Inspection of Complex Surfaces by Means of Structured Light Patterns

Inspection of complex surfaces by means
of structured light patterns
Yannick Caulier
Department Process Integrated Inspection Systems
Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Circuits IIS,
D-91058 Erlangen, Germany
yannick.caulier@iis.fraunhofer.de
Abstract: This paper addresses the generalization of a surface inspection

methodology developed within an industrial context for the characterization
of specular cylindrical surfaces. The principle relies on the interpretation of
a stripe pattern, obtained after projecting a structured light onto the surface
to be inspected. The main objective of this paper is to apply this technique to
a broader range of surface geometries and types, i.e. to free-form rough and
free-form specular shapes. One major purpose of this paper is to propose
a general free-form stripe image interpretation approach on the basis of a
four step procedure: (i) comparison of different feature-based image content
description techniques, (ii) determination of optimal feature sub-groups,
(iii) fusion of the most appropriate ones, and (iv) selection of the optimal
features. The first part of this paper is dedicated to the general problem
statement with the definition of different image data sets that correspond
to various types of free-form rough and specular shapes recorded with
a structured illumination. The second part deals with the definition and
optimization of the most appropriate pattern recognition process. It is
shown that this approach leads to an increase in the classification rates of
more than 2 % between the initial fused set and the selected one. Then, it is
demonstrated that with approximately a fourth of the initial features, similar
high classification rates of free-form surfaces can be obtained.
© 2010 Optical Society of America
OCIS codes: (100.2650) Fringe analysis; (150.3040) Industrial inspection; (999.9999) Struc-
tured light; (999.9999) Fringe analysis.
References and links

1. Aceris-3D, “Fc substrate bump inspection system,” Clark Graham 300, Baie D’Urfe, Québec, Canada, (2005).
2. Comet-AG, “Feinfocus fox, high resolution 2d/3d,” Herrengasse 10, 31775 Flamatt, Switzerland, (2005).
3. Solvision, “Precis 3d, wafer bump inspection solution,” 50 De Lauzon, Suite 100, Boucherville, Québec, Canada,
(2007).
4. Y. Caulier, K. Spinnler, S. Bourennane, and T. Wittenberg, “New structured illumination technique for the in-
spection of high reflective surfaces,” EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing, 2008, 14 pages, (2007).
5. Y. Caulier, K. Spinnler, T. Wittenberg, and S. Bourennane, “Specific features for the analysis of fringe images,”
J. Opt. Eng. 47, (2008).
6. S. Kammel, “Deflektometrische Untersuchung spiegelnd reflektierender Freiformflächen,” Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Karlsruhe (TH), Germany, (2004).
7. S.J. Raudys and A.K. Jain, “Small sample size effects in statistical pattern recognition: Recommendations for
practitioners,” IEEE Trans. Pattern. Anal. Mach. Intell. 13, 252–264 (1991).
8. W.B. Li and T.J. Cui and X. Yin and Z.G. Qian and W. Hong, “Fast algorithms for large-scale periodic structures
using subentire domain basis functions”, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 53, 1154–1162 (2005).
#120418 - $15.00 USD Received 25 Nov 2009; revised 25 Jan 2010; accepted 26 Jan 2010; published 16 Mar 2010
(C) 2010 OSA 29 March 2010 / Vol. 18, No. 7 / OPTICS EXPRESS 6642
9. J.P. Besl and J. Ramesh, “Three-dimensional object recognition,” ACM Comput. Surv. 17, 75–145 (1985).
10. Gerd Häulser, “Verfahren und Vorrichtung zur Ermittlung der Form oder der Abbildungseigenschaften von
spiegelnden oder transparenter Objekten,” Patent, (1999).
11. A. Williams, “Streifenmuster im spiegelbild,” Inspect Magazine, GIT Verlag GmbH & Co. KG, Darmstadt
(2008).
12. P. Marino, M.A. Dominguez, and M. Alonso, “Machine-vision based detection for sheet metal industries,” in The
25th Annual Conf. of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (IECON’1999), 3, 1330–1335 (1999).
13. I. Reindl, and P. O’Leary., “Instrumentation and measurement method for the inspection of peeled steel rods,” in
IEEE Conf. on Instrumentation and Measurement (IMTC’2007), (2007).
14. F. Pernkopf., “3d surface inspection using coupled hmms,” in Proc. of the 17th Int. Conf. on Pattern Recognition
(ICPR’2004), (2004).
15. M. Petz, and R. Tutsch, “Optical 3d measurement of reflecting free form surfaces,” (2002).
16. G. Delcroix, R. Seulin, B. Laalle, P. Gorria, and F. Merienne., “Study of the imaging conditions and processing
for the aspect control of specular surfaces,” Int. Society for Electronic Imaging 10, 196–202 (2001).
17. R. Seulin, F. Merienne, and P. Gorria, “Machine vision system for specular surface inspection: use of simula-
tion process as a tool for design and optimization,” in 5th Int. Conf. on Quality Control by Artificial Vision
(QCAV’2001), (2001).
18. S.K. Nayar, A.C. Sanderson, L.E. Weiss, and D.A. Simon, “Specular surface inspection using structured highlight
and gaussian images,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom. 6, 208–218 (1990).
19. F. Puente Leon, and J. Beyerer, “Active vision and sensor fusion for inspection of metallic surfaces,” in Intel-
ligent Robots and Computer Vision XVI: Algorithms, Techniques, Active Vision, and Materials Handling, D.P.
Casasent (ed.), Proc. SPIE 3208, 394–405, (1997).
20. R. Woodham, Y. Iwahori, and R. Barman, “Photometric stereo: Lambertian reflectance and light sources with
unknown direction and strength,” University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1991, (1991).
21. J.S. Weska, “A survey of threshold selection techniques,” Comput. Graph. Image Process. 7, 259–265 (1978).
22. Huang Zhi, and Rolf B. Johansson, “Interpretation and classification of fringe patterns,” in 11th Int. Conf. on
Image, Speech and Signal Analysis (IAPR’1992) 3, 105–108 (1992).
23. L. Lepistö, J. Rauhamaa, I. Kunttu, and A. Visa, “Fourier-based object description in defect image retrieval,”
Machine Vision Applications 17, 211–218 (2006).
24. Cem Ünsalan, “Pattern recognition methods for texture analysis case study: Steel surface classification,” Ph.D.
dissertation, University of Hacettepe, Turkey, (1998).
25. D.M. Tsai, and T.Y. Huang, “Automated surface inspection for statistical textures,” Image Vision Comput. 21,
307–323 (2003).
26. H. S. Soon, K. Qian, and A. Asundi, Fringe 2005: Fault detection from temporal unusualness in fringe patterns.
Stuttgart, Germany, (2005).
27. T.M. Cover, and P.E. Hart, “Nearest neighbor pattern classification,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 13, 21–27 (1967).
28. R. Gutierrez-Osuna, “Pattern analysis for machine olfaction: A review,” IEEE Sens. J. 2, 189–202 (2002).
29. R. Kohavi, “A study of cross-validation and bootstrap for accuracy estimation and model selection,” in IJCAI,
1137–1145 (1995).
30. I. H. Witten, and E. Frank, Data mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques, 2nd ed., ser. The
Morgan Kaufmann series in data management systems. Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann/Elsevier, (2008).
1. Introduction
One major goal of computer vision processes is the characterization of industrial (quality con-
trol) or medical (diagnosis) objects using automatic surface inspection methods. In other words,
this research field tackles the processing of different surfaces to be characterized, by means of
different types of illuminations and/or recording techniques, for the visual enhancement of de-
fective surface parts. Common and main requirements of proposed vision methods are their
ability to characterize the surface to be inspected and their rapidity in terms of inspection time.
Thus, effective lightings, and algorithms, but also efficient handling and software frameworks
have to be involved, in order to address more and more challenging tasks, like the recognition
of different types of surface defects in real-time.
In general, the visual enhancement of a certain type of defective surfaces is directly depen-
dent on the lighting and the recording technology. Typically, depth defects related to geometric
deformations of the surface, or textural defects synonymous of different surface roughness have
to be visually enhanced by means of a structural and a diffuse lighting. Different automatic in-
spection systems have been recently proposed, as the measurement of electronic devices by the
companies Aceris [1] or Comet [2], or the wafer inspection by the company Solvision [3].
With the same objective of increasing different defect types with one system, an alterna-
tive surface inspection procedure has been proposed in [4]. It has been demonstrated that the
characterization of a projected structured pattern serves the direct surfaces interpretation. The
adapted and textural feature-based content description method of the corresponding stripe im-
ages rely on the characterization of the depicted bright/dark structures [5]. The advantages of
such a method are manifold, especially in terms of real-time processing, “simple” algorithmic
procedure, and process simplification, enhancement of different defect types in one camera
shot.
However, in order to simplify the algorithmic processing of the stripe images, periodical and
vertical bright/dark structures have been considered. Hence, the described inspection task in [5]
can be applied to the same approaches, i.e. the inspection of specular and cylindrical surfaces
by means of an adapted illumination technique, or to further inspection tasks necessitating the
interpretation of similar vertical bright/dark structures. Such results are therefore only applica-
ble in case of the characterization of vertical patterns. There are two possible steps toward the
generalization of the proposed inspection method to further non-cylindrical free-form surfaces.
The first possible alternative could be to adapt the structured illumination to the inspected
surface shape so that a periodical vertical pattern is depicted in the recording sensor. This ap-
proach is difficult or even impossible to implement in case of free-formed surfaces, in particular
if these are highly specular which are more difficult to record: the camera does not observe the
surface itself, but the reflection of the light on it. This problem is addressed in detail in [6].
The second possible solution could be to consider the characterization of non-vertical and non-
periodical bright/dark structures which are produced when a light pattern is projected onto
free-form surfaces. This approach is tackled in this paper.
Hence, one major purpose of this paper is to define and to optimize a free-form stripe pat-
tern recognition process, in terms of retrieving the most relevant set of features that accurately
classifies the reference image sets. According to Raudys and Jain [7], the main steps defining a
typical pattern recognition system are the data collection, the pattern class formations, the char-
acteristic feature selections, and the classification algorithm specifications. With the proposed
free-form surface inspection task a successive optimization of these stepwise procedures will
be addressed.
At first, various reference stripe image sets defining the free-form surfaces to be character-
ized will be introduced. Each considered set of patterns will be classified in two formations,
corresponding to two distortion types. Then, two different stripe feature-based image content
description methods will be considered: a method specially adapted for the characterization
of such stripe patterns, and a general textural Fourier-based approach. The optimization of the
feature selection will be addressed by means of specific feature fusion and one optimal fea-
ture selection method. Finally, the determination of the optimal pattern recognition process is
achieved by means of the classification rate.
Hence, on the basis on the previous experiments related to the characterization of cylindrical
specular surfaces, the purposes of this paper are:
• to generalize a surface inspection method based on stripe illumination, initially defined

for cylindrical specular objects, for the characterization of free-form specular and rough
surfaces,
• to define a new feature selection procedure based on a four steps approach, by (i) com-
paring different approaches, (ii) determining optimal sub-groups, (iii) combining those,
and (iv) selecting optimal feature sub-sets using known feature selection methods,
• and to apply this approach to the case of non-vertical and non-periodical stripe structure
characterization.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: The use of structured illumination for surface
quality control is introduced in Sec. 2. The two considered image content description methods,
namely the general Fourier and the adapted stripe approaches are presented in Sec. 4. Section 5
describes the involved proposed four steps procedure for the determination of optimal feature
subsets in case of free-form bright/dark structure characterization. Finally, a summary is given
in Sec. 6.
2. Structured Light for Surface Characterization

2.1. General approach
The general purpose of structured light is the shape recovery of objects or scenes to be in-
spected, see [9]. Concerning object reconstruction principles, the adequate method is related
to surface reflectivity, i.e. wether the surface is rough (diffuse reflection) or reflective (specular
reflection).
An approved method for specular surface inspection is the deflectometric-based approach
[10], which is used in many industrial inline inspection processes [11–13]. According to light
source intensity and surface diffuse reflection proportion, 3D triangulation-based methods were
defined for rough surface reconstruction [14]. However, all cited 3D-shape recovery methods
necessitate a preliminary recording set-up calibration [6, 15]. Complete 3D reconstruction can
be avoided by adapting the set-up elements (light, surface, sensor) to visually enhance defec-
tive geometrical surface parts [16–18]. Depending on the involved lighting, geometrical and/or
textural surface information can be directly recovered: light-sectioning [13], image fusion [19]
, or photometric stereo [20] for example.
However, all these methods do not address the inline inspection (complex calibration proce-
dure) for the simultaneous detection of geometrical and textural defects (non-adapted lighting)
in real-time environments (complex handling or recording processes).
2.2. Adapted Approach for Limited Surface Geometries

In addition to previously cited conventional approaches, and as stated in the introduction, a
new cylindrical surface interpretation principle, based on the projection of a structured light
pattern, has been defined [4]. This surface inspection task is a 2 12 D approach, no 3D depth in-
formation is required, as all the relevant information is contained in the image. Indeed, patterns
corresponding to a geometrical deformation of the surface can be discriminated by “only” in-
terpreting the stripe disturbance degree, their real depth is not retrieved. Figure 1 depicts the
pattern arrangement for the three considered classes ΩA , ΩR,3D , and ΩR,2D .
Such regular patterns depicted in Fig. 1 are only a part of the non-vertical and non-periodical
bright/dark stripe structures that would be depicted in case of free-form surfaces, i.e. when the
light cannot be adapted to the surface geometry.
2.3. Adapted Approach for Free-Form Surfaces

The aim of this paper is to apply the inspection principle to a broader range of surface types
and geometries. Figure 2 depicts two examples of free-form surfaces, a rough and a specular
one, being illuminated with a “non-adapted” structured light pattern.
Although the recording principle of rough and specular objects are different [6], the camera
focusses on the surface in case of the former and on the lighting screen for the latter, both
defective 3D depth defects depicted in Fig. 2(b) can be visually enhanced by means of the
depicted bright/dark structures in the images.
ΩA (Acceptable) ΩR,3D (Rejected) ΩR,2D (Rejected)
Geometry Grey level
changes changes
no / small medium / large medium / large
Fig. 1. Six examples taken from the reference initial set of images Φ00 made of 252 patterns.
This set has been used for the qualification of the industrial system for the cylindrical spec-
ular surfaces inspection. All the patterns have been classified into distinct classes: Accept-
able ΩA , rejected (non-acceptable) ΩR,3D , and ΩR,2D . All other 246 patterns depict similar
structures, i.e. correspond to similar geometry and/or grey level changes/perturbations.
Fig. 2. (a) Surface inspection principle: A camera C records the object surfaces to be
inspected S, illuminated by a lighting L. (b) Recordings of one free-form rough surface and
one free-form specular surface, both are illuminated by a structured light pattern.
The major difference with the considered images in [4], where regular periodical stripe struc-
tures are observed, is that, as both objects have a non-planar surface, and a conventional planar
structured lighting is used, the bright and dark stripes in the images of Fig. 2(b) are neither
vertical nor periodical. Rather, their geometries depend on the shape of the inspected objects.
As a consequence, with the purpose of generalizing the inspection principle to free-form
rough and specular surfaces, an extensive range of stripe structures have to be considered.
Such stripe geometries can be obtained by means of different surface shapes, structured light
positions or sensor types. Our task is not to enumerate all possible combinations of these com-
ponents and to compute the corresponding stripe geometries. This would hardly be possible.
Hence, it is preferable to focus our investigations on a restricted and predefined number of
non-vertical and non-periodical bright/dark stripe deformations.
Figure 3 depicts two examples of bright/dark geometries. Each geometry can be obtained
when a rough or a specular surface is inspected. The case of a linear moving object with speed
V recorded with a static line-scan camera is considered. One application example for a spherical
object is also shown.
For the purpose of clarity, only the case of surfaces recorded by means of line-scan sensors
Fig. 3. Left and middle: Two different examples of stripe deformations arising when (a1)
and (b1) free-formed rough or (a2) and (b2) free-formed specular objects are recorded.
These two examples show that depending on the surface geometry, similar stripe deforma-
tions can be observed for rough or specular objects. These two examples show the inspec-
tion of a surface S illuminated by a lighting L and recorded by a line-scan camera C during
its linear movement along V. Right: One possible bright/dark structure example in case of
a round (spherical) object. Upper image shows a sphere with 3 surface portions of different
sizes. Lower images show the corresponding image structures if a light pattern is projected.
has been considered in Fig. 3. However, this does not restrict the application of the proposed
surface inspection principle, as similar patterns can be obtained when matrix cameras are used.
On the basis of these two examples, it can be demonstrated that it is possible to obtain the
same bright/dark structures for specular and rough surfaces.
The underlying assumption is that the disturbances induced by the depicted bright/dark im-
age patterns are always distinguishable from the undisturbed pattern. Thus, as stripe structure
geometry and/or gray level is used for the defect localization and characterization, this means
that in the vicinity of a defective region, the “background” variations, i.e. of the surface geome-
try and/or the surface texture, are below a certain level. The illumination is considered as ideal
and projects a homogeneous bright/dark light structure on all the surfaces to be inspected.
Hence, the same reference stripe patterns can be used for the characterization of rough and
specular surfaces. The considered reference patterns used for retrieving the ideal free-form
stripe pattern recognition process, and the influence of such different bright/dark structures on
the classification rate, will be tackled in the next sections.
As it is not possible to consider all possible stripe disturbance induced by object geometry, for
the rest of the paper, the investigations will be “restricted” to the two types of stripe geometrical
deformations depicted in Fig. 3(a) and 3(b), the perspective and the geometrical ones. Indeed,
Fig. 3(c) shows an example of bright/dark stripe geometry obtained for a round object. It can
be seen how these disturbances encompass, i.e. can be described by the two considered.
Thus, perspective and geometrical disturbances will serve for the generalization of the pro-
posed inspection method based on the direct interpretation of “almost” free-form stripe pat-
terns, i.e. non-vertical and non-periodical ones, for the characterization of free-form surfaces.
The terminology “almost” is used, as it is assumed that the complex bright/dark structures to be
characterized, must permit the localization and description of all the defects situated completely
on the surface to be inspected.
The limiting factors for this statement is the bright/dark structures disturbance degree. Figure
3(c) clearly shows by means of a concrete example, that the recorded surface size must be
adapted to object geometry. Content description with the proposed method will be more robust
if it is applied to image (1) than to image (3). Thus, in case of spherical objects, it would be
preferable to increase the number of recordings in order to permit a robust inspection of the
whole object.
2.4. Defining the Reference Image Sets

The primary condition to evaluate the proposed inspection method for the characterization of
free-form surfaces, is to define a set of reference stripe image patterns, where number and
type of reference stripe patterns depend on the considered inspection task. For example, the
reference Brodatz database is used for the evaluation of various textural analysis approaches,
so that it encompasses different textural gray level pattern types, as regular and stochastic ones.
A good alternative therefore is to consider the reference stripe patterns that have been involved
for the qualification of the industrial system [4].
Each stripe pattern, which depicts one type of surface to be characterized, has been recorded
by an adapted stripe illumination, producing vertical and periodical stripe structures. The whole
set of reference patterns, named Φ00 , is made of 252 elements manually annotated and classi-
fied into three distinct classes ΩA , ΩR,3D , and ΩR,2D . These classes correspond to acceptable
surfaces, rejected 3D geometrical, and rejected 2D textural surfaces.
Further pattern structures have therefore to be defined. The easiest and simplest way consists
of using the patterns of Φ00 and to “transform” or “adapt” them, so that these can be used for
the characterization of free-form surfaces.
Thus, the stripe-illumination-based free-form surface inspection task will be addressed by
means of different image sets: The reference initial set Φ00 , previously introduced, and eight
further derived sets. The four sets Φ11 -Φ41 correspond to the warping of all patterns of Φ00 with
increasing projective transformations. The four sets Φ12 -Φ42 correspond to the warping of all
patterns of Φ00 with increasing cylindrical transformations. Both projective -1- and cylindrical
-2- transformations correspond to the types of stripe pattern geometries depicted in Figs. 3(a1),
3(a2) and 3(b1), 3(b2). All sets are made of 252 patterns.
Figure 4 shows 3 of the 9 considered stripe image data sets. Φ00 is the reference set where the
stripe structures are periodical and vertical, Φ41 is the set corresponding to the warped patterns
of set Φ00 with a maximum perspective distortion -1- and Φ42 is the set corresponding to the
warped patterns of set Φ42 with a maximum cylindrical distortion -2-.
Such nine sets of reference patterns can be used to address the proposed inspection task
within a general approach, if following conditions are fulfilled:
• all the defective surfaces to be characterized induce stripe geometrical and textural de-
formations that are always distinguishable from the non-defective surfaces,
• the position, the geometry and the period of the light structure allow the enhancement
of the whole surface, typical recording set-up problems such as occlusions are not ad-
dressed.
The first condition addresses the necessary minimal size and intensity of the defect to be
detected, whereas the second condition is related to the capacity of the illumination to enhance
all the surface to be inspected. In the following, the lighting is considered to be ideal, i.e. pro-
duces a homogeneous bright/dark structure, for all possible surface geometries and reflectance.
Fig. 4. Left: Reference patterns for the classification of free-form rough and specular sur-
faces. These image patterns correspond to three different surface shapes illuminated with
a regular periodical structured illumination: -0- for surfaces inducing no deformations, and
-1- and -2- for surfaces inducing perspective and cylindrical distortions. Φ00 corresponds
to patterns without distortion related to the shape of the object. These patterns have been
measured. Φ41 and Φ42 corresponds to patterns with a maximal perspective distortion of type
-1- and a maximal cylindrical distortion of type -2-. These patterns have been simulated by
transforming patterns Φ00 with perspective and cylindrical distortions. All the patterns have
a size of 64 × 64 pixel. Right: Bright/dark geometry and reflectance characteristics: Sur-
face: Period dL,P and coefficient ρS ; Defect: Size [dD,u × dD,v ] and coefficient ρD .
Defect minimal size and intensity is directly linked to the bright/dark structure deformations
and sensor sensitivity.
In order to be detected, each defect D must be at least as huge as the minimal depicted
bright/dark structure period and have a significant reflectance coefficient. Hence, if dD,u and
dD,v are the defect width and height, rC,u and rC,u the sensor resolution in u− and v− directions,
dL,P the projected light stripe period, ρD and ρS the reflectance coefficients of the defect D and
the neighboring surface S, following equation holds:
dD,u > dL,P ≥ 4.rC,u and dD,v ≥ 2.rC,u

(1)
ρD /ρS > α
−1 −1
Factor 2 comes from the Shannon theorem, linking the sampling frequency, rC,u and rC,u ,
−1
with the signal frequency in u−, (dP /2) , and in v−, dv . Factor α depends on the sensor
sensitivity, the lighting intensity, and surface reflectance.
Hence, for the further stripe image content description, Eq. (1) must be verified for all the
considered reference patterns. For the measured Φ00 patterns, used for the qualification of the in-
dustrial system [4], above conditions are fulfilled, as these correspond to the customer’s require-
ments. Concerning the other reference artificial patterns, Φ41 and Φ42 , obtained after simulating
a perspective and a cylindrical transformation, the constrain was that all depicted transformed
defects are still characterized by above Eq. (1).
Thus, the necessary assumption in case of real images obtained with a surface inspection sys-
tem based on the proposed researches, is that the requirements defined by Eq. (1), are fulfilled.
It is therefore assumed, that the considered lighting technique, described in [4], can always
be adapted and applied for the characterization of free-form surfaces by means of almost free-
form, i.e. non-vertical and non-periodical bright/dark patterns. Necessary set-up optimizations
for optimal components spatial arrangements are not tackled here.
3. Stripe Image Content Description

The next important step now consists of defining the most appropriate algorithmic procedures
that best characterize non-vertical and non-periodical stripe patterns, i.e. to search for adequate
feature sets and groups that best describe such bright/dark structures. As stated in the intro-
duction, a hierarchical method is proposed to optimize the retrieval of the most appropriate
non-vertical and non-periodical stripe pattern characterization features. The steps are: (i) eval-
uation of two different methodologies, (ii) individual evaluation of different feature groups,
and determination of the most appropriate feature subsets by means of appropriate feature (iii)
fusion and (iv) selection approaches.
Concerning the considered feature families/methodologies, two approaches will be evalu-
ated. An adapted one, previously defined in [5], and a general one, based on Fourier analysis,
see [21]. The reasons for involving these two procedures are described hereafter.
Concerning the adapted features, a set of 14 stripe features has been evaluated in a previous
paper. It has been shown that these characteristics outperform in terms of classification rates
five further different types of textural feature families. Moreover, 8 of these 14 features were
adapted from previously defined features describing fringe patterns [22], which are also used
for non-destructive inspection purposes, based on interferometric approaches. A particularity
of such fringe patterns is that they have a more complex geometrical structure, see [5]. This
is also the case of the depicted bright/dark stripes that will be considered in case of the free-
form surface inspection, see Fig. 4. In addition, the classification results in [5] showed that the
adapted stripe characterization approach mostly outperforms the general textural methods. It is
therefore strongly assumed that such adapted features are particularly suited for the free-form
surface inspection task considered in this paper.
Fourier-based approaches are very attractive methods in case of real-time applications, where
low computation costs are demanded. [23] proposes a Fourier-based approach for the descrip-
tion of industrial surface defects, and demonstrates that such a technique is accurate and com-
putationally light. Ünsalan [24] uses Fourier-based features for the description of steel surfaces
and the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) to increase the speed of the transformation. [8] et al.
propose two efficient algorithms to analyze large scale periodic structures by means of FFT-
based methods. Then, the Fourier transform has the property of periodic features description,
which makes such an approach very attractive in terms of stripe pattern characterization de-
picting periodic or almost periodic structures. Several authors use this property to describe
images depicting periodic structures. Within the field of surface inspection, [25] uses the in-
verse Fourier transform to remove the repetitive periodic patterns of statistical features. Qian et
al. [26] propose a fault detection method by means of interferometric fringe patterns based on
a windowed Fourier transform approach. As such fringes can be considered as non-vertical and
non-periodical stripe structures, it is strongly believed that such an approach will also be suited
for this paper’s purposes.
All these facts concerning the adapted and the Fourier-based transformation, are strong ar-
guments in favor of using adapted stripe features and textural Fourier-based features for the
characterization of non-vertical and non-periodical stripe images.
3.1. Textural Analysis with Fourier Features

The characterization of the stripe structures by means of the textural Fourier analysis will be
based on the approach of Weska [21]. The author uses the power spectrum P as an image
signature for the discrimination of different types of image patterns F. P , defined as the square
of the spectral’s magnitude, is a matrix of same size as the matrix F. The major goal of [21]
was to use the particularity of the spectral domain by selecting different frequency subbands,
which is equivalent to retaining certain levels of details and directions in the patterns to be
analyzed. Weska considers the radial and the angular spectral distributions, saying that the
former is sensitive to texture coarseness and the latter to texture directionality. He also uses the
distributions corresponding to the principal spectral image axes, the u- and v-directions.
The features are directly computed from amounts of values in the Fourier spectrum for differ-
ent spectral regions. [21] defines various radial, directional, horizontal and vertical frequency
regions. The assumption is here that the use of different spectral regions characterizing different
image frequencies, would be more appropriate for the description of almost free-form patterns,
corresponding to spatial frequency variations of bright/dark structures.
3.2. Defining Fourier Feature Groups

The assumption in using different parts of the power spectrum for Fourier-based image content
description is that some regions may be more discriminative or representative of certain classes
of stripe images.
A major part of the considered bright/dark stripes are characterized by a vertical pattern
whose disturbances are synonymous of defective surfaces. Hence, a first hypothesis could be
that filtering out the power spectrum regions which correspond to the vertical stripe pattern,
could lead to an increase of the signal (defective surface) to noise (vertical patterns) ratio, and
therefore lead to higher classification rates. Such a filtering could be obtained by considering
for example only the horizontal or the directional frequency.
The considered disturbed stripe patterns are also characterized by local variations of the
pattern, corresponding to high frequency changes (geometric disturbances) or low frequency
changes (grey-level disturbances), see Fig. 1. Thus, the signal (disturbance) to noise (vertical
pattern) ratio could be increased using different pass-band radial frequency filters.
Next Fig. 5 illustrates the relation of the frequency distribution and the image contents with
three examples, and shows the mathematical expression of the considered spectral regions.
The images show that disturbances in the spatial domain have typical signatures in the fre-
quencies representation. The above figure illustrates three different cases.
As depicted in the left image in Fig. 5, a regular non-disturbed pattern is represented with
two peaks related to the pattern frequency. If the pattern intensity changes along a certain direc-
tion in the spatial domain, its transformed counterpart in the Fourier domain is orthogonal, as
depicted in the middle image in Fig. 5. Then, if pattern geometrical disturbance is characterized
by a local variation of pattern frequency, a broader energy distribution is observed at two peak
positions, see right image in Fig. 5 .
For these three examples, it is highly probable that the directional or the horizontal compo-
nents in the frequency domain may be strongly discriminative in terms of stripe pattern char-
acterization. Hence, with a generalization purpose, this approach can be applied for all the
considered stripe disturbances. In case of the stripe pattern analysis, feature vectors integrating
different subbands of the frequency domain were taken into consideration. The following five
different feature vectors of lengths Nc will be used:
cFr,θ ,v,u = {cFr ; cFθ ; cFv ; cFu }: Nc = 33

cFr : Nc = 8
cFθ : Nc = 10 (2)
cFv : Nc = 5
cFu : Nc = 10
The length of each feature vector depends on the considered frequency regions. The vector
cF,r,θ ,v,u , which considers all possible regions has a maximal length of Nc = 33.
Pr1 ,r2 = ∑ | fˆ(κ , λ )|2 Pv1 ,v2 = ∑ | fˆ(κ , λ )|2
r12 ≤κ 2 +λ 2 <r22 0<κ <Mu ;v1 <λ <v2
0<κ < M2u ;0<λ < M2v
Pθ 1 θ 2 = ∑ | fˆ(κ , λ )|2 Pu1 ,u2 = ∑ | fˆ(κ , λ )|2

θ1 ≤tan−1 (λ /κ )<θ1 u1 <λ <u2 ;0<κ <Mv
0<κ < M2u ;0<λ < M2v
Fig. 5. Image characterization from amounts of values in the Fourier spectrum, according
to [21]. Four different spectral regions are considered: The radial Pr1 ,r2 , directional Pθ 1 θ 2 ,
horizontal Pv1 ,v2 and vertical Pu1 ,u2 spectral ones.
3.3. Use of Adapted Stripe Features

In [5], 14 features for the characterization of the bright and dark stripes have been introduced.
Six features were specially developed for the purpose of vertical bright and dark structure char-
acterization, eight features were adapted from fringe features originally defined by Zhi [22] for
the purpose of free-form bright fringes description. In order to propose a homogeneous adapted
approach, we also applied these eight features to the dark stripes of the considered non-vertical
and non-periodical patterns.
The notations and names of the 20 considered stripe features are listed in the table below:
Table 1. Notation and names of the 20 considered adapted features of the stripe feature
vector cS . These features characterize the bright and the dark stripe depicted in a pattern.
cS (00), cS (01) Bright and dark stripes horizontal deviations
cS (02), cS (03) Bright and dark horizontal minimum distances
cS (04), cS (05) Bright and dark horizontal maximum distances
cS (06), cS (07) Bright and dark intensities
cS (08), cS (09) Bright and dark tangents
cS (10), cS (11) Bright and dark curvatures
cS (12), cS (13) Bright and dark lengths
cS (14), cS (15) Bright and dark shapes
cS (16), cS (17) Bright and dark straightness
cS (18), cS (19) Bright and dark number of elements
Hence, a total of 20 adapted features are computed for each stripe pattern F. The algorithmic
procedure to retrieve these feature images is described in [5]. The mathematical expression of
related feature vectors of lengths Nc are described in [5].
3.4. Defining Adapted Feature Groups

Within the context of defining optimal adapted feature groups, the above described features can
be classified in two main groups: The 6 first features specially developed for vertical stripe de-
scription, and the remaining 14 features defined for fringe structure description. Figure 6 illus-
trates these two groups, depicting three “projected” stripe patterns and three “interferometric”
fringe patterns examples, and showing the computation of “adapted stripe” feature deviation
and “adapted fringe” feature shape.
N
cm = 1
Nw ∑n=1
w
Om m ∈ {02; 08}
→ ((B) sic ); dist2−

O02 = min[dist1− → ((B) sic )]
H H
O08 = tan((B) sic )
(B) si , central bright pixel element ; Nw , number of (B) sic in F

c
Fig. 6. Typical “projected” and “interferometric” bright/dark structures. The three upper
images correspond to ideal “projected” structures, the three lower ones to more complex
“interferometric” fringe structures. The first “vertical stripes” feature group was defined for
the characterization of the former, whereas the second “free-form” feature group was de-
veloped for description of the latter. For illustration purpose, the equations of one adapted
“vertical stripes” “minimum distance” feature c02 and one adapted “free-form stripe” “tan-
gent” feature c08 are listed. The results of corresponding operators are written for one cen-
tral blue marked pixel (B) sic . Both are the average results of operators O02 and O08 applied
to all bright stripes central pixel elements (B) sic of the considered image F.
The major difference between the two feature groups is that for the former group the as-
sumption is made that the stripe structures are vertical, i.e. that the result depends on the main
direction of the structures. For the latter group, the feature value is independent of the stripe
direction, with the assumption that it is more adapted for the characterization of non-vertical
and non-periodical structures.
The following three different feature vectors of lengths Nc will be used:
cS = {cS06 ; cS14 } Nc = 20
cS06 = cS ([00 : 05]): Nc = 06 (3)
cS14 = cS ([06 : 19]): Nc = 14
The considered feature vector cS encompasses two different feature groups or types, cS06 , cS14 ,
each defined for similar bright/dark image structure characterization tasks. Former group con-
sists of vertical bright/dark structures, whereas the latter of more free-form bright/dark struc-
tures. It therefore seems appropriate, to fuse these two feature groups into one describing vec-
tor, as the considered inspection task consists of describing and characterizing disturbed “pro-
jected” stripe patterns, whose disturbance degrees are in between the disturbance degrees of the
considered bright/dark image groups, see Fig. 4. Thus, we are convinced that such a fused fea-
ture vector should lead to optimal image classification rates, as non-vertical and non-periodical
bright/dark structures must be interpreted.
4. Feature Selection and Pattern Classification

This section addresses the involved feature subset selection (FSS) and classification procedures
applied for the general inspection problem stated in this paper, i.e. the inspection of free-form
objects using structured illumination. As stated in Sec. 2.4 it is assumed that for all considered
free-form surfaces, it is possible to define an adapted lighting which produces “almost” free-
form bright/dark structures, so that the requirements defined by Eq. (1), are fulfilled.
Testing the influence of various feature selection and pattern classification approaches would
be beyond the scope of this paper. Previous investigations will therefore be considered.
Concerning the feature-based interpretation of stripe structures, three different rules were
considered in [5]: the Naive Bayes, the One-Nearest-Neighbor and the Three-Nearest-Neighbor.
Their influence on the classification of vertical periodical bright/dark structures was evaluated.
The comparison of these three classificators showed that, in general better classification rates
were obtained using the One-Nearest-Neighbor approach. This is a strong argument in terms of
using “only” this approach for our purposes. Furthermore, Cover [27] and Guttierez [28] show
that the k-NN method approaches the results of the Naive Bayes classifier in case of a large data
set as we have here.
With the methodology, a 10-fold stratified validation, which is certainly the mostly used ap-
proach within the pattern classification community, was addressed in [5]. Various n-fold cross-
validation approaches for different values of n have been evaluated and compared with the
bootstrap technique by Kohavi [29]. He shows that a stratified 10-fold cross-validation is the
more appropriate model in terms of classification accuracy. Moreover, Witten [30], referred that
a ten times sampling is the right number of folds to get the best estimation error.
Thus, as our aim is to evaluate the two involved feature families, Fourier and adapted stripe
features, and not a certain stripe pattern classification, in the following considered feature se-
lection will be a 1-NN-wrapper-based procedure, whereas a 1-NN classification rule will be
combined with a stratified 10-fold cross-validation for supervised pattern classification.
5. Proposed Four Steps Procedure: Results for Free-Form Surfaces

This section addresses the involved proposed four steps procedure for the determination of
optimal feature subsets using feature evaluation, grouping, fusing, and selection in case of the
general inspection problem stated in this paper, i.e. the inspection of free-form objects using
structured illumination.
As stated before this evaluation is based on two feature families: 33 Fourier and 20 adapted
stripe features. It has been demonstrated that these two sets of 33 and 20 features can be divided
into four and two groups, see Eqs. (2) and (6). The evaluation criteria for each feature group
is the rate R of correctly classified non-vertical and non-periodical bright/dark stripe patterns.
This rate is expressed in percent.
The optimal feature groups are determined in the first subsection by means of the reference
image data set Φ00 . Then, the second section addresses evaluation of these considered fea-
ture groups in case of problem generalization, i.e. free-form surface quality control. The third
section addresses the evaluation of FSS methods by considering the further eight reference
databases defined for problem generalization to free-form surfaces. Finally, the last and fourth
section is dedicated to the evaluation, in terms of types and number, of the previously selected
features.
Evaluation criterion for all these investigations is the classification rate R , expressed in per-
cent, which corresponds to the amount of correctly classified patterns for the 3 considered
classes, ΩA , ΩR,3D , and ΩR,2D . These 3 distinct pattern classes and the annotated data set
Φ00 were considered, as these correspond to the qualification requirements of the reference
industrial system [4].
Thus, changing this predefined pattern distinction and/or the reference data set, would have
a direct impact on the results. In case of other applications, the number n of distinct pattern
classes, but also the number ni , i = {0, .., n − 1} of reference pattern for each considered class
i, must be determined in accordance. Typical industrial applications for example consider 2-
classes problems n = 2 with the same proportion of reference pattern ni ∼ = n j ∀i = j, {i, j} =
{0, .., n − 1}.
However, in case of the considered inspection task, other different approaches would have
been possible, such as the consideration of two consecutive 2-classes procedures. It would have
been possible to first classify all good and all bad patterns, ΩA , {ΩR,3D ; ΩR,2D }, and then to
classify all 3D- and 2D-bad ones, ΩR,3D , ΩR,2D .
5.1. Fourier and Adapted Feature Groups Evaluation

Concerning the determination of optimal feature groups, Table 2 shows the classification results
of image set Φ00 by means of vector cS made of the 20 adapted stripe features, vector cFr,θ ,v,u
made of the 33 Fourier features, and the four and two feature group vectors described in Eqs.
(2) and (6). Classification rates CP and corresponding root mean square errors Erms are listed.
Table 2. Rates R of correctly classified patterns for image set Φ00 with Fourier’s textural
features and stripe adapted features by means of a 1-NN classifier.
Feature vector CP Erms
cFr,θ ,v,u 87.7 0.28
cFr 79.3 0.36
cFθ 92.4 0.22
cFv 86.5 0.30
cFu 86.5 0.30
cS 89.3 0.26
cS06 72.6 0.42
cS14 86.5 0.30
In Sec. 3.1 the assumption was made that some frequency subbands could be more represen-
tative of the stripe patterns to be characterized. This is clearly observable in case of the results
Rates for increasing distortions of types -1- and -2- for feature vectors cFr,θ ,v,u cFθ and cS .
Fig. 7. The detection rates were computed for different image sets and correspond to in-
creasing distortions of type -1- and of type -2-. Left to right values: detection rates for
image set Φ00 to image sets Φ41 and Φ42 .
listed in Table 2. A high discrepancy in the classification results is observable concerning the
Fourier-based approach. Best classification rates of 92.4% are obtained when only the 10 direc-
tional Fourier features cFθ are used. With the adapted features, the best rate could be obtained
when all the 20 features are used. It is however noticeable that the 14 “free-form” features
outperform the 6 “adapted” ones.
These first results show that from the 33 Fourier features and the 20 stripe features, the feature
group made of the 10 directional Fourier features is particulary relevant in terms of stripe pattern
characterization. Thus, further investigations are dedicated to the characterization of free-form
surfaces using the 33 Fourier, the 10 directional Fourier, and the 20 adapted features sets and
groups.
5.2. Feature Groups Evaluation for Free-Form Surfaces

The previously determined optimal feature groups for the reference patterns are now evaluated
on all considered pattern sets, in order to tackle the inspection of free-form objects. These nine
pattern sets were introduced in Sec. 2.4.
Figure 7 shows the classification rates for image distortions of type -1- and of type -2- by
means of the three feature vectors cFr,θ ,v,u , cFθ , cS .
For both types of distortions the 20 adapted stripe features lead to higher classification rates
than when the complete 33 Fourier features are considered. The directional Fourier features
are more characteristic of certain types of distortions. In case of the results depicted in Fig. 7,
stripe distortions of type -2- (cylindrical) are better characterized using the directional Fourier
features.
Rates for increasing distortions of type -1- and -2- for feature vectors cFr,θ ,v,u S , cFθ S , and
1−NN cF S .
θ
Fig. 8. The detection rates were computed for different image sets and correspond to in-
creasing distortions of type -1- and of type -2-. Left to right values: detection rates for
image set Φ00 to image sets Φ41 and Φ42 .
The next step now consists of attempting to improve these results in terms of increasing the
classification rates and decreasing the number of necessary features, by fusing and selecting the
involved features.
5.3. Feature Groups Fusion and Selection for Free-Form Surfaces

This section investigates to what extend an appropriate fusion and selection of the Fourier and
the adapted stripe feature sets can lead to a better quality control of the free-form surfaces. For
this purpose, three different feature vectors will be considered. cFr,θ ,v,u S is a vector combining the
33 Fourier and the 20 adapted features, and cFθ S is a vector made of the 10 directional Fourier
and the 20 adapted features. Vector 1−NN cFθ S is made of the selected features of vector cFθ S using
a 1-NN-wrapper-based feature subset selection (FSS) method.
Figure 8 shows the classification rates for image distortions of type -1- and of type -2- by
means of these three feature vectors.
On the whole, the reported classification rates in Fig. 8 are higher than those depicted in
Fig. 7. Indeed, in the first case, more features or relevant selected features by means of a wrapper
approach are considered.
These results show that fusing optimal feature groups leads to higher classification rates,
which are in case of the considered problem, of approximately 2 % (difference between the
maximal detection rates of both considered graphics).
Concerning the use of a feature selection method, both graphics of Fig. 8 show that for the
considered sets of patterns, the considered FSS method does not improve the classification
rates, but leads to similar classification results when the combined 10 directional Fourier and
20 adapted stripes are used.
Thus, the last investigation is dedicated to a more detailed depiction of the considered FSS
method, in order to determine the relevant features.
5.4. Evaluation of Selected Features

The influence of increasing distortions of type -1- and of type -2- in the number and types of
selected features using a wrapper 1-NN approach with a 10-Fold cross-validation are depicted
in Tables 3 and 4.
Table 3. Selected features when a wrapper 1-NN approach is used, for increasing distortion
of type -1-. The maximum number of times a feature can be selected is 10. The variables
Nc,sub on the left give the total number of selected features after the 10 runs. The 10 time,
9 time and 8 time selected features are marked with ∗∗∗ , ∗∗ and ∗ . Results for all relevant
features are marked in bold.
Feature set Φ00 Φ41 Φ42 Φ43 Φ44
Nc,sub 90 90 95 107 108
cS (00) 0 0 0 0 0
cS (01) 1 1 0 0 3
cS (02) 0 0 0 0 0
cS (03) 0 0 1 2 3
cS (04) 3 3 2 8∗ 2
cS (05) 4 4 1 3 3
cS (06) 2 2 4 1 0
cS (07) 9∗∗ 9∗∗ 3 8∗ 3
cS (08) 6 6 6 3 3
cS (09) 7 7 4 6 4
cS (10) 7 7 6 7 5
cS (11) 0 0 3 5 4
cS (12) 6 6 3 3 5
cS (13) 2 2 6 8∗ 10∗∗∗
cS (14) 0 0 1 0 7
cS (15) 0 0 3 2 7
cS (16) 9∗∗ 9∗∗ 6 6 9∗∗
cS (17) 2 2 5 10∗∗∗ 6
cS (18) 1 1 5 4 6
cS (19) 6 6 8∗ 10∗∗∗ 9∗∗
cFθ (0) 0 0 2 1 0
cFθ (1) 0 0 2 1 1
cFθ (2) 5 5 3 4 1
cFθ (3) 4 4 5 2 3
cFθ (4) 4 4 4 1 3
cFθ (5) 10∗∗∗ 10∗∗∗ 10∗∗∗ 10∗∗∗ 10∗∗∗
cFθ (6) 0 0 0 1 0
cFθ (7) 1 1 2 1 0
cFθ (8) 1 1 0 0 1
cFθ (9) 0 0 0 0 0
Table 4. Selected features when a wrapper 1-NN approach is used, for increasing distortion
of type -2-. The maximum number of times a feature can be selected is 10. The variables
Nc,sub on the left give the total number of selected features after the 10 runs. The 10 time,
9 time and 8 time selected features are marked with ∗∗∗ , ∗∗ and ∗ . Results for all relevant
features are marked in bold.
Feature set Φ00 Φ41 Φ42 Φ43 Φ44
Nc,sub 90 99 107 116 107
cS (00) 0 0 1 0 0
cS (01) 1 1 0 1 0
cS (02) 0 0 2 0 0
cS (03) 0 0 3 2 3
cS (04) 3 3 4 5 3
cS (05) 4 2 1 3 5
cS (06) 2 4 1 5 8∗
cS (07) 9∗∗ 8∗ 7 6 5
cS (08) 6 6 6 6 6
cS (09) 7 5 4 4 2
cS (10) 7 4 6 6 1
cS (11) 0 0 1 1 0
cS (12) 6 6 2 6 1
cS (13) 2 5 5 8∗ 4
cS (14) 0 4 4 4 3
cS (15) 0 5 0 2 6
cS (16) 9∗∗ 4 6 3 4
cS (17) 2 1 4 5 8∗
cS (18) 1 3 0 4 6
cS (19) 6 7 7 7 4
cFθ (0) 0 0 0 0 1
cFθ (1) 0 1 3 3 2
cFθ (2) 5 7 4 5 5
cFθ (3) 4 2 5 2 3
cFθ (4) 4 5 9∗∗ 6 6
cFθ (5) 10∗∗∗ 10∗∗∗ 10∗∗∗ 10∗∗∗ 10∗∗∗
cFθ (6) 0 2 4 0 0
cFθ (7) 1 2 2 5 4
cFθ (8) 1 1 5 3 1
cFθ (9) 0 1 1 4 6
An important parameter is the variable Nc,sub , which is the total number of selected features
after the 10 runs of the 10-Fold cross-validation. As 10 is the maximum number of times a
feature can be selected, Nc,sub /10 is the average measure of feature relevance. For both tables,
increasing the distortion of the bright/dark structures, leads to an increase of the necessary
relevant features.
A general remark for both tables concerns the types and the number of selected features,
which are approximately the same. It appears that approximately seven features, i.e. only a
fourth of the initial 30 ones, are relevant. Most of the selected features are adapted ones, whereas
mainly the directional 90o Fourier features have a strong relevance.
It is also noticeable, that feature relevance is related to the bright/dark structure distortion
degree. As an example, in case of both tables, the importance of feature cS13 is proportional to
the distortion degree, whereas the contrary is observed for feature cS07 .
6. Summary
In this paper, a general structured-illumination-based method for the characterization and inter-
pretation of free-form and rough surfaces is proposed. Such a procedure was initially defined
for the inspection of cylindrical specular industrial objects.
Starting from the reference image set defined for the qualification of the industrial process,
eight additional image sets, corresponding to various types of free-form rough and specular
shapes recorded with a structured illumination could be defined. All these image sets are used
to search for the most appropriate pattern recognition process, in terms of retrieving the most
adequate subset of features.
In order to address such an inspection task within a general approach, two different image
content description methods, a Fourier-based approach and an adapted stripe-based technique,
were considered. These methods necessitate the computation of a huge amount of 33 and 20
features, which signifies high computational costs. Hence, in order to propose a competitive
solution adapted to real-time processes, extensive investigations were done to retrieve only the
most relevant features that accurately classify the reference image sets.
A four steps feature evaluation, grouping, fusion, and selection procedure was taken into
consideration. At first, each feature group is evaluated and compared individually. Then, the
influence of various feature combination and selection techniques on the detection accuracy
was evaluated. Finally, it has been demonstrated that feature grouping leads to an increase
of at least 2 % of the classification rates, and that on average approximately a fourth of the
initial features are relevant for free-form surfaces characterization by means of a structured
illumination.
Acknowledgment
The author would like to thank the Bavarian Research Foundation BFS (Bayerische
Forschungsstiftung) for its financial support.

Inspection of Complex Surfaces by Means of Structured Light Patterns

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inspection of Complex Surfaces by Means of Structured Light Patterns

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inspection of complex surfaces by means

of structured light patterns

Abstract: This paper addresses the generalization of a surface inspection

References and links

• to generalize a surface inspection method based on stripe illumination, initially defined

2. Structured Light for Surface Characterization

2.2. Adapted Approach for Limited Surface Geometries

2.3. Adapted Approach for Free-Form Surfaces

no / small medium / large medium / large

2.4. Defining the Reference Image Sets

dD,u > dL,P ≥ 4.rC,u and dD,v ≥ 2.rC,u

3. Stripe Image Content Description

3.1. Textural Analysis with Fourier Features

3.2. Defining Fourier Feature Groups

cFr,θ ,v,u = {cFr ; cFθ ; cFv ; cFu }: Nc = 33

Pθ 1 θ 2 = ∑ | fˆ(κ , λ )|2 Pu1 ,u2 = ∑ | fˆ(κ , λ )|2

3.3. Use of Adapted Stripe Features

3.4. Defining Adapted Feature Groups

→ ((B) sic ); dist2−

(B) si , central bright pixel element ; Nw , number of (B) sic in F

4. Feature Selection and Pattern Classification

5. Proposed Four Steps Procedure: Results for Free-Form Surfaces

5.1. Fourier and Adapted Feature Groups Evaluation

Feature vector CP Erms

cFr,θ ,v,u 87.7 0.28

cFr 79.3 0.36

cFθ 92.4 0.22

cFv 86.5 0.30

cFu 86.5 0.30

cS06 72.6 0.42

cS14 86.5 0.30

5.2. Feature Groups Evaluation for Free-Form Surfaces

5.3. Feature Groups Fusion and Selection for Free-Form Surfaces

5.4. Evaluation of Selected Features

You might also like