Issue: Speed, achieved and potential, of
quantitative assessment of shape irregularities
(acquisition, recognition, processing and decision). This includes two options:
the aggregation option, when the optical 2D gauge is used to measure
aggregated shape irregularities within specified dimensional tolerance limits,
and the segregation option, when the system is used as
as an optical detector and selecting tool for each of specific
shape irregularity separately.
Comment: Image acquisition itself is fast (tens of milliseconds). The problem is the multiple views to be captured and the mechanical positioning of the shape or/and the camera which may be required in case of multiple views. (For example, rotating table or camera.) If no mechanical positioning is needed in front of the camera, that is, if the shapes arrive in fixed positions, then the image acquisition time is simply multiplied by the number of views/cameras, or even remains constant, as several images can be acquired simultaneously.
With mechanical positioning, the acquisition time may increase to seconds, that is, no online processing seems to be possible.
Concerning the aggregation and the segregation options, it is not clear how they influence the acquisition time. Selecting and viewing a specific irregularity may pose additional problems. However, some specific measurements -- for instance, measuring circularity, as in magnet rings -- may simplify the acquisition because of the symmetry of the shapes to be measured: pre-orienting may not be needed.
Processing means, above all, bringing the measured shape into the reference position, by comparing (matching) it with the reference shape. Here again, the time basically depends on the pre-positioning constrains, especially orientation. Also, image resolution is important. Processing is probably the slowest part of computation, at least in general case. Time may vary from 100 milliseconds to a few seconds. Certainly, in the aggregation case this is always needed. For some specific measurements (segregation), matching is not needed, as it was not done, e.g., for magnet rings. Basically, if a measurement is `direct' (or `absolute'), not `relative to reference', then no matching is needed. For example, you may say: `Measure the average width of the central leg'. For this, you don't need image-based comparison with the reference shape. This is a direct measurement. Aggregate measurements are deviations from reference.
Decision may mean comparison to the reference shape, either after matching or on the basis of absolute measurements. Then we have to decide upon the acceptability of the shape (classification). This is usually fast, since the decision rule is simple: within or beyond the tolerance limit.