Solid Modeling Solutions: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 18:59, 10 December 2012

Revision as of 19:02, 10 December 2012

Line 19:

<!-- : P(t) = ∑iwiPibi(t) / ∑iwibi(t) -->

for anything more than a conic Bezier segment. Searching for a single form, the group worked together, learning about knots, multiple knots and how nicely Bezier segments, especially the conics, could be imbedded into a B-spline curve with multiple knots. Looking back, it seemed so simple: It is easy to verify that the equation for P(t) is valid for the B-spline basis functions as well as for Bernstein basis functions. By the end of 1980 the staff knew we had a way to present all the required curve forms using a single representation, now know as the NURBS form. But this new representation could easily have died at this point. The staff were already 12 to 18 months down a development path. They had completed a large number of algorithms using the old curve forms. They now had to convince SMS managers and the other technical groups, such as the database and graphics groups, that they should be allowed to start over using a single representation for all curves. The NURBS surface form did not present a problem since they had not yet developed any surface algorithms. The review of this new TIGER curve form was held on February 13, 1981. The review was successful and the staff were allowed to start over using the new curve form. It was at this time that the NURBS acronym was first used by the other side of the TIGER project, i.e., the TIGER software development groups of Boeing Computer Services. Management was very eager to promote the use of these new curve and surface forms. They had a limited understanding of the mathematics but they were very aware of the need to communicate geometric data between systems. Hence, Boeing very quickly prepared to propose NURBS to the August ’81 [[IGES]] meetings.

There are two reasons why NURBS were so quickly accepted by IGES. The first was that IGES was in great need of a way to represent objects. Up to that point there were, for example, only two surface definitions in IGES and the B-spline form was restricted to cubic splines. The other, surprisingly important, reason for the rapid acceptance was that Boeing, not being a CAD system supplier, was not a threat to any of the major turnkey system vendors. Evidently, IGES easily bogs down when different vendors support their own slightly different representations for the same objects. At this first IGES meeting, it was discovered that the people with the best understanding of the presentation were the SDRC representatives. Evidently SDRC was also active in defining a single representation for the standard CAD curves and was working on a similar definition.

So that’s how NURBS started at Boeing. Boehm’s B-spline refinement paper from CAD ’80 was of primary importance. It enabled the staff to understand non-uniform splines and to appreciate the geometrical nature of the definition so as to use B-splines in solving engineering problems. The first use of the geometrical nature of B-splines was in the curve/curve intersection. The Bezier subdivision process was utilized, and a second use was SMSour curve offset algorithm, which was based on a polygon offset process that was eventually communicated to and used by SDRC and explained by Tiller and Hanson in their offset paper of 1984. The staff also developed an internal NURBS class taught to about 75 Boeing engineers. The class covered Bezier curves, Bezier to B-spline and surfaces. The first public presentation of SMS'sour NURBS work was at a Seattle CASA/SME seminar in March of 1982. The staff had progressed quite far by then. They could take a rather simple NURBS surface definition of an aircraft and slice it with a plane surface to generate an interesting outline of some of the wing, body and engines. The staff were allowed great freedom in pursuing SMS'sour ideas and Boeing correctly promoted NURBS, but the task of developing that technology into a useable form was too much for Boeing, which abandoned the TIGER task late in ’84.

For the record, by late 1980, the TIGER Geometry Development Group consisted of Robert Blomgren, Richard Fuhr, George Graf, Peter Kochevar, Eugene Lee, Miriam Lucian and Richard Rice. Robert Blomgren was “lead engineer”.