Three-dimensional information exchange over the semantic web for the domain of architecture, engineering, and construction

Abstract

3D geometry can be described in many ways, with both a varying syntax and a varying semantics. As a result, several very diverse schemas and file formats can be deployed to describe geometry, depending on the application domain in question. In a multidisciplinary domain such as the domain of architecture, engineering and construction (AEC), this range of specialised schemas makes file format conversions inevitable. The approach adopted by current conversion tools, however, often results in a loss of information, most often due to a ‘mistranslation’ between different syntaxes and/or semantics, leading to errors and limitations in the design conception stage and to inefficiency due to the required remodelling efforts. An approach based on semantic web technology may reduce the loss of information significantly, leading to an improved processing of 3D information and hence to an improved design practice in the AEC domain. This paper documents our investigation of the nature of this 3D information conversion problem and how it may be encompassed using semantic web technology. In a double test case, we show how the specific deployment of semantic rule languages and an appropriate inference engine are to be adopted to improve this 3D information exchange. It shows how semantic web technology allows the coexistence of diverse descriptions of the same 3D information, interlinked through explicit conversion rules. Although only a simple example is used to document the process, and a more in-depth investigation is needed, the initial results indicate the suggested approach to be a useful alternative approach to obtain an improved 3D information exchange

Supporting Decision-Making in the Building Life-Cycle Using Linked Building Data

“…Similar suggested approaches relying on semantic modelling of product information, not necessarily targeting improvements regarding the interoperability issue, can be found in Kraft and Nagl [27], Abdul-Ghafour et al [28], Böhms et al [29,30], Yang and Zhang [31]. Pauwels et al [32] similarly presents how semantic web technologies enable the integration of architectural design information with general AEC and 3D information available through the IFC schema, whereas Pauwels et al [33] considers the usage of rules and reasoning engines for the proper exchange of 3D information itself.…”

Interoperable data models for infrastructural artefacts – a novel IFC extension method using RDF vocabularies exemplified with quay wall structures for harbors

“…of reusing e.g. existing RDF representations of the IFC model (Pauwels et al 2011), experiments with referencing different engineering vocabularies such as the QUDT ontology framework (http://qudt.org/) for the re-usable definition of quantities, units measures and values have been conducted during the transformation of the original EXPRESS data set.…”

Making SimModel information available as RDF graphs

“…We then elaborate on the way in which we can extend this initial level of interoperability to other building domain data sources using semantic web technologies (Berners-Lee et al 2001). In order to be able to better integrate SimModel information with other building information, we have aimed at representing SimModel information in the Resource Description Framework (RDF) data model (Manola & Miller 2004), thereby relying on earlier work on the usage of semantic web technologies in the AEC domain (Pauwels et al 2010(Pauwels et al , 2011a. By doing so, the BEPS information in a SimModel can be made available as directed labelled graphs.…”

“…As such, a web of linked building data can be generated, including partial models with different types of information (GIS, IFC, SimModel, and so forth) for diverse buildings. After building this web of linked building data (LBD, 2013), query technologies and reasoning technologies can be deployed, thereby realising the benefits that can be offered by semantic web technologies at their maximum (Pauwels et al 2011a(Pauwels et al , 2011b.…”