Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Validation and Inference of Geometrical Relationships in IFC

Validation and Inference of Geometrical Relationships in IFC

Presentation of the paper available at http://dx.doi.org/10.46421/2706-6568.37.2020.paper008

Abstract: The Industry Foundation Classes are a prevalent open standard to exchange Building Information Models. In such a model, geometric representations are provided for individual building elements along with semantic information, including a significant amount of properties related to geometry and explicit topological relationships. These relationships and quantities introduce redundancies and often inconsistencies as well. Moreover, they introduce complexity in down-stream processing. Combining multiple aspect models into a single model has non-trivial consequences for the connectivity graphs. Programmatic mutations are complicated because of the relationships that need to be updated as a result of changes.
In order to alleviate these issues, this paper provides a theoretical framework and implementation for both validating and inferring semantic and topological con-structs from the geometric representations, rooted on Egenhofer spatial predicates and extended with the IFC modelling tolerance. Combining these two concepts, wall connectivity is equivalent to the intersection of the wall representation boundaries, where a boundary is not a surface, but rather a hollow solid with a thickness derived from the modelling tolerance.
The algorithms presented in this paper are implemented in fully open source software based on the IfcOpenShell software library and the CGAL computational geometry library using Nef polyhedra. We provide a formalization of space boundaries, spatial containment and wall connectivity relationships. The validation and inference rules are applied to a public set of building models. We conclude that exported models have geometric flaws and that several relationships can indeed be inferred by means of generic geometric intersection logic.

Thomas Krijnen

August 19, 2020
Tweet

More Decks by Thomas Krijnen

Other Decks in Research

Transcript

  1. 18-20 August
    VALIDATION AND INFERENCE OF GEOMETRICAL
    RELATIONSHIPS IN IFC
    3B.5
    Thomas Krijnen, Delft University of Technology, NL
    Francesca Noardo, Ken Arroyo Ohori, Hugo Ledoux, and Jantien Stoter

    View full-size slide

  2. 18-20 August
    Inference, or from a dense graph to bag of elements
    for processing and manipulation
    2
    transactional update
    extract valid
    subgraphs

    View full-size slide

  3. 18-20 August
    The complete BIM as a set of aspect models
    in a federated work environment
    3

    View full-size slide

  4. 18-20 August
    How to export relationships (e.g space boundaries)
    when the elements are in disjoint models?
    4
    Application 1 Application 2
    ?

    View full-size slide

  5. 18-20 August
    5
    Implementation
    https://github.com/tudelft3d/IfcOpenShell/blob/cgal/src/ifcconvert/validate_wall_connectivity.cpp
    IfcOpenShell
    the open source ifc toolkit and geometry engine

    View full-size slide

  6. 18-20 August
    6
    Boundary Representation (BRep)
    u (periodic) ⟶
    v ⟶
    0 2π

    View full-size slide

  7. 18-20 August
    CGAL Nef Polyhedra
    7
    https://doc.cgal.org/latest/Nef_3/index.html

    View full-size slide

  8. 18-20 August
    8
    Boundary Representation
    matches IFC geometry model
    curved surfaces and semantics (like radii)
    CGAL Nef Polyhedra
    arbitrarily precise number types
    lazy exact evaluation:
    propagating rounding errors to interval | fallback to exact when uncertain
    closed under all binary set operations

    View full-size slide

  9. 18-20 August
    Relationships in IFC
    9

    View full-size slide

  10. 18-20 August
    Egenhofer spatial predicates
    10
    EGENHOFER & FRANZOSA (1991) Point-set topological spatial relations, International Journal of
    Geographical Information System, 5:2, 161-174, DOI: 10.1080/02693799108927841

    View full-size slide

  11. 18-20 August
    Minkowski sum
    11
    https://www8.cs.umu.se/kurser/TDBAfl/VT06/algorithms/BOOK/BOOK5/NODE199.HTM

    View full-size slide

  12. 18-20 August
    Methodology (e.g wall connectivity)
    12
    wall axis (for qualifying start/end)
    wall body
    wall boundary volume (computed)
    boundary intersection (computed)
    legend

    View full-size slide

  13. 18-20 August
    Validation of three public building models
    13
    Duplex1, Fzk2, and Smiley3; 1 IFC2X3; Autodesk Revit Architecture 2011; U.S Army, Corps of Engineers 2 IFC2X_FINAL; Autodesk
    Architectural Desktop; Automation and Applied Informatics (IAI) / Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) 3 IFC4; Archicad 20; IAI / KIT

    View full-size slide

  14. 18-20 August
    Results spatial containment
    two elements contained in wrong storey
    14

    View full-size slide

  15. 18-20 August
    Results wall connectivity
    15
    Duplex Fzk Smiley
    missing relation 2 2 0
    invalid relation:
    wrong connection
    type
    4 6 0
    invalid relation:
    walls not touching
    8 0 0

    View full-size slide

  16. 18-20 August
    Results wall connectivity (Duplex)
    16
    wrong connection type is supplied | no connectivity information | not touching but for which connection information

    View full-size slide

  17. 18-20 August
    Results space boundaries (Duplex)
    17

    View full-size slide

  18. 18-20 August
    Results space boundaries (Smiley)
    18

    View full-size slide

  19. 18-20 August
    Performance (Duplex)
    19
    Task Time (s)
    a. IFC parsing (tokenization and storage) 0.7174
    b. Geometry mapping 0.0364
    c. Geometry creation 0.5732
    d. Conversion to Nef polyhedron 1.4116
    e. Minkowski sum with small cube 7.0064
    f. 3D Box intersection pairs 0.0006
    g. Boolean intersection on Nef 16.5032
    h. Conversion of result back to polyhedron 1.5342

    View full-size slide

  20. 18-20 August
    Conclusion
    20
    Infered connections to enable distributed and transactional working
    Geometrical validation shows all assessed models contain flaws
    Calculate predicates and quantities to comply to local norms
    Exact CGAL Nef Polyhedra are robust, but the Minkowski sum is slow on concave
    inputs.

    View full-size slide