Method and system for designing custom restorations for dental implants

Abstract

A method of designing a dental restoration component. A set of design dimensional constraints is defined which must be satisfied for the dental restoration component. A set of design parameters for the dental restoration component also is defined. Using at least in part a penalty function, a value is assigned to each of said design parameters for the dental restoration component, consistent with the constraints for said component, said penalty function taking into account at least more than one of said design parameters and which signals a constraint being reached when the value of any of said parameters violates a constraint.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings are not intended to be drawn to scale. In the drawings, each identical or nearly identical component that is illustrated in various figures is represented by a like numeral. For purposes of clarity, not every component may be labeled in every drawing. In the drawings:

FIG. 1 is a high-level conceptual block diagram of a first example of an implant restoration design process as taught herein, wherein as a predicate, the required implant(s) has(have) already been fixed (i.e., placed) in the patient's jaw;

FIG. 2 is a high-level conceptual block diagram of a second example of an implant restoration design process as taught herein, wherein the implant(s) has(have) not already been fixed (i.e., placed) in the patient's jaw and the design of implant placement is part of such restoration process;

FIG. 3 is a diagrammatic illustration, from a single side view, of an implant and an abutment showing several design parameters;

FIG. 4 is a graph of three exemplary shoulder width penalty functions, non-normalized;

FIG. 5 is a graph of the same three exemplary shoulder width penalty functions, centered and normalized;

FIG. 6 is a graph of an example of an emergence angle penalty function;

FIG. 7 is a graph of an example of a shoulder width penalty function used in conjunction with the graph of FIG. 6 to demonstrate penalty function-constraint interaction;

FIG. 8 is a graph of an example of a space-from-core penalty function discussed in relation to the penalty functions of FIGS. 6 and 7;

FIG. 9 is a part-flow, part-block diagram useful for understanding the overall restoration planning process in which aspects of the present invention may be utilized; and

FIG. 10 (parts A and B) is a block diagram of a typical computer system that might be used to practice aspects of the invention that are computer-implemented, though the invention is not limited to any particular computer system.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented method for specifying design parameters for at least first and second dental restoration components that must be installed in a cooperating relationship, said method comprising: receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for each of the first and second dental restoration components;receiving a set of design parameters for each of the first and second dental restoration components; andassigning values to the design parameters of the first and second dental components such that there is an absence of conflicts between the values of the design parameters and the design constraints.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the first and second dental restoration components are an abutment and a crown, respectively.

3. A computer-implemented method of specifying design parameters for at least first and second dental restoration components that must be installed in a cooperating relationship, comprising, with a computer system: a. receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for each of the first and second dental restoration components;b. receiving a set of design parameters for each of the first and second dental restoration components;c. for the first dental restoration component, assigning a value to each of said design parameters, consistent with the constraints for said component;d. for the second dental restoration component, determining whether there is a conflict between possible values for a design parameter and the dimensional constraints for the first component and, if there is a conflict, changing a value of at least one design parameter for the first component and re-determining whether there is a conflict, until no conflict exists or it is established that for all values of the design parameters for the first component there will be conflict;e. assigning a value to a first design parameter of the second dental restoration component, consistent with all constraints; andf. repeating acts “d” and “e” until values have been assigned to all design parameters of the first and second components and no constraint or parameter value conflicts exist.

4. The method of claim 3, further including recording said assigned parameter values in a data structure on a computer-readable medium.

5. The method of claim 4 further including operating a computer-aided manufacturing system in accordance with said values in said data structure, to manufacture said first and second components.

6. A computer-implemented method of designing a dental restoration component, comprising: receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for the dental restoration component;receiving a set of design parameters for the dental restoration component;receiving a definition for a penalty function which takes into account at least more than one of said design parameters and which signals a constraint being reached when the value of any of said parameters violates a constraint; andusing the penalty function, assigning a value to each of said design parameters for the dental restoration component, consistent with the constraints for said component.

7. The method of claim 6 wherein the penalty function is used to assist, along with other factors, assigning a value to at least one of said design parameters.

8. A computer-implemented method of designing a dental restoration component, comprising: receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for the dental restoration component;receiving a set of design parameters for the dental restoration component; andusing at least in part a penalty function, assigning a value to each of said design parameters for the dental restoration component, consistent with the constraints for said component, said penalty function taking into account at least more than one of said design parameters and which signals a constraint being reached when the value of any of said parameters violates a constraint.

9. The method of claim 8, wherein assigning a value to each of said design parameters comprises assigning said values consistent with the corresponding value of the penalty function being at or near an extreme value of the penalty function.

10. The method of claim 9 wherein the extreme value is a minimum value.

11. The method of any of claims 8-10 wherein assigning the value to each of said design parameters is not limited to using the penalty function to do so.

12. The method of any of claims 8-10, further including recording said assigned parameter values in a data structure on a computer-readable medium.

13. The method of claim 12 further including operating a computer-aided manufacturing system in accordance with said values in said data structure, to manufacture at least one of said first and second components.

14. A computer-implemented method of designing an optimized dental restoration component, comprising: a. receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for the component;b. receiving a set of design parameters for the component;c. assigning a value to each of said design parameters, consistent with the constraints for said component;d. determining whether there is a conflict between possible values for a design parameter and the dimensional constraints for the component and, if there is a conflict, changing a value of at least one design parameter for the component and re-determining whether there is a conflict, until no conflict exists or it is established that for all values of the design parameters for the component there will be conflict;e. repeating act “c” until values have been assigned to all design parameters of the component and no constraint or parameter value conflicts exist; andf. executing a penalty function to calculate an acceptable set of design parameter values for the component.

15. The method of claim 14, further including recording said acceptable set of parameter values in a data structure on a computer-readable medium.

16. The method of claim 15 further including operating a computer-aided manufacturing system in accordance with said acceptable set of values in said data structure, to manufacture said component.

17. A computer-implemented method for specifying a least one common design feature for at least first and second dental restoration components that must be installed in a cooperating relationship, said method comprising: receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for each of the first and second dental restoration components;receiving a set of design parameters for each of the first and second dental restoration components; andassigning values to the common design feature for said first and second dental components such that there is an absence of conflicts between the design parameters and the design constraints of said components.

18. The method of claim 17 wherein the first and second components comprise an abutment and a crown, and the at least one common design feature is a common margin for the abutment and crown.

19. A method for designing at least first and second dental restoration components that must be installed in a cooperating relationship, said method comprising: defining a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for each of the first and second dental restoration components;defining a set of design parameters for each of the first and second dental restoration components; andassigning values to the first and second dental components such that there is an absence of conflicts between the design parameters and the design constraints.

20. A method of specifying design parameters for at least first and second dental restoration components that must be installed in a cooperating relationship, comprising, with a computer system: a. defining a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for each of the first and second dental restoration components;b. defining a set of design parameters for each of the first and second dental restoration components;c. for the first dental restoration component, assigning a value to each of said design parameters, consistent with the constraints for said component;d. for the second dental restoration component, determining whether there is a conflict between possible values for a design parameter and the dimensional constraints for the first component and, if there is a conflict, changing a value of at least one design parameter for the first component and re-determining whether there is a conflict, until no conflict exists or it is established that for all values of the design parameters for the first component there will be conflict;e. assigning a value to a first design parameter of the second dental restoration component, consistent with all constraints; andf. repeating acts “d” and “e” until values have been assigned to all design parameters of the first and second components and no constraint or parameter value conflicts exist.

21. The method of claim 20, further including recording said assigned parameter values in a data structure on a computer-readable medium.

22. The method of claim 21 further including operating a computer-aided manufacturing system in accordance with said values in said data structure, to manufacture at least one of said first and second components.

23. A method of designing a dental restoration component, comprising: defining a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for the dental restoration component;defining a set of design parameters for the dental restoration component;defining for a penalty function which takes into account at least more than one of said design parameters and which signals a constraint being reached when the value of any of said parameters violates a constraint; andusing the penalty function, assigning a value to each of said design parameters for the dental restoration component, consistent with the constraints for said component.

24. The method of claim 23 wherein the penalty function is used to assist, along with other factors, assigning a value to at least one of said design parameters.

25. A method of designing a dental restoration component, comprising: defining a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for the dental restoration component;defining a set of design parameters for the dental restoration component; andusing at least in part a penalty function, assigning a value to each of said design parameters for the dental restoration component, consistent with the constraints for said component, said penalty function taking into account at least more than one of said design parameters and which signals a constraint being reached when the value of any of said parameters violates a constraint.

26. The method of claim 25, wherein assigning a value to each of said design parameters comprises assigning said values consistent with the corresponding value of the penalty function being at or near an extreme value of the penalty function.

27. The method of claim 26 wherein the extreme value is a minimum value.

28. The method of any of claims 25-27 wherein assigning the value to each of said design parameters is not limited to using the penalty function to do so.

29. The method of any of claims 25-27, further including recording said assigned parameter values in a data structure on a computer-readable medium.

30. The method of claim 29 further including operating a computer-aided manufacturing system in accordance with said values in said data structure, to manufacture said first and second components.

31. A method of designing a dental restoration component, comprising: a. defining a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for the component;b. defining a set of design parameters for the component;c. assigning a value to each of said design parameters, consistent with the constraints for said component;d. determining whether there is a conflict between possible values for a design parameter and the dimensional constraints for the component and, if there is a conflict, changing a value of at least one design parameter for the component and re-determining whether there is a conflict, until no conflict exists or it is established that for all values of the design parameters for the component there will be conflict;e. repeating act “d” until values have been assigned to all design parameters of the component and no constraint or parameter value conflicts exist; andf. using a penalty function to calculate an acceptable set of design parameter values for the component.

32. The method of claim 31, further including recording said calculated set of parameter values in a data structure on a computer-readable medium.

33. The method of claim 32 further including operating a computer-aided manufacturing system in accordance with said calculated set of values in said data structure, to manufacture said component.

34. A method for specifying a least one common design feature for at least first and second dental restoration components that must be installed in a cooperating relationship, said method comprising: providing a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for each of the first and second dental restoration components;providing a set of design parameters the at least one common design feature for each of the first and second dental restoration components; andassigning values to the common design feature for said first and second dental components such that there is an absence of conflicts between the values of said design parameters and the design constraints of said components.

35. The method of claim 34 wherein the first and second components comprise an abutment and a crown, and the at least one common design feature is a common margin for the abutment and crown.

36. An article comprising a computer-readable signal, recorded on a computer-readable medium, and comprising instructions which, when executed, cause a computer system to perform a method for specifying design parameters for at least first and second dental restoration components that must be installed in a cooperating relationship, said method comprising: receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for each of the first and second dental restoration components;receiving a set of design parameters for each of the first and second dental restoration components; andassigning values to the first and second dental components such that there is an absence of conflicts between the design parameters and the design constraints.

37. An article comprising a computer-readable signal, recorded on a computer-readable medium, and comprising instructions which, when executed, cause a computer system to perform a method of specifying design parameters for at least first and second dental restoration components that must be installed in a cooperating relationship, comprising: a. receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for each of the first and second dental restoration components;b. receiving a set of design parameters for each of the first and second dental restoration components;c. for the first dental restoration component, assigning a value to each of said design parameters, consistent with the constraints for said component;d. for the second dental restoration component, determining whether there is a conflict between possible values for a design parameter and the dimensional constraints for the first component and, if there is a conflict, changing a value of at least one design parameter for the first component and re-determining whether there is a conflict, until no conflict exists or it is established that for all values of the design parameters for the first component there will be conflict;e. assigning a value to a first design parameter of the second dental restoration component, consistent with all constraints; andf. repeating acts “d” and “e” until values have been assigned to all design parameters of the first and second components and no constraint or parameter value conflicts exist.

38. The article of claim 37, wherein said method further includes operating a computer-aided manufacturing system in accordance with said assigned values, to manufacture at least one of said first and second components.

39. An article comprising a computer-readable signal, recorded on a computer-readable medium, and comprising instructions which, when executed, cause a computer system to perform a method of designing a dental restoration component, comprising: receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for the dental restoration component;receiving a set of design parameters for the dental restoration component;receiving a definition for a penalty function which takes into account at least more than one of said design parameters and which signals a constraint being reached when the value of any of said parameters violates a constraint; andusing the penalty function, assigning a value to each of said design parameters for the dental restoration component, consistent with the constraints for said component.

40. The article of claim 39, wherein said instructions when executed further cause the penalty function to be used to assist, along with other factors, assigning a value to at least one of said design parameters.

41. An article comprising a computer-readable signal, recorded on a computer-readable medium, and comprising instructions which, when executed, cause a computer system to perform a method of designing a dental restoration component, comprising: receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for the dental restoration component;receiving a set of design parameters of said parameters for the dental restoration component; andusing at least in part a penalty function, assigning a value to each of said design parameters for the dental restoration component, consistent with the constraints for said component, said penalty function taking into account at least more than one of said design parameters and which signals a constraint being reached when the value of any of said parameters violates a constraint.

42. The article of claim 41, wherein assigning a value to each of said design parameters comprises assigning said values consistent with the corresponding value of the penalty function being at or near an extreme value of the penalty function.

43. The article of claim 42 wherein the extreme value is a minimum value.

44. The article of any of claims 41-43 wherein assigning the value to each of said design parameters is not limited to using the penalty function to do so.

45. The article of any of claims 41-43, wherein said instructions further effect recording said assigned parameter values in a data structure on a computer-readable medium.

46. The article of claim 41, further including instructions which, when executed, operate a computer-aided manufacturing system in accordance with said values in said data structure, to manufacture said at least one of first and second components.

47. An article comprising a computer-readable signal, recorded on a computer-readable medium, and comprising instructions which, when executed, cause a computer system to perform a method of designing an optimized dental restoration component, comprising: a. receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for the component;b. receiving a set of design parameters for the component;c. assigning a value to each of said design parameters, consistent with the constraints for said component;d. determining whether there is a conflict between possible values for a design parameter and the dimensional constraints for the component and, if there is a conflict, changing a value of at least one design parameter for the component and re-determining whether there is a conflict, until no conflict exists or it is established that for all values of the design parameters for the component there will be conflict;e. repeating act “d” until values have been assigned to all design parameters of the component and no constraint or parameter value conflicts exist; andf. executing a penalty function to calculate an acceptable set of design parameter values for the component.

48. The article of claim 47 further including instructions which, when executed, operate a computer-aided manufacturing system in accordance with said acceptable set of values to manufacture said component.

49. An article comprising a computer-readable signal, recorded on a computer-readable medium, and comprising instructions which, when executed, cause a computer system to perform a method of specifying a least one common design feature for at least first and second dental restoration components that must be installed in a cooperating relationship, said method comprising: receiving a set of design dimensional constraints which must be satisfied for each of the first and second dental restoration components;receiving a set of design parameters for each of the first and second dental restoration components; andassigning values to the common design feature for said first and second dental components such that there is an absence of conflicts between the design parameters and the design constraints of said components.

50. The article of claim 49 wherein the first and second components comprise an abutment and a crown, and the at least one common design feature is a common margin for the abutment and crown.

51. A dental restoration abutment and a corresponding, paired dental restoration crown which when assembled together share between them a common margin, made using the process of any of claims 17-18 and 34-35.

52. A dental restoration component made using the process of any of claims 1-35.