The present invention relates generally to the field of automatic test equipment for the testing of electronic signals generated by equipment under test including, but not limited to, complex video signals. More specifically, the present invention relates to a method and system for determining the validity of video monitors and their associated systems in various environments, including what are considered difficult environments such as a jet fighter cockpit, without disconnecting and removing the constituent electronic modules.
Automatic test equipment for the testing and measuring of electronic signals and electronic video signals is known to those skilled in the art to which the invention pertains. Electronics is one of the primary markets for automatic test equipment and drives much innovation in this realm due to constantly evolving and demanding requirements. Electronics are universally installed on numerous commercial and military platforms including automobiles, jet fighters, helicopters, tanks and other mobile vehicles. Often, in-place testing of such electronics is not always supported with a sufficient built-in test function (commonly referred to as a BIT function) and system trouble reports require time consuming instrument (UUT) removal from the platform. The situation becomes even more complex when an interconnected system is failing and all of the constituent modules of the system must be removed for bench testing. Radar displays or multi-function displays are examples of such an interconnected system.
Portable automatic test equipment for the testing of video devices is also known to those skilled in the art to which the invention pertains. Such test equipment requires a physical electrical connection to the unit or units under test (UUT) in order to capture a video signal and/or generate a video signal. In instances where physical connections are not possible, typical presently available portable automatic test equipment is unable to perform its mission.
Accordingly, there exists a need to provide a new method that does not require physical electrical connections to the video or indicator system and can still identify and verify images from these indicators. Such a method would reduce unnecessary UUT removal, thereby producing measurable economic and time savings.
A portable automatic video device tester with an optical imaging ability, e.g., a camera, is disclosed. This tester combines a portable computer, novel software embodied on computer-readable media with automatic scale transformation algorithms and electronic template comparison technology, a video acquisition function and a high resolution camera with versatile mounting options.
There are technical difficulties to overcome when capturing an image with a camera, or other optical imaging device, that is arbitrarily aimed at a target image. Without precision alignment of the camera to the target image, there will be scale distortions in the captured image and a linear comparison between the captured image and a predetermined reference image cannot be successfully performed. Complicating the matter further, the environment in which this testing is to be performed, mobile vehicles and aircraft, is not designed to allow any form of secure mechanical attachment for a camera.
To overcome these limitations, the present invention includes a camera designed with one of several possible mounting options including a custom-fit handheld shroud with integrated camera mount, a universal seat mount which mounts the camera to any available seating surface, or a user-wearable helmet with integrated camera which an operator would wear while sitting in the area where the video monitor would normally be viewed from.
The video acquisition function of the video device tester will capture the video signal coming from the camera, without being physically electrically connected thereto, and forward it to the tester software associated with the video device tester. The tester software is responsible for programmatically mapping the captured image from the camera to a predetermined reference image for the specific monitor or video device whose screen is being imaged by the camera (i.e., calculating a transformation matrix), comparing the captured mapped image to the reference image and determining the validity of the video device. Optionally, if the captured image fails validity, the tester software can search a reference library containing images with known anomalies in an attempt to diagnose the fault and recommend the proper module removal/repairs.
While a preferred application of the portable video device tester in accordance with the invention is verification of video monitors and subsystems, the tester is also well suited for the testing and validation of non-video indicators or an orientation validation of manual controls, such as performed during an aircraft preflight check.
Also disclosed is a portable analyzer for testing a unit under test, the unit being a video monitor, an indicator or a gauge. The portable analyzer includes a portable chassis, a high resolution camera, a video acquisition module arranged on the chassis and coupled to the camera, a memory component including a reference image library, and a processor coupled to the video acquisition module and configured to command the video acquisition module to initiate the camera to obtain at least one image of the unit under test and perform analysis of the obtained image(s) relative to one or more images in the reference image library to assess functionality of the unit under test. The portable analyzer also includes a portable computer monitor coupled to the processor on which information about the assessed functionality of the unit under test is provided, and a mounting structure, arrangement, device, system or means for mounting the camera in a fixed position in front of the unit under test. The mounting means include whatever structure is disclosed herein that contributes to the mounting of the camera in a fixed position in front of the unit under test.
In one embodiment, the mounting means include a shroud attached at one end to the camera and having an opening at an opposite end adapted to fit exactly over the unit under test. The shroud may be rigid and made of opaque material. In another embodiment, the mounting means include a base adapted to be placed on a seating surface or other rigid surface, at least one strap for securing the base to the seating surface, and an extendable arm attached to the base and to the camera to enable movement of the camera relative to the unit under test. In another embodiment, the mounting means include a helmet, the camera being integrated into the helmet.
A more complete appreciation of the present invention and many of the attendant advantages thereof will be readily understood by reference to the following detailed description of the invention when considered in connection with the accompanying drawings in which:
For the purposes of the following description, reference will be made to a ‘cockpit’ as the location where the invention will be performing its primary function. This terminology is used to illustrate an exemplifying application of the method and system in accordance with the invention within an applicable environment in which the equipment to be tested is mounted and is not intended to limit the scope of this invention in any way.
Referring to the accompanying drawings wherein the same reference numerals refer to the same or similar elements, a portable automatic video test analyzer in accordance with the invention is generally designated as 8 and generally includes either only partly or in its entirety, concepts from a Programmable Video Generator and Analyzer (PVGA/ePVGA), such as the type disclosed in the current assignee's U.S. Pat. No. 6,396,536 incorporated by reference herein in its entirety (shown in
The computer 14 performs numerous functions, including but not limited to, conducting all test operations and displaying user prompts, visual image feedback and test results on the portable computer monitor 16. Operator input to the computer 14 is transferred via, but not limited to, conventional means of computer control such as keyboard, touch screen, or mouse. Such device for effecting control over the computer 14 are often referred to as user interface devices or user interface means and represented by box 22 in
In a preferred embodiment, a technician using the video test analyzer 8 will select the monitor or indicator to-be-tested from a visual menu presenting available choices on the computer monitor 16. In some embodiments, there will be more than one independent image for a given monitor or indicator, depending upon the present mode of operation of the monitor system. The technician may select the proper anticipated image or may select a feature that will have a software program executed by the video test analyzer 8 search all available images in the tester's reference image library 20 for a match when the test image is captured by the high resolution camera 18. This software program may be embodied in usual physical componentry, either physically present in the video test analyzer 8 or available using a communications network, and is made accessible to the computer 14.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Referring again to
An exemplifying method for using the video test analyzer 8 described above is shown in flow chart form in
Once the camera apparatus of any of the configurations shown in
The method of image comparison, step 64, utilizes concepts described in, for example, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/238,588 assigned to the current assignee, and which is incorporated by reference herein. Specifically, the image pixels of both the test image and the reference image are concatenated (respectively) and treated as analog waveforms. As defined in the '588 application, a pair of upper and lower timing-vs.-voltage limit lines may be defined from the basis reference image by specifying an allowable amplitude tolerance value (Y axis) and adding/subtracting it from every pixel value. Furthermore, a position (X axis) tolerance is defined by shifting each pixel value right and left and calculating minimum and maximum pixel values at each location. It is anticipated that the transformation matrix described above will not always produce a perfect pixel-to-pixel matrix.
The comparison method defined in the '588 application allows for a tolerant data comparison that would not have otherwise been possible. If the comparison results in a successful status, as defined by two statistics (number of pixels failing on a line, number of lines failing in the overall image), then the tested image is reported as passing, step 66. This is considered a validation of the monitor being tested, or other indicator, control or gauge being tested.
If the comparison results in a failing status, the method may terminate here or, if available in the tester's reference library 20, other known-bad reference images could be compared to the test image (step 68). If a tolerant match is found, the report and/or documented details attached to or associated with the known-bad reference image is/are reported to the technician as a guide to assist in the repair effort (step 70). This report may be made on the portable computer monitor 16 or through any technique to notify the technician of a possible repair solution.
In a preferred embodiment, the known-bad reference images are generated from previously executed tests and saved to the reference image library 20 with an accompanying report detailing the details of the cause of the problem. Documented details include, but are not limited to, which module(s) failed, which component(s), time of repair, and prior symptoms of the problem. If the reference image library 20 does not contain any known-bad reference images for the monitor, the video test analyzer 8 will enter the current test image into the reference image library 20.
There are multiple benefits of this invention over other legacy methods. As stated, the unit or equipment under test does not require removal or electrical access to perform the test. Also, in event of a suspected failure, the comparison to known-bad reference images stored in the reference image library 20 results in a reduction of unnecessary module removal for repair by utilizing the documentation associated with the known-bad reference image and stored in a memory component accessible upon access to the known-bad reference images. Additionally, this invention can universally test monitors of all video formats including composite video, raster video and stroke video and all monitor technologies, such as CRT and LCD displays, resulting in economic savings through a reduction in required testing equipment. Furthermore, non-video devices, such as dial and gauges may be also interrogated with this method.
The basic structure of the tester described above can be readily modified to suit any given set of requirements or configurations. For instance, the video test analyzer 8 could be constructed as individual modules in a VXI, PXI or other format chassis. In other embodiments, the computer 14 may be a laptop, tablet or other external computing device. Additionally, improvements and variations could be made to the camera mounting mechanisms described in connection with
In this regard,
In a similar manner,
Instead of a single camera 78 as shown in
With the foregoing structure and functionality, several innovations are obtained. For example, new and versatile apparatus for portable testing of electronic video monitors and indicator systems that do not require physical access to the electrical signals which are driving those systems are provided.
The invention also enables portable testing of electronic video monitors and indicator subsystems while they are still within the physical environment in which they are installed, such as an aircraft cockpit or crew cabin. The invention also enables testing of both video and non-video indicators in an automated method. Further, the invention enables automatic validation of the current orientation of manual controls. Even further, the invention enables testing and validating of manual controls that have display feedback presented on visual displays or indicators within the environment of those manual controls.
The foregoing invention may be used as alternatives to or in combination with other inventions of the same assignee herein. Some of these inventions are disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,179,344, 5,337,014, 5,952,834, 6,057,690, 6,396,536, 6,429,796, 6,502,045, 7,065,466, 7,180,477, 7,253,792, 7,289,159, 7,358,877, 7,495,674, 7,624,379, 7,642,940, 7,683,842, 7,768,533, and 7,978,218, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/938,911 filed Nov. 13, 2007, Ser. No. 12/043,183 filed Mar. 6, 2008, Ser. No. 12/687,283 filed Jan. 14, 2010, now abandoned, Ser. No. 12/781,888 filed May 18, 2010, Ser. No. 13/182,063 filed Jul. 13, 2011, Ser. No. 13/237,304 filed Sep. 20, 2011, Ser. No. 13/236,869 filed Sep. 20, 2011, Ser. No. 13/238,588 filed Sep. 21, 2011, Ser. No. 13/303,960 filed Nov. 23, 2011, and Ser. No. 13/324,240 filed Dec. 13, 2011, and U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 61/597,877 filed Feb. 13, 2012, all of which are incorporated by reference herein.
The portable analyzer described above may be used as explained in the method depicted in
The three mounting techniques described above may be used in the method, specifically, 1) the camera is mounted in front of the unit under test by attaching a shroud at one end to the camera and fitting an opening at an opposite end of the shroud exactly over the unit under test, or 2) the camera is mounted in front of the unit under test by placing a base on a seating surface or other rigid surface, securing the base, by at least one strap, to the seating surface, and attaching an extendable arm to the base and to the camera to enable movement of the camera relative to the unit under test, or 3) the camera is mounted in front of the unit under test by integrating the camera into a helmet adapted to be worn by a person viewing the unit under test.
Further, the method may entail comparing images of the unit under test to the known-good images in the reference image library to assess functionality of the unit under test, when the reference image library contains known-good images of units under test. When the reference image library further contains known-bad images of units under test along with information about anomalies associated with the known-bad images, the method may entail comparing images of the unit under test to the known-bad images in the reference image library to provide, upon a match between an image of the unit under test and the known-bad images, the information about the anomalies associated with the matching known-bad image. Further, the processor may be programmed to derive a transformation matrix between the obtained at least one image of the unit under test and at least one image in the reference image library and then apply a fault-tolerant comparison between the two images resulting in a pass/fail determination of the validity of the obtained at least one image of the unit under test.
Having thus described a few particular embodiments of the invention, various alterations, modifications, and improvements will readily occur to those skilled in the art. Such alterations, modifications and improvements as are made obvious by this disclosure are intended to be part of this description though not expressly stated herein, and are intended to be within the spirit and scope of the invention. Accordingly, the foregoing description is by way of example only, and is not limiting. The invention is limited only as defined in the claims and equivalents thereto.
This application claims priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(e) of U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 61/609,399 filed Mar. 12, 2012, now abandoned, incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4884145 | Kaye et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
5572444 | Lentz et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5638461 | Fridge | Jun 1997 | A |
6396536 | Howell et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
7180477 | Howell | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7180530 | Whittington et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7253792 | Biagiotti et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7289159 | Biagiotti et al. | Oct 2007 | B1 |
7495674 | Biagiotti et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7768533 | Biagiotti et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7978218 | Biagiotti et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8300153 | Engel et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
20040179603 | Kamisuwa | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20070085906 | Hill et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070195209 | Cheng | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070236366 | Gur et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20100214130 | Weinmann et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100214418 | Germain | Aug 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61609399 | Mar 2012 | US |