Geodesic dome construction has interested me since the 1960s, when I first became aware of that alternative to square box architecture. Buckminster "Bucky" Fuller popularized the idea, but as my quick research for this instructable finds, he was not the originator. That credit apparently goes to Dr. Walther Bauersfeld, who used the concept for the Zeiss Planetarium built some 20 years prior to Fuller's work. This is a Wikipedia link to Buckminster Fuller http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller and to Walther Bauersfeld http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walther_Bauersfeld .
Credits out of the way, geodesic domes are beautiful structures. Spheres give the greatest interior volume with the minimum of material. Their basic geometry can be broken up into hexagons and pentagons, or further broken up into triangles. See the rotating geogedisic spheres on the Buckminster Fuller page.
This model is made up of triangle units, which I then combined into hexagons and pentagons. Those units were then combined to make the sphere. I used bamboo shish-kabob skewers from the supermarket (called pincho sticks where I live), and hot melt glue.
Credits out of the way, geodesic domes are beautiful structures. Spheres give the greatest interior volume with the minimum of material. Their basic geometry can be broken up into hexagons and pentagons, or further broken up into triangles. See the rotating geogedisic spheres on the Buckminster Fuller page.
This model is made up of triangle units, which I then combined into hexagons and pentagons. Those units were then combined to make the sphere. I used bamboo shish-kabob skewers from the supermarket (called pincho sticks where I live), and hot melt glue.
Remove these ads by
Signing UpStep 1: GEOMETRY
An equilateral triangle is a triangle composed of three sides of equal length. A flat hexagon (six sides) can be constructed out of six equilateral triangles. To more closely approximate spherical curvature, you want to raise the center of the hexagon a little. You do this by increasing the length two sides of each triangles, the sides that radiate out from the center of the hexagon. The longer you stretch the two sides, the more exaggerated will be the peak in the center of the hexagon.
In a flat pentagon (5 sides) the two sides of the triangles that radiate from the center will be shorter than the third side. To more closely approximate a sphere, you have to lengthen them also. As with the hexagon, the amount that those sides are lengthened will determine the height of the peak in the center.
I don't know the math for making triangles that result in a near-perfect sphere, but I find the idea of lumpy domes and peaky geodesic spheres more interesting anyway. Just playing it by feel, this is the design I came up with.
I used the same triangles for making the hexagons and the pentagons. The dimensions I used for the triangles are: 2 inches for the short side, 2 1/4 inches for the long sides. Whatever variations you do with sides that radiate from the center, the outer sides have to be the same so that the hexagons and pentagons will join correctly.
(I have plans for making a next-generation model with the hexagon peaks going inward and the pentagon peaks going outward, to make a pollen grain-like structure.)
In a flat pentagon (5 sides) the two sides of the triangles that radiate from the center will be shorter than the third side. To more closely approximate a sphere, you have to lengthen them also. As with the hexagon, the amount that those sides are lengthened will determine the height of the peak in the center.
I don't know the math for making triangles that result in a near-perfect sphere, but I find the idea of lumpy domes and peaky geodesic spheres more interesting anyway. Just playing it by feel, this is the design I came up with.
I used the same triangles for making the hexagons and the pentagons. The dimensions I used for the triangles are: 2 inches for the short side, 2 1/4 inches for the long sides. Whatever variations you do with sides that radiate from the center, the outer sides have to be the same so that the hexagons and pentagons will join correctly.
(I have plans for making a next-generation model with the hexagon peaks going inward and the pentagon peaks going outward, to make a pollen grain-like structure.)
Visit Our Store »
Go Pro Today »
I'm just a little bit before step 6.
I did the first pentagon, 5 hex, and 5 pent.
Next layer will be 5 hex. Actually it stands at 12inch high.
I used popsicle stick I found in my old appartment. not sure I'll have enough though..
Added a Row tonight using all that was left of stick.
Then went to buy all the stick I will need to finish it. Plus all the glue...
Want to build one the size of a mouse or the size of a house heres the place you need
I been playing with these for a long time...
If you want the corners to be more precise, try marking the end cuts with a pencil and then whacking it with a sharp chisel and a hammer over a block of wood to make the cut. It should be fairly fast and precise.
You could calculate the angles with math or come close enough with trial and error. When you have your pattern stick you can easily cut copies of it.
I made a similar structure a few years back (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_ditrigonal_icosidodecahedron) with hot glue and toothpicks -- and covered it with tissue paper.
I hung it up as a lampshade (on an incandescent bulb) and within a few hours it had fallen down to the ground misshapen and somewhat concave... :(
Very nice 'ible!
Because you can model almost anything with small enough triangles (as in, for computer graphics) you can make non-regular shapes (like faces, etc.) too. I am however, quite partial to the regular sphere-like shapes.
Just a thought i wouldn't go much hight than a 60 watt bulb with a paper cover anyway .....