Search Results

With a number of 3-D scanners now available commercially, little work has been done to directly compare their capabilities. This study was designed to characterize differences between the Vitronic Vitus Pro scanner owned by TNO in the Netherlands and the Cyberware WB4 scanner owned by AFRL/HECP at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. For the purpose of the study, the Cyberware scanner was transported to the TNO facility in the Netherlands. Ten male and ten female subjects were scanned three times in each of three poses in both scanners. All scans for a subject were taken in one session. 3-D image data were segmented, aligned and compared using a difference mapping algorithm. The Cyberware scanner yielded useable data for all twenty subjects; however, the scans from the Vitronics scanner were of higher resolution. This method can be used to compare scanners or poses.

Traditional and three-dimensional (3-D) scan tools capture anthropometric information in different ways. It is not surprising that measurements from each can have different values. Some possible reasons for differences are tissue compression when using traditional tools, and the difficulty of precise replication of traditional measures using computer algorithms. Even with precise replication of traditional methods, there may be consistent differences in magnitude that can be compensated for. Once compensation factors have been determined, people who have only traditional tools available can also use measurements extracted from 3-D scan data, and people who use 3-D scans can relate extracted measurements to historical data. With adjustments, the results of either method can be used interchangeably. This research compares the consistency of traditional and 3-D scan anthropometry for a small set of traditional univariate measures.