Determination of

displacements using an
improved digital correlation
method
M A Sutton, W J Walters, W H Peters, W F Ranson and S R McNeil1

An improwed digital correlation method is presented for

obtaining the full-field in-plane deformations of an object.
The deformations are determined by numerically correlating a selected subset fromthe digitized intensity pattern of
the ~~defo~ed object. T&e improved n~rn~~a~ ~o~e~at~o~
scheme is discussed in detail- The d~~~ac~~ts
of a simple
object, as computed by the correlation routine, are shown CO
agree with theoretical calculations.
Keywords:

digital, processirtg$ displacement;s

It has been stated many times that the computer will alter
the way we live. Without question, this simple statement
continues to be proven true every day. However, the full
potential of the computer has not been realized in many
areas. In particular, those people who wish to contribute to
a better understanding of our world through innovative
measurements have seen little change. The basic reason
for this is that older measurement techniques were
simply not developed for use with the computer. Recently9
however, researchers have developed a novel measurement scheme which employs a digital imaging system. In
this scheme, a video camera observes an object and the
image is digitized and sent to a computer. Within the
computer, numerical schemes utilize the basic theory of
deformatian as a mapping.
In this paper we present a synopsis of the basic
theory of digital correlation as used in the analysis of
object deformation. An improved numerical scheme for
computing the deformation of an object is discussed in
detail. Finally, the technique is successfully employed to
analyse the displacements of a simple object, a cantilever
beam with an end load.

BASIC THEORY OF DIGITAL

CORRELATION AS APPLIED TO
SURFACE DEFORMATION
MEASUREMENTS
Suppose an object is viewed with a stationary video
camera as shown in Figure 1. The intensity distribution of
light reffected by the specimen can be stored as a set of
numbers or grey levels in a computer via an appropriate
information transfer. Usually, the continuously varying
intensity pattern is discretely sampled with an array of
sensors that records and stores an array of intensity
values. A typical size for such an array is 512 X 512. Each
sensor converts the intensity to a number. For typical
scanners, the number will range from 0 to 255 (0
represents zero light intensity). The conversion of light
intensity to a digital number is controlled by the digitizer. In many cases the digitizer is controlled by
a m~i~omputer, the PDP/gE in Figure 1. The PIXf8E
transfers the digital information into an array in
White light sowe
x
Specimen

White liqht source

~--_-H5 ~,

College of Engineering, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC

29208, USA

wol f no 3 arigust 1983

Figure 1. Schematic ofthe experimental

correlation analysis

0252-88551831030133-579B83.40 0 I983 Butterworth

configuration for

& Co (Publishers) Ltd.

I33

small subsets from the intensity pattern stored in array B

are related to small subsets of the same size in array A by a
homogeneous linear mapping.. The assumed deformation
process is shown conceptually in Figure 5. It is further
assumed that this mapping of local subsets of intensity data is the same mapping as that which applies to the
deformation of the object surface which reflected the
intensity pattern. The actual computation of these
mapping parameters proceeds in a direct manner using
digital correlation methods that are discussed in the
following section.
The entire process described above can be presented
in a compact form mathematically. Let A (x) denote the
digital form of the scalar intensity field recorded when the
object is deformed. If we assume a homogeneous linear
mapping for each small subset, then we can write
Figure 2.

Digital intensities for a 10 X 10 subset

(X)j =

(X)i

(U)i +

$$$

dxj

i,j=l,2

(1)

intensity.

IQ,

EP)

where x is the deformed position of an arbitrary

point in the small subset, u is the vector displacement field
and dui l&j are components of the deformation gradient.

Figure 3. Bilinear reconstrzlction of the intensity surface

for four data points. <I, 6~ speczfy the local coordinate
system and range from 0 to 1 in both directions; one point is
assigned to each set of four sample points.

the VAX 11/780 computer. Typical digital intensities for a 10 X 10 array are graphically portrayed in Figure
2. As noted previously, this discrete data is only a
sampled version of the actual intensity distribution
present at the image plane of the TV scanner. To provide a
more usefid representation of this intensity pattern, a
surface fit method known as the bilinear interpolation
technique is used to represent the data in continuous form.
Briefly, an expression of the formfd +fG1 + f&r2 + f$l x2,
where farfb, fC, and fd are constants, is used to estimate the
intensity distribution for any square set of four sample
points, as shown in Figure 3. A typical intensity pattern
which has been reconstructed by using the bilinear
method is shown in Figure 4. Implementation procedures
for the bilinear fit are discussed in the following
section.
Suppose the arrays A and B in the computer
contain the tw~dimensional intensity distributions from
the undeformed and deformed object configurations.
Before these two arrays can be used , a mathematical
relationship between the actual object deformation and
the deformation or change in the stored intensity
pattern must be assumed. Specifically, it is assumed that

134

F&we 4. intensity pattern reconstructed using bilkear

interpolation
Undefqrmed

subimage

Area of scpnning

x,x1

Figure 5.

Deformation of a subimage in a sampling grid

image and vision computing

To obtain the displacement and deformation gradient

terms for a local subset, we minimize the square of the
difference between the chosen subset in array A and all
other subsets of the same size in array B. Thus, ifwe define
a correlation coefficient C by the equation
..

C(z$$
I

[A(x)

B(x')J2 dx

i,j=lt2

(2)

I
then the analytical task we must perform is to minimize
the coefficient C with respect to the six mapping
parameters (ui and dui/dxj) for two-dimensional deformation Physically, this analytical task may be understood
by reference to Figure 4. The analyst chooses a lagrangian
reference frame attached to the undefo~ed
object. A
small subset centred at PO is chosen. The defo~ation of
this small subset due to applied loads is required. This
subset is moved and distorted homogeneously as shown.
it is then compared with the stored values of intensity
within the deformed array B(x). The deformations which
minimize the difference in intensity, as given in equation
(2), are defined as the local mapping of the actual object
surface. It should be noted that a basic tenet of elasticity is
that there exists a subset within the body such that the
deformation in this small region may be expressed as a
homogeneous deformation. Therefore, if the subsets are
chosen sufftciently small and the various assumptions
noted previously are generally valid, then the method described is useful for both large and small deformation
processes.
Relative to the above discussion, two remarks must
be included. First, the procedure for determining the
minimum in a function ofseveral variables is currently an
area of active research in applied mathematics. The
improved scheme used in this work will most certainly be
updated as more efficient methods are developed.
Secondly, it may seem that all this analysis is based on a
rather tenuous assumption: that the intensity pattern
deforms in a one-to-one correspondence with the object
surface. This assumption has been partially verified in
recent research-. This work indicated that large uniaxial
deformations (ie &i/&iin the range from 0.01 to 0.04)
were determined successfully, and rigid body displacements of various ma~itudes have been measured quite
accurately. The use of the method for computing
displacements in a varying strain field is considered
here.

IXSCUSSION OF THE STRAIN ROUTINE

The subroutine Strain inputs light intensity data from an
undeformed surface and intensity data from the same
surface after it has been deformed. Strain examines the
points in the undeformed image and locates their new
positions on the deformed surface. Values for the variables
ult u2, dut:&r, duzidxz, dut/d~~ and duzidxl are also
obtained. As noted previously, it has been assumed that for
sufficiently small regions the deformation of straight lines
on the original surface yields straight lines. Therefore
Strain is limited to the processing of very small surface
areas. When a much Iarger surface area is to be examined,
it must be broken into many smaller areas that can be
handled individualiy by separate calls to this routine.
The deformation process can move points on the
original surface relatively large distances in any direction.

For this reason, the deformed surface data that is

examined represent a relatively large surface that is
centred about the undeformed surface.
Figure 6 is a simplified flowchart for this routine.
There are two major stages to the routine. These are called
the starting value procedure and the iteration procedure.
When the routine is entered, there are no available
values for the six variables of interest. The starting value
procedure examines the variables two at a time in order to
determine a good first estimate for each variable. Once the
starting values have been obtained, the iteration procedure
searches for the best set of values for the variables by
combining the effects of all six variables. The best set of
values minimizes (in the least-squares sense) the correlation coefficient defined by equation (2).

Program initiadon
At program initiation, information
includes

that must be input

an m X m array of intensity data from the undeformed

image, where m is an integer from 1 to 50
four 100 x 100 data arrays for determination of
intensity data for the deformed image
upper and lower bounds on the six variables
end points for the start-up procedure
a minimum acceptable correlation coefftcient for
program termination

r____--L

-__._-

j~d_eslmo:es:for

us and_!+;

______t______-

i--F?nGi
estmotei for a,,/ax,
L--_______,______L_*_

ond

a4ax

-y

Starting value procedure

Figure 7. Examination of the variables u1 and ~42.a gives

the size and initialposition of the undefomzed square subset;
b is an array of 121 cambinatio~~ of u1 and u2 values used to
shift the or&ina~ subset a.

For example, a 15 X 15 intensity array represents a very

small subset of the intensity data from a much larger
undeformed object. This was the array size chosen for
most of the analysis to follow. The goal of Strain is to
determine the location of the 225 surface points after
deformation. The routine may be called many times for a
single set of undeformed and deformed data, and it
requires thousands of bilinear inte~la~ons
to determine
the intensity data for deformed surface locations. Therefore-, to minimize the interpolation calculations performed
within Strain, the deformed surface intensity array (B)
must be converted to four arrays before any Strain call.
The new arrays (FA, Fg, Fc and FD) are obtained from

Thestarting value procedure works as follows. First, the u1

and 24 values are examined to determine the translations
that occurred. The original surface data is translated to
each position (xi, x2) within the rectangle defined by the u1
and u2 ranges, as shown in Figure 7. At each of these 121
positions, the original 15 X 15 array ofundeformed data is
compared with a 15 X 15 array of deformed surface data.
For each of the 225 deformed surface points, the light
intensity is calculated by bilinear interpolation. A correlation coefficient is calculated for the two intensity arrays.
The position of the translated square that yields the lowest
correlation coefficient produces the best values for u1 and
242.~1 is the difference between the x1 coordinate of the
position of this square and that of the centre of the original
square. 242is found in a similar manner.
The end points mentioned previously are minimum
acceptable values for the increment sizes. If the variable
increments are greater than the end values for ZL~
and u2,
the ranges are reduced and centred about the position with
the lowest correlation coefficient. Again, the increment
size is the range divided by ten. The above procedure is
repeated. This process continues until the best values ofui
and ~2 are found such that they are incremented by
acceptably small amounts.
After good first estimates for ul and u2 have been
obtained the variables dullax1 and du2/axz are examined
to determine if the surface expanded or contracted in the
xi and x2 dimensions. The area of the deformed surface
that is to be searched is centred about the position
(xi0 + ui, xzO+ uZ). Position (xlO,x2,) is the centre of the
undeformed surface. For all variables, the increment size
is one-tenth of the range. Therefore the 121 possible
combinations of dullax and du2dx2 within their ranges
are examined. This amounts to finding the rectangle
which best correlates with the undeformed data. Some of
the possible rectangles are indicated in Figure 8.

FA(I,J) = B(f + l,J)-B(i,J)

FB(I,J) = B(i,J

+ 1) - W43)

Fc(Z, J) = B(Z + 1,J + 1) + B(Z, r>

(3)

F,(I, 3) = B(I, 3)
The upper and lower bounds for a variable define
the limits of values that will be examined. The range for a
variable is the difference between the limits, and the
increment size is the range divided by ten. This provides
11 acceptable values for a variable at any given time.
When a very small section of a surface is examined,
deformation can produce three types of change. The
surface section can be translated along the xi and x2 axes,
the x1 and x2 dimensions of the section can be expanded or
contracted, and the sides of the section can be rotated
about their vertices. These changes represent the respective effects of nonzero values for the three sets of
variables

Ic

Figure 8. Examination of dull&xl and du2/dx2. a gives

the size of an undeformed square; b-f are examples of
rectangles that are correlated with the undeformed square.

136

image and vision computing

After
the
121 combinations
of
dutldxt
and
duZldxZ have been examined,
the combination
producing the best correlation
is retained. The ranges are
reduced and centred about this combination
of values and
a new smaller set of increment
sizes is obtained. The
process for finding dutldxt and duJdxZ is repeated in a
manner similar to that for ut and 2~2.After all combinations
have been examined, the ranges and increment
sizes for
these variables are reduced. The search continues until the
increment size becomes sufficiently small.
The third set of variables examined are dul/dx2 and
du211dx1. in this process we examine the parallelograms
that are centred about (xl0 + ul, x20 + u2) and that have
sides of the lengths found from &t/&t
and duddx2
(Figure 9). All 121 combinations
of du11dx2 and &Z/&i
are examined to find the parallelogram
that produces the
lowest correlation coefficient. This process is repeated for
reduced ranges as the two previous
processes
were
repeated.
While two variables
are being examined,
there is
considerable
data processing at each of the 121 combinations of values. First, locations must be determined for
each of the 225 points to be used for the deformed surface.
The locations are calculated from equation (3). During
much of the starting value procedure,
several of the
variables
in equation
(3) are zero. This causes the
calculations
to be relatively quick and inaccurate.
Once the location of a point has been determined,
the light intensity at that point must be determined using
bilinear interpolation.
For a point at (I+ &, J + G),
where Z and J are integers and <t and c2 are positive
fractional
distances
as shown in Figure 3, the light
intensity is given by

Finally, after all 225 intensities have been determined, the

correlation coefftcient is found by applying equation (2). If
a correlation coefficient is lower than any previous value,
it is saved along with the variable values at which it
occurred.

Iteration procedure
Once the starting value routine is complete, the ranges of
the variables are returned to the large original ranges used
at the beginning of the Strain routine. The ranges are also
centred about the estimated
values produced
by the
starting value procedure. The iteration procedure is very
similar to the starting value procedure. Again, the goal is to
find the values of the variables that produce the minimum
correlation coefbcient. Again, the variables are examined
in the same three pairs, one pair at a time. In many ways,
the two procedures
are identical.
There
are three
important differences. After 121 combinations
ofut and u2
values have been examined, the same is done for 121
combinations
of dulldxl and du21dx2 and then for 121
combinations
of dulldx2 and du21dx1. This represents one
pass of the six variables.
After a pass has been
completed, the ranges of the six variables are reduced. In
this way, the convergence of the six variables is as close to
simultaneous
as is possible for this type of technique.
Secondly,
in the interation
procedure
there are
always good reasonable
values available
for the six
variables. Therefore the position calculations
involving
equation (3) will be much more accurate than during the
starting value routine.
Finally, the iteration routine terminates
as soon as
the correlation
coefficient,
at the end of a pass, is
acceptably low. This is true regardless of the increment
sizes used.
It is noted that the coarse&ne approach used by the Strain
routine is heavily laden with nested loops. Even the
calculation
of the correlation
coefficient, which is performed thousands of times, is a summation requiring two
more loops. To make Strain as efIicient as possible all
calculations are performed as far from the innermost loop
as possible. Therefore the source code for the calculations
seems quite fragmented and unreadable, but this is a small
price for efficiency. Also, in calculating the summation for
the correlation coefftcient, the summation
is aborted if it
ever exceeds the previous lowest value for the coefftcient.
In this way, all obvious improvements
in the efftciency of
Strain have already been made.
The improvements
in Strains
efficiency
are best
illustrated
by comparing
execution
times. The CPU
computation
time required to determine
the converged
values of all six variables at one position has been reduced
from 210 s to 100 s. If only the displacements
are calculated, the required CPU time is reduced from 10 s to 5.2 s.
These times were obtained by compiling
Strain on a
version V3.0 FORTRANcompiler and by executing Strain
on a version V3.01 VAXIVMS operation system on a VAX
1 l/780 computer.

EXPERIMENTS
Figure 9.
Examination of dulldx2 and du21dxl. a is a rectangle with dull&x2 z= du21dxl = 0; b-d are parallelograms for nonzero values of the variables.

vol 1 no 3 august

1983

A cantilever beam specimen, as shown in Figure 10, was

employed to verify the results obtained
by using the

137

Top steel ptate

Sted rod
4 8 mm diameter

Dial
indicator

Plexiglas
block

i j Floating table

11

25.4 mm
bolts

for all cases. However, because of equipment limitations,

only arrays of 100 x 100 could be processed. For each load
or noload condition, six separate camera positions were
required for the entire beam to be analysed. The
horizontal movements were accomplished by the use of a
specially designed horizontal translation stage on which
the Eyecom camera was mounted. The horizontal position
along the beam for each of the six views was obtained by
loosely attaching a ruler to the top of the beam. To ensure
correct positioning along the beam, the ruler information
was entered into each data file. Then the load was applied
to the beam. However, instead of measuring the applied
load, the vertical free end deflection (Se) was the measured
quantity. This procedure was used to simplify interpretation of the results. Two values of I?* were analysed,
S* = 0.2616 mm and 6* = 0.503 mm.
For each value of s*, 12 100 X 100 arrays of ideas
were stored in the computer. Each of the 12 files was then
displayed on the Comtal image processor screen. The ruler
was disolaved
on the screen to indicate the actual position
.
of a file along the beam.

/I
,

F&we 10.

101.6 mm

Fixed end co~d~t~on for a cant~lev~

beam

7060Y
Q
x 50a/*&

0-y

Figure 11.

o-----I---I-----L-_

Typical random pattern

25.4

f
50.8

+-
R

Distance, mm
Digitalired imoge

Figure 13.
Vertical displacement (S/S*) as determined
porn theory (-),
finite element analysis (-I-) and cross
co~e~ation (*) (PexP = 0,262 mm)

I
I

-.

I
I

Centre
line

-1.

S&et

Ft;eUre 12. Measuring

imaging techniques

of i~estigatlon

beam

deflections

using digital

correlation method. The beam was machined from a

Plexiglas sheet to the dimensions shown in Figure 10. The
estimated material properties for the Plexiglas were
E = 34.48 GPa and v = 0.37.
The experimental procedure was as follows. First
the surface of the beam was coated with black rubberized
paint. It was then lightly spray painted white to obtain a
random pattern similar to that shown in Figure 11. This
surface was viewed with an Eyecom digitizing camera and
its associated equipment as shown in Figure 1. Next, the
cameras image magnification was set to 8.3 lines mm-

138

Distance, mm

Figure 14.
theory (-)
mm)

Verticat displacement as determined from

and cross correlation (0) (c?*~~~= 0.503

image and vision computes

Top

of

beam

26

36

.4I

__-----

__----/

,D-----*__---

46cf
51 cv

_---

_---

L_--/I
-0 II

-0

IO

-0.09

-0.08

-0.07

-0.06

-0.05

, r(/ ,
-0.04

C-

1:

A/

__--

__--

,,*.w

_---

___--

--o-

-003

rr

I/

.--

76,_

81

,
-002

pttm

of

beam

-001

001

002

003

004

005

_1._. ~_L.
0.06

007

.L/
008

J
009

010

Oil

Pixels

Figure 15. Horizontal dtiplacement

0, at 25.4 mm from the free end

in pixels as determinedfrom

Finally
the Strain subroutine
calculated
the displacements of the 15 x 15 subsets which were centred in
the front surface. Figure 12 shows the approximate
location of each subset.
The vertical deflection results are given in Figures
13 and 14. The theoretical values ofthe vertical deflections
were those obtained from simple beam theory with

In addition, a linear, elastic, finite element analysis of the

member was performed for the case where 6* = 0.2616
mm. The triangular plate bending element was used and
40 elements, four through the thickness and ten along the
length, were used to represent the structure.
Relative to these results, the following comments
can be made. First, the results of the finite element
analysis indicate that the cantilever member does behave
like a beam. Secondly, the experimental
results for all
cases are quite good with a maximum error of 5%. Finally,
the results appear to have the largest errors in the regions
near the fixed support. This is to be expected since
elasticity theory is most accurate in regions far from the
imposed boundary condition.
The experimental
results for the horizontal
deflections of the beam are shown in Figure 15. These results
were obtained at two horizontal locations removed from
support uncertainties.
The 15 x 15 subsets were selected
along a vertical line to detect the horizontal displacements
along the line. The results are quite poor and bear little
resemblance to the theoretical profile of displacements.
As
the computed displacements
in Figure 15 are all less than
0.12 pixels, it is clear that these results indicate that a
lower threshold for accurate measurement
of displacements is above 0.10 pixels.

vol 1 no 3 august 1983

cross correlation:

0, at 19.1 mm from the free end;

CONCLUSIONS
An improved two-dimensional
digital c:orrelation algorithm has been developed and specially adapted to the
processing
of digitized video signals so that surface
deformations
can be obtained.
The computation
sub
routine Strain was found to require half the computer
execution
time with minimal
changes in computing
precision.
This routine was used to deduce the twodimensional displacements of the centreline of a cantilever
beam. Comparisons
of these results with known theoretical results indicate that the algorithm can successfully
compute displacements
larger than approximately
0.10
pixels by using a bilinear interpolation
procedure.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We wish to acknowledge the encouragement
of C J Astill
and the support ofthe National Science Foundation
and of
the College of Engineering, University ofSouth Carolina.

REFERENCES
1

Peters, W H and Ranson, W F Digital imaging

techniques on experimental
stress analysis Opt. Eng.
Vol21 No 3 (1982) pp 427-431

Chu, T C, Peters, W H, Ranson, W F and Sutton,

M A Application of digital correlation
methods to
rigid body mechanics Proc. 1982 Fall Meet. of SESA
pp 73-77

McNeill, S R, Peters, W H, Ranson, W F

and Sutton, M A A study of fracture parameters by
digital image processing Proc. 1983 Spring Meet. of
SESA to be published

139