Virtual performance conformance checking and management for modular construction and related methods

Abstract

Various examples are provided for virtual performance conformance checking and management for modular construction. In one example, a method includes segmenting boundaries of as-built and as-planned models of construction elements, determining characteristics of each boundary segment of the as-built and as-planned models, determining a similarity ratio for a matching pair of boundary segments of the as-built and as-planned models, comparing a total similarity ratio based on the similarity ratios for the matching pair of boundary segments to a specified threshold, and snapping the as-built model to a predefined location within the point cloud in response to the comparison. A system with computing or processing circuitry can execute a program or application to implement the similarity / conformance checking methodology. The similarity / conformance checking methodology can be implemented within a construction performance modeling and simulation (CPMS) framework.

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS This application claims priority to and the benefit of co-pending U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63 / 157,119, entitled "Virtual Performance Compatibility Checking and Management for Modular Construction and Related Methods," filed March 5, 2021, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

[0002] STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT This invention was made with United States government support under Grant No. DE-AR0001155 awarded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency of Energy. The United States government has certain rights in this invention. [Background technology]

[0003] The architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry is one of the largest in the United States, spending more than $1.3 trillion in 2019. However, over 98% of large-scale construction projects experience cost overruns and delays. Many projects experience rework, the costs of which can reach 5% to 20% of the total contract value. The main causes of rework include a lack of communication between different construction parties, a lack of adequate visualization capabilities to recognize design conflicts, a lack of support for advanced communication technologies, and finally, as-built modular incompatibility. These significant increases in construction costs and schedule delays associated with rework make many projects commercially unattractive. Summary of the Invention [Means for solving the problem]

[0004] Aspects of the present disclosure relate to virtual performance conformance checking and management for modular construction, and related methods. The presented framework can model and simulate construction performance in a virtual environment, hereafter referred to as Construction Performance Modeling and Simulation (CPMS). The CPMS can serve as a monitoring and digital data management solution that can serve construction project stakeholders (e.g., contractors, vendors, designers, and owners). For example, the CPMS can visualize as-built and as-planned models of a building under construction. It can also visualize modular components (fabricated in off-site facilities) along with the as-built / as-planned models of the building. The visualization can be achieved automatically using a common globally unique identifier (GUID). The visualization can be independent of conformance checking and can serve as an additional manual check by a user.

[0005] In one aspect, among other things, a method for modular construction conformance checking includes segmenting boundaries of as-built and as-planned models of construction elements, determining characteristics of each boundary segment of the as-built and as-planned models, determining a similarity ratio for matching pairs of boundary segments of the as-built and as-planned models, comparing a total similarity ratio based on the similarity ratios for matching pairs of boundary segments to a specified threshold, and snapping the as-built model to a predetermined location within the point cloud in response to the comparison. In one or more aspects, the determined characteristics of each boundary segment of the as-built and as-planned models may include a segment surface, a segment dimension, and a segment aggregate normal. The similarity ratio for matching pairs of boundary segments may be based on the segment surface, the segment dimension, and the segment aggregate normal of matching pairs of boundary segments of the as-built and as-planned models.

[0006] In various aspects, determining characteristics of each boundary segment may include determining highest and lowest points in a plurality of defined directions for each boundary segment. The as-built model may be snapped to a predetermined location when the total similarity ratio is equal to or less than a specified threshold. The alignment of the as-built model in the point cloud may be adjusted in response to the total similarity ratio exceeding a specified threshold. The as-built model and the as-planned model may be identified by a common globally unique identifier (GUID) and may be aligned with the as-built model and the as-planned model of other building components. In some aspects, the construction element may be configured to couple to a second construction element along a bonding interface. The method may include comparing the as-built model of the construction element with the as-built model of the second construction element along the bonding interface. The comparison may include comparing characteristics of boundary segments along the bonding interface of the as-built model of the construction element with characteristics of corresponding boundary segments along the bonding interface of the as-built model of the second construction element. The characteristics of each boundary segment may include highest and lowest points in a plurality of defined directions for each boundary segment. The as-built model of the construction element may be displayed in the user interface in the bonded orientation. The conformance check method can be implemented within a construction performance modeling and simulation (CPMS) framework.

[0007] In another aspect, a system includes a processing circuit having a processor and a memory, and a similarity and compatibility checking program (or application) executable by the processing circuit. Execution of the similarity and compatibility checking program may cause the processing circuit to segment boundaries of the as-built and as-planned models of the construction element, determine characteristics of each boundary segment of the as-built and as-planned models, determine a similarity ratio for matching pairs of boundary segments of the as-built and as-planned models, compare a total similarity ratio based on the similarity ratios for matching pairs of boundary segments to a specified threshold, and snap the as-built model to a predetermined location within the point cloud in response to the comparison.

[0008] In one or more aspects, the determined characteristics of each boundary segment of the as-built model and the as-planned model may include a segment surface, a segment dimension, and a segment aggregate normal. A similarity ratio for a matching pair of boundary segments may be based on the segment surface, the segment dimension, and the segment aggregate normal of the matching pair of boundary segments of the as-built model and the as-planned model. The as-built model may be snapped into position when the total similarity ratio is equal to or less than a specified threshold. The alignment of the as-built model in the point cloud may be adjusted in response to the total similarity ratio exceeding a specified threshold. In various aspects, execution of the similarity and compatibility checking program may cause the processing circuit to compare the as-built model of the construction element with the as-built model of the second construction element along the bond interface. The comparison may include comparing characteristics of the boundary segment along the bond interface of the as-built model of the construction element with characteristics of a corresponding boundary segment along the bond interface of the as-built model of the second construction element.

[0009] Other systems, methods, features, and advantages of the present disclosure will become apparent to those skilled in the art upon examination of the following drawings and detailed description. All such additional systems, methods, features, and advantages are intended to be included within this specification, be within the scope of this disclosure, and be protected by the accompanying claims. In addition, all optional and preferred features and modifications of the described embodiments can be used in all aspects of the disclosure taught herein. Furthermore, individual features of the dependent claims, and all optional and preferred features and modifications of the described embodiments, are combinable and interchangeable with each other. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0010] Many aspects of the present disclosure can be better understood with reference to the following drawings. The components in the drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon clearly illustrating the principles of the present disclosure. Moreover, in the drawings, like reference numerals indicate corresponding parts throughout the several views.

[0011] [Figure 1] 1 illustrates an example of a CPMS in a supply chain loop, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 2] 1 illustrates an example of a generated point cloud of a construction site, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 3] 1 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a compatibility check and management framework, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 4A] 1 illustrates an example of BIM and point cloud alignment using cloud comparison software, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 4B] 1 illustrates an example of BIM and point cloud alignment using cloud comparison software, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 5] 1 illustrates an example of an interface for displaying aligned point clouds and imagery, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 6A] 10 illustrates an example of an interface displaying a compatibility check mode, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 6B] 10 illustrates an example of an interface displaying a compatibility check mode, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 6C] 10 illustrates an example of an interface displaying a compatibility check mode, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 6D] 10 illustrates an example of an interface displaying a compatibility check mode, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 6E] 10 illustrates an example of an interface displaying a compatibility check mode, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 7] 10 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a similarity checking function according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 8A] 1 illustrates an example of a segmentation and similarity process according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 8B] 1 illustrates an example of a segmentation and similarity process according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 8C] 1 illustrates an example of a segmentation and similarity process according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 9] 1 illustrates an example of a comparison between an as-built model and an as-planned model, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 10A] 10 illustrates an example of an as-built model comparison of coupled elements, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 10B] 10 illustrates an example of an as-built model comparison of coupled elements, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 11A] 10 illustrates an example of an as-built model comparison of coupled elements, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 11B] 10 illustrates an example of an as-built model comparison of coupled elements, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 11C] 10 illustrates an example of an as-built model comparison of coupled elements, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. [Figure 12] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram illustrating an example of a system employed for similarity and compatibility checking and management, according to various embodiments of the present disclosure. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0012] Disclosed herein are various examples of virtual performance conformance checking and management for modular construction, and related methods. Reference will now be made in detail to the description of the embodiments as illustrated in the drawings, wherein like reference numerals refer to like parts throughout the several views.

[0013] Inefficiencies resulting from high nighttime construction costs and schedule delays can be resolved through an integrated framework that visualizes construction status simultaneously with BIM. Much of the research and development has focused on developing new reactor designs with accident-tolerant fuel and passive safety systems intended to reduce operating and lifecycle costs. This disclosure presents a monitoring framework for modular construction that uses a virtual environment to digitally manage quality control (QC) inspections and construction progress and improve supply chain efficiency. This framework can contribute to lower fabrication and construction costs in the construction industry and contribute to reducing nighttime construction costs.

[0014] This innovative concept builds on advances in building information modeling (BIM) and reality capture, leveraging the capabilities of 3D laser scanners and camera-equipped drones for 3D image / video processing. The presented framework, hereafter referred to as Construction Performance Modeling and Simulation (CPMS), can model and simulate construction performance in a virtual environment. CPMS can facilitate construction through virtually connected decision-making on-site and off-site facilities. The presented solution can be integrated into the supply chain loop to ensure ongoing quality control, simulation of weekly progress and work schedules, and timely decision support throughout the construction process. Figure 1 shows a schematic example of a CPMS in the supply chain loop. Further details can be found in K. Han and A. Gupta, "Performance monitoring of modular construction through a vertically connected project site and off-site manufacturing facilities," Transactions, SMiRT-25, August 2019, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

[0015] As-built modeling using 3D reconstruction. Data collection is the first step in generating a point cloud (as-built model). For example, a drone can fly around an existing site (e.g., a construction site) acquiring images of the project at short time intervals to facilitate data collection. This allows as many images of the project as possible to be captured in a flowing pattern around the site. Taking photographs using this method increases the probability of creating a dense point cloud with as few holes as possible. In addition, CPMS can also visualize other types of 3D models, such as 3D laser scans, which can be used primarily for quality assessment of off-site and / or prefabricated components.

[0016] Once the captured images (or scans) are recorded, 3D reality capture software (e.g., Pix4D in the example presented, but any other suitable image processing software can be used) can generate a 3D point cloud from the 2D images. Figure 2 shows an example of a point cloud of a construction site generated using Pix4D software. During the reconstruction process, the intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics of the cameras for each image can be determined and recorded in an output file. This file can later be analyzed to determine the position and viewing direction of each camera. This information in the output file can then be converted into a readable format for a 3D engine.

[0017] Figure 3 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a compatibility check and management framework method. This framework includes three main sections: point cloud generation 303, camera transformation 306, and Unity framework 309 (a 3D game engine, but any 3D visualization tool / library can be used). The first section 303 involves generating a point cloud from acquired images using image processing software (Pix4D). The point cloud can be generated by finding corresponding features in recorded images of the site. The second section 306 includes the camera transformation and details how the transformation matrix from point cloud generation section 303 is interpreted and converted into a readable format for the 3D engine (e.g., using Matlab software). Prior to this, the BIM and point cloud can be imported into cloud comparison software for precise manual alignment of the BIM and point cloud information. The alignment operation generates translation and rotation matrices for the point cloud, which can then be imported into the Unity engine or Three.JS for the web version (Three.JS is an open source library based on WebGL that is used in addition to Unity to develop a lighter version of the framework for web applications). The Unity Framework section shows how the framework works and introduces the framework features.

[0018] Point Cloud Alignment. Figures 4A and 4B show an example of the process of manually aligning a BIM and point cloud using Cloud Compare software. Five points were selected from the BIM and point cloud to perform the alignment. By selecting the points, Cloud Compare software can automatically generate a translation and rotation matrix, which is then used in Unity or Three.JS. Cloud Compare software can also display the error associated with each point, indicating how accurately the alignment process was performed. The alignment accuracy averaged 1 to 6 inches. The table in Figure 4A shows the accuracy of each point in each point cloud and the average accuracy in inches, while Figure 4B shows the point cloud alignment accuracy. The average accuracy was less than 2 inches.

[0019] Framework Details. Camera parameters can be stored in a CSV file, so a Unity C# script can be written to plot images and move the field of view to each image. To plot the images, the CSV file can be read, and a Game Object can be instantiated using each camera's position and "looking" direction determined. The look-at vector can then be multiplied by the camera's focal length and scale factor. By adding this resulting vector to the camera's position, the image position can be found and another Game Object can be instantiated. A Unity project can include a Game Object for each camera and image used in the reconstruction. To apply images to Game Objects, a Unity material can be created for each image. In a plotter script, the corresponding material can be applied to the image Game Object. For example, when an image number is selected from a drop-down menu (in the Unity framework 309 of Figure 3), the Unity camera can be translated and the viewing direction can be transformed to the corresponding camera Game Object. This transformation allows the display of images aligned with the point cloud or mesh. Figure 5 shows an example Unity interface displaying aligned point clouds. The Unity framework can include one or more of the following features: Real images can be selected from section 1 of Figure 5. Photographs or images (e.g., as may be used in VisualSFM) can be transferred and aligned automatically with the BIM and point cloud using MATLAB and Unity scripts. BIM and images can be turned on and off for better visualization and improved user experience in section 2 of Figure 5. The framework can switch between UAV point clouds and laser scanner point clouds in section 3 of Figure 5. · The framework can switch to a compatibility mode as discussed below in section 4 of Figure 5. The framework can show each BIM element and related information in sections 5, 6, and 7 of Figure 5. A timeline can be presented and designed so that the user can move a slider to the desired time point in section 8 of Figure 5. Each time point can be rendered with a corresponding point cloud and BIM model. At each time point, BIM elements can be displayed using color to indicate schedule conditions. For example, a BIM can be color-coded using four primary colors. Opaque white on a BIM element can indicate that construction of the part is complete. Transparent white can indicate that the element has not yet been constructed and that the element's construction time has not yet been reached according to the schedule. Green can indicate that the element is under construction and construction is ahead of schedule, and red can indicate that the element is under construction but construction is behind schedule. The number of points rendered in each frame (RP) and the number of frames rendered per second (FPS) can be shown in separate windows in section 9 of FIG.

[0020] Conformance Check Mode in CPMS Framework. Conformance check mode is a new feature of the framework. A button or other selection icon may be included to enter conformance check mode. By selecting or "clicking" this button or icon, the user can move to conformance check mode as shown in FIG. 6A, where the user can check the conformance of the as-built and as-planned models with the modules produced in the manufacturing plant before shipping the actual modules to the site.

[0021] Within the compatibility mode, the user can see three main components. The components are shown in Figure 6B. The first component 603 (shown in the upper right corner) can control the position and rotation of the fabricated module that is virtually brought into the as-built model for the compatibility check. The second component 606 (shown in the lower right corner) can allow the user to select a remote module, and the remote module's information is displayed according to the selection. The user can bring the selected element into the as-built model to perform the compatibility check by clicking "Bring Element Virtually." A GUID (Globally Unique ID) is used to associate prefabricated components with their CAD / BIM model. This allows for automatic alignment of the as-built model of the prefabricated component with the rest of the structure. The third component (shown in the lower left corner) can show the corresponding BIM element of the remote module previously selected in 609. The user can exit the compatibility mode by clicking "View Mode."

[0022] Figure 6C shows the procedure for selecting a remote module. By selecting a manufactured module in 606 (top image), the framework automatically finds the corresponding as-planned component with the same GUID and displays the BIM element in 609, as shown in the bottom image of Figure 6C. After the user selects an element and clicks "Bring Element Virtually," the framework can automatically zoom to the element's location in the model in Figures 6D and 6E. The framework then moves the remote module and places it at the corresponding BIM element location, as shown in Figure 6D. This location is not necessarily accurate and depends on the laser scanning process. Next, as shown in Figure 6E, the button (or icon) in 603 can be used to correct (or fine-tune) the element's position and rotation. After fine-tuning the position and rotation of the remote module, the inspection process can be performed in Figure 6E. The user can move and virtually inspect the joints and compatibility of the as-built model and the scanned module. After approval, the remote module can be sent to the site.

[0023] Automated as-built component compatibility As-built vs. As-Planned Conformance. A similarity check function can be implemented to automate the process of checking conformance between as-built and as-planned versions of an element. This function calculates the similarity between a virtually derived as-built model (ex-site element) and its as-designed element and can convey whether the virtual element meets specified criteria set by the user as a threshold. This function can be used to manually fine-tune the ex-site element position by allowing the element to "snap" to its as-designed position when the difference between the two positions falls below a user-provided threshold, as described above with respect to FIGS. 6D and 6E.

[0024] 7 is a flowchart illustrating an example methodology for the similarity check function. First, the as-built model and the planned model are loaded. Then, the as-built model and the planned model may be segmented by a segmentation process 703. This process may divide the mesh into smaller segments (depending on a selected number of segments). The as-built model may then be compared to the planned model by a similarity process 706. At 709, if specified criteria are met, the as-built model may be locked in place. If not, fine-tuning of the as-built model may be performed and the compatibility check may be repeated.

[0025] Figure 8A shows an example of the BIM and scanned model segmentation process 703. The similarity check function can operate based on the following mathematical definitions, operations and steps to compare the BIM and scanned model segments: A mesh M is a mesh with three vertices (V i , V j , V k ) is defined as a triangular plane containing the vertices V. Each vertex V is created from three values ​​that represent its 3D coordinates (i.e., x, y, z). Each face F is defined as a triangular plane containing the vertices V. i , V j , V k ) can be created by connecting the meshes M(V,F). Therefore, a mesh can be defined as M(V,F). The normals of the faces in TIFF0007805655000001.tif1010 can be defined as follows:

number

[0026] The highest point (vertex) of a mesh or mesh segment M in each direction can be defined as follows, where p is (x,y,z):

number

number

number

number

[0027] Calculating the segment boundaries can be useful as these values ​​can be used to divide a model (BIM or scan) into segments. The lower boundary of a mesh segment M in each direction can be defined as follows:

number

number

[0028] To calculate the similarity ratio (SR) between each pair of segments, the following equation (8) can be defined: where the values ​​of each parameter of the as-built and as-planned segments are compared and used to create the SR ratio.

number

number

[0029] Simulation of operations in VR space allows for testing of parts before actual shipping of the parts occurs. Figure 9 shows an example of how this section fits together in practice, illustrating the process of virtually transporting elements to a site (e.g., a facility or construction site) and visually inspecting and checking for compatibility issues before shipping prefabricated elements. During construction, compatibility issues with prefabricated components can be avoided by this process before they arrive on site; similarly, during operation and maintenance, compatibility issues can be avoided for any replacement parts / components (e.g., old steam generators in a power plant) that arrive at a facility with quality assurance. In this way, any discrepancies in as-built components can be addressed at the manufacturing facility, which reduces costs and improves delivery.

[0030] As-built vs. As-Built Compatibility in a Bonded System. A compatibility algorithm can be used to check the compatibility of as-built components in a bonded system. Figures 10A and 10B show a simple bonded system where two pipes are bonded together. Figure 10A shows a cross-section of the components for comparison. The compatibility check algorithm can check the cross-sections of both components and calculate a threshold in each direction, as shown in Figure 10B. The thresholds can be color coded to visualize deviations in the as-built components and indicate or mark them as non-compliant.

[0031] FIG. 11A shows an example of a coupling system having an inner pipe 1103 and an outer pipe 1106. Both pipes 1103 and 1106 can be scanned separately using a laser scanner (e.g., Artec Eva) to generate an as-built model of the components. FIG. 11B shows color-coded pipes in the coupling system. Whiter vertices indicate closer distances to the outer pipe 1106, while darker vertices indicate greater distances from the outer pipe 1106. A compatibility algorithm can calculate the distance from each vertex of the smaller inner pipe 1103 to the larger outer pipe 1106. To improve user visualization, a user interface can be designed to display the model, allowing users to view the coupling system from different perspectives and turn off each component separately for a better view of each component. FIG. 11C shows preliminary results of the compatibility system for the coupling system from different perspectives, allowing users to clearly see which parts require modification before installation.

[0032] Framework Capabilities. Next, we consider the capabilities of a monitoring framework for modular construction. This disclosure presents components of a CPMS, including as-built modeling at the main project site and off-site facilities, data capture through advances in robotics and computer vision, and a virtual environment to visualize the as-built model and as-planned BIM. The presented CPMS can enable visualization of actual construction progress compared to plans (4D BIM). Because 4D BIM has an embedded construction schedule, inference about construction activity dependencies along with compared progress can enable traveling back in time to identify root causes and forward in time to identify potential problems. The CPMS can serve as a monitoring and digital data management solution that can serve all stakeholders in a construction project, including the owner, construction manager, general contractor, subcontractors, and vendors. Framework capabilities may include, for example, the following: · Seamlessly render multiple point clouds alongside your BIM model. Render point clouds in real-time (frame rates can be higher than 60FPS) and visualize the frames per second and number of rendered points in real-time. Render point clouds from laser scanning and / or photogrammetry approaches. You can seamlessly switch between point clouds based on the time they are acquired. Color-code BIM elements based on the production or construction schedule to indicate whether an element is ahead or behind schedule. Align point clouds and BIM with high accuracy, possible down to 1-6 inches. Visualize the images used to perform the 3D reconstruction in their corresponding positions related to the BIM and point cloud. -Conduct compatibility checks between as-built and as-planned models (point cloud and BIM) through compatibility check mode. · Check connections and joints through as-built to as-built model comparisons at joints or other interfaces. The framework (including both the Unity version for the web and the Three.JS lite version) can run on a variety of systems, including but not limited to Windows, Mac, web, and / or Linux systems.

[0033] The conformance check and control methodology transforms a project's on-site and off-site facilities into a virtual environment that enables the virtual assembly of modular components manufactured off-site, such as those used in the nuclear or other industries, ensuring the quality and conformance of different components before shipping. Additionally, this technology enables a holistic approach to the generation and management of digital records in the supply chain loop. All processes of fabrication, assembly (both on-site and virtually), and inspection can be documented through as-built 3D point clouds and as-planned construction and fabrication models. The disclosed technology significantly reduces associated uncertainties and prevents unexpected delays and cost overruns caused by quality and conformance issues, addressing the risks associated with uncertain construction costs and schedules, especially for facilities with complex designs.

[0034] Computing or processing devices can be utilized to implement the compatibility check and management system. In some embodiments, the computing or processing devices may represent, among other things, mobile devices (e.g., smartphones, tablets, computers, etc.). Each computing or processing device may include, for example, at least one processor circuit having a processor and memory coupled to a local interface. To this end, each computing or processing device may comprise, for example, at least one server computer or similar device. The local interface may comprise, for example, a data bus with an associated address / control bus or other bus structure, as can be appreciated. In some embodiments, the computing device may include one or more network interfaces, which may comprise, for example, a wireless transmitter, a wireless transceiver, and a wireless receiver.

[0035] The memory stores both data and components executable by the processor. In particular, one or more compliance checking and management applications are stored in the memory and executable by the processor. As can be appreciated, there may be other applications stored in the memory and executable by the processor. In this regard, the term "executable" refers to a program file in a format that can ultimately be executed by the processor. If any component discussed herein is implemented in software, any one of several programming languages ​​may be employed. The executable program may be stored in any portion or component of memory, including, for example, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), a hard drive, a solid-state drive, a USB flash drive, a memory card, an optical disk such as a compact disc (CD) or a digital versatile disc (DVD), a floppy disk, a magnetic tape, or other memory component. If embodied in dedicated hardware, each may be implemented as a circuit or state machine employing any one or combination of several technologies. These technologies may include, but are not limited to, discrete logic circuits having logic gates for implementing various logic functions upon the application of one or more data signals, application specific integrated circuits (ASICs) having appropriate logic gates, field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), or other components, etc. Such technologies are generally well known to those skilled in the art and therefore will not be described in detail herein.

[0036] Also, any logic or application described herein, including the compliance checking and management applications, comprising software or code, may be embodied in any non-transitory computer-readable medium for use by or in association with an instruction execution system, such as, for example, a processor in a computer system or other system. In this sense, logic may include statements, including, for example, instructions and declarations, that may be fetched from a computer-readable medium and executed by an instruction execution system. In the context of this disclosure, a "computer-readable medium" may be any medium that can contain, store, or maintain the logic or application described herein for use by or in association with an instruction execution system.

[0037] 12, a schematic block diagram of a computing (or processing) device 1200 that may be utilized for similarity and compatibility checking and management for module construction using the described techniques is shown. In some embodiments, computing device 1200 may represent, among other things, a mobile device (e.g., a smartphone, tablet, computer, etc.) or other processing device. Each computing device 1200 includes a processing circuit comprising at least one processor circuit, e.g., having a processor 1203 and memory 1206, both of which are coupled to a local interface 1209. To this end, each computing device 1200 may comprise, for example, at least one server computer or similar device. Local interface 1209 may comprise, for example, a data bus with an associated address / control bus or other bus structure, as can be appreciated.

[0038] In some embodiments, computing device 1200 may include one or more network interfaces 1210. Network interface 1210 may comprise, for example, a wireless transmitter, a wireless transceiver, and a wireless receiver. As discussed above, network interface 1210 may communicate with remote computing devices using the Bluetooth protocol. As one skilled in the art will appreciate, other wireless protocols may be used in various embodiments of the present disclosure.

[0039] The memory 1206 stores both data and components executable by the processor 1203. In particular, a similarity and compatibility check program 1215, an application program 1218, and potentially other applications are stored in the memory 1206 and executable by the processor 1203. For example, the similarity and compatibility check program 1215 may be implemented within a construction performance modeling and simulation (CPMS) framework. The memory 1206 may also store a data store 1212 and other data. Additionally, an operating system may be stored in the memory 1206 and executable by the processor 1203.

[0040] As can be appreciated, there may be other applications stored in memory 1206 and executable by processor 1203. If any component discussed herein is implemented in the form of software, any one of a number of programming languages ​​may be employed, such as, for example, C, C++, C#, Objective C, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Visual Basic, Python, Ruby, Flash, or other programming languages.

[0041] Multiple software components are stored in memory 1206 and are executable by processor 1203. In this regard, the term “executable” refers to a program file in a format that can ultimately be executed by processor 1203. Examples of executable programs may be, for example, a compiled program that can be loaded into a random access portion of memory 1206 and converted into machine code in a format that can be executed by processor 1203; source code that can be expressed in a suitable format, such as object code, that can be loaded into a random access portion of memory 1206 and executed by processor 1203; or source code that can be interpreted by another executable program to generate instructions in the random access portion of memory 1206 to be executed by processor 1203. The executable program may be stored in any portion or component of memory 1206, including, for example, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), a hard drive, a solid-state drive, a USB flash drive, a memory card, an optical disk such as a compact disc (CD) or digital versatile disc (DVD), a floppy disk, a magnetic tape, or other memory component.

[0042] Memory 1206 is defined herein to include both volatile and nonvolatile memory and data storage components. Volatile components are those that do not retain data values ​​upon loss of power. Nonvolatile components are those that retain data upon loss of power. Thus, memory 1206 may comprise, for example, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), a hard disk drive, a solid-state drive, a USB flash drive, a memory card accessed via a memory card reader, a floppy disk accessed via an associated floppy disk drive, an optical disk accessed via an optical disk drive, a magnetic tape accessed via an appropriate tape drive, and / or other memory components, or a combination of any two or more of these memory components. Additionally, RAM may comprise, for example, static random access memory (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (DRAM), or magnetic random access memory (MRAM), and other such devices. ROM may include, for example, programmable read-only memory (PROM), erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), or other similar memory devices.

[0043] Also, processor 1203 may represent multiple processors 1203 and / or multiple processor cores, and memory 1206 may represent multiple memories 1206 each operating in parallel processing circuitry. In such cases, local interface 1209 may be a suitable network facilitating communication between any two of multiple processors 1203, between any processor 1203 and any one of memories 1206, or between any two of memories 1206, etc. Local interface 1209 may include additional systems designed to coordinate this communication, including, for example, performing load balancing. Processor 1203 may be electrical or any other available configuration.

[0044] The similarity and compatibility check program 1215 and application program 1218, as well as various other systems described herein, may be embodied in software or code executed by general-purpose hardware, as discussed above, but may alternatively be embodied in dedicated hardware, or a combination of software / general-purpose hardware and dedicated hardware. If embodied in dedicated hardware, each may be implemented as a circuit or state machine employing any one or combination of several technologies. These technologies may include, but are not limited to, discrete logic circuits having logic gates for implementing various logical functions upon the application of one or more data signals, application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) with appropriate logic gates, field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), or other components. Such technologies are generally well known to those skilled in the art and therefore will not be described in detail herein.

[0045] Also, any logic or application described herein, including similarity and compatibility check program 1215 and application program 1218, comprising software or code, may be embodied in any non-transitory computer-readable medium for use by or in association with an instruction execution system, such as, for example, processor 1203 in a computer system or other system. In this sense, logic may include statements, including, for example, instructions and declarations, that may be fetched from a computer-readable medium and executed by an instruction execution system. In the context of the present disclosure, a "computer-readable medium" may be any medium that can contain, store, or maintain the logic or application described herein for use by or in association with an instruction execution system.

[0046] The computer-readable medium may include any one of many physical media, such as, for example, magnetic media, optical media, or semiconductor media. More specific examples of suitable computer-readable media include, but are not limited to, magnetic tape, magnetic floppy diskettes, magnetic hard drives, memory cards, solid-state drives, USB flash drives, or optical disks. The computer-readable medium may also be random access memory (RAM), including, for example, static random access memory (SRAM) and dynamic random access memory (DRAM), or magnetic random access memory (MRAM). In addition, the computer-readable medium may be read-only memory (ROM), programmable read-only memory (PROM), erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), or other types of memory devices.

[0047] Furthermore, any logic or application described herein, including similarity and compatibility checking program 1215 and application program 1218, may be implemented and structured in various manners. For example, one or more of the described applications may be implemented as modules or components of a single application. For example, separate applications may be executed for similarity and compatibility checking and management workflow, as shown in FIGS. 3 and 7. Furthermore, one or more of the applications described herein may be executed on shared or separate computing devices, or a combination thereof. For example, multiple applications described herein may be executed within the same computing device 1200 or within multiple computing devices in the same computing environment. Additionally, it should be understood that terms such as “application,” “service,” “system,” “engine,” “module,” etc. may be interchangeable and are not intended to be limiting.

[0048] It should be emphasized that the above-described embodiments of the present disclosure are merely possible examples of implementations, set forth for a clear understanding of the principles of the present disclosure. Many variations and modifications can be made to the above-described embodiments without substantially departing from the spirit and principles of the present disclosure. All such modifications and variations are intended to be included herein within the scope of the present disclosure and protected by the following claims.

[0049] The term "substantially" is intended to permit deviations from the descriptive term that do not adversely affect the intended purpose. A descriptive term is implicitly understood to be modified by the word "substantially" even if the term is not explicitly modified by the word "substantially."

[0050] It should be noted that ratios, concentrations, amounts, and other numerical data may be expressed in range format herein. It should be understood that such range format is used for convenience and brevity and, therefore, should be interpreted flexibly to include not only the numerical values ​​explicitly recited as the limits of the range, but also all individual numerical values ​​or subranges subsumed within that range, as if each numerical value and subrange were explicitly recited. By way of example, a concentration range of "about 0.1% to about 5%" should be interpreted not only to include the explicitly recited concentration of about 0.1% by weight to about 5% by weight, but also to include individual concentrations (e.g., 1%, 2%, 3%, and 4%) and subranges (e.g., 0.5%, 1.1%, 2.2%, 3.3%, and 4.4%) within the stated range. The term "about" may include conventional rounding to the nearest significant digit. Furthermore, the phrase "about 'x' to 'y'" includes "about 'x' to about 'y'."

Claims

1. 1. A method for checking the conformance of a module construction, comprising: Segmenting the boundary between the as-built model and the as-planned model of the construction element; determining characteristics of each boundary segment of the as-built model and the as-planned model; determining a similarity ratio for matching pairs of boundary segments of the as-built model and the as-planned model; comparing a total similarity ratio based on the similarity ratios for matching pairs of boundary segments to a specified threshold; and snapping the as-built model to a predetermined location within a point cloud in response to the comparison.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the determined characteristics of each boundary segment of the as-built model and the planned model include a segment surface, a segment dimension, and a segment aggregate normal.

3. The method of claim 2 , wherein the similarity ratio for a matching pair of boundary segments is based on the segment surfaces, segment dimensions, and segment aggregate normals of the matching pair of boundary segments of the as-built model and the as-planned model.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining characteristics of each boundary segment comprises determining highest and lowest points in a plurality of defined directions for each boundary segment.

5. The method of claim 1 , wherein the as-built model is snapped into place when the total similarity ratio is less than or equal to the specified threshold.

6. The method of claim 5 , wherein the alignment of the as-built model in the point cloud is adjusted in response to the total similarity ratio exceeding the specified threshold.

7. The method of claim 1 , wherein the as-built model and the as-planned model are identified by a common globally unique identifier (GUID).

8. The method of claim 1 , wherein the construction element is configured to bond to a second construction element along a bonding interface.

9. The method of claim 8 , further comprising comparing the as-built model of the construction element with an as-built model of the second construction element along the bond interface.

10. 10. The method of claim 9, wherein the comparing comprises comparing characteristics of a boundary segment along the bonded interface of the as-built model of the construction element with characteristics of a corresponding boundary segment along the bonded interface of the as-built model of the second construction element.

11. The method of claim 10 , wherein the characteristics of each boundary segment include a highest point and a lowest point in a plurality of defined directions for each boundary segment.

12. The method of claim 9 , wherein the as-built models of the construction elements are displayed in a coupled orientation on a user interface.

13. The method of claim 1 , wherein the conformance checking method is implemented within a Construction Performance Modeling and Simulation (CPMS) framework.

14. 1. A system comprising: a processing circuit comprising a processor and a memory; a similarity and compatibility check program executable by the processing circuit, wherein the execution of the similarity and compatibility check program includes: Segmenting the boundary between the as-built model and the as-planned model of the construction element; determining characteristics of each boundary segment of the as-built model and the as-planned model; determining a similarity ratio for matching pairs of boundary segments of the as-built model and the as-planned model; comparing a total similarity ratio based on the similarity ratios for matching pairs of boundary segments to a specified threshold; and snapping the as-built model to a predetermined location within the point cloud in response to the comparison.

15. The system of claim 14 , wherein the determined characteristics of each boundary segment of the as-built model and the planned model include a segment surface, a segment dimension, and a segment aggregate normal.

16. The system of claim 15 , wherein the similarity ratio for a matching pair of boundary segments is based on the segment surfaces, segment dimensions, and segment aggregate normals of the matching pair of boundary segments of the as-built model and the as-planned model.

17. The system of claim 14 , wherein the as-built model is snapped into place when the total similarity ratio is less than or equal to the specified threshold.

18. The system of claim 17 , wherein the alignment of the as-built model in the point cloud is adjusted in response to the total similarity ratio exceeding the specified threshold.

19. 15. The system of claim 14, wherein execution of the similarity and compatibility checking program causes the processing circuitry to compare the as-built model of the construction element with an as-built model of a second construction element along a bond interface.

20. 20. The system of claim 19, wherein the comparing comprises comparing characteristics of a boundary segment along the bond interface of the as-built model of the construction element with characteristics of a corresponding boundary segment along the bond interface of the as-built model of the second construction element.

Images