Decadent – Triple Dip

What do you do when you go to make a symmetry puzzle from a highly symmetric shape cut into 10 congruent isosceles triangles and then lose one of the those triangles?  Well, if you’ve been at this for a while, you randomly glue the triangles up and hope nobody notices.  And just to be sure that no one catches on, you theme the whole thing on 3s – 3 triangles, 3 pieces, triple ...
 
Triple Dip, designed by symmetrologist George Sicherman, is a 2D symmetry puzzle consisting of 3 pieces, each consisting of 3 isosceles triangles.  All 9 triangles are identical and are one tenth of a decagon.  Most 2D symmetry puzzles are laser-cut or 3D printed but the Triple Dip puzzles offered in Wood Wonders last release are of the decadent variety, made from a selection of exotic woods.

I got the triple Triple Dip made from 3 different types of exotic woods.  The choices where 1, 3, or 9 different types of exotic woods.  Having each piece with the same 3 different types of woods seemed like the most mind-bending option.  We’re all used to symmetry puzzles in a single color.  9 different colors would start to shake things up a bit.  But having each piece made from the same 3 different woods starts to pull the brain out of whack as it tries to align the colors.  Already possessing a herniated brain, I simply enjoyed the swirling colors in my mind as I ceaselessly shuffled pieces in front of me. 

Triple Dip arrives in a nice drawstring pouch with the name of the puzzle lasered on the bag.  Of course, the object is to arrange the 3 pieces into a symmetric shape once you have stopped admiring the eye candy.

I’m always amazed with how non-straightforward solving 3-piece 2D symmetry puzzles are.  I just know that there is a mathematical approach to solving them but I haven’t cracked it yet.  It always looks so easy and I always end up spending way more time than I expected on solving them.  Needless to say, they are awesome and I have quite a few of them.  Perfect fidget puzzles and they travel nicely.

After working on Triple Dip for a while, I discovered that I could make a symmetric shape with just 2 of the pieces.  The third piece wasn’t really needed after all.  Pretty sneaky I thought as I put the puzzle on the solved pile where it sat all alone.

Missing the swirling colors in my mind, I took Triple Dip back out for another twirl.  I spun those bits around like there was no tomorrow until it looked like it was ready to take off.  It was then that I noticed something peculiar.  The left side looked kind of like the right side but reversed.  Checking to be sure that a mirror hadn’t slipped in during the frenzy, I concluded that I must have come across a 3-piece solution.  Undaunted, I quickly scrambled them back up and continued twirling them around with a big smile.  Pretty wood ...

If you want to dip into symmetry puzzles, Triple Dip is still available at Wood Wonders.  And you can choose between having the puzzle made from either 1, 3, or 9 species of exotic woods.

A Spirited Journey – Templars Cross

Templars Cross is as easy as Six Face (Little Nightmares – Six Face), the last Andrew Crowell Turning Interlocking Cube (TIC) that I did.  In other words, I found it difficult.  Six Face had a piece that just gave me problems.  Templars Cross gave me twins to deal with.  Beware the terrible twos(ome).  But let’s start at the beginning.

Templars Cross is a 5x5x5 TIC designed by Andrew Crowell.  The red outer shell encases a 3x3x3 white apparent cube.  Each side of the outer shell has 8 missing voxels basically giving you 6 red crosses on a white background.  Of the 6 pieces that comprise Templars Cross, 2 are mostly red and 4 are mostly white.

Creating the red outer shell is not difficult but adding the white pieces becomes progressively harder.  The first piece is a gimme with a gotcha.  However, the gotcha will be short-lived if you stumble across it.  That leaves 3 little pieces to go.  2 are all white and 1 has a single red cube.  And that single red cube will be your friend once you solve it.

You need to determine how to place the 3 white pieces to make a cube with the white pieces already in the frame.  And do it such that the single empty voxel is cached behind the red frame making the cube appear solid.  And do it so that the frame pieces can be put together.  Did I mention that those twins have to be rotated several times while all this is going on?

The twins are mirror images of each other and are the A and B Soma pieces.  One end of the A piece is red so that has to plug the missing spot in the frame.  Easy, right?  Not so much.  And with all those rotations going on, it gives you an extra opportunity to get the wrong end of the A piece sticking out.

It’s an effort to determine how the white pieces need to be oriented in the cube.  It’s a bigger effort to determine how the pieces need be oriented to get the cube apart.  It’s an even bigger effort to determine how to perform the rotations to go between the 2 orientations.  This is the part that I really struggled on.

After a couple of sessions with Templars Cross, I was beginning to understand the symbolic tie to martyrdom and sacrifice.  I finally decided to throw a Hail Mary and put the pieces in what I assumed was the starting configuration and closed it up.  The only thing to do now was to rotate the pieces until it was solved, taken back apart, or stuck.

Once the frame is closed and locked (yes, one of the pieces acts as a lock), the 2 halves of the frame only shift 1 voxel in either of 2 directions but not both.  It turns out that both are needed in the solution.  I was happy to discover that I had indeed correctly figured out the starting configuration and was able to perform the required rotations to achieve the solved state.  And I find it highly repeatable knowing how Rudolph needs to be oriented.

Oh! – Fudge

Were you are expecting a quick solve?  Fudge get about it.  Which brings us to the latest puzzle confection – Fudge.

Fudge is a 3D packing puzzle designed by Takuro Kawasaki.  It was entered in the Nob Yoshigahara Puzzle Design Competition at the 42nd International Puzzle Party (IPP) where it won a Top 10 Vote Getter award.

How difficult could it be?  4 simple identical pieces that have to be packed in a box with one side completely open except for 2 voxels on opposite sides of the box. Not only are the pieces identical but they are symmetric, reducing the number of orientations that you have to check.  You will eventually stop yourself from rotating the pieces completely around to see if it fits in better the other way.  Or grabbing another piece to see if it fits better.

The pieces work in pairs and tangle each other to lock them in place.  You’ll eventually convince yourself that they only go together in 2 configurations that I call the cuboid and the corner.  And you would be right.  Unless you were wrong.

Any combination of cuboids and corners can fit within the box but not all them can be removed.  Once under the 2 covered corners, nothing wants to let go.

You may try to solve it with nice simple crisp rectilinear movements but at some point you’re just going to have to fudge it, maybe even double fudge it so do it on a Sunday.  It’s not difficult but makes for a nice treat on the weekend. 

Magical Slant On Puzzling – Diagonal Twins

Diagonal Twins was designed byYasuhiro Hashimoto and entered in the Nob Yoshigahara Puzzle Design Competition at the 42nd International Puzzle Party (IPP) in Japan.  It won the Puzzlers’ Award (top puzzle selected by the attendees) as well as a Jury Honorable Mention Award (even the judges liked it).

Diagonal twins consists of 4 dicubes that need to be packed within a cubic box.  The box opening is just about a quarter of the box.  Normally it would be easy to put 4 dicubes in such a box in several ways but the dicubes have been altered to make 2 identical male (rails) and 2 identical female (alleys) dicubes.  All you have to do is match them to get a nice cube and then figure out how to get that cube within the box.  There is no more room for requirements. 

Except that the angle of the rails and alleys forces the pieces to be at 90 degrees to each other, which appears impossible to place within the box.  Somehow, each diagonal rail has to be magically transported within a diagonal alley.  However, with the box impeding your progress, you’re left wondering how to get through the walls.

You need to experiment and discover how to levitate a piece without touching it (wingardium leviosa – pronunciation counts apparently).  It’s even more challenging without the benefit of a wand.  With some practice, you can learn to do this when you’re in a tight spot – like a box – like a box with a constrained opening.

Although not difficult, the movements to solve the puzzle are magical indeed.  And if it takes you a while, don’t be a muggle and give up.  Keep going and discover the magic for yourself.

And once the puzzle is solved, removing the pieces from the box is as easy as spilling butterbeer from a leaky cauldron.  

Little Nightmares – Six Face

It seems that I’ve been on a Turning Interlocking Cube (TIC) hiatus.  Not sure how that happened, but I’m glad to have recently acquired some new Andrew Crowell gems in the 5x5x5 format.  The first one that I decided to tackle was Six Face.  Not Six Faces, Sixth Face, or Six’s Face but Six Face.  I could only assume that it would be a significant challenge and reveal itself as a little nightmare.  Needless to say, it took me longer than expected to solve.

Six Face was designed by Andrew Crowell and my version is 3D printed.  The puzzle is not a complete 5x5x5 cube but looks like a 3x3x3 cube with each face extended outward.  One of these faces is debossed with the name of the puzzle.  The face was carefully chosen so that the name was on a single piece to avoid providing any additional placement clues.  In total, there are 6 pieces that have to be assembled into the final shape.  It only takes 28 moves and there are a couple of rotations along the way.

I took Six Face and several other puzzles with me on vacation to PA, which is ironic since they were sent from PA by kind gentleman looking to spread the frustration.  And by frustration, I mean joy of course.  As always, I overestimated the number of puzzles that I would need.  I started with Six Face and almost ended there as well.  At least I was able to bring it home solved.  YES it was me that solved it!  I’m disappointed that you would even think otherwise.

Solving Six Face took me several sessions.  Right out of the bag, you need to spend 1 of your rotations to get the first 2 pieces together.  Or are they not the first 2 pieces?  Only time will tell.

With the 3 biggest pieces, you can construct most of the visible shape leaving you with the 3 smaller pieces that need to fill the gaps.  Of course, the order of entering those pieces and movements required are what make the puzzle challenging.  Two of the smaller pieces are dancing partners and work nicely to build out the solution path.  But it’s that last piece that is the crux of the solve.  For whatever reason, I had a huge blind spot concerning the where, when, and how of this piece.  It could obviously exist in 2 different orientations, so there were twice as many avenues to explore.  Adding it earlier would provide more room for it to navigate but of course would reduce the mobility of the other pieces.  And just how could that crux piece be added and manipulated into position.

I’m sure it will come as no surprise that a lot of steps were repeated looking for a new avenue to present itself.  With all this experimentation, it became apparent that the final orientation of the crux piece would be different from the orientation that it would enter the framework with regardless of which of the 2 possible orientations was the correct one.  You would think that knowing this, it would be easy to find an orientation where it could be inserted within the frame.  However, I found this a difficult challenge.

Eventually, I found a way to add the crux piece and rotate it into place.  So simple!  How could I have missed it?  All that was left was to determine how to add the dancing partners with it.  Not easy.  Nope.  Not happening.  And it didn’t happen, leaving me to wonder if it was just difficult or if I was barking up the wrong orientation.  At this point I had to split my time between working this approach as well as trying to find an approach for the other crux piece orientation.

Eventually 2, I found a way to add the crux piece in the other orientation and rotate it into place.  So simple!  How could I have missed it?  All that was left was to determine how to add the dancing partners with it.  At least this time, I was able to get everything in place and finally solve Six Face.

Fast forward several months to now when I want to blog about it and take it apart.  No surprises.  The crux piece volunteers to rotate and comes out nicely as expected.  Mission completed!  Except I can’t get it back together!  Try as I might, I just can’t find the exact insertion trajectory.  Unbelievable!  (You’d think by now that I would find this believable).  I spent at least another hour if not 2 getting it back together.  Not only that, I had to check both crux piece orientations since I didn’t pay attention to which one it was when taking it apart.  I’m assuming/hoping that if I take it apart again several months from now, it will be smooth sailing but at this point, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it were a rough ride.

If you're interested in acquiring any of Andrew's puzzles, you can visit his online store ARC Puzzles.

No Problem Puzzles, Update #7

No Problem Puzzles provided over 100 amazing puzzles designs for the community between November 2020 and April 2023 until the tragic passing of Symen Hovinga on 7 April 2023.  Theo Geerinck, the other half of the No Problem Puzzles duo, decided to graciously allow the puzzle designs to be made available to the puzzle community for anyone to print their own copy to keep the legacy alive.  Mr BurrTools himself, Andreas Röver, is currently in the process of verifying and publishing the stl model files over the next several months.  These are being made available on the Printables site under the No Problem Puzzles collection.  Another contributor, Crab on Printables, has also tweaked some of the models to improve them.

This post continues the review of the No Problem Puzzles as the models are being released.  Since the last review (No Problem Puzzles, Update #6), more No Problem Puzzles have become available.

Squeezy

Squeezy consists of 5 pieces that have to be packed within a holey frame made from 2 identical pieces that slide together.  And the sliding is hampered by all the pieces that have to be stuffed inside.  Of course, this is one of those puzzles where you don’t have much to start with, find some things to hang your hat on, discover some key moves, realize what you had been missing, and end up saying - of course.  The things that I got right didn’t hurt me whereas the things that I got wrong led me astray.  In the end, after discovering some rather nice movements, I managed to get past my short-sightedness and strangle, I mean squeeze the frame together.  Squeezy provides a really good challenge for a level 3 puzzle.

I lied when I said that the 2 halves of the frame were identical.  One piece has the puzzle information debossed on it.  Ohhhh, is that a clue?  Maybe, maybe not.  But I did reverse the 2 halves after I initially solved it.  Make of it what you will.  Just for the record, my wife believes that I have no clue what clue really means and that I don’t give out clues because I’m clueless.

I Box

The goal of I Box is to pack 5 pieces within a box with a v-shaped opening.  It has the same difficulty rating of level 3 as Squeezy but is completely different.  For this one, I would recommend that you solve it before you solve it.  In other words, have a well defined plan when adding the pieces to the box since it is a bit fiddly to get pieces back out once they are in the box.  Especially since the pieces need to be rotated and enter/exit the box at a 45 degree angle.  Also, unlike Squeezy, it doesn’t have a lot of finger holes for manipulating the pieces - 0 versus 18 unless you count the opening.  However, I did find the solution much quicker and with a solid plan, manipulating the pieces into place was not that difficult.

Mecon

A truncated octahedron by any other name, such as macon, would look as wondrous.
    - Not Shakespeare

Macon is a level 3 puzzle requiring packing 12 truncated octahedrons, or macons, into a cubish form that can be displayed in the provided stand.  But wait, the macons are split in half resulting in 24 semimacons.  Groups of 4 are then reattached to make 6 semimacon tetraclusters.  Except the process was botched and they weren’t reattached where they were cut.  Of the 6 tetraclusters, there are 4 of one type and 2 of another.  It’s up to you to rejoin the unmated halves.  To make it a bit more interesting, not all semimecons are mated to lend it a more cubish appearance.

The puzzle is not difficult, but it does take some time to adjust to the geometry.  And having done it more than once, it didn’t seem to get any easier the second time around.

But why were the truncated octahedrons made hollow?  Probably because they make a cool pattern when the puzzle is solved.  But of course, now everyone is going to wonder if you place a space-filling cuboid in each mated center, would you still be able to assemble it?  I would go with no but they tell me you never no.

Multiplex

Multiplex consists of 4 square chipped tiles that need to be packed within a square tray.  In essence, you need to map the pointy bits into chips.  The description says that Multiplex is a level 2 puzzle with 196,608 theoretical combinations to try.  Not hard, just takes a long time to solve.  I don’t know how the number of combinations was computed, but lucky for us, it seems a bit inflated.  Disregarding the edge details of the pieces, I think there would be 12,288 combinations.  And if you’re observant, you can quickly knock it down to 3,072.  After that, you will certainly avoid trying every possible combination and only check the ones with matching edges to converge on the solution.  I appreciated the thought that went into this design that rewarded the solver with a significant clue in the beginning to avoid a lot of unnecessary and tedious tile swapping.


If you don’t have a 3D printer, you can obtain copies of these puzzles from Nothing Yet Designs based in the US or the PuzzleguyStore based in the EU.

King Of Red Herrings – Neptune

Neptune is a 3D packing puzzle designed by Osanori Yamamoto and made by Pelikan Puzzles.  The pieces are made from Maple and contrast nicely with the Mahogany box.  The box is very well made and has the name of the puzzle and designer identified on one of the sides.  The box also features 2 large opposing slots in the box for entering and manipulating the pieces.

I was a bit surprised that the puzzle consisted of 6 pieces to be packed within the box.  This is more than you would typically encounter for this type of puzzle, especially from Osanori.

I assumed that the goal was to make an apparent cube within the box.  Taking the 6 pieces, I was quickly able to make a cube outside the box.  It took me a minute to realize that it wasn’t just apparently a cube, it was a cube.  All 27 voxels of the 3x3x3 space are occupied.  I was completely surprised since that would mean that the first piece to be removed would have to come out in a single move.  Completely un-Osanori like.

So I did some googling and found a couple of reputable sites indicating that the level of difficulty for Neptune was 7.2.1.2.2.  This means that the first piece would come out after 7 moves.

What!!!  That’s not possible!  I’m certain it’s not possible.  It couldn’t really be possible could it?  Will this puzzle open my eyes and demonstrate some out-of-this-world physics to accomplish the seemingly impossible?

Taken in by this claim, I spent an hour revisiting my assertion that the first piece must come out in 1 move and tried to find a flaw in my logic that would allow a move that did not free the first piece.  Try as I might, I was unsuccessful and decided that something fishy was going on.

Starting over with the assumption that the first piece comes out in 1 move, I rather quickly had the pieces packed within the box.  It wasn’t that difficult.  Most of the time I had spent with the puzzle was trying to envision the impossible.

So did I really solve it?  I believe so.  I dug a little deeper and found that puzzlewillbeplayed.com had the same level that I experienced – with the first piece coming out in 1 move!  I should have checked there first.