Author Affiliations
1College of Information Science and Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao, Shandong 266100, China2Institute of Ocean Remote Sensing, Ocean University of China, Qingdao, Shandong 266100, China3Institute for Advanced Ocean Study, Ocean University of China, Qingdao, Shandong 266100, China4Laboratory for Regional Oceanography and Numerical Modeling, Pilot National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology (Qingdao), Qingdao, Shandong 266237, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Schematic of Scheimpflug imaging
Fig. 2. Relationship among measurement parameters. (a) Relationship of camera pixel points with measurement distance and distance resolution; (b) relationship of camera pixel points with backscattering angle and angle resolution
Fig. 3. Schematic of diffusion circle
Fig. 4. Relationship between depth-of-field and distance resolution of pixel points
Fig. 5. Schematic of experimental system
Fig. 6. Relationship between beam refraction and detection distance. (a) Schematic of light refraction; (b) relationship between pixel points and detection distance
Fig. 7. Intensity curves of water Scheimpflug lidar and intensity curves of backscattered light with different exposure time when tap water used as medium. (a) 1 s; (b) 5 s; (c) 10 s; (d) 14 s
Fig. 8. Scattered signal intensities of different measurement media. (a) Deionized water; (b) tap water; (c) river water
Fig. 9. Beam width diagrams obtained from three water body measurements. (a) Deionized water; (b) tap water; (c) river water
Fig. 10. Flowchart of laser beam width data processing
Fig. 11. Laser beam width and its standard deviation versus measurement distance for three different water bodies
Fig. 12. Scatter plots of initial beam width, beam width decay rate, and scattered light intensity decay rate for three different water bodies
Fig. 13. Filter membranes obtained from filtration for three different water bodies
Water | Spectrophotometer | Water Scheimpflug lidar | |
---|
Absorbance | Absorption coefficient /m-1 | Beam width decay rate /m-1 | Scattered light intensity decay rate /m-1 |
---|
Deionized water | 0.0027 | 0.158 | 0.463 | 0.618 | Tap water | 0.0052 | 1.243 | 1.014 | 18.866 | River water | 0.2346 | 24.182 | 14.302 | 126.741 |
|
Table 1. Comparison of data from spectrophotometer and water Scheimpflug lidar