A Blind Comparison Between Results of Four Image Analysis Systems using a Photo-Library of Piles of Sieved Fragments
Four image analysis systems for measuring rock fragmentation: FragScan, PowerSieve®, Split and WipFrag, have been compared under conditions necessary to provide an objective though limited assessment of their capabilities. The analysis of results is based on a sample of ten photographs taken from a series of photographs of controlled artificial muckpiles. These were created from dumping a blended mixture of sieved samples of limestone aggregate, in order to create a range of near perfect Rosin-Rammler sieve size distributions. Results from the various systems are compared with sieved results using both histogram and cumulative forms, with and without fines corrections in the case of Split and Wipfrag. Statistical indicators are evaluated to examine the match between system prediction values and sieving values. Commentaries on the results by the inventors of each system have been incorporated. All four systems were found to perform both well in some cases and poorly in others. From a detailed examination of the results, some insight into the strengths and weaknesses of the various systems is presented.
J. Latham et al., "A Blind Comparison Between Results of Four Image Analysis Systems using a Photo-Library of Piles of Sieved Fragments," Fragblast, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 105-132, Taylor & Francis, Jun 2003.
The definitive version is available at https://doi.org/10.1076/frag.22.214.171.12499
Geosciences and Geological and Petroleum Engineering
Keywords and Phrases
Fragmentation; Image analysis; Sampling bias; Size distribution; Limestone; Rocks; Statistical methods; Rock fragmentation; comparative study; particle size; photograph; Image analysis
International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)
Article - Journal
© 2003 Taylor & Francis, All rights reserved.
01 Jun 2003