To Model or Not to Model?

1. That is the key question, at least in terms of project costs.
2. We do not have the luxury of starting from scratch in terms of integrating point clouds with CAD.
3. The operations workflows are the early adopters of working directly with the point cloud.

That is the key question, at least in terms of project cost. It seems that some workflows, such as parts re-engineering, are so tightly integrated with the need for a CAD model, in this case in order to eventually produce the item, that there is no choice – you must convert the point cloud to surfaces and eventually to an intelligent model. The same would seem to apply to highway and bridge engineering, for instance.

The one general area where there seems to be a trend to not model is operations, in most cases in a process or manufacturing plant. With a dense point cloud and perhaps the use of digital photography to add color and texture the point cloud may be sufficient to meet the needs of the decision makers. Is this a glimpse into the future? Are these early adopters on the right track?

Unfortunately, we do not have the luxury of building new design software/CAD engines that are 3D image/point cloud aware. That is one reason why I think the 3D cities application is so interesting – we are all pretty much starting from scratch to build the workflows. In the design space we are struggling with outdated 2D workflows that are standard operating procedures in many organization. In addition, there is the data format issue. There is so much historical info locked up in these formats that even thinking about creating a new product seems hopeless.

All that being said, there is opportunity to innovate and to push for innovation at the interface of the point cloud and the 3D model. Those who find more streamlined workflows will have a competitive advantage.