2017
DOI: 10.1177/1729881417737799
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pallet recognition and localization using an RGB-D camera

Abstract: This article reports our research results on an autonomous forklift, with the focus on pallet recognition and localization using an RGB-D camera. It is a fundamental issue for unmanned storehouses, which enables the forklift to insert the forks within the pallet's slots for loading and unloading packages. Particularly, a pallet recognition and localization approach is presented. The range image is firstly segmented into planar patches based on a region growing algorithm. Then, the segments are filtered heurist… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Overall, our pallet docking accuracy can be controlled within ±6 mm and the coverage range is from 1–3 m and from −15° to +15°. When compared to the measures in the literature [ 32 ], the coverage range is roughly the same, but it does not test for severe pallet angle deflection. More importantly, the pallet accuracy in the literature [ 32 ] is only ±3 cm, which is much lower than our ±6 mm accuracy.…”
Section: Experiments Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Overall, our pallet docking accuracy can be controlled within ±6 mm and the coverage range is from 1–3 m and from −15° to +15°. When compared to the measures in the literature [ 32 ], the coverage range is roughly the same, but it does not test for severe pallet angle deflection. More importantly, the pallet accuracy in the literature [ 32 ] is only ±3 cm, which is much lower than our ±6 mm accuracy.…”
Section: Experiments Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When compared to the measures in the literature [ 32 ], the coverage range is roughly the same, but it does not test for severe pallet angle deflection. More importantly, the pallet accuracy in the literature [ 32 ] is only ±3 cm, which is much lower than our ±6 mm accuracy. Similar coverage and coverage angle experiments to ours were carried out in the literature [ 33 ], but their maximum error of recognition was 10.5 mm after only 135 experiments, which was 75% higher than our maximum error of 6 mm.…”
Section: Experiments Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3D cameras and processing algorithms of point clouds (3D-Keypoints, depth segmentation, etc.) were also used in [12,19,20] and [21] for this same task. Note that the purpose of all these works is automatic pallet detection, but using only views of the side faces.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, this method suffered from pallets varying in size and shape, as it could not capture enough features from the 2D depth information (Mohamed et al , 2020; Molter and Fottner, 2018). Some authors suggested using plane segmentation and template matching or registration to deliver more precise results (Xiao et al , 2017). However, the speed and accuracy of pallet recognition are heavily influenced by pallet types and the quality of point cloud data, potentially imposing severe requirements requiring a demanding high-fidelity depth camera and a powerful computer, significantly increasing cost.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%