 | | Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
So, out of curiosity, I started toying around with the smallest possible Lego-cube that is smooth on all sides. IE no studs, stud holes, technic pin holes, etc showing on any of the 6 faces. Getting a 6x6x6 stud cube wasn't too hard... a 5x5x5 was (...) (20 years ago, 25-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) Great challenge, Dave! I gave this a shot for about 45 minutes. I made a 3x3x3...but it has two tiny square holes (4x4 LDU) It uses 18 parts. (...) Hmm, my 4x4x4 took 24 pieces, but it's very sturdy. Half of those are 2x2 tiles though. It (...) (20 years ago, 25-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) Oops...that's not quite true. It's actually 2.8 x 2.8 x 3 studs: (URL) 4 and 5 stud ones are exact though :) --Bram (20 years ago, 26-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) Closer than I got! That's pretty cool... (...) Yeah, mine turned out uber-simple: (URL) 1 1x4 brick to expose the inner headlight bricks, and minus 2 headlight bricks (not really necessary) for a lower piece count) (...) Ooo, neat! You'll have (...) (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) Doh! Yeah, I got a 3x3x3 that had 4 studs poking out, that was as close as I was able to get... DaveE (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) Ok, here are mine: (URL) is the minimum pieces 4x4x4, but it's kind of cheating. Next are the exploded and unexploded views of the center of the sturdy 4x4x4 that I actually built. (...) bottom which are built studs up, 5x5 bricks x 5 plates? (...) (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) OK...got it...but I don't feel like LDrawing anymore :P (...) whoops... and 4 x 4x6 plate --Bram (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) I actually didn't think I would be able to do it but I stumbled upon this configuration for a 2x2, smooth cube with four pieces. (URL) Nathan (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) (URL) sturdy. --Bram (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
My challenge was even more challenging: building a die with smooth tiles on all six sides. You may have missed it when I announced it on Fri, 21 Nov 2003 (I didn't know there was a schleim-newsgroup). I started with a 9x9x9 die, very soon followed (...) (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) It doesn't quite work. The flange on the stud-pin leaves a gap between the brick and the lower tile. (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) Heh, that's what I get for toying around and calling "done" the first thing that worked. :) I hadn't even thought of that until just now, but yeah, could easily reduce that mess of 5 pieces down to a single 1x1 with side studs on its side... (...) (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) Yeah, I've tried that technique before (for a different project) and noticed the same gap. How about using a small bit of flex tubing inside a bit of pneumatic tubing like so: (URL) No gap: (URL) And, it's still technically 100% Lego, though I (...) (20 years ago, 27-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
In lugnet.build.schleim, Mark Riley wrote: <snip> (...) Bram and I were discussing this and we had both came up with this modification. If you take 4 1x1 tiles and put them end on into one of the 2x2 tiles you can use them to attach the tile to the (...) (20 years ago, 28-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Smallest smooth cube challenge
|
|
(...) Wow, that's clever. Nice work! So I am wondering if it is even possible to go smaller. The geometric ratio seems to suggest not, but then I keep thinking that's the smallest you can go and someone goes smaller. (20 years ago, 28-Mar-04, to lugnet.build.schleim, FTX)
|
