完善资料让更多小伙伴认识你,还能领取20积分哦, 立即完善>
我试图通过测量已知距离的目标范围(Y = 100mm,200mm,300mm和390mm)来校准我的D435:
相机距离地平面390mm,水平(顶部目标是所有距离的像素行240),我的水平仪告诉我,我的地板是平的,目标是垂直的。 对于Z = 500mm,1m,1.5m,2m,2.5m和3m,我将Z距离(从相机深度图的原始范围,没有后处理)到4个目标中的每一个,平均超过100次测量。 这是结果的Z-Y图(2'200次测量): Y误差是由于垂直FOV中公布的±3%容差(我通过线性回归估计为56.1739°)。 真正的Z距离大致遵循二次方a * Z * Z + b * Z + c,a = -0.000039 b = 0.0375,c = -6.531(有趣的是这个线程中提到的7mm https://communities.intel。 com / thread / 128141我应用它来获得更准确的结果没有问题。 现在我的设置可能有些偏差,但Z误差在3米处始终为+ 300mm(+ 10%)。 误差增加为距离的平方,我完全理解,但假设误差是高斯的,它应平均超过100次测量并且不作为Z的函数系统地增加。 我是否犯了另一个明显的错误? -0.000039497035 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 I am trying to calibrate my D435 by measuring the range to targets (Y=100mm, 200mm, 300mm and 390mm) at a known distances: The camera is 390mm from the ground plane, horizontal (the top target is pixel row 240 at all distances), my spirit level tells me that my floor is flat and the targets are perpendicular. I take the Z distance (the raw range from the camera depthmap, no post-processing) to each of the 4 targets, averaged over 100 measurements, for Z=500mm, 1m, 1.5m, 2m, 2.5m and 3m. This is the Z-Y plot of the results (2'200 measurements): The Y error is due due to the published +-3% tolerance in the vertical FOV (which I estimate by linear regression to be 56.1739°). The true Z distance roughly follows the quadratic a*Z*Z+b*Z+c for a=-0.000039 b=0.0375 and c=-6.531 (which interestingly is the 7mm mentioned in this thread https://communities.intel.com/thread/128141 and I have no problem applying that to get a more accurate result. Now my setup may be a little off-kilter, but the Z error is consistently some +300mm (+10%) at 3 metres. That the error increases as a square of the distance, I fully understand, but assuming that the error is gaussian it should average out over 100 measurements and not systematically increase as a function of Z. Have I made another glaring blunder?
|
|
相关推荐
12个回答
|
|
你用的是什么分辨率?
由于分辨率降低,深度误差会增加,因此建议在D435上使用至少848x480的分辨率,在D415上使用1280x720(请参阅下面英特尔调谐指南中的图像 - 左键单击它以全尺寸查看) 。 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 What resolution are you using please? Depth error can increase as resolution reduces, so it is recommended that a resolution of at least 848x480 is used on D435 and 1280x720 on D415 (see the image below from Intel-s tuning guide - left-click on it to view in full size). |
|
|
|
嗨Marty,谢谢你的及时跟进。
我遵循Intel-RealSense-Depth-PostProcess.pdf和BKMs-For-Tuning-RealSense_D4xx_Cameras_WP_1.7.pdf中的建议。 默认视觉预设英特尔.Realsense.CustomRW.exe -g重置为黄金标准工厂848x480没有后期处理。 我已经尝试打开所有后处理器(除了抽取),没有任何变化。由于我的应用程序需要识别薄的障碍(花茎),我宁愿尽可能避免抽取。 我从BKM得知,3米处的误差约为35毫米,但Z系统地高估了,当我预计读数会在3米左右(上下)时徘徊。 这本身不是问题; 如果所有相机都像这样,那很容易纠正。 我担心的是我的设置在某些方面是不正确的。 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 Hi Marty, thanks for the prompt follow-up. I'm following the recommendations in Intel-RealSense-Depth-PostProcess.pdf and BKMs-For-Tuning-RealSense_D4xx_Cameras_WP_1.7.pdf.
I know from the BKM that the error at 3m is around 35mm but the Z is systematically over-estimated, when I would have expected the readings to wander around 3m (above and below). This isn't a problem per se; if all cameras behave like this it's easily corrected. My worry is that my setup is incorrect in some way. |
|
|
|
YY599566 发表于 2018-11-20 18:57 你确定你有100个测量值吗? 如果您进行了少于或超过100次测量并且将所有测量值相加,然后将总和除以固定值100以获得距离的平均值,则会使结果偏斜。 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 Are you sure you have 100 measurements? If you had less or more than 100 measurements and were adding up all the measurements and then dividing the total by a fixed value of 100 to get the average of the distance, that would skew the result. |
|
|
|
我重复了实验,记录了每个测量的时间戳,参见附件.XLS。
真实距离500,1,000,1,500等是从相机的玻璃上用钢尺测量的。 这是我的测试安全带的屏幕截图,同时测量为1'500mm: 仅供参考,在底部,您可以看到第424列的值在1'000mm; 地板平坦到1米,然后Y按预期几乎垂直增加,表明木制目标。 红十字表示障碍物的位置,I.E。 下一个像素高出30mm的第一个像素。 测量值是行240列424处的原始范围值,摄像机的中心(真实摄像机中心实际上是239.5,423.5但是半个像素是无关紧要的)。 出乎意料的大错误似乎呈指数级增长: 有趣的是,红色趋势线的截距非常接近零,这意味着Z焦点离玻璃不远。 所以,将这个问题与我的相关焦点问题合并,https://communities.intel.com/thread/128141 根据这些数据,Z焦点在哪里?为什么误差随距离增加? D435RangeProblem.xlsx 32.0 K. 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 I've repeated the experiment, logging every measurement, with its timestamp, see attached .XLS. The true distances 500, 1'000, 1'500 etc are measured from the camera's glass, with a steel ruler. Here's a screenshot of my test harness whilst measuring at 1'500mm: FYI, at the bottom, you can see the values for column 424 at 1'000mm; the floor is flat out to 1 metre and then the Y increases almost vertically as expected, indicating the wooden target. The red cross indicates where the obstacle is, I.E. the first pixel where the next pixel is >30mm higher. The measurements are the raw range values at row 240 column 424, the centre of the camera (the true camera centre is actually 239.5, 423.5 but half a pixel is insignificant). The unexpectedly large error seems to increase exponentially: Interestingly, the intercept of the red trend line is very close to zero, which implies that the Z focal point isn't far from the glass. So, merging this question with my related focal-point question, https://communities.intel.com/thread/128141
|
|
|
|
YY599566 发表于 2018-11-20 19:26 测量的距离越大,相机的RMS误差因子(或深度噪声)就越大。 由于D435硬件的特性,D435型号在距离上的RMS误差大于D415型号。 D435是橙色的上面一行,D415是下面的绿线。 英特尔的RMS误差图表与您自己的D435图表彼此相邻的曲率之间存在相似之处。 这两个图表没有相同的误差测量 - 英特尔图表以毫米为单位测量误差量,并以百分比衡量 - 但原理类似。 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 The greater the distance that is being measured, the greater the RMS Error factor (or depth noise) of the camera becomes. The RMS Error on the D435 model over distance is larger than the D415 model due to the characteristics of the D435's hardware. The D435 is the upper line in orange, and the D415 is the lower green line. There are similarities between Intel's RMS Error chart and your own D435 chart's curvature when they are placed beside each other. The two charts do not measure error the same - the Intel chart measures error amount in mm and you measure it in percent - but the principle is similar. |
|
|
|
nywerwer 发表于 2018-11-20 19:45 似乎我在准确性和精确度之间还不够清楚。 根据你的图表,我的相机非常精确(RMS与平均值的偏差),几乎和D415一样好: 这是问题的准确性,3米处的误差超过425mm: 当测量3米外的目标时,它报告的平均范围为3425.39,超过100个读数,RMS误差为~17mm。 从统计上看,人们可以预期测量结果为3000mm左右的高斯分布,而不是3425.29mm左右。 这些数字相当于±17毫米的RMS精度(令人惊叹)但是不准确度为425.39毫米(这是可怕的)。 这会让我的问题更清楚吗? 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 It seems like I haven't been clear enough between accuracy and precision. My camera is remarkably precise (RMS deviation from the mean), it's nearly as good as a D415, according to your graph: It's the accuracy which is the problem, the error is over 425mm at 3 metres: When measuring a target 3 metres away it reports an average range of 3425.39 over 100 readings with an RMS error of ~17mm. Statistically, one would expect the measurements to be a gaussian distribution around 3000mm and not around 3425.29mm. Those numbers equate to an RMS precision of ±17mm (which is stunning) but an inaccuracy of 425.39mm (which is ghastly). Does that make my issue clearer? |
|
|
|
YY599566 发表于 2018-11-20 20:02 使用400系列相机测试深度结果的权威指南是英特尔的“深度测试方法论”论文。 遵循本文中的测试程序是测试您获得的结果是否存在问题的最佳方法。 https://www.intel.com/content/dam/support/us/en/documents/emerging-technologies/intel-realsense-technology/RealSense_Dep... 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 The definitive guide to testing depth results with the 400 Series cameras is Intel's "Depth Testing Methodology" paper. Following the testing procedures in this paper is the best way to test whether there is a problem with the results that you are getting. https://www.intel.com/content/dam/support/us/en/documents/emerging-technologies/intel-realsense-technology/RealSense_Dep… |
|
|
|
我已阅读该论文,谢谢,并使用其方法来确定准确性,我在上面的帖子中有所描述。
我的Z-Accuracy(第1.3.1节,第7页)在3米处不正确425mm,而您的误差图表示Z-Accuracy误差应在35mm左右。 问题仍然存在:为什么我的相机的Z-Accuracy比预期的要差一个数量级? 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 I had read that paper, thanks, and used its methods to determine the accuracy, described in my posts above. My Z-Accuracy (section 1.3.1, page 7) is incorrect by 425mm at 3 metres, whilst your error graph says the Z-Accuracy error should be around 35mm. The issue remains: Why is my camera's Z-Accuracy an order of magnitude worse than expected? |
|
|
|
YY599566 发表于 2018-11-20 20:32 我看到你校准了你的相机,上次我们在前面的案例中讨论了不寻常的测量。 因此,可能不值得再次建议校准,除非相机在这种情况下采取了猛烈的敲击或掉落在地板上,这可能会导致校准失效。 D435几何:相机后面的焦点似乎是285mm 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 I see that you calibrated your camera that last time that we discussed unusual measurements in an earlier case. So it is probably not worth suggesting calibration again, unless the camera has taken a hard knock or a drop onto the floor since that case, which could throw off the calibration. D435 Geometry: Focal point seems to be 285mm BEHIND the camera |
|
|
|
YY599566 发表于 2018-11-20 20:32 嗨Maurice,重新校准你的相机导致更好的Z-Depth准确度?问候,Sahira 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 Hi Maurice, Has re calibrating your camera resulted in better Z-Depth accuracy? Regards, Sahira |
|
|
|
我重置到黄金工厂 Intel.Realsense.CustomRW.exe -g 我能否认为这会让我回到一个良好的起点? 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 I reset to the gold factory with Intel.Realsense.CustomRW.exe -g Can I assume that this should bring me back to a good starting point? |
|
|
|
现在您已完成重置,请再次尝试使用固件更新程序工具查看您是否可以成功完成此次固件更新。 以上来自于谷歌翻译 以下为原文 Now that you have done the reset, please try the firmware updater tool again to see if you can successfully complete the firmware update this time. |
|
|
|
只有小组成员才能发言,加入小组>>
255浏览 0评论
小黑屋| 手机版| Archiver| 电子发烧友 ( 湘ICP备2023018690号 )
GMT+8, 2024-4-24 15:34 , Processed in 0.608011 second(s), Total 83, Slave 68 queries .
Powered by 电子发烧友网
© 2015 bbs.elecfans.com
关注我们的微信
下载发烧友APP
电子发烧友观察
版权所有 © 湖南华秋数字科技有限公司
电子发烧友 (电路图) 湘公网安备 43011202000918 号 电信与信息服务业务经营许可证:合字B2-20210191 工商网监 湘ICP备2023018690号