Cloud Compare for structures

Deformation Analysis Software for 3D Point Cloud Data eg CloudCompare
Post Reply
User avatar
EdgarTrevizo
I have made 80-90 posts
I have made 80-90 posts
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:35 pm
9
Full Name: Edgar Omar Trevizo Aragon
Company Details: GrupoITT
Company Position Title: Engineer
Country: Mexico
Contact:

Cloud Compare for structures

Post by EdgarTrevizo »

Hi all

I need to scan to compare a structure of the construction of a very big stadium in Mexico, i need to analyze the up structure, it have big and small parts. If they give me the 3d model of the structureand I scan the stadium, i can analyze it with cloud compare?, and then what software can i use for do the as built model?. I need to determine the time and how i will can do the work to know what is the price of my work.

if you can tell me with your experience how can i quote that work, quote a price for the project, or for day, and how can i know how many days i will do it?. I have no much experience with modeling, we use Faro Focus X330 scanner. But i learn so fast :lol:

Sorry for my bad english.


here are some pics:

http://postimg.org/image/syp94ghzx/

http://postimg.org/image/uf0rmlkwt/
User avatar
danielgm
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:45 am
10
Full Name: Daniel Girardeau-Montaut
Company Details: CloudCompare
Company Position Title: Administrator
Country: France
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: Grenoble, France
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 34 times
Contact:

Re: Cloud Compare for structures

Post by danielgm »

Hi,

I'll only be able to answer to the first part of your question: yes, you should definitely be able to compare the clouds and the 3D model. This is what CloudCompare has been originally made for (in nuclear power plants):
cc_tqc_deformation_analysis.jpg
The main challenge for you will be to get the data in the right formats. Exporting the cloud from Faro software to ASCII or E57 should be quite easy. But you'll have to get the 3D model as an OBJ, STL or PLY file (i.e. a tessellated version of the CAD model). Try also to get both datasets in the same coordinate system and in the same units (you will be able to fix this later in CC, but it's always better and more accurate to get everything right before exporting the data).

Once you are ready, don't hesitate to ask me questions via email or via CC's forum.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Daniel
CloudCompare admin
http://www.cloudcompare.org/
rstuckey13
I have made 40-50 posts
I have made 40-50 posts
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:22 am
10
Full Name: Richard Stuckey
Company Details: Richard Stuckey
Company Position Title: Surveyor
Country: Australia
Linkedin Profile: No
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Cloud Compare for structures

Post by rstuckey13 »

Daniel,
thanks once again for a brilliant piece of software.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when performing this type of analysis, one has to be careful with relatively thin two sided objects, as illustrated with the diagram below showing scan points , the first instance with the beam deviating only a little from the anticipated location, the second beam deviating by an amount equal to the beam web thickness.
Both would show the same deviation value, correct?


Richard Stuckey.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
danielgm
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:45 am
10
Full Name: Daniel Girardeau-Montaut
Company Details: CloudCompare
Company Position Title: Administrator
Country: France
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: Grenoble, France
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 34 times
Contact:

Re: Cloud Compare for structures

Post by danielgm »

Definitely!

Especially if you have scanned only one side. In this case you have to be very careful and double check the results. But if you have scanned both ways, the remaining points (on the other side) will have greater distances and will eventually lead you to detect the problem.

During my PhD we developed strategies to cope with this issue when comparing two scans captured at different dates (this was relatively easy as we knew in which direction the scanner looked and we also knew that the light didn't cross the wall ;)). But now that I think of it, it would be totally possible to do the same with a 3D model: knowing where the scanner lies let you guess which surface it has (potentially) sensed and which were hidden...

Sadly the scanner position and orientation was really hard to export from manufacturer's applications at that time. So we left this unfinished. But with E57 and PTX formats it may be possible now...
Daniel
CloudCompare admin
http://www.cloudcompare.org/
User avatar
EdgarTrevizo
I have made 80-90 posts
I have made 80-90 posts
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:35 pm
9
Full Name: Edgar Omar Trevizo Aragon
Company Details: GrupoITT
Company Position Title: Engineer
Country: Mexico
Contact:

Re: Cloud Compare for structures

Post by EdgarTrevizo »

thanks a lot for your replys, very helpfull

So the recomendatios is to scan two sides of the beam?, is better if I analyze sections of +-50meters individualy or all the stadium structure once?

Thanks
Edgar
User avatar
danielgm
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:45 am
10
Full Name: Daniel Girardeau-Montaut
Company Details: CloudCompare
Company Position Title: Administrator
Country: France
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: Grenoble, France
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 34 times
Contact:

Re: Cloud Compare for structures

Post by danielgm »

If you can you should definitely work with smaller parts (for the cloud), otherwise it might be difficult to navigate inside the dataset as well as to "read" the result.

But you should be able to compute all the distances at once then slice the cloud.
Daniel
CloudCompare admin
http://www.cloudcompare.org/
User avatar
EdgarTrevizo
I have made 80-90 posts
I have made 80-90 posts
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:35 pm
9
Full Name: Edgar Omar Trevizo Aragon
Company Details: GrupoITT
Company Position Title: Engineer
Country: Mexico
Contact:

Re: Cloud Compare for structures

Post by EdgarTrevizo »

Ok thank you danielgm
Manuel_ICA_BIM
I have made 10-20 posts
I have made 10-20 posts
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:34 pm
11
Full Name: Manuel Lopez
Company Details: construction
Company Position Title: surveyor
Country: Mexico City
Skype Name: ingemls
Linkedin Profile: No

Re: Cloud Compare for structures

Post by Manuel_ICA_BIM »

Cloud Compare es genial, pero también puedes hacerlo con Pointools.
Saludos.
User avatar
EdgarTrevizo
I have made 80-90 posts
I have made 80-90 posts
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:35 pm
9
Full Name: Edgar Omar Trevizo Aragon
Company Details: GrupoITT
Company Position Title: Engineer
Country: Mexico
Contact:

Re: Cloud Compare for structures

Post by EdgarTrevizo »

Muchas gracias, saludos
MarcinL
I have made 50-60 posts
I have made 50-60 posts
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 7:35 am
10
Full Name: Marcin
Company Details: Not Available
Company Position Title: 3D Project Manager
Country: Poland
Linkedin Profile: No
Location: Cracow, Poland

Re: Cloud Compare for structures

Post by MarcinL »

Edgar, it is very difficult to estimate time which is needed to creating as built CAD model for big objects such this stadium. It is good way to know how many elemnets you are able to make per day and estimate how many elements is at your object. Based on my experience I estimate c.a 150 structural elements per day (beams etc.), but it depend how regular contruction is. I am working with Bentley software so elements are created manually.
Of course for every estimation you must add bonus time in case unpredictable situations, such as poor data. additinal areas etc.


Will you have acces to sth like man lifts to make scans from higher levels? This structure is really high above the ground and I think that data collected only from ground level could be not so good..
Post Reply

Return to “Deformation Analysis Software”