Nate uploaded the SpaceCats camera calibration video today. I got 3 screenshots, one with the camera at 3, 6,  and 9 feet.

Picture one: (855, 328) -> (850, 643). Pixel length: 315 pixels.

Picture two: (866, 434) -> (863, 599). Pixel length: 165

Picture 3: (583, 582) -> (852, 498). Pixel length: 84 pixels.

So I think this data shows that there isn’t a direct relationship between the Pixels per meter ratio and the target distance… Hm. After plugging these numbers into my calculator, it gave me a linear and quadratic regression.

Linear: -121x + 1318

Quadratic: 12X^2 + -266x +1683

I feel the quadratic to be more accurate, but I would like a second opinion on that.

I think I need some help. -Beau

I did some more measurements on the 200 mph car video. The 240p resolution didn’t help me much, but I think I got some solid data. The first picture is the screenshot I used to capture pixels to man height. The second is the spreadsheet I set up to calculate rang of track radius. Take a look,

-B

I took 3 screenshot of out video all from different heights. I will measure the ratio of Pixels to actual Length. From this, I think I will be able to find the height at each point.

Picture 1: (813, 445) to (827, 406), 14^2+39^2=1717, so length is 41.44 pixels, which equates to a certain distance (That I need to find) [The distance between the edge of the rectangle to the semicircle on Broyles patio]

Picture 2: (984, 545) to (838, 594), 146^2 + 49^2 = 23,717, so the length is 154 pixels, which equates to 100 yards of the Westminster football field.

Picture 3: (1470, 228) to (1515, 304), 45^2 + 76^2 = 7,801, so the length is 88 pixels which equates to 155 feet of a baseball diamond.

Tomorrow my plan is to measure that distance on Broyles patio. Then i’ll set up a test . Ill position the camera 30 feet away and foot a 1 foot ruler in front of it. Then I can say at 30 feet, 1 foot was x pixels. So, at Y feet 154 pixels was 300 feet. Kool stuff.

-B

I just got back from retrieving my high altitude weather balloon. Here are some considerations: We have no idea the rate of accent/max altitude/rate of decent. I was thinking I could use the 27 minutes of video that we have to measure the accent rate. I know that the balloon accelerated pretty quickly, but need to affirm this in the video. My method will to take a series of pictures from different heights and measure Pixel to WMS stadium ratio. Graph that, and see if it results in a linear relationship. Now all I’m waiting for is a video. All the best,

-B.

For my new capstone I will be analyzing this video of a tethered RC car going 200 miles per hour. To start off, here’s what I’ve collected:

Important information:
Radius (est): approximatly 25 feet = 7.6m
Period (timed): .65 Seconds.
Claimed Speed (video claim): 200 MPH = 89.4M/s
Estimated Acceleration (calculation of estimates): 1,051M/s^2
Estimated mass (est): 1KG
Force (Newtons): 1,051 N = 236 pounds of force

Result of estimations:

Could be held by a 1/16 steel cable

As you can see, There are a lot of estimations. I’m not sure how I can affirm some of those estimations, so feedback on how to confirm/disprove/comment on my estimation would be very appreciated. All the best,

-B