4.6 Article

A Joint Extrinsic Calibration Tool for Radar, Camera and Lidar

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT VEHICLES
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 571-582

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TIV.2021.3065208

关键词

Calibration; camera; intelligent vehicles; lidar; optimization; ROS; radar; robots

资金

  1. NWO TTW under the project STW [13434]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Our study addresses joint extrinsic calibration of lidar, camera and radar sensors, proposing a single calibration target design for all three modalities. The results show that using terms for all sensor pairs is the most robust method, especially for lidar to radar calibration.
We address joint extrinsic calibration of lidar, camera and radar sensors. To simplify calibration, we propose a single calibration target design for all three modalities, and implement our approach in an open-source tool with bindings to Robot Operating System (ROS). Our tool features three optimization configurations, namely using error terms for a minimal number of sensor pairs, or using terms for all sensor pairs in combination with loop closure constraints, or by adding terms for structure estimation in a probabilistic model. Apart from relative calibration where relative transformations between sensors are computed, our work also addresses absolute calibration that includes calibration with respect to the mobile robot's body. Two methods are compared to estimate the body reference frame using an external laser scanner, one based on markers and the other based on manual annotation of the laser scan. In the experiments, we evaluate the three configurations for relative calibration. Our results show that using terms for all sensor pairs is most robust, especially for lidar to radar, when minimum five board locations are used. For absolute calibration the median rotation error around the vertical axis reduces from 1 degrees before calibration, to 0.33 degrees using the markers and 0.02 degrees with manual annotations.

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