Advertisement

Investigating Semantic Functionality of 3D Geometry for Land Administration

  • George FlorosEmail author
  • Eva Tsiliakou
  • Dimitrios Kitsakis
  • Ioannis Pispidikis
  • Efi Dimopoulou
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)

Abstract

Significance of semantic data during the recent years is growing. This trend, combined with facilitation of new 3D object modeling has led to semantically enriched 3D models, serving various applications where relations between objects’ components and their environment need to be stored and presented. In the field of Land Administration, semantics can greatly contribute to optimize land management and land policies. Integration of semantics to 3D building models is currently achieved through two differently structured models: semantic-oriented CityGML and structural-oriented BIM/IFC. Integration of the semantic information of each model is still an object of intense research worldwide. In this paper, a 3D building model designed in SketchUp Pro software was transformed using FME software to a CityGML file; land use features were assigned to the model and attribute queries were executed in order to check the exported models’ functionality in terms of semantics.

Keywords

3D modeling Land use SketchUp Pro CityGML Attribute query 

References

  1. Aien, A., Kalantari, M., Rajabifard, A., Williamson, I., & Wallace, J. (2013). Towards integration of 3D legal and physical objects in cadastral data models. Land Use Policy, 35, 140–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balogun, A. L., Matori, A. N., & Lawal, D. U. (2011). Geovisualization of sub-surface pipelines: A 3D approach. Modern Applied Science, 5(4), p158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biljecki, F., Zhaoa, J., Stoter, J., & Ledouxa, H. (2013, September). Revisiting the concept of level of detail in 3D city modelling. In ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences. Proceedings of the ISPRS 8th 3D GeoInfo Conference & WG II/2 Workshop (pp. 63–74).Google Scholar
  4. Billen, R., Zaki, C. E., Servières, M., Moreau, G., & Hallot, P. (2012). Developing an ontology of space: application to 3D city modeling. Usage, usability, and utility of 3D city models.Google Scholar
  5. Breunig, M., & Zlatanova, S. (2011). 3D geo-database research: Retrospective and future directions. Computers & Geosciences, 37(7), 791–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, G., Nagel, C., Zlatanova, S., & Kolbe, T. H. (2013). Modelling 3D topographic space against indoor navigation requirements. In Progress and New Trends in 3D Geoinformation Sciences [pp. 1- 22]. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  7. Çağdaş, V. (2013). An application domain extension to citygml for immovable property taxation: A Turkish case study. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 21, 545–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheng, J., Deng, Y., & Du, Q. (2013). Mapping between BIM models And 3D GIS city models of different levels of detail. In N. Dawood & M. Kassem (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Construction Applications of Virtual Reality, 30–31 October 2013, London, UK.Google Scholar
  9. de Laat, R., & van Berlo, L. (2011). Integration of BIM and GIS: The development of the CityGML GeoBIM extension. In Advances in 3D Geo-information sciences (pp. 211–225). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. de Vries, T., & Zlatanova, S. (2011). 3D intelligent cities. GEO Informatics, 14(3), 6–8.Google Scholar
  11. Diakité, A. A., Damiand, G., & Gesquière, G. (2014). Automatic semantic labelling of 3D buildings based on geometric and topological information. In Proceedings of 9th International 3D GeoInfo Conference (3D GeoInfo), Nov. 2014, Dubai. United Arab Emirates. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 3DGeoInfo conference proceedings series. <http://nbnresolving. org/urn:nbn:de:swb:90-438043>. <hal-01122533>.Google Scholar
  12. Dimopoulou, E., & Elia, E. (2012). Legal aspects of 3D property rights, restrictions and responsibilities in Greece and Cyprus. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on 3D Cadastres, Developments and Practices (pp. 25–26).Google Scholar
  13. Dimopoulou, E., Kitsakis, D., & Tsiliakou, E. (2014). Investigating correlation between legal and physical property: possibilities and constraints. In Proceedings of SPIE 9535, Third International Conference on Remote Sensing and Geoinformation of the Environment (RSCy2015), 95350A 19 June 2015. doi: 10.1117/12.2192572.
  14. Dimopoulou, E., Tsiliakou, E., Kosti, V., Floros, G., & Labropoulos, T. (2014). Investigating integration possibilities between 3D modeling techniques. In Proceedings of 9th International 3D GeoInfo Conference (3D GeoInfo), Nov. 2014, Dubai. United Arab Emirates.Google Scholar
  15. Donkers, S. (2013). Automatic generation of CityGML LoD3 building models from IFC models. MSc thesis, Delft University of Technology, Department of GIS Technology, OTB Research Institute for the Built Environment.Google Scholar
  16. El-Mekawy, M. (2010). Integrating BIM and GIS for 3D city modelling: The case of IFC and CityGML.Google Scholar
  17. El-Mekawy, M., Östman, A., & Shahzad, K. (2011). Towards interoperating cityGML and IFC building models: A unified model based approach. In Advances in 3D Geo-information sciences (pp. 73–93). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Frédéricque, B., Raymond, K., & Van Prooijen, K. (2011, May). 3D GIS as applied to cadastre–A benchmark of today’s capabilities. In FIG Working Week.Google Scholar
  19. Geiger, A., Benner, J., & Haefele, K. H. (2014). Generalization of 3D IFC building models. In M. Breunig, M. Al-Doori, E. Butwilowski, P. V. Kuper, J. Benner, & Haefele, K. H (Eds.), 3D Geoinformation sciences, The Selected papers of the 3D GeoInfo 2014 (pp. 19-35). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Góźdź, K., Pachelski, W., & Poland, P. V. (2014). The possibilities of using CityGML for 3D representation of buildings in the cadastre. In Proceedings 4th International Workshop on 3D Cadastres, 9–11 Nov 2014, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. International Federation of Surveyors (FIG).Google Scholar
  21. Gröger, G., & Plümer, L. (2009). Updating 3D City models—How to preserve geometric-topological consistency. In W. G. Aref, D. Agrawal, M. F. Mokbel, C.T. Lu, C. Shahabi, P. Scheuermann, et al. [Eds.], Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems (ACM SIGSPATIAL GIS 2009) Seattle, Washington, 4–6 Nov 2009, ACM Press, New York, pp. 536–539.Google Scholar
  22. Gröger, G., & Plümer, L. (2012). CityGML–Interoperable semantic 3D city models. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 71, 12–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guo, R., Li, L., Ying, S., Luo, P., He, B., & Jiang, R. (2013). Developing a 3D cadastre for the administration of urban land use: A case study of Shenzhen, China. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 40, 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Guo, R., Yu, C., He, B., Zhao, Z., Li, L., & Ying, S. (2012). Logical design and implementation of the data model for 3D cadastre in China. In Proceedings 3rd International Workshop 3D Cadastres: Developments and Practices (pp. 113–136).Google Scholar
  25. Hu, M. (2008). Semantic based LoD models of 3D house property. In The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences (Vol. XXXVII, Part B2), Beijing.Google Scholar
  26. Isikdag, U., & Zlatanova. S. (2009). Towards defining a framework for automatic generation of buildings in CityGML using building information models. In J. Lee, & S. Zlatanova (Eds.), 3D geoinformation sciences (pp. 79–96). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Isikdag, U., Horhammer, M., Zlatanova, S., Kathmann, R., & van Oosterom, P. J. M. (2014). Semantically rich 3D building and cadastral models for valuation. In Proceedings 4th International Workshop on 3D Cadastres, 9–11 Nov 2014, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. International Federation of Surveyors [FIG].Google Scholar
  28. Isikdag, U., Zlatanova, S., & Underwood, J. (2013). A BIM-oriented model for supporting indoor navigation requirements. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 41, 112–123. INSPIRE, D2.8.III.2 Data Specification on Buildings—Draft Technical Guidelines.Google Scholar
  29. Jazayeri, I., Rajabifard, A., & Kalantari, M. (2014). A geometric and semantic evaluation of 3D data sourcing methods for land and property information. Land Use Policy, 36, 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Karki, S., McDougall, K., & Thompson, R. J. (2010). An overview of 3D Cadastre from a physical land parcel and a legal property object perspective. In Proceedings of the XXIV FIG International Congress 2010: Facing the Challenges-Building the Capacity, Sydney, 11–16 April 2010. FIG.Google Scholar
  31. Kolbe, T. H. (2009). Representing and exchanging 3D city models with CityGML. In 3D geoinformation sciences (pp. 15–31). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Kolbe, T. H., & Plümer, L. (2004). Bridging the Gap between GIS and CAAD. GIM International 2004, 18(7).Google Scholar
  33. Li, Y., & He, Z. (2008). 3D indoor navigation: A framework of combining BIM with 3D GIS. In 44th ISOCARP Congress.Google Scholar
  34. Löwner, M. O., Benner, J., Gröger, G., & Häfele, K. H. (2013). New concepts for structuring 3D city models–an extended level of detail concept for CityGML buildings. In Computational Science and Its Applications–ICCSA 2013 (pp. 466–480). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Nagel. C., Stadler, A., & Kolbe, T. (2009). Conceptual requirements for the automatic reconstruction of building information models from uninterpreted 3D models. In The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences (Vol. XXXIV, Part XXX).Google Scholar
  36. Rönsdorff, C., Wilson, D., & Stoter, J. E. (2011). Integration of land administration domain model with CityGML for 3D Cadastre. In Proceedings 4th International Workshop on 3D Cadastres, 9-11 November 2014, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. International Federation of Surveyors [FIG].Google Scholar
  37. Shojaei, D., Kalantari, M., Bishop, I. D., Rajabifard, A., & Aien, A. (2013). Visualization requirements for 3D cadastral systems. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 41, 39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shojaei, D., Rajabifard, A., Kalantari Soltanieh, S. A. E. I. D., Bishop, I., & Aien, A. (2012). Development of a 3D ePlan/LandXML visualisation system in Australia.Google Scholar
  39. Shojaei, D., Rajabifard, A., Kalantari, M., Bishop, I. D., & Aien, A. (2014). Design and development of a web-based 3D cadastral visualisation prototype.International Journal of Digital Earth, [ahead-of-print], 1–20.Google Scholar
  40. Stadler, A., & Kolbe, T. H. (2007). Spatio-semantic coherence in the integration of 3D city models. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Spatial Data Quality, Enschede.Google Scholar
  41. Stadler, A., Nagel, C., König, G., & Kolbe, T. H. (2009). Making interoperability persistent: A 3D geo database based on CityGML. In 3D Geo-information sciences (pp. 175–192). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  42. Van Berlo, L., & de Laat, R. (2009). Integration of BIM and GIS: The development of the CityGML GeoBIM extension. In: T. Kolbe, G. Konig, & C. Nagel (Eds.), 3D Geo-information sciences. Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography (pp. 211–225). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  43. van Oosterom, P. (2013). Research and development in 3D cadastres. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 40, 1–6.Google Scholar
  44. Xiong, X., & Huber, D. (2013). Using context to create semantic 3D models of indoor environments. In Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference, BMVA Press (2010), pp. 45.1–45.11.  http://dx.doi.org/10.5244/C.24.45.
  45. Ying, S., Guo, R., Li, L., & He, B. (2012). Application of 3D GIS to 3D cadastre in urban environment. In 3rd International Workshop on 3D Cadastres: Developments and Practices, Shenzhen, China (pp. 25–26).Google Scholar
  46. Ying, S., Li, L., & Guo, R. (2011). Building 3D cadastral system based on 2D survey plans with SketchUp. Geo-spatial Information Science, 14(2), 129–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhu, Q., Zhao, J., Du, Z., Zhang, Y., Xu, W., Ding, Y., et al. (2011). Towards semantic 3D city modeling and visual explorations. In T. Kolbe, G. Konig, & C. Nagel (Eds.), 3D Geo-information sciences (pp. 275–294). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zlatanova, S., Stoter, J., & Isikdag, U. (2012, June). Standards for exchange and storage of 3D information: Challenges and opportunities for emergency response. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Cartography and GIS, Albena, Bulgaria (pp. 17–28).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Floros
    • 1
    Email author
  • Eva Tsiliakou
    • 1
  • Dimitrios Kitsakis
    • 1
  • Ioannis Pispidikis
    • 1
  • Efi Dimopoulou
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Rural and Surveying EngineeringNational Technical University of AthensZografouGreece

Personalised recommendations