tony... I'm not falling for one of your April Fool's jokes again!

But seriously, it's fabulous. Breathtaking.

Thomas

_________________

My mods | My other hobby: www.unused-prince-tickets.com

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:10 pm

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:42 pm
Location: Missouri, USA
Tony Fisher wrote:
TheAtarian1 wrote:
I think that 90% of the time the peices staying in is good enogh to still cube with.
The pieces stay in 100% of the time but 10% is due to the ball bearings and springs.

OK. I now see what you mean.

Noah wrote:
Amazing! Any chance of a video?

Just look at his new avatar, lol.

_________________

Last edited by TheAtarian1 on Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:42 pm

Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 2:11 am
Location: Chicago,Il
That's truely amazing.
your work is really inspirational. Wahhh blew my mind.

_________________
3x3:PB 25.81 | AVG 32.44
4x4:PB:2:38.XX |
5x5:PB:4.52.XX |

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 5:14 pm

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:10 pm
Location: Belgium
Tony Fisher is a mad genius!!
never stop

_________________
www.fredericplateus.com

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 5:34 pm
Wow. That is all I can say. How is this to solve?

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 5:56 pm

Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:05 am
Location: Eastern Michigan University (Minnesota at heart)
Ethan Rosen wrote:
Wow. That is all I can say. How is this to solve?
Solution wise, it's very easy. Turning wise, seems a bit difficult.

Solve it like a 2x2x3 and keep working your way out from the center.

_________________
Fridrich
3x3 PB 22.63
3x3 Av 30.57

20, Male
Started cubing Oct 15 '05

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:13 pm

Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:23 am
Location: massachusetts, USA
WOW!!! you are truly amazing, tony.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:02 pm

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 5:55 pm
Location: Michigan
That puzzle looks sweet. Great job.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:59 pm

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Carnegie Mellon
am i correct in thinking that this is built from a rubik 4x4, modified like a geert style 4x4x6, then bandaged into a 2x2x5 and extended to allow the tracks for layers 2 and 6

brilliant design, i dont think it would be necessary to "slip proof" layers 2+6 if theyre so difficult to turn

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:11 am

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 12:12 pm
Location: NY, USA
This is beautiful! A bit big, but an amazing build.

Completely seriously, how hard would it be to go from this to make a cubical 7x7x7?

_________________
My official times
Puzzle Solving Service! - a puzzle that has never been scrambled and solved has been wasted.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:18 am

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Carnegie Mellon
qqwref wrote:
Completely seriously, how hard would it be to go from this to make a cubical 7x7x7?

exceedingly

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:52 am

Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 3:14 pm
Location: Orange County, CA
Nearly impossible, since the mechanisms are totally unrelated.

_________________
-Garrett

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 2:46 am

Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:11 am
Location: Oregon, USA
Completely impossible, actually.

It's impossible to build an NxNxN where N is larger than 6 unless the slices vary in thickness, the surfaces are non-orthogonal, or the corners are not attached to the center.

There has been at least one 7x7x7 that used thinner slices in the middle. The Olympic V-Cube 7x7x7 uses pillowed surfaces.

As far as I know, nobody has yet tried the third compromise (disconnected corners) but some day I would like to try...

_________________
See my blog about 3D printing puzzles at MySD300

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:01 am

Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:01 pm
TheCube wrote:
this could be fake, last year he "made" a 9x9x9 cube, but it was an early april fools joke

The video proves it. I can see why you call it "could be fake" cause it's too amazing. The 2x2x7 is too crazy for the human eye.
The mechanism is genius! Great job Tony. You never cease to amaze the cubing society.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 3:44 pm

Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:44 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
TheCube wrote:
this could be fake, last year he "made" a 9x9x9 cube, but it was an early april fools joke

The video proves it. I can see why you call it "could be fake" cause it's too amazing. The 2x2x7 is too crazy for the human eye.
The mechanism is genius! Great job Tony. You never cease to amaze the cubing society.

i posted this before he made the video an dbefore he changed his channel avatar, so techinally, i didn't have much proof

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:42 pm

Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:39 pm
Location: Webster, NY
Tony,
Neat and clever way around the popping out problem. Great work, as always!
Lee

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 11:24 am

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:00 am
Location: Shanghai, China
Noah wrote:
Ethan Rosen wrote:
Wow. That is all I can say. How is this to solve?
Solution wise, it's very easy. Turning wise, seems a bit difficult.

Solve it like a 2x2x3 and keep working your way out from the center.

Middle layer is intuitive.

The rest is easy if you know Sq-1 optimal algs or commutators.

_________________
[02:25] <fusion> does look ahead on a 3x3 make someone faster?
[02:25] <Swordsman_Kirby> Yes.
[02:25] <fusion> maybe i should try that

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 12:07 pm

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:19 pm
DAAAAAMN!!

Sweet stuff as always Tony!!!

Btw - What are the shape changing aspects, if there are any?

_________________
http://www.rockstargames.com/maxpayne3/ ... ?redirect=

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:04 pm

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 6:14 am
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Since it's a 2x2x2 in the core, you could certainly have long extensions sticking out from any of the six faces. Obviously however you couldn't actually scramble the extensions when in this configuration, so that would be the extent of the shape changing.

Any NxNxM puzzle where M is greater than N by a factor of 2 or more will exhibit this behavior. At least I believe so.

_________________
http://chrono.org/puzzles.html

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:10 pm

Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 10:05 am
Location: Eastern Michigan University (Minnesota at heart)
Jin H Kim wrote:
Since it's a 2x2x2 in the core, you could certainly have long extensions sticking out from any of the six faces. Obviously however you couldn't actually scramble the extensions when in this configuration, so that would be the extent of the shape changing.

Any NxNxM puzzle where M is greater than N by a factor of 2 or more will exhibit this behavior. At least I believe so.
Does a 2x2x3 change shape? M in this case is odd, ergo, no shape changing.

_________________
Fridrich
3x3 PB 22.63
3x3 Av 30.57

20, Male
Started cubing Oct 15 '05

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:12 pm

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 1:45 pm
I do not understand how you can produce such consistently imaginative builds with such precision and speed - excellent!

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:16 pm

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
Cuboids change shape when any two dimensions are even but different, or odd but different, except when one dimension is one in which case it doesn't change shape.

2x2x3- no
2x2x4- yes
2x2x5- no
2x2x6- yes
2x2x7- no
2x3x3- no
2x3x4- yes
3x3x4- no
3x3x5- yes
3x4x4- no
4x4x5- no
4x4x6- yes
4x5x5- no

BTW My 2x2x7 doesn't have a 2x2x2 core.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:09 pm

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 6:14 am
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Noah wrote:
Jin H Kim wrote:
Since it's a 2x2x2 in the core, you could certainly have long extensions sticking out from any of the six faces. Obviously however you couldn't actually scramble the extensions when in this configuration, so that would be the extent of the shape changing.

Any NxNxM puzzle where M is greater than N by a factor of 2 or more will exhibit this behavior. At least I believe so.
Does a 2x2x3 change shape? M in this case is odd, ergo, no shape changing.

Where M is greater than N by a factor of 2 or more.

2x2x4
3x3x5
4x4x6

My statement did not take into account AxBxC type puzzles, although I'm incorrect about the "or more" part. It has to exceed it by an even number, hence

2x2x6
2x2x8
3x3x7
3x3x9
etc

_________________
http://chrono.org/puzzles.html

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:12 pm

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 6:14 am
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Tony Fisher wrote:
BTW My 2x2x7 doesn't have a 2x2x2 core.

Yes, I should have phrased that better. I meant that at its core the puzzle BEHAVES LIKE a 2x2x2, not that it literaly has a 2x2x2 since we clearly know it's a 5x5x5 puzzle as the true core.

_________________
http://chrono.org/puzzles.html

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:45 pm

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 7:37 pm
Jin, It's a 4x4x4 at it's core though it behaves like a 1x2x2. There is no 2x2x2 or any parts that behaves like one.. Obviously a 4x4x4 is also a 2x2x2 but any 2x2x2 characteristics are lost immediately the puzzle was started.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 7:09 pm

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 6:14 am
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
ugh. You're right. What was I thinking. Even when I clarified myself I was just clarifying an error. it's clearly a 2x2x1 at its heart since it's an odd number of layers.

With your permissions I'll just quit while I'm behind and bow out of this discussion thread.

_________________
http://chrono.org/puzzles.html

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 1 [ 35 posts ]

 All times are UTC - 5 hours

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

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

Search for:
 Jump to:  Select a forum ------------------ Announcements General Puzzle Topics New Puzzles Puzzle Building and Modding Puzzle Collecting Solving Puzzles Marketplace Non-Twisty Puzzles Site Comments, Suggestions & Questions Content Moderators Off Topic