Advertisement

Domain-Specific Model Transformation in Building Quantity Take-Off

  • Jim Steel
  • Robin Drogemuller
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6981)

Abstract

The two core concepts of model-driven engineering are models and model transformations. Domain-Specific Modelling has become accepted as a powerful means of providing domain experts and end users with the ability to create and manipulate models within the systems that they use. In this paper we argue that there are domains for which it is appropriate to also provide domain experts with the ability to modify and develop model transformations. One such domain is that of quantity surveying, and specifically the taking-off of quantities from a building design. We describe a language for expressing transformations between building models and bills of quantities, and its implementation within an automated quantity take-off tool, reflecting on the commonalities and differences between this language and a general-purpose model transformation language/tool.

Keywords

Model Transformation Building Information Model Automate Estimator Building Element Trade Section 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Australian Institute of Quantity Surveyors: Australian standard method of measurement of building works. 5th edn. Australian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (1990)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    buildingSMART Consortium: Industry foundation classes, ifc2x edition 3, technical corrigendum 1 (2007), http://buildingsmart-tech.org/ifc/IFC2x3/TC1/html/index.htm (accessed April 30, 2011)
  3. 3.
    Cuadrado, J.S., Molina, J.G., Tortosa, M.M.: RubyTL: A practical, extensible transformation language. In: Rensink, A., Warmer, J. (eds.) ECMDA-FA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4066, pp. 158–172. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S.: Feature-based survey of model transformation approaches. IBM Systems Journal 45(3), 621–646 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Daly, C.: Emfatic language for emf development. IBM alphaWorks (November 2004), http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/emfatic
  6. 6.
    Duddy, K., Gerber, A., Lawley, M., Raymond, K., Steel, J.: Model transformation: A declarative, reusable patterns approach. In: EDOC, pp. 174–185. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lawley, M., Steel, J.: Practical declarative model transformation with tefkat. In: Bruel, J.-M. (ed.) MoDELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3844, pp. 139–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rittel, H., Webber, M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy sciences 4(2), 155–169 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jim Steel
    • 1
  • Robin Drogemuller
    • 2
  1. 1.University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Queensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations