Parametric Building Element Assembly With Constraint-Based Verification

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for designing and manufacturing building elements lack flexibility and verification in ensuring structural integrity, dimensional accuracy, and compliance with regulatory requirements, making it difficult to create customized building elements that meet both functional and aesthetic needs while being easily certifiable.

Innovation Solution

A method and software system that utilizes parametric 3D modeling and constraint spaces to allow users to modify building element dimensional parameters within defined limits, ensuring that the building elements comply with structural, legal, and aesthetic requirements, with the system converting these modifications into control instructions for 3D manufacturing processes.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If traditional design and manufacturing methods are used for building elements, then the manufacturing process is straightforward, but the flexibility for customization and verification of structural integrity is limited

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecustomization flexibilityVSAvoidsystem complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the building element design into parametric 3D models with defined constraint spaces, allowing independent modification of dimensional parameters while maintaining structural integrity through mathematical coupling relationships between parameters

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system enables customization by allowing users to modify dimensional parameters within defined constraint spaces, where parameters are mathematically coupled to ensure structural requirements are met automatically when parameters are changed

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If traditional design methods are used, then the design process is simple, but ensuring compliance with structural, legal, and aesthetic requirements becomes difficult

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecompliance verificationVSAvoidsoftware system complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary verification by defining constraint spaces that encode structural, legal, and aesthetic requirements before the actual design process, automatically checking compliance as parameters are modified rather than requiring post-design verification

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system provides continuous feedback to users when parameter modifications would violate constraint space boundaries, automatically adjusting parameters or alerting users to maintain compliance with requirements throughout the design process

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Productivity

If manual verification methods are used for building element integrity, then the process is straightforward, but time consumption increases and productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedesign and manufacturing efficiencyVSAvoidverification time

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system replaces manual verification processes with automated computer-based verification through parametric modeling and constraint space algorithms, eliminating time-consuming manual calculations and checks while maintaining verification accuracy

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Adaptability or versatility

If highly customized building elements are created, then adaptability to specific needs is improved, but manufacturing precision and dimensional accuracy become more difficult to maintain

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecustomization capabilityVSAvoiddimensional accuracy

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts design parameters within constraint spaces based on user requirements, automatically recalculating dimensional relationships to maintain manufacturing precision while accommodating customization needs through real-time parameter interdependency management

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentUS11480943B2Method and assembly for forming a building element

Publication Date: 2022.10.25 AECTUAL HLDG BV

AI summary

A method of designing and engineering a building element (e.g., a staircase) that is structurally verified and may be easily certified. The method uses a parametric three-dimensional (3D) model of the building element and a constraint space definition. It ensures that the building element will fit in the building and will comply with functional, legal, and/or other requirements, such as strength, dimensional requirements, or use of certain materials. A computer system provides a user tool for easily amending the building element while visualizing it in its specific use. It also converts the amended building element to processing instructions for 3D manufacturing, such that the end product complies with the constraint space definition. A user without extensive knowledge of engineering, complex computer-aided design (CAD) programs, or 3D manufacturing can easily amend a design to his or her personal need and have the building element custom produced.