Multi-Resolutional Parallel Isosurface Extraction based on Tetrahedral Bisection

  • Thomas Gerstner
  • Martin Rumpf

Abstract

A variety of multi-resolution visualisation methods have been designed to serve as tools for interactive visualisation of large datasets. The local resolution of the generated visual objects, such as isosurfaces, is thereby steered by error indicators which measure the error due to a locally coarser approximation of the data. On one hand, post-processing methods can be applied to already extracted surfaces and can turn them into multi-resolutional objects, which can then be interactively inspected [1–4]. On the other hand, we can also adaptively extract the considered isosurfaces from the 3D dataset. Thereby, starting at a coarse approximation of the data, we recursively add details in areas where some error indicator points out a local error with respect to the exact data values. If the error is below a user prescribed threshold, the algorithm locally stops the successive refinement and extracts the surface on the current level. Different approaches have been presented to solve the outstanding continuity problem, i.e., to avoid cracks in the adaptive isosurfaces. In the Delaunay approach by Cignoni et al. [5] and the nested mesh method by Grosso et al. [6], the successive remeshing during the refinement guarantees the continuity. On the other hand, Shekhar et al. [7] rule out hanging nodes by inserting additional points on faces with a transition from finer to coarser elements due to an adaptive stopping criterion.

Keywords

Intersection Line Bucky Ball 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Certain A, Popovic J, DeRose T, Duchamp T, Salesin D, Stuetzle W. Interactive multiresolution surface viewing. In: Proc. SIGGRAPH ’96 Conference, 1996; 91–98.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gross MH, Staadt RG. Fast multiresolution surface meshing. In: Proc. IEEE Visualization ’95; 135–142.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hoppe H. Progressive meshes. In: Proc. SIGGRAPH ’96 Conference, 1996; 99–108.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schroeder WJ, Zarge JA, Lorensen WA. Decimation of triangle meshes. ACM/SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics 1992; 26 (4): 65 – 70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cignoni P, De Floriani L, Montoni C, Puppo E, Scopigno R. Multiresolution modeling and visualization of volume data based on simplicial complexes. In: Proc. Symposium on Volume Visualization 1994; 19 – 26.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grosso R, Luerig C, Ertl T. The multilevel finite element method for adaptive mesh optimization and visualization of volume data. In: Proc. IEEE Visualization ’97, Phoenix, AZ, 1997; 387 – 562.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shekhar R, Fayyad E, Yagel R, Cornhill JF. Octree-based decimation of marching cubes surfaces. In: Proc. IEEE Visualization ’96, San Francisco, CA, October 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bansch E. Local mesh refinement in 2 and 3 dimensions. IMPACT of Computing in Science and Engineering, 1991; (3):181–191.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maubach J. Local bisection refinement for n-simplicial grids generated by reflection. SIAM Journal of Scientific. Computing, 1995; (16):210–227.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ohlberger M, Rumpf M. Adaptive projection methods in multiresolutional scientific visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 1998; 4(4).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ohlberger M, Rumpf M. Hierarchical and adaptive visualization on nested grids. Computing, 1997; 59 (4): 269 – 285.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Neubauer R, Ohlberger M, Rumpf M, Schworer R. Efficient visualization of large scale data on hierarchical meshes. In: Lefer W, Grave M (Eds), Visualization in Scientific Computing, Springer, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rumpf M. Recent numerical methods — A challenge for visualization. To appear in: Future General Computer Systems.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhou Y, Chen B, Kaufman A. Multiresolution tetrahedral framework for visualizing volume data. In: Proc. IEEE Visualization ’97, Phoenix, AZ, 1997; 135 – 142.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Livnat Y, Shen HW, Johnson CR. A near optimal isosurface extraction algorithm using the span space. Transactions on Visulization and Computer Graphics, 1996; 2 (l): 73 – 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gerstner T. Adaptive hierarchical methods for landscape representation and analysis. In: Hergarten S, Neugebauer H-J (Eds), Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences 78, Springer, 1998.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilhelms JP, van Gelder A. Octrees for faster isosurface generation. ACM/SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 1990; 24 (4): 57 – 62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Gerstner
  • Martin Rumpf

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations