0

Full Content is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >
Proceedings Article

NVThermIP vs TOD: matching the target acquisition range criteria

[+] Author Affiliations
Piet Bijl, Maarten A. Hogervorst

TNO Defense Security and Safety, Human Factors (Netherlands)

Proc. SPIE 6543, Infrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing XVIII, 65430C (April 30, 2007); doi:10.1117/12.716656
Text Size: A A A
From Conference Volume 6543

  • Infrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing XVIII
  • Gerald C. Holst
  • Orlando, Florida, USA | April 09, 2007

abstract

Currently, three major approaches exist to predict Target Acquisition (TA) performance with thermal imagers: i) the TOD laboratory method and model, ii) the NVThermIP model and iii) the MTDP lab method and TRM3 model. In this study, TOD measurements, TOD predictions and NVThermIP predictions are compared for a number of simulated sensors ranging from very well-sampled to highly under-sampled. A similar comparison study using a previous (2001) version of the NVTherm model showed huge differences in sensor performance predictions (Bijl, Hogervorst & Valeton; SPIE Proceedings Vol. 4719, 51-62; 2002). The most important result of the current study is that NVThermIP predictions are much closer to the TOD measurements and predictions than those of its predecessor, showing limited effect of under-sampling. Quantitatively, TA range predictions for well-sampled imagers are equivalent and NVThermIP predicts 25% longer ranges than the TOD model for under-sampled imagers with MP = 0.35• VP and β = 1.25, where VP are the criteria published with NVThermIP to predict TA range for a variety of target sets, MP are the corresponding TOD magnification factors, and β is the slope of the probability vs range function in the TOD target acquisition model. Which method yields the best predictions under which circumstances should be the subject of an empirical study using TA performance for real targets. It is therefore advised that all available TA validation data be presented in such a way that all models and methods can be compared to the data directly and unambiguously.

© (2007) COPYRIGHT SPIE--The International Society for Optical Engineering. Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Citation

Piet Bijl and Maarten A. Hogervorst
"NVThermIP vs TOD: matching the target acquisition range criteria", Proc. SPIE 6543, Infrared Imaging Systems: Design, Analysis, Modeling, and Testing XVIII, 65430C (April 30, 2007); doi:10.1117/12.716656; http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.716656


Access This Article
Sign In to Access Full Content
Please Wait... Processing your request... Please Wait.
Sign in or Create a personal account to Buy this article ($15 for members, $18 for non-members).
 

Figures

Tables

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Related Book Chapters

Topic Collections

Advertisement


Buy this article ($18 for members, $25 for non-members).
Sign In