10393
File:Nc393 4sensors.jpeg
uploaded "[[File:Nc393 4sensors.jpeg]]"
Oleg10393
10393
NC393 progress update: 14MPix Sensor Front End is up and running
Sensors (ON Semiconductor MT9F002) and blank PCBs arrived in time and so I was able to hand-assemble two 10398 boards and start testing them. I had some minor problems getting data output from the first board, but it turned out to be just my bad soldering of the sensor, the second board worked immediately. To my surprise I did not have any problems with HiSPi decoder that I simulated using the sensor model I wrote myself from the documentation, so the color bar test pattern appeared almost immediately, followed by the real acquired images. I kept most of the sensor settings unmodified from the default values, just selected the correct PLL multiplier, output signal levels (1.8V HiVCM – compatible with the FPGA) and packetized format, the only other registers I had to adjust manually were exposure and color analog gains.
As it was reasonable to expect, sensitivity of the 14MPix sensor is lower than that of the 5MPix MT9P006 – our initial estimate is that it is 4 times lower, but this needs more careful measurements to find out exposure required for pixel saturation with the same illumination. Analog channel gains for both sensors we set slightly higher than minimal ones for the saturation, but such rough measurements could easily miss a factor of 1.5. MT9F002 offers more controls over the signal chain gains, but any (even analog) gain in the chain that boosts signal above the minimal needed for saturation proportionally reduces used “well capacity”, while I expect the Full Well Capacity (FWC) is already not very high for the 1.4μm x1.4 μm pixel sensor. And decrease in the number of electrons stored in a pixel accordingly increases the relative shot noise that reveals itself in the highlight areas. We will need to accurately measure FWC of the MT9F002 and have better sensitivity comparison, including that of the binned mode, but I expect to find out that 5MPix sensor are not obsolete yet and for some applications may still have advantages over the newer sensors.
Both sensors used identical f=4.5mm F3.0 lenses, the 5MPix one lens is precisely adjusted during calibration, the lens of the 14MPix sensor is just attached and focused by hand using the lens thread, no tilt correction was performed. Both images are saved at 100% JPEG quality (lossless compression) to eliminate compression artifacts, both used in-camera simple 3×3 demosaic algorithm. The 14 MPix image has visible checkerboard pattern caused by the difference of the 2 green values (green in red row, and green in the blue row). I’ll check that it is not caused by some FPGA code bug I might introduce (save as raw image and do de-bayer on a host computer), but it may also be caused by pixel cross-talk in the sensor. In any case it is possible to compensate or at least significantly reduce in the output data.
MT9F002 transmits data over 5 differential 100Ω pairs: 1 clock pair and 4 data lanes. For the initial tests I used our regular 70mm flex cable used for the parallel interface sensors, and just soldered 5 of 100Ω resistors to the contacts at the camera side end. It did work and I did not even have to do any timing adjustments of the differential lanes. We’ll do such adjustments in the future to get to the centers of the data windows – both the sensor and the FPGA code have provisions for that. The physical 100Ω load resistors were needed as it turned out that Xilinx Zynq has on-chip differential termination only for the 2.5V (or higher) supply voltages on the regular (not “high performance”) I/Os and this application uses 1.8V interface power – I missed this part of documentation and assumed that all the differential inputs have possibility to turn on differential termination. 660 Mbps/lane data rate is not too high and I expect that it will be possible to use short cables with no load resistors at all, adding such resistors to the 10393 board is not an option as it has to work with both serial and parallel sensor interfaces. Simultaneously we designed and placed an order for dedicated flex cables 150mm long, if that will work out we’ll try longer (450mm) controlled impedance cables.
File:10398.pdf
deleted "[[File:10398.pdf]]" Deleted old revision 20151112064946!10398.pdf: obsolete
Andrey.filippov10398
10393
10398
File:10398.jpeg
uploaded "[[File:10398.jpeg]]"
Andrey.filippov10398
Created page with "==10398== 10398 Circuit Diagram, Parts List <br/> 10398 Gerber files]]"
New page
==10398==[[Image:10398.png | frame|[[Media:10398.pdf|10398 Circuit Diagram, Parts List]] <br/> [[Media:10398_gerber.tar.gz|10398 Gerber files]]]] Andrey.filippov
File:10398.png
uploaded "[[File:10398.png]]"
Andrey.filippovFile:10398 bottom.png
uploaded "[[File:10398 bottom.png]]"
Andrey.filippovFile:10393 bottom.jpeg
uploaded a new version of "[[File:10393 bottom.jpeg]]"
OlegNC393 progress update: one gigapixel per second (12x faster than NC353)
All the PCBs for the new camera: 10393, 10389 and 10385 are modified to rev “A”, we already received the new boards from the factory and now are waiting for the first production batch to be build. The PCB changes are minor, just moving connectors away from the board edge to simplify mechanical design and improve thermal contact of the heat sink plate to the camera body. Additionally the 10389A got m2 connector instead of the mSATA to accommodate modern SSD.
While waiting for the production we designed a new sensor board (10398) that has exactly the same dimensions, same image sensor format as the current 10338E and so it is compatible with the hardware for the calibrated sensor front ends we use in photogrammetric cameras. The difference is that this MT9F002 is a 14 MPix device and has high-speed serial interface instead of the legacy parallel one. We expect to get the new boards and the sensors next week and will immediately start working with this new hardware.
In preparation for the faster sensors I started to work on the FPGA code to make it ready for the new devices. We planned to use modern sensors with the serial interfaces from the very beginning of the new camera design, so the hardware accommodates up to 8 differential data lanes plus a clock pair in addition to the I²C and several control signals. One obviously required part is the support for Aptina HiSPi (High Speed Serial Pixel) interface that in case of MT9F002 uses 4 differential data lanes, each running at 660 Mbps – in 12-bit mode that corresponds to 220 MPix/s. Until we’ll get the actual sensors I could only simulate receiving of the HiSPi data using the sensor model written ourselves following the interface documentation. I’ll need yet to make sure I understood the documentation correctly and the sensor will produce output similar to what we modeled.
The sensor interface is not the only piece of the code that needed changes, I also had to increase significantly the bandwidth of the FPGA signal processing and to modify the I²C sequencer to support 2-byte register addresses.
Data that FPGA receives from the sensor passes through the several clock domains until it is stored in the system memory as a sequence of compressed JPEG/JP4 frames:
- Sensor data in each channel enters FPGA at a pixel clock rate, and subsequently passes through vignetting correction/scaling module, gamma conversion module and histogram calculation modules. This chain output is buffered before crossing to the memory clock domain.
- Multichannel DDR3 memory controller records sensor data in line-scan order and later retrieves it in overlapping (for JPEG) or non-overlapping (for JP4) square tiles.
- Data tiles retrieved from the external DDR3 memory are sent to the compressor clock domain to be processed with JPEG algorithm. In color JPEG mode compressor bandwidth has to be 1.5 higher than the pixel rate, as for 4:2:0 encoding each 16×16 pixels macroblock generate 6 of the 8×8 image blocks – 4 for Y (intensity) and 2 – for color components. In JP4 mode when the de-mosaic algorithm runs on the host computer the compressor clock rate equals the pixel rate.
- Last clock domain is 150MHz used by the AXI interface that operates in 64-bit parallel mode and transfers the compressed data to the system memory.
Two of these domains used double clock rate for some of the processing stages – histograms calculation in the pixel clock domain and Huffman encoder/bit stuffer in the compressor. In the previous NC353 camera pixel clock rate was 96MHz (192 MHz for double rate) and compressor rate was 80MHz (160MHz for double rate). The sensor/compressor clock rates difference reflects the fact that the sensor data output is not uniform (it pauses during inactive lines) and the compressor can process the frame at a steady rate.
MT9F002 image sensor has the output pixel rate of 220MPix/s with the average (over the full frame) rate of 198MPix/s. Using double rate clocks (440MHz for the sensor channel and 400MHz for the compressor) would be rather difficult on Zynq, so I needed first to eliminate such clocks in the design. It was possible to implement and test this modification with the existing sensor, and now it is done – four of the camera compressors each run at 250 MHz (even on “-1″, or “slow” speed grade silicon) making it total of 1GPix/sec. It does not need to have 4 separate sensors running simultaneously – a single high speed imager can provide data for all 4 compressors, each processing every 4-th frame as each image is processed independently.
At this time the memory controller will be a bottleneck when running all four MT9F002 sensors simultaneously as it currently provides only 1600MB/s bandwidth that may be marginally sufficient for four MT9F002 sensor channels and 4 compressor channels each requiring 200MB/s (bandwidth overhead is just a few percent). I am sure it will be possible to optimize the memory controller code to run at higher rate to match the compressors. We already identified which parts of the memory controller need to be modified to support 1.5x clock increase to the total of 2400MB/s. And as the production NC393 camera will have higher speed grade SoC there will be an extra 20% performance increase for the same code. That will provide bandwidth sufficient not just to run 4 sensors at full speed and compress the output data, but to do some other image manipulation at the same time.
Compared to the previous Elphel NC353 camera the new NC393 prototype already is tested to have 12x higher compressor bandwidth (4 channels instead of one and 250MPix/s instead of 80MPix/s), we plan to have the actual sensor with a full data processing chain results soon.
10338D
User:Saint17
Blanked the page
← Older revision Revision as of 09:53, 29 October 2015 Line 1: Line 1: -Jeff Leach -*leach17 at gmail.com - -"There can be only one!" Saint17Google is testing AI to respond to privacy requests
Robotic customer support fails while pretending to be an outsourced human. Last week I searched with Google for Elphel and I got a wrong spelled name, wrong address and a wrong phone number.
A week ago I tried Google Search for our company (usually I only check recent results using last week or last 3 days search) and noticed that on the first result page there is a Street View of my private residence, my home address pointing to a business with the name “El Phel, Inc”.
Yes, when we first registered Elphel in 2001 we used our home address, and even the first $30K check from Google for development of the Google Books camera came to this address, but it was never “El Phel, Inc.” Later wire transfers with payments to us for Google Books cameras as well as Street View ones were coming to a different address – 1405 W. 2200 S., Suite 205, West Valley City, Utah 84119. In 2012 we moved to the new building at 1455 W. 2200 S. as the old place was not big enough for the panoramic camera calibration.
I was not happy to see my house showing as the top result when searching for Elphel, it is both breach of my family privacy and it is making harm to Elphel business. Personally I would not consider a 14-year old company with international customer base a serious one if it is just a one-man home-based business. Sure you can get the similar Street View results for Google itself but it would not come out when you search for “Google”. Neither it would return wrongly spelled business name like “Goo & Gel, Inc.” and a phone number that belongs to a Baptist church in Lehi, Utah (update: they changed the phone number to the one of Elphel).
Honestly there was some of our fault too, I’ve seen “El Phel” in a local Yellow Pages, but as we do not have a local business I did not pay attention to that – Google was always good at providing relevant information in the search results, extracting actual contact information from the company “Contacts” page directly.
Noticing that Google had lost its edge in providing search results (Bing and Yahoo show relevant data), I first contacted Yellow Pages and asked them to correct information as there is no “El Phel, Inc.” at my home address and that I’m not selling any X-Ray equipment there. They did it very promptly and the probable source of the Google misinformation (“probable” as Google does not provide any links to the source) was gone for good.
I waited for 24 hours hoping that Google will correct the information automatically (post on Elphel blog appears in Google search results in 10 – 19 seconds after I press “Publish” button). Nothing happened – same “El Phel, Inc.” in our house.
So I tried to contact Google. As Google did not provide source of the search result, I tried to follow recommendations to correct information on the map. And the first step was to log in with Google account, since I could not find a way how to contact Google without such account. Yes, I do have one – I used Gmail when Google was our customer, and when I later switched to other provider (I prefer to use only one service per company, and I selected to use Google Search) I did not delete the Gmail account. I found my password and was able to log in.
First I tried to select “Place doesn’t exist” (There is no such company as “El Phel, Inc.” with invalid phone number, and there is no business at my home address).
Auto confirmation came immediately:
From: Google Maps <noreply-maps-issues@google.com>
Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 9:55 AM
Subject: Thanks for the edit to El Phel Inc
To: еlphеl@gmаil.cоm
Maps
Thank you
Your edit is being reviewed. Thanks for sharing your knowledge of El Phel Inc.
El Phel Inc
3200 Elmer St, Magna, UT, United States
Your edit
Place doesn't exist
Edited on Sep 23, 2015 · In review
Keep exploring,
The Google Maps team
© 2015 Google Inc. 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043
You've received this confirmation email to update you about your editing activities on Google Maps.
But nothing happened. Two days later I tried with different option (there was no place to provide text entry)
Your edit
Place is private
No results either.
Then I tried to follow the other link after the inappropriate search result – “Are you the business owner?” (I’m not at owner of the non-existing business, but I am an owner of my house). And yes, I had to use my Gmail account again. There were several options how I prefer to be contacted – I selected “by phone”, and shortly after a female-voiced robot called. I do not have a habit of talking to robots, so I did not listen what it said waiting for keywords like: “press 0 to talk to a representative” or “Please stay on the line…”, but it never said anything like this and immediately hang up.
Second time I selected email contact, but it seems to me that the email conversation was with some kind of Google Eliza. This was the first email:
From : local-help@google.com
To : andrey@elphel.com
Subject : RE: [7-2344000008781] Google Local Help
Date : Thu, 24 Sep 2015 22:48:47 -0700
Add Label
Hi,
Greetings from Google.
After investigating, i found that here is an existing page on Google (El Phel Inc-3200 S Elmer St Magna, UT 84044) which according to your email is incorrect information.
Apologies for the inconvenience andrey, however as i can see that you have created a page for El Phel Inc, hence i would first request you to delete the Business page if you aren't running any Business. Also you can report a problem for incorrect information on Maps,Here is an article that would provide you further clarity on how to report a problem or fix the map.
In case you have any questions feel free to reply back on the same email address and i would get back to you.
Regards,
Rohit
Google My Business Support.
This robot tried to mimic a kids language (without capitalizing “I” and the first letter of my name), and the level of understanding the matter was below that of a human (it was Google, not me who created that page, I just wanted it to be removed).
I replied as I thought it still might be a human, just tired and overwhelmed by so many privacy-related requests they receive (the email came well after hours in United States).
From : andrey <andrey@elphel.com>
To : local-help@google.com
Subject : RE: [7-2344000008781] Google Local Help
Date : Fri, 25 Sep 2015 00:16:21 -0700
Hello Rohit,
I never created such page. I just tried different ways to contact Google to remove this embarrassing link. I did click on "Are you the business owner" (I am the owner of this residence at 3200 S Elmer St Magna, UT 84044) as I hoped that when I'll get the confirmation postcard I'll be able to reply that there is no business at this residential address).
I did try link "how to report a problem or fix the map", but I could not find a relevant method to remove a search result that does not reference external page as a source, and assigns my home residence to the search results of the company, that has a different (than listed) name, is located in a different city (West Valley City, 84119, not in Magna, 84044), and has a different phone number.
So please, can you remove that incorrect information?
Andrey Filippov
Nothing happened either, then on Sunday night (local time) came another email from “Rohit”:
From : local-help@google.com
To : andrey@elphel.com
Subject : RE: [7-2344000008781] Google Local Help
Date : Sun, 27 Sep 2015 18:11:44 -0700
Hi,
Greetings from Google.
I am working on your Business pages and would let you know once get any update.
Please reply back on the same email address in case of any concerns.
Regards,
Rohit
Google My Business Support
You may notice that it had the same ticket number, so the sender had all the previous information when replying. For any human capable of using just Google Search it would be not more than 15-30 seconds to find out that their information is incorrect and either remove it completely (as I asked) or replace with some relevant one.
And there is another detail that troubles me. Looking at the time/days when the “Google My Business Support” emails came, and the name “Rohit” it may look like it came from India. While testing a non-human communications Google might hope that correspondents would more likely attribute some inconsistencies in the generated emails to the cultural differences and miss actual software flaws. Does Google count on us being somewhat racists?
Following provided links I was not able to get any response from a human representative, only two robots (phone and email) contacted me. I hope that this post will work better and help to cure this breach of my family privacy and end harm this invalid information provided by a so respected Internet search company causes to the business. I realize that robots will take over more and more of our activities (and we are helping that to happen ourselves), but maybe this process sometimes goes too fast?