Generic model

The geometric construction of the model, based on previous documentation or scans, results in a general geometrical model. This process yields a discrete surface approximation of the specimens analyzed previously.

The pathway unfolds as follows: it starts with the importation of an image-based model, re-positioned according to Moreno Gata, Seiter, et al. (Reference Moreno Gata, Seiter, Grizmann and Trautz2023). The mesh volume is subdivided into transverse sections parallel to the relocation plane ${\alpha _i}$ , defined by the vertical vector $h$ and the normal vector ${a_i}$ . This generates a section ${s_i}$ , determining a geometric center point ${A_i}$ , later generalized as uppercase ${C_g}$ . This process constructs a geometric center line ${c_g}$ , composed of the individual geometric centers.

Subsequently, this information is hierarchically organized for NURBS construction. Given the cross-sections ${s_i}$ , they are divided into a maximum of four points ${S_i}$ . These points segment the sections, later used to construct a degree-3 transition surface. These 2D surfaces, termed patches, along with the geometric center line, are exported for subsequent mechanical simulations, see Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Pathway for the geometric construction of a generic elongated curved element.

Generic model for bifurcations

The digital processing of bifurcated elements, or forks, is determined by an integration in three axes of the generic model (Figure 6). The oriented model, in 3D mesh format, interprets a bifurcation with three central lines, $a$ , $b$ and $c$ , which are discretized in their length, yielding vectors ${a_0}$ , ${b_0}$ and ${c_0}$ at their initial segment starting from the bifurcation. This process allows the generation of sections ${s_{A - 0}}$ , ${s_{B - 0}}$ and ${s_{C - 0}}$ , whose centroids ( ${A_0},{B_0},{C_0}$ ) define the plane $\pi $ . This plane $\pi $ have a normal vector ${h_\pi }$ . The sum of possible combinations of vectors ${a_0}$ , ${b_0}$ and ${c_0}$ , along with the vector $h$ , and the central geometric point ${C_{g - 0}}$ , gives us the cutting planes $\alpha, \beta, \gamma $ . These planes intersect the volume of the 3D mesh.

The subsequent step of defining patches and constructing NURBS is determined, similar to the generic model, by the division of cross-sections ${s_i}$ , in this case coinciding with the edges defined by the cutting planes. For a proper curvature transition, a subdivision geometry element (Sub-D) is employed. This is followed by exporting for subsequent mechanical simulation.

Figure 6.

Geometric construction of a tree bifurcation based on subdivision modeling.

This geometric process is integrated and programmed within the Rhinoceros (McNeel et al. Reference McNeel2023) environment to facilitate its automation.

Polar definition of the cross-section

A significant challenge in this context is accurately determining the center line, also known as the growth central axis, often mistakenly assumed to be the geometric central axis. This center line is formed by the union of growth centers ${C_G}$ , currently only obtainable through visual information or CT data. The center ${C_G}$ represents the tree’s initial growth center, located at the central point of the annual rings. In a straight element with a circular cross-section, the geometric centroids ${C_g}$ and growth centers ${C_G}$ tend to coincide. However, this deviation becomes more pronounced in irregular elements, such as oval-shaped cross-sections primarily generated by reaction wood or in a bifurcation. This is supplemented with the center of mass, – ${C_M}$ –. This is the sum of all masses within the section. In a rectilinear element, it tends to be the same as ${C_G}$ and ${C_g}$ . To determine its location in an irregular element, it is necessary to conduct a density variation study. This center allows observing the displacement of biomass throughout growth. This is applied to analyze eccentricities and displacement of the centers along the tree length, see Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Definition of the three centers of the cross-section: geometric center –centroid–, growth center and center of mass. Polar ray (r) positioning for cross-section analysis.

Wood cross-sections are commonly considered with a polar coordinate system. The center ${C_G}$ , serving as the center of the polar system, acts as the starting point for drawing rays ${r_i}$ extending to the previously defined geometric perimeter ${s_i}$ . Rays are determined at an angle ${\theta _i}$ . The intersection of ${r_i}$ with ${s_i}$ gives us the points ${R_i}$ . These rays are utilized for a density variation analysis later in Figure 9.

Growth-induced mass displacements

The mass displacement can be observed in the model (see Figure 8). For visualization, a tubular volume with variable radius $\left| {{{\bf{t}}_{\bf{j}}}} \right|$ is traced along the central growth line as a reference. This tube is determined at each cross-section, taking the smallest modulus of all $\left| {{{\bf{r}}_{\bf{i}}}} \right|$ . This defines a circle ${s_{i - j}}$ , with a tangent ${T_j}$ at ${s_i}$ . Using this method, it is possible to visualize an approximation of the volume generated by the tree as reaction wood. In the example in Figure 8 – based on a reference oak specimen – it can be recognized how the added volume in growth corresponds to tension wood. Furthermore, one central line of a bifurcation element has been extracted. With the ${C_G}$ of each section in a straight line, one can observe the quantitative difference in geometric eccentricities, which increase along with the tension in the wood.

Figure 8.

Visualization of the bifurcation of a small specimen of oak. In red: reference tangent circular geometry with ${C_G}$ , if the tree grows straight. In blue: grown geometry with eccentric displacement of ${C_g}$ . The production of tension wood can be seen in blue. ${C_M}$ calculated after applying the derived polynomial density.

The last part of this section outlines the application of the polar method for analyzing density variations within the volume. These techniques are instrumental in detecting higher-density zones, such as heartwood. The relevant eccentricities are then defined. The eccentricity ${e_g}$ of the central axis is calculated as the distance between ${C_g}$ and ${C_G}$ . After calculating the ${C_M}$ , with the help of the density distribution (in Figure 9), the ${e_M}$ can be found. This is relevant for a mechanical understanding of the tree, as it has implications on the moment of inertia of each section ${s_i}$ . In Figure 8, the cross-section on the right illustrates the variation in moment of inertia due to geometrical ${J_g}$ , in comparison to a moment of inertia reference due to growth ${J_G}$ . For instance, in a straight-grown tree with a perimeter ${s_{i - j}}$ – delineated in red – its ${J_G}$ would be much lower than the actual ${J_g}$ . This consideration requires complementing with a calculation of the mass moment of inertia ${J_M}$ .

Figure 9.

Material density variation $\lambda $ along the radius $R$ . ${\lambda _i}$ corresponds to every ${r_i}$ , and ${\lambda _m}$ represents the resulting density in the cross-section. Using a polynomial, a formula can be derived, which can then be reapplied to the cross-section from ${C_G}$ to ${R_i}$ .

Exploration of material stiffness

The polar structure has been used to determine the moments of inertia and densities, as discussed above. In addition, there are more properties that vary along the radius, starting from ${C_G}$ , such as strength and stiffness. Studies have shown that there is a relationship between density variation and strength. Matsuo-Ueda et al. (Reference Matsuo-Ueda, Tsunezumi, Jiang, Yoshida, Yamashita, Matsuda, Matsumura, Ikami and Yamamoto2022) show that in Japanese cedar – softwood, its modulus is higher in the center and decreases in the radial direction (see Figure 10), right; on the contrary, in deciduous trees – hardwood, their modulus is lower in the center and increases in the radial direction, which can be contrasted with the density variation study of the previous section. The integration of material properties and the $E$ modulus, based on material tests, can be employed for further analytical methods and simulations. In Figure 10, a general formulation of area distribution proposes how to numerically analyze the variation of stiffness and the inertia moment $J$ along the radius, where ${A_i}$ is the area of every accumulation of growth rings, ${J_i}$ the moment of inertia and ${E_i}$ the Young modulus.

$${A_{0{\rm{\;\;}}}} \ldots {\rm{\;\;\;\;}}{A_{i{\rm{\;\;}}}}$$

$${J_{0{\rm{\;\;}}}} \ldots {\rm{\;\;\;\;}}{J_{i{\rm{\;\;}}}}$$

(1) $$\matrix{ {{A_{{\rm{tot}}}}} \hfill & { = {A_0}{{{E_0}} \over {{E_{{\rm{tot}}}}}} + {A_1}{{{E_1}} \over {{E_{{\rm{tot}}}}}} + \ldots + {A_i}{{{E_i}} \over {{E_{{\rm{tot}}}}}}} \hfill & { = \mathop \sum \limits_{n = 0}^{n = i} {A_i}{{{E_i}} \over {{E_{{\rm{tot}}}}}}} \hfill \cr {{J_{{\rm{tot}}}}} \hfill & { = {J_0}{{{E_0}} \over {{E_{{\rm{tot}}}}}} + {J_1}{{{E_1}} \over {{E_{{\rm{tot}}}}}} + \ldots + {J_i}{{{E_i}} \over {{E_{{\rm{tot}}}}}}} \hfill & { = \mathop \sum \limits_{n = 0}^{n = i} {J_i}{{{E_i}} \over {{E_{{\rm{tot}}}}}}} \hfill \cr } $$

Figure 10.

Symmetrized variation of the E-modulus over the cross-section according to Matsuo-Ueda et al. Reference Matsuo-Ueda, Tsunezumi, Jiang, Yoshida, Yamashita, Matsuda, Matsumura, Ikami and Yamamoto2022, in a softwood.

Isogeometric analysis

Geometries in engineering design applications are typically modeled in CAD software by NURBS. As Hughes, Cottrell and Bazilevs (Reference Hughes, Cottrell and Bazilevs2005) initially demonstrated, these geometry-describing functions can be used in the isogeometric analysis to solve engineering problems. In contrast to classical simulation approaches, such as finite element analysis (FEA), the computational effort of meshing the geometry can be neglected. Many efficient and numerically stable algorithms exist for processing NURBS in NURBS objects. Besides its usefulness in accurately describing conical cross-sections such as ellipsoids, circles, spheres or cylinders, the significant advantage of the FEA is the higher continuity over element borders and the efficient mesh refinement possibilities. As stated in the previous chapter, through modern 3D-scanning techniques, an accurate description of arbitrary geometries is possible. Here, a two-dimensional NURBS surface patch in a three-dimensional space is created. Coming from 2D image data, a solid volume description can be generated by scaling the NURBS surface in a scaling center point. This method is called scaled boundary isogeometric analysis (SBIGA) (Chen, Simeon and Klinkel Reference Chen, Simeon and Klinkel2016, Chasapi et al. Reference Chasapi, Mester, Simeon and Klinkel2022). For the application in modeling long slender geometries, such as wooden branches or trees, this technique has drawbacks since numerical condition problems due to obtuse-angled polyhedral patches can occur. To avoid this, a novel generalized scaled boundary isogeometric analysis (GSBIGA) approach is introduced. This new method employs a scaling center line instead of a scaling center point (Spahn et al., Reference Spahn, Moreno Gata, Trautz and Klinkel2024). Figure 11 shows the basic principles.

Figure 11.

General SBIGA approach depicted, spanned by parametric coordinates $\xi $ , $\eta $ and $\zeta $ . Functions as polar scaling approach in cross-sectional area for $\xi $ and $\eta $ at a given $\zeta $ .

For this purpose, the parameters $\eta $ , $\zeta $ and $\xi $ are introduced. The boundary surface is spanned by $\eta $ in tangential and $\zeta $ in the longitudinal direction; the spatial scaling direction is described by $\xi $ . All three parameters are defined on the interval from $0$ $ \le $ $\eta $ , $\zeta $ , $\xi $ $ \le 1$ . The modeled slender geometry of the domain ${{\rm{\Omega }}_0}$ has a defined longitudinal direction, coinciding with the primary growth direction of wood and its center line. This modeling technique shares the characteristics of wood as the polar definition in the cross-sectional area. This relation is advantageous for modeling the polar dependency of material properties as already suggested in Figure 7. The position vector $\hat X\left( \zeta \right)$ contains the Cartesian coordinates of an arbitrary point on the center line $\left( {{{\hat X}_1},{\rm{\;}}{{\hat X}_2},{\rm{\;}}{{\hat X}_3}} \right)$ , also known as the center of growth ${C_G}$ . A point on the boundary surface $\left( {{{\tilde X}_1},{\rm{\;}}{{\tilde X}_2},{\rm{\;}}{{\tilde X}_3}} \right)$ is described by the position vector $\tilde X$ , while the position vector $X$ describes an arbitrary point $\left( {{X_1},{\rm{\;}}{X_2},{\rm{\;}}{X_3}} \right)$ in the interior of the domain. For an arbitrary point on the boundary $\partial {{\rm{\Omega }}_0},$ the following relation exists

(2) $$\tilde X\left( {\eta, \zeta } \right) = {{\rm{N}}_i}\left( \eta \right){{\rm{N}}_j}\left( \zeta \right){X_s} = {N_b}\left( {\eta, {\rm{\;}}\zeta } \right){X_s}{\rm{\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;on}}\partial {{\rm{\Omega }}_0}.$$

Here, ${X_s}$ contains all control point coordinates of the boundary surface and ${N_b}\left( {\eta, {\rm{\;}}\zeta } \right)$ the corresponding NURBS basis functions.

Any point on the center line can be expressed by

(3) $$\hat X\left( \zeta \right) = {{\rm{N}}_j}\left( \zeta \right){X_0}{\rm{\;\;}},$$

with the location vector ${X_0}$ containing the coordinates of all control points of the center line. An arbitrary point in the interior domain of the geometry ${{\rm{\Omega }}_0}$ can be expressed by

$$X( \xi, {\rm \eta}, \zeta ) =\xi ( {\tilde X( {\rm \eta, \zeta }}) - \hat X( \zeta ) ) + \hat X( \zeta )$$

(4) $$= {\xi {\rm N_b}( {\rm \eta, \zeta } ){X_s} + ( {1 - \xi } ){{\rm{N}_j}( \zeta ){X_0}{\rm{\quad in\;\;}}{\rm \Omega }_0}{\rm{\;\;}}.}$$

In contrast to the SBIGA, for the novel GSBIGA, the center line needs to be described with the same NURBS basis functions as the boundary patches in the longitudinal direction. This is depicted in Figure 12, with $R_i^p$ and $R_j^q$ being the NURBS boundary functions and $R_k^r$ being the NURBS functions in scaling direction. In the longitudinal direction, share the boundary and the center line the same NURBS basis functions $R_j^q$ . The general concept of the scaled boundary method remains unchanged. The 3D scanned geometric model, including the NURBS description of the body, is directly used to analyze the structure. Since isogeometric analysis is used, mesh refinement is straightforward by applying the aforementioned refinement methods. The center line should represent the initial annual ring (pith). The shape of a tree’s pith, or growth center 7, is individual as its shape and strongly depends on wood type and constraints such as light, soil or altitude. The shape of the center line and position can be arbitrarily chosen to match these obligations. Thus, the shape of the boundary surface and the shape of the center line are generally independent. The only prerequisites are the center line position in the geometries interior domain and using similar basis functions to the longitudinal boundary patches.

Figure 12.

Geometry patch and its NURBS functions. Boundary surface spanned by $R_j^q$ and $R_i^p$ , volume spanned additionally in scaling direction by $R_k^r$ . NURBS functions in the longitudinal direction of the center line identical to surface functions $R_j^q$ .

Elongated elements

When simulating naturally grown unprocessed structural elements, exact mapping of the structure is essential since small deflections or imperfections can significantly impact stresses and deformations if not considered correctly. Figure 13 shows a wooden branch under longitudinal compression. The deformed geometry is plotted over the non-deformed structure in the bottom part. The displacement field is plotted over the deformed body.

Figure 13.

Longitudinally loaded compression test of the unprocessed slender wooden branch. The deformation figure is given in the bottom view.

The stress plots from Figure 14 in the x and z directions show that the perpendicular stresses cannot be neglected since they vary with the factor ${10^1}$ – ${10^2}$ . This should underline how important an accurate representation of the actual geometry is. Even minor imperfections of an approximately straight wooden branch result in significant deflection radial to the center line.

Figure 14.

Stress distributions in x, y and z directions for stresses separated.

Throughout the polar description of the parametric model, different densities, stiffness and shear stiffness of naturally grown wood can be described in the future based on the cross-sectional radius. Using multiple Young’s moduli over the cross-sectional area results in more accurate simulations. A preliminary simulation is conducted in 15 with a distribution of Young’s modulus smaller in the center. This is a consideration taken as a reference from the density variation of a softwood or deciduous tree (Matsuo-Ueda et al. Reference Matsuo-Ueda, Tsunezumi, Jiang, Yoshida, Yamashita, Matsuda, Matsumura, Ikami and Yamamoto2022), which is less resistant at the core. The simulation results show less deformation compared to a reference simulation of a uniform averaged E-modulus ${E_m}$ (Figure 15).

Figure 15.

Comparison of a branch under bending for calculation with a constant mean modulus of elasticity distribution, with calculation with different E-modulus ranges.

Bifurcated elements

Multiple patches and center lines in the longitudinal direction are necessary when modeling bifurcated structural elements. Figure 16 shows the structural analysis of a wooden bifurcation model. The structure is loaded in the xy-plane toward the axes and clamped at the support. An isotropic linear elastic material model was used for the simulation. The advantages of the polar geometric description will be used for material modeling in future works.

Figure 16.

Combined bending and tension test, while bending is induced by force in the y direction, the tensional force applies in the x direction. A structural model with boundary and loading is given on the left. The deformation figure of loaded and clamped bifurcation in the bending test is on the right. The displacement field is plotted over the deformed structure.

Development of structural joints

The development of structural joints in the off-knot construction primarily begins with a three-dimensional definition of the stock material, utilizing a 3D mesh converted to a NURBS model to accurately determine geometrical and growth directions necessary for correct joint positioning. This method prevents the introduction of incorrect static eccentricities that could compromise the structure’s integrity. The joints themselves are designed based on a combination of shape and interlocking, supplemented by the use of fully threaded screws. This approach allows for assembly and disassembly without the need for adhesive materials, facilitating easier maintenance and potential reconfiguration of the construction elements.

For the joint development, an automated system for positioning cut planes at each joint was implemented (see Figure 22). These joint planes were parametrically developed and aligned along the center line, facilitating the transmission of loads through the natural wood geometry. Despite static calculations treating the joints as rotational springs, receiving only axial forces, screws were strategically placed to ensure proper load transmission and prevent asymmetric horizontal forces from causing dislocations at the joints.

Figure 22.

Structural connection: Photo of a construction element from an oak specimen, depicting the position of the contact faces of the joint, considering the central line of the tree’s growth.

The structure was fabricated and assembled during the Summer Semester of 2023 as part of a research assignment course in the Master of Architecture program at RWTH Aachen University (Chair of Structures and Structural Design) (Figure 23).

Figure 23.

Final state. The construction is currently located in the inner courtyard of the Faculty of Architecture (Schinkelstr. 1, 52064, Aachen, Germany) for testing and public use.

Sandwich panels

The bar-type structures are therefore the most used method in literature, and an example is presented here. However, alternative concepts can be explored, such as sandwich structures, where raw wood is positioned in the core of a wood panel. The project “reGrowth,” as outlined in Moreno Gata et al. (Reference Moreno Gata, Amtsberg, Stephens, Menges and Trautz2024), illustrates a practical application of these principles. By aligning the growth direction of timber elements with stress trajectories, it achieves a naturally grown timber panel that is oriented in harmony with the distribution of forces, ensuring optimal stress alignment.

Automatizing process

Work in progress to extend the findings presented here. In particular, geometry and simulation developments are currently being automated to provide an open-source package.

Besides that, the automated interpretation of timber can be enhanced through the application of neural networks, proving their applicability in growth ring recognition (Abdeljaber, Habite and Olsson Reference Abdeljaber, Habite and Olsson2023). This research encompasses a testing phase that leverages the neural network (Detectron2 2023) to identify crucial points or zones within wood trunks indicative of tree growth from CT scans (see Figure 24). It utilizes Cartesian information, derived from the perimeter and the pith – the central point, to ascertain the growth path of the tree – center line. This data proves instrumental in training the neural network and is subsequently implemented in new CT scans. The primary objective lies in the recognition of shifts in the tree’s center of gravity due to static loads.

Figure 24.

Automation of geometric development based on CTs through neural networks.

Experiments in plant growth

This research also extends into the study of growing trees and plant guidance. For the past three years, an ongoing data collection on plant growth has been conducted as part of a current research project Moreno Gata, Grizmann and Trautz (Reference Moreno Gata, Grizmann and Trautz2021). Regular documentation of several Paulownia specimens is been compiled, including measurements of the base perimeter and diameter, to analyze trunk curvature. The collected data seeks to demonstrate that the static response of the young tree contributes to an elliptical shaping of its trunk (see Figure 25).

Figure 25.

Continuous growth measurements on 3-year-old Paulownia trees. Deviated perimeter ${p_2}$ , from ${p_1}$ tending to an egg-like shape and displacement of the center of mass. In red, the tangent circle reference ${p_{1 - j}}$ and ${p_{2 - j}}$ .