For the Crazy Split 1x2x3's solve, you get to see my first solve and the thought process that went along with it. Normally I solve puzzles several times before recording, but this puzzle turned so poorly that I didn't want to solve it multiple times. Looking back, I think that watching a later solve would have been more interesting than the first one, because it would make for a quicker solve and more insightful commentary.
I have been thinking for the last 2 weeks how to make a mirror megaminx WITHOUT curved cuts,intersecting planes AND still retaining the dodecahedral shape(if you just cut and extend each face will become distorted).
If you make the tolerances a little to tight then sanding the parts down some will help. Also keep in mind that your standard AVG. FDM home Desktop size 3d printers don't always print your models perfectly. You might have to do some multiple prints before you get one that you like. One last thing is layer thickness and nozzle size will also affect the overall print quality.
If this was my design, I would have simply adjusted clearances and re-printed it... However, I only had STLs for this, which you can't really edit on a fine-grained level. While I could have technically sanded down the internals, as I mentioned in the video I was leaving for a trip right after building the puzzle, so I didn't have the time (or desire) to sand those areas.
He added it after I replied. If it turns well, then sure get one if you're interested in the solve. I know you don't have a printer so you can't just make the updated design for yourself.
@@CubesMadeEasy my turns pretty good but it required alot of sanding. And I made my own lego bits because mine were too long. And I made a piece for connecting the two halves together without a nut and bolt. But it is the first of the puzzles I've been happy with how the stickers came out. :)
Yeah, I didn't sand the internal surfaces of this one. Didn't have time (or, honestly, the motivation) for that, and it's something that a good design would never require.
Heyyy thanks for the video on one of my first projects, haven't realized you were asking about this puzzle for a video of yours. It's funny that on my version, the 2 outer ring layers turn really good and the 1x2x3 cuts are a little stiff, just the opposite of your experience. In my defense for the fair critics, it's been made with a software barely usable for the task, and the toleraces made optimal for an uncalibrated Ender 3 Pro. I uploaded the files to Thingiverse not thinking anyone would be interested to print it. It was very interesting to see your process of solving, it indeed was made with the intent of easy-looking but actually just different enough in every step to f with you. You came a long way since the first method that came to your mind, but all that matters is you solved it! After my 3rd solve I decided on a method that dealt with most parity situations relatively early in the solve, and the rest wasn't that bad either. I've remade the puzzle in Onshape with slightly diffferent proportions and *completely* different internals, it hasn't been tested yet tho: cad.onshape.com/documents/3e16546521970cda27e0edbc/w/20ca27eec40f7c1298a3f596/e/586cc4b103292adfdd7659ce
For the Crazy Split 1x2x3's solve, you get to see my first solve and the thought process that went along with it. Normally I solve puzzles several times before recording, but this puzzle turned so poorly that I didn't want to solve it multiple times. Looking back, I think that watching a later solve would have been more interesting than the first one, because it would make for a quicker solve and more insightful commentary.
Ok
eso no es un Crazy Split 1x2x3 es un Crazy Split 2x2x3
I have been thinking for the last 2 weeks how to make a mirror megaminx WITHOUT curved cuts,intersecting planes AND still retaining the dodecahedral shape(if you just cut and extend each face will become distorted).
The closest I have seen is this: ua-cam.com/video/5ynWmLIz1Wo/v-deo.html
Super interesting! If and when you revisit this puzzle and design it yourself, would be cool to look at the process of what changes you make and why.
Hey, been a while since I've seen you around! Yeah, when this gets revisited, I would most likely show the design process.
This looks interesting AF, I would never guessed the 1 in the name.
Yeah, you can't even see from the outside that the circle centers are technically just 1 layer. Definitely a confusing puzzle to look at initially.
If you make the tolerances a little to tight then sanding the parts down some will help. Also keep in mind that your standard AVG. FDM home Desktop size 3d printers don't always print your models perfectly. You might have to do some multiple prints before you get one that you like. One last thing is layer thickness and nozzle size will also affect the overall print quality.
If this was my design, I would have simply adjusted clearances and re-printed it... However, I only had STLs for this, which you can't really edit on a fine-grained level. While I could have technically sanded down the internals, as I mentioned in the video I was leaving for a trip right after building the puzzle, so I didn't have the time (or desire) to sand those areas.
@@CubesMadeEasy true
Chewbacca has this on his site. Would like to try it for myself.
Does he? I can't find it there.
He added it after I replied. If it turns well, then sure get one if you're interested in the solve. I know you don't have a printer so you can't just make the updated design for yourself.
I printed mine probably 2 months ago but have yet not scrambled it. But it looks cool and the turning is pretty good.
If yours turns well, that's awesome. The split 1x2x3 and split 3x3x2 parts interact in really unique ways so it's quite interesting to solve.
@@CubesMadeEasy my turns pretty good but it required alot of sanding. And I made my own lego bits because mine were too long. And I made a piece for connecting the two halves together without a nut and bolt. But it is the first of the puzzles I've been happy with how the stickers came out. :)
Yeah, I didn't sand the internal surfaces of this one. Didn't have time (or, honestly, the motivation) for that, and it's something that a good design would never require.
@@CubesMadeEasy I do it to all my puzzles since my printer can't produce products of the quality I want.
If all your puzzles need internal sanding, sounds like you would really benefit from tuning your printer. Maybe look up teaching tech's tutorial.
Heyyy thanks for the video on one of my first projects, haven't realized you were asking about this puzzle for a video of yours. It's funny that on my version, the 2 outer ring layers turn really good and the 1x2x3 cuts are a little stiff, just the opposite of your experience. In my defense for the fair critics, it's been made with a software barely usable for the task, and the toleraces made optimal for an uncalibrated Ender 3 Pro. I uploaded the files to Thingiverse not thinking anyone would be interested to print it.
It was very interesting to see your process of solving, it indeed was made with the intent of easy-looking but actually just different enough in every step to f with you. You came a long way since the first method that came to your mind, but all that matters is you solved it! After my 3rd solve I decided on a method that dealt with most parity situations relatively early in the solve, and the rest wasn't that bad either.
I've remade the puzzle in Onshape with slightly diffferent proportions and *completely* different internals, it hasn't been tested yet tho:
cad.onshape.com/documents/3e16546521970cda27e0edbc/w/20ca27eec40f7c1298a3f596/e/586cc4b103292adfdd7659ce
After making this video, I solved the puzzle a few more times and now I have a reliable method for it.