CAD-based View Planning with Globally Consistent Registration for Robotic Inspection

Abstract

In robotic 3D inspection systems, it is essential to obtain precise measurement results by covering the entire surface area of the target objects. To this end, various view planning methods have been proposed to guarantee complete coverage in order to ensure precise measurements of the target object. However, for precise inspection, in addition to the coverage of the object, globally consistent registration should also be considered. If the target object has a complex shape, occlusions may occur and registration often fails. Therefore, this study proposes a computer-aided design-based automatic inspection system that simultaneously guarantees both the coverage and globally consistent registration model for objects with complex shapes. To this end, view planning that covers all areas of the complex-shaped objects without occlusions and guarantees globally consistent registration is proposed. Experiments were performed on a piston head, casting mold for a smartphone case, and gear; these objects were inspected using an error map and a quantitative error report. Experimental results show that complex-shaped objects can be successfully inspected without unscanned areas and registration failure by using the proposed method.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

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
Fig. 14

References

  1. 1.

    Xu, J., Xi, N., Zhang, C., Shi, Q., & Gregory, J. (2011). Real-time 3D shape inspection system of automotive parts based on structured light pattern. Optics and Laser Technology, 43(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2010.04.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Lyngby, R. A., Nielsenb, E., De Chiffrec, L., Aanæsa, H., & Dahla, A. B. (2019). Development and metrological validation of a new automated scanner system for freeform measurements on wind turbine blades in the production. Precision Engineering, 56, 255–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.precisioneng.2018.12.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Cicconi, P., & Raffaeli, R. (2020). An industry 4.0 framework for the quality inspection in gearboxes production. Computer-Aided Design and Applications, 17(4), 813–824. https://doi.org/10.14733/cadaps.2020.813-824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Prieto, F., Redarce, T., Lepage, R., & Boulanger, P. (2002). An automated inspection system. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 19(12), 917–925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001700200104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Scott, W. R. (2009). Model-based view planning. Machine Vision and Applications, 20, 47–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001700200104

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Chen, S., Li, Y., & Kwok, N. M. (2011). Active vision in robotic systems: A survey of recent developments. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 30(11), 1343–1377. https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364911410755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Jing, W., Polden, J., Tao, P. Y., Goh, C. F., Lin, W., & Shimada, K. (2017). Model-based coverage motion planning for industrial 3D shape inspection applications. 2017 13th IEEE Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), 20–23. https://doi.org/10.1109/COASE.2017.8256278

  8. 8.

    Bogaerts, B., Sels, S., Vanlanduit, S., & Penne, R. (2018). A gradient-based inspection path optimization approach. International IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 3(3), 2646–2653. https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2018.2827161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Bogaerts, B., Sels, S., Vanlanduit, S., & Penne, R. (2019). Near optimal path planning for complex robotic inspection tasks. International arXiv preprint

  10. 10.

    Besl, P. J., & Mckay, N. D. (1992). A method for registration of 3-D shape. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 14(2), 239–256. https://doi.org/10.1109/34.121791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Germani, M., Mandorli, F., Mengoni, M., & Raffaeli, R. (2010). CAD-based environment to bridge the gap between product design and tolerance control. Precision Engineering, 34, 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.precisioneng.2008.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Wu, Q., Zou, W., & Xu, D. (2016). Viewpoint planning for freeform surface inspection using plane structured light scanners. International Journal of Automation and Computing, 13, 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11633-015-0916-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Haleem, A., Gupta, P., Bahl, S., Javaid, M., & Kumar, L. (2021). 3D scanning of a carburetor body using COMET 3D scanner supported by COLIN 3D software: Issues and solutions. Materials Today: Proceedings, 39(1), 331–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.07.427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Barone, S., Paoli, A., & Razionale, A. V. (2012). Three-dimensional point cloud alignment detecting fiducial markers by structured light stereo imaging. Machine Vision and Applications, 23, 217–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00138-011-0340-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Bauer, P., Flores, A. M., & Reinhart, G. (2019). Free-form surface analysis and linking strategies for high registration accuracy in quality assurance applications. Procedia CIRP, 81, 968–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2019.03.236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Raffaeli, R., Mengoni, M., Germani, M., & Mandorli, F. (2013). Off-line view planning for the inspection of mechanical parts. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing, 7(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-012-0160-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Blagojević, M., Živković, M., & Topalović, M. (2017). Registration and surface inspection of automotive pressed parts based on point cloud generated by optical measuring techniques. Mobility and Vehicle Mechanics, 43(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.24874/mvm.2017.43.04.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Papon, J., Abramov, A., Schoeler, M., & Wörgötter, F. (2013). Voxel cloud connectivity segmentation - Supervoxels for point clouds. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2027–2034.

  19. 19.

    Hornung, A., Wurm, K. M., Bennewitz, M., Stachniss, C., & Burgard, W. (2013). OctoMap: an efficient probabilistic 3D mapping framework based on octrees. Autonomous Robots, 34(3), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-012-9321-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Katz, S., Tal, A., & Basri, R. (2007). Direct visibility of point sets. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 26(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/1275808.1276407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Shi, Q., Xi, N., & Zhang, C. (2010). Develop a robot-aided area sensing system for 3D shape inspection. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4000756

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by an IITP grant funded by the Korea Government MSIT. (No. 2018-0-00622).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jae-Bok Song.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Na, M., Jo, H. & Song, JB. CAD-based View Planning with Globally Consistent Registration for Robotic Inspection. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. 22, 1391–1399 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-021-00550-w

Download citation

Keywords

  • Model-based robotic inspection
  • View planning
  • Globally consistent registration