See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264542054

Determining Surface Roughness Level Based on Texture Analysis

Conference Paper · December 2009

DOI: 10.13140/2.1.2587.9682

CITATIONS READS

4 1,957

2 authors:

Dedy Septiadi Aulia Nasution

Université de Fribourg Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
59 PUBLICATIONS   1,090 CITATIONS    45 PUBLICATIONS   103 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Melanoma and Nevus Classification Based on Asymmetry, Border, Color and GLCM Texture Parameters Using Deep Learning Algorithm View project

Non-invasive Glucose Monitoring View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dedy Septiadi on 07 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Determining Surface Roughness Level
Based on Texture Analysis
Dedy Septiadi, Aulia MT Nasution
Photonics Engineering Lab. - Department of Engineering Physics
Faculty of Industrial Technology - Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember (ITS)
Kampus ITS Keputih Sukolilo Surabaya 60111 Indonesia
Email: dedy_21@ep.its.ac.id, anasution@ep.its.ac.id
Abstract — In this paper efforts to quantify the
surface roughness based on texture analysis will be
reported. The quantification is done using method
of grey level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM). Texture
features are extracted from GLCM, and analysed
by using statistical correlation to examine their
correlation to the particle diameter size. For
quantification purposes, a criterion of correlation
coefficient r ≥ 0.9 is determined for a maximum
correlation. Four texture features fulfilled such a
criterion, i.e. the correlation (d=5, θ=135o),
information correlation 2 (d=4, θ=135o),
o
homogeneity (d=2, θ=0 ), information correlation 1
(d=4, θ=135o). Among these four features, only the
first two features are the most suitable to be the
best descriptors for quantifying the surface
roughness.
I. INTRODUCTION
Quantification of surface roughness has many
importances in many science and engineering
applications. Among others are in the field of medical
diagnostics and materials processing [6, 11]. Several
methods have been developed nowadays for
quantification, i.e. which are based on phase shifting
interferometry [1], atomic force microscopy, stereo
scanning electron microscopy, laser confocal scanning
microscopy [7], as well as the one based on digital
image processing.
In the digital image processing, object’s
information of shape, color, as well as texture are
coded into changes in intensity and color information.
Any variation in intensity and color that related to
textural information is due to variation in roughness of
an object surface [5]. The intensity variation can also
be described as variation of grey levels in a
neighborhood of a pixel, where the size of the
neighborhood depends on the size of the fundamental
textural element. This textural element is generally
known as a texton [13].
The analysis of textural information is known as a
texture analysis, which refers to a class of
mathematical models and procedures being used to
characterize the spatial variations within a digital
image, as a mode of information extraction [17].
Several methods have already developed for the
texture analysis application, i.e. statistical,
geometrical, structural, as well as a model-based and
signal processing features [18].
In this paper, quantification of surface roughness
based on statistical texture analysis will be described.
The method used is the grey level co-occurrence
matrix (GLCM), as one of the most well known and
widely used method in texture analysis [8].
The GLCM explains how often a gray level occurs
at a pixel located at a fixed geometric position relative
to its neighborhood pixels i.e. described as a joint
probability distribution from pair of pixels [17]. The
extracted information by GLCM will correlate to
surface roughness variability. The GLCM has several
features of extraction, known as texture features [8],
among others are angular second
moment/energy/uniformity, contrast, correlation,
variance, inverse difference moment/homogeneity,
sum average, sum variance, sum entropy, entropy,
difference variance, difference entropy, information
correlation measurement 1 and information correlation
measurement 2. Other features like cluster prominence
and cluster shade [16], dissimilarity, maximum
probability, inverse difference normalized, and inverse
difference moment normalized [4] would be
additionally advantageous. A statistical correlation
analysis will be used to identify the texture features
which show a maximum correlation with surface
roughness. These texture features would be the best
descriptors for quantifying the state of surface
roughness.
II. SURFACE ROUGHNESS
The terminology surface roughness is normally
used as a measure of a finer surface irregularity in the
surface texture. It is also stated as a result of the
existence of peaks and valleys in the surface [19]. As
shown in Fig 1, the surface roughness is quantified as
the arithmetic average deviation of the surface valleys
and peaks.
Fig 1 Explanatory sketch for surface roughness
 One example of material to best describe the
surface roughness is an abrasive paper. The roughness
levels of abrasive papers depend on their size
particles, and usually measured as grit.
The higher the grit value, the smoother the surface
probability that gray level i and gray level j co-occur
for a given distance d and orientation θ.
The mathematical modeling/equation of the grey level
co-occurrence matrix can be written as:

(, ; , ) = #((1, 1)(2, 2 ∈ | = (1, 1), (2, 2)|

of the abrasive paper. The CAMI, Coated Abrasives
Manufacturers Institute (North America), compares
 = ∠(, ), ( ′  ′ ); (1, 1) = ; (2, 2) = ;
(1)
the grit level with particle size as shown in TABLE 1.
(2)
TABLE 1
Comparison between grit levels with particle size where # denotes the number of elements in the set, G
Grit Diameter (micron) is grey level. Examples of the grey level co-
GR60 268.0 occurrence matrix at distance d=1 and using four
GR80 192.0 orientations, θ = 0, 45, 90 and 135 degrees is shown in
GR100 141.0 Fig.3.
GR120 116.0
GR180 78.0
GR220 66.0
GR240 53.5
GR280 44.0
GR320 36.0
GR400 23.6
GR500 19.7
GR800 12.3

III. TEXTURE ANALYSIS

According to the Collins English Dictionary, a
texture is the structure, appearance, and feel of a
woven fabric, the surface of a material especially as
perceived by the sense of touch; the general structure
and disposition of the constituent parts of something.
Haralick [8] described texture as the coarseness,
homogeneity, and orientation of image structure.
Texture analysis is then a quantification and use of an
image for extracting texture properties. It is the basis
of many image processing operations such as
Fig 3 Grey level co-occurrence matrix at d=1
and θ=0, 45, 90 and 135 degrees [9]
From the GLCM created, several texture features can
be computed. The computation of the texture features
based on the mathematical equations (3)–(18) which
described in Haralick [8], equations (22)-(23) which
described in Soh and Tsoulis [16], and equations
(24)-(28) which described in Clausi [4]. These
equations can be listed below:
Angular Second Moment/ Energy/ Uniformity

 (. )
classification, segmentation and synthesis of textured (3)
" ! !
images [20]. One of the most famous methods in
texture analysis is the grey level co-occurrence matrix Contrast
%'! % %

 # $  (. )& ; | − | = #
[8].
The gray level co-occurrence matrix is based on (4)
( ) " "  !
the estimation of the second-order joint conditional
 
Correlation
1 
probability density functions, P(i,j,d,a) [15]. Consider
  -. − (, ) − / /, 01
+ +,
a pair of pixels (x1,y1) and (x2,y2) in a texture image, (5)
that are separated by a distance d and angle θ with " ! !

respect to the horizontal axis, as shown in Fig. 2. where µx, µy, σx dan σy are mean and standard
( ( ( (
deviation of px and py; δ=d

/ =    2 (. ); /, =    2 (. ) (6)

" !  ! " !  !
( (

+ = (1 − / )  2 (, ) (7)

" !  !
( (

+, = .1 − /, 0  2 (, )

(8)
 !  !
Fig 2 Distance and Orientation of GLCM [13] Sum of Squares/Variance
 ( − /) (, ) (9)
" 
Let the gray level of pixel (x1,y1) be of value i, and
that of pixel (x2,y2) be of value j. P(i,j,d,a) is the
 1
Inverse Difference Moment/Homogeneity 50x, and a constant illumination system is used. Two
 (, )
1 + ( − ) (10) sample images of them are depicted in Fig 4.
" 
Sum Average


 4, () (11)

" 
Sum variance


( − 5) 4, (); 5 = 678 9#:;< (12)

" 
Sum Entropy

(a) (b)
−  4, () log@4, ()A
Fig 4 Images of abrasive paper with (a) Grit 120, (b) Grit 80
(13)
" 
Entropy The original images captured are 1280 x 1024 pixels
  (, ) log.(, )0
and image preprocessing is applied to all images.
(14) These images are then transformed into grey scale and
" 
resized into 250 x 250 pixels. The next step would be
BC;C# <5 ',
Difference Variance
(15) creating the GLCM of the images based on equation
Difference Entropy (1). The GLCM created had eight grey levels, so there
'!

 ', () log@', ()A

would be 8 x 8 matrices of GLCM. Two examples of
(16) the GLCM are shown in Fig 5 and Fig 6 respectively.
" 

DEF − DEF1
Information Correlation 1
24039 1776 2 0 0 0 0 0
8CGDE, DFH
(17) 1736 16327 1381 80 7 1 0 0
8 1349 5570 1016 90 4 0 0
(1 − 9−2.0(DEF2 − DEF)) J
Information Correlation 2
! 0 91 959 2224 703 92 1 0
(18) 0 5 126 690 436 445 9 2
where
DEF = −   (, ) log.(, )0
0 0 3 56 483 1501 119 1
0 0 1 1 10 117 270 8
(19)
" 
0 0 0 0 0 3 8 0

DEF1 = −   (, ) log - (), ()1 (20) Fig 5 GLCM of Image Grit 60 at d=1 and θ=0 degree
" 

DEF2 = −    (), () log - (), ()1 (21) 23210 2455 70 6 0 0 0 0
"  2439 14952 1664 344 48 2 0 0
Cluster prominence 48 1704 4858 1038 289 41 0 0
'! '!

 @ +  − / − /, A (, )
K
5 277 1097 1758 716 195 4 1
0 60 27 756 1090 493 25 2
" )  )
(22) 0 2 42 132 561 1285 136 2
Cluster Shade 0 0 3 5 16 138 235 6
'! '!

 @ +  − / − /, A (, )
L
0 0 0 0 1 3 7 0
(23)
" )  ) Fig 6 GLCM of Image Grit 60 at d=1 and θ=45 degrees
Dissimilarity
 M", | − |
The extraction of nineteen texture features based on
(24) equations (3)-(28) are done for several specific
distance and orientation parameters. The orientations
M", = ∑P
N(",)
where
(25) used are 0, 45, 90, and 135 degrees [3], whilst values
Q,RST N(",) for the distance are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, and 20 [2, 10,

8C878 BCU79 <5 @M", A 5<; CUU <5 (, )

Maximum Probability 12, 14]. A statistical correlation analysis is the
(26) performed (assuming that the data of extracted texture
Inverse Difference Normalized

M",
features are linear and independent variable), and the

1 + | − | / 
(27) texture features which show a maximum correlation to
", ! the surface roughness changes can be determined.
Inverse Difference Moment Normalized

M",

V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1 + ( − ) / 
(28)
", !
Accomplishing the statistical correlation analysis
on extracted GLCM texture features (at several values
IV. METHODS
of d = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, and 20; as well as θ = 0, 45,
90, and 135 degrees) to the particle diameter size, all
Twelve abrasive papers, as listed in table 1, are the correlation coefficients can be obtained. Some
captured using a stereo microscope Olympus SZ11 –
features (with respective specific values of d and θ, as
which integrated with a CCD Camera of Olympus
well as the calculated correlation coefficient r) are
OLY-220. The magnification of the microscope is depicted in TABLE 2.
 TABLE 2
Texture Features at specific d and θ
with their Coefficient Correlation
distance (d); Correlation
Texture Features
Orientation (θ) Coefficient r
INFORMATION
5; 135o 0.946
CORRELATION 2
CORRELATION 5; 135o 0.937
HOMOGENEITY 2; 0o 0.912
INVERSE DIFFERENT
1; 0o 0.886
NORMALIZED
CLUSTER SHADE 10; 90o 0.856
CLUSTER PROMINENCE 10; 90o 0.855
INVERSE DIFFERENT
1; 0o 0.81
MOMENT NORMALIZED
SUM ENTROPY 20; 0 o
0.778 Fig 7 Relationship of four prominent texture features
with particle diameter size
ENTROPY 20; 135 o 0.741
o
MAXIMUM PROBABILITY 4; 0 0.383 The graphs shows how the four texture features,
ENERGY 20; 135 o
-0.657 which have maximum correllation coefficients (as
o
determined by the criterion) relate to the particle
SUM SQUARES 20; 90 -0.781
diameter size. The gradual incremental change of the
SUM VARIANCE 20; 90o -0.798 particle diameter size will affect to the change of
DIFFERENCE VARIANCE 1; 0 o
-0.8 surface coarsness. In general sense, the higher the
o diameter size of forming particles, the coarser will be
CONTRAST 1; 0 -0.8
the surface. It is also normally said that the coarser the
o
DIFFERENCE ENTROPY 1; 0 -0.827 surface, the higher the level of its roughness.
SUM AVERAGE 20; 90o -0.857 All of the four above feature show linearity
DISSIMILARITY 1; 0 o
-0.878
relationship. Among the four, only two features that
additionally show a higher slope. In terms of
INFORMATION
4; 135o -0.941 measurement principle, these higher linearity slope
CORRELATION 1
implies a better sensitivity. The magnitudes of these
A maximum correlations are then determined by slopes are 1.97.10-3 and 1.91.10-3 for the respective
using a criterion, i.e. that the magnitude of correlation texture features of correlation and information
coefficient must be greater than 0.9. Applying such correlation-2, meanwhile the other two are 6.89.10-4
criteria to the all of the analyzed data, the respective and 4.27.10-4 for texture features of information
features that fulfilled this criterion can be tabulated in correlation-1 and homogeneity.
TABLE 3. In this regard, the work shows that the texture
features of correlation and information correlation-2
TABLE 3 can be used as best descriptor in determining the
Four Texture Features at specific d and θ textural-coarseness (roughness) state by using the
which shows maximum correlation with the surface roughness texture analysis which is based on GLCM method.
Correlation
Information Information This result is quite promising to be used as a
Dia Homogeneity Correlation Correlation
Grit #
(µm)
(d=5;
(d=2; θ=0o) -1 (d=4; -2 (d=5;
determining relationship in developing future texture
θ=135o)
θ=135o) θ=135o) images based surface roghness measurement system.
60 268 0.508 0.850 -0.173 0.565
80 192 0.392 0.807 -0.105 0.424 VI. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
100 141 0.479 0.838 -0.147 0.500
120 116 0.339 0.796 -0.089 0.393 The work shows that texture image analysis can be
180 78 0.217 0.776 -0.038 0.242 well implemented to determine the roughness level of
220 66 0.157 0.763 -0.028 0.190 a surface. Among the texture features extracted using
240 53.5 0.154 0.780 -0.025 0.180
the GLCM method, only two features that most
280 44 0.134 0.739 -0.021 0.163
320 36 0.143 0.758 -0.023 0.175
suitable (in terms of linearity and sensitivity) for
400 23.6 0.093 0.745 -0.013 0.122 surface’s roughness quantification purposes. They are
500 19.7 0.073 0.747 -0.008 0.101 the correlation (d=5, θ=135o) and information
800 12.3 0.050 0.751 -0.007 0.102 correlation-2 (d=4, θ=135o).
Future work will be devoted to develop a controlled
Pattern of relationship of these four texture features to calibration of these two features, in order to obtain an
the particle size diameters can be shown in the accurate correllation with the surface roughness
following graphs. variables. This step is regarded important to be
accomplished, prior to implementing this roughness
 measurement method to our studies in dental erosion
process. The artificial neural network and other expert
systems algorithms will be integrated to benefit this
future research.
VII. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like herewith to express highest
gratitude to the Department of Biology – FMIPA ITS
for lending us the stereo microscope for taking all
pictures necessary during this study, and also for Dr.
Suhartono from the Department of Statistics – FMIPA
ITS for the contributing discussions in suitable
statistical analysis methods for this research.
VIII. REFERENCES
[1] B. Bhushan, J.C. Wyant, C.L. Koliopoulos, 1985.
Measurement of surface topography of magnetic tapes by
Mirau interferometry, Appl. Opt. 28 .1489–1497.
[2] Barber, D.G and LeDrew. E.F. 1991. SAR Sea Ice
Discrimination Using Texture Analysis: A Multivariate
approach. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote
Sensing. Vol.57, No. 4, pp. 385-395.
[3] Celebi et al. 2000. Clustering of Texture Features for
Content based Image Retrieval. Advances in Information
Systems , Volume 1909/2000, 216-225, Springer Berlin /
Heidelberg.
[4] Clausi, DA. 2002. An Analysis of Co-occurrence Texture
Statistics as a Function of Grey Level Quantization, Can.
J. Remote Sensing, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 45-62.
[5] Davies, ER. 2008, Introduction to Texture Analysis, in
Handbook of Texture Analysis, (eds. Mirmehdi et.al.),
Word Scientific Publ.
[6] Gadelmawla, E.S, 2004. A vision system for surface
roughness characterization using the gray level co-
occurrence matrix. NDT & E International 37 (7), 577–
588.
[7] H. Rohrer, 1992. 10 years of STM, in: Proceedings of the
6th International Conference on Scanning Tunneling
Microscopy (Interlaken), pp. 1–6.
[8] Haralick et al. 1973. Textural Features of Image
Classification. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and
Cybernetics, vol. 3(6) , 610 - 621
[9] Harmoko et al. 2004, Extraction of GLCM features and
Probabilistic Neural Network for Inspection of Welding
Defects. Lokakarya Komputasi Sains dan Teknologi
Nuklir XV, P2TIK – BATAN, Jakarta 13 – 14 Juli 2004.
[10] Holmes, Q. A., Nuesch, D.R., and Shuchman, R. A.
1984. Textural Analysis and Real-Time Classification of
Sea-Ice Types Using Digital SAR Data. IEEE
Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing. Vol.22
(2), pp. 113-120.
[11] Mirmehdi, M. et.al. (eds.), 2008, Handbook of Texture
Analysis, Word Scientific Publ.
[12] Nystuen, J. A and Garcia Jr., F. W. 1992. Sea Ice
Classification Using SAR Backscatter Statistics. IEEE
Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing. Vol. 30
(3), pp. 502-509.
[13] Pressman, N.J, 1976. Markovian analysis of cervical cell
images. The Journal of Histochemistry and
Cytochemistry 24 (1), 138-144.
[14] Shokr, M.E. 1991. Evaluation of Second-Order Texture
Parameter for Sea Ice Classification from Radar
Images. Journals of Geophysical Research, Vol. 96.No.
C6, pp.10 625- 10 640.
[15] Siranita, Kazuhiko., Miyajima Tsuneharu., Takiyama
Ryuzo., 1998. Determination of Meat Quality by Texture
Analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters 19 (14), 1319 -
1324. Elsevier Science B.V.
View publication stats
[16] Soh and Tsatsoulis. 1999. Texture Analysis of SAR Sea
Ice Imagery Using Gray Level Co-Occurrence Matrices.
IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing,
vol. 37 (2.) Part I, 780 – 795.
[17] Srinivasan, G.N and Shobha G, 2008. Statistical Texture
Analysis. Proceeding of World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology Volume vol. 36, 1264 –
1269.
[18] Tuceyran, M and A.K. Jain. 1993. Texture Analysis, in
Handbook of Pattern Recognition and Computer Vision
(eds. Chen C.H. et.al. , Chapter 2, pp. 235-276. World
Scientific, Singapore.
[19] Vandenberg, S and Osborne, C. F. 1992. Digital image
processing techniques, fractal dimensionality and scale-
space applied to surface roughness, Wear, vol.159 (1),
17 - 30
[20] Walker, R. F. 1997, Adaptive Multiscale GLCM. CSSIP
Technical Report TR1/97 Cooperative Research Centre
for Sensor Signal and Information Processing, Adelaide
South Australia.
*
Dedy Septiadi was born in
Pangkalpinang on September 17th, 1988.
He finished his senior high school at
SMAN 3 Pangkalpinang in 2005. Since
2005 he is studying at the Department of
Engineering Physics - ITS. During this
time he has written several papers and
won two Indonesian National paper
competitions in 2006 and 2007. In 2008
he was awarded the IELSP Scholarship from the US
Department of State, to participate in exchange program at
The University of Arkansas Fayetteville. His research
interests are in biomedical optics and bio-photonics, which
applied to both of diagnostics and therapy.
**
Aulia MT Nasution was born in
Surabaya in 1967. He got his Ir. degree
in Engineering Physics from ITB
Bandung and MSc. in Medical Physics
from the USM Penang, Malaysia. In
Oct. 2006 he received his Dr.rer.nat.
degree in Experimental Physics (Optical
Diagnostics). His research interests are
related to bio-photonics, optical
diagnostics based on spectroscopy,
optical metrology, and medical engineering. In period of
Sept – Nov 09 he is doing a research stay as visiting scientist
at the Clinical Photonics Lab. of the Erlangen Graduate
School in Advanced Optical Technologies (SAOT),
involving in the research project of Development of Video
Endoscopy Hyperspectral and Fluorescence Imaging
Diagnostic and Biopsy/Microsurgery Guidance for Stomach
Cancer.