Loading…
Development and validation of a quantitative model for the subjective and objective minimum resolvable temperature difference of thermal imaging systems
The performance evaluation of infrared (IR) imaging systems plays a vital role prior to effective deployment. The minimum resolvable temperature difference (MRTD) is the primary key parameter of an IR imaging system, because it describes the overall system performance including that of a human opera...
Saved in:
Published in: | Optical engineering 2019-10, Vol.58 (10), p.104111-104111 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | The performance evaluation of infrared (IR) imaging systems plays a vital role prior to effective deployment. The minimum resolvable temperature difference (MRTD) is the primary key parameter of an IR imaging system, because it describes the overall system performance including that of a human operator. MRTD defines the minimum temperature difference required to resolve the four-bar target of defined spatial frequencies and is used to estimate the recognition ranges of a thermal imaging system before deployment for field evaluation. Conventionally, MRTD measurements use the temperature difference of a four-bar target that is exposed to the minimum resolvable condition. In current practice, subjective MRTD measurement employs a human operator to observe the minimum resolvable condition and therefore suffers from poor repeatability. It is a tedious procedure to evaluate large numbers of thermal imaging sights during production. In this work, an accurate objective MRTD measurement method is described by measuring the modulation transfer function and the noise equivalent temperature difference (NETD) of the thermal imager. Experiments were carried out to measure both subjective and objective MRTD. The results of the subjective and objective MRTD measurements are presented along with a comparison of the results. It is observed that the percentage error in objective MRTD is very close to that from a conventional subjective MRTD measurement. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0091-3286 1560-2303 |
DOI: | 10.1117/1.OE.58.10.104111 |