On-Orbit MTF Detection Method for Optical Remote Sensing Images Based on Airport Targets

Haiyu Wang; Xiao Liu; Lili Du; Xiaobing Sun; Zhiyuan Zhou

doi:10.3788/LOP241093

Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, Volume. 61, Issue 22, 2228002(2024)

On-Orbit MTF Detection Method for Optical Remote Sensing Images Based on Airport Targets

Haiyu Wang^1,2, Xiao Liu^2,3、*, Lili Du^2,3, Xiaobing Sun^2,3, and Zhiyuan Zhou⁴

Author Affiliations

¹School of Physical Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, Anhui , China

²Anhui Institute of Optics and Fine Mechanics, Hefei Institute of Physical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei 230031, Anhui , China

³Key Laboratory of General Optical Calibration and Characterization Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei 230031, Anhui , China

⁴Key Laboratory of Quantum Information, Chinese Academy of Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, Anhui , China

show less

Abstract Get PDF(in Chinese)

Figures & Tables(27)

Fig. 1. Atmospheric simulation results based on ideal edge target

Download full size

Fig. 2. MTF of rural aerosol varies with visibility at different observation wavelengths. (a) 490 nm; (b) 560 nm; (c) 665 nm

Download full size

Fig. 3. MTF of maritime aerosol varies with visibility at different observation wavelengths. (a) 490 nm; (b) 560 nm; (c) 665 nm

Download full size

Fig. 4. MTF of urban aerosol varies with visibility at different observation wavelengths. (a) 490 nm; (b) 560 nm; (c) 665 nm

Download full size

Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of basic principle of edge method

Download full size

Fig. 6. Schematic of ideal edge area

Download full size

Fig. 7. Different contrast targets simulate atmospheric interference. (a) Contrast is 5.71; (b) contrast is 4.00; (c) contrast is 2.98; (d) contrast is 2.35; (e) contrast is 1.86; (f) contrast is 1.22

Download full size

Fig. 8. Spectral characteristic curves of typical ground objects in airports

Download full size

Fig. 9. Spectral response functions of Sentinel-2A

Download full size

Fig. 10. Usable edge area at Beijing Daxing International Airport

Download full size

Fig. 11. Different non-uniformity targets simulate atmospheric interference. (a) Non-uniformity is 1.42; (b) non-uniformity is 2.98; (c) non-uniformity is 5.87; (d) non-uniformity is 7.88; (e) non-uniformity is 10.15; (f) non-uniformity is 18.03

Download full size

Fig. 12. Distribution trend of correlation factor and atmospheric compensation factor between AOD and MTF degradation at 490 nm wavelength. (a) Correlation factor; (b) atmospheric compensation factor

Download full size

Fig. 13. Distribution trend of correlation factor and atmospheric compensation factor between AOD and MTF degradation at 560 nm wavelength. (a) Correlation factor; (b) atmospheric compensation factor

Download full size

Fig. 14. Distribution trend of correlation factor and atmospheric compensation factor between AOD and MTF degradation at 665 nm wavelength. (a) Correlation factor; (b) atmospheric compensation factor

Download full size

Fig. 15. flowchart of on-orbit MTF detection mission planning

Download full size

Fig. 16. Data flow chart of on-orbit MTF detection method based on airport target

Download full size

Fig. 17. Edge detection obtains position of edge

Download full size

Fig. 18. Sub-pixel registration schematic diagram

Download full size

Fig. 19. On-orbit MTF detection based on airport target. (a) Edge area selection; (b) ESF fitting; (c) LSF; (d) MTF

Download full size

Fig. 20. Sentinel-2A Atlanta International Airport image

Download full size

Table 1. Degradation degree of MTF under different aerosol models
View table
Table 1. Degradation degree of MTF under different aerosol models
Aerosol type Degradation of MTF /%
490 nm 560 nm 665 nm
Rural 49.63 49.59 45.11
Maritime 62.69 59.42 55.65
Urban 55.91 55.96 52.50

Table 2. Reflectivity contrast between airport runway and surrounding ground objects in each band of optical remote sensing camera
View table
Table 2. Reflectivity contrast between airport runway and surrounding ground objects in each band of optical remote sensing camera
Band Contrast
Concrete-vegetation Concrete-soil
Blue 4.27 9.34
Green 2.82 6.48
Red 5.17 3.99

Table 3. Evaluation results of spatial uniformity of typical feature areas in airports
View table
Table 3. Evaluation results of spatial uniformity of typical feature areas in airports
Target area Spatial nonuniformity /%
Blue Green Red
Runway 1.84 2.26 2.37
Roof 1.90 1.85 1.49
Vegetation 1.49 2.53 2.69
Soil 1.59 2.01 2.00

Table 4. List of medium and large airports worldwide that can be used for on-orbit MTF detection

View table

Table 4. List of medium and large airports worldwide that can be used for on-orbit MTF detection

No.	Airport（IATA）	Location	No.	Airport（IATA）	Location	No.	Airport（IATA）	Location
1	DMM	26.47N，49.80E	16	AUH	24.44N，54.65E	31	EZE	34.81S，58.54W
2	DEN	39.86N，104.68W	17	HND	35.55N，139.78E	32	CTU	30.56N，103.95E
3	DFW	32.90N，97.04W	18	ZRH	47.46N，8.55E	33	SVO	55.97N，37.41E
4	MCO	28.43N，81.31W	19	YVR	51.47N，0.46W	34	ZIA	55.56N，38.12E
5	IAD	38.95N，77.45W	20	LHR	40.08N，116.60E	35	VKO	55.60N，37.27E
6	PKX	39.51N，116.41E	21	PEK	40.08N，116.60E	36	DME	55.41N，37.91E
7	IAH	29.99N，95.34W	22	HKG	22.31N，113.91E	37	CCU	22.65N，88.44E
8	PVG	31.14N，121.81E	23	ICN	37.45N，126.45E	38	MED	24.55N 39.71E
9	CAI	30.11N，31.40E	24	SIN	1.35N，103.99E	39	CCJ	11.14N，75.95E
10	BKK	13.69N，100.75E	25	ATL	33.64N，84.43W	40	BLR	13.20N，77.71E
11	DWC	24.89N，55.16E	26	LAX	33.94N，118.41W	41	HYD	17.24N，78.43E
12	HEL	60.32N，24.95E	27	ORD	41.98N，87.91W	42	ISB	33.55N，72.84E
13	DXB	25.25N，55.37E	28	CDG	49.01N，2.55E	43	PEW	33.99N，71.52E
14	MUC	48.35N，11.78E	29	SYD	33.93S，151.18E
15	YYZ	43.68N，79.62W	30	MEL	37.67S，144.85E

Table 5. ESA MTF test results at Nyquist frequency of Sentinel-2 L1C products for 2020‒2023
View table
Table 5. ESA MTF test results at Nyquist frequency of Sentinel-2 L1C products for 2020‒2023
Satellite Band MTF
2020 2021 2022 2023
Sentinel-2 A Blue 0.31 0.26 0.35 0.37
Green 0.31 0.27 0.35 0.36
Red 0.29 0.26 0.29 0.32
Sentinel-2 B Blue 0.33 0.30 0.37 0.36
Green 0.31 0.30 0.36 0.34
Red 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.30

Table 6. On-orbit MTF detection results based on airport targets are compared with ESA results

View table

Table 6. On-orbit MTF detection results based on airport targets are compared with ESA results

Date	Airport （IATA）	MTF-blue			MTF-green			MTF-red
Date	Airport （IATA）	Detection	ESA	Absolute deviation	Detection	ESA	Absolute deviation	Detection	ESA	Absolute deviation
Mean absolute deviation		–	–	0.04	–	–	0.03	–	–	0.04
2020-02-22	PKX	0.27	0.31	0.04	0.30	0.31	0.01	0.24	0.29	0.05
2020-05-12	PEK	0.26	0.31	0.05	0.27	0.31	0.04	0.25	0.29	0.04
2021-01-04	PEK	0.23	0.26	0.03	0.24	0.27	0.03	0.25	0.26	0.01
2021-01-04	ATL	0.20	0.26	0.06	0.22	0.27	0.05	0.18	0.26	0.08
2022-01-13	EZE	0.34	0.37	0.03	0.31	0.36	0.05	0.28	0.29	0.01
2022-01-17	PKX	0.32	0.37	0.05	0.35	0.36	0.01	0.26	0.29	0.03

Table 7. Validation of rapid on-orbit MTF detection method

View table

Table 7. Validation of rapid on-orbit MTF detection method

Date	Airport （IATA）	MTF-green	AOD	Type	Q	After compensation	Absolute deviation
2024-01-09	HKG	0.32	0.20	Maritime	1.65	0.45	0.09
2024-01-19	HKG	0.19	0.08	Maritime	1.11	0.21	0.15
2024-01-26	LHR	0.35	0.05	Urban	1.06	0.35	0.01
2024-01-29	PEK	0.05	0.89	Urban	7.20	0.36	0
2024-02-12	LHR	0.28	0.02	Urban	1.01	0.28	0.08
2024-02-13	CTU	0.05	1.05	Rural	7.01	0.35	0.01
2024-02-23	DFW	0.14	0.37	Urban	1.93	0.27	0.09
2024-03-01	DFW	0.26	0.23	Urban	1.45	0.38	0.02
2024-03-05	MEL	0.31	0.10	Maritime	1.16	0.33	0.03
2024-03-08	MUC	0.29	0.15	Rural	1.25	0.36	0
2024-03-08	HYD	0.30	0.24	Urban	1.51	0.45	0.09
2024-03-10	ICN	0.02	1.13	Maritime	16.43	0.33	0.03

Tools

Get Citation

Copy Citation Text

Haiyu Wang, Xiao Liu, Lili Du, Xiaobing Sun, Zhiyuan Zhou. On-Orbit MTF Detection Method for Optical Remote Sensing Images Based on Airport Targets[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2024, 61(22): 2228002

Download Citation

EndNote(RIS)BibTex Plain Text

Set citation alerts for article

Save article for my favorites

Paper Information

Category: Remote Sensing and Sensors

Received: Mar. 4, 2024

Accepted: Apr. 12, 2024

Published Online: Nov. 20, 2024

The Author Email: Xiao Liu (liux@aiofm.ac.cn)

DOI:10.3788/LOP241093

CSTR:32186.14.LOP241093

Topics

laser devices and laser physics

Lasers and Laser Optics

Laser physics

laser manufacturing

Instrumentation, Measurement and Metrology

Table 1. Degradation degree of MTF under different aerosol models

Table 1. Degradation degree of MTF under different aerosol models

Table 2. Reflectivity contrast between airport runway and surrounding ground objects in each band of optical remote sensing camera

Table 2. Reflectivity contrast between airport runway and surrounding ground objects in each band of optical remote sensing camera

Table 3. Evaluation results of spatial uniformity of typical feature areas in airports

Table 3. Evaluation results of spatial uniformity of typical feature areas in airports

Table 4. List of medium and large airports worldwide that can be used for on-orbit MTF detection

Table 4. List of medium and large airports worldwide that can be used for on-orbit MTF detection

Table 5. ESA MTF test results at Nyquist frequency of Sentinel-2 L1C products for 2020‒2023

Table 5. ESA MTF test results at Nyquist frequency of Sentinel-2 L1C products for 2020‒2023

Table 6. On-orbit MTF detection results based on airport targets are compared with ESA results

Table 6. On-orbit MTF detection results based on airport targets are compared with ESA results

Table 7. Validation of rapid on-orbit MTF detection method

Table 7. Validation of rapid on-orbit MTF detection method