Heritage house maintenance using 3D city model application domain extension approach

Heritage house is part of the architectural heritage of Malaysia that highly valued. Many efforts by the Department of Heritage to preserve this heritage house such as monitoring the damage problems of heritage house. The damage problems of heritage house might be caused by wooden decay, roof leakage and exfoliation of wall. One of the initiatives for maintaining and documenting this heritage house is through Three-dimensional (3D) of technology. 3D city models are widely used now and much used by researchers for management and analysis. CityGML is a standard tool that usually used by researchers to exchange, storing and managing virtual 3D city models either geometric and semantic information. Moreover, it also represent multi-scale of 3D model in five level of details (LoDs) whereby each of level give a distinctive functions. The extension of CityGML was recently introduced and can be used for problems monitoring and the number of habitants of a house

Exploring 3D Data Reuse and Repurposing through Procedural Modeling

Most contemporary 3D data used in archaeological research and heritage management have been created through ‘reality capture,’ the recording of the physical features of extant archaeological objects, structures, and landscapes using technologies such as laser scanning and photogrammetry (Garstki 2020, ch.2; Magnani et al. 2020). A smaller quantity of data are generated by Computer Aided Design (CAD) and Building Information Modeling (BIM) projects, and even fewer data are generated through procedural modeling, the rapid prototyping of multi-component threedimensional (3D) models from a set of rules (Figure 8.1.). It is unsurprising therefore that in archaeology and heritage, efforts around digital 3D data preservation and accessibility have concentrated on high-resolution 3D data produced through scanning and image-based techniques (Hardesty et al. 2020; Richards-Rissetto and von Schwerin 2017). Establishing best practices, cultivating a community of experts, and developing infrastructure for this kind of 3D data in the archaeological and cultural heritage domains have been the focus of several coordinated efforts in Europe over the past decade (Fresa et al. 2015, Remondino and Campana 2014, Taylor and Gibson 2017, Vecchio et al. 2015). A series of European projects including 3D-COFORM, CARARE, and their successor projects, made particularly notable contributions (D’Andrea et al. 2013, Kuroczyski et al. 2014, Papatheodorou et al. 2011, Pitzalis et al. 2011, Remondino and Campana 2014). These projects were primarily oriented toward 3D data captured as part of conservation and heritage management work. Issues of preservation, accuracy, fidelity, access, and associated ethical issues of ownership, stewardship, contextualization, and interpretation were, appropriately, the center of extended disciplinary debates (for example, Magnani et al. 2018, Santana Quintero et al. 2019, Ulguim 2018; and more broadly on digital ethics Dennis 2020 and Richardson 2018). File size, geometric complexity, the diversity of ‘standard’ formats, evolving platforms for delivery, and presentation online posed challenges that continue to re-emerge today (for example, Digital Lab Notebook http://culturalheritageimaging.org/ Technologies/Digital_Lab_Notebook/, Jensen 2018a, Koutsoudis et al. 2020, Münster et al. 2016, Rahaman et al. 2019, Rourk 2019). To these efforts, heritage practitioners working in the context of architecture and urban development communities added workflows and tools designed to make CAD- and BIM-produced 3D models FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable). Such work provides a foundation for broader efforts to make data in 3D digital archaeology and heritage FAIR (Apollonio et al. 2012, Leventhal 2018, Pocobelli et al. 2018, Saygi et al. 2013, Wilkinson et al. 2016). These CAD and BIM projects also advanced the development of archaeological information infrastructures and workflows for 3D data by incorporating more extensive use of paradata, while also grappling with issues of uncertainty and intellectual transparency in the interpretive modeling process (Bentkowska-Kafel et al. 2012, Denard 2012). In contrast, procedural modeling’s geometrically simple, lego-like 3D models have received little attention from the community concerned with digital 3D infrastructures, standards, and practices (Coelho et al. 2020). Various sectors employ the approach to create multiple virtual reconstructions (simulations) and to explore alternative constructions and arrangements with varying properties. These multiple, nesting-doll reconstructions redeploy components such as buildings in different arrangements according to diverse rules (Figure 8.1.). In archaeology, they have been used to investigate ancient Roman, Greek, Egyptian, and Maya cities in connection with core research questions about the emergence, character, and experience of urban life (Dylla et al. 2009, Fanini and Ferdani 2011, Kitsakis et al. 2017, Piccoli 2014, 2016, 2018, Richards- Rissetto and Plessing 2015, Saldana 2014, Saldana and Johanson 2013, Sullivan 2017, 2020)

Procedural Modeling for Ancient Maya Cityscapes: Initial methodological challenges and solutions

Digital reconstruction of 3D cityscapes is expensive, time-consuming, and requires significant expertise. We need a 3D modeling approach that streamlines the integration of multiple data types in a time-efficient and low-cost manner. Procedural modeling—rapid proto-typing of 3D models from a set of rules— offers a potential solution to this problem because it allows scholars to create digital reconstructions that can be quickly updated and used to test and formulate alternative hypotheses that are derived from and linked to underlying archaeological data. While procedural modeling is being used to visualize ancient Roman, Etruscan, and Greek cities, in the Maya region the approach has only been applied to reconstructions of individual buildings and not an entire city. In this paper, we present initial methodological challenges and solutions to procedural modeling of ancient Maya cityscapes using the UNESCO World Heritage Site of Copan, Honduras as a case study

Using Virtual Reality and Remotely Sensed Data to Explore Object Identity and Embodiment in a Virtual Mayan City

3D visualization, LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), and 3D modeling are not new concepts in archaeology, however when combined they represent a growing body of research that seeks to understand both how these tools can help us to study the people of the past, and the past itself. Recently, archaeologists have been creating large amounts of 3D digital assets because of new and more advanced technologies. Along with these digital assets has come a myriad of single object viewers—both web and desktop based. These platforms specifically focus on visualizing individual objects (i.e., artifacts or buildings). In contrast, 3DGIS and Virtual Reality (VR) software employ recreated landscapes with multiple 3D objects rather than single 3D models. The MayaCityBuilder Project (http://mayacitybuilder.org) employs Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and LIDAR data to simulate the ancient Maya city of Copan in a virtual space for immersive exploration. Using this environment as a virtual lattice, we embed object data into the actual simulated space of Copan, which users can explore using a virtual reality headset. I propose that such an environment allows us to explore the concept of object identity. Wherein the “objects” in the environment (i.e. 3D models of both remotely sensed extant objects and reconstructed buildings) are immersively evaluated by users who can better perceive the relationships between themselves and the “objects” with which they are interacting; resulting in insights that can push archaeological inquiry in new directions. Further, applying such an approach opens the door for 3D data reuse providing a platform that serves a unique database structure holding intuitive and perceptual data. In order to test these ideas, I embed multiple kinds of 3D models into the Copan VR platform and use the relationships between both the environment and the objects to explain object identity. Advisor: Heather Richards-Rissett