Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Become a Premium Member! Help
Latest News Article

My Formula for Calculating the Amount of Blocks Needed for a House

formula house calculating amount blocks

  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1

Scratchthatguys
  • Location: Bham, Alabama
  • Minecraft: Scratchthatguys
  • Xbox:blahgory

Posted 01 February 2013 - 03:23 AM

This formula is only capable of calculating square or rectangular houses, sorry.
The formula is as follows: ((l * w) - ((l - 2) * (w - 2)) * (h - i)) + (l * w) * 2
It counts the floor in it too, so make sure to change the l - 2 and w - 2 to l - 1 and w - 1.

Basically, what it's doing is first taking l (the length) and multiplying it by the width to get the floor height. But for this part, we don't want the floor height. We subtract two from the length and width and multiply those two new numbers (It gives us the interior length and width somehow).

Then, we subtract both of the numbers we ended up with and multiply it by h (height) and i (indoor height, because subtracting 2 doesn't work. I could remove it with a small workaround, but it'd make the formula larger and more complicated.) We should end up with the amount of wood we need for the house, minus the roof and floor. To get that, we multiply the length and width, then multiply that by two, to combine our roof and floor block totals. We just add both numbers, and then we have our total!

Hope I haven't hurt your head too much. Note you need to subtract two from the total to create the doorway. Subtract four for double, and subtract more for windows as needed.

Also, the modified one without the indoor height parameter is like this:
((l * w) - ((l - 2) * (w - 2)) * (h - (h - 2))) + (l * w) * 2
It makes you only have to specify the length, width and height for the house.
I'll come up with more formulas soon. Also, if you have another formula, you're welcome to post it here!

Posted Image

Join Now! (Or die.)


Register or log in to remove.

#2

TNTProfessional

Posted 01 February 2013 - 03:25 AM

What did I just read?

Anyways nice formula, sure you put a lot of work into it, but being someone like me, I don't quite get it.
Posted Image
Piggy is now your king. Bow.

#3

Scratchthatguys
  • Location: Bham, Alabama
  • Minecraft: Scratchthatguys
  • Xbox:blahgory

Posted 01 February 2013 - 03:33 AM

I was bored and I was in math class. Pre-AP gets boring when you're going over homework D:
So yeah, it pretty much takes the amount of wood for the floor and roof, and each layer of the actual wall, and adds them all up in the "easiest" way possible.
Replace every "l" with a number, every "w" with a number, and every "h" with a number and do the resulting math. Remember, everything surrounded by 3 or 4 parentheses is done first, 3 or 2 is done second, 2 or 1 is done third, and 1 or 0 is done last. Know your Order of Operations, kids. :P
So try this:
l=5
w=5
h=5
(The standard 5x5x5 house. It has no windows, but I'll subtract 2 for a door.)
((5 * 5) - ((5 - 2) * (5 - 2)) * (5 - (5 - 2))) + (5 * 5) * 2
So yeah, just do that.

Posted Image

Join Now! (Or die.)


#4

SuperZac
    SuperZac

    Ghast Hunter

  • Members
  • 2522 posts
  • Location: Las Vegas, NV
  • Minecraft: SuperZac

Posted 01 February 2013 - 04:38 AM

My mathematically incorrect formula

A x B = House

Where A = amount of blocks/second placed and B = amount of time until night.
Anyway, good formula, though that is a really boring house. And don't get mad at me for my little joke.

#5

MossStoneLover64

Posted 01 February 2013 - 06:12 AM

Just use the surface area of the rectangular prism you use.

#6

Laughing_Man16
  • Location: Oh you know. Here and there I suppose.
  • Minecraft: Laughing_Man16
  • Xbox:No thank you

Posted 01 February 2013 - 06:19 AM

I'm sorry but you actually 'calculate' your houses? That's... Well it's one way to make a house I suppose. But it seems a little soulless. Maybe if you were doing a modular thing it could work but I think it kind of takes the life out of the house to just have it rectangular or square. though it might be a good jumping off point if you had a basic area you wanted to build on and just wanted to ball park what some more complex geometry might cost you block wise.
Humanity is the creation of Logic and Emotion, Calculation and Imagination, Cold Analysis and Blind Faith. This is why I believe it is a strange Human that would prize one while shunning the other. For a calculator can do math just as well as you, but a calculator can not use math to make the world a better place.

#7

SeriouslyGuize

Posted 01 February 2013 - 10:51 PM

Hey guys! I saw this thread and thought boy, this is right up my alley! I love using complex formulas to do stuff, especially plan out complex projects! I really started my love for mathematicals when I was five or six, I was born in a small city called Ashmore right south of Canberra to a loving couple. My mother is a teacher and my father has a natural passion for science and intellectual pursuits, so it's in my genes to do things like this! I know what you're thinking, "woah, this guy was born in australia!?" but don't worry! I'm a normal kid just like you. After all, I moved to southern california when I was two. I've lived here most of my life, so I've been raised in the most intelligent region of the world. I am really mature and super smart for my age, probably smarter than my teachers lol. I'm just naturally talented. In the first grade I decoded my own toaster for a science project, but it was really simple when I think about it now. As I grew up I made some friends but most of them just didn't get along with me. It's not easy when you're so far ahead of the curve. I like coding in batch and DDOS stuff so I guess you could say I'm kind of a techno nerd prodigy. I excelled in maths and realized my real creative potential in minecraft last year. I'm sort of a hipster so I played minecraft before everyone else really. I decided that maybe there were people on the forums that could use my expertise so here I am!

Anyway, I made up this formula originally to tell me how long a rod of length X is, but I've used my knowledge to adapt it to this game. So we can easily just plug in the numbers and find our answer in blocks, and know how many blocks we will need to create a 1x1 pillar of a certain height.

First we have to convert our blocks to meters. We know that a block is 1 cubic meter, and that the length and width are 1 meter, so we can deduce that the height must be 1 meter. So for each block we're going to use, this pillar will be 1 meter taller. This can be expressed as ((blocks x 1 meter)=tallness)

Now this seems relatively simple, but we need to add some safeties to make sure our formula will work in regions as far as 1024(i use this number because it is more computer savvy than 1000) meters from the origin. So now we can use our calculus knowledge to work it out!


This format uses the S as the integral sign and then (lower limit, upper limit)

(((((S(0,height) (2) dx) + 4)/2) - (2 x (sin(pi x (height/(2 x height))))))^2 = (blocks^2))





And there you go!!! Just plug in the numbers to find out how many blocks you need!

#8

Impl0x
    Impl0x

    Tree Puncher

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:17 PM

View PostSeriouslyGuize, on 01 February 2013 - 10:51 PM, said:

Hey guys! I saw this thread and thought boy, this is right up my alley! I love using complex formulas to do stuff, especially plan out complex projects! I really started my love for mathematicals when I was five or six, I was born in a small city called Ashmore right south of Canberra to a loving couple. My mother is a teacher and my father has a natural passion for science and intellectual pursuits, so it's in my genes to do things like this! I know what you're thinking, "woah, this guy was born in australia!?" but don't worry! I'm a normal kid just like you. After all, I moved to southern california when I was two. I've lived here most of my life, so I've been raised in the most intelligent region of the world. I am really mature and super smart for my age, probably smarter than my teachers lol. I'm just naturally talented. In the first grade I decoded my own toaster for a science project, but it was really simple when I think about it now. As I grew up I made some friends but most of them just didn't get along with me. It's not easy when you're so far ahead of the curve. I like coding in batch and DDOS stuff so I guess you could say I'm kind of a techno nerd prodigy. I excelled in maths and realized my real creative potential in minecraft last year. I'm sort of a hipster so I played minecraft before everyone else really. I decided that maybe there were people on the forums that could use my expertise so here I am!

Anyway, I made up this formula originally to tell me how long a rod of length X is, but I've used my knowledge to adapt it to this game. So we can easily just plug in the numbers and find our answer in blocks, and know how many blocks we will need to create a 1x1 pillar of a certain height.

First we have to convert our blocks to meters. We know that a block is 1 cubic meter, and that the length and width are 1 meter, so we can deduce that the height must be 1 meter. So for each block we're going to use, this pillar will be 1 meter taller. This can be expressed as ((blocks x 1 meter)=tallness)

Now this seems relatively simple, but we need to add some safeties to make sure our formula will work in regions as far as 1024(i use this number because it is more computer savvy than 1000) meters from the origin. So now we can use our calculus knowledge to work it out!


This format uses the S as the integral sign and then (lower limit, upper limit)

(((((S(0,height) (2) dx) + 4)/2) - (2 x (sin(pi x (height/(2 x height))))))^2 = (blocks^2))





And there you go!!! Just plug in the numbers to find out how many blocks you need!

An excellent and impressive effort, SeriouslyGuize!

However while yours is no doubt a highly useful and accurate formula, I have to say that I find it to be insufficient for the level of accuracy which I often find myself requiring. You see, I've been playing minecraft since its first alpha release, and have watched with pride as the game grew and developed. When infdev came out, I realized I was going to need a highly sophisticated yet concise formula to calculate the number of blocks required for my rectangular and square structures. What I developed over course of 3 months is the following formula. I know that you all may be unfamiliar with the methods for solving multivariable calculus expressions, and may be wondering why such an expression is necessary, but I assure you, when you are 1024 kilometers from the initial spawn point, the formula quoted above simply will not allow for the level of accuracy that you need. Those familiar with the fundamentals of multivariable calculus will no doubt notice that this formula compensates for the problems stemming from quadratic integral residue in the context of a 3-dimensional manifold.

Remember your order of operations! Posted Image

Posted Image


And the trojan horse beguiling my sad fancy into smiling.

#9

SeriouslyGuize

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:23 PM

View PostImpl0x, on 01 February 2013 - 11:17 PM, said:

An excellent and impressive effort, SeriouslyGuize!

However while yours is no doubt a highly useful and accurate formula, I have to say that I find it to be insufficient for the level of accuracy which I often find myself requiring. You see, I've been playing minecraft since its first alpha release, and have watched with pride as the game grew and developed. When infdev came out, I realized I was going to need a highly sophisticated yet concise formula to calculate the number of blocks required for my rectangular and square structures. What I developed over course of 3 months is the following formula. I know that you all may be unfamiliar with the methods for solving multivariable calculus expressions, and may be wondering why such an expression is necessary, but I assure you, when you are 1024 kilometers from the initial spawn point, the formula quoted above simply will not allow for the level of accuracy that you need. Those familiar with the fundamentals of multivariable calculus will no doubt notice that this formula compensates for the problems stemming from quadratic integral residue in the context of a 3-dimensional manifold.

Remember your order of operations! Posted Image

Posted Image
That's a clever attempt, but I simplified your formula using the triplimatic regression and all you did was rewrite my formula in a new form. I can confirm this because the squaring of both sides in my formula already compensates for the quadratic residue. I don't know if you're trying to be funny, but your little joke isn't tickling my testicles. You overused the sin-cos conundrum and Euler's theorem isn't necessary when you could simply express your integral input as (-1).

#10

SeriouslyGuize

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:35 PM

View PostSeriouslyGuize, on 01 February 2013 - 11:23 PM, said:

That's a clever attempt, but I simplified your formula using the triplimatic regression and all you did was rewrite my formula in a new form. I can confirm this because the squaring of both sides in my formula already compensates for the quadratic residue. I don't know if you're trying to be funny, but your little joke isn't tickling my testicles. You overused the sin-cos conundrum and Euler's theorem isn't necessary when you could simply express your integral input as (-1).

ACTUALLY I FOUND YOUR ERROR. IF YOU MULTIPLY YOUR ENTIRE EQUATION BY THE SQUARE ROOT OF TWO, THEN DIVIDE THE RESULT SQUARED BY THE SQUARE ROOT OF FOUR, WE CAN REACH A COMMON GROUND!!!!

#11

Impl0x
    Impl0x

    Tree Puncher

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:54 PM

View PostSeriouslyGuize, on 01 February 2013 - 11:35 PM, said:

ACTUALLY I FOUND YOUR ERROR. IF YOU MULTIPLY YOUR ENTIRE EQUATION BY THE SQUARE ROOT OF TWO, THEN DIVIDE THE RESULT SQUARED BY THE SQUARE ROOT OF FOUR, WE CAN REACH A COMMON GROUND!!!!

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image MY WORD! Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

This explains why I was unable to prevent one of my structures from being bigger on the inside than it was on the outside!!! If only von Nuemann were alive to see us now.

Here is the corrected formula:

Posted Image


And the trojan horse beguiling my sad fancy into smiling.

#12

Leo898
    Leo898

    Stone Miner

  • Members
  • 73 posts
  • Location: US
  • Minecraft: dmr898
  • Xbox:Leo898

Posted 02 February 2013 - 01:47 AM

LOL I dont think I have EVER laughed so hard on this forums. Thanks guys!

#13

squirrelboy15
  • Location: Above this line ^
  • Minecraft: Squirrelboy15

Posted 02 February 2013 - 02:00 AM

No no. You have it all wrong. Multiply both sides if your equation by zero, then add ten obsidian and block of fire. This will, in fact, allow for buildings that are larger on the inside than the outside.
You better watch closely, or these words just might turn into a juggling squirrel...

#14

KodyKLB
    KodyKLB

    Stone Miner

  • Members
  • 87 posts
  • Minecraft: KodyKLB

Posted 02 February 2013 - 03:38 AM

Dahfuq did I just read? (IM IN CALCULUS I)
Full-time Male nursing student, part-time runner, and casual gamer.

#15

Panda_Doom
  • Location: United States
  • Minecraft: foosey1

Posted 02 February 2013 - 03:48 AM

LOL
Posted Image

#16

sosladms
    sosladms

    Diamond Miner

  • Members
  • 789 posts
  • Location: The Former Hell of Blazing fires
  • Minecraft: CarbonateWater

Posted 02 February 2013 - 05:37 AM

lulz for the posters

Posted Image


#17

cxmaster
    cxmaster

    Redstone Miner

  • Members
  • 651 posts
  • Location: Buildin a house
  • Minecraft: AwedEven
  • Xbox:CxMaster

Posted 02 February 2013 - 05:40 AM

Anyone who builds block houses should just count on their fingers
Posted Image
Did help you or show you something cool. Click that green + and help me.

#18

wilum1
    wilum1

    Diamond Miner

  • Members
  • 801 posts
  • Location: London
  • Minecraft: wilum1

Posted 02 February 2013 - 07:55 AM

View PostImpl0x, on 01 February 2013 - 11:54 PM, said:

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image MY WORD! Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

This explains why I was unable to prevent one of my structures from being bigger on the inside than it was on the outside!!! If only von Nuemann were alive to see us now.

Here is the corrected formula:


Posted Image



I used this formula, and my building ended up smaller on the outside!? WTF!?!

#19

SeriouslyGuize

Posted 02 February 2013 - 04:42 PM

View Postwilum1, on 02 February 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:



I used this formula, and my building ended up smaller on the outside!? WTF!?!

I remember a time back in the summer of '96 when I went to visit my great uncle in China. I began my venture in February, and ended it in July. I know what you may think, but swimming across the pacific is no easy task. At the start I had only my bathing trunks and as i finished my journey I realized what I had become. I looked around at my new kingdom, my new allies. I had assembled a legion of sea turtles to aid me, and an entire army of whales as military escorts through the harsh Asian waters. As I arrived on the shores of Xai-Sho I was greeted by a choir of monks, all welcoming me. They taught me that my methods were with good intentions, but I had made a small error. I hadn't lathered my body correctly. So they brought me to my uncle, a short and uneventful visit, and then I was on my way home. The monks had rubbed my nipples down with smoked salmon, and sent me through the waters. It only took two weeks to make it home. The juices of the salmon had boosted my capacity for love, and my heart grew by four sizes. As everyone knows, the heart is the muscle that makes you swim faster. Those monks allowed my to get home in time to see my fourth child being born, and they taught me a lesson. Always check your methods for small errors. Impl0x didn't correctly express the formula. The sqrt4 in the denominator needs to be square rooted. It should be to the fourth root.

#20

Impl0x
    Impl0x

    Tree Puncher

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 03 February 2013 - 03:47 AM

Ah my mistake. An error when I expressed the equation in LaTeX. Yes, simply change the sqrt(4) to the fourth root of 4 and everything will be resolved.
And the trojan horse beguiling my sad fancy into smiling.