Meas. Sci. Technol. 8 (1997) 1393–1398.

Printed in the UK PII: S0957-0233(97)84340-8

Dynamic ranges of velocity and

spatial resolution of particle image
velocimetry
R J Adrian
Department of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, University of Illinois, Urbana,
Illinois 61801, USA

Received 21 May 1997, accepted for publication 21 July 1997

Abstract. To observe instantaneous fields of vorticity and rate-of-strain using PIV

(particle image velocimetry) measurements of the velocity field, it is necessary to
achieve maximum dynamic ranges in space and in velocity while simultaneously
making accurate, low-noise measurements for the differentiation process. In this
paper the dynamic ranges achievable with PIV are established in the context of the
super-resolution algorithm described previously which seeks to extract the
maximum possible information from a particle image field. Bounds on the dynamic
spatial range and the dynamic velocity range are established in terms of optical
parameters, and simple rules are derived for optimum design of PIV optical
systems for various types of image recording media.

1. Introduction instrumental parameters divided by the minimum resolvable

In its simplest form a particle image velocimeter measures
two-dimensional velocity vectors on a two-dimensional
plane at one instant in time. Typically, the velocity
accuracy of PIV measurements is of order one per cent,
and the spatial resolution is of order one millimetre. A
convenient width of the field-of-view in the fluid is of
the order of 100 mm, but both larger and smaller fields
are possible, subject to certain practical limitations. The
basic two-dimensional PIV system consists of a pulsed
light sheet, scatterers in the fluid, a photographic lens,
usually located at right angles to the light sheet, and an
optical recording medium, either photographic film or a
video camera array. The light sheet is pulsed two or more
times to produce a series of images of the particles on the
image plane, each image being separated in the erected
image plane approximately by
1Xp ' Mo vp 1t
where Xp is the two-dimensional position vector in the
image plane, Mo is the optical magnification of objects in
the object plane z = 0, 1t is the time between pulses, and
vp is the vector velocity of the particle labelled ‘p’.
The usefulness of a PIV instrument is often char-
acterized by its accuracy and its spatial resolution.
However, neither of these quantities completely describes
the capabilities of a PIV system. Another related and
equally important characteristic is the dynamic velocity
range, defined for present purposes as the maximum
velocity range that can be measured with a fixed set of
velocity measurement. Early PIV instruments had dynamic
velocity ranges of order ten, and for this reason they were
unable to measure certain regions of a flow field if the
velocity varied by more than a factor of ten over the field-
of-view. Even if the variation was rather less, the small
dynamic velocity range made it necessary to carefully adjust
the PIV parameters in order to bracket the range of velocity
variation by the range over which measurements could be
made. With careful design the best current PIV instruments
achieve dynamic velocity ranges of order several hundred.
Since this is still not so large as to render the dynamic
velocity range a non-issue, it is desirable to understand
how this number might be improved and what quantities
limit it fundamentally.
It is also useful to define the dynamic spatial range of
a PIV as the field-of-view in the object space divided by
the smallest resolvable spatial variation. Essentially, this
ratio is the same as the number of independent (i.e. non-
(1) overlapping) vector measurements that can be made across
the linear dimension of the field-of-view. Obviously, large
dynamic spatial resolution allows one to measure small-
scale variation embedded in larger scale motion, as occurs
in numerous fluid mechanical phenomena such as boundary
layers and turbulence.
Dynamic spatial range is related to spatial resolution,
and dynamic velocity range is related to the fundamental
velocity resolution and accuracy of a PIV. This paper
establishes upper bounds on both and the manner in
which they depend on the design of the optical system
and the characteristics of the recording medium, either
photographic film or videographic arrays.

0957-0233/97/121393+06$19.50

c 1997 IOP Publishing Ltd 1393
R J Adrian
It will be argued that the maximum spatial resolution is
achieved by measurement of single particle displacements,
assuming that other factors required to make that
measurement have been satisfactorily resolved. The factors
which ultimately determine the accuracy of single particle
displacement measurements are inherent uncertainties due
to finite time sampling and finite displacement of the
particles, particle dynamics, and uncertainties in measuring
the displacements of the particle images. These issues
will be discussed in successive sections with the goal of
determining conditions that maximize the dynamic spatial
resolution and the dynamic velocity resolution of PIV. The
discussion will consider only double-pulsed PIV systems,
but extension to multiple pulses is trivial.
2. Optimum spatial resolution and single particle
measurements
A major conceptual element in the PIV technique is the
process by which one quickly and automatically extracts
quantitative vector measurements from an image. The
recorded image of the field-of-view can be divided into
a number of small areas of dimension DI which are
referred to as interrogation spots. The corresponding
dimension in the fluid is dI = DI /Mo (lower case
letters refer to quantities in the fluid and upper case
letters denote quantities on the image recording plane.)
Each spot contains several particle images. Analysis of
the displacements of images in each spot by means of
two-dimensional spatial correlation methods (either cross-
correlation or auto-correlation) leads to an estimate of the
average displacement of the particles in the spot. This
approach is valid for the case in which there are many
particles per interrogation spot, referred to as the high
image density limit (Adrian 1991). It is a desirable
working condition because it guarantees that at every
interrogation spot on the image plane there is a high
probability of obtaining a velocity vector that represents the
average motion of the particles in that spot. The resulting
velocity vector field consists of vectors on a rectangular
grid, each vector representing a spatially averaged velocity
measurement.
It can be shown (Adrian 1988) that the spatial averaging
operation is effectively a volume average over the domain
of each interrogation spot and the thickness of the laser light
sheet. Hence, the spatial resolution of the velocity fields
found by correlation of high image density recordings is just
the size of the interrogation spot in the fluid, dI = DI /Mo .
In contrast to the high image density case, the accepted
strategy for low image density measurements is to track
individual particles, with the consequence that vectors are
obtained at random points in space. One can interpolate
these randomly located vectors, but often the interpolation
is coarse, because the vectors are spaced far apart relative to
the scales of motion of the flow field. In fact, most particle
tracking algorithms rely on the assumption that nearest
neighbouring images belong to the same particle, and this
is not valid if the particle image density becomes too high,
so particle tracking is normally limited to relatively low
1394
image density. Hence, it provides poorer spatial resolution
than the high image density case.
Recent work on improving the spatial resolution of PIV
for the purpose of high-resolution turbulence measurements
has proceeded in the direction of making it possible to
track individual particles reliably in the case of high
image density (Keane et al 1995). The idea is that the
displacement of a particle during a measurement time
provides the minimum possible spatial uncertainty in the
measurement, and thus if one can measure the displacement
of each particle in the flow field, one should obtain
the maximum possible spatial resolution. However, such
resolution is local to the vicinity of the particle, and to be
able to claim to have resolved the flow with resolution of
the order of the particle displacement, the spacing between
particles must be of the same order. By definition, this is
the high image density limit (Adrian 1991). Owing to the
difficulty of matching up pairs of images, it is normally
held to be difficult.
To achieve this sort of measurement, Keane and
Adrian (1993) and Keane et al (1995) adapted an idea
originally suggested by Guezennec and Kiritsis (1990) and
Perkins and Hunt (1989) that uses a two-pass interrogation
process. In this approach, called ‘super-resolution’,
the high image density particle field is analysed using
conventional correlation analysis of displacements within
interrogation spots, and then the information about the
vector displacement averaged over the interrogation volume
is used to enhance the probability of being able to track
the individual particles within each volume. The work of
Keane et al (1995) proves that it is possible to achieve
reliable pairing of a large fraction of the particle image
pairs in the optical field, and thereby enhance the linear
spatial resolution of the measurements by a factor in excess
of three. That is, the linear spatial resolution is one-third of
the interrogation spot dimension, dI or less. In effect, this
provides ten times more vectors per unit area. The ultimate
spatial resolution is therefore determined by one’s ability
to track individual particles.
3. Optical resolution and the resolution of particle
displacements
The foregoing analysis ignored all factors relating to the
accuracy with which the displacement of a particle can
be located. This accuracy is determined by the finite
uncertainty that exists in determining the centre of each
particle image, and it directly affects the spatial and
temporal resolution of a PIV instrument. Specifically, if the
errors associated with particle response were negligible, one
could make finite differencing errors vanish also by letting
1t vanish. However, 1t cannot be made arbitrarily small
because in order to make accurate velocity measurements
the displacement must be larger than the uncertainty in
its measurement. Thus, the value of 1t depends upon
the displacement accuracy, and the displacement accuracy
determines the spatial resolution. This result can be cast
in the form of an uncertainty principle that states that the
product of the uncertainty in the velocity and the uncertainty
in spatial location is a constant of the PIV system that is
 Dynamic ranges of PIV

recorded. The quadrature in (4) is valid if both the noise

from the recording and the image intensity are Gaussian.
Assuming diffraction limited imaging, and a Gaussian
intensity distribution of the geometric image of the particle,
the diameter of the diffracted image of the particle is

de2 = ds2 + Mo2 dp2 (5)

where dp is the particle diameter, and the diffraction limited

spot size is given by

ds = 2.44(1 + Mo )f # λ (6)
Figure 1. Measuring the displacement of particle images is
uncertain due to noise in the images. The uncertainty is where f # is the f -number of the lens, and λ is the
proportional to the mean diameter of the image. wavelength of light. For later reference, the equation for
the depth-of-field of the image δz, i.e. the thickness of the
region containing in-focus particles in the object space, is
determined by its optical resolution (Adrian 1986). In the
following we re-derive this result and extend it to arrive at δz = 4(1 + Mo−1 )2 f #2 λ. (7)
a new set of criteria for designing PIV systems.
Consider the measurement of the displacement between Following Offutt (1995), it is convenient to eliminate the
two images of the same particle, as shown in figure 1. f -number of the lens in favour of the depth-of-field, since
Due to noise the recorded optical images are not perfect the depth-of-field is frequently a constraint imposed on the
circular distributions. With the exception of rather idealized system:
experiments or highly idealized computer simulations, de = Mo (1.5δzλ + dp2 )1/2 . (8)
the images are usually irregular in shape as a result
The rms error σu defines the minimum resolvable
of noise in the light field such as background speckle,
velocity fluctuation. Let the particle displacement
aberrations of the lenses, or noise in the image recording
associated with the full-scale velocity be 1xpmax . Then
medium. Photographic media create noise because of the
the dynamic velocity range (DVR), defined as the ratio of
irregular grain structure of the chemicals in the emulsion,
the maximum velocity to the minimum resolvable velocity,
and videographic media impart noise to images through
is given by
electronics noise in the circuits and shot noise in the photo-
detection process. Regardless of the source, the noise umax Mo 1xpmax
makes even the first and second exposures of the same DV R = = (9)
σu cτ dτ
particle appear different, and there is a root mean square
(rms) error in determining the displacement of the centroid where umax = 1xpmax /1t is the full-scale velocity. (This
of the particle image which we will call σ1X . (Recall that definition ignores negative velocities. If negative velocities
x denotes position in the fluid and X denotes position in do occur, it is recommended that umax be defined to the
the image plane.) Ignoring error caused by uncertainty in larger of the maximum positive velocity or the maximum
1t (valid for flows less than several hundred metres per magnitude of the negative velocity.) If we denote the
second), the rms error in the velocity measurement is given format of the recording medium by its dimensions Lx and
by Ly in the recording plane, then the field-of-view in the fluid
σ1x σ1X is given by
σu = = . (2)
1t Mo 1t lx = Lx /Mo (10)
The precise relationship between the rms displacement and similarly for ly . The minimum resolvable scale is less
error and the properties of the image is complex, and than 1xpmax , so the dynamic spatial range (DSR) is at least
it depends upon the method used to determine 1Xp .
However, on the basis that it must be easier to locate the lx Lx /Mo
DSR = = . (11)
centre of a small image than a large image Adrian (1986) 1xpmax 1xpmax
asserts that
σ1X = cτ dτ (3) It follows immediately that

where dτ is the diameter of the recorded image and cτ Lx

is a constant that depends on the ability of the analysis
procedure to determine the displacement between the
images. Typically the constant is 1–10% of the image
diameter. The recorded image diameter dτ is given
approximately by
dτ2 = de2 + dr2 (4)
where dr represents the resolution of the recording medium
and de is the diameter of the optical image prior to being
(DSR)(DV R) = . (12)
cτ dτ
Equation (12) states that the capability of a PIV system
to have both a large dynamic velocity range and a large
dynamic spatial range is determined by a dimensionless
constant Lx /cτ dτ that is a characteristic of the system.
The format length Lx characterizes the physical size of
the recording medium, which determines its capacity to
hold information; the recorded image diameter is a measure

1395
R J Adrian
of the performance of the optical imaging system and
the recording system; and cτ is a measure of the ability
of the interrogation algorithm to measure displacements
accurately. (This equation is, of course, a variation of
the PIV uncertainty principle σu 1xp max = cτ dτ umax stated
by Adrian (1986).) PIV systems having large values
of Lx /cτ dτ are well suited for turbulence research, and
measurements in higher Reynolds number flows require
larger values of this constant.
We now consider how one configures a PIV system to
be optimum for a given experiment. The most important
consideration is to match the size of a typical particle image
with the resolution of the recording medium, denoted by
dr . The resolution elements of photographic film are the
grains in the emulsion, and the resolution, in millimetres,
is conventionally given as dr = 2/(number of resolvable
line pairs per millimetre). The resolution elements of
a videographic device are the pixel elements, and the
resolution dr is characterized by their spacing.
One can think of these elements as sampling the
analogue image at discrete points in space. If the image
diameter de is too small, the image is under-sampled
according to Nyquist’s criterion, and one expects to lose
information. If the image is too large, the system wastes the
information capacity of the recording medium by sampling
more often than needed to specify the image. Under-
sampling leads to both mean bias errors in locating the
particle and a random error, while over-sampling does
little to reduce the errors once the number of samples
per diameter cr exceeds a critical value (Prasad et al
1992, Wernet and Pline 1993, Westerweel 1993). These
investigations have shown that discrete sampling by a video
array leads to negligible mean bias error if cr is greater than
one to three pixels per diameter. If the image diameter
satisfies the following criterion, the finite resolution of the
recording medium has a negligible effect on the accuracy
of measuring the displacement of the particle image:
de ≥ cr dr . (13)
For reference we shall take cr = 2.
From equation (8) the optimum magnification of the
imaging lens is found by reducing the magnification Mo
until de is just equal to cr dr . This makes de as small
as possible, given the resolution limits of the recording
medium, and it therefore minimizes dτ , and maximizes the
dynamic range product in equation (12). Reducing the
magnification also increases the depth-of-field, increases
the field-of-view, and increases the dynamic spatial range.
The only disadvantage to reducing the magnification is
that it reduces the dynamic velocity range, according to
equation (9). However, it is frequently the case that
the maximum particle displacement is determined by the
maximum number of pixels that the image is allowed to
move in the image plane,
Mo 1xp max = cmax dr . (14)
This restriction may be imposed by the interrogation
software, especially if it uses a single window which
contains both first and second image data. To retain a large
1396
fraction of pairs of images as particles enter and leave the
interrogation one can apply the ‘one-quarter rule’ (Adrian
1986), which states that the maximum displacement should
be less than one-quarter of the size of the fixed interrogation
spot. For example, it is common to employ interrogation
spots that are 64 pixel squares, for which the maximum
image displacement would be cmax = 16. In this case the
DV R is given by
cmax
DV R = p (15)
cτ 1 + cr2
independent of Mo .
From equation (9), the optimum magnification, found
by setting de = cr dr , is just
cr dr
Mopt = (16)
(1.5δzλ + dp2 )1/2
and the corresponding optimum f -number is
(δz/λ)1/2
#
fopt = 0.5 −1
. (17)
1 + Mopt
Equation (16) defines the minimum magnification that
will avoid errors due to finite resolution of the recording
medium. Higher magnifications are allowable.
The optimum system is defined by the resolution dr ,
the requisite depth-of-field δz, and the accuracy of the
displacement interrogation algorithm cr . Table 1 gives
the resolution and format lengths Lx and Ly of a variety
of videographic and photographic recording media. The
resolution of the film is taken to be 2/(line pairs per
mm), and the effective pixel format is defined to be
Lx /dr × Ly /dr . While it is apparent that high-resolution
films offer many more pixels than videographic cameras,
it is less obvious that one is able to take advantage of
the film resolution since the resolution becomes very small
with respect to the diffraction limited spot size of a particle
image.
Table 2 summarizes the properties of several PIV
systems tailored to different types of measurements. The
table assumes λ = 532 nm, cτ = 0.05, and cmax = 16.
The magnification is calculated for the optimum condition
in which the diameter of the image is matched to the
resolution of the recording medium according to equality
in equation (13). The value of cr is taken to be 2.0. Thus,
for every entry in the table the magnification is adjusted
so that the focused image diameter is twice the pixel size
in the x-direction given in table 1. Since the resolution
is fixed with respect to the medium, and the maximum
displacement is taken to be fixed with respect to the pixel
size, the accuracy of the velocity measurements is the same
for all entries (better than one per cent of full scale), and
the dynamic velocity range is fixed at DV R = 143. If the
magnification exceeds one of the values given in table 2, the
image is enlarged, and the recording medium over-samples
it. Likewise, if the f -number is increased above a value in
the table, the image diameter and the depth-of-field are both
enlarged. Conversely, if a large depth-of-field is required,
as in particle tracking over large rectangular volumes, the
 Dynamic ranges of PIV

Table 1. Properties of various image recording media.

Format Pixel sizea Resolution Effective pixel

Recording medium Lx × Ly (mm) (µm) (line pairs/mm) format
Sony XC-75 (RS-170) 6.4 × 4.8 8.4 × 9.8 768 × 494
Sony XC-999 (NTSC color) 6.4 × 4.8 8.4 × 9.8 768 × 494
Dalsa IA-D2 10.24 × 10.24 10 × 10 1024 × 1024
Kodak Megaplus 1.4 8.98 × 7.04 6.8 × 6.8 1317 × 1035
Kodak Megaplus 4.2 18.5 × 18.5 9.0 × 9.0 2029 × 1044
TMAX 400 35 × 24 5×5 100 7000 × 4800
TMAX 400 125 × 100 5×5 100 25 000 × 20 000
TMAX 400 250 × 200 5×5 100 50 000 × 40 000
Technical Pan 125 × 100 1.5 × 1.5 320 80 000 × 64 000
Technical Pan 250 × 200 1.5 × 1.5 320 160 000 × 128 000
a
The effective pixel size of film is calculated from 1/2 (line pairs per mm).

Table 2. Characteristics of PIV systems. Mf = Medium-field; Lf = Large-field.

Depth- Field-
Recording of-field Optimum Optimum Dxmax of-view DSR
System medium (µm) mag. F -number (µm) Ix (mm) DSR DVR ×DVR
Particle diameter = 1 µm
Probe video SONY XC-75 300.0 1.08 6.2 124.0 5.9 47.6 143.1 6815
Standard video SONY XC-75 1000.0 0.59 8.1 226.1 10.8 47.6 143.1 6815
Deep-field video SONY XC-75 100 000.0 0.06 12.2 2259.9 107.6 47.6 143.1 6815
Large-format
probe video Megaplus 4.2 300.0 1.16 6.4 124.0 15.9 128.5 143.1 18 385
Large-format
video Megaplus 4.2 3000.0 0.37 10.1 391.5 50.3 128.5 143.1 18 385
Deep-field large-
format video Megaplus 4.2 100 000.0 0.06 13.0 2259.9 290.3 128.5 143.1 18 385
Standard 35 mm TMAX400 300.0 0.64 4.7 124.0 54.3 437.5 143.1 62 610
Standard 35 mm TMAX400 1000.0 0.35 5.7 226.1 98.9 437.5 143.1 62 610
Mf 400 ×500 film TMAX 400 300.0 0.64 4.7 124.0 193.8 1562.5 143.1 223 607
Mf 400 ×500 film TMAX 400 1000.0 0.35 5.7 226.1 353.3 1562.5 143.1 223 607
Lf 400 ×500 film Tech Pan 1000.0 0.11 2.1 753.8 1177.8 1562.5 143.1 223 607
Lf 800 ×1000 film TMAX 400 300.0 0.64 4.7 124.0 387.6 3125.0 143.1 447 214
Lf 800 ×1000 film TMAX 400 1000.0 0.35 5.7 226.1 706.7 3125.0 143.1 447 214
Lf 800 ×1000 film TMAX 400 3000.0 0.20 6.4 391.5 1223.5 3125.0 143.1 447 214

Particle diameter = 20 µm
Probe video SONY XC-75 300.0 0.66 4.7 202.3 9.6 47.6 143.1 6815
Standard video SONY XC-75 1000.0 0.49 7.1 276.9 13.2 47.6 143.1 6815
Large-probe video Megaplus 4.2 300.0 0.71 4.9 202.3 26.0 128.5 143.1 18 385
Large-format video Megaplus 4.2 3000.0 0.34 9.5 422.9 54.3 128.5 143.1 18 385
Standard 35 mm TMAX400 300.0 0.40 3.4 202.3 88.5 437.5 143.1 62 610
Standard 35 mm TMAX400 1000.0 0.29 4.9 276.9 121.1 437.5 143.1 62 610
Mf 400 ×500 film TMAX 400 300.0 0.40 3.4 202.3 316.1 1562.5 143.1 223 607
Mf 400 ×500 film TMAX 400 1000.0 0.29 4.9 276.9 432.7 1562.5 143.1 223 607
Lf 800 ×1000 film TMAX 400 300.0 0.40 3.4 202.3 632.2 3125.0 143.1 447 214
Lf 800 ×1000 film TMAX 400 1000.0 0.29 4.9 276.9 865.3 3125.0 143.1 447 214
Lf 800 ×1000 film TMAX 400 3000.0 0.19 6.0 422.9 1321.5 3125.0 143.1 447 214

f -number must be increased, and the image diameter must
also increase, requiring a decrease in the magnification.
The general trend shown in table 2 is one of increasing
field-of-view as the format size and number of pixels is
increased. The number of pixels varies over a 200:1 range
between the standard resolution video camera and a large
800 ×1000 sheet of high-resolution black and white film. We
see that while the parameters vary somewhat, the principal
effect is to change the dynamic spatial range, and this leads
to different types of PIV instruments.
Standard resolution video cameras operating to fully
resolve the particle images are not able to cover a field-of-
view much larger than 10 mm. If such cameras are used
for a larger field-of-view by decreasing the magnification,
the diameter of the images will decrease, and the inherent
errors will increase. Cameras in this range perform very
well if they are used in probe-type PIV systems that view a
small region of the flow for the purpose of determining the
local velocity and velocity derivatives. If the depth-of-field
is increased substantially, say to 100 mm, then the field-

1397
R J Adrian
of-view also increases. As shown in table 2, it is possible
to have a field-of-view comparable to the depth-of-field in
a deep-field camera. The dynamic spatial range obtained
from standard videos is of order 50.
High-resolution cameras with up to 2k × 2k pixels
are roughly comparable to 35 mm cameras, yielding
fully resolved images on fields-of-view roughly 50 mm
square. We refer to a field-of-view around 50–200 mm as
medium format. This is enough for many laboratory-scale
experiments, but the dynamic spatial range of the large-
format video camera, of order 128, is not large enough for
high Reynolds number experiments that attempt to resolve
the full spectrum of the turbulence, or to resolve the details
of flow around large-scale objects.
The most impressive capabilities occur when one uses
high-resolution, large-format films. Fields of the order of
one square metre can be resolved with a spatial resolution
around 300 microns full scale. This corresponds to a 3000:1
dynamic spatial range enough, for example, to measure
three decades of a turbulence spectrum.
The effect of performing experiments in water instead
of air is to require significantly larger scattering particles to
compensate for scattered light energy lost due to the smaller
ratio of refractive indices. The recorded image of a 20
micron particle is less sensitive to the effects of parameters
other than the geometric image diameter, so the optimum
magnification varies less for experiments in water.
4. Summary and conclusions
The factors determining the spatial resolution and the
dynamic spatial range of particle image velocimeters have
been examined with particular interest in determining
means of reducing the spatial resolution for experiments
on turbulent flow, and finding bounds on the maximum
resolution attainable. It is argued that the best utilization of
an optical recording medium’s information storage capacity
is achieved when the diameter of the particle image is
matched to the resolution of the medium. Magnifications
that ensure this condition and related f -numbers have been
found. Spatial resolution of order 100–500 microns is
1398
achievable in a variety of configurations, depending upon
the recording medium. The greatest potential for fully
resolving high Reynolds number flows and turbulent flows
lies in the direction of increasing the Reynolds number by
increasing the scale of the flow. Large-format films should
give more than three decades of spatial frequency.
Acknowledgment
This research was supported by a grant from the National
Science Foundation.
References
Adrian R J 1986 An image shifting technique to resolve
directional ambiguity in double-pulsed velocimetry Appl.
Opt. 25 3855–8
——1988 Statistical properties of particle image velocimetry
measurements in turbulent flow Laser Anemometry in Fluid
Mechanics (Lisbon: Ladoan) pp 115–29
——1991 Particle-imaging techniques for experimental fluid
mechanics Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 23 261–304
Guezennec Y G and Kiritsis N 1990 Statistical investigation of
errors in particle image velocimetry Exp. Fluids 10 138–46
Keane R D and Adrian R J 1993 Prospects for super-resolution
with particle image velocimetry Optical Diagnostics in
Fluid and Thermal Flow vol 2005, ed S S Cha and
J D Trolinger (Bellingham, WA: SPIE) pp 283–95
Keane R D, Adrian R J and Zhang J 1995 Super-resolution
particle-imaging velocimetry Meas. Sci. Technol. 6 754–68
Offutt P W 1995 Development of experimental technique and
studies of spatial structure in turbulent thermal convection
PhD Thesis University of Illinois
Perkins R J and Hunt J C R 1989 Particle tracking in turbulent
flows Advances in Turbulence vol 2 ed H H Fernholz and
H E Fiedler (Berlin: Springer) pp 286–91
Prasad A K, Adrian R J, Landreth C C and Offutt P W 1992
Effect of resolution on the speed and accuracy of particle
image velocimetry interrogation Exp. Fluids 13 105–16
Wernet M and Pline A 1993 Particle displacement tracking
technique and Cramer–Rao lower bound error in centroid
estimates from CCD imagery Exp. Fluids 15 295–307
Westerweel J 1993 Digital particle image velocimetry—theory
and application PhD Thesis Delft University of Technology,
The Netherlands