Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Nondestructive Detection of Stem Content in Tobacco Strips Using X-Ray Imaging Analysis Cover

Nondestructive Detection of Stem Content in Tobacco Strips Using X-Ray Imaging Analysis

Open Access
|Dec 2022

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Tobacco leaves before and after threshing.

(a) Cured tobacco leaves before threshing

(b) Leafy strips

(c) Stems with leaf attached

(d) Fully stripped stems

Table 1

The density of leaves and stems.

SamplesApparent density (g/cm3)Thickness (mm)Area density (g/cm2)
Leaves000
Stems (2.38 mm)120
Stems (1.50 mm)110
Figure 2

Experimental system.

(a) Physical simulation diagram

(b) Schematic illustration of the experimental system

Figure 3

Gray image of tobacco leaves and stems.

Figure 4

Image processing flowchart of stem recognition and quantization algorithm.

Figure 5

Determination of stem diameter by image segmentation.

Figure 6

Comparison of stem images from two kinds of X-ray detectors.

Figure 7

Contrast of stems and leaves on an X-ray image as a function of X-ray intensity.

Table 2

Calculation results of i=1nlnG0/Gi for each image in Figure 5.

Test No.ValueRelative deviation (%)
1#166320.10
2#16588−0.17
3#16613−0.02
4#166420.16
5#166210.03
6#16600−0.10
Table 3

The determination result of tobacco stems in pure tobacco leaves by the X-ray identification and determination system.

Test No.Actual content of stem (%)Determination of stem* (%)Relative error (%)
11.00000.9689−3.11
21.50001.4712−1.92
32.00002.05522.76
42.50002.4090−3.64
53.00002.9538−1.54
63.50003.4926−0.21
74.00003.9033−0.06
84.50004.4258−2.03
95.00004.9108−1.78
106.00006.14322.34

* Mean of 5 replicates at each level

Table 4

The comparison of quantitative detection results of two methods.

SampleActual content of stem (%)ISO methodX-ray method
Detected content (%)Relative error (%)Detected content (%)Relative error (%)
3000 g leaves + 30 g stems0.99010.9571−3.321.01052.07
3000 g leaves + 60 g stems1.96081.7682−9.792.00032.06
3000 g leaves + 90 g stems2.91262.7123−6.792.93760.95
3000 g leaves + 120 g stems3.84623.5256−8.433.7995−1.31
Table 5

The determination results of thick stems.

Test No.Number of detected thick stemNumber of total thick stemIdentification accuracy (%)
1475094.00
2495098.00
3465092.00
Average94.67
Table 6

The determination results of long stems.

Test No.Number of detected long stemNumber of total long stemIdentification accuracy (%)
1495098.00
25050100.00
35050100.00
Average99.33
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/cttr-2022-0015 | Journal eISSN: 2719-9509 (formerly 1612-9237)
Language: English, French, German
Page range: 142 - 150
Submitted on: Feb 21, 2022
Accepted on: Jun 16, 2022
Published on: Dec 10, 2022
Published by: Beiträge zur Tabakforschung GmbH
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2022 Wenkui Zhu, Hongkun Liu, Bo Zhou, Meizhou Ding, Bing Wang, Bin Liu, published by Beiträge zur Tabakforschung GmbH
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License.