3D Puzzle Generation via Mesh Segmentation and Flexible Joints

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Designing three-dimensional jigsaw puzzles is complex due to the difficulty in creating pieces that can bend at joints in a durable and repeatable manner, making it challenging to construct a desired three-dimensional shape from flat pieces connected at angles.

Innovation Solution

A system and process for generating three-dimensional puzzle pieces by converting a given shape into a mesh representation, adding attachment and receiving points, and fabricating pieces that can bend at flexible joints to form the desired shape, using a processor and memory to control the process and ensure accurate assembly.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If pieces are designed to bend at joints to form three-dimensional shapes, then the ability to construct desired 3D shapes is improved, but manufacturing durability and repeatability deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveability to construct desired 3D shapesVSAvoidmanufacturing durability and repeatability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The puzzle is divided into multiple flat pieces that can be manufactured separately using standard manufacturing processes, with each piece containing specific joint regions. This segmentation allows each piece to be manufactured with high durability using conventional methods while the collective assembly achieves complex 3D shapes through the arrangement and connection of these segmented components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The invention transitions from traditional 2D puzzle pieces to 3D-capable flat pieces that assemble into three-dimensional structures. By maintaining the flat manufacturing dimension while enabling 3D assembly through angular connections at joints, the system achieves dimensionality transformation without compromising manufacturing reliability of individual pieces.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Shape

If pieces are made to bend at joints in specific ways, then the desired three-dimensional shape is achieved, but fabrication complexity and cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedesired three-dimensional shapeVSAvoidfabrication complexity and cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ShapeVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The puzzle structure is segmented into flat pieces with predefined joint regions that require no complex bending during manufacturing. Each piece is manufactured as a rigid flat component using simple cutting processes, eliminating the need for complex fabrication techniques while still achieving the desired 3D shape through assembly.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of manufacturing pieces that bend into their final 3D shape, the invention inverts the approach by manufacturing flat pieces that assemble into 3D shapes through rigid connections. The bending and angular positioning occurs during assembly rather than during manufacturing, simplifying the fabrication process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

3Ease of manufacture

If a grid pattern is used for cutting puzzle pieces, then manufacturing simplicity is maintained, but piece distinctiveness and puzzle difficulty decrease

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanufacturing simplicityVSAvoidpiece distinctiveness
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The invention introduces asymmetry into the puzzle piece design by varying the joint configurations, connection types, and geometric features of each piece while maintaining the overall grid-based layout. This allows pieces to be manufactured using simple grid-aligned cutting processes while ensuring each piece has distinct characteristics that contribute to puzzle complexity and engagement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

Solution Approach 2:

While maintaining a global grid pattern for manufacturing simplicity, the invention applies local quality variations at each piece level through different joint types, connection geometries, and piece shapes. This allows standard manufacturing processes to be used while creating distinctive and varied puzzle pieces that enhance puzzle difficulty and engagement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS10195519B23D puzzle generation, algorithms for generation, and physical instantiations
Publication Date: 2019.02.05 AUTODESK INC
  • US10195519B2 patent drawing
  • US10195519B2 patent drawing
  • US10195519B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system for generating a three-dimensional puzzle comprises a processor and a memory. The processor is configured to generate a three dimensional mesh representation. The processor is further configured to convert polygons comprising the three-dimensional mesh representation to one or more puzzle piece representations. The processor is further configured to add attachment points and receiving points to the one or more puzzle piece representations. The processor is further configured to provide the one of more puzzle piece representations with attachment points and receiving points. The memory is coupled to the processor and configured to provide the processor with instructions.