Fig. 1. Optical geometry of measurement system

Fig. 2. (a) Daughter wavelets with different scales; (b) Fourier spectra of daughter wavelets; (c) mother wavelets with different fb values; (d) Fourier spectra of mother wavelets

Fig. 3. (a) Deformed fringe pattern without noise; (b) wavelet ridges with different fb values; (c) unwrapped phase of Fig. 3(b); (d) wavelet ridges when fb is equal to 0.2; (e) unwrapped phase of Fig. 3(d)

Fig. 4. (a) Deformed fringe pattern considering random noise with mean square deviation of 0.20; (b) wavelet ridges with different fb values; (c) unwrapped phase of Fig. 4(b); (d) wavelet ridges introducing improved wavelet processing method; (e) unwrapped phase of improved wavelet processing method

Fig. 5. (a) Simulated object; (b) deformed fringe pattern

Fig. 6. Error distribution without noise. (a) fb=0.5; (b) fb=1.0; (c) fb=1.5; (d) fb=2.0

Fig. 7. Error considering random noise influence with mean square deviation of 0.20.(a) fb=0.5; (b) fb=1.0; (c) fb=1.5; (d) fb=2.0

Fig. 8. Results and error distribution considering random noise with mean square deviation of 0.20. (a) Reconstruction results by improved wavelet processing method; (b) reconstruction error distribution by improved wavelet processing method; (c) error distribution by method proposed by Liu et al.[8]

Fig. 9. (a) Deformed fringe with low noise; (b) fringe distribution of the 381th row in Fig. 9(a)

Fig. 10. (a) Unwrapped phase by employing improved wavelet processing method; (b) unwrapped phase of the 381th row of deformed fringe pattern

Fig. 11. (a) Deformed fringe pattern with high noise level; (b) fringe distribution of the 286th row in Fig. 11(a)

Fig. 12. (a) Wrapped phase when fb=1.0; (b) wrapped phase when fb=2.0; (c) unwrapped phase when fb=1.0; (d) unwrapped phase when fb=2.0; (e) wrapped phase extracted by method proposed by Liu et al.[8]; (f) wrapped phase extracted by improved wavelet processing method; (g) unwrapped phase extracted by method proposed by Liu et al[8]; (h) unwrapped phase extracted by improved wavelet processing method

Table 1. Standard deviation of reconstruction errors for complex Morlet wavelet method with different fb values and improved wavelet processing method at different noise levels