• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 30 subscribers
  • Views 295 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

AWR1843AOPEVM: Obstacle Detection Demo Binary File

Henry Parsania
Prodigy 10 points
Part Number: AWR1843AOPEVM
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: AWR1843AOP

Hi TI team,

I tried to make some changes on the AWR1843AOP Obstacle Detection example, but I noticed if I compile the code without any changes, the generated binary file is different than what we have in the pre-built binaries, and also the performance is very different. With the same configuration, I get false points in almost every frame, and all of them have rounded values for the x or y axis (for example: x: 13.000, y: 1.5000).

How can we achieve the same result as the pre-built binary file when we compile the code?

Thank you.

  • 0
    TI__Guru*** 140784 points

    Hi,

    Please let us know the version of the Radar Toolbox or Automotive Toolbox this code is coming from

    Thank you

    Cesar

  • 0 in reply to Cesar
    Prodigy 10 points

    Thank you for your response,

    I tried on Radar Toolbox 1.30.00.05 and 1.20.00.11

    Here is a sample of detected objects: (Objects 7, 9, and 11)

  • 0 in reply to Henry Parsania
    TI__Guru*** 140784 points

    Thank you for the additional information

    For obstacle detection use cases, I recommend using the mmWave demo provided in the mmWave SDK v 3.6.

    The reason for this is that the mmWave demo is more flexible and provides similar performance.

    The obstacle detection demo is one of the older demos. The developer is no longer available for support. So we can only provide limited support.

    Please let me know if there are any concerns using the mmwave demo

    Thank you

    Cesar

  • 0 in reply to Cesar
    Prodigy 10 points

    We have two objectives: detecting stationary objects at close range (up to 4 meters) and detecting moving objects up to 20 meters away.

    By making some changes to the Obstacle Detection demo and also modifying the chirp configuration, we achieved very good results for detecting stationary objects at close range.

    We hoped to be able to add another subframe to detect moving objects at further ranges.

    We couldn't achieve good results with the Out Of Box demo, either for stationary or moving objects.

  • 0 in reply to Henry Parsania
    TI__Guru*** 140784 points

    Hi,

    You are correct, the obstacle detection demo will have better performance for static objects. The oob demo will have better performance for moving objects.

    I have re-built the binaries and I noticed that the size of the flashable image is 3x smaller than the size of the image provided in the Radar Toolbox. The sizes of the ARM and DSP executables is similar.

    I don't know why there is such difference in the size of the flashable image. I don't think it is due to Release/Debug configurations.

    Do you see a performance difference with both flashable image and ARM and DSP executables?

    Thank you

    Cesar