4.6 Article

A Binocular Vision-Based 3D Sampling Moire Method for Complex Shape Measurement

期刊

APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL
卷 11, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/app11115175

关键词

3D sampling moire method; binocular vision; 3D shape measurement

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [12032013, 11972209, 11802156]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFB1103900]
  3. National Science and Technology Major Project [2017-VI-0003-0073]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research proposes a phase correction method to address the phase mismatch issue of sampling moire, achieving high-precision 3D shape measurement with high robustness and anti-noise ability. The method shows great potential for applications such as residual stress analysis in additive manufacturing processes.
As a promising method for moire processing, sampling moire has attracted significant interest for binocular vision-based 3D measurement, which is widely used in many fields of science and engineering. However, one key problem of its 3D shape measurement is that the visual angle difference between the left and right cameras causes inconsistency of the fringe image carrier fields, resulting in the phase mismatch of sampling moire. In this paper, we developed a phase correction method to solve this problem. After epipolar rectification and carrier phase introduction and correction, the absolute phase of the fringe images was obtained. A more universal 3D sampling moire measurement can be achieved based on the phase match and binocular vision model. Our numerical simulation and experiment showed the high robustness and anti-noise ability of this new 3D sampling moire method for high-precision 3D shape measurement. As an application, cantilever beams are fabricated by directed energy deposition (DED) using different process parameters, and their 3D deformation caused by residual stresses is measured, showing great potential for residual stress analyses during additive manufacturing.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据