JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Development of a Batch-mode-based Comparison System for 3D Piping CAD Models of Offshore Plants
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Development of a Batch-mode-based Comparison System for 3D Piping CAD Models of Offshore Plants
Lee, Jaesun; Kim, Byung Chul; Cheon, Sanguk; Cho, Mincheol; Lee, Gwang; Mun, Duhwan;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
When a plant owner requests plant 3D CAD models in the format that a shipbuilding company does not use, the shipyard manually re-models plant 3D CAD models according to the owner`s requirement. Therefore, it is important to develop a technology to compare the re-modeled plant 3D CAD models with original ones and to quantitatively evaluate similarity between two models. In the previous study, we developed a graphic user interface (GUI)-based comparison system where a user evaluates similarity between original and re-modeled plant 3D CAD models for piping design at the level of unit. However, an offshore plant consists of thousands of units and thus a system which compares several plant 3D CAD models at unit-level without human intervention is necessary. For this, we developed a new batch model comparison system which automatically evaluates similarity of several unit-level plant 3D CAD models using an extensible markup language (XML) file storing file location and name data about a set of plant 3D CAD models. This paper suggests system configuration of a batch-mode-based comparison system and discusses its core functions. For the verification of the developed system, comparison experiments for offshore plant 3D piping CAD models using the system were performed. From the experiments, we confirmed that similarities for several plant 3D CAD models at unit-level were evaluated without human intervention.
 Keywords
3D CAD model;Aveva Marine;Batch mode;Offshore plant;Similarity evaluation;SmartMarine 3D;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
PARTSolutions, http://www.partsolutions.com/, 2014.

2.
ENOVIA Live Similarity, http://www.3ds.com/, 2014.

3.
Geolus Search, http://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/, 2014.

4.
Lee, J., Kim, B.C., Kim, H., Cheon, S., Cho, M., Lee, G., Mun, D. and Han, S., 2015, A Similarity Evaluation System for Offshore Plant's 3D Piping CAD Models between Aveva Marine and SmartMarine 3D, Proceedings of the Society of CAD/CAM Engineers Conference, pp.961-963.

5.
Tangelder, J.W. and Veltkamp, R.C., 2008, A Survey of Content Based 3D Shape Retrieval Methods, Multimedia Tools and Applications, 39(3), pp.441-471. crossref(new window)

6.
Iyer, N., Jayanti, S., Lou, K., Kalyanaraman, Y. and Ramani, K., 2005, Three-dimensional Shape Searching: State-of-the-art Review and Future Trends, Computer-Aided Design, 37, pp.509-530. crossref(new window)

7.
Paquet, E., Rioux, M., Murching, A., Naveen, T. and Tabatabai, A., 2000, Description of Shape Information for 2-D and 3-D Objects, Signal Processing: Image Communication, 16(1), pp.103-122.

8.
Ramesh, M., Yip-Hoi, D. and Dutta, D., 2001, Feature Based Shape Similarity Measurement for Retrieval of Mechanical Parts, Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 1(3), pp.245-256. crossref(new window)

9.
Kim, C.Y., Kim, Y.H. and Kang, S.H., 2000, Similarity Assessment for Geometric Query on Mechanical Parts, Transactions of the Society of CAD/CAM Engineers, 5(2), pp.103-112.

10.
El-Mehalawi, M. and Miller, R.A., 2003, A Database System of Mechanical Components Based on Geometric and Topological Similarity. Part I: Representation. Computer-Aided Design, 35(1), pp.83-94. crossref(new window)

11.
Horn, B.K.P., 1984, Extended Gaussian Images, Proceedings of the IEEE, 72(12), pp.1671-1686. crossref(new window)

12.
Herrmann, J.W. and Singh, G., 1997, Design Similarity Measures for Process Planning And Design Evaluation, Maryland Univ College Park Dept of Mechanical Engineering.

13.
Rodriguez, M.A. and Egenhofer, M.J., 2003, Determining Semantic Similarity Among Entity Classes from Different Ontologies, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 15(2), pp.442-456. crossref(new window)

14.
Alizon, F., Shooter, S.B. and Simpson, T.W., 2006, Reuse of Manufacturing Knowledge to Facilitate Platform-based Product Realization. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 6(2), pp.170-178. crossref(new window)

15.
Mun, D. and Ramani, K., 2011, Knowledgebased Part Similarity Measurement Utilizing Ontology and Multi-criteria Decision Making Technique, Advanced Engineering Informatics, 25(2), pp.119-130. crossref(new window)

16.
Osada, R., Funkhouse, T., Chazelle, B. and Dobkin, D., 2002, Shape Distributions, ACM Transactions on Graphics, 21(4), pp.807-832. crossref(new window)

17.
Ohbuchi, R., Minamitani, T. and Takei, T., 2005, Shape-similarity Search of 3D Models by Using Enhanced Shape Functions, International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology, 23(2-4), pp.70-85. crossref(new window)

18.
Tangelder, J.W. and Veltkamp, R.C., 2003, Polyhedral Model Retrieval Using Weighted Point Sets, International Journal of Image and Graphics, 3(01), pp.209-229. crossref(new window)

19.
Hwang, T.J., Lee, K., Oh, H.Y. and Jeong, J.H., 2004, Shape Similarity Measurement Using Ray Distances for Mass Customization, Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Solid Modeling and Applications, pp.279-284.

20.
Hong, T.S., Lee, K.W. and Kim, S.C., 2006, Similarity Comparison of Mechanical Parts, Transactions of the Society of CAD/CAM Engineers, 11(4), pp.316-326.

21.
Ip, C.Y., Lapadat, D., Sieger, L. and Regli, W.C., 2002, Using Shape Distributions to Compare Solid Models, Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Solid Modeling and Applications, pp.273-280.

22.
Cheng, H., Lo, C., Chu, C. and Kim, Y., 2011, Shape Similarity Measurement for 3D Mechanical Part Using D2 Shape Distribution and Negative Feature Decomposition, Computers in Industry, 62(3), pp.269-280. crossref(new window)

23.
Chu, C.H. and Hsu, Y.C., 2006, Similarity Assessment of 3D Mechanical Components for Design Reuse. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 22(4), pp.332-341. crossref(new window)

24.
Aveva Marine, http://www.aveva.com/, 2014.

25.
SmartMarine 3D, http://www.intergraph.com/, 2014.