Gap Detection in Drawings Using Sweeping Evaluation Line
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing gap detection methods in drawing applications are computationally intensive and time-consuming, often closing unintended gaps while filling regions, which can lead to inefficient and user-unsatisfactory results.
Innovation Solution
A method involving sweeping an evaluation line across the drawing to detect gaps, with endpoints intersecting the line, and determining distances to identify gaps, followed by culling criteria such as aspect ratio and width to generate gap lines that close gaps only when necessary, optimizing the process for efficiency.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If existing gap detection methods use a small stamp to search for candidate gaps, then gap detection can be performed, but the computational intensity and time consumption increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the gap detection process into distinct phases: candidate gap identification using efficient algorithms, followed by separate evaluation and culling stages. This segmentation allows the use of different algorithms optimized for each stage, improving overall efficiency while maintaining detection accuracy.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent performs preliminary actions by first identifying candidate gaps using an efficient search algorithm before applying more computationally intensive evaluation criteria. This preliminary filtering reduces the number of candidates that require detailed analysis, thereby reducing overall computational intensity and time consumption.
2Reliability
If existing gap detection methods close all detected gaps, then region filling becomes more reliable, but unintended gaps are also closed causing user dissatisfaction
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements feedback mechanisms through evaluation criteria that assess whether closing a candidate gap would create unintended geometric issues. The system evaluates aspect ratios, area changes, and other geometric properties to determine if a gap should be closed, providing intelligent feedback rather than blanket closing of all gaps.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent changes parameters such as aspect ratio thresholds and area constraints to control gap closing behavior. By adjusting these parameters, the system can distinguish between intended and unintended gaps, closing only those that meet specific criteria while preserving user-intended gap structures.
3Measurement precision
If gap detection processes the entire drawing, then all gaps are detected, but the computational intensity increases significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts and processes only the necessary portions of the drawing by first identifying candidate gap regions and then applying evaluation criteria only to those specific areas. This extraction approach avoids processing the entire drawing, significantly reducing computational energy while maintaining detection completeness for actual gaps.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies partial action by performing detailed evaluation only on candidate gaps that pass initial filtering criteria. Rather than applying comprehensive analysis to all possible gap locations in the drawing, the system performs partial evaluation only where needed, reducing computational energy consumption while maintaining detection effectiveness.
Data Source
AI summary
A technique for searching for a gap in a drawing is disclosed. The technique includes sweeping an evaluation line across at least a portion of the drawing, detecting on the evaluation line an endpoint of a first segment, determining a distance from the endpoint to a point on the second segment, comparing the distance to a maximum gap distance, and detecting a gap.