This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Artifact vs. Anatomy: Dealing with Conflict of Geometric Modeling Descriptions
Technical Paper
2007-01-2450
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
In applications ranging from design of customized vehicle interiors to virtual testing of biomedical devices, the processes of modeling, design and analysis involve the simultaneous treatment of artifacts (i.e., parts designed by humans) and anatomical structures. An inherent conflict arises because the geometric descriptions are completely different. Artifact descriptions are typically the output of computer-aided design (CAD) software and consist of a collection of parametric patches that comprise the boundary of the artifact. In stark contrast, the native description of an anatomical structure typically consists of an image stack obtained using a volumetric scanning technology such as computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Current practice for simultaneously dealing with both categories of entities involves working primarily in the world of CAD. The scanner data must be processed to determine segmentation (i.e., to decide which voxel belongs to each object of interest), and then the segmented results are converted to traditional boundary representation (b-rep) CAD models. However, the CAD models consist of such large numbers of triangles (often on the order of 106 or 107) that performing standard CAD operations becomes problematic. Most traditional CAD systems are designed to deal with environments composed of at most 1000's of individual objects with tens of thousands of individual surfaces (beyond which many CAD systems- performance is so slow as to have effectively failed).The question then arises whether forcing everything into the traditional CAD environment is really the best approach. If anatomical structures have more complicated geometry than CAD artifacts, does it make sense to work with anatomy in the CAD environment? In this paper we present a modeling representation whose basic data is much closer to the natural representation of scanned objects in that the representation is based on a 3D grid of data. While the raw scan data is too noisy to be directly useful, the grid of signed distance values that are obtained by recently developed segmentation algorithms is well behaved and amenable to accurate interpolation by wavelets. Thus we present a modeling approach that employs wavelets to interpolate signed distance values resulting in useful function-based representations (f-reps). We present examples to show how this approach produces models of scanned structures, provides for import of artifacts, and supports simultaneous modeling of artifacts and anatomy.
Authors
Topic
Citation
Storti, D., Ganter, M., Ledoux, W., Ching, R. et al., "Artifact vs. Anatomy: Dealing with Conflict of Geometric Modeling Descriptions," SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-2450, 2007, https://doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-2450.Also In
SAE 2007 Transactions Journal of Passenger Cars: Electronic and Electrical Systems
Number: V116-7; Published: 2008-08-15
Number: V116-7; Published: 2008-08-15
References
- Jones M. Baerentzen J. Sramek M. “3D distance fields: A survey of techniques and applications,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 12 4 581 599 2006
- Sethian J. A. Level Set Methods and Fast Marching Methods 2nd Cambridge University Press New York 1999
- Osher S. J. Fedkiw R. P. Level Set Methods and Dynamic Implicit Surfaces Springer Verlag, New york 2002
- Hu Y. Haynor D. Fassbind M. Rohr E. Ledoux W. “Image Segmentation and Registration for the Analysis of Joint Motion from 3D MRI,” Proc. SPIE Vol. 6141 133 142 Medical Imaging 2006: Visualization, Image-Guided Procedures, and Display 2006
- Boykov Y. Veksler O. “Graph cuts in vision and graphics: Theories and applications,” In” Paragios N. Chen Y. Faugeras O. Handbook of Mathematical Models in Computer Vision Springer-Verlag 79 96 2006
- Lorensen W. Cline H. “Marching Cubes: A High Resolution 3D Surface Construction Algorithm,” Computer Graphics 21 4 163 169 1987
- Cline H. Lorenson W. Ludke S. Crawford C. Teeter B. “Two Algorithms for the Three-Dimensional Reconstruction of Tomograms,” Medical Physics 15 3 320 327 1988
- Bloomenthal J. Introduction to Implicit Surfaces Morgan Kaufmann San Francisco 1997
- Rheinbolt W. “On the computation of multidimensional solution manifolds of parametrized equations,” Numerische Mathematik 53 165 182 1988
- Allgower E. Georg K. Numerical Continuation Methods, An Introduction Springer Series in Computational Mathematics 13 Springer-Verlag New York 1990
- Allgower E. Gnutzmann S. “Simplicial pivoting for mesh generation of implicity defined surfaces,” Computer-Aided Geometric Design 8 4 305 325 1991
- Velho L. Gomes J. de Figueiredo L. H. Implicit Objects in Computer Graphics Springer-Verlag New York 2002
- Voelker A. Requicha
- Hoffmann C Geometric and Solid Modeling: An Introduction Morgan Kaufmann San Francisco 1989
- Glassner A. “Space Subdivision for Fast Ray Tracing,” IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 4 10 15 22 1984
- Voelker/Requicha
- Shapiro V. “Real functions for representation of rigid solids,” Computer-Aided Geometric Design 11 153 175 1994
- Ricci A. “A Constructive Geometry for Computer Graphics,” The Computer Journal 16 2 157 160 1973
- Ensz M. “Implicit swept solids,” M. S. Thesis University of Washington Seattle 1994
- Ganter M. Storti D. “Object Extent Determination for Algebraic Solid Models,” ASMEJournal on Mechanical Design 117 20 26 1995
- Sourin A. Pasko A. “Functional representations for sweeping by a moving solid,” Proceedings 3 rd Symposium on solid Modeling and Applications 383 391 ACM Press NY 1995
- Sourin and Pasko 1995 reconstruction
- Lim C.-T. Ensz M. Ganter M. Storti D. “Object reconstruction from layered data using implicit solid modeling,” International Journal of Manufacturing Systems special focus issue on Layered Manufacturing 260 272 1997
- Maneewarn T. Hannaford B. Storti D. Ganter M. A. “Haptic rendering for internal content of an implicit object,” Proceedings of ASME IMECE Nashville, TN 1999
- Ensz M. Storti D. Ganter M. “Implicit methods for geometry creation,” International Journal of Computational Geometry & Applications 8 5 6 509 536 1998
- Jones M. “Distance Field Compression,” Journal of WSCG 11 2 247 254 2004
- Daubechies I. Wavelets , CBMS-NS Series in Applied Mathematics, SIAM Publications, Philadelphia 1992
- Resnikoff H. Wells R. Wavelet Analysis: The Scalable Structure of Information Springer-Verlag New York 1998
- Hart J. “Sphere-tracing: A geometric method for the antialised ray tracing of implicit surfaces,” The Visual Computer 12 10 527 545 1997
- Ensz M. “Implicit solid modeling through manifold modification,” PhD Thesis University of Washington Seattle 1997