Calibration of Uncooled Thermal Infrared Cameras
Calibration of Uncooled Thermal Infrared Cameras
Calibration of Uncooled Thermal Infrared Cameras
, 4, 187–197, 2015
www.j-sens-sens-syst.net/4/187/2015/
doi:10.5194/jsss-4-187-2015
© Author(s) 2015. CC Attribution 3.0 License.
Abstract. The calibration of uncooled thermal infrared (IR) cameras to absolute temperature measurement is
a time-consuming, complicated process that significantly influences the cost of an IR camera. Temperature-
measuring IR cameras display a temperature value for each pixel in the thermal image. Calibration is used to cal-
culate a temperature-proportional output signal (IR or thermal image) from the measurement signal (raw image)
taking into account all technical and physical properties of the IR camera. The paper will discuss the mathemat-
ical and physical principles of calibration, which are based on radiometric camera models. The individual stages
of calibration will be presented. After start-up of the IR camera, the non-uniformity of the pixels is first corrected.
This is done with a simple two-point correction. If the microbolometer array is not temperature-stabilized, then,
in the next step the temperature dependence of the sensor parameters must be corrected. Ambient temperature
changes are compensated for by the shutter correction. The final stage involves radiometric calibration, which
establishes the relationship between pixel signal and target object temperature. Not all pixels of a microbolome-
ter array are functional. There are also a number of defective, so-called “dead” pixels. The discovery of defective
pixels is a multistep process that is carried out after each stage of the calibration process.
Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the AMA Association for Sensor Technology.
188 H. Budzier and G. Gerlach: Calibration of uncooled thermal infrared cameras
with the slope of the straight line represented by amn and the
intercept by bmn . Slope and intercept behave pixel-specific
and must be calculated so that a standard characteristic curve
is obtained for all pixels:
Figure 5. Flow chart of radiometric calibration.
Unorm = anorm 8 + bnorm , (12)
The description of the pixel characteristic curve is often a where anorm is the slope and bnorm is the intercept. For each
function of the object temperature ϑO . The function Umn (ϑO ) pixel (m, n), a constant pair offsetmn and gainmn must be de-
of the pixel at location (m, n) is not linear. Therefore, the termined so that
characteristic curve is generally described with a second-
order polynomial (Schulz and Caldwell, 1995). For radio- Ukorr,mn = (Umn − offsetmn )∗ gainmn + Unormoffset (13)
metric IR cameras this regression is not sufficient. Here, an
exponential regression (Horny, 2003) is provided, which will applies. The voltage Ukorr,mn is then corrected, i.e. on the
be described in Sect. 3.5. standard curve traced back to the voltage value of the pixel.
The characteristic curve corrections described in the liter- Figure 6 shows the principle of this two-point correction pro-
ature (Schulz and Caldwell, 1995, and Wallrabe, 2001) also cedure. First, the pixel graph is shifted in parallel (−offsetmn )
refer to photon sensors, whose function Umn (8O ) is often and then the slope is corrected (*gainmn ). Finally, for all pix-
not linear, as well as IR vision equipment without radiomet- els a valid constant voltage can be added. The standard curve
ric adjustment. In contrast, the relationship between the ra- is thus shifted back (+Unormoffset ). This last step is not nec-
diant flux 8 and the pixel voltage Umn of a microbolome- essary in every case but guarantees that the corrected pixel
ter is linear and can be used for describing a characteris- voltages are in the same range of values as the measured pixel
Using the method of least squares, a function, UP (ϑA ) = UO + UC (ϑC ) + US (ϑS ) . (27)
1Umn = cmn Umn + dmn , (20) It is important that both the camera temperature ϑC and the
sensor temperature ϑS can be distinguished from the ambient
can now be determined so that all voltage differences 1Umn,k temperature ϑA . They are always higher by a few kelvin. If
are minimal. Using a simple regression the pixel-specific co- the ambient temperature changes, then the camera and sensor
efficients from Eq. (20) can now be obtained: temperatures change, in fact, with different time constants.
This makes them distinguishable in the output signal. The
1Umn,1 − 1Umn,2 temperature dependence of the pixel offsets US (ϑS ) is given
cmn = , (21)
hU1 i − hU2 i by Eq. (8). The signal voltage UC , resulting from the temper-
ature ϑC of the camera interior, is calculated with a quadratic
hU1 i 1Umn,2 − hU2 i 1Umn,1 polynomial:
dmn = . (22)
hU1 i − hU2 i UC (ϑC ) = aC ϑC2 + bC ϑC + cC , (28)
The corrected pixel voltage Ukorr,mn is then calculated from where the polynomial coefficients aC , bC and cC are initially
the current measured value Umn of the pixel and the differ- unknown. If a measurement is made at the point in time ti
ential voltage 1Umn : with the temperatures ϑC and ϑS i , then, by superposition of
Eqs. (27) and (28),
Ukorr,mn = Umn − 1Umn . (23)
3 2 2
Ui = UO +o3 ϑS,i +o2 ϑS,i +o1 ϑS,i +aC ϑC,i +bC ϑC,i +c (29)
The values for Eq. (15) result from a comparison of the fol-
lowing coefficients: applies using the combined constant
gainmn = (1 − cmn ) , (24) c = o0 + cC . (30)
By making a series of measurements with i = 1, 2, . . ., So now the desired polynomial coefficients are known, in
i.e. measurements under varying ambient temperatures, then particular the sensor offsets o3 , o2 and o1 . The missing con-
the following vectors are obtained: stant o0 can be chosen arbitrarily. When the calculated value
is subtracted from the sensitivity corrected signal according
1 to Eq. (8),
o3
UPixel = Ukorr /GV (ϑC ) − o3 ϑC3 + o2 ϑC2 + o1 ϑC + o0 ,
o2
3 2 2
Ui = UO ϑC,i ϑC,i ϑC,i ϑK,i ϑK,i 1 o1
.
(39)
ak
bk the camera will behave like a camera with temperature-
c stabilized microbolometers.
(31)
3.3 Defective pixel correction
This series of measurements is taken with three different ob-
ject temperatures, but they are constant in each case. In the Due to the difficult manufacturing process for microbolome-
IR image three emitters are thus shown with different tem- ter arrays, all pixels have different parameters such as operat-
peratures ϑO1 , ϑO2 and ϑO3 : ing points, characteristic curves and noise. Pixels that either
do not work or whose parameters vary greatly from the mean
Un = An X, (32) are defined as non-functional or defective. Defective pixels
are generally referred to as “dead” pixels.
with n = 1, 2, 3, and the vectors Pixel defects manifest themselves as defective pixels in the
IR image. Their actual value can only be estimated with the
3 2 2
An = UO ϑC,i ϑC,i ϑC,i ϑK,i ϑK,i 1 , (33) help of neighbouring pixels. The measured value at this point
of the IR image is not reconstructable. Therefore, the number
of dead pixels is an important quality characteristic of mi-
crobolometers. Normally not more than a maximum of 1 %
1 of all pixels should be defective.
o3
A pixel is considered defective if any of the following con-
o2
ditions is met.
X=
o1
. (34)
ak
– The operating point is outside of the previously defined
bk voltage range 1UAP of the offset value dispersion.
c
– The sensitivity differs more than ±10 % from the mean
The series of measurements can now be represented in matrix value.
notation: – The noise voltage is 1.5 times greater than the average
noise voltage of the array.
U = AX, (35)
In addition, a group of defective pixels exist, which, although
with they do not meet the above criteria, behave differently and are
classified as defective. These are, for example, short circuits
U1 between adjacent pixels or non-linear characteristics of indi-
U = U2 , (36) vidual pixels. Figure 7 shows a raw image with a plurality of
U3 defective pixels (black dots).
Defective pixels occur not only individually but also in
clusters. A cluster of dead pixels is a group of at least two
A1 defective pixels that are adjacent or gather together in a cor-
A = A2 . (37) ner. Clusters are characterized by their size, that is, by the
A3 number of defective pixels. In the image section in Fig. 7b
clusters are clearly visible. Particularly critical are defective
The vector X includes the desired polynomial coefficients.
rows or columns, because, despite a correction in the IR im-
The solution to this over-determined system of equations
age, they are always conspicuous. A column or row is usually
with I 3 can be calculated with the Gaussian standard
considered defective if more than 50 % of the pixels do not
equation:
work.
−1 Since the number of defective pixels of a microbolome-
X = AT A AT U. (38) ter is an important quality attribute, the manufactures will
Format AH AV
BH xBV
384 x 288 80 60
Figure 8. Typical subdivision of infrared microbolometer arrays in the mid (zone A) and marginal zones (zone B).
UC (ϑC ) = RV AP LC . (41)
Figure 10. Effect of two-point correction. (a) Raw image (colour bar chart in grey values) and (b) thermal image (colour bar chart in ◦ C).
Figure 11. Histograms of (a) the offset values and (b) the gain val-
ues of the microbolometer arrays under consideration. The coefficients allow for a physical interpretation. The value
of O is a general offset. Using this value, the characteristic
curve along the ordinate can be displaced in parallel. The co-
According to Horny (2003) it is possible to approximate
efficient R represents the system response of the IR camera
the sensor output signal with a Planck curve:
and is the counterpart to the system sensitivity. Planck’s ra-
R diation law can be applied for the coefficient B:
UD = B
+ O, (50)
e TO
−F c2
B= . (52)
λB
where in B, F , O and R are the regression coefficients to be
determined. Then the inverse function from Eq. (50) serves It thus describes the spectral behaviour of the system. The
to calculate the object temperature TO : wavelength λB is the effective wavelength of the IR camera.
B The coefficient F allows for an alignment of the non-linearity
TO = . (51) of the system. The coefficients can be determined using a
R
ln UD −O +F non-linear regression analysis.
5 Summary
4 Example of application
The calibration of an uncooled IR camera is a complex and
In the following, the calibration process will be illustrated by lengthy process, which significantly affects the cost of an
an example. IR camera. Depending on the measurement technology used,
The calibration process begins with the setting of the op- such as black bodies, references and climatic chambers, the
erating point. Figure 9 shows a histogram of the raw image proposed calibration allows for the measurement of absolute
with optimized operating point (dynamic range of −32 000 temperatures with a maximum measurement uncertainty of
to +32 000 grey values). To demonstrate the modulation, a about ±1 K. This is only true for steady ambient tempera-
black body with a temperature of 150 ◦ C has additionally tures, i.e. when the camera is at a constant temperature. When
been shown. changing the ambient temperature a shutter cycle is always
After the operating point has been fixed, in the first de- required. With sudden changes of the camera temperature be-
fective pixel detection procedure, all pixels which lie out- tween two shutter cycles, e.g. as a result of a jump in the am-
side of the dynamic range are defined as defective. Figure 10 bient temperature, strong variations in measurements can ap-
shows the effect of a two-point correction of the pixel graph, pear. The behaviour of the IR camera is not ergodic. An addi-
in which the variation of the values of the individual pix- tional measurement of the ambient temperature is not usually
els occurring in the raw image (Fig. 10a) is eliminated. The possible. In commercial IR cameras, this problem is solved
recognizable characteristic stripe structure is formed by the by predictive models which estimate an expected camera in-
column-wise arrangement of “blind” bolometers. The optical ternal temperature from the previous temperature change of
image resulting from the natural vignetting of the optical sig- the camera. Solutions to these problems are not known or
nal and delivered to the image edge is also always present in published.
raw image where in Fig. 10a it is hardly recognizable by the
content of the thermal image.
For rapid changes in temperature of the camera, the shut- Gross, W., Hierl, T., and Schulz, M.: Correctability and long-term
ter needs to be frequently operated, e.g. several times within stability of infrared focal plane arrays, Opt. Eng., 38, 862–869,
1 min. Since the operation of the shutter always causes 1999.
an interruption of the measuring process, the user should Horny, N.: FPA camera standardization, Infrared Phys. Technol., 44,
operate the shutter as little as possible or even completely 109–119, 2003.
Kruse, P. W.: Uncooled Infrared Imaging Arrays and systems, Aca-
avoid using it. For the shutterless operation of IR cameras,
demic Press, San Diego, 1997.
however, much more complex calibration algorithms are Mounier, E.: Technical and market trends for microbolometers for
required, which build on those described here. Such an thermography and night vision, Proc. SPIE, 8012, 80121U-1–6,
approach is pursued by Tempelhahn et al. (2014). 2011.
Schulz, M. and Caldwell, L.: Nonuniformity correction and cor-
Edited by: R. Morello rectability of infrared focal plane arrays, Infrared Phys. Technol.,
Reviewed by: three anonymous referees 36, 763–777, 1995.
Tempelhahn, A., Budzier, H.; Krause, V., and Gerlach, G.: Devel-
opment of a shutterless calibration process for microbolometer-
References
based infrared measurement systems, International Conference
on Quantitative Infrared Thermography, 7–11 July 2014, Bor-
Black, S. H., Sessler, T., Gordon, E., Kraft, R., Kocain, T., Lamb,
deaux, QIRT-2014-060, 2014.
M., Williams, R., and Yang, T.: Uncooled detector development
Vollmer, M. and Möllmann, K.-P.: Infrared Thermal Imaging,
at Raytheon, Proc. SPIE, 8012, 80121A-1–12, 2011.
Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2010.
Budzier, H.: Radiometrische Kalibrierung ungekühlter Infrarot-
Wallrabe, A.: Nachtsichttechnik, Vieweg, Braun-
Kameras, TUDpress, Dresden, 2014.
schweig/Wiesbaden, 2001.
Budzier, H. and Gerlach, G.: Thermal Infrared Sensors, John Wiley
& Sons, Chichester, 2011.
DeWitt, D. P. and Nutter, G. D.: Theory and Practice of Radiation
Thermometry, Wiley, New York, 1989.