You are on page 1of 15

Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

FIBER IMAGE ANALYSIS
PART III: AUTONOMOUS SEPARATION OF FIBER CROSS
SECTIONS

Bugao Xu, Sihong Wang and Jie Su
University of Texas at Austin

Abstract
One of the challenging tasks in fiber image analysis is to separate touching
cross sections of fibers before extracting fiber geometrical features. This paper
reports a skeleton-based segmentation algorithm that deals with this problem.
A skeleton of touching objects in an image is the medial axis of the objects, and
can be obtained with a sequential erosion procedure. A skeleton reflects the
overall longitudinal shape of an object. When the pixels on a skeleton are
weighted by the distances to the object edge, the skeleton also contains the
information about the transverse shape of the object. The pixels where the
distances are minimal indicate possible connecting points of two adjacent
objects. A line perpendicular to the skeleton can be drawn across the touching
objects at an identified connecting pixel to separate the objects. Inappropriate
separations caused by small concave noises on the edge can be avoided by
using pre-specified thresholds when checking the skeleton distance, and the
time-efficiency can be greatly improved by eliminating iterative thickening
operations.

Introduction

Object segmentation is an image-processing procedure to separate touching

objects in a binary image. Autonomous segmentation of touching objects is

crucial for the accurate measurement of object features, because touching

objects will be considered as one entity that does not represent the true features

of individual objects. Fiber cross-sections entail important geometrical

properties of fibers, and image analysis is one of the most effective ways for

automatic fiber cross-sectional measurements [Xu, et al. (1993)]. To cut a thin,

smooth layer of fibers transversely, a bundle of fibers is usually jammed and

embedded in the mounting medium, yielding severe touching in the image

captured with a CCD camera through a light microscope. Touching fibers must

be reasonably separated before taking measurements. Due to the complexity in

1
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

touching situations, a segmentation procedure often disconnects fibers at wrong

positions or is unable to detect connections. Operator’s assistance is often

needed to correct false separations or missed separations.

Object segmentation may be carried out in a gray-scale image by locating

the edges of objects. For touching objects that have little or no contrast

between their connecting portions, the final separation has to be fulfilled after

the image is converted into a binary one in which specific morphological

operations, such as the watershed segmentation [Russ, et al. (1988) and Xu, et

al. (1996)], can be implemented. The watershed algorithm comprises two

major steps: iterative erosion and conditional thickening. A gray-scale image,

called the distance map, is created to register the nearest distances of

sequentially eroded layers to the object periphery by assigning different levels

of brightness. The touching objects are eventually disconnected as the erosion

repeats. The nuclei of different objects, the last eroded pixels, are labeled with

the maximum brightness in the distance map. A nucleus in the distance map

represents the core of a separate object. The nuclei are then dilated layer by

layer with the preset rules to ignore any pixel that makes a connection with

another nucleus. A separation line between two touching objects can be formed

by this conditional thickening process. However, the watershed segmentation is

sensitive to small concave variations (dips) on the object edge because a dip

results in two nuclei. Therefore, it is applicable only to the separation of

smooth convex objects. In addition, the watershed algorithm is a slow

procedure due to the iterative thickening operations in which every pixel is

subject to the checking with 256 3x3 templates [Russ, et al. (1988)].

2
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

In the first two papers of this series, we introduced various image-

processing algorithms effective for fiber image enhancement and measurement

including both longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis [Xu, et al. (1996)]. In

this paper, we will report the development of a skeleton-based segmentation

algorithm and its application to the separating of touching fiber cross sections.

The new algorithm aims at reducing mis-separations and improving the time-

efficiency of the segmentation. One limitation of the algorithm is that it

requires fiber cross sections to have a regular and uniform shape. Circular,

elliptical and trilobal fibers will be used to show the results of this segmentation

algorithm.

Weighted Skeleton

The developed segmentation algorithm utilizes the skeletons of objects in an

image. The skeleton of an object is the medial axis of the object, and it

represents its longitudinal shape, but it does not contain any information about

the transverse shape (thickness) of the object. Both longitudinal and transverse

shapes are needed in finding a connection along the skeleton of two touching

objects. Since the transverse shape of an object varies along its skeleton, it is

advantageous to use a skeleton to carry both longitudinal and transverse shape

information of an object.

The skeleton of an object can be found by using iterative inward erosions

[Dougherty et al. (1988) and Serra (1988)]. Before the outer layer or edge of an

object is eroded, all these edge pixels are examined to see if this layer contains

a skeleton pixel. The neighboring pixels of an edge pixel in a 3x3 region,

3
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

including skeleton pixels found previously, are checked to find out whether the

neighboring pixels are a connected group. If the neighboring pixels are not

connected, this edge pixel is a skeleton pixel because removing it causes

disconnection of the object. Figure 1 shows some examples of connected and

disconnected neighboring pixels in a 3x3 region. One particular case is that

there is only one neighbor pixel in the template. In fact, this pixel is an end

point of the skeleton.

Connected Disconnected
Figure 1 3x3 Region ( : edge pixel, : neighboring pixel, : no pixel)

When the touching objects are eroded layer by layer, the number of the

removed layers, or the distance (or thickness) from the current layer to the edge,

can be recorded. When a skeleton pixel is found, its intensity can be used to

register the transverse distance at this point. In other words, the number stored

in a skeleton pixel is the shortest distance of the pixel to the edge. After the

skeletonization, an object is shrunk into a number of skeleton pixels weighted

by the distances (Figure 2). The weighted skeleton not only saves the storage

space (no extra space is needed to register the thickness), but also associates the

traverse shape of an object with its longitudinal shape, which is important in

determining whether the object contains sub-touching objects and where the

connecting point is on the skeleton.

4
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

original object after the first erosion weighted skeleton
Figure 2 Skeletonization

Detection of Connecting Pixel

After a weighted skeleton is obtained, the pixels on the skeleton where the

object can be split can be detected by using information from the distance

profile of the skeleton. A distance profile is a curve of the distance to edge d

against the skeleton length l (Figure 3). The following parameters are used to

describe a skeleton: the total length L, the maximum distance dmax, the

minimum distance dmin, and the dip depth D= dmax- dmin.

d

D dma
L
dmin

l
Figure 3 Distance Profile along the Skeleton

If connections occur only between two circular or elliptical objects, the

criteria for detecting connecting points on a skeleton are straightforward. The

first step is to set a minimal length-distance ratio, because when the skeleton

length L is significantly larger than the maximum distance dmax the skeleton

probably connects the two objects. If L/dmax is smaller than the selected

5
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

minimal ratio, the skeleton does not have to be checked for connections.

Considering the uniformity in object size and shape, the minimal L/dmax ratio

should be adjustable to accommodate for different samples. It was found out

that 1.5 is a reasonable selection for the minimal ratio of L/dmax for many

circular and elliptical objects.

The second step is to check the dip depth D. When D is larger than a pre-

set threshold, the object edge contains a dip that is deep enough to indicate a

division for two objects. A skeleton pixel with the minimum distance dmin is the

point where the skeleton should be split (Figure 4). Once the connecting point

is detected, a line perpendicular to the skeleton at this point can be drawn to cut

the object from edge to edge. The threshold can be adjusted based on the user’s

criterion to avoid a separation at a small dip.

20

breaking point

d 10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
l Skeletonized Separated

Figure 4 Distance Profile

When the dip is narrow and sharp the connecting point is relatively easy to

determine. When two objects are connected by a long bridge, the distance

profile will have a wide range of the minimum-distance pixels (Figure 5). The

minimum-distance pixels are counted, and the object is cut either through the

center of the minimum-distance range or at all the minimum-distance pixels.

6
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

20

breaking point
d 10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
l Skeletonized Separated

Figure 5 A Long Bridge Connection

The third step is to consider special cases in the distance profiles, such as a

one-side dip showed in Figure 6 and a thin tail in Figure 7. A one-side dip

often occurs in the objects intercepted by the image frames. Incomplete objects

should be separated from other objects and then deleted from the image. The

connecting point on the skeleton distance profile can be detected by finding the

pixel where a long flat portion starts. A thin tail is usually a residual of the

embedding medium or extraneous matter attached to the object. It can be found

by checking the turning point on the distance profile that leads to a long and

narrow portion.

20

breaking point

d 10

0
0 5 10 15 20
l Skeletonized Separated

Figure 6 One-Side-Dip Distance Profile

7
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

35

30

25

20
d
15 breaking point
10

5

0
0 10 20 30 40 Skeletonized Separated
l

Figure 7 A Thin Tail on A Distance Profile

If a skeleton connects more than two objects in a series, there will be

multiple waves on the distance profile (Figure 8). The computer calculates the

weighted skeleton and then sorts the distance dips along the skeleton. The dips

are respectively checked in the order of their depths and cut if satisfying the

criteria set for the length/distance ratio and the dip depth.

20

breaking point

d 10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
l Skeletonized Separated

Figure 8 Connection in Series

Breaking the Skeleton Net

When more than two objects connect together in different directions, their

skeletons will cross each other, forming a net. The typical skeleton nets may

include triangular nets, branch nets and polygonal nets (Figure 9). For convex

objects, the intersections of their skeletons appear approximately at the centers

of the objects. A skeleton net can be broken down at the intersection points to

8
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

produce a number of separated skeletons that have only two ends. Then the

same procedure described previously is applied to detect the connecting point

for each broken skeleton. The first example in Figure 9 shows three objects

touching each other and forming a triangular skeleton net with short branches.

This triangular net can be broken into three pieces at the intersection points in a

way that the lengths of the broken pieces are as uniform as possible. After the

net is broken down, a connecting point is identified on each piece of the

skeletons and therefore three objects are separated. If three objects overlap, the

skeletons become a branch net that has only one intersection point to be broken

in this case (see the second example). However, the three broken pieces are all

too short to satisfy the minimal L/dmax ratio. Three edge points that are closest

to the intersection point of the skeletons and spread roughly at a 120o interval

can be located, and therefore the object can be cut from these edge points to the

intersection point. Skeletons of touching objects may form a closed curve as

seen in the third example in the figure. The skeleton is opened up first at a

pixel where the skeleton has the largest distance to the edge. Along this open

skeleton, several touching objects exist, and the connecting points can be

sequentially detected. The last example in the figure contains four connecting

objects with small concave variations on the edges. After breaking up the

skeleton at the intersection point, each piece of the skeleton still has a sufficient

length and a connecting point can be found to separate the surrounding object

from the centered object.

9
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Original Skeletonized Separated
Figure 9 Separation of Skeleton Nets

If objects are not circular or elliptical but have regular and uniform shapes,

the shape information will be needed in determining where to break up the

skeleton net. In Figure 10, for example, breaking the skeleton net is guided by

the structure of the trilobal shape. The skeleton is split only at the intersections

of three branches that spread at approximately 120o. If an intersection point is

passed by only two skeleton lines, the shorter one should be cut off at this point

and then deleted. Short branches arise from edge noises as seen in the figure.

10
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

Original Skeletonized Separated
Figure 10 Separation of Trilobal Objects

Separation of Fiber Cross Sections

Figures 11, 12 and 13 show three examples of separations of fiber cross

sections accomplished by using this skeleton-based segmentation algorithm.

After fibers are separated, the fibers touching the image frames are removed in

the “separated” images. The first example, shown in Figure 11, contains

circular cross-sections. All the intersections in the skeleton net are at the

centers of the circular cross sections, even if one fiber is touching with several

other fibers. Branches are simply broken at intersection points, and one

connecting point is searched on each branch. Figure 12 shows the second

example that contains elliptical cross sections. One elliptical fiber may have

more than one intersection, depending upon the number of fibers it touches and

the touching positions. After the skeleton is broken down at all intersections,

branches shorter than the maximum distance dmax to the edge of corresponding

objects are deleted before finding a connecting point on each broken skeleton.

Figure 13 is the image of a trilobal nylon. A fiber center can be located at the

11
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

intersection point of three branches of the skeleton, and the disconnecting point

of two touching fibers can be found on the skeleton between the two fiber

centers by checking the depth D of a dip. Double bridges are due to the small

holes in fiber boundary regions, and can be broken by tracing a skeleton

between two connecting centers twice.

Original Skeletonized Separated
Figure 11 Separation of Circular Cross Sections

Original Skeletonized Separated
Figure 12 Separation of Elliptical Cross Sections

12
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

Original Skeletonized Separated
Figure 13 Separation of Trilobal Cross Sections

Representation of Fiber Cross Sections

If a fiber cross section is circular or elliptical, the weighted skeleton of the

fiber can be used to describe its size and shape. Also, the skeleton

appropriately represents the position and orientation of the cross section in the

image. After fibers are separated, the weighted skeletons of all fibers are re-

calculated and then fitted by straight lines to minimize the influence of noise.

Assume that the maximum distance of a weighted skeleton is dmax, the skeleton

length is L and the distances at the two skeleton ends are d1 and d2. The semi-

short axis a and the semi-long axis b of an ellipse that fits into the cross section

are (Figure 14):

a = d max

b = ( L + d1 + d 2 ) / 2

x
y’
x’ b
a
y0
skeleton
y
θ
x0
Figure 14 A Fitting Ellipse

If the origin of the x-y coordinate system is located at the center of the

image, a fiber cross section in the image will normally not be centered at the

origin and its axis will be tilted to the x-axis. Once the center coordinate and

the orientation of the skeleton are know, it takes two steps to calculate an

13
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

ellipse that fits into the cross section. First, calculate a standard ellipse in the

x’-y’ coordinate system as follows:

x '2 y '2
+ =1
a 2 b2

and then shift and rotate the (x’,y’) coordinates of the ellipse in the (x,y) system

using the following conversions:

x = ( x '− x0 ) cos θ − ( y '− y 0 ) sin θ
y = −( x '− x0 ) sin θ + ( y '− y0 ) cos θ

where (x0, y0) is the center of the skeleton and θ is the slope angle of the

skeleton. Figure 15 shows calculated ellipses of fiber cross sections in Figures

11 and 12. Ellipses provide not only the size and shape measurements but also

a way to reduce the storage space for fiber cross sections. A cross section can

Figure 15 Fitting Ellipses of Fiber Cross Sections
be saved and reconstructed using the parameters of its fitting ellipse instead of

all the coordinates of its boundary.

Summary

The skeleton-based segmentation provides a fast and precise procedure for

separating fiber cross sections in an image, because it eliminates the iterative

14
Journal of Textile Institute, 90, 288-297.

thickening process required in the watershed segmentation and it reduces the

mis-separations caused by small concave variations on object edges. It is

particularly effective when fibers to be analyzed have regular and uniform

shapes.

Acknowledgement

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science

Foundation of the United States under Grant DMI-9522943, and by the United

States Agriculture Department under Grant 95-37500-1950.

Reference
Dougherty, E.R., and Giardina, C.R., 1988. Mathematical Methods for Artificial
Intelligence and Autonomous Systems, Prentice-Hall, Inc., pp 351-358.

Russ, J.C. and Russ, J.C., 1988. Improved Implementation of A Convex
Segmentation Algorithm, ACTA Stereol, 7/1, 33-40.

Serra, J. P., 1988. Image Analysis and Mathematical Morphology, Academic
Press Limited, pp 257-295.

Xu, B., Pourdeyhimi, B. and Sobus, J., 1993. Fiber Cross-Sectional Shape
Analysis Using Imaging Techniques, Textile Research Journal, 63, 717-730.

Xu, B. and Ting, Y., 1996. Fiber Image Analysis, Part I: Fiber Image
Enhancement, J. of Textile Institute, 87, 274-283.

Xu, B. and Ting,Y., 1996. Fiber Image Analysis, Part II: Measurement of
General Geometric Properties of Fibers, J. of Textile Institute, 87, 284-295.

15