TRACEABLE 3D IMAGING METROLOGY: EVALUATION OF 3D DIGITIZING TECHNIQUES IN A DEDICATED METROLOGY LABORATORY

This paper summarizes our initial work in evaluating 3D imaging systems at our state of the art newly constructed and equipped metrology laboratory. Completed in 2006, the laboratory space allows accurate measurements of 3D data from devices operating at standoff distances from a few centimetres up to 10 meters. A laminar flow of 20°C air at 50% humidity level is maintained within ±0.1°C. The total volume of air in the lab is changed twice a minute and the air cleanliness is Class 100. We will show a number of results on actual 3D systems: a laser tracker, dense stereo matching, three triangulation laser scanners and a TOF system.

[1]  J. Mills,et al.  Towards a standard specification for terrestrial laser scanning of cultural heritage , 2003 .

[2]  S. Bougnoux,et al.  From projective to Euclidean space under any practical situation, a criticism of self-calibration , 1998, Sixth International Conference on Computer Vision (IEEE Cat. No.98CH36271).

[3]  Emmanuel P. Baltsavias,et al.  A comparison between photogrammetry and laser scanning , 1999 .

[4]  Peter Sturm.  Critical motion sequences for the self-calibration of cameras and stereo systems with variable focal length , 2002, Image Vis. Comput..

[5]  François Blais.  Review of 20 years of range sensor development , 2004, J. Electronic Imaging.

[6]  Marc Rioux,et al.  Object model creation from multiple range images: acquisition, calibration, model building and verification , 1997, Proceedings. International Conference on Recent Advances in 3-D Digital Imaging and Modeling (Cat. No.97TB100134).

[7]  Wolfgang Förstner,et al.  Calibration Errors in Structure from Motion , 1998, DAGM-Symposium.

[8]  Johan Karlsson,et al.  Benchmarking of Algorithms for Automatic Correspondence Localisation , 2006, BMVC.

[9]  José Santos-Victor,et al.  Uncertainty analysis of 3D reconstruction from uncalibrated views , 2000, Image Vis. Comput..

[10]  Robert M. Haralick,et al.  Error propagation in machine vision , 2005, Machine Vision and Applications.

[11]  Marco Gaiani,et al.  Evaluating the performance of close-range 3D active vision systems for industrial design applications , 2004 .

[12]  Alan M. Lytle,et al.  Status of the NIST 3D imaging system performance evaluation facility , 2006, SPIE Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[13]  Richard Szeliski,et al.  A Taxonomy and Evaluation of Dense Two-Frame Stereo Correspondence Algorithms , 2001, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[14]  David Nitzan,et al.  Three-Dimensional Vision Structure for Robot Applications , 1988, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[15]  Aly A. Farag,et al.  On the Performance Evaluation of 3D Reconstruction Techniques from a Sequence of Images , 2005, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process..

[16]  Martial Hebert,et al.  3-D measurements from imaging laser radars: how good are they? , 1991, Proceedings IROS '91:IEEE/RSJ International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems '91.

[17]  Sabry El-Hakim.  A SEQUENTIAL APPROACH TO CAPTURE FINE GEOMETRIC DETAILS FROM IMAGES , 2006 .

[18]  Bettina Pflipsen.  Volume computation : a comparison of total station versus laser scanner and different software , 2007 .

[19]  Richard Szeliski,et al.  A Comparison and Evaluation of Multi-View Stereo Reconstruction Algorithms , 2006, 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'06).

[20]  Francois Blais,et al.  Traceable 3D imaging metrology , 2007, Electronic Imaging.

[21]  J. G. Lahoz,et al.  LASER SCANNING OR IMAGE-BASED MODELING? A COMPARATIVE THROUGH THE MODELIZATION OF SAN NICOLAS CHURCH , 2005 .

[22]  Warren H. Stevenson,et al.  Performance characteristics of range sensors utilizing optical triangulation , 1992, Proceedings of the IEEE 1992 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference@m_NAECON 1992.

[23]  Wolfgang Boehler,et al.  Investigating Laser Scanner Accuracy , 2005 .