Slide 1

Slide 1 text

How useful are current 3D city models? Hugo Ledoux 102nd OGC Technical Committee TU Delft, the Netherlands 2017-03-20

Slide 2

Slide 2 text

Not only my work, but that of my research group 2

Slide 3

Slide 3 text

Not only my work, but that of my research group 3 •Mathematically easy but tools are needed From multiple representation to higher dimensional GIS x y z time scale

Slide 4

Slide 4 text

More and more 3D (open) data from cities 4 Whole North Rhine-Westphalia: 10M+ LoD2 buildings

Slide 5

Slide 5 text

More and more 3D (open) data from cities 5 New York City

Slide 6

Slide 6 text

More and more 3D (open) data from cities 6 Helsinki: with textures

Slide 7

Slide 7 text

More and more 3D (open) data from cities 7 Whole of the Netherlands: 10M+ LoD1 buildings + terrain, roads, forest

Slide 8

Slide 8 text

More and more 3D (open) data from cities 8

Slide 9

Slide 9 text

Why do cities reconstruct their 3D city model?

Slide 10

Slide 10 text

10 solar potential shadow analysis noise modelling energy estimation bomb detonation wind turbulence pollutant tracking

Slide 11

Slide 11 text

3D in the mainstream: NY Times shadow analysis 11 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/21/upshot/Mapping-the-Shadows-of-New-York-City.html

Slide 12

Slide 12 text

Environmental law: from 2018 in NL 12 Video “Stip op de horizon: Dynamisch 3D model” from Municipality of The Hague

Slide 13

Slide 13 text

How are geometric errors affecting applications?

Slide 14

Slide 14 text

Consequences of geometric errors in 3D city models 14 1. for “simple” visualisation 2. for solar potential 3. for volume calculation 4. for advanced simulations I ignore the semantic here

Slide 15

Slide 15 text

Visualisation duplicated surfaces == annoying 15

Slide 16

Slide 16 text

Visualisation duplicated surfaces == distracting 16

Slide 17

Slide 17 text

Visualisation duplicated surfaces == distracting 17

Slide 18

Slide 18 text

Visualisation wrong orientation of surfaces (red ones) 18

Slide 19

Slide 19 text

Visualisation wrong orientation == missing faces 19

Slide 20

Slide 20 text

Solar potential wrong orientation == no potential assigned 20

Slide 21

Slide 21 text

Volume calculation tiny problems == impossible to calculate 21

Slide 22

Slide 22 text

Volume calculation tiny problems == impossible to calculate 22

Slide 23

Slide 23 text

Volume calculation big problems == also impossible to calculate… 23

Slide 24

Slide 24 text

Volume calculation superstructures not topologically connected 24

Slide 25

Slide 25 text

Volume calculation superstructures not topologically connected 25

Slide 26

Slide 26 text

Volume calculation superstructures not topologically connected 26

Slide 27

Slide 27 text

Advanced simulations wind comfort for pedestrians 27 Figure from CADFEM.de

Slide 28

Slide 28 text

Advanced simulations 3D CFD methods: tetrahedralisation of volume 28 computational fluid dynamics Figure from CADFEM.de

Slide 29

Slide 29 text

Advanced simulations very strict input requirements 29 Figure from CADFEM.de • no holes • no intersections • triangles must have certain shape (no slivers) • a “perfect” surface is thus required • in practice, that still means several hours of (semi-)manual repair

Slide 30

Slide 30 text

Do current 3D city models often contain these geometric errors?

Slide 31

Slide 31 text

tl;dl: YES.

Slide 32

Slide 32 text

Our methodology 37 CityGML datasets from 9 countries 40 million polygons in 3.6 million buildings (Solids + MultiSurfaces) our software: val3dity 32

Slide 33

Slide 33 text

Error codes 33 Solid + MultiSolid CompositeSurface MultiSurface LinearRing 101 TOO_FEW_POINTS 102 CONSECUTIVE_POINTS_SAME 103 NOT_CLOSED 104 SELF_INTERSECTION 105 COLLAPSED_TO_LINE Polygon 201 INTERSECTION_RINGS 202 DUPLICATED_RINGS 203 NON_PLANAR_POLYGON_DISTANCE_PLANE 204 NON_PLANAR_POLYGON_NORMALS_DEVIATION 205 INTERIOR_DISCONNECTED 206 HOLE_OUTSIDE 207 INNER_RINGS_NESTED 208 ORIENTATION_RINGS_SAME Shell 301 TOO_FEW_POLYGONS 302 NOT_CLOSED 303 NON_MANIFOLD_VERTEX 304 NON_MANIFOLD_EDGE 305 SEPARATE_PARTS 306 SELF_INTERSECTION 307 POLYGON_WRONG_ORIENTATION 308 ALL_POLYGONS_WRONG_ORIENTATION Solid (with 2+ Shells) 401 SHELLS_FACE_ADJACENT 402 SHELL_INTERIOR_INTERSECT 403 INNER_SHELL_OUTSIDE_OUTER 404 INTERIOR_OF_SHELL_NOT_CONNECTED For CompositeSurface these 3 are excluded LinearRing Polygon Point Solid ultiSurface CompositeSurface Shell CompositeSolid LinearRing Polygon Point Solid MultiSurface CompositeSurface Shell CompositeSolid

Slide 34

Slide 34 text

Summary of results 34 • No CityGML dataset is 100% valid, not even LoD1 • Many simple errors, eg: • repeated vertices • non-planar polygons (most common error!) • Notice that these are often not visible

Slide 35

Slide 35 text

Summary of results 35 • No CityGML dataset is 100% valid, not even LoD1 • Many simple errors, eg: • repeated vertices • non-planar polygons (most common error!) • Notice that these are often not visible

Slide 36

Slide 36 text

Level of detail Primitive ID(a) Geometric validation Semantics(f) Schema 1xx 2xx 3xx 4xx Total(b) LOD1 Solid 1 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 9 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 LOD2 MultiSurface 10 1 4 – – 5 (e) 3 11 0 0 – – 0 0 3 12 2 21 – – 23 45 3 13 10 2 – – 12 4 7 14 0 1 – – 1 12 3 15 0 9 – – 9 2 3 16 4 8 – – 12 1 7 17 5 0 – – 5 5 7 18 0 0 – – 0 4 7 19 0 0 – – 0 1 7 20 0 4 – – 4 6 7 21 0 1 – – 1 3 7 LOD2 Solid 22 0 42 58 0 100 – 3 23(c) – – – – – – 7 24 0 31 1 3 35 – 7 25 4 0 16 2 22 – 3 26(c) – – – – – – 7 27 22 17 50 0 89 – 3 LOD2 MultiSurface and Solid(d) 28 0 42 1 1 44 0 3 29 2 35 54 0 92 4 3 30 0 10 0 1 11 2 3 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 LOD3 MultiSurface 32 2 13 – – 15 54 3 33 6 5 – – 11 23 3 34 8 10 – – 19 45 3 35 5 0 – – 5 34 3 36 0 0 – – 0 1 7 LOD4 Solid 37 0 0 3 0 3 68 3 (a) % of invalid actually all between 99.5% and 99.9%

Slide 37

Slide 37 text

Level of detail Primitive ID(a) Geometric validation Semantics(f) Schema 1xx 2xx 3xx 4xx Total(b) LOD1 Solid 1 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 9 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 LOD2 MultiSurface 10 1 4 – – 5 (e) 3 11 0 0 – – 0 0 3 12 2 21 – – 23 45 3 13 10 2 – – 12 4 7 14 0 1 – – 1 12 3 15 0 9 – – 9 2 3 16 4 8 – – 12 1 7 17 5 0 – – 5 5 7 18 0 0 – – 0 4 7 19 0 0 – – 0 1 7 20 0 4 – – 4 6 7 21 0 1 – – 1 3 7 LOD2 Solid 22 0 42 58 0 100 – 3 23(c) – – – – – – 7 24 0 31 1 3 35 – 7 25 4 0 16 2 22 – 3 26(c) – – – – – – 7 27 22 17 50 0 89 – 3 LOD2 MultiSurface and Solid(d) 28 0 42 1 1 44 0 3 29 2 35 54 0 92 4 3 30 0 10 0 1 11 2 3 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 LOD3 MultiSurface 32 2 13 – – 15 54 3 33 6 5 – – 11 23 3 34 8 10 – – 19 45 3 35 5 0 – – 5 34 3 36 0 0 – – 0 1 7 LOD4 Solid 37 0 0 3 0 3 68 3 (a) % of invalid rather good, but it’s “easy”

Slide 38

Slide 38 text

Level of detail Primitive ID(a) Geometric validation Semantics(f) Schema 1xx 2xx 3xx 4xx Total(b) LOD1 Solid 1 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 – 3 9 0 0 0 0 0 – 7 LOD2 MultiSurface 10 1 4 – – 5 (e) 3 11 0 0 – – 0 0 3 12 2 21 – – 23 45 3 13 10 2 – – 12 4 7 14 0 1 – – 1 12 3 15 0 9 – – 9 2 3 16 4 8 – – 12 1 7 17 5 0 – – 5 5 7 18 0 0 – – 0 4 7 19 0 0 – – 0 1 7 20 0 4 – – 4 6 7 21 0 1 – – 1 3 7 LOD2 Solid 22 0 42 58 0 100 – 3 23(c) – – – – – – 7 24 0 31 1 3 35 – 7 25 4 0 16 2 22 – 3 26(c) – – – – – – 7 27 22 17 50 0 89 – 3 LOD2 MultiSurface and Solid(d) 28 0 42 1 1 44 0 3 29 2 35 54 0 92 4 3 30 0 10 0 1 11 2 3 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 LOD3 MultiSurface 32 2 13 – – 15 54 3 33 6 5 – – 11 23 3 34 8 10 – – 19 45 3 35 5 0 – – 5 34 3 36 0 0 – – 0 1 7 LOD4 Solid 37 0 0 3 0 3 68 3 (a) % of invalid some datasets couldn’t be read high % of invalid

Slide 39

Slide 39 text

Most common error: non-planar surface 39

Slide 40

Slide 40 text

How to improve the situation?

Slide 41

Slide 41 text

1. Improve awareness most practitioners are not aware of the rules 41

Slide 42

Slide 42 text

1. Improve awareness most practitioners are not aware of the rules 42

Slide 43

Slide 43 text

1. Improve awareness most practitioners are not aware of the rules 43 software vendors are not either

Slide 44

Slide 44 text

2. Include validation support in software or use the open-source software 44

Slide 45

Slide 45 text

3. Modify software with constraints TU Delft’s 3dfier is only but one example 45

Slide 46

Slide 46 text

4. Work on automatic repair funding a research team is a great way to start! 46 Surface reconstruction:

Slide 47

Slide 47 text

thank you. Hugo Ledoux h.ledoux@tudelft.nl 3d.bk.tudelft.nl/hledoux 3d.bk.tudelft.nl/code/ Open-source software