View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0027200CommunityOCCT:Modeling Datapublic2016-08-18 15:43
Reporternicolas_c Assigned Tobugmaster  
Status closedResolutionnot fixable 
PlatformWindowsOSVC++ 2012 
Product Version6.7.0 
Target VersionUnscheduled 
Summary0027200: Bounding box of Surfaces
DescriptionThe bounding box of the attached surface is larger than expected (648m >> 0.018m).
Steps To ReproduceImport exp.igs and compute bounding box with BRepBndLib::Add(shape, box);
then sqrt(B.SquareExtent()) gives 648.5m even if the face is less than 2cm.
Additional information
and documentation updates
I was able to achieve an accurate enough result by switching from GeomAbs_BSplineSurface method using surface.Poles() to default method (UV Sampling of surface) in BndLib_AddSurface::Add(S, UMin, UMax, VMin, VMax, Tol, B).
I think poles are outside of the surface in BSPlineSurface definition. So actual implementation gives wrong result
TagsNo tags attached.
Test case number

Attached Files

  • exp.igs (27,945 bytes)


related to 0025631 closedbugmaster Open CASCADE Bounding box is too big for the face. 



2016-02-24 17:31


exp.igs (27,945 bytes)


2016-02-24 18:19

developer   ~0051089

The method BRepBndLib::Add is known to compute box by poles of b-spline. If we computed it by UV samples we could skip some areas of a surface thus getting a box of less size than expected. It would be much worse then computing a box larger than expected. It is because the bounding box must include all points of the shape, and if it includes some extra space it is not so crucial for algorithms as when it does not include some space.

By the way, this method has been improved since 6.7.0 version, and in the current version (7.0 beta) it returns mush less bounding box for the attached face, due to taking out of consideration the poles that do not take part in the piece of surface on which the face is built:

in 6.7.0:
Draw[9]> bounding a
-486977.59931860428 -17150.230749889812 973.93123226598641 127108.75830253531 87454.155837981787 181435.96443249242

in 7.0:
Draw[5]> bounding a
-4529.1900235495541 248.0745436809822 990.00742501574109 -4218.9689926495166 286.58002984226323 1045.7647693584593


2016-02-24 18:47

reporter   ~0051090

OK, results are better but still far from expected result (31cm > 1.8cm). I'll try to investigate why triangulation method doesn't work.


2016-08-18 09:17

developer   ~0056813

We cannot make the method BRepBndLib::Add compute optimal bounding box, because it would raise a lot of regressions for performance cause.

However, recently we have added the new method BRepBndLib::AddOptimal, which computes optimal axis-aligned bounding box for a shape.

So, this bug can be closed.


2016-08-18 09:20

developer   ~0056814

The class BndLib_AddSurface also acquired the new methods AddOptimal.


2016-08-18 09:21

developer   ~0056815

Dear bugmaster, please close this bug.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2016-02-24 17:31 nicolas_c New Issue
2016-02-24 17:31 nicolas_c Assigned To => msv
2016-02-24 17:31 nicolas_c File Added: exp.igs
2016-02-24 18:19 msv Note Added: 0051089
2016-02-24 18:25 msv Relationship added related to 0025631
2016-02-24 18:27 msv Assigned To msv => nicolas_c
2016-02-24 18:27 msv Status new => feedback
2016-02-24 18:27 msv Target Version => Unscheduled
2016-02-24 18:47 nicolas_c Note Added: 0051090
2016-03-16 11:37 nicolas_c Assigned To nicolas_c => msv
2016-08-18 09:17 msv Note Added: 0056813
2016-08-18 09:20 msv Note Added: 0056814
2016-08-18 09:21 msv Note Added: 0056815
2016-08-18 09:21 msv Assigned To msv => bugmaster
2016-08-18 09:21 msv Resolution open => not fixable
2016-08-18 15:43 bugmaster Status feedback => closed