• Laser & Optoelectronics Progress
  • Vol. 59, Issue 4, 0412001 (2022)
Shiyong An1, Jiangping Zhu1、2、*, Hongyu Yang1、2, Pei Zhou1、2, Wenfan Xiao1, and Changhui Zhu2
Author Affiliations
  • 1National Key Laboratory of Fundamental Science on Synthetic Vision, Sichuan University, Chengdu , Sichuan 610065, China
  • 2College of Computer Science, Sichuan University, Chengdu , Sichuan 610065, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/LOP202259.0412001 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Shiyong An, Jiangping Zhu, Hongyu Yang, Pei Zhou, Wenfan Xiao, Changhui Zhu. Simulation and Experiment Research on Camera Calibration Based on Absolute Phase Target[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2022, 59(4): 0412001 Copy Citation Text show less
    Camera imaging model
    Fig. 1. Camera imaging model
    Simulation vision system based on absolute phase calibration method
    Fig. 2. Simulation vision system based on absolute phase calibration method
    22 simulated poses in the camera's view
    Fig. 3. 22 simulated poses in the camera's view
    Part of the simulated images
    Fig. 4. Part of the simulated images
    Simulated results. (a) Pixel error in u direction; (b) pixel error in v direction
    Fig. 5. Simulated results. (a) Pixel error in u direction; (b) pixel error in v direction
    Absolute error at different noise levels. (a)(d)(g) Absolute error of checkerboard calibration method; (b)(e)(h) absolute error of circle calibration method; (c)(d)(g) absolute error of APT calibration method
    Fig. 6. Absolute error at different noise levels. (a)(d)(g) Absolute error of checkerboard calibration method; (b)(e)(h) absolute error of circle calibration method; (c)(d)(g) absolute error of APT calibration method
    Absolute error at different fuzzy levels. (a)(d)(g) Absolute error of checkerboard calibration method; (b)(e)(h) absolute error of circle calibration method; (c)(d)(g) absolute error of APT calibration method
    Fig. 7. Absolute error at different fuzzy levels. (a)(d)(g) Absolute error of checkerboard calibration method; (b)(e)(h) absolute error of circle calibration method; (c)(d)(g) absolute error of APT calibration method
    APT experimental device
    Fig. 8. APT experimental device
    Part calibration images and part feature points. (a)(c)(e) In-focus images; (b)(d)(f) out-of-focus images
    Fig. 9. Part calibration images and part feature points. (a)(c)(e) In-focus images; (b)(d)(f) out-of-focus images
    Target poses in the camera's view. (a) 16 poses under in-focus condition; (b) 14 poses under out-of-focus condition
    Fig. 10. Target poses in the camera's view. (a) 16 poses under in-focus condition; (b) 14 poses under out-of-focus condition
    Re-projection errors of three calibration methods under in-focus condition. (a) Checkerboard calibration method; (b) circle calibration method; (c) APT calibration method
    Fig. 11. Re-projection errors of three calibration methods under in-focus condition. (a) Checkerboard calibration method; (b) circle calibration method; (c) APT calibration method
    Re-projection errors of three calibration methods when the target is far away from the effective working distance of the camera. (a) Checkerboard calibration method; (b) circle calibration method; (c) APT calibration method
    Fig. 12. Re-projection errors of three calibration methods when the target is far away from the effective working distance of the camera. (a) Checkerboard calibration method; (b) circle calibration method; (c) APT calibration method
    Column charts of world coordinate difference before and after optimization. (a)(d) Checkerboard calibration method under in-focus condition and out-of-focus condition; (b)(e) circle calibration method under in-focus condition and out-of-focus condition; (c)(f) APT calibration method under in-focus condition and out-of-focus condition
    Fig. 13. Column charts of world coordinate difference before and after optimization. (a)(d) Checkerboard calibration method under in-focus condition and out-of-focus condition; (b)(e) circle calibration method under in-focus condition and out-of-focus condition; (c)(f) APT calibration method under in-focus condition and out-of-focus condition
    Parameterfu /pixelfv /pixelu0 /pixelv0 /pixeltx /mmty /mmtz/mm
    Ground truth14551455102454000650
    Absolute error0.00360.00370.00030.000560.034770.027850.0283
    Table 1. Systematic errors of visual simulation system and calibration software
    ParameterCheckerboardCircleAPT
    fu /pixel2605.922606.922603.82
    fv /pixel2606.032607.112603.74
    u0 /pixel648.82647.13648.38
    v0 /pixel511.21510.75511.68
    k1-0.03199-0.04702-0.05360
    k20.013090.46870.58223
    p10.000440.000160.00021
    p20.000860.000620.00085
    tx0.029010.0731780.10481
    ty3.849723.137283.87875
    tz1001.606221094.466711095.71075
    θx0.028980.068270.02897
    θy0.043195-0.454060.04366
    θz-0.0032190.047016-0.003272
    Re-project_error /pixel0.033660.028400.02262
    Table 2. Calibration results of the camera
    ParameterCheckerboardCircleAPT
    fu /pixel2650.702637.382641.39
    fv /pixel2649.462636.902640.65
    u0 /pixel627.04624.25622.55
    v0 /pixel501.50502.06505.19
    k1-0.06195-0.00610-0.04133
    k20.86519-0.192450.17647
    p10.000300.000270.00014
    p20.00211-0.00137-0.00202
    tx5.760056.699445.47052
    ty-24.34501-24.12537-23.96307
    tz1305.403171303.117041301.76072
    θx-0.00512-0.0027632-0.12287
    θy0.0810870.079357-0.00606
    θz0.00298410.00285010.0028776
    Re-project_error /pixel0.046410.033710.01393
    Table 3. Calibration results when the target is far away from the effective working distance of the camera
    Shiyong An, Jiangping Zhu, Hongyu Yang, Pei Zhou, Wenfan Xiao, Changhui Zhu. Simulation and Experiment Research on Camera Calibration Based on Absolute Phase Target[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2022, 59(4): 0412001
    Download Citation