Surface reflectance variations in realistic targets

David J. Thomas; Roger Evans; Jim Crosby; James C. Jafolla

doi:10.1117/12.327160

7 July 1998 Surface reflectance variations in realistic targets

David J. Thomas, Roger Evans, Jim Crosby, James C. Jafolla

Proceedings Volume 3375, Targets and Backgrounds: Characterization and Representation IV; (1998) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.327160
Event: Aerospace/Defense Sensing and Controls, 1998, Orlando, FL, United States

Abstract

Signature prediction models have become an increasingly important tool for the ground combat vehicle designer in recent years. System designers have been successful in prototyping entire vehicles in each spectral band. With this success, focused efforts to improve the accuracy of these signature models have produced robust, validated performance for many operational conditions. One of the most recent improvement in prediction models for ground vehicle systems has been improvements in surface reflectance. Surface reflectance is central to the predicted performance of these models and range from simple to very complex. Simple surface reflectance models treats the surface as totally lambertiant has an advantage of being fast to calculate but does not take into account the specular nature which all surfaces posses. The bi-directional reflectance distribution function (BRDF) is a more complex representation which allows for a more accurate representation of surface reflectance phenomena. The input to the BRDF usually comes from a laboratory sample measured in a laboratory setting. These laboratory samples are made to be perfect so that comparisons can be made between variations in formulas for the coatings. The limitation of these inputs is that surfaces that are exposed to environments effects and normal daily use are the more representative of data we are interested in. Other effects such as the conditions under which the surface coatings are applied can cause reflectance variability as well. This paper explores the variability on real targets and compares them to laboratory samples. The implication of these variations to signature models will be explored.

Citation Download Citation

David J. Thomas, Roger Evans, Jim Crosby, and James C. Jafolla "Surface reflectance variations in realistic targets", Proc. SPIE 3375, Targets and Backgrounds: Characterization and Representation IV, (7 July 1998); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.327160

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available

Members: $17.00

Non-members: $21.00 ADD TO CART

PROCEEDINGS
12 PAGES

DOWNLOAD PAPER SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

GET CITATION

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Get copyright permission Get copyright permission on Copyright Marketplace

KEYWORDS

Reflectivity

Bidirectional reflectance transmission function

Data modeling

Visualization

Systems modeling

Near infrared

Process modeling

Show All Keywords

Keywords/Phrases

Search In:

Publication Years