Author, Subjects, Keywords

Cited Author

 
 
   » By Author or Editor
 » Browse Author by Alphabet
 » By Journal
 » By Subjects
 » Malaysian Journals
 » By Type
 » By Year
 » By Latest Additions
 
 
   » By Author
 » Top 20 Authors
 » Top 20 Article
 » Top Journal Cited
 » Top Article Cited
 » Journal Citation Statistics
 » Usage Since Sept 2007


 
 
 

Login | Create Account

Solid Modeler Evaluation and Comparison: Perspective of Computer Science

Awanis Romli, and Habibollah Haron , (2007) Solid Modeler Evaluation and Comparison: Perspective of Computer Science. Jurnal Teknologi, 47 (D). pp. 15-26.

[img]
Preview
PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
100Kb

Official URL: http://www.penerbit.utm.my/onlinejournal/47/D/JTDIS47D02.pdf

Affiliations

Universiti Malaysia Pahang. Faculty of Computer System and Software Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Faculty of Computer Science and Information. Dept. of Modeling and Industrial Computing

Abstract

Solid modeling theory and technology are maturing rapidly. We have seen explosive growth in the field based on scientific literature reviews, and by the number of solid modelers that are commercially available. Constructive Solid Geometry (CSG) is a method used to represent solid objects in many contemporary solid modeling systems. A CSG representation is a binary tree whose nonterminal nodes represent Boolean operations and whose terminal nodes represent primitive solids. In this paper, the comparison between four solid modelers in term of their difficulties and friendliness in designing and representing a solid object are presented. The solid modelers are AutoCAD 2004,
Solid Edge V12, SolidWorks 2001 plus, and 3D Studio Max 7. The research methodology is based on Solid Modeler Evaluation and Comparison Cycle (SMECC) methodology. This paper documents seven performance parameters in the design process namely, extrusion, setup time, ease of use, speed, flexibility, feature based design, and CSG tree. The outcomes presented by this paper is expected to assist companies and design educators in making solid modeler selection decisions.
Abstrak. Teori dan teknologi pemodelan padu telah berkembang secara pesat. Kita dapat melihat pembangunan mendadak berdasarkan kajian literatur saintifik dan kewujudan pelbagai perisian pemodel padu yang telah dikomersialkan. Geometri Padu Konstruktif (GPK) merupakan kaedah yang digunakan untuk mewakili objek padu dalam kebanyakan sistem pemodel padu. Perwakilan CSG adalah pohon binari dengan nod bukan terminalnya mewakili operasi Boolean dan nod terminalnya mewakili objek padu primitif. Dalam kertas kerja ini, perbandingan antara empat pemodel padu dari segi kesukaran dan mesra-pengguna dalam mereka bentuk dan mewakili objek padu dipersembahkan. Kempatempat pemodel padu tersebut ialah AutoCAD 2004, Solid Edge V12 with Insight, SolidWorks 2001 plus, dan 3D Studio Max 7. Metodologi kajian yang digunakan ialah metolodogi Penilaian Perisian Permodelan Bersepadu dan Kitar Perbandingan (SMECC). Kertas kerja ini mendokumentasikan tujuh parameter pencapaian dalam proses reka bentuk, iaitu masa memulakan sistem, kesenangan penggunaan, ektrusi, kepantasan, fleksibiliti, reka bentuk berasaskan ciri, dan pohon CSG. Hasil daripada kajian ini diharap dapat memberi panduan kepada syarikat dan pengajar reka bentuk dalam membuat keputusan tentang pemilihan perisian permodelan bersepadu.

Item Type:Journal
Keywords:Constructive Solid Geometry (CSG), binary tree, solid modeling, solid modeler, SMECC methodology, Geometri Padu Konstruktif, pohon binari, pemodelan padu, pemodel padu
Subjects:T Technology, Engineering
ID Code:4038

[1] Blackwell, A. F. 1988. Spatial Reasoning for Robots: A Qualitative Approach. Master Thesis. Victoria University of Wellington.

[2] Requicha, A. A. G. and S. C. Chan. 1986. Representation of Geometric Features Tolerances and Attributes in Solid Modelers Based on Constructive Geometry. IEEE Robotics and Automation. 2(3): 156-166.

[3] Bigelmaier, A. 1986. Profile of a Geometrical Knowledge Base for CAD Systems. Computer and Graphics. 10(4): 297-306.

[4] Bezak, D. 2001. Mass Scenes Rendering Framework. Master Thesis. Comenius University.

[5] Requicha, A. A. G and J. R. Rossignac. 1992. Solid Modeling and Beyond. IEEE. 12(5): 31-44.

[6] Requicha, A. A. G. and Voelcker, H. B. 1983. Solid Modeling: A History Summary and Contemporary Assessment. IEEE Computer. Graphics & Appication. 3(7): 25-37.

[7] Ullman, D. G. 2001. Toward the Ideal Mechanical Engineering Design Support System. Research in Engineering Design. 13(2): 55-64.

[8] Aldefeld, B. 1983. On Automatic Recognition of 3D Structures from 2D Representations. Computer Aided Design. 15(2): 59-72.

[9] Bin, H. 1986. Inputting Constructive Solid Geometry Representations Directly From 2D Orthographic Engineering Drawings. Computer Aided Design. 18(3): 147-155.

[10] Sanna, A., and Montuschi, P. 1995. Spatial Bounding of Complex CSG Objects. Computers and Digital Techniques, IEEE Proceedings. 142(6): 431-439.

[11] Moran, M. and G. A. Allan. 2000. IC Critical Volume Calculation Through Ray-casting of CSG Trees. Defect and Fault Tolerance in VLSI Systems, 2000. Proceedings. IEEE International Symposium. 25-27 Oct.2000. 12-20.

[12] Noaker, P. M. 1996. CAM’s Solid Modeling Connection. Manufacturing Engineering. 117(5): 70-80.

[13] Okudan, G. E., and R. Rutkowski. 2004. Solid Modeler Evaluation and Comparison Cycle: A Methodology for Optimum Selection of Modeling Software. Proceedings of DETC’04 ASME 2004 Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. September 28-October 2, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.

[14] Greco, J. 2003. Feature Review: Catia V5 R11. CADANCE.

[15] Kumar, A. V. and L. Yu. 2001. Sequential Constraint Imposition for Dimension-driven Solid Models. Computer Aided Design. (33): 475-486.

Repository Staff Only: item control page
 
 
 
 
 
 
© Copyright 2007 MyAIS Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Malaya – All Rights Reserved. Malaysian Abstracting and Indexing System is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.