CIPA 2003 XIX th International Symposium, 30 September-04 October, 2003, Antalya, Turkey
483
aiijxj
3 '3 ® «i
v.ppp ;aii
jtiQliSJ
;
3
Is
jJJLl*
l fL ESZ
T & (9 (V 0 t? V ( ’l
?, ft .F-
-lQteJ
mlQjXj
3
4"
Dors, stairs
t3ooAk@f»g3a4ggiKJS] saga‘■an I j;
fcolchl
In? PxWiAdi 2JS 300«’t64’2816700030 ' ' "““"‘''VfArtG: FASTER ORTHO [TOUftft OfiWJ'OTfUOU LST?i«6iu
Figure 6b. 3D-model: Columns, beams, walls, windows, doors,
stairs
The approach described in this paper has the following
advantages and disadvantages:
The use of CAAD-building elements is coupled with a
height-parameter resulting in 3D-extruded objects. A simple
shadowed or rendered model can be generated immediately
from within the CAD-system.
The creation and adaptation of CAAD-building elements
using tacheometry ensures a high-precision plan
representation which can, as necessary, be dislocated from
the rest of the building model for independent editing.
The three-dimensional model allows the generation of
simple system sections.
- The geometric area or volume of individual building
elements can be calculated automatically with a view to
determining areas and bills of quantities.
Individual building elements can be assigned attributes or
parameters so that this information becomes integral to the
building model.
The 3D model is not detailed enough for special
requirements, because deformations in the extruded surface
cannot be included or are difficult to model - walls and
ceilings are flat.
Information management does not fulfil more complex
requirements such as those which can be expected from a
GIS-system. Information assigned to building elements
should be restricted to essential properties.
4, CONCLUSION
The use of CAAD systems for surveying historic buildings was
previously not possible as such system models were not able to
reproduce the uneven surfaces and deformations inherent in
existing buildings. The use of modifiers applied to the standard
CAAD-elements makes it possible for CAAD-systems to
respond to the actual plan geometry of existing buildings. This
is made possible by using CAAD-software in conjunction with
tacheometric software on a common working platform (for
instance ADT Architectural Desktop). A 3D-model results
directly from the survey and serves as a basis for visualisations,
automated calculations (such as surface areas, volumes etc.) and
as a 3D unit of reference for further non-geometric data. The
practicability of the process was tested and exhibited using a
real case study object. The main practical advantage of such an
approach is the ability to quickly realise a 3D-visualisation of
the surveyed building, in essence a by-product of the survey.
This is useful for understanding relationships within the
building and for initial planning studies. It is possible to link the
model with further information but the results of this
combination do not fulfil the requirements of a building
information system both in terms of performance and usability.
The potential offered through the combination of surveying
equipment and software should be examined in more detail. The
usability of such systems should be simplified through the
provision of a tailor-made interface and tools which are oriented
around the demands of practitioners in conservation and
archaeology.
5. REFERENCES
acadGraph: http ://www. acadgraph. de/start. htm 1
autodesk: http://www.autodesk.com
kubit: http://www.kubit.de
pms: http://www.elcovision.com/
