A survey on 3D CAD model quality assurance and testing

[EN] A new taxonomy of issues related to CAD model quality is presented, which distinguishes between explicit and procedural models. For each type of model, morphologic, syntactic, and semantic errors are characterized. The taxonomy was validated successfully when used to classify quality testing tools, which are aimed at detecting and repairing data errors that may affect the simplification, interoperability, and reusability of CAD models. The study shows that low semantic level errors that hamper simplification are reasonably covered in explicit representations, although many CAD quality testers are still unaffordable for Small and Medium Enterprises, both in terms of cost and training time. Interoperability has been reasonably solved by standards like STEP AP 203 and AP214, but model reusability is not feasible in explicit representations. Procedural representations are promising, as interactive modeling editors automatically prevent most morphologic errors derived from unsuitable modeling strategies. Interoperability problems between procedural representations are expected to decrease dramatically with STEP AP242. Higher semantic aspects of quality such as assurance of design intent, however, are hardly supported by current CAD quality testers. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness and the European Regional Development Fund, through the ANNOTA project (Ref. TIN2013-46036-C3-1-R).González-Lluch, C.; Company, P.; Contero, M.; Camba, J.; Plumed, R. (2017). A survey on 3D CAD model quality assurance and testing. Computer-Aided Design. 83:64-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2016.10.003S64798

An automated method mapping parametric features between computer aided design software

This thesis was submitted for the award of Doctor of Philosophy and was awarded by Brunel University LondonEnterprise efficiency is limited by data exchange. A product designer might specify the geometry of a product with a Computer Aided Design program, an engineer might re-use that geometry data to calculate physical properties of the product using a Finite Element Analysis program. These different domains place different requirements on the product representation. Representations of product data required for different tasks is dependent on the vendor software associated with those tasks, sharing data between different vendor programs is limited by incompatibility of the vendor formats used. In the case of Computer Aided Design where the virtual form of an object is modelled, no standard data format captures complete model data. Common data standards transfer model surface geometry without capturing the topological elements from which these geometries are constructed. There are prescriptive data representations to allow these features to be specified in a neutral format, but little incentive for vendors to adopt these schemes. Recent efforts instead focus on identifying similar feature elements between different vendor CAD programs, however this approach relies on onerous manual identification requiring frequent revision. This research develops methods to automate the task of mapping relationships between different data format representations. Two independent matching techniques identify similar CAD feature functions between heterogeneous programs. Text similarity and object geometry matching techniques are combined to match the data formats associated with CAD programs. An efficient search for matching function parameters is performed using a genetic algorithm that incorporates semantic data matching and geometry data matching. A greedy semantic matching algorithm is developed that compares with the Doc2vec short text matching technique over the API dataset tested. A SVD geometric surface registration technique is developed that requires fewer calculations than an equivalent Iterative Closest Point method

An Ontology-based Approach for "Procedural CAD Models" Data Exchange

International audienceIn the Concurrent Engineering environment, the interoperability of various CAD systems requires maintaining the design intent. In this paper, we present an ontology based approach as a means for semantic data exchange in engineering design area. Our purpose is to provide capabilities to transfer procedural model data including the design intent. The devised approach consists of developing generic feature-based design ontology in addition of specific design ontologies for CAD systems. Concepts defined in our ontology include parts, features, constraints, history of construction. Interoperability among ontologies is fulfilled by defining several mapping rules. We use descriptive logic language, notably OWL to represent formally our ontology