Show us your models and discuss model-making techniques. Paper? Wood? Single vs double tabs? etc.
-
robertw
- Site Admin
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 6:47 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
-
Contact:
Post
by robertw » Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:02 am
Very nice! Looks very accurate too. Keep up the good work

-
robertw
- Site Admin
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 6:47 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
-
Contact:
Post
by robertw » Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:05 am
Also nice. Wow, it's big. I tend to make models about as small as workable, which generally means shortest edge between 0.5 and 1 cm.
I haven't made either of your models, I would make this model with about 16cm diameter, or 6.3 inches. About a quarter the size of yours.
The smaller they are, the more I can fit in a display case

Big models are great though if you've got somewhere to store them.
-
Ulrich
- Posts: 133
- Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:08 am
- Location: Germany
-
Contact:
Post
by Ulrich » Tue Dec 11, 2018 8:01 am
This is one of my favourite uniform polyhedra and I like your model very much.
I once made this shape too but only with three colours. That‘s not really satisfying.
Ulrich
-
Robin Adair
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:57 am
Post
by Robin Adair » Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:15 pm
I think I should have gone for smaller, as you say it is hard to store. I thought about giving it to a classroom, thinking that they might have more room, but my daughter wanted it for her home. You may have noticed some creases. The pentagrams (stars) are the weak areas. I reinforced some of them with a thicker star glued to the interior, but I didn't like the way it deformed the surface. I also tried paper plates glued internally to the tabs. This seemed better.
-
Peter Kane
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:50 am
- Location: S.E England
Post
by Peter Kane » Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:46 pm
Yes, a very nice model. Makes me want to reach for the glue...
Pete K
-
marcelteun
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sweden, Europe
-
Contact:
Post
by marcelteun » Mon Sep 23, 2019 11:46 am
Robin Adair wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 9:09 pm
Just completed this. I was fooling around with some of the 4D built in .stel files, and came up with this. I'll send the file next.
Nice work, Robin!
-
Robin Adair
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:57 am
Post
by Robin Adair » Thu Oct 31, 2019 7:49 pm
Just finished my first compound, a tetrahedron, cube, and dodecahedron. Here’s a few pics:
I remember seeing a compound of 14 cubes in a book, years ago. I would like to try that next. Thinking on it, I believe the 15th cube would match the positioning of the first cube (with a different face at that position). This indicates to me that each successive cube should be rotated 6 degrees in each of two planes. Any ideas for how this could be done?

-
robertw
- Site Admin
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 6:47 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
-
Contact:
Post
by robertw » Fri Nov 01, 2019 3:47 am
14 cubes? They couldn't all fit into the symmetry group the same way.
Stella has compounds of 6 and 8 cubes in its library. You can blend these together (make sure the scales match!) to make a compound of 14 cubes:

-
Robin Adair
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2018 12:57 am
Post
by Robin Adair » Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:04 pm
Yes, this was in the early 1970’s; I wish I could remember what the book was. I was interested, but (considering the methods of the time) I felt it would have been more work than I was willing to expend.
I really want to thank you for your program ,making it so much easier. Back in the day, using a protractor to measure small prints, making an enlarged version, pushing pins through several sheets of construction paper (not as stiff as card stock), and the poorer glues available to me, between the time and effort of all this, it was easy to get overwhelmed. And, of course, the results were not as good.
-
marcelteun
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sweden, Europe
-
Contact:
Post
by marcelteun » Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:32 pm
You can also put together 1, 3, 4, and 6 to get 14 cubes. This looks as follows:
In that case you will not be able to the the 15th of course
Here I used the 6 | S4xI /D2xI version, there is also a version 6 | S4xI / C4xI where you have a rotational freedom. In that case I would use an angle that will evenly divide when adding the extra cube, i.e.mu=30 degrees.... Hmm, actually because to the classical compound of 3 cubes, one more is added to that plane. That means that mu=22.5 degrees would be even nicer.
-
marcelteun
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:07 am
- Location: Sweden, Europe
-
Contact:
Post
by marcelteun » Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:54 pm
marcelteun wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:32 pm
Here I used the 6 | S4xI /D2xI version, there is also a version 6 | S4xI / C4xI where you have a rotational freedom. In that case I would use an angle that will evenly divide when adding the extra cube, i.e.mu=30 degrees.... Hmm, actually because to the classical compound of 3 cubes, one more is added to that plane. That means that mu=22.5 degrees would be even nicer.
Here is how that looks like
Here it is actually the compound of 11 cubes that looks quite nice.