Skip to main content
Log in

Motion compensated image processing and optimal parameters for egg crack detection using modified pressure

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Sensing and Instrumentation for Food Quality and Safety Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Shell eggs with microcracks are often undetected during egg grading processes. In the past, a modified pressure imaging system was developed to detect eggs with microcracks without adversely affecting the quality of normal intact eggs. The basic idea of the modified pressure imaging system was to apply a short burst of vacuum within a transparent chamber in order to cause a momentary and forced opening in the egg shell with a crack and thus to utilize the changes in image intensities during this process. The intensity changes from dark to bright in the shell surface were recorded by a high-resolution digital camera and processed by an image ratio technique. However, the performance of the imaging system was compromised by both false readings due to motion of intact eggs relative to the camera and an improper selection of parameter values for the detection algorithm. First, a machine vision technique based on motion estimation of individual eggs was developed to compensate any motion errors present on images and thus reduce false crack-detection readings. The simulation results of the developed motion estimation and compensation technique with 3,000 eggs showed no false errors. Second, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate and compare the performance of the crack-detection algorithm under varying parameters (ratio and detection-tolerance thresholds) and to find the optimal parameter values. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was used to compare the performance under varying parameter values. The minimum distance and Youden index criteria were used to find the optimal values from the ROC curve. The minimum distance criterion found the optimal parameters at 1.11 and 20 (or 1.1 and 25) for the ratio and detection-tolerance thresholds, respectively. The true positive and false positive rates at the optimal conditions were 98.91 and 0.14 %, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. E.C.D. Todd, Int. J. Food Microbiol. 30, 125 (1996)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. M.M. Bain, N. MacLeod, R. Thomson, J.W. Hancock, Poult. Sci. 85, 2001 (2006)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. D.R. Jones, K.C. Lawrence, S.C. Yoon, G.W. Heitschmidt, Poult. Sci. 89, 761 (2010)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. USDA, Agricultural Marketing Service, United States standards, grades, and weight classes for shell eggs. AMS-56 (2000)

  5. USDA, Agricultural Marketing Service, “Egg-grading manual,” Agricultural Handbook Number 75, (2000)

  6. USDA, Agricultural Marketing Service, Regulations governing the voluntary grading of shell eggs. 7 CFR Part 56 (2008)

  7. K.C. Lawrence, S.C. Yoon, G.W. Heitschmidt, D.R. Jones, B. Park, Sens. Instrum. Food Qual. Saf. 2, 116 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. K.C. Lawrence, S.C. Yoon, D.R. Jones, G.W. Heitschmidt, B. Park, W.R. Windham, Trans. ASABE 52, 983 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  9. K.C. Lawrence, Y.C. Yoon, G.W. Heitschmidt, D.R. Jones, B. Park, V.A. Savage, U.S. Patent 7,796,241, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  10. X. Deng, W. Wang, H. Chen, H. Xie, Comput. Electron. Agric. 70, 135 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. B. DeKetelaere, P. Coucke, J. DeBaerdemaeker, J. Agric. Eng. Res. 76(2), 157 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. B. DeKetelaere, F. Bamelis, B. Kemps, E. Decuypere, J. Debaerdemaeker, World’s Poult. Sci. J. 60, 289 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. J. Lin, Y. Lin, M. Hsieh, C. Yang, ASAE Paper No. 016032. St. Joseph, MI (2001)

  14. P. Coucke, Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 1998

  15. G.N. Bliss, U.S. Patent 3,744,299, 1973

  16. R.T. Elster, J.W. Goodrum, Trans. ASAE 34(1), 307 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  17. J.W. Goodrum, R.T. Elster, Trans. ASAE 35(4), 1323 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  18. A.M. Tekalp, in Digital Video Processing (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 1995)

  19. A. Yilmaz, O. Javed, M. Shah, ACM Comput. Surv. 38(4), 1–45 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. http://www.darpagrandchallenge.com/

  21. L. Tang, L.F. Tian, Trans. ASABE 51(3), 1079 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Y. Yang, M.D. Schrock, Trans. ASABE 36(4), 1229 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  23. J.M. Sanchiz, F. Pla, J.M. Marchant, SPIE Conference on Enhanced and Synthetic Vision, p. 287, 1998

  24. F. Cointault, P. Sarrazin, M. Paindavoine, Precis. Agric. 4, 279 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. W. Hu, T. Tan, L. Wang, S. Maybank, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. C 34(3), 334 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. H.L. Chou, C.C. Tseng, U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2011/0157392 A1, 2011

  27. H. V. Poor, in An Introduction to Signal Detection and Estimation (Springer, New York, NY)

  28. M. Gonen, SUGI 31 Proceedings, Paper 210-31, 2006

  29. N. Ancona, G. Cicirelli, E. Stella, A. Distante, IEEE ICPR, 2, p. 426, 2002

  30. E.F. Schisterman, N.J. Perkins, A. Liu, H. Bondell, Epidemiology 16(1), 73 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seung Chul Yoon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yoon, S.C., Lawrence, K.C., Jones, D.R. et al. Motion compensated image processing and optimal parameters for egg crack detection using modified pressure. Sens. & Instrumen. Food Qual. 5, 172–184 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-012-9124-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-012-9124-1

Keywords

Navigation