2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.cad.2010.01.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Transformation of a thin-walled solid model into a surface model via solid deflation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are dimension reduction methods (Rezayat, 1998;Donaghy et al, 2000;Sheen et al, 2010), which reduce the dimension of a shape, and feature removal methods (Venkataraman et al, 2002;Zhu and Menq, 2002;Sun et al, 2009), which remove the small or unnecessary features of a shape. In dimension reduction methods, thin-walled solids are converted into faces by extracting the mid-surfaces, and long cylindrical solids are converted into edges.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are dimension reduction methods (Rezayat, 1998;Donaghy et al, 2000;Sheen et al, 2010), which reduce the dimension of a shape, and feature removal methods (Venkataraman et al, 2002;Zhu and Menq, 2002;Sun et al, 2009), which remove the small or unnecessary features of a shape. In dimension reduction methods, thin-walled solids are converted into faces by extracting the mid-surfaces, and long cylindrical solids are converted into edges.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They are usually available for existing buildings but they are too detailed to use in GIS simulation. Analysis becomes complex and the efficiency of computation is low (Sheen et al, 2010). Thus model generalization is required -small details (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…if Figure 8 refers to interfaces of surface type, these configurations can be extended to interfaces of volume type. More specifically, it can be noticed that the configuration where I G is orthogonal to the mid-surfaces of S 1 and S 2 both is lacking of robust solutions [16,21] and other connections can require deviation from mid-surface location to improve the mesh quality. Figure 10b illustrates such configurations and further details will be given in Section 6.…”
Section: Processing Connections Between 'Idealizable' Sub Domainsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among them, the face-pairing [16,21] works from nearly parallel faces of CAD models, which produces robust results on a reduced set of configurations, and Medial Axis Transform (MAT) methods work on mesh models, which is more generic, but produce complex geometry in connection areas. More recently, Robinson and Armstrong [17] used the MAT to identify thin regions candidate to idealization.…”
Section: Prior Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation