Modal-Based Camera Correction for Large Pitch Stereo Imaging

  • Prather Lanier
  • Nathan Short
  • Kevin Kochersberger
  • Lynn Abbott
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)


Stereo imaging is typically performed using two cameras that have been calibrated to account for lens-induced distortion and pointing errors, resulting in rectified images that are processed to obtain distance information. The accuracy of a 3-D map obtained from stereopsis is closely tied to the calibration data, and so relative motion between the cameras must be kept small. In order to reduce errors from a stereo image caused by motion, the structural connection between the cameras can be stiffened, but this comes with a weight and size penalty. For cameras that have a large baseline (pitch) distance, it may be impossible to have enough stiffness in the structure to obtain reasonable error bounds. An alternative approach is to model the camera motion using a modal technique and account for this motion during imaging. This paper outlines a procedure for stereo camera correction using measured accelerations to optimally trigger the camera. Results of the technique are shown for a simple beam that is center-mounted to a shaker to induce symmetric bending.


Cantilever Beam Deflection Angle Camera Motion Stereo Image Stereo Vision 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Shapiro, L., and Stockman, G. (2001). Computer Vision. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bradski, G., and Adrian, K. (2008). Learning OpenCV: Computer Vision with the OpenCV Library. Sebastopol: O'Reilly Media Inc.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
    Inman, Daniel J. 2001. Engineering Vibration. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall,Inc.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Watec. (2008). Watec Cameras. Retrieved September 28, 2009, from
  6. 6.
    Axis Communications. (2009). Axis Communications. Retrieved September 28, 2009, from
  7. 7.
    Lee, I. and Lee, J. J., “Vibration Analysis of Composite Wing with Tip Mass Using Finite Elements,” Computers and Structures, Vol. 47, No. 3, p. 495 – 504, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eslimy-Isfahany, S. H. R., and Banerjee, J. R., “Dynamic Response of Composite Beams with Application to Aircraft Wings,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 34, No. 6, p.785 – 791, Nov – Dec 1997.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Balakrishnan, A. V., “Modeling Response of Flexible High-Aspect-Ratio Wings to Wind Turbulence,” Journal of Aerospace Engineering, Vol. 19, No. 2, p. 121 – 132, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bennett,F. V., and Yntema, R. T., “The Evaluation of Several Approximate Methods for Calculating Symmetrical Bending-Moment Response of Flexible Airplanes to Isotropic Atmospheric Turbulence,” NASA TN 2-18-59L, March 1959.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Businees Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Prather Lanier
    • 1
  • Nathan Short
    • 1
  • Kevin Kochersberger
    • 1
  • Lynn Abbott
    • 1
  1. 1.Unmanned System LaboratoryVirginia TechBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations