One of the fundamental unsolved problems in geometric design of mechanical solids has been the lack of a proper notion of family or class. Numerous heuristic and often incompatible definitions are used throughout the CAD industry, and it is usually not clear how to generate members of a family or, to decide if a given object belongs to an assumed family. Until these difficulties are resolved, no guarantees or standards for parametric modeling are possible, and all efforts to allow exchange of parametric representations between different CAD systems are likely to remain futile. Standardizing on a particular definition may be difficult, because parametric families depend intrinsically not only on shape but also on its representation. We classify families into parameter-space and representation-space, and show that both types are representation-induced families. We propose a formal framework for families based on the notion of topological categories. Every parametric family is defined by the representation-induced topological space of solids that are closed under the continuous maps in the assumed topology. We illustrate several well defined families and formally define a special but important case of CSG-induced family that generalizes to the more general case of feature-induced families.

1.
Pahl, G., and Beitz, W., 1984, Engineering Design, The Design Council, London.
2.
Shapiro, V., and Vossler, D. L., 1995, “What is a Parametric Family of Solids?” In 3rd ACM Symposium on Solid Modeling and Applications, Salt Lake City, Utah, May.
3.
Raghothama
,
S.
, and
Shapiro
,
V.
,
1998
, “
Boundary Representation Deformation in Parametric Solid Modeling
,”
ACM Trans. Graphics
,
17
(
4
),
259
286
, October.
4.
Bidarra R., and Bronsvoort, W., 2000, “On Families of Objects and their Semantics,” In Proceedings of Geometric Modeling and Processing, Hong Kong. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, April.
5.
Stewart
,
N. F.
,
1992
, “
Sufficient Condition for Correct Topological Form in Tolerance Specification
,”
Comput.-Aided Des.
,
12
,
39
48
.
6.
Pavel, M., 1989, Fundamentals of Pattern Recognition, Marcel Dekker Inc, New York.
7.
Sabin, M., and Shapiro, V., 1998, “Modifications in Cellular Models,” Technical report, NA-09, DAMTP, University of Cambridge, UK, September.
8.
Raghothama
,
S.
, and
Shapiro
,
V.
,
2000
, “
Consistent Updates in Dual Representation Systems
,”
Comput.-Aided Des.
,
32
(
8-9
),
463
477
, August.
9.
Raghothama, S., 2000, “Models and Representations for Parametric Family of Parts,” PhD thesis, Spatial Automation Laboratory, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
10.
Shapiro
,
V.
,
1997
, “
Maintenance of Geometric Representations through Space Decompositions
,”
International Journal of Computational Geometry and Applications
,
7
(
4
), pp.
383
418
.
11.
Requicha
,
A. A. G.
,
1980
, “
Representations for Rigid Solids: Theory, Methods and Systems
,”
ACM Comput. Surv.
,
12
, pp.
437
464
, December.
12.
Requicha, A. A. G., 1977, “Mathematical Models of Rigid Solid Objects,” Technical report, TM-28, PAP, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, November.
13.
Ja¨nich, K., 1983, Topology, Springer-Verlag, New York.
14.
Borisovich, Y., Bliznyakov, N. Izrailevich, Y., and Fomenko, T., 1985, Introduction to Topology, Mir Publishers, Moscow.
15.
Maunder, C. R. F., 1996, Algebraic Topology, Dover Publications, New York.
16.
Munkres, James R., 1984, Elements of Algebraic Topology, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts.
17.
Pierce, B., 1990, “A Taste of Category Theory for Computer Scientists,” Technical report, CMU-CS-90, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, March.
18.
ter Hofstede
,
A. H. M.
,
Lippe
,
E.
, and
Frederiks
,
P. J. M.
,
1996
. “
Conceptual Data Modeling from a Categorical Perspective
,”
Comput. J. (Switzerland)
,
39
(
3
), pp.
215
231
.
19.
Munkres, James R., 1975, Topology A First Course, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
20.
Requicha, A. A. G., 1977, “Part and Assembly Description Languages: I—Dimensioning and Tolerancing,” Technical report, TM-19, PAP, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, May.
21.
Hoffmann
,
C. M.
, and
Kim
,
K.-J.
,
2001
, “
Towards valid parametric CAD models
,”
Comput.-Aided Des.
,
33
, pp.
81
90
.
22.
O’Connor, M. A., and Rossignac, J. R., 1990, SGC: A Dimension Independent Model for Pointsets with Internal Structures and Incomplete Boundaries, In IFIP/NSF Workshop on Geometric Modeling, Rensselaerville, NY, 1988, North-Holland, September.
23.
Rossignac, J. R., 1996, “MAGISET: Architecture and Programming Interface for a Universal Modeler,” In Proceedings of the Blaubeuren Workshop on Graphics and Modeling, Germany, June.
24.
Gomes A., and Teixeira, J., 1996, Modeling shape through a cellular representation scheme, In Modeling and Graphics in Science, J. Teixeira and J. Rix, eds., Springer-Verlag.
25.
Armstrong, C., Bowyer, A. A., Cameron, S., Corney, J., Jared, G., Martin, R., Middleditch, A., Sabin, M., Salmon, J., and Woodwark, J., 1997, “Djinn: A Geometric Interface for Solid Modeling,” Technical report, Information Geometers.
26.
Bidarra
,
R.
, and
Bronsvoort
,
W.
,
2000
, “
Semantic Feature Modeling
,”
Comput.-Aided Des.
,
32
(
3
), pp.
201
225
.
27.
Chen
,
X.
, and
Hoffmann
,
C. M.
,
1995
, “
Towards Feature Attachment
,”
Comput.-Aided Des.
,
27
, pp.
675
702
.
28.
Shapiro
,
V.
, and
Vossler
,
D. L.
,
1991
, “
Construction and Optimization of CSG Representations
,”
Comput.-Aided Des.
,
23
(
1
), pp.
4
20
, January.
29.
Lefchetz
,
S.
, 1942, “Algebraic Topology,” Am. Math. Soc. Trans., American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI.
30.
Shapiro
,
V.
, and
Vossler
,
D. L.
,
1993
, “
Separation for Boundary to CSG Conversion
,”
ACM Trans. Graphics
,
12
(
1
), pp.
35
55
, January.
31.
Kinsey, Christine, 1993, Topology of Surfaces, Springer-Verlag, New York.
32.
ISO-STEP Part 42. 1998, “Product Data Representation and Exchange,” Technical report, ISO.
You do not currently have access to this content.