Eliminating Lubrication with a Mechanical Backstop

[7ombie]

If you added a little backstop (just a small lump of metal) to each of the six arms that form the core of a cube, so there's a backstop just below each centerpiece, the backstops would prevent the springs inside the centerpieces from pushing the centerpieces inwards any further than the position of the backstops.

If the backstops were positioned correctly, the springs would still be able to pull the centerpieces (and in turn, the layers and cube) together, but no more than that. They would not be able to squeeze the layers together, minimizing friction.

A cube could be sold with a specific friction coefficient baked in, or the backstops could be adjustable. Either way, you wouldn't need lubricant anymore.

Would this work, or am I missing something?

 

[abunickabhi]

I did not understand the situation you are describing

 

[7ombie]

Thank you for explaining the issue. I need to make a little CAD model to illustrate the mechanism.

In the mean time, as you were interested, I'll try to explain it another way.

If you grab the Right and Left layers of any cube, and pull them apart, the cube opens up a bit, and the layers split apart. If you then let go, the springs in the center pieces pull the layers back together again. However, the springs don't stop once the layers touch. The springs continue to extend, squeezing the layers together, creating friction between them.

In fact, it's the layers squeezing against one another that stops the springs.

If there was a little stopper on the bar that connects the centre piece to the core, to stop the spring just as the layers touch, it'd (more or less) eliminate the friction.

The exact position of the stopper would determine how much the layers can squeeze together, and the friction that's generated.

 

[7ombie]

I did not understand the situation you are describing

I replied above, but forgot to make it a reply. I hope it makes a bit more sense now. I'll do an illustration soon. Thanks again, mate.

 

[Michael Wimberly]

Thank you for explaining the issue. I need to make a little CAD model to illustrate the mechanism.

In the mean time, as you were interested, I'll try to explain it another way.

If you grab the Right and Left layers of any cube, and pull them apart, the cube opens up a bit, and the layers split apart. If you then let go, the springs in the center pieces pull the layers back together again. However, the springs don't stop once the layers touch. The springs continue to extend, squeezing the layers together, creating friction between them.

In fact, it's the layers squeezing against one another that stops the springs.

If there was a little stopper on the bar that connects the centre piece to the core, to stop the spring just as the layers touch, it'd (more or less) eliminate the friction.

The exact position of the stopper would determine how much the layers can squeeze together, and the friction that's generated.

So you mean a stopper that forms a ring around the plastic stalk of the core at the right diameter to force the springs to stop pushing inwards at a certain point? Is it built in between the spring and the floor of the center piece, or between the center piece and the core?

 

[abunickabhi]

I replied above, but forgot to make it a reply. I hope it makes a bit more sense now. I'll do an illustration soon. Thanks again, mate.

Sounds good

 

[7ombie]

So you mean a stopper that forms a ring around the plastic stalk of the core at the right diameter to force the springs to stop pushing inwards at a certain point? Is it built in between the spring and the floor of the center piece, or between the center piece and the core?

The stopper would be just below the center piece, between the piece and the core, positioned so the bottom (core-facing) side of the center piece hits the stopper (and stops) just as the layers begin to touch.

The little hole in the bottom of the center piece would slide down (towards the core), until it hit the stopper, which would be too big for the hole.

The exact position of the stopper depends on how loose you want it to be, but the difference would be small, maybe 1mm between the loosest setting and the tightest.

 

[Michael Wimberly]

The stopper would be just below the center piece, between the piece and the core, positioned so the bottom (core-facing) side of the center piece hits the stopper (and stops) just as the layers begin to touch.

The little hole in the bottom of the center piece would slide down (towards the core), until it hit the stopper, which would be too big for the hole.

The exact position of the stopper depends on how loose you want it to be, but the difference would be small, maybe 1mm between the loosest setting and the tightest.

This sounds like a good idea

 

[7ombie]

This sounds like a good idea

Thank you. I appreciate you saying so.

 

[That0newe1rdo]

Thank you for explaining the issue. I need to make a little CAD model to illustrate the mechanism.

In the mean time, as you were interested, I'll try to explain it another way.

If you grab the Right and Left layers of any cube, and pull them apart, the cube opens up a bit, and the layers split apart. If you then let go, the springs in the center pieces pull the layers back together again. However, the springs don't stop once the layers touch. The springs continue to extend, squeezing the layers together, creating friction between them.

In fact, it's the layers squeezing against one another that stops the springs.

If there was a little stopper on the bar that connects the centre piece to the core, to stop the spring just as the layers touch, it'd (more or less) eliminate the friction.

The exact position of the stopper would determine how much the layers can squeeze together, and the friction that's generated

So, sounds like a good idea on paper, but would this not feel weird to hold as there may be gaps between layers (my interpretation of this, might have misunderstood).

 

[7ombie]

You could leave very narrow gaps, for minimal friction, or let the gaps close, so the layers are touching, but not pressed together much. It'd be a matter of preference.

That said, I'm not certain that the corner pieces would stay in place properly, if the layers are loosely held together. I think it'd be OK in practice, because the layers are more or less touching still, but it is difficult to say, and may work better with some designs than others etc.

 

[That0newe1rdo]

Yeah. Would probably work best on 3x3s where corner stalks are much wider, and edge stalks are thinner to make up room for corner ones.

You could leave very narrow gaps, for minimal friction, or let the gaps close, so the layers are touching, but not pressed together much. It'd be a matter of preference.

That said, I'm not certain that the corner pieces would stay in place properly, if the layers are loosely held together. I think it'd be OK in practice, because the layers are more or less touching still, but it is difficult to say, and may work better with some designs than others etc.

 

[-Cube Kid-]

I mean, I think it would reduce the need for lube, but not entirely eliminate it. Lube also cuts the noise down and makes it smoother/faster. And there would still be friction present, but there would be less.

 

[-Cube Kid-]

And wouldn't there be a lot of friction between the stoppers and the center pieces?

 

[That0newe1rdo]

I mean, I think it would reduce the need for lube, but not entirely eliminate it. Lube also cuts the noise down and makes it smoother/faster. And there would still be friction present, but there would be less.

Less friction can make the cube more smooth and fast, so lube wouldn't be needed for that, and I don't know about noise but I assume it also decreases that as layers aren't completely touching.

And wouldn't there be a lot of friction between the stoppers and the center pieces?

The stopper could be attached to the center rather then acting as it's own piece. The then no longer interact in a way creating friction.

Some mechanisms could make this harder as some cores have huge spaces in, making it so the stopper may only work keep the layers seperate when the puzzle is completely aligned, and when not aligned, the stopper would just fall down as there is nothing to hold it, rendering it almost useless since there is no easy way to get it back into a useful posistion.

Ball core cubes shouldn't have this issue though.