Automated reinforcement coordination system for clash detection and resolution in 3D structural models

Abstract

The present disclosure pertains to an automated system for the identification and resolution of clashes involving reinforcing bars (rebars) in a three-dimensional (3D) model of a building project. The system integrates a computing device that receives and processes 3D models comprised of multiple building areas, each containing detailed rebar designs for beams and columns. A remote server, connected via a network interface, comprises a non-transitory storage device housing executable routines and a building construction history database. The database includes various 3D building templates with beam and column patterns, each marked with unique dimension data to facilitate clash detection. When spatial distances between rebar structures fall beneath certain threshold limits, indicating clashes or disagreements, the processing unit of system initiates an analysis. Utilizing historical data and comparative models, the processing unit formulates resolution strategies, calculates optimized rebar dimensions, and generates updated 3D models devoid of any conflicts. The clash-free models, including optimized beam and column BIMs, are subsequently rendered onto the display of computing device.

Description

AUTOMATED REINFORCEMENT COORDINATION SYSTEM FOR CLASH DETECTION AND RESOLUTION IN 3D STRUCTURAL MODELSTECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present disclosure pertains to construction building information modeling, specifically an automated system for clash detection and resolution of reinforcing bars in three- dimensional models of reinforced concrete structures.BACKGROUND

[0002] In recent decades, the world has witnessed an unprecedented increase in building infrastructure, spurred by population growth, urbanization, and the economic imperative to support commercial and residential development. As cities expand vertically and horizontally, the construction industry has had to evolve to meet the demands of building more complex, taller, and more resilient structures. Among the various construction techniques that have been adopted, reinforced concrete construction (RCC) stands out due to the versatility and strength. RCC structures capitalize on the ability of composite material to withstand tensile, compressive, and shear forces, making RCC structures a preferred choice for a variety of building projects.

[0003] RCC structures offer several benefits over other construction methodologies. The inherent properties of concrete, such as resistance to fire and weathering, combined with the ability to be molded into almost any shape, provide architects and engineers with a high degree of flexibility in design. Additionally, the economic advantages of RCC construction, including lower material costs and reduced labor expenses, contribute to the widespread adoption. Moreover, the capacity of RCC for energy efficiency through thermal mass contributes to the sustainability of buildings.

[0004] The utilization of reinforcing bars, or rebars, within RCC structures is integral to the functionality. Rebars are typically made of steel and are embedded in the concrete before being set, significantly enhancing the tensile strength of the final structure. The rebars act as a skeletal framework, giving the concrete the necessary support to withstand various stresses. The strategic placement of rebars is important in RCC design, as the rebar directly impacts the structural integrity and durability of a building.

[0005] Despite the advantages, the complexity of rebar frameworks can lead to congestion and conflicts within the RCC structure. Congestion occurs when rebars are placed too closely, leadingto insufficient space for concrete to flow around and between them during pouring. The congestion can result in voids and weak spots in the concrete, compromising the strength of structure. Conflicts, on the other hand, arise when the paths of two or more rebars intersect in a way that is not part of the design, which can make it impossible to place the rebars as intended without modifications. The aforementioned issues are not merely theoretical; they can lead to significant structural failures if not addressed properly.

[0006] Traditionally, the identification and analysis of congestion and conflicts between rebars have been performed manually by skilled technicians and engineers. The process involves reviewing detailed rebar drawings and physically inspecting the rebar placement during construction. While manual inspection allows for a high level of detail and expert judgment, manual inspection is time-consuming and can be subject to human error. Moreover, the manual process can be inefficient, because of iterative revisions of rebar placement, which can delay construction schedules and increase costs.

[0007] The shortcomings of manual inspection and analysis are manifold. Human inspectors can overlook complex clashes, especially in dense and intricate rebar networks. The interpretation of 2D plans does not always translate accurately to the 3D reality of the construction site, leading to miscommunication and errors in rebar placement. Additionally, the labor-intensive nature of manual inspection is not conducive to the fast-paced environment of modern construction projects, where time is often of the essence.

[0008] As the scale and complexity of building projects continue to grow, the construction industry faces increasing pressure to ensure that structures are built efficiently and without compromise to the intended design. The need for further technological advancement becomes apparent here. There is a clear demand for an automated solution capable of identifying and resolving congestion and conflicts between rebars in a more timely and accurate manner. Thus, there is need of technology for improving the placement and analysis of rebars.SUMMARY

[0009] The aim of the present disclosure is to provide an automated clash identification and resolution system for the reinforcing bars (rebars) in a 3 -dimensional (3D) model of a building project to enhance the efficiency, accuracy, and reliability of construction planning and execution.

[0010] The present disclosure introduces an automated clash identification and resolution system for reinforcing bars (rebars) in a 3 -dimensional (3D) model of a building project. The system consists of a computing device and a remote server connected via a network interface. The computing device receives the 3D model, which includes multiple 3D building areas with beam and column rebar designs. The remote server stores executable routines and a building construction history database with multiple 3D building templates, each containing 3D beam and column patterns tagged with unique dimensional data. The system identifies clashes and disagreements where rebar structures are too closely positioned within the beam and column models. A processing unit analyzes the models, utilizing the building construction history database to develop resolution strategies, determining optimum and targeted dimensions for the rebar designs. The processing unit generates clash-free updated 3D models with optimal beam and column dimensions, ultimately rendering them on the display of computing device. The disclosure streamlines the construction design process, enhances structural integrity, and mitigates manual error, leading to more efficient building practices.BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0011] The summary above, as well as the following detailed description of illustrative embodiments, is better understood when read in conjunction with the appended drawings. For the purpose of illustrating the present disclosure, exemplary constructions of the disclosure are shown in the drawings. However, the present disclosure is not limited to specific methods and instrumentalities disclosed herein.

[0012] Embodiments of the present disclosure will now be described, by way of example only, with reference to the following diagrams.

[0013] FIG. 1 illustrates an automated clash identification and resolution system for identifying and resolving clashes in reinforcing bars (rebars) within a three-dimensional (3D) model of a building project, in accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure;

[0014] FIG. 2 (FIG. 2A to FIG. 2B) illustrates the 3D isometric views of a 3D beam model and a 3D column model, in accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure;

[0015] FIG. 3 illustrates an exemplary 3D isometric view of a beam pattern, in accordance with the embodiment of the present disclosure;

[0016] FIG 4 (FIG. 4A and Fig. 4B) illustrates two configurations of an exemplary 3D beam pattern in a reinforced concrete structure, in accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure; and

[0017] FIG. 5 (FIG. 5 A and FIG. 5B) illustrate two separate instances of a 3D column pattern within a structural design, highlighting the spatial arrangement of rebar elements, in accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure.DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS

[0018] The following detailed description illustrates embodiments of the present disclosure and ways in which they can be implemented. Although some modes of carrying out the present disclosure have been disclosed, those skilled in the art would recognize that other embodiments for carrying out or practicing the present disclosure are also possible.

[0019] FIG. 1 illustrates an automated clash identification and resolution system 100 (interchangeably referred as system 100) for identifying and resolving clashes in reinforcing bars (rebars) within a three-dimensional (3D) model of a building project, in accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure. The system 100 comprises a computing device 102, a network interface 104, a remote server 106 and other known components of a building information modelling application / software.

[0020] In an embodiment, the computing device 102 receives a 3D model of the building project from a user. The computing device 102 comprises a processor, memory, and an interface, all of which are integral to the operation. The interface of computing device 102 facilitates the reception of 3D models, which may be transmitted through various means including, but not limited to, wired or wireless communication protocols, such as USB, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or other similar technologies. The memory of the computing device 102 stores the necessary software and temporarily stores the 3D models prior to the further processing or transmission to another component of the system 100. The computing device 102 is embedded with software specifically developed for the initial handling and verification of the received 3D models. The system 100 can supports various file formats commonly used in 3D modeling, thereby offering versatility and ease of use for users working with different types of 3D modeling software. The computing device 102 also includes security features to protect the integrity and confidentiality of the data (related to 3D model) being received. The security features may include encryption protocols and secureauthentication methods to assure that only authorized users can transmit 3D models to the system 100.

[0021] In an embodiment, the 3D model comprises multiple 3D building areas (such as entrance or lobby, living rooms, bedrooms, kitchens, bathrooms, office spaces, meeting rooms, sales floors, display areas, etc.), each of which may include structural elements. Within the multiple 3D building areas, at least one 3D beam model is included, wherein each 3D beam model comprises at least one 3D beam rebar design (which can be arranged in patterns that can be selected from straight rebars, bent-up bars, stirrups, grid pattern, layered rebars, etc.). Such detailing in the 3D beam model afirms that every aspect of the beam rebar design, including the orientation, dimensions, distance and interaction with adjacent structures, is accurately represented and communicated to the computing device 102. Alternatively, or in addition, the 3D model may encompass at least one 3D column model, wherein each 3D column model comprises at least one 3D column rebar design (which can be arranged in patterns that can be selected from tied columns, spiral columns, grid pattern, prefabricated rebar cages, etc.). The 3D column models provide a complete and detailed representation of the columnar aspects of the building project, including the specific arrangement and design of column rebars. The computing device 102 preprocesses the 3D models, ensuring that all the aspects of both beam and column rebar designs within the building project are captured with precision.

[0022] In an embodiment, the network interface 104 facilitates communication between the computing device 102 and the remote server 106. The network interface 104 (e,g., wired or wireless network) enables transmission of various data, including the 3D model of the building project and the related clash identification and resolution data, to and from the remote server 106. The network interface 104 (e.g., WIFI, telecommunication network) may be associated with security protocols to safeguard the data transmitted between the computing device 102 and the remote server 106, thereby ensuring the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive information.

[0023] In an embodiment, the system 100 comprises the remote server 106, which is operatively coupled to the computing device 102 through the network interface 104. Within the remote server 106, a non-transitory storage device 106-A is included, which stores a variety of data and software components for the operation of the system 100. The set of executable routines, which are specifically implemented to permit the remote server 106 to perform various complex functionalities include, but are not limited to, the processing and analysis of the 3D model receivedfrom the computing device 102, identification of clashes within the 3D beam rebar design and the 3D column rebar design of the 3D model, and the generation of resolution strategies to address the identified clashes.

[0024] In an embodiment, the non-transitory storage device 106-A stores a building construction history database that comprises multiple 3D building templates, each associated with distinct 3D graphic models (first and second), including multiple 3D beam patterns and multiple 3D column patterns. In an embodiment, the building construction history database is an aggregation of multiple 3D building templates, each serving as a reference model for various types of building structures. The inclusion of the multiple 3D building templates in the system 100 allows for a comparative analysis against 3D model of the building project, facilitating the identification of clashes and design inefficiencies.

[0025] In an embodiment, each 3D building template is associated with a first 3D graphic model. The first 3D graphic model comprises multiple 3D beam patterns. Each of the 3D beam pattern comprises first 3D coordinate data, representing the positioning and orientation of each beam rebar structure within the 3D beam pattern. In addition to the coordinates, each first 3D coordinate data is tagged, individually, with first-dimension data (such as length, diameter, etc.). Such tagging allows for enhanced data classification and retrieval, enabling more precise comparative analysis between the stored templates and the 3D model of building project.

[0026] In an embodiment, the 3D beam patterns are utilized in the identification of conflicts. A conflict in the aforesaid context is defined as a location within the 3D beam pattern where the geo-spatial distance between more than two beam rebar structures falls below a predetermined first threshold limit. Such conflicts may indicate structural issues or inefficiencies in rebar placement, which, if unaddressed, could lead to construction problems or structural weaknesses in the building project.

[0027] In an embodiment, the building construction history database within the non-transitory storage device 106-A includes multiple 3D column patterns. Each 3D column pattern comprises primary 3D position data of each column rebar element. Like the 3D beam patterns, the primary 3D position data in the column patterns details the location and orientation of column rebar elements. Each primary 3D position data is individually tagged with a second-dimension data (such as length, diameter, etc.), enhancing the depth and usability of the data stored within the system 100. In an embodiment, the 3D column patterns are utilized in the identification ofdisagreements. In the aforesaid context, a disagreement is defined as a position within the 3D column pattern where the three-dimensional (3D) distance between more than two column rebar elements is less than a predetermined second threshold limit. Identifying such disagreements is crucial for ensuring the structural integrity and construction feasibility of the building project.

[0028] In an embodiment, the stored 3D building templates, encompassing both beam and column patterns, serve as a foundational reference for the processing unit 106-B of system 100. The processing unit 106-B acquires and analyzes the 3D model by comparing against the stored 3D building templates. By identifying deviations, conflicts, or disagreements in the 3D model relative to the established templates, the processing unit 106-B can flag issues for review and resolution.

[0029] In an embodiment, each 3D building template within the building construction history database comprises the updated 3D beam patterns and updated 3D column patterns, which are utilized in identifying and resolving clashes in rebar designs.

[0030] In an embodiment, the updated 3D beam patterns comprise second 3D coordinate data for each updated beam rebar structure. The second 3D coordinate data is tagged with third- dimension data (such as length, diameter, etc.), wherein second 3D coordinate data enable representation of each updated beam rebar structure. Each updated 3D beam pattern stored in the non-transitory storage device 106-A is free from conflicts between the updated beam rebar structures.

[0031] In an embodiment, the non-transitory storage device 106-A also stores updated 3D column patterns. Similar to the updated beam patterns, the updated 3D column patterns comprise secondary 3D position data for each updated column rebar element. The secondary 3D position data is individually tagged with fourth-dimension data (such as length, diameter, etc.), providing an enhanced depth of information regarding the orientation and position of each column rebar element. The fourth-dimension data tagging facilitates adjustments and modifications in the 3D model of the building project. Furthermore, each updated 3D column pattern is characterized by being free from disagreements between the updated column rebar elements.

[0032] In an embodiment, the data stored in the non-transitory storage device 106- A is not limited to static information. The building construction history database is dynamic, allowing for continuous updates and refinements based on new building projects, advancements in constructiontechniques, and evolving architectural trends. Such dynamic nature assures that the system 100 remains relevant and effective in addressing the challenges faced in modern construction projects.

[0033] In an embodiment, the remote server 106 comprises a processing unit 106-B to acquire the received 3D model of the building project from the computing device 102, wherein the received 3D model, comprising details of various structural elements including beams, columns, foundations, shear walls, structural slab and their respective reinforcing bars, is transmitted from the computing device 102. The processing unit 106-B facilitates the efficient and accurate reception of data sets embodied in the 3D model. The reception is essential for the subsequent analysis and identification of clashes within the network of rebars as depicted in the 3D model. The processing unit 106-B, upon acquiring the 3D model, initiates a series of programmed analytical procedures to interpret and process the complex structural information contained within the 3D model. Such procedures are utilized in identifying and resolving clashes in the rebar designs, thereby ensuring the structural integrity and feasibility of the building project as represented in the 3D model.

[0034] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B analyzes the acquired 3D model of the building project. The processing unit 106-B analyze each 3D model (of the building construction history database) using Al / machine learning based methodologies for identification of conflicts and incompatibilities within the 3D model, specifically focusing on the aspects of rebar designs (both beams and columns). The processing unit 106-B identifies at least one clash within the 3D beam rebar design. The clashes may represent points of structural weakness or inefficiency within the beam design, impacting the overall integrity and functionality of the building structure. In addition to beam rebar design clashes, the processing unit 106-B identifies disagreements within the 3D column rebar design. Such disagreements are critical as they often highlight areas where the column rebar design does not align with optimal construction practices, leading to structural issues or inefficiencies in the construction process.

[0035] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B can develop a refined model based on the building construction history database that is an amalgamation of various historical construction templates, each providing valuable insights and patterns that are crucial for devising effective clash resolution strategies.

[0036] In a preceding embodiment, the processing unit 106-B involves in the resolution of identified clashes within the 3D beam rebar designs. The resolution process is carried out throughcomparative analysis, where each 3D beam model within the building project is examined against an array of 3D beam patterns, both in the original and updated forms for identifying and rectifying conflicts. The updated 3D beam patterns are devoid of prior conflicts, thereby providing a framework for aligning current designs with conflict-free models.

[0037] In a preceding embodiment, the processing unit 106-B resolves disagreements found within the 3D column rebar designs. Such resolution mechanism operates similarly to that of the beam rebar designs, wherein each 3D column model undergoes a thorough comparison with both the original and updated 3D column patterns. The updated patterns represent refined designs that have effectively eliminated previous disagreements.

[0038] In a preceding embodiment, the processing unit 106-B determines the optimum dimensions for both beam and column rebar designs. The determination is executed individually for each design element, ensuring tailored and precise adjustments. For the 3D beam rebar designs, the optimum dimensions(e.g., length and diameter / width of each rebar) are derived based on an analytical assessment of the first-dimension data, which is associated with the original beam patterns, and the third-dimension data, corresponding to the updated beam patterns. Such dualdimensional analysis facilitates the identification of the most suitable dimensions that harmonize structural integrity with spatial requirements.

[0039] In a preceding embodiment, for the 3D column rebar designs, the targeted dimensions are ascertained through an analysis of the second-dimension data (linked to the original column patterns) and the fourth-dimension data (associated with the updated column patterns). Such analytical approach makes sure that each column rebar design is modified or reaffirmed to fit optimally within the overall structural framework of the building model.

[0040] The processing unit 106-B unit considers various parameters for determination optimum dimension of 3D beam rebar design and targeted dimension of 3D column rebar, as various parameters influence the behavior of the beams and columns under load. Exemplary parameters can be use / function of building and parts thereof, expected load on beams or columns, connectivity with other structural components and the like. As function of the building plays a crucial role in determining the rebar dimensions. For instance, commercial buildings with heavy machinery will have different reinforcement needs compared to residential structures. The processing unit 106-B incorporates the building’s purpose to predict stress points and load-bearing requirements. Further, anticipated loads, including dead loads (the weight of the structure itself)and live loads (weight of the occupants, furniture, equipment, etc.), are crucial factors. The processing unit 106-B consider load data to determine the size and distribution of rebar within the beams or columns to ensure rebar can support weights without compromising on safety or integrity. As connectivity of beam and column with other structural components is critical, the processing unit 106-B consider interconnectivity of each beam and column with the rest of the structure's framework. Moreover, the processing unit 106-B consider material properties, including the strength and elasticity of concrete and steel, are applied to the model elements. These properties will influence the behavior of the beams and columns under load. Optimal rebar dimensions are crucial for ensuring the safety and structural integrity of the building. They prevent catastrophic failures, such as collapsing due to inadequate reinforcement. Furthermore, determining the precise amount and dimension of rebar needed avoids overuse of materials, which can be cost-prohibitive. It ensures that the building is both safe and economically constructed.

[0041] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B determines the most effective 3D orientations (e.g., placement or distance between rebar, vector etc.) for each beam rebar design. The determination is based on an analysis of the first and second 3D coordinate data, representing the original and updated beam patterns, respectively. By juxtaposing the two sets of data, the processing unit 106-B can calculate the optimum orientation for each beam rebar design, ensuring that each beam rebar design aligns with both structural requirements and spatial constraints.

[0042] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B calculates the targeted 3D positions of each column rebar design based on analysis of the primary and secondary 3D position data, pertaining to the original and updated column patterns, respectively. Such detailed analysis determination of precise positioning of each column rebar element within the 3D model, thereby optimizing the overall structural configuration and mitigating conflicts.

[0043] The processing unit 106-B creates at least one building information model (BIM) of a beam. The generation of the BIM of the beam is based on optimum dimension determined by the system 100. Additionally, the processing unit 106-B calculates the optimum 3D orientation of the beam and integrates the information into the BIM. Furthermore, the processing unit 106-B creates at least one BIM of a column. The BIM of the column is based on a targeted dimension that the system 100 ascertains as being the most suitable for the specific project and incorporates a calculated targeted 3D position of the column. Both BIMs, of the beam and the column, are developed through a process that involves analyzing numerous factors, which include, but are notlimited to, the inherent structural requirements of the building project, the constraints presented within the 3D model, and the interactions between various elements within the model. The processing unit 106-B, by employing algorithms and drawing upon database of building construction history, can resolve clashes within the 3D model effectively.

[0044] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B executes a series of functions pertaining to the management and visualization of the 3D model. Key among the functions is to render one or more clash-free updated 3D models. The one or more clash-free updated 3D models, are presented in an updated form, free from conflicts that could compromise the structural integrity or aesthetic appeal of the building project. The rendering process involves the transformation of the updated 3D model data into a visually accessible and interpretable format. The processed data is then transmitted to the computing device 102, which display the updated 3D model to the user (e.g., architect, construction engineer, manager etc.).

[0045] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may modify the generated one or more clash-free updated 3D models, based on at least one factor selected from a group comprising an environmental impact factor, an expected load, a usage pattern, and the local building codes and regulations thereof. The processing unit 106-B receives data related to the environmental impact factor, which includes, but is not limited to, sustainability considerations, external environment condition (e.g. temperature, rain fall etc.) in which building is going to be constructed, energy efficiency metrics, and carbon footprint estimations. The received data are utilized to adjust the 3D model in a manner that aligns with eco-friendly building practices and minimizes the environmental impact of the construction project. Concurrently, the processing unit 106-B considers the expected load, which encompasses the anticipated weight and stress that the building structure may withstand. Adjustments to the 3D model are made to assure that the structural integrity of the building is maintained under the expected loads. Furthermore, the processing unit 106-B considers the usage pattern of the building project, which involves understanding the functional requirements and occupant behavior patterns, thereby tailoring the 3D model to suit the specific needs and usage scenarios of the building. In addition to the mentioned factors, the processing unit 106-B analyzes and adheres to the local building codes and regulations, which assist to comply with the prescribed standards and guidelines set forth by local authorities, encompassing aspects such as safety norms, construction standards, and regulatory compliances. Through such considerations, the processing unit 106-B ensures that the updated 3D modelresolves clashes within the rebars and optimizes the building design for environmental sustainability, structural integrity, functional efficacy, and regulatory compliance.

[0046] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may receive a modification command for modifying a user-selected clash free updated 3D model. Upon receipt of the modification command, the processing unit 106-B engages in a sequence of operations to adjust the user- selected clash free updated 3D model in accordance with specified parameters or preferences. The adjustment involves the processing unit 106-B interpreting the modification command to determine the nature and extent of the modifications required. Subsequently, the processing unit 106-B accesses the relevant portions of the clash free updated 3D model stored in the non- transitory storage device 106-A within the remote server 106, to which the processing unit 106-B is communicatively coupled. The modifications to the clash free updated 3D model are executed by altering the structural elements represented in the 3D model, such as the positioning, orientation, or dimensions of the rebars (beam or column), as dictated by the modification command. During such process, the processing unit 106-B affirms that the modifications adhere to predefined design rules and constraints, which may include, but are not limited to, structural integrity, aesthetic considerations, and compliance with building codes. Furthermore, the processing unit 106-B may perform real-time analysis to assess the impact of the modifications on the overall design and structural integrity of the building project. The analysis includes evaluating clashes or incompatibilities that may arise due to the modifications and proposing solutions to resolve such issues. Once the modifications are completed, the processing unit 106-B generates an updated version of the 3D model, reflecting the changes made. The updated 3D model is then rendered onto the display of a computing device 102 for review and further action by the user.

[0047] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may enable estimation of billing costs associated with each generated clash-free updated 3D model. The estimation is performed by the processing unit 106-B upon the acquisition and analysis of the received 3D model of the building project. After the generation of the clash free updated 3D model, the processing unit 106-B estimates the billing cost for each clash-free updated 3D model. The cost estimation is executed by utilizing an algorithm embedded within the processing unit 106-B, which considers various factors such as the complexity of the clashes resolved, the resources expended during the resolution process, and the time required for effecting the resolutions. The algorithm additionally factors in the current market rates for materials and labor, thereby providing a realistic estimation of thebilling cost. The estimation provides valuable financial insights to the stakeholders of the building project, enabling informed decision-making regarding project budgeting and resource allocation. Furthermore, the estimated billing cost, once generated by the processing unit 106-B, is rendered accessible for review and analysis on the display of the computing device 102, offering a transparent and detailed breakdown of the financial implications of the clash resolutions effected in the updated 3D model.

[0048] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may execute two operations for optimizing the structural integrity and efficacy of the 3D model. Firstly, the processing unit 106- B calculates an optimum 3D orientation for each 3D beam rebar design. The calculation is based on an analysis of the first 3D coordinate data, which is tagged with first-dimension data representing each beam rebar structure and the respective orientation within the 3D model. Simultaneously, the processing unit 106-B considers the second 3D coordinate data, which includes tagged information regarding the orientation of updated beam rebar structures within the updated 3D model. The convergence of data from the two sources permits the processing unit 106- B to determine the most suitable orientation for each 3D beam rebar design, ensuring that the structural requirements and design aesthetics are optimally balanced in the 3D model. Secondly, the processing unit 106-B calculates a targeted 3D position for each 3D column rebar design. The calculation involves an analysis of the primary 3D position data, which encompasses detailed information about the original positioning of each 3D column rebar element, including the orientation and tagged with second-dimension data. In conjunction, the processing unit 106-B also analyzes the secondary 3D position data, which pertains to the positioning of updated 3D column rebar elements in the revised 3D model. By juxtaposing the two sets of data, the processing unit 106-B effectively ascertains the most effective placement for each column rebar within the 3D model, thereby enhancing the overall structural integrity and ensuring compliance with the predefined design parameters and architectural specifications.

[0049] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may recalibrate one or more clash-free updated 3D models of the building project. The recalibration is based on both the calculated optimum 3D orientation and the calculated targeted 3D position of the rebars within the 3D model. The optimum 3D orientation and the targeted 3D position of the rebars are determined by the processing unit 106-B after the analysis of the 3D model received by the computing device 102. The analysis involves identifying clashes and disagreements in the original rebar designs, whichare represented in the 3D model of the building project. Upon identification, the processing unit 106-B calculates the optimum orientation and targeted position for each rebar, ensuring that the updated 3D model is free from any conflicts or discrepancies. Subsequently, the recalibration process undertaken by the processing unit 106-B involves adjusting the arrangement and orientation of the rebars in the 3D model. The adjustment is executed while maintaining the structural integrity and design specifications of the building project. The recalibrated 3D model, now refined to eliminate clashes, provides a more accurate and efficient framework for the construction of the building project. The system 100, through such recalibration, make certain that the final construction adheres to the highest standards of safety, accuracy, and efficiency.

[0050] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may employ a machine learning technique for the identification of clashes and disagreements within the 3D model. The machine learning technique involves the analysis of various data inputs (included within the 3D model), including but not limited to, the geo-spatial coordinates, orientations, and dimensions of rebar structures within the 3D model. The machine learning algorithm, executed within the processing unit 106-B, is trained on the dataset comprising historical construction data, clash instances, and resolutions. The training allows the algorithm to effectively recognize patterns and anomalies that signify clashes or disagreements between the rebar structures in different parts of the building project. Moreover, the machine learning technique is continually refined and updated based on the input of new construction data, ensuring the effectiveness and accuracy over time. The processing unit 106-B adaptively learns from each project, enhancing the capability to pre-emptively identify issues in subsequent projects. The machine learning technique discerns the geometric relationships and constraints within the 3D models. As a result, system 100 can identify current clashes and disagreements and can predict future conflicts in the design, thereby facilitating pre-emptive modifications and optimizations in the 3D model.

[0051] In an embodiment, the system 100 comprises a mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) unit within the processing unit 106-B. The integrated MEP unit enhances the capabilities of the system 100 in identifying and resolving clashes and disagreements within the 3D model of the building project. The processing unit 106-B, in conjunction with the integrated MEP unit, analyzes the 3D model received by the computing device 102. The analysis involves a detailed examination of various aspects of the building project, including but not limited to MEP components. The purpose of such analysis is to identify any instances where the rebars mightconflict or interfere with MEP systems, hereby referred to as clashes. Furthermore, the integrated MEP unit is also tasked with the identification of disagreements, which are defined as instances where the positioning or orientation of the rebars does not align optimally with the MEP systems, leading to inefficiencies or complications in the construction process. Upon identification of at least one clash and at least one disagreement by the MEP unit, the processing unit 106-B proceeds to engage in the resolution process. The process involves the application of a set of predefined rules and algorithms, stored within the non-transitory storage device 106-A, to generate viable solutions for the identified clashes and disagreements. The solutions are then rendered in the form of updated 3D models, which are subsequently communicated to the computing device 102 for display and further action.

[0052] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may perform a stress testing procedure on each BIM of beam and each BIM of column incorporated within every clash-free updated 3D model. The stress testing executed by the processing unit 106-B assesses and evaluates the structural integrity and durability of the beams and columns under various simulated load conditions. The conditions are modeled to mirror real-world scenarios, encompassing a spectrum of stress factors that the building project is likely to encounter during the lifecycle, including but not limited to gravitational forces, wind loads, seismic events, and other environmental stressors. The results obtained from the stress testing by the processing unit 106-B make certain that each BIM of beam and each BIM of column within the clash-free updated 3D model meets the requisite safety standards and structural resilience criteria. The computational algorithms employed in the processing unit 106-B provide the precise calculation of stress distribution, points of failure, and load-bearing capacities of the beams and columns. Such feature is integral in affirming that the structural components of the building project, as represented in the clash-free updated 3D model, adhere to the established engineering principles and building codes.

[0053] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may identify and resolve at least one clash that occurs at the intersection of the 3D beam model and the 3D column model within a designated 3D building area of the 3D model (of building project). The processing unit 106-B executes the set of instructions, which allows the analysis of the relationship between the 3D beam rebar design and the 3D column rebar design. Upon detection of any overlap or proximity that violates predefined thresholds and thereby constitutes a clash, the processing unit 106-B employs a resolution protocol that involves a comparative analysis against a repository of historical data and3D building templates stored within the building construction history database. Through the comparison, an appropriate adjustment to the rebar designs is determined, effectively eliminating the identified clash without compromising the structural integrity or design requirements of the 3D building area. The adjustments are calculated to assure that the rebars within the beam and column models maintain the requisite separation, thus facilitating a clash-free integration of the 3D beam model with the 3D column model. The result of the resolution is the updated 3D model where the rebars are repositioned or resized in accordance with the optimized design parameters, thereby ensuring that the intersection of the 3D beam and column models within the 3D building area is free from conflicts.

[0054] In an embodiment, the building construction history database may record and store the first 3D graphic model and the second 3D graphic model. The first 3D graphic model encompasses multiple 3D reference slab models, each containing a plurality of 3D reference rebar patterns, which are associated with at least one clash that is defined as a specific location where at least two 3D reference rebar patterns are closer than a first pre-set distance, thereby indicating a structural conflict within the rebar of slab framework. In contrast, the second 3D graphic model consists of multiple 3D updated slab models, each comprising a series of 3D updated rebar patterns that have been refined and adjusted to be clash free. The transformation from the first 3D graphic model to the second 3D graphic model is achieved through the application of the set of executable routines within the system 100. The process is facilitated by comparing the 3D reference rebar patterns against established rebar arrangement protocols and utilizing historical data from the database to inform the generation of the 3D updated rebar patterns. The systematized approach ensures that each updated slab model adheres to the optimal rebar layout, effectively eliminating the identified clashes and promoting a more effective and structurally sound construction process.

[0055] In an embodiment, the 3D model of the building project may comprise at least one 3D structural slab model. Each 3D structural slab model includes multiple 3D rebar patterns. The 3D rebar patterns represent the precise arrangement of rebars, which are to be embedded within the concrete slab structures of the building project. Within each 3D structural slab model, the multiple 3D rebar patterns are delineated to reflect the accurate positioning, spacing, and bending details of the rebars, ensuring that the tensile forces experienced by the slab during service conditions are effectively countered. Each rebar within the 3D rebar patterns is endowed with a unique identifier, whereby the geo-spatial coordinates and orientation data of the rebars are tagged with dimensiondata. The dimensional tagging facilitates the automated clash identification and resolution system 100 in executing the intended function of detecting any overlaps, congestions, or inconsistencies that may arise within the complex interplay of the reinforcing framework. Moreover, each 3D structural slab model integrates with other structural components of the building project, thereby allowing for a cohesive 3D representation of the entire structure.

[0056] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may perform an analysis of the building construction history database, which comprises a compilation of multiple 3D reference rebar patterns from past projects. Within the building construction history database, each 3D reference rebar pattern is associated with dimensional data and a record of previously encountered clashes and the resolutions thereof. By accessing and scrutinizing the historical data, the processing unit 106-B systematically identifies one or more clashes among the multiple 3D rebar patterns present in the 3D model of building project. The clashes typically occur when the arrangement of rebar structures within the model does not conform to predefined spacing criteria, leading to structural conflicts. Upon identification of clashes, the processing unit 106-B employs algorithmic strategies, which have been derived from the analysis of past resolutions stored in the building construction history database, to propose effective solutions. Such solutions may involve adjusting the position, orientation, or dimension of the rebar structures in the 3D model to eliminate the identified clashes. The processing unit 106-B re-evaluates the adjusted 3D rebar patterns to ensure that the proposed resolutions have indeed rectified the conflicts without introducing new ones. The resolutions are then applied to generate the updated clash-free 3D model of the building project.

[0057] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may scrutinize multiple 3D rebar patterns, which are employed within at least one 3D structural slab model. The processing unit 106-B discerns any instances where the multiple 3D rebar patterns and the rebars within the 3D beam rebar design or the 3D column rebar design results in overlaps or proximity infractions that do not conform to predetermined threshold parameters. Upon identification of clashes, the processing unit 106-B applies the resolution protocol, utilizing the database of construction history and rebar patterning to propose alternative arrangements or modifications. The modifications assure that the geo-spatial relationships between the rebars comply with the required construction standards and specifications, thereby mitigating structural issues. The processing unit 106-B mitigates the structural issues by comparing the detected clashes against a repository of known 3D rebar patterns and their historical efficacies in similar structural scenarios. The result of analysis and resolutionprocess by the processing unit 106-B is the generation of the updated 3D model that reflects an optimized rebar configuration that eliminates the previously identified clashes.

[0058] In an embodiment, the building construction history database may comprise multiple 3D reference foundation models. Each of the reference foundation models includes a plurality of 3D reference rebar designs, which are associated with at least one clash that is defined as a location where at least two 3D reference rebar designs are closer than a second pre-set distance, thereby presenting structural conflicts within the 3D model of the building project. Furthermore, the second 3D graphic model contains multiple 3D updated foundation models, which encompass a plurality of 3D updated rebar designs. The updated rebar designs within the 3D updated foundation models are characterized by the absence of clashes, denoting that the updated rebar designs have been modified to eliminate any intersection that would result in a clash, as previously identified in the 3D reference foundation models. The resolution of the clashes makes sure that the updated rebar designs are optimized for conflict-free integration within the structural framework of the building project. The optimization is achieved through the execution of set of executable routines by the processing unit 106-B, which utilizes the historical data and comparative analysis between the reference and updated designs to facilitate a streamlined construction process free from rebar clashes.

[0059] In an embodiment, the 3D model of building project is provided, wherein the 3D model comprising at least one 3D foundation model. Within each 3D foundation model, multiple 3D rebar designs are encompassed, wherein each 3D rebar design is constructed to represent the layout of rebars as required for foundational integrity and stability of building project. The 3D rebar designs are constituted in such a manner as to accurately reflect the configuration and the specific reinforcement needs of the building foundation. The complexity inherent in the foundational rebar designs necessitates a detailed representation of the positioning, bending, and anchoring details of rebars, ensuring that all stress points and load-bearing requirements are appropriately addressed. Each rebar within the multiple 3D rebar designs is rendered with precision to include the exact dimensions, material properties, and orientations, which are important for the structural performance of foundation. The 3D rebar designs are developed to enable a thorough visualization of the foundational framework, providing a basis for subsequent construction activities. Furthermore, the incorporation of the multiple 3D rebar designs within the 3D foundation model facilitates the identification of clashes between reinforcing bars, thereby allowing for pre-emptiveremedial measures to be taken. The pre-emptive clash detection serves to minimize the risk of construction delays, reduce the occurrence of material wastage, and maintain that the integrity of the foundation throughout the construction process.

[0060] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may identify and resolve one or more clashes between the multiple 3D rebar designs based on analysis of the building construction history database. The building construction history database comprises a compilation of 3D building templates, each associated with a distinct set of 3D rebar patterns and historical clash instances. Upon acquisition of the 3D model of building project, the processing unit 106-B commences a comparison against the stored 3D building templates. During the comparison, conflicts within the 3D rebar designs are detected when the positioning of the rebars encroaches upon the space defined by established threshold limits. The clashes are indicative of areas within the design that may hinder construction or compromise structural integrity if not addressed. Upon the identification of clash, the processing unit 106-B employs predetermined resolution strategies, which have been developed and refined through analysis of past construction projects and recorded within the building construction history database. The strategies involve the adjustment of the 3D rebar designs to alleviate identified clashes, thereby generating an optimized, clash-free rebar layout. The resolution process confirms that the integrity and functionality of the 3D rebar designs are maintained, while also adhering to the requisite building codes and structural specifications.

[0061] In an embodiment, the processing unit 106-B may identify and resolve one or more clashes among the plurality of 3D rebar designs that are employed within at least one 3D foundation model, the at least one 3D beam rebar design, and the at least one 3D column rebar design. The processing unit 106-B make certain that each rebar within the composite 3D model adheres to predetermined geo-spatial requirements, thereby preventing structural overlap and construction issues. Upon receipt of the 3D models from the computing device 102, the processing unit 106-B engages in an analysis, utilizing algorithms to compare the positional data of each rebar design against established threshold parameters. In instances where the geo-spatial positioning data of the rebars within the foundation, beam, or column designs is determined to infringe upon the thresholds (indicating a clash), the processing unit 106-B executes a series of corrective measures. The measures include the realignment of rebar positions, adjustment of rebar dimensions, and, if necessary, a complete reconfiguration of the rebar layout within the 3D model to meet the requisite standards for clearance and separation. The resolution of clashes is carriedout in a manner that maintains the structural integrity and design specifications of the building project, with the processing unit 106-B autonomously generating an updated 3D model that is devoid of any such conflicts.

[0062] In an embodiment, the building construction history database archives both the first 3D graphic model and the second 3D graphic model. The first 3D graphic model encompasses multiple 3D shear wall models, each comprising multiple 3D reference rebar models. Within the 3D reference rebar models, at least one clash is associated, which defines a precise location where at least two 3D reference rebar models intersect with each other, thereby presenting structural conflicts. Conversely, the second 3D graphic model comprises multiple 3D updated shear wall models, each including multiple 3D updated rebar models, from which all clashes have been systematically eradicated. The resolution of the clashes within the updated 3D models is achieved through the application of the set of executable routines processed by the remote server 106, which is operatively coupled to the computing device 102. Such arrangement makes sure that each updated 3D shear wall model is characterized by an absence of intersectional discrepancies, thereby rendering the updated rebar models clash-free. The clash-free state is essential for maintaining the structural integrity and facilitating the ease of construction for building projects.

[0063] In an embodiment, the 3D model of the building project may comprise at least one 3D shear wall model that encompasses multiple 3D rebar models, each of which contributes to the overall shear resistance and structural integrity of the building project. Within the 3D shear wall model, each 3D rebar model comprises a plurality of rebar models, which affirm the capacity of shear wall to withstand lateral forces such as wind or seismic activity. Each 3D rebar model is calculated to optimize the distribution of stresses and to enhance the ductility of the shear wall. The arrangement of rebars is such that the potential for congestion is minimized while maximizing the structural performance of the shear wall. Each 3D rebar model within the shear wall is aligned in a predetermined pattern, which is determined by structural analysis algorithms to ensure compliance with applicable building codes and standards. The alignment and positioning data for each 3D rebar model are stored and represented as part of the 3D rebar models, with each 3D rebar model tagged with unique identification data to facilitate automated clash detection. The system 100 enables the identification of conflicts between the rebar elements during the design phase, thus pre-empting construction issues.

[0064] In an embodiment, through the execution of the set of programmed routines, each clash within the multiple 3D rebar models is compared against the information within the building construction history database. The comparison is conducted with a focus on recognizing patterns, dimensions, and orientations of rebars that have historically resulted in conflicts. Upon detection of clash, the processing unit 106-B employs algorithmically-derived strategies, informed by the building construction history database, to propose viable solutions for the reconfiguration of the rebar models. Such solutions aim to realign or adjust the rebars to assure that the geo-spatial distances between them meet or exceed established threshold limits, thereby eliminating the clashes. The resolution output, consisting of one or more adjusted 3D rebar models, is then verified against the database to confirm the absence of further conflicts. The efficacy of the proposed solutions is corroborated through the iterative process, ensuring that each rebar within the 3D models is positioned in a manner that optimizes structural integrity and facilitates construction efficiency.

[0065] FIG. 2 (FIG. 2A to FIG. 2B) illustrates the 3D isometric views of a 3D beam model and a 3D column model, in accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure. An isometric view, which is a form of orthogonal projection, presents the 3D beam model (FIG. 2 A) and the 3D column model (FIG. 2B) in two dimensions, allowing for a clear view of the dimensions and relationships of 3D beam model and the 3D column model without the distortion of perspective. Such illustration is particularly useful for displaying the placement and design of the rebars. Each model includes at least one distinctive rebar design that is integral to the structural integrity: the beam rebar design, typically running longitudinally within the beam to resist tensile forces; and the column rebar design, usually consisting of both vertical members and lateral ties or spirals to provide strength against compression and buckling. The illustrations convey precise information about the rebar layout, size, and spacing, which are important for the safety, durability, and performance of the concrete structures.

[0066] FIG. 3 illustrates an exemplary 3D isometric view of a beam pattern, in accordance with the embodiment of the present disclosure. As illustrated, 3D beam pattern comprises coordinate data (such as first 3D coordinate data) of each beam rebar structure and the orientation thereof. Each coordinate data is tagged, individually, with dimension data (such as first-dimension data). The dimension data uniquely identifies each beam rebar within the 3D model, facilitating precise clash detection and resolution. The coordinate data, representing the positioning andorientation of each beam rebar, is generated, and processed by the system 100. Such processing includes the mapping and analysis of the 3D coordinates to ascertain the exact location and alignment of each rebar in the structural framework. Such documentation and tagging of the coordinate data with dimension data enables the system 100 to accurately identify conflicts between rebars and other structural elements.

[0067] FIG 4 (FIG. 4A and Fig. 4B) illustrates two configurations of an exemplary 3D beam pattern in a reinforced concrete structure, in accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure. As illustrated, FIG. 4A depicts a condition in which the geo-spatial distance between proximate rebar structures does not exceed a first threshold limit. Such proximity may result in a congested arrangement, leading to a higher likelihood of clashing between the rebars, which could complicate the construction process and compromise the structural integrity. Such congestion requires planning and precise placement to mitigate the risks of structural interference and to assure compliance with safety and design standards. On the other hand, FIG. 4B illustrates an alternative configuration, characterized by the geo-spatial distance between rebar structures that surpasses the first threshold limit. The increased separation aids in preventing rebar clashing, enabling a more streamlined construction process, and improving the manageability of the rebar framework within the concrete milieu.

[0068] FIG. 5 (FIG. 5 A and FIG. 5B) illustrate two separate instances of a 3D column pattern within a structural design, highlighting the spatial arrangement of rebar elements, in accordance with the embodiments of the present disclosure. FIG. 5 A details a scenario wherein the 3D distance between each adjacent rebar element is kept below a second threshold limit, which, although optimizing the use of space within the concrete formwork, raises concerns regarding rebar congestion. Such compact arrangement might lead to increased difficulty in ensuring proper concrete flow and coverage, as well as challenges in maintaining sufficient concrete protective layering around each rebar, which is important for the long-term durability of the structure. Meanwhile, FIG. 5B is set to depicts a larger 3D distance between each rebar element. Such expanded spacing is anticipated to enhance the constructability of the column by reducing the risk of rebar clashing, facilitating better concrete placement, and improving the overall quality of the concrete encapsulation. The depictions serve to demonstrate the necessity for a balanced approach in rebar placement, where the automated clash identification and resolution system (100) mustoptimize between too narrow and excessively wide rebar spacings to achieve an ideal structural design and ease of construction.

[0069] In an embodiment, the system 100 significantly improves the accuracy and efficiency of identifying and resolving conflicts between rebars, thereby enhancing the structural integrity and constructability of the building framework. By utilizing a database of building construction history and applying advanced algorithms, the system 100 autonomously detects clashes between rebars, which may not be readily apparent to human operators due to the complex interplay of multidimensional elements. Upon identification of a clash, the system 100 proposes one or more viable solutions to resolve the identified issue, effectively reducing the time and labor typically required for manual clash detection and correction. The system 100 streamlines the design and construction process and minimizes errors and the need for costly post-construction modifications. Furthermore, the system 100 allows for the pre-emptive optimization of rebar placement within the 3D model, thus preventing construction delays and ensuring compliance with safety regulations and design specifications. The system 100 thereby provides a tangible improvement over conventional manual methods, offering an approach to rebar clash resolution that is both timeefficient and cost-effective.

Claims

CLAIMSWhat is claimed is:

1. An automated clash identification and resolution system for the reinforcing bars (rebars) in a 3 -dimensional (3D) model of a building project, the system comprising: a computing device to receive the 3D model of the building project, wherein the 3D model comprises the multiple 3D building areas, wherein each 3D building area comprises: at least one 3D beam model, wherein each 3D beam model comprises at least one 3D beam rebar design; or at least one 3D column model, wherein each 3D column model comprises at least one 3D column rebar design; a remote server coupled to the computing device via a network interface, wherein the remote server comprises: a non-transitory storage device to store: a set of executable routines; and a building construction history database comprising multiple 3D building templates, wherein each 3D building template is associated with: a first 3D graphic model comprising: the multiple 3D beam patterns, wherein each 3D beam pattern comprises a first 3D coordinate data of each beam rebar structure and orientation thereof, wherein each first 3D coordinate data is tagged, individually, with a first-dimension data, wherein at least one 3D beam pattern is associated with at least one conflict that defines a location at which a geo-spatial distance between more than two beam rebar structures is less than a first threshold limit; the multiple 3D column patterns, wherein each 3D column pattern comprises a primary 3D position data of each column rebar element and orientation thereof, wherein each primary 3D position data is tagged, individually, with a second-dimension data, wherein at least one 3D column pattern is associated with at least one disagreementthat defines a position at which a 3D distance between more than two column rebar elements is less than a second threshold limit; a second 3D graphic model comprises: the multiple 3D updated beam patterns, wherein each updated 3D beam pattern comprises a second 3D coordinate data of each updated beam rebar structure and orientation thereof, wherein each second 3D coordinate data is tagged, individually, with a third-dimension data, wherein each updated 3D beam pattern is free from conflict between each updated beam rebar structure; the multiple updated 3D column patterns, wherein each updated 3D column pattern comprises a secondary 3D position data of each updated column rebar element and orientation thereof, wherein each secondary 3D position data is tagged, individually, with a fourthdimension data, wherein each updated 3D column pattern is free from disagreement between each updated column rebar element; a processing unit to: acquire the received 3D model of the building project from the computing device; analyse the acquired 3D model of the building project, based on the building construction history database to identify: at least one clash in the 3D beam rebar design; or at least one disagreement in the 3D column rebar design; develop a model based on the building construction history database to derive one or more strategies to: resolve each identified clash in the 3D beam rebar design based on comparison of each 3D beam model with the multiple 3D beam patterns and multiple 3D updated beam patterns; and resolve each identified disagreement in the 3D column rebar design based on comparison of each 3D column model with the multiple 3D column patterns and the multiple updated 3D column patterns;determine, individually, an optimum dimension of 3D beam rebar design based on analysis of the first-dimension data and the third- dimension data; determine, individually, a targeted dimension of 3D column rebar design based on analysis of the second-dimension data and the fourth-dimension data; generate one or more clash free updated 3D model of the building project comprising: at least one building information model (BIM) of beam based on the determined optimum dimension; and at least one BIM of column based on the determined targeted dimension and; and render the generated one or more clash free updated 3D model onto a display of the computing device.

2. The system of claim 1, wherein the processing unit modifies the generated one or more clash free updated 3D model based on, at least one selected from: an environmental impact factor, an expected load, a usage pattern, a local building codes and regulation thereof.

3. The system of claim 1, wherein the processing unit receives a modification command to modify a user selected clash free updated 3D model.

4. The system of claim 1, wherein the processing unit estimates a billing cost of each generated clash free updated 3D model.

5. The system of claim 1, wherein the processing unit calculates, individually: an optimum 3D orientation of each 3D beam rebar design based on analysis of the first 3D coordinate data and the second 3D coordinate data; and a targeted 3D position of each 3D column rebar design based on analysis of the primary 3D position data and the secondary 3D position data.

6. The system of claim 5, wherein the processing unit recalibrates one or more clash free updated 3D model based on the calculated optimum 3D orientation and the calculated targeted 3D position.

7. The system of claim 1, wherein the processing unit utilizes a machine learning technique for identification of at least one clash and at least one disagreement.

8. The system of claim 1, wherein the processing unit integrates a mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) unit for identification of at least one clash and at least one disagreement.

9. The system of claim 1, wherein the processing unit performs a stress testing of each BIM of beam and each BIM of column of each clash free updated 3D model.

10. The system of claim 1, wherein the processing unit identifies and resolves at least one clash between the 3D beam rebar design and the 3D column rebar design, at an intersection of the 3D beam model and the 3D column model.

11. The system of claim 1, wherein the building construction history database comprises: the multiple 3D reference slab models comprising the multiple 3D reference rebar patterns, which are associated with at least one clash, which defines a location at which at least two 3D reference rebar patterns are closer than a first pre-set distance; and the multiple 3D updated slab model comprising the multiple 3D updated rebar patterns, which are clash free.

12. The system of claim 11, wherein the 3D model of building project comprises at least one 3D structural slab model, wherein each 3D structural slab model comprises the multiple 3D rebar patterns, wherein the processing unit identifies and resolves one or more clashes between the multiple 3D rebar patterns by analysing the building construction history database.

13. The system of claim 11, wherein the processing unit identifies and resolves one or more clashes between the multiple 3D rebar patterns, the at least one 3D beam rebar design and the at least one 3D column rebar design.

14. The system of claim 1, wherein the building construction history database comprises: the multiple 3D reference foundation models comprising the multiple 3D reference rebar designs, which are associated with at least one clash, which defines a point at which at least two 3D reference rebar designs are closer than a second pre-set distance; and the multiple 3D updated foundation model comprising the multiple 3D updated rebar designs, which are clash free.

15. The system of claim 14, wherein the 3D model of building project comprises at least one 3D foundation model, wherein each 3D foundation model comprises the multiple 3D rebar designs,wherein the processing unit identifies and resolves one or more clashes between the multiple 3D rebar designs by analysing the building construction history database.

16. The system of claim 14, wherein the processing unit identifies and resolves one or more clashes between the multiple 3D rebar designs, the at least one 3D beam rebar design and the at least one 3D column rebar design.

Images