Help with Yoshino's T-Rex Skeleton

[Ben385]

No, twenty-one 40cm squares

Epic, epic fail.

Thanks for my 'lol of the day'

[Adam]

If the Origamido sheet is 16" x 20", then it's surface area is 320 inch². A 4" square has a surface area of 4"² = 16". Thus, from said Origamido sheet one can derive 320"/16" = 20 squares of 4". What Jared said was correct.

If the squares are 3" in length and width, they have a surface area that is 3"² = 9". Thus, 320" of surface area could provide you with 320"/9" = 35 5/9 squares. What Jared said was again correct.

If the squares have a surface area of 40 cm² - I assume that's what you mean - then you could derive ((16* 2,54)*(20*2,54))/40 = 51,6128 squares. Each square would have a length of 40^½, which is somewhere around 2,49". What Hydrax said was correct, though it's a bit of a peculiar choice.

Given the fact that you need 21 squares, the most optimal way to cut the Origamido sheet into pieces would be:
320"/x² = 21
21x² = 320"
x² = (320")/21
x = ((320")/21)^½ ≈ 3,9" in length and width.

3,9" is about 9,91 centimeters, thus it would satisfy Jared's condition that:

(...) Yeah, it's a little complex, but I would go for 7.5 to 10 cm squares.

All hail Origamido!

[origamimasterjared]

Adam, you can't just use area to determine the number of squares you can cut.

Example: How many 3.5 inch squares can you make?

Method 1 (Incorrect): (16 x 20) / (3.5 x 3.5) = 26 3.5 inch squares and change.

Method 2 (Truth): You have to tile the squares across. The question is how many squares can you have in each dimension.
20 / 3.5 = 5.7 = 5 squares
16 / 3.5 = 4.6 = 4 squares

5 x 4 = 20. So you can only make 20 whole squares. The same number of 4 inch squares. If you want to tape scraps together then you can accomplish the numbers you get using the total area method.

20 / 3 = 6.7 = 6
16 / 3 = 5.3 = 5

6 x 5 = 30 3 inch squares.

4 inch squares works either way, because both 16 and 20 are divisible by 4.

If you wanted all 21 squares from one sheet, 3.5 or 3.6 inch squares would probably be a good option. This is because you could make 20 squares, and use some of the fairly large scraps to form a 21st square. Using 3.9 inch squares, that would be really difficult.

And Origamido is too thin. Using 16 inch squares would be a horrible idea.

[Adam]

I stand corrected! Didn't think about it that way.

Although theoretically speaking my analysis is still correct; one can always tape together the scraps to form additional squares, thus using the full surface area

[HankSimon]

My method took less math.

I bought a packet of 4" gold foil squares, and had a few left over for mistakes. I'd recommend saving the Origamido - regardless of the thickness - for a nice, archival, wet-folded, non-modular model.

- Hank Simon

[Origamist388]

Using Origamido for a modular really seems like a waste paper,doesn't it.

[Hydraxon493]

No, twenty-one 40cm squares

Epic, epic fail.

Thanks for my 'lol of the day'

I now bring joy to the world.
Yay.

Edit:
I first tried the model with 21 pieces of A4 paper cut to square, fail.
I bought a pack of 100 3 inch gold foil squares, will this work?
The head will probably only be about 5cm long, but meh.

[Flame_Kurosei]

Hello everyone,

So sorry to bring an old topic up but..could someone help me with the neck of the skeleton? I'm on the part about the neck and arms (more specifically the neck) and I'm not sure what the author is asking for in step 10. What exactly does he mean by "top sheets?" As for what I have so far, (since it has only been 10 steps) I have exactly (at the very least what I believe is exactly) what the diagram is showing so far.

The only way that I believe vaguely resembles the next step is if I alter the center square by adding two (one on each side flap) mountain folds. I've included an image of what I'm trying to say (sorry if my scans are a bit unclear). Is this what the author's trying to say?

http://flamekurosei.deviantart.com/#/d33iyyw

Thank you for your assistance.

[Falcifer]

Look at step 8, where you "fold the top sheet inside", this is basically what you're trying to do in step 10, too.

Where it says "fold the top sheets inwards" in step 10, it means that you fold the topmost layers inside, along the diagonal mountain folds.

The new mountain fold that you've indicated shouldn't be necessary, however, it does say "use the existing creases", but there's a diagonal valley fold which isn't on an existing crease (at least in my quickly folded version).
When you fold the layer inside, and fold the top part down (along the horizontal valley fold and the lower diagonal valley fold), it will be necessary to create a new diagonal crease, which will be on the inside part. In the diagrams, it looks like it's at 45 degrees, but it's not at 45 degrees on my model.

I would suggest folding the top part so that it's at 90 degrees to the rest of the model.
Then tuck the top layers inside the points. The top layers will lift up and the model won't lie flat.
Then flatten the model, slowly, pushing the layer which is inside the point flat, then press it flat completely.

Hope this helps.