Shadowless lighting systems are used in medical procedure rooms, dental offices, labs, clean-rooms and many other areas. In all these applications it is required a local illumination of a certain, geometrically well-defined, area.
Prior arts are either a single- or a multiple-light assembly, controlled by different type of controls. These controls need human intervention, what is not always available. The invention is suitable to both of the assembly types, single or multiple lights, making human intervention unnecessary.
The invention is directed to eliminate human intervention in shadowless illumination systems and to create optimal lighting conditions.
For a better understanding of the working principles of the invention, it is better to analyze first the purpose of the invention.
The primary purpose of the invention is to illuminate a defined/target area, without having a disturbing shadow over this specific area.
Shadow, thru definition, means usually a less illuminated area bordered by a more illuminated area. It is the most disturbing, when the less illuminated area is in the primary visual field—which is the work area too—, and the more illuminated area is in the secondary visual field. The optimal situation is when the primary visual field is better illuminated than the secondary visual field.
Shadow is created usually, when between the light source and the target area interposes an object. This object can be the head of a surgeon or dentist, and cannot be controlled in his moves, neither restricted, due the importance of their activity. So, it is necessary for the system to react to different situations, for self-corrections, to be smart.
To eliminate shadow in a certain target position, as analyzed above, it is necessary to make sure, that the primary visual field—the target area—is better illuminated than the secondary visual field—the unimportant area.
To achieve this, there are 2 solutions:
For single-lamp systems it applies the first solution.
For multiple-lamp systems there apply both solutions.
The invention's purpose is also to eliminate human intervention in adjustments.
For a system to be able to react, it needs some inputs. The inputs in the invention are the direct visual contact conditions from the lamp(s) to the target area, information resulted from targeting the object of illumination.
For this, there are 2 different procedures:
The following examples will use a direct targeting procedure. If direct targeting cannot be used because of different reasons, indirect targeting will be used. That makes the system more expensive, but still possible.
The number of motion axis and of features determines the number of receivers on each lamp.
Other component to be determined in the invention is the optimal geometry.
For a minimal configuration, because of cost and reliability reasons, it is necessary to keep all the time the lamp(s) perpendicularly oriented towards the same spot and to keep the same distance to the target area. That makes additional tilt and focusing mechanism unnecessary.
The theoretical geometrical area equidistantly defined to a single point is a sphere. In this case, the minimal, is a circle or an arch of a circle, with the target as center. Any mechanism, once mounted and oriented towards the center, if it is moved along that circular trajectory is keeping his orientation and distance to that center point.
So, for the most efficient configuration, the rail will have a circular geometry.
Instead the use of a rail, it is also possible the use of a rotating arm for dynamic applications.
An example solution for the static shadowless illumination system is presented in
An example solution for the dynamic shadowless illumination system is represented in
In all drawings:
The static solution for the shadowless illumination system is represented in
The target area can be marked directly or indirectly. The emitter 1 is used to mark directly the target area. The obstacle 2 is blocking the visibility for lamp 3, the fact is sensed by the sensor 6, what is turning the lamp 5 off. The other lamps, in position 4 have a visibility on 1, so they are on.
The lamps are mounted on the rail 9 and they are oriented and focused on 1.
The dynamic solution for the shadowless illumination system, with a single-axis motion control, is showed in
The target area can be marked directly or indirectly. The emitter 1 is used to mark directly the target area. The obstacle 2 is blocking the visibility for lamp 3, the fact is sensed by the sensor 6, 7 and 8. The sensors, together with an internal control logic, are controlling a bi-directional motor mounted inside the lamp's housing. This motor is moving the lamp along the rail in such a manner, that the lamp is moved out from the shadow zone. The sensors 6, 7 and 8 are determining the sense of motion. The optimal position for a single-lamp system is out of the shadow zone, but still as close as possible to the operator's head.
Implementing a positive logic on sensor 8 and a negative logic on sensor 6 and 7, the lamp assembly will be situated all the time in the very close proximity of the shadow zone, actively following it. It is recommended the use of limit switches at the ends of the rail, if it is not fully circular.
The examples above are describing technical solutions using direct targeting. If direct targeting is not possible, indirect targeting will be used.
The systems described above are not strictly defined, they are just examples.
There are multiple solutions for the same purpose, not all have been presented.
It should be understood that the invention is not intended to be limited by the specifics of the above described embodiments, but rather defined by the operating principles.
3,702,928November 1972Alger362/233 X4,025,778May 1977Hayakawa240/1.44,078,720March 1978Nurnberg236/46 R4,200,862April 1980Campbell et al.340/825.07 X4,288,844September 1981Fishet et al.362/804 X4,365,720December 1982Kaneshiro211/874,578,575March 1986Roos250/2034,639,838January 1987Kato et al.362/334,709,412November 1987Seymour et al.455/1284,712,167December 1987Gordin et al.362/2334,728,949March 1988Platto et al.340/825.374,817,203March 1989Tsurumoto et al.455/6034,826,059May 1989Bosch et al.211/DIG. 14,890,207December 1989Jones362/2335,010,459April 1991Taylor et al.362/233 X5,031,082July 1991Bierend362/233 X5,038,261August 1991Kloos362/2865,060,124October 1991Crispin et al.362/804 X5,068,767November 1991Koyama362/335,072,216December 1991Grange362/233 X5,093,769March 1992Luntsford362/804 X5,189,412February 1993Mehta et al.340/8255,294,915March 1994Owen340/5395,526,245June 1996Davis et al.362/233
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60512705 | Oct 2003 | US |