Making a Rubik´s Cube animation

I´m continue the discussion held in the comments of the part Rubik Cube by Robert Stein.

I wondering how you do an animation without using mates? How can I move the cube properly if is isn´t defined with constraints?

I know that I could make the mates suppressed and unsupressed but it will take for ever. There are 87 mates to defined all parts to the right place and it will be even more when starting to move it. I used the this part instead Rubik's Cube

An other problem is when applying colors to the faces. If I give one face a color, every parts get it´s face with that color, because it´s the same parts reused. How can I apply a color to only one brick?

Comments 0

11 Answers

Like I said before, animating the a cube being solved won't be an issue, if you can actually solve it ;). And I'll make a simple video if you like.
Making a functional virtual cube using Physical Move won't be a problem in my opinion, making it work with mates could be a little troublesome and I haven't thought about it yet.
For the stickers color issue, you can model the sticker as a separate parts and use Component Level appearances, Display states or making 6 copies of the file to group each color.
Anyone up to modeling an accurate cube?

Comments 0

Hahahha it can be done with Diven constraints in IV

" • Autodesk Inventor 5.3 used.
• Dimensions match a typical Rubik’s Cube
• All dimensions of parts calculated from paramters in Excel file
– Exterior size
– Diameter of internal sphere
– Length and diameter of central core arms.
– Clearance between components.
• Motion of faces controlled by constraints.
– To rotate a face of a specific color, shut off all the constraints with
names starting with a different color. then drive the angle
constraint of the center to be rotated.
• Animations created by driven "


Comments 1

That's the question, How do you disable/reenable constraints depending on the others?
It would be easy if the constraint could be an equation and not just a number.
Can it be done in ProE, NX or Catia?
I've also tried with path mates and limit mates but SW tells me I'm overdefining the mates.

Comments 0

About the color issue, it's odd because in my other assemblies, when I add the same part more than once into the assembly, I can independently assign colors/appearances to faces/features/bodies to the part without any effect to the same part (#2, #3 etc) in the same assembly. The model I created was assembled with only one mate - concentric, because I couldn't figure what other mate I could add without restraining the freedom of movement of the cube parts that are on corners or edges... For the center cubes I could have use coincident mate as well, but I got away with concentric since the center of the cube is a sphere... I think there is no such solution that would allow a definition of this assembly that would allow a full range of possible moves without getting it to blow to pieces. Creating sets of mates or configurations would be possible, but that is not the solution I was looking for... I guess that this is way beyond my capabilities to solve the puzzle... If that's possible at all...

Comments 8

Just a quick question
does SW not support driven constraints?

Comments 4

I agree with you Ahmed and yes I will go after school tomorrow and get a Rubix cube and take it apart and then model it so it is an exact copy of the cube that we can work with.

Comments 5

You guys are really taking this seriously......... see if this helps

Comments 14

The problem is that IMO most applications don't allow you express the constraints as an equation or relate them to other constraints.
However some script languages could be used.

Comments 0

How do I simulate Rubik's cube in CATIA? Please someone help me out

Comments 0

I have the same problem. Does anyone have solved this puzzle?

Comments 0