Virtual Reality For Oil and Gas

2nd Life as a learning tool?

2011-04-05T06:47:00.003-05:00

Although I am intrigued by Second Life, I am not yet 100% sold on the concept for day-to-day interaction. I still think that if you want to talk to your family or neighbor you should just call or stop by, not a big fan of unnecessary social media no matter how good the cellphone package.

That said their are benefits to virtual communication. In fact my blog (this one) is dedicated to the benefits of virtual reality as it relates to process engineering.

So here is an interesting video with a cute kid voice boasting all of the benefits of 2nd Life from commerce to learning a new language.

More on 2nd Life: http://secondlife.com

Do you need access to all of the data?

2011-03-30T06:15:00.001-05:00

One of the hindrances to take up of 3d virtual reality solutions for asset management is the sheer amount of graphical data. Depending on the value proposition users may opt to break down the model and visualized components or systems rather than the entire asset. It is important to consider an application that permits the user to access entire asset view. In this post I will talk about the benefits of visualizing the entire asset for training, work flow optimization and data access. 1. Training 1.1. Familiarization Although there is a benefit to training operators on systems and even individual equipment it should not negate the benefits of training an operator on the facility. The asset view can be used to train users on evacuation routes, standard procedures, team dependent procedures as well as multi-system duties. Additionally, a comprehensive view permits operators to understand how systems interact with each other. An example of this is the affect of radiant heat transfer between neighboring equipment. 1.2. Multi-user training Using the entire model users can simulate plant wide evacuations during a standard operations procedure by coaching users on corresponding huddle points, evacuation routes and alarming protocols. 2. Workflow optimization 2.1. Time savings The time required to break down the model and manage versions for separate files makes virtual solutions for asset management prohibitive. The process and resources required to intelligently break down a facility may take months and resource from the end user, this timeline is not practical for model updates. 3. Data Access 3.1. User queries Streamlining data access by using the 3D virtual world as a portal to data is diminished when the model is broken into parts. This concept assumes that the end user already knows which system contains the attributes they are searching for. When building decision support tools this reduces access forcing organizations to add a layer of training before introducing the technology. 3.2. No –one to-one If the information system does not have a corresponding bread down of information; this information will have to be mapped or even added to the information system increasing the chance for error and null values. The process may also required more time and resources. Conclusions Using the entire asset 3D view, when incorporating interactive 3D solutions for life cycle asset management, reduces time and improves overall value.

1st you will need a server based solution.

2011-03-28T06:18:00.000-05:00

The benefits gained from using a server based application have been vetted since before this millennium. For those of you who need a refresher some of the benefits include: 1) Centralized access 2) User management 3) Data integrity/ quality 4) Minimizing data loss 5) Reduce time to find information There are a host of other benefits ranging from interoperability, to streamlined deployment and etc. An interested article written in 2001 by Paul Graham, on the future of software from desktop to server based, outlines the drivers for server based applications. At the time Graham called this the “Road Ahead”, but today many of these observations are for the most part obvious. http://www.paulgraham.com/road.html Side note: Although I do not focus on the design in my blog, but rather how to continually leverage the 3D design data throughout the asset lifecycle; even CAD designers would benefit from server based solutions especially to resolve some of the version management problems. What are the benefits to virtual reality solutions for asset management? Now that you have the 3D virtual world of the process facility the fundamentals of data management stand- true- and- firm. 1) Keeping the model green However you chose to update the model, I hope we can agree that deploying the model to the end user community is shortened through centralized server based solutions. Having an expensive technical person run around with a DVD to transfer data within the organization should be save for hazing interns and not as an actual expected workflow. 2) Version management Servers allow you to manage versions, back up data and access past versions incase a mistake is made. Confusion and mistakes related to inaccurate versions are not only a financial sink; but a potential liability in time-dependant projects. 3) Time savings There are many was to distribute data to a user group. Typically 3D data is too large to email and requires delivery on mass media devices such as USBs or DVDs (see my reference to intern hazing above). The other option is to upload the files to an FTP location where users download the model to access it. Again, with these larger data sets this could take a couple of hours to complete. Conclusions: In this new millennium server based technology is no long a nice to have, but a must have. We have already eaten the red pill and it is too late to go back to old bad habits no matter how tempting.

Design -- Virtualize-- Build

2010-01-31T23:34:00.000-06:00

New Technology Hardships (part 2)

2010-01-20T10:13:00.001-06:00

New technology needs a quick, easy and relatively painful win in an organization for take up.
Prior to this quick win, it needs a mildly strong prove-able business value.

A few years ago I put an effort into learning the fundamentals of Six Sigma. I recall at the time having a colleague that was in the middle of evaluating an engineering information management project. The idea was to start from scratch and reevaluate how the organization looked at engineering data. At the time “intelligent” design and information management were all the buzz. For 3 years this team ran a Six Sigma evaluation only to identify the business value and “low hanging fruit” project they could implement to prove the business proposition. Although it took over 3 years to complete the “study” it took less than a year to prove the technology get buy-in and deploy a selected technology.

My simple conclusion: Although the technology had many strong benefits, it was the ONE practical benefit that drove uptake.

To answer my previous post, it doesn’t so much matter what all of the value props are, of which there are many, it is more important to identify the ONE that works for the organization.

Next time I will provide a generic list of value propositions for interactive 3D.

New Technology Hardships

2010-01-07T20:20:00.008-06:00

I was in a meeting this week were the business development head of a service company simply stated, “this is interesting and visualization has a known value add,” then he added, “ but what is the compelling business value of virtual reality solutions for large assets?”

At first glance this sounds like a simple enough question. In the next few paragraphs I will dissect this question for the real questions behind it, which is the very sensitive and frankly complex underlying question common to most new technologies, which is, “ What does this technology have that will make people use/buy it over others?”

Laying the ground work
Over the last 6 years or so I have been lucky enough to work on what most would call “new concepts”, in the form of new technologies or new ideas on existing technologies. Some might say I am lucky while other say I am a glutton for punishment. Nonetheless, there are some observations I have made that are commonplace as it relates to introducing new ideas to a marketplace and the belly of the beast are the emotions around convincing a person/group that is surviving with their current strategy to change mindsets and take on a new strategy.

For example ---> from easy to difficult
1) Why should I use a database if we have a library?
2) Why should I use an integration information management system if we have databases and emails
3) Why should I use interactive visualization if we have 3D visualization?

In both 1 and 2 we change workflows and culture with technology. Also common to both 1 and 2 is the obvious industry direction. Independent of the technologies used the industry as a whole saw the preverbal writing on the wall. Customers are convinced that these are requirements. In conclusion the debate with the customer is not whether or not you need the technology, but which technology to implement.

Now to question #3
Have we as an industry seen the writing on the wall for interactive 3D solutions and if so what are the compelling value propositions?

TO BE CONTINUED

Using VR for with Laser Scan

2010-01-04T16:14:00.002-06:00

In this new decade we have new technologies. Using VR on laser scan is one of them. You may already be merging laser scan with CAD drawings for expansions, comparisons and etcetera.
Doing this merging in VR permits additional flexibility. Here is a short list:

Basics:
1) Walkthroughs
2) Comments/redlines
3) Moving objects

For the dreamers with some configuration there are more sophisticated capabilities with laser scan including:

1) Collision/ gravity (not to be confuse with clash)
This for avatar walkthroughs, accessibility, CFD visualization.
2) Training/ familiarization
3) Management of change
4) Safety planning/ optimization
5) File size management and rendering --> manipulated VR formats versus CAD and scan sometimes significantly improves large model rendering.

To help conceptualize how laser scan is enhanced with VR here is a CFD video. I will try to get a laser scan video up soon.

The Technology Whisperer

2009-12-17T08:51:00.004-06:00

Like an excited puppy some of us can get very excited about our new technologies, maybe even a little bit out of control. At which point, scope creep takes on a new meaning. In the world of engineering Virtual Reality we are often called to be “technology whisperers” along with our other titles.

On one side we want to keep everyone excited about the products and the potential in virtual worlds. On the other hand there are a lot of heightened expectations set by very good advertising, well meaning sales folks and sheer imagination.

What can we do?

Can we take a large 3D CAD asset model and convert it into a virtual world relatively quickly? Yes.
Can we add avatars, physics, weather and animations? Sure.
Can we integrate these worlds into existing information systems? No problem.
Can we convert to ray tracing, incorporate scripts and add complex weather conditions in less than an hour? Probably not.

What you see in a game is not what you will necessarily see in the engineering virtual worlds, especially for large asset models on low end PCs. Gaming developers are permitted to use tricks that are not available to us in the engineering world. Some tricks include:

Control of the hardware
Here are some hardware specs that might not work on a high-end game, but have to work in engineering VR: Windows PC, <2gig>
No measurement: Re-sizing models to reduce memory usage
You can’t walk around the distillation tower: Intermingling 2D back-drops for memory management
The Drafter is King: The design architecture is created for both aesthetics and memory management (i.e. the drafter and not the engineer controls the number of complex design objects, splines, nurbs and etc.)
No Updates: Conversion is done by the drafter at the creation of the game. Gamers don't do monthly or weekly updates to the design.
Cut & Paste: Even some engineering tools do this. Basically the design team breaks the model into parts for memory management. The problem with this is that the user no longer has full control to re-group systems for other purposes (i.e. shutdowns, maintenance, expansion projects and etc).
Longer turnaround cycles: Games can take months even years to complete and make the model pretty. Making the model pretty in many engineering projects is not a priority that can account for 50% or more of the budge. This is especially the case for process engineering models.

In short although some of the technologies in movies and games such as The Avatar, Modern Warfare and Halo can now be leveraged in engineering these technologies still have their limitations in the world of engineering.

The Age of 3D

2009-12-17T08:27:00.003-06:00

The relationship between utilization of advanced technology and the age group of the users is a topic that comes up quite often. People associate gaming with their teenagers and project this view to the industry. Well my friends, even grandma has an iPhone.

In my opinion; scratch this topic off of the list of CONs on your benchmark sheets. It is very far from the truth.

1) We’re not talking about gaming

When looking at the technology remove the association to a specific industry when reviewing acceptance. In my observations people use a tool based on other factors including 1)added value to daily work, 2) availability of the tool/data and 3) ease of use. Then of course they go and brag to their kids about how fun work is :)

2) Think -- time to learn and not age of student

Attention span is limited for new technology when people have a lot on their plates. Learning to use the new tool should be easy and require very little time. My rule of thumb used to be less than 4hours, but lately even that amount of time is too much. People want it to be intuitive. Something you can pick up after a brief discussion with a colleague and not something that requires a trainer or a course.

3) Value Value Value

No matter the years of experience, no one wants to be linked to a tool that is going nowhere in the organization. People learn new technologies because 1) it makes them valuable to the organization, 2) has a broad appeal in the industry 3) it has the potential to be broadly used 4) it is valuable to the company. In summary, I would think it is more important that the implementation of the application in the organization is driven by a simple and clear value proposition.

4) It’s Ok to be Fun

One of the pros of interactive solutions is that it requires interaction. This keeps the user involved in the process and offers a unique ability to introduce complex degrees of awareness when looking at data. An example I bring up quite often is data clusters. In 3D users incorporate visual relationships to speed up quality decision making (i.e. not only is there an alarm, but the alarm is next to an outstanding work- order in a limited access area).

Presenting at Houston's 1st 3D Camp

2009-12-15T17:05:00.003-06:00

One of the things I spend time on is educating others on the benefits of interactive virtual worlds for engineering and operations.

A more recent presentation was at the Houston 3D Camp. The camp was a broad brush of uses for 3D applications with everything from GIS to jewelry design. It was a good chance to see how different industries implement interactive 3D.

Here I am in action [below].

For more information on 3DCamp: http://3dcamphouston.com/

A picture is a 1000 words?

2009-12-15T09:56:00.007-06:00

If a picture is a 1000 words then a virtual space is + high multiple of that, that is, when it comes to articulating a thought. It is a moving picture that you control and interact with, which is better than a commercial --> My opinion.

Here’s my reasoning:

Scenario animations in virtual worlds give users the marketing power of a commercial with the added interactivity:

The beauty of a commercial
1) Quickly present a well thought-out idea, or strategy.
2) Define and target stakeholders/audience
3) Outline a goal
4) Set the mood of discussion
5) Present the culture of the team/company
6) And of course present the product

With virtual scenarios you create the commercial using animations scenes then to get the above benefits plus a few more:

1) Pause the virtual scene and interrogate other objects around it
2) Link to information systems and broaden the scope of the discussion
3) Develop adhoc "What ifs" permit questions from the audience to be more specific
4) Encourage involvement -->
A) Get more feedback,
B) Increased brainstorming,
C) Stimulate creativity

Here is an animation scenario. It is a bit random. It shows various moving parts. In this case each part is animated using curves associated to the respective objects.

Later, I hope to load a video with more specific use cases(?)

It's not Green!

2009-12-14T13:42:00.004-06:00

I have posted in a long time and not for a lack of information or will, just a simple lack of time. This however allows me to make a very persuasive point about why many operators have not implemented interactive 3d technology into their daily work flow. Simply put: the information is not up-to-date!

A common song in the industry among folks who have looked at interactive 3d and "seen the light" on the value proposition is the massive on taking of changing mentalities. For those of you not in the industry you would be quite surprised realize that oil and gas engineering in many ways is not that technologically advanced and in fact is one of the more conservative industries when it comes to change. There are plenty of good reasons for this 1) safety, 2)quality, 3)predictability (to name a few).

On to my main point: Once a company decides to make a technological leap they want to ensure that the technology enhances quality by providing accurate and refreshed information. THUS although interactive 3D is interesting, if it is not up to date it can be "dangerous." Aah like my blog, which for several months lie stagnant.

Interested people log on to feed their curiosity and appetite for information only to find out that the source of information is dusty and un-kept.

SOOO, how do we keep the model green?

Here is a short list:

1) Standardize: Once you have sung the song of 3D and everyone in the organization has consumed the Kool-Aid, it is a good idea to detail the update workflow.

Answer these:

a. What does it take to update a model?
b. Can our company do it or does this task require outsourcing?
c. Does updating a model require a specialist?
d. Does updating a model require specialization not common to the world (i.e. special unique program languages, a special computer and etc. )?
e. What all needs to be updated? Is it just the 3d model or do the links, data and etc need to be updated?

____________THE SUM OF THIS______________

EQUALS:

+/- THE TOTAL UPDATE TIME

2) Publish the "real" refresh times. Make sure that people understand when logging on to the system when the system was updated (both data and model). This is "easily" done by pulling from information management solutions. Be honest and realistic on these numbers. Whether the refresh time is 1month, 1 minute or 30 seconds can make a difference in the decision cycle.

3) Start slow. Adding interactive 3D to a workflow is like introducing the motor vehicle to community used to using mules. Take it slow. Pick a quick and easy win. It is better to have 1 or 2 highly functional use cases. Once people are comfortable with the application it will catch on.
However if even one car explodes prematurely then everyone will stick to the reliable and inefficient mule.

4) Document and promote. This is a new concept and will require a lot of education. I find that most people are one of 2 extremes neither of which is realistic. Promoting the technology is not to fuel the expectations but to set realistic expectations and answer questions that people may have. It is also a great opportunity to capture reactions and document feedback for next steps.

Gamer meet the operator

2009-12-14T13:37:00.005-06:00

Here are some examples of gaming solutions used to optimize operator work flows on production facilities.

When we talk about training on a plant many people if not most think of a classroom with simulated mechanical pieces. You know the giant valves and if you are lucky an actual vessel to play with.

Virtual worlds take this to the next level because not only can you walk a variety of facilities, but you can explore the entire plant.In this virtual utopia you can set up complex scenarios with teams of people (i.e. the control room and field operator ) where no one gets hurt, but everyone learns.

Here is a pretty simplistic video of using virtual worlds for familiarization on a plant.

List of Laser Scan Companies

2009-06-08T06:59:00.002-05:00

LEICA.
Leica Scanstation2
http://www.leica-geosystems.com/corporate/en/ndef/lgs_62189.htm
Leica HDS 6000
http://www.leica-geosystems.com/corporate/en/ndef/lgs_64228.htm

RIEGL
Terestrial Scanners
http://www.riegl.com/terrestrial_scanners/terrestrial_scanner_overview_/terr_scanner_menu_all.htm
Airborne scanners
http://www.riegl.com/airborne_scannerss/airborne_scanners_overview_/airborne_scanner_menu_all.htm
Industrial laser scanners
http://www.riegl.com/industrial_scanners_/industrial_scanner_overview_/industrial_scanner_menu_all_.htm

FARO
http://www.faro.com/content.aspx?ct=uk&content=pro&item=5
880 HE80 – high range
http://www.faro.com/content.aspx?ct=uk&content=pro&item=5&subitem=12
880 HE40
http://www.faro.com/content.aspx?ct=uk&content=pro&item=5&subitem=13
420 HE20 – short range scanner
http://www.faro.com/content.aspx?ct=uk&content=pro&item=5&subitem=14

ARIUS
http://www.arius3d.com/
high accuracy scanner for small objects
another link :
http://www.inition.co.uk/inition/product.php?URL_=product_digiscan_arius3d&SubCatID_=30

MICROMETRIC

http://www.micrometric-vision.com/Products.html
with the CLS series – it scans colour also and the XLS series, which doesn’t scan the objects color.
Additional link
http://www.inition.co.uk/inition/product.php?URL_=product_digiscan_mvt_cls&SubCatID_=30

POLHEMUS
The Fastscan series
http://www.polhemus.com/?page=Scanning_Fastscan

3rdTECH

Deltasphere 3000
http://www.deltasphere.com/DeltaSphere-3000.htm

KONICA MINOLTA
Vl-9i
http://www.konicaminolta-3d.com/index.php?id=18&L=0
Vl-910
http://www.konicaminolta-3d.com/index.php?id=17&L=0

CREAFORM
Handyscan3d
http://www.handyscan3d.com/en/description/index.php

3SHAPE
http://www.3shape.com/3d_scanners/_3d_scanners/3d_scanners.htm

SURPHASER
25 HS
http://www.surphaser.com/3dscanner_hs25.html
25SP
http://www.surphaser.com/3d_scanner_sp25.html

Z+F ( see my comments above)
Imager 5006
http://www.zf-laser.com/e_imager5006.html
Imager 5003
http://www.zf-laser.com/e_bildgebende.html

TRIMBLE
GX 3D
http://www.trimble.com/trimblegx.shtml?WT.svl=img2

CALLIDUS
CP 3200
http://callidus.de/en/cp3200/index.html

OPTECH
Ilris-3D
http://www.optech.ca/i3dprodline-ilris3d.htm

4400LR
http://www.isite3d.com/4400lr.html

Eyetronics
www.eyetronics.com[/b]

Collaboration

2009-06-02T22:59:00.003-05:00

Here are two categories of collaboration technologies
1) Teams work in the same environment for presentation, training and communication. In this example everyone is looking at the same machine through virtualization technology such as Webex, DCV or NetMeeting

and

2) Teams work on a centralized environment where data can be published and accessed for different user tasks. This is the technology available in servers, portals and interactive dashboards.

I am not aware of any company that allows plant employees to walk the plant with a hand held wireless camera for remote meetings, because this is how I see 3D visualization transforming the operations and production world. Users would be able to interactively collaborate on an asset for tasks ranging from daily mundane activities to complex troubleshooting.

What to look for?

Requirements

Rapid direct access to as-built data (including scanned data)
Useable on low-end machines with limited graphics cards (this is the state of things in 2009)
Remote access technology for both type of collaborative options (i.e. server based solutions)
User friendly. It shouldn’t be harder to use than MS Word XP

Basic nice to haves

Collaboration solutions (redlining, bookmarking, commenting)
Integration tools --> Ideally users can use the model to access data about any given piece of equipment and/or system.
Tools to make things easier to find: hide/show/isolate

Always ends up on the list

Recording tools --> screenshots, video, save walked paths
Highlighting
Resizable movable object (i.e. avatar)
Listing and grouping (equipment list, instrument and etc )

Wow factor- Pick a couple of wow factors and send it out with the bid. You never know what will come back! Here are some interesting ones that I have seen that are actually feasible:

Weather scenarios- users want to incorporate environmental factors to improve analysis and interpretation. Remind me it is snowing in December when the project starts.
Moving object with clash detection. We want to move a crane through the facility and get a clash output for it.
Remote stereo collaboration. Users can utilize immersive technologies on a remote collaboration session.
Instant messaging in the model

4D visualization

2009-06-02T22:54:00.003-05:00

I have often had conversations about the benefits of 3D visualization. Most of the time users seem to understand a clear value in project design visualization and 4d visualization. Then I ask the users how often they actually use 4D visualization? The typical response I get back to this is “rarely”. The biggest setback for 4d is the amount of time and effort required by the user to create a 4d model for a project. The 4D tools that I have seen are very straightforward if you are a design engineer or if you have had some form of IT experience. However, this is not always the profile of a project manager or even a project engineer. Add to that, the existing work load already involved in capital project management. So what to do?

What is the ROI?

Please contact me with corrections to these equations, as I may be missing something

To calculate this ROI, Cost of Investment is the sum of

The total cost of the software (taxes, maintenance, expected support, etc.) ,
Time and money required for end user training and *support (Support is key since the users may require additional time after the training period getting support from the vendor. Estimate the cost of this time.)
Time typically required by the project team to create the model and
Time required to process the model (if required).
Additional resources, if you expect to add a new resource for this activity
Cost of new resources (you may need someone to create these models that doesn’t exist yet)

The gain from investment seems easy :)

Cost of estimated time saved
Cost of estimated risk reduction
Cost of estimated resource optimization
Cost of improved data quality
Customer satisfaction

A note on Risk Reduction; by supplementing or even replacing the standard project progress report with a visual 3D depiction of the project status you should immediately see an improvement on communication and safety. The project teams see where they are working compared to where others are and how much of that section of the facility is complete.

Another note on Time Savings benefits; over time projects see an improved reproducibility that can be gained by leveraging 4D data from previous projects. Future PMs can better plan resources and project schedules fundamentally driving down the potential for wasted time in any given task.

Here is a nice list of 4D project planning benefits compiled by MIT:

Improved Project Communication through Construction Sequencing
• Visually communicate project schedule to all project stakeholders
• Communicate and show flow of work
• Visually assess impact to ongoing facility operations

Preproject Planning and Development
• Easily review site access, parking, transportation routing
• Overlay aerial images to show site/work context and interactively view site issues
• Quickly do what-if's and solicit feedback from clients and customers

Analyzing Site Management
• Visually communicate project schedule to all project stakeholders
• Communicate and show flow of work
• Visually assess impact to ongoing facility operations

Comparison of As-Planned vs. Current Schedule Status
• Easily switch between date fields (plan vs. actual) or alternative schedules
• Compare schedules in same or different views

What is missing in this analysis?

There are some practical problems with this analysis.

What about existing facilities? How do we leverage laser scan data for our 4D visualization
How fast are models processed? How accurate are they?
Can models compare actual project status with pre-project planning data (see question above)?

This is why I think rapid conversion/access of 3D design data is a minimum requirement when looking at standardizing 3D solutions for non-design engineering tasks.

Laser Scan (side note)

2009-06-02T22:12:00.002-05:00

Since I mentioned laser scan in my previous article I wanted to add some early notes on brown-fields solutions that enable 3d visualization. I’ll elaborate on this later.

What is laser scanning

Here is an academic analysis if you are curious.
http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1742-6596/48/1/160/jpconf6_48_160.pdf?request-id=cc60bd96-61ad-4909-aa14-a9473733014b

List of scanners

Here is a list to start evaluating vendors.

FYI: some things that stand out on this list are

1) A company called Quantapoint uses a different type of technology in which they produce Laser Models™. Quantapoint defines Laser modes as, “a unique Quantapoint technology that integrates all laser scan data to provide detailed, high-definition 3D solid “models” of a facility.” Whether or not this technology is “better” than laser scan is up to the buy and the project parameters.

2) Working with VRcontext I have worked with Z+F a company that boasts, “Z+F were one of the first companies to release a Phase Based Laser Scanner. We also invented the Worlds 1st Stand Alone 3D Laser Scanner.” From personal experience Z+F appears to be one of the most leveraged laser scan hardware companies with a vast network of service providers for scanning.

I pulled this list from the Quantapoint site and I think it is a good starting questionnaire to use when starting a selection process for laser scan technology and vendor:

— Relevant industry experience and understanding (articles, case studies, white papers, references)
— Field crew with significant plant experience and safety training
— A defined quality assurance programme and dedicated customer support
— Is software included with the serviceor an additional charge?
— Other services to help leverage the digitised plant, such as certification of tie point locations, confirming designs are clash-free, verifying spool and equipment are fabricated to design specification, and visualising the construction of the design.

I got this list of laser scan from www.3dlaserscanning.org. This is a list or scanners and not of available laser scan software, of which there are many. In general many of this scanners have their own visualization software. There is a technology called

LEICA.
Leica Scanstation2
http://www.leica-geosystems.com/corporate/en/ndef/lgs_62189.htm
Leica HDS 6000
http://www.leica-geosystems.com/corporate/en/ndef/lgs_64228.htm

RIEGL
Terestrial Scanners
http://www.riegl.com/terrestrial_scanners/terrestrial_scanner_overview_/terr_scanner_menu_all.htm
Airborne scanners
http://www.riegl.com/airborne_scannerss/airborne_scanners_overview_/airborne_scanner_menu_all.htm
Industrial laser scanners
http://www.riegl.com/industrial_scanners_/industrial_scanner_overview_/industrial_scanner_menu_all_.htm

FARO
http://www.faro.com/content.aspx?ct=uk&content=pro&item=5
880 HE80 – high range
http://www.faro.com/content.aspx?ct=uk&content=pro&item=5&subitem=12
880 HE40
http://www.faro.com/content.aspx?ct=uk&content=pro&item=5&subitem=13
420 HE20 – short range scanner
http://www.faro.com/content.aspx?ct=uk&content=pro&item=5&subitem=14

ARIUS
http://www.arius3d.com/
high accuracy scanner for small objects
another link :
http://www.inition.co.uk/inition/product.php?URL_=product_digiscan_arius3d&SubCatID_=30

MICROMETRIC

http://www.micrometric-vision.com/Products.html
with the CLS series – it scans colour also and the XLS series, which doesn’t scan the objects color.
Additional link
http://www.inition.co.uk/inition/product.php?URL_=product_digiscan_mvt_cls&SubCatID_=30

POLHEMUS
The Fastscan series
http://www.polhemus.com/?page=Scanning_Fastscan

3rdTECH

Deltasphere 3000
http://www.deltasphere.com/DeltaSphere-3000.htm

KONICA MINOLTA
Vl-9i
http://www.konicaminolta-3d.com/index.php?id=18&L=0
Vl-910
http://www.konicaminolta-3d.com/index.php?id=17&L=0

CREAFORM
Handyscan3d
http://www.handyscan3d.com/en/description/index.php

3SHAPE
http://www.3shape.com/3d_scanners/_3d_scanners/3d_scanners.htm

SURPHASER
25 HS
http://www.surphaser.com/3dscanner_hs25.html
25SP
http://www.surphaser.com/3d_scanner_sp25.html

Z+F ( see my comments above)
Imager 5006
http://www.zf-laser.com/e_imager5006.html
Imager 5003
http://www.zf-laser.com/e_bildgebende.html

TRIMBLE
GX 3D
http://www.trimble.com/trimblegx.shtml?WT.svl=img2

CALLIDUS
CP 3200
http://callidus.de/en/cp3200/index.html

OPTECH
Ilris-3D
http://www.optech.ca/i3dprodline-ilris3d.htm

4400LR
http://www.isite3d.com/4400lr.html

Eyetronics
www.eyetronics.com[/b]

When do we use interactive 3d? Project Visualization: Part I

2009-05-04T00:22:00.000-05:00

For clarification, I don’t plan to discuss 3d in the context of design for the purpose of this blog. There is plenty of work on this topic and for the most part it is more of a developing technology and not a next generation technology like interactive 3d (my opinion).

So when do we use interactive 3d for engineering visualization? I guess the easiest way to tackle this question is to start at the beginning of the asset life cycle and work through each phase. In this article we will look at project visualization requirements. Eventually, I think I will need to offer a specific outline for capital projects visualization. However, for now we will generically review project visualization requirements.

Project Visualization

Although, I expect to further develop this topic over time, here are some of the basics. We can break this topic up into 5 main areas including; Design Review, 4d visualization, Collaboration, Simulation, and Mock-ups. My point here is that there are different user perspectives and needs at the project phase of the asset life cycle even for interactive 3d. In some cases the requirements for any of the individual topics are sufficient to justify more than one dedicated application. Thus, for example the user will get a 4d visualization tool independent to the collaboration tool. Below are some simple requirements lists to get you started assessing tools for Design Review. I guess you can call this the first recipe :).

The format that I use is to start with a Q&A and then end the article with a simplified requirements list. Use the Q&A to help you understand common issues and how others have resolved these issues.

Part I: Design Review

What formats will I need to handle?

Identify the formats that you expect to use. It is not so important to have a tool that handles a wide array of formats as it is to have a tool that handles the formats you actually expect to get and receive. From my experience, this is easier said to an operator then it is to a contractor, since most contractors want to have a tool flexible enough to handle any project, especially for an enterprise solution. Consider that there are some tools that offer an extensive list of compatible formats at the price of interactive functionality or even model size. If you have a project using a limited subset of design formats, then a long list of compatible formats is just more paper to file. The vendor can tell you if their application is compatible with the formats you need (that is, if you know the applications you need).

Note, there are some gray areas related to obscure formats that we will address in the future.

Do I need to look at Laser scan data?

Also, how large are the expected files and how will I use the data? If you are looking at a relatively small retrofit project then you have a larger pool of applications to choose from. However if you expect to create an engineering grade view of a large expansion or new facility, your options significantly reduce.

Forget about how many different point cloud files the application can handle, because at this point there are very few laser scan companies that are commonly used for large projects throughout the globe. To clarify this sentence, do your own homework to understand the formats commonly used by your organization. Avoid asking a vendor the boundless question, “what laser scan files do you support.” Instead ask yourself, “What laser scan formats and/or application does our company use?”

Do you realistically expect to use the point cloud view or is there a real use case in converting this data to 3D primitives? It usually means more work and therefore a larger investment to convert point cloud to 3d primitives. I am not yet familiar with a magic button that you click on to automatically generate a 3d CAD file from a point cloud survey.

Furthermore, there are many arguments around converting the survey data to solid primitives for project optimization; for example generating more accurate as-built data on brown fields that do not have corresponding 3d design data. That said depending on the cost point, there is a benefits case to simply creating a simple 3d virtual retrofit for communication, measurement and collaboration. I guess the best question to ask is how much more funding can be allocated to this part of the project? Does the return justify the investment? Run a simple ROI analysis to get the answers to these questions. Where is this technology saving us time, resources and money? Compare this number to the real cost of implementing the solution. More questions to ask yourself:

How many assets can this impact?
How productive are these assets?
How much life do these assets have left?
Can I leverage this work beyond the project?
How does this work benefit future projects?
What real savings can be gained by other groups?

How do we update the data?

Perhaps the better question to ask is; how are revisions handled? Some of the technologies that support high model turn-arounds are; 1) Direct conversion- where you just click on the file and it opens in the interactive viewer, 2) batch conversion- which permits automatic and event driven conversion 3) no conversion- some design applications offer their own compatible visualization technologies.

Do you want to store the revisions in the original design format?
Are you merging different formats into one?

Do you want to automate the process? Sometimes the project is not sufficiently complex, in which case automation is more of a 'nice to have'. This is the case if the team is centrally located, relatively small and the model is mostly unique. One point to note is that there is almost always a value proposition for automation, since typically users see increased data quality when the process is automated.

How will the client receive revisions? Even when your team has the perfect workflow to handle revisions internally, once you add an external variable the control parameters change.

Functionalities that expire models or offer web based visualization reduce the chances of version confusion when sharing data with clients or other external parties. Synchronized files are great for centrally located teams working on the same server; they generally do not address communication to clients.

Summarized Recipe
Basic
1. Compatible 3d CAD file formats
2. Compatible laser scan solutions
3. Functionality for model updates

Addition functionalities
4. Clash detection
5. Database visualization
6. Interactive walkthrough
7. Viewpoints
8. Redlines
9. Screenshots
10. Compatible with web collaboration tools
11. Visualization of your required model sizes (large models may limit your options)
12. Measurement
13. Wireframe
14. Hyper linking or referencing capability

Virtual reality requirements- you will need to consider these for virtual rooms
15. Compatible with multi-screens
16. Stereo visualization
17. Compatible with joysticks (optional)
18. Compatible with virtual reality hardware
19. Graphic card requirements

Next topics:
Integrated visualization
Training
Communication

Why a "CookBook"

2009-04-23T10:54:00.000-05:00

After much conversation with different key people in the industry about how virtual reality and gaming technologies are impacting the engineering industry, I have decided to put together a "cook book" of concepts for engineering managers to consider when deciding to buy a virtual reality software tool.

WHY A COOK BOOK?
I have to thank Rick Jackson from Fiatech for this idea. He is also the reason that I have added about 3 more books to my ToDo list.

The "cook book" concept is ideal because it allows us to look at a specific problems and put together a basic "recipe" of functionalities that can be used to help users make purchasing decisions. Users can use the “recipes” as a starting point for a checklist of requirements. In the blog and over this year, I hope to analyze "recipes" for;

1) Project planning & 4D visualization
2) Safety
3) Integrated asset management
4) Simulation
5) Training
6) Real-time visualization
7) And a few more...

The idea of the blog is to look at specific user requirements based on my own experiences and ideas from my colleagues. In effect I will outline what you should consider when looking for a solution and what do avoid putting emphasis on. Assuming that most of the people interested in this kind of information are new to the arena of VR (virtual reality) and gaming for engineering; I will try to keep things simple and straightforward.

I hope this stimulates discussion around this relatively new concept to the industry and empowers users with the information they need to confidently assess this new generation of technology in our industry.