Surface area of a cuboid

Geometry Level 1

I want to arrange 12 unit cubes into a rectangular cuboid so that its surface area is maximized.

One way I can do it is by arranging each of these cubes from left to right. Can I increase the surface area further?


Note : A rectangular cuboid is a three-dimensional solid with 6 rectangular faces.

Yes No

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

5 solutions

Stephen Mellor
Oct 16, 2017

Relevant wiki: Surface Area - Problem Solving

No calculations need to be done, as we can prove that this has the most surface area. To maximise the surface area, we want to minimise the number of joined faces, as each joining loses a surface area of 2 × ( 1 × 1 ) 2 \times (1 \times 1) . By joining up each unit cube in a long line, this is meaning that the end cubes have 1 face joined and the rest have 2 faces joined. As this is the smallest possible way in this respect of connecting all the cubes together, it has the maximum surface area.

It's simple folding

Lori Diamond - 3 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

I agree. This has caused high rise building design issues since the wind shear at a 45 degree rotation will increase the structural requirements.

Jaime Aleman - 3 years, 7 months ago

It is a tricky thing to do, but balancing them on edge as diamonds will expose more surface area.

David Jenkins - 3 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

I was thinking the same thing. If they are connected by only their edge (as diamonds), the surface area would be even larger...

Hiba Hamdan - 3 years, 7 months ago

I agree. This has caused high rise building design issues since the wind shear at a 45 degree rotation ill increase the structural requirements.

Jaime Aleman - 3 years, 7 months ago

The problem requires a rectangular cuboid

Stephen Mellor - 3 years, 7 months ago

Moderator note:

This proof is done by showing every cuboid, and noting the surface area of the 1 by 1 by 12 cuboid is the largest. What it doesn't do is rigorously show this is the entire set of possible cuboids.

First cuboid: 1 by 1 by 12

We can split the 12 into two factors, leaving one of the dimensions as 1. As the factors of 12 are 2, 2, and 3, we could factor out 2, 3, 4, or 6. Factoring out a 2 leaves a 6 (and is equivalent to factoring out a 6) and factoring out a 3 leaves a 4 (and is equivalent to factoring out a 4).

Second cuboid: 1 by 2 by 6

Third cuboid: 1 by 3 by 4

Finally, we can split 12 into all three of its factors: 2, 2, 3. Since these are all prime this is the only way to split into three factors where none of the sides are 1.

Fourth cuboid: 2 by 2 by 3

Is this true in general? I.e., can you prove that the surface area of n n unit cubes formed into a cuboid is always maximized when they are arranged in one row?

Eli Ross Staff - 3 years, 8 months ago

Log in to reply

My feeling says yes, but I have no proof. If we look at the number of faces that's out of sight, it seems that in a row that number is least. n-2 cubes have 2 faces covered and 2 cubes have 1 faces covered. This leads to an area of 6 n 2 ( n 2 ) 2 = 4 n + 2 6n - 2 (n-2) - 2 = 4n + 2 . But I in don't know for sure if there's not a configuration of n cubes which has less area loss.

Peter van der Linden - 3 years, 7 months ago

I imagine you can prove it by starting with some arbitrary configuration, then show that moving the cubes more towards the n x 1 x 1 configuration implies that the surface area always increases.

Erik Mingjun - 3 years, 7 months ago

I want to say "Yes". In the figure of result 40 above, It's still arranged from left to right, but 6 top unit cubes just connect to the under ones by their sides, It 's like this " / " or " \ " not like the second " | ".

Long Trần - 3 years, 7 months ago

This question seems contradictory, it states to get the maximum surface area, so doesn't the single separate unit cubes have more surface area than the long line depicted here?

Yaseen Ahammed - 3 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

True, but the problem says that you must glue them together into a single cuboid.

Agnishom Chattopadhyay - 3 years, 7 months ago
Jesse Nieminen
Oct 17, 2017

Relevant wiki: Surface Area of a Cuboid

Imagine any rectangular cuboid constructed 12 12 of these unit cubes floating space.
The surface area of the cuboid can now be measured by how many faces of these unit cubes are visible.
This means that if we want to maximize the surface area, we want to maximize the number of the faces being visible.
However, some of the faces are hidden inside the cuboid and since we have a fixed number of cubes, and thus faces, it is equivalent to say that we want to minimize the number of faces hidden inside the cuboid.
However, to construct a rectangular cuboid out of these unit cubes, we must connect unit cubes by their faces, thus hiding some of the faces.
To construct a cuboid, we must start with a single unit cube and then connect the other cubes to it by faces.
This means that since we have 12 12 cubes, we have to hide at least 2 × 11 2 \times 11 faces, because we have at least 11 11 face-to-face connections between the cubes.



However, in the example cuboid, we make exactly 11 11 face-to-face connections and thus hide 22 22 faces.
Hence, the example cuboid has the maximum possible area meaning that the answer is No \boxed{\text{No}} .

How about a Triangle? X X X X X X X
X X X X X

Rakesh Patel - 3 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

OR CORNER TO CORNER TRIANGLE

Rakesh Patel - 3 years, 7 months ago

Connect each one To Each corner to form a rectangle. That way all 72 faces can be counted.

Ronald Shepard - 3 years, 7 months ago

Log in to reply

That is not a rectangular cuboid.

Jesse Nieminen - 3 years, 7 months ago
Auro Light
Oct 18, 2017

For a given volume, the surface area of sphere is minimum. So, one could imagine that the arrangement in a straight line would have maximum surface area.

John Bonbonniere
Oct 16, 2017

Set the solid in the picture as a fundamental cube. If we want the surface of this solid to be the maximum, we only choose to save the most 1×1 square surfaces. Every time we move a little cube somewhere else to make a new three dimensional solid, the fewest surfaces we delete must be 2 or 0. So, bsed on the solid in the picture 2, whatever move we make, we will only make the number of surfaces fewer or the same. As the consequence, the solid in the picture 2 has the maximum of surface area.

could we make it into a pyramid?

Nico Davila - 3 years, 7 months ago

could we make it into a rectangular donut ?

Gerald Green - 3 years, 7 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...