Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Geometric Over-Constraints Detection: A Survey

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 02 August 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

Currently, geometric over-constraints detection is of major interest in several different fields. In terms of product development process (PDP), many approaches exist to compare and detect geometric over-constraints, to decompose geometric systems, to solve geometric constraints systems. However, most approaches do not take into account the key characteristics of a geometric system, such as types of geometries, different levels at which a system can be decomposed e.g numerical or structural.  For these reasons, geometric over-constraints detection still faces challenges to fully satisfy real needs of engineers. The aim of this paper is to review the state-of-the-art of works involving with geometric over-constraints detection and to identify possible research directions. Firstly, the paper highlights the user requirements for over-constraints detection when modeling geometric constraints systems in PDP and proposes a set of criteria to analyze the available methods classified into four categories: level of detecting over-constraints, system decomposition, system modeling and results generation. Secondly, it introduces and analyzes the available methods by grouping them based on the introduced criteria. Finally, it discusses possible directions and future challenges.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

References

  1. Falcidieno B, Giannini F, Léon JC, Pernot JP (2014) Processing free form objects within a Product Development Process framework, vol 1. ASME-Press, New York, pp 317–344

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cheutet V, Daniel M, Hahmann S, La Greca R, Léon JC, Maculet R, Ménegaux D, Sauvage B (2007) Constraint modeling for curves and surfaces in CAGD: a survey. Int J Shape Model 13(02):159

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Gouaty G, Fang L, Michelucci D, Daniel M, Pernot JP, Raffin R, Lanquetin S, Neveu M (2016) Variational geometric modeling with black box constraints and DAGs. Comput Aided Des 75:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Graver J, Servatius B, Servatius H (1993) Combinatorial rigidity. Graduate studies in mathematics. American Mathematical Society, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Laman G (1970) On graphs and rigidity of plane skeletal structures. J Eng Math 4(4):331–340

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Podgorelec D, Žalik B, Domiter V (2008) Dealing with redundancy and inconsistency in constructive geometric constraint solving. Adv Eng Softw 39(9):770–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Foufou S, Michelucci D, Jurzak JP (2005) Numerical decomposition of geometric constraints. Proceedings of the 2005 ACM symposium on solid and physical modeling. ACM, pp 143–151

  8. Sitharam M, Zhou Y (2004) A tractable, approximate, combinatorial 3d rigidity characterization. Fifth Automated Deduction in Geometry (ADG)

  9. Jermann C, Neveu B, Trombettoni G (2003) Algorithms for identifying rigid subsystems in geometric constraint systems. In: 18th International Joint Conference in Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-03 (No CONF, pp 233-238)

  10. Latham RS, Middleditch AE (1996) Connectivity analysis: a tool for processing geometric constraints. Comput Aided Des 28(11):917–928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ait-Aoudia S, Jegou R, Michelucci D (2014) Reduction of constraint systems. arXiv:1405.6131

  12. Hu H, Kleiner M, Pernot JP (2017) Over-constraints detection and resolution in geometric equation systems. Comput Aided Des 90:84–94

  13. Diestel R (2017) Graph theory. GTM 173, 5th edition, Vol 173. Springer, Heidelberg Graduate Texts in Mathematics

  14. Welsh D (2010) Matroid theory. Dover books on mathematics. Dover Publications, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Michelucci D, Foufou S (2006) Detecting all dependences in systems of geometric constraints using the witness method. In: International Workshop on Automated Deduction in Geometry, pp 98–112. Springer, Berlin

  16. Coxeter HSM, Greitzer SL (1967) Geometry revisited, vol 19. Maa, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Peng X, Chen L, Zhou F, Zhou J (2002) Singularity analysis of geometric constraint systems. J Comput Sci Technol 17(3):314–323

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Fudos I, Hoffmann CM (1997) A graph-constructive approach to solving systems of geometric constraints. ACM Trans Gr (TOG) 16(2):179–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brüderlin B, Roller D (eds) (2012) Geometric constraint solving and applications. Springer Science & Business Media

  20. Hoffmann CM, Sitharam M, Yuan B (2004) Making constraint solvers more usable: overconstraint problem. Comput Aided Des 36(4):377–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hoffmann CM, Lomonosov A, Sitharam M (1997, October). Finding solvable subsets of constraint graphs. In: International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming. Springer, Berlin, pp 463–477

  22. Dulmage AL, Mendelsohn NS (1958) Coverings of bipartite graphs. Can J Math 10:517–534

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Fritzson P, Bunus P (2002, April) Modelica—a general object-oriented language for continuous and discrete-event system modeling and simulation. In: Proceedings 35th Annual Simulation Symposium. SS 2002, IEEE, pp 365–380

  24. Serrano D (1987) Constraint management in conceptual design, Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

  25. Strang G (2014) Linear algebra and its applications. Elsevier Science

  26. Light RA, Gossard DC (1983) Variational geometry: a new method for modifying part geometry for finite element analysis. Comput Struct 17(5–6):903–909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Okunev P, Johnson CR (2005) Necessary and sufficient conditions for existence of the LU factorization of an arbitrary matrix. arxiv:math/0506382

  28. Dongarra J, Kennedy K, Messina P, Sorensen DC, Voigt RG (1990) Proceedings of the Fourth SIAM Conference on Parallel Processing for Scientific Computing, Chicago, Illinois, USA. SIAM 1990, ISBN 0-89871-262-9

  29. Cox D, Little J, OShea D (2013) Ideals, varieties, and algorithms: an introduction to computational algebraic geometry and commutative algebra. Springer

  30. Bose NK (2013) Multidimensional systems theory and applications. Springer

  31. Chou SC (1988) An introduction to Wu’s method for mechanical theorem proving in geometry. J Automat Reason 4(3):237–267

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Wu WT (2012) Mechanical theorem proving in geometries: basic principles. Springer

  33. Cox DA, Little J, O’Shea D (2015) Ideals, varieties, and algorithms. Springer, New York, pp 49–119

    Book  Google Scholar 

  34. Hoffmann CM (1989) Geometric and solid modeling: an introduction. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kondo K (1992) Algebraic method for manipulation of dimensional relationships in geometric models. Comput Aided Des 24(3):141–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Chou S (1988) Mechanical geometry theorem proving. Mathematics and its applications. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Gao XS, Chou, SC (1998) Solving geometric constraint systems. II. A symbolic approach and decision of Rc-constructibility. Comput Aided Des 30(2):115–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Haug EJ (1989) Computer aided kinematics and dynamics of mechanical systems, vol 1. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, pp 48–104

    Google Scholar 

  39. Krantz S, Parks H (2012) The implicit function theorem: history, theory, and applications. Modern Birkhäuser classics. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  40. Michelucci D, Foufou S (2006) Geometric constraint solving: the witness configuration method. Comput Aided Des 38(4):284–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Moinet M, Mandil G, Serre P (2014) Defining tools to address over-constrained geometric problems in computer aided design. Comput Aided Des 48:42–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Michelucci D, Schreck P, Thierry SE, Fünfzig C, Génevaux JD (2010). Using the witness method to detect rigid subsystems of geometric constraints in CAD. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM symposium on solid and physical modeling. ACM, pp 91–100

  43. Michelucci D, Foufou S, Lamarque L, Schreck P (2006) Geometric constraints solving: some tracks. In: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM symposium on solid and physical modeling. ACM, pp 185–196

  44. Thierry SE, Schreck P, Michelucci D, Fünfzig C, Génevaux JD (2011) Extensions of the witness method to characterize under-, over-and well-constrained geometric constraint systems. Comput Aided Des 43(10):1234–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kubicki A, Michelucci D, Foufou S (2014) Witness computation for solving geometric constraint systems. In: Science and information conference (SAI), 2014. IEEE, pp 759–770

  46. Zou, Qiang, and Hsi-Yung Feng (2019) On Limitations of the Witness Configuration Method for Geometric Constraint Solving in CAD Modeling. arXiv:1904.00526

  47. Zou Q, Feng HY (2020) A decision-support method for information inconsistency resolution in direct modeling of CAD models. Adv Eng Inform 44:101087

  48. Pernot JP, Falcidieno B, Giannini F, Léon JC (2008) Incorporating free-form features in aesthetic and engineering product design: State-of-the-art report. Comput Industry 59(6):626–637

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the China Scholarship Council (No. 201406090176) for supporting this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Guangdong Bright Dream Robotics, Foshan, China

    Hao Hu, Chao Zhang, Yanjia Huang & Qian Zhao

  2. Guangdong Country Garden School, Foshan, China

    Hao Hu & Sunny Yeung

  3. Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, LISPEN, HESAM Université, Aix-en-Provence, 13617, France

    Hao Hu, Mathias Kleiner & Jean-Philippe Pernot

Authors
  1. Hao Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mathias Kleiner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jean-Philippe Pernot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yanjia Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Qian Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sunny Yeung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hao Hu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hu, H., Kleiner, M., Pernot, JP. et al. Geometric Over-Constraints Detection: A Survey. Arch Computat Methods Eng 28, 4331–4355 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-020-09509-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-020-09509-y

Search

Navigation