• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 31 subscribers
  • Views 841 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

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.

Original question:

IWR1642BOOST: Is it possible to change the "Entrance/Exit" side of the PeopleCounting Demo?

IWR6843: Defining static boxes through configuration file and using static2free parameter

Shruti Koparkar1
Prodigy 30 points
Part Number: IWR6843
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: IWR1642

Hi,

I'd would like to modify the static2free parameter to ensure that tracks that were once active and then are stationary - e.g. a person sitting down, aren't freed right away. I tried changing this parameter from the default 100 to 1000, 5000 and even 10,000 but saw no difference in behavior. What am I doing wrong or what else do I need to do? One thing I was wondering is where is the static box defined. The default as seen in gtrack_create.C is no boundary and no static boxes. Now while the boundary box is set through the config file, overriding the default, I don't know that the static box is. Unless ofcourse by default the boundary values for the boundary box are also used for static box.

Anyway, can you please help with both these - 1. Defining static boxes through configuration file or otherwise. 2. Getting the static2free parameter to work correctly. 

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 28055 points

    Hi Shruti,

    The boundary box values are used for the static boxes as well. You should try lowering the first threshold, det2active, so that tracks become active faster after the initial detection. Only active tracks can become static.

    Regards,

    Justin

  • 0 in reply to Justin Curewitz
    Expert 1171 points

    I am noticing the exact same thing on my setup. The interesting thing is that the static2free feature is working fine if I use the people counting demo on IWR1642 hardware but if I run the demo on IWR6843 then no matter what value I populate for the static2free parameter, it doesn't affect the performance. In my setup I have the frame rate set for 50mS and the active2free set to 10 and statice2free set to 200. In the IWR1642 case, the targets are free after about 10 sec but using the same parameter and same exact setup, the IWR6843 free targets almost right away.

    I know the targets are being detects because I examined the fHist.mat file the demo spits out. In the case of IWR1642, I counted 200 frames where the numTargets parameter was set to 1 with empty indexArray before it got updated to 0. However, in the case of IWR6843, it only waited for 10 frames before it set the numTargets parameter to 0.

    I think for some reason the IWR6843 code is not supporting the static2free feature. Please let me know if I am missing anything here and what can be done. Thanks!

  • 0 in reply to Mustafa Homsi
    Expert 1171 points

    Any update on this? Can you please confirm if static2free feature works at your end. Thanks!

  • 0 in reply to Mustafa Homsi
    TI__Mastermind 28055 points

    Hi Mustafa,

    Please try modifying the Boundary and Static boxes that are defined in Task_app.c instead of using the CLI parameters. (Then do not send the SceneryParam command). The trackingCfg cli command selects the second set of parameters stored in task_app.c, so make sure you modify those parameters. 

    Regards,

    Justin

  • 0 in reply to Justin Curewitz
    Expert 1171 points

    Thanks for the info. We will try it tonight but are you saying if we just use the standard CLI scenery command, this feature does not work? Is it not working at your end with just CLI command? With 1642 hardware, I don't have to touch task_app.c.

  • 0 in reply to Mustafa Homsi
    TI__Mastermind 28055 points

    Hi Mustafa,

    The feature appears to be working on my end.  Since you are having issues, I recommend removing one of the potential points of failure, which is the CLI command. You should be able to compare the behavior when using the CLI command vs using hard coded values.

    Regards,

    Justin

  • 0 in reply to Justin Curewitz
    Expert 1171 points

    Thank you Justin. We identified a bug in the code and were able to get the static2free feature to work after implementing a fix. I am supersized the feature did work at your end but maybe you are using the industrial toolbox v4+ which might have solved the bug. I am using v3.6.2 of the toolbox.