Need low latency network camera for Mule

[TommyT]

Hi forum! and happy New Year.

For the last month I'v been trying to find cameras(USB/Network)that will work for my
Mule. as is I have 5 cameras now in the junk bin that are just too slow to respond to
movement. I'm now testing a Linksys network(Wifi)camera, but it even has a .5 sec
latency. does anyone know of a USB/Wifi camera with a very low latency rate?

Tommy

 

[electron]

hi Tommy, welcome to CT!

First of all, what is this 'Mule' product you are talking about, or are you talking about the animal?

As for low latency stuff, are you trying to respond to motion? What about having the camera doing the processing like many IP cams now support?

 

[Waynedb]

hi Tommy, welcome to CT!

First of all, what is this 'Mule' product you are talking about, or are you talking about the animal?

As for low latency stuff, are you trying to respond to motion? What about having the camera doing the processing like many IP cams now support?

I believe this is the M.U.L.E..
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1304511

 

[TommyT]

As for low latency stuff, are you trying to respond to motion?

Dan, I'm not looking for motion detecting cameras. Because my Mule has to work
very close to objects(like Cars, house,ect.) any delay in the video could cause
me lots of explaining(like why I hit my lovers car). even the Network(Wifi) camera
I'm testing now has about half a second of latency. so I stay back at least a foot
from objects. I hope to be able to get a few inches away with the right cameras.

Waynedb is correct, that is my Mule.

Tommy

 

[electron]

That's awesome, I was actually looking at building a snowblower version of that this year after I found a used 'tracked' snowblower on sale, but plans fell through. Do you have a blog anywhere showing the build (if not, start one on CT!). That said, what about the cameras people use in RC planes? They should be fast enough, since they even use them to 'simulate' cockpit view by moving your head.

 

[BraveSirRobbin]

I'm no expert, but I think you are going to have a hard time finding no latency with any networked cam. Could you possibly think the 'other' way and delay transmission to the MULE to compensate for the latency?

 

[electron]

I would also install some proximity type sensors to ignore any commands which would put itself at a collision course with an object.

 

[tmbrown97]

+1 for what Dan said with the proximity sensors, and I'd go with an analog wireless camera - they tend to not really have any latency.

 

[TommyT]

Could you possibly think the 'other' way and delay transmission to the MULE to compensate for the latency?

I would also install some proximity type sensors to ignore any commands which would put itself at a collision course with an object.

Theres the rub, I'm using the cameras as a proximity sensors and localization in the autonomous mode.

That said, what about the cameras people use in RC planes?

I'll have check into that.

Tommy

 

[electron]

FPV or First Person View is the term you are looking for if you are looking for a camera which moves with your head.

 

[drvnbysound]

Theres the rub, I'm using the cameras as a proximity sensors and localization in the autonomous mode.

I'll have check into that.

Tommy

Im interested to know how well this works. Using the cameras as sensors, seeing as it will be moving any sort of video analysis will be difficult to make autonomous. Analytics can work well on fixed cameras, but it's a hurdle to get them working on a camera that moves.

I would think the camera would be good for a user/operator to watch view just to have eyes on the situation, but would rely on acoustic or IR sensors to do object avoidance.

What do you mean as far as localization? It knowing a "home" position? I would think one would integrate a USB or BlueTooth GPS into the unit for something like this. Such as: http://www.google.com/products/catalog?hl=en&safe=off&q=USB+GPS&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=6482896719493198656&ei=j1ssTYfVLsT48Aakqc26CQ&sa=X&oi=product_catalog_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDMQ8wIwAA#

 

[TommyT]

I would think the camera would be good for a user/operator to watch view just to have eyes on the situation

The cameras I'm looking for now are for ROV mode. But even so any latency make moving close to things tough.

What do you mean as far as localization?

The Mule uses dead reckoning as it's main positioning system(now) then uses an on-board USB web cam, digital
compass and a Yaw axis feedback with .005 deg. resolution to get it real position from targets.(yellow streamers)

video analysis will be difficult to make autonomous

I agree, thats why I have been doing image analysis, but speed is not an issue in that mode but the Mule has
a single core processor.

I would think one would integrate a USB or BlueTooth GPS into the unit for something like this

I have not invested any time or money on GPS for the Mule for a number of reasons(trees, accuracy being top of list)


Tommy

 

[drvnbysound]

The cameras I'm looking for now are for ROV mode. But even so any latency make moving close to things tough.

The Mule uses dead reckoning as it's main positioning system(now) then uses an on-board USB web cam, digital
compass and a Yaw axis feedback with .005 deg. resolution to get it real position from targets.(yellow streamers)

I agree, thats why I have been doing image analysis, but speed is not an issue in that mode but the Mule has
a single core processor.

I have not invested any time or money on GPS for the Mule for a number of reasons(trees, accuracy being top of list)


Tommy

As far as the GPS, I was just assuming it would be useful for it to know where in the world it was, to be able to return to it's "home" position easier (??). Assuming you have it avoiding objects, it can continue in a particular direction, toward "home", avoiding obstacles on it's way. I wasn't referencing GPS in the sense of using maps or any sort of Garmin-like data, just use of the raw data to help with positioning, locating, tracking, etc. Likewise, you could give it coordinates for a "starting" position as well.

What do you mean as far as image analysis?

I was under the impression that you wanted to incorporate a video stream that would allow the Mule to "see" objects, and also use it to avoid them. This is where I would imagine this would get VERY difficult, as you would have to map pixels to distances, and use real-time video analytics to determine if said pixels were an object that needed to be avoided, or just a piece of paper on the ground. I certainly understand the use of it in a ROV mode, and agree that latency would cause issues when needing to get close to objects, particularly those with value such as vehicles. However, I dont know how you can avoid latency in a wireless environment - there will always be some delay in the process of encoding/sending and receiving/decoding the data (video). On the other hand, I certainly dont see you thethering a coax video cable from it to get real-time video either (to the home-base location). You could get near real-time video on-board the MULE itself with either an IP camera, or an analog camera with an encoder (such as Axis), however relaying that data back to a home-base location will likely always have a delay.

 

[TommyT]

I was just assuming it would be useful for it to know where in the world it was, to be able to return to it's "home" position easier (??).

If it was more accurate GPS would be a great localizing tool, as is GPS can only be counted on for @9ft radius with an open sky view.

What do you mean as far as image analysis?

I use a few SDK's that let me manipulate video data into images that can be filtered at a fairly high rate. filters that product a negitive
of an image then filtered for contrast and then edging effect are useful in navigating around objects.
http://www.viscomsoft.com/products/videocap/index.html

Tommy

 

[drvnbysound]

If it was more accurate GPS would be a great localizing tool, as is GPS can only be counted on for @9ft radius with an open sky view.

I use a few SDK's that let me manipulate video data into images that can be filtered at a fairly high rate. filters that product a negitive
of an image then filtered for contrast and then edging effect are useful in navigating around objects.
http://www.viscomsoft.com/products/videocap/index.html

Tommy

Yes, the "spec" is about 9-ft, but GPS seems to be one of the few technology specs that seems to be very underrated IMO. I have seen it tested on other robotics where one would set a home position, navigate the ROV about 125 yards away from the position, and have it return to the home position and be within 2-ft. However, using GPS is may only beneficial when you the device travels extended distances and needs to return. Note, that I have also seen the GPS, used in conjunction with IR/Acoustic sensors and a compass to also plot out objects (essentially drawing it's own [rough] 'map' on the fly), so that it's return path was approximated with those objects taken into account.

All of that said, it is meaningless if you already have a better way of keeping track of your MULE. Personally, I just like the idea of GPS vs. a dead-reckoning type system for tracking purposes.