| Literature DB >> 30200665 |
Limei Song1, Xinyao Li2, Yan-Gang Yang3, Xinjun Zhu4, Qinghua Guo5,6, Hui Liu7.
Abstract
The non-contact three-dimensional measurement and reconstruction techniques have played a significant role in the packaging and transportation of precious cultural relics. This paper develops a structured light based three-dimensional measurement system, with a low-cost for cultural relics packaging. The structured light based system performs rapid measurements and generates 3D point cloud data, which is then denoised, registered and merged to achieve accurate 3D reconstruction for cultural relics. The multi-frequency heterodyne method and the method in this paper are compared. It is shown that the relative accuracy of the proposed low-cost system can reach a level of 1/1000. The high efficiency of the system is demonstrated through experimental results.Entities:
Keywords: 3D reconstruction; cultural relics packaging; structured light
Year: 2018 PMID: 30200665 PMCID: PMC6164865 DOI: 10.3390/s18092981
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Neighborhood searching.
Figure 2Octree. (a) Space decomposition, (b) Octree hierarchical structure.
Figure 3ICP algorithm.
Figure 4The binocular 3D reconstruction system developed in our Lab.
Figure 5Comparison of the reconstruction results. (a) The traditional method (grey anime dolls). (b) The proposed method (grey anime dolls). (c) The traditional method (colored puppets). (d) The proposed method (colored puppets). (e) The traditional method (colorful kittens). (f) The proposed method (colorful kittens). (g) The traditional method (air valves). (h) The proposed method (air valves). (i) The traditional method (flat). (j) The proposed method (flat).
Figure 6Field map. (a) Terra Cotta Warrior; (b) 3D reconstruction.
Figure 7The results of the 3D reconstruction. (a) Body (b) Head.
Calibration results for the plane calibration board with different distances.
| Scanning Distance (cm) | Absolute Mean Value of Error (mm) | General Standard Deviation (mm) |
|---|---|---|
| 30 | 0.0227 | 0.0212 |
| 40 | 0.0229 | 0.0212 |
| 50 | 0.0300 | 0.0303 |
| 60 | 0.0336 | 0.0343 |
Figure 8Geomagic studio sphere fitting comparison. (a) The fitting result of the traditional method (b) The result of the method in this paper.
Data comparison of fitting results.
| Average Distance (mm) | Standard Deviation (mm) | Root Mean Square (mm) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The traditional method | 0.0115 | 0.0501 | 0.0514 |
| The method in this paper | 0.0016 | 0.0493 | 0.0493 |
Comparison of the three-dimensional reconstruction measurements of body parts and the actual size of the Terra-Cotta Warriors.
| Three-Dimensional Measurement Boundary Frame (mm) | Dimensions of Three-Dimensional Measurement (mm) | Actual Size of an Object (mm) | Error (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| X [−135.6255, 265.2018] | 400.8273 | 400.0 | 0.8273 |
| Y [−209.0496, 734.4292] | 943.4788 | 943.5 | 0.0212 |
| Z [−8.7729, 387.0705] | 395.8434 | 396.0 | 0.1566 |
Comparison of measurement dimensions of head 3D reconstructions and actual size of the Terra-Cotta Warriors.
| Three-Dimensional Measurement Boundary Frame (mm) | Dimensions of Three-Dimensional Measurement (mm) | Actual Size of an Object (mm) | Error (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| X [−64.2971, 207.2918] | 271.5889 | 271.0 | 0.5889 |
| Y [−25.8170, 264.2313] | 290.0483 | 290.0 | 0.0483 |
| Z [−108.8357, 63.6009] | 172.4366 | 172.0 | 0.4366 |
3D measurement data and actual value.
| X Axis (mm) | Y Axis (mm) | Z Axis (mm) | 3D Data (mm) | Actual Value (mm) | Error (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 78.081 | 5.441 | 3.291 | 78.340 | 78.501 | 0.161 |
| 37.899 | 3.279 | 0.494 | 38.044 | 38.000 | 0.044 |
| 223.785 | 2.242 | 10.705 | 224.052 | 224.00 | 0.052 |
Figure 9A sample of the packing for transportation. (a) Body, (b) Head.