Patent Grant
6891677
Brightness enhancing films (BEF) have been used in lighting panels for directing light from lighting fixtures through luminaires and laptop computers displays. The brightness enhancing films, which can have linear prisms, diffuse light with a desired directionality. Often the films have been used in combination with a fluorescent light source. The films have had partial success in improving luminaire or display brightness by controlling the angle at which light emerges. However, a need still exists for improved control of lighting and enhancement of brightness for laptop computer screens.
The present invention includes a light-redirecting or collimating film having a sheeting having a first side and a second side, wherein the first side includes a series of linear optical elements having a primary axis running the length of the optical elements, and the second side includes a plurality of subwavelength structures being oriented at about 90 degrees relative to the primary axis of the linear optical elements. The subwavelength structures can include linear moth-eye structures. In one embodiment, the linear optical elements are linear prisms having an included angle in the range of between about 60 and 120 degrees. In another embodiment, the linear optical elements include lenticular linear elements. In a particular embodiment, the prisms have an included angle of about 88 degrees. In another particular embodiment, the prisms have an included angle of about 89 degrees.
In another embodiment, the invention includes a back lighting display device having a lighting device, a display panel, and a sheeting having a first side and a second side, wherein the first side includes a series of linear prisms having peaks, and the second side includes a plurality of subwavelength structures, the subwavelength structures being oriented at about 90 degrees relative to the peaks of the linear prisms.
In a further embodiment, the invention includes an optical structure having a first light-redirecting film having a first surface with a plurality of linear moth-eye structures thereon and a second surface with first linear prisms having peaks, the linear moth-eye structures being about parallel or perpendicular to the peaks of the first linear prisms. The optical structure can also include a second light-redirecting film having a first surface with a plurality of linear moth-eye structures thereon and a second surface with second linear prisms having peaks, the linear moth-eye structures being about parallel or perpendicular to the peaks of the second linear prisms.
In particular embodiments, a diffuser can be provided between the first light-redirecting film and the waveguide and/or a diffuser can be positioned between the second light-redirecting film and the display panel.
A method of forming a light-redirecting film is also provided that includes the steps of forming a series of linear prisms, which include peaks, on a first side of a sheeting, and forming a plurality of linear moth-eye structures on a second side of the sheeting with the linear moth-eye structures being oriented at about 90 degrees relative to the peaks of the linear prisms. The method can further include the steps of forming a series of linear prisms, which also include peaks, on a first side of a second sheeting, and forming a plurality of linear moth-eye structures on a second side of the second sheeting with the linear moth-eye structures being oriented at about 90 degrees relative to the peaks of the linear prisms. In one embodiment, the first and second sheetings are arranged such that the moth-eye structures of the first sheeting face the moth-eye structures of the second sheeting.
The foregoing and other objects, features and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the following more particular description of preferred embodiments of the invention, as illustrated in the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters refer to the same parts throughout the different views. The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the invention. All percentages and parts are by weight unless otherwise indicated.
With respect to the optical performance of a light-redirecting or collimating film, it has been found that for individual AMLCD (active matrix liquid crystal display) back lighting system designs, the optical efficiency of the particular lamp, waveguide, and diffuser system can be improved by designing a light-redirecting film to maximize the use of the diffraction and refraction effects. For example, as shown in
Above diffuser 20, first light-redirecting film 22 has moth-eye structure 24 on a first side adjacent waveguide 16. Second side of first light-redirecting film 22 has prism structure 25. An optional abrasion reduction layer 26 is between first light-redirecting film 22 and second light-redirecting film 28. The abrasion reduction layer can have a moth-eye structure on one or two surfaces to improve performance. Second light-redirecting film 28 has moth-eye structure 30 on a first side adjacent first light-redirecting film 22 and prism structure 32. Prism structure 32 of second light-redirecting film 28 can be oriented in the same direction as the prisms on first light-redirecting film 22. Alternatively, it may be offset by rotating the prism orientation up to about 180 degrees. In one embodiment, the second light-redirecting film is rotated about 90 degrees with respect to the first light-redirecting film to reduce moiré fringe formation and improve the uniformity of the exiting light distribution. Above the second light-redirecting film is a liquid crystal display 34 or display panel. A light-redirecting film that has linear prisms designed with a tilt, size, and included angle that match the light source, waveguide, and diffuser properties provides enhanced performance. Employing linear prism arrays with included angles that range from 95 degrees to 120 degrees provides a light distribution that is optimized for viewing angles of a computer screen. The included angle is considered the top angle of a triangular linear prism structure. A diffuser can also be positioned between the second light-redirecting film 28 and the display panel 34.
In alternative embodiments, the moth-eye structures 24, 30 are linear moth-eye structures and can be oriented parallel or non-parallel to the respective linear prisms 25, 32 in a horizontal orientation. In a particular embodiment, longitudinal axes of the moth-eye structures 24 are about perpendicular to longitudinal axes of the prisms 25, while longitudinal axes of the moth-eye structures 30 are about perpendicular to longitudinal axes of the prisms 32. In another embodiment, the moth-eye structures 24 are about perpendicular to the prisms 25, while the moth-eye structures 30 are about parallel to the prisms 32. In further embodiments, the moth-eye structures 24 are about parallel to the prisms 25, while the moth-eye structures 30 are about perpendicular to the prisms 32. In alternative embodiments, the moth-eye structures 24, 30 are about parallel to respective prisms 25, 32. In further embodiments, the moth-eye structures 24 and/or 30 are oriented non-parallel and non-perpendicular to respective prisms 25, 32, depending on the desired optical properties.
When the linear moth-eye structures have a pitch near 225 nm and the linear prism apex angle is about 90 degrees, resonance of the light causes a green color viewed from wide-viewing angles (angles at about 70 to 80 degrees from normal) that are perpendicular to the direction of the linear moth-eye structures. For example, if the product is constructed so that both films, even if they are crossed at 90 degrees, have both linear moth-eye structures oriented perpendicular to a cold cathode fluorescent light source, the color appears only in a side-to-side direction in a display where the light source is located across the bottom of the display. By orienting the linear moth-eye structures parallel to each other, the color can be controlled to be on only one viewing axis. When the linear moth-eye structures are perpendicular to each other, the color is evident on two viewing axes that are perpendicular to each other. This latter result is the same as having regularly spaced 225 nm pitch two-dimensional structures (as compared to linear moth-eye structures) that produce color at wide-viewing angles in two axes that are perpendicular to each other. One reason for using linear moth-eye structures is to control the direction at which the color can be viewed. When the pitch of the moth-eye structures is made to be less than about 180 nm, the resonant colors are not present at the wide-viewing angles and the need to use linear moth-eye structures is no longer present. In accordance with embodiments of the invention, the moth-eye structures are linear, having a pitch between about 150 and 350 nanometers.
An example of a linear prism film is shown in a perspective view in FIG. 2 and in a side view in FIG. 3. Linear prism film 40 has prism surface 42 and window surface 44 and is formed of a transparent polymeric material. Prisms 46 have sides 48 with peaks 50 and valleys 52. The pitch (p) of the prisms 46 is measured from valley 52 to next valley 52. The pitch can be in the range of between 0.001 and 0.003 inches (25 and 76 μm). The height (h) of the linear prisms is measured by the vertical distance from the valley 52 to peak 50. The height can be in the range of between 0.0003 and 0.0015 inches (7.6 and 38 μm). The included angle (∝) is measured between the two sides that meet at peak 50. The angle (∝) can range from about 60 to 120 degrees. In a preferred embodiment, the angle (∝) is in a range of between about 60 and 85 degrees or between about 95 and 120 degrees. Sides 48 on each side of the peak 50 can be the side length (l) from valley 52 to peak 50 to form an isosceles triangle. Alternatively, the sides can have different lengths, thereby tilting or canting the prisms. The tilting angle (β) of the prisms is between the optical axis 54 and a line 56 perpendicular to the window side 44. The prisms can be tilted in the range of between about −44 and +44 degrees. In one embodiment, the tilting is about seven degrees.
In other embodiments, prism structures 22, 32 can include lenticular linear elements, such as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,592,332, issued to Nishio et al. on Jan. 7, 1997.
Another embodiment of the present invention is shown in
Above waveguide 106, first light-redirecting film 116 has first prism structure 118 with peaks 120 pointed toward waveguide 106 and first moth-eye structures 122 on the window side of first prism structure 118. Preferably, the peaks of linear prisms on first light-redirecting film 116 run parallel to light source 102. Above first light-redirecting film 116, second light-redirecting film 124 has second moth-eye structure 126 and second prism structure 128. Peaks 130 of second prism structure 128 point away from waveguide 106. Preferably, the peaks 130 of second prism structure 128 are oriented in a non-parallel direction to peaks 120 of first prism structure 118. A more preferred orientation is 90 degrees.
In one embodiment, the first moth-eye structures 122 are oriented at about 90 degrees relative to the peaks of the linear prisms on the first light-redirecting film 116. In one embodiment, angle (∝) of the linear prisms on the first light-redirecting film 116 is about 88 degrees. In another embodiment, angle (∝) is about 89 degrees.
The second moth-eye structures 126 can be oriented at about 90 degrees relative to the peaks of the second light-redirecting film 124. In one embodiment, angle (∝) of the linear prisms on the light-redirecting film 116 is about 88 degrees. In another embodiment, angle (∝) is about 89 degrees. The moth-eye structures 122, 126 are oriented at about 90 degrees relative to the linear prisms of respective light-redirecting films 116, 124 to minimize, and preferably eliminate, the deep blue to deep green color that is produced by light resonance, and which is visible, at wide entrance angles.
In one embodiment having the moth-eye structures 122, 126 oriented 90 degrees relative to the linear prisms of respective light-redirecting films 116, 124, only a small amount of green color shows at very wide-viewing angles, for example, 70 to 80 degrees from normal. In contrast, when the moth-eye structures 122, 126 are oriented parallel to the linear prisms of respective light-redirecting films 116, 124, the off-axis color becomes a very vivid purple-blue at a viewing angle of about 45 degrees from normal. In some applications, this vivid color may be desirable where a narrow useable viewing is needed, such as in security/privacy applications.
In the embodiment having 88 degree linear prisms on light-redirecting films 116, 124 with moth-eye structures 122, 126 oriented at about 90 degrees relative to respective linear prisms, a 4% performance increase over commercially available brightness enhancing films having 90 degree prisms has been realized.
In the embodiment having 89 degree linear prisms on light-redirecting films 116, 124 with moth-eye structures 122, 126 oriented at about 90 degrees relative to respective linear prisms, a 6% performance increase over commercially available brightness films having 90 degree prisms has been realized.
The performance of TIR (total internally reflecting) films, often called BEF (brightness enhancing film), which are used to increase the light output from back lighting systems in AMLCD flat panel displays, can be improved by changing the tilt angle of the linear prism, the linear prism included angle, and also the pitch of the linear prism array. A further improvement can be made by making the film monolithic or polylithic. A monolithic film removes one material interface (at the substrate) and improves optical transmission. In the case of the polylithic film, a diffuser can be incorporated into the film structure, saving the need to fabricate a separate diffuser and dependent on the degree of collimation required.
A fine pitch of a linear corner cube prism structure provides excellent performance as a first layer in a back lighting system if a diffuser is not used between the top smooth surface of a waveguide and a flat surface of the linear micro corner cube sheet. A fine pitch, preferably in the range of between about 0.00005 and 0.0001 inches (1.3 and 2.5 μm), of the corner cube array helps to spread the refracted and retroreflected light by diffraction, creating increased diffusion of recycled light. In a more preferred embodiment, the pitch is about 0.000075 inches (1.9 μm). The refracted and retroreflected light is spread by one to two degrees, depending on the accuracy of the linear corner cube array dihedral angles. This spreading is then increased by diffuse structures on the second surface of the waveguide, creating a smooth diffuse light pattern without the need of the diffuser between the waveguide and linear corner cube light-redirecting sheet. In addition, the groove pattern in the linear corner cube array is oriented in directions that do not modulate with the diffuse dot pattern on the rear of the waveguide. Therefore, moiré fringes are not created. A surface is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,600,462, issued to Suzuki et al. on Feb. 4, 1997, the teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference, which employs a rough structure (0.004 inches, 10 μm) for performing diffuse transmission to create a “ground glass-type diffusion.”
Also, it has been found that the addition of one or two 95 degree linear prism sheet(s) with 0.0019 inch (48 μm) pitch above the fine pitch linear corner cube sheet and with the smooth surface oriented toward the corner cube array further enhances the brightness. The second linear prism sheet is oriented about 90 degrees with respect to the first sheet.
The materials that work well for optical microstructured films are ultraviolet-cured polymers bonded to a polyester substrate, which can have abrasion resistance which is important during handling of the light-redirecting films. If the prism tips are damaged during handling, the resulting display can have fine lines that appear as less bright than surrounding areas on axis and brighter than surrounding areas off-axis. The films can be formed of suitable polymers, such as polycarbonate. The films can be constructed from a polycarbonate material, acrylic, or other suitable material, such as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,396,350, issued to Beeson et al. on Mar. 7, 1995, the teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference.
An abrasion reduction sheeting, such as a thin polypropylene film or similar material, can be placed in between the light-redirecting film layers to help to reduce any effect from abrasion without losing significant brightness. Subwavelength visible light moth-eye structures can be used on these overleaf films to effectively eliminate Fresnel reflection light losses. The softer films do not abrade the linear prism peaks as easily as hard films. A semi-soft substrate, such as a polyvinyl chloride film, can be used in place of the polyester substrate to make light-redirecting films and reduce abrasion. However, one must be careful of out-gassing and resulting surface contamination that can occur with polyvinyl chloride.
A linear non-isosceles prism array tilted or canted in the range of between about −45 and +45 degrees and preferably at seven degrees, having a 95 degree included angle and a 0.0019 inch (48 μm) pitch as a first layer and a linear isosceles prism (with zero tilt), having a 95 degree included angle and a 0.0019 inch (48 μm) pitch as a second layer can significantly improve the amount of light that is directed through an AMLCD to the angles (geometry's) desired for optimum user viewing angles. The tilt or canting of the optical axis of the first layer linear prism array corrects the skewed direction of the light distribution coming from the waveguide and diffuser. A 0.0019 inch (48 μm) pitch can cause diffraction spreading, which smooths the light distribution and maximizes the light directed toward the angles most beneficial or desired for a AMLCD display user. The 95 degree included angle further optimizes the field of view of the light distribution for the display user while still recycling light that is headed in the incorrect direction back into the display where it is used again.
Therefore, a preferred light-redirecting film combination for a wedge waveguide includes a first light-redirecting film that has prisms tilted to correct for the skew created by the waveguide wedge and diffuser layers and has a prism angle designed to maximize the user field of view plus a second light-redirecting film oriented at 90 degrees to the first and with a symmetrical linear prism pattern. In the second light-redirecting film the prisms can be tilted uniformly in both directions (tilt every other prism in the opposite direction) to have a prism angle that optimizes the user field of view for this axis.
Further, performance change can be achieved by combining the diffuser into the first zone of the first light-redirecting film to eliminate one film component. However, the focusing effect of the first surface is lost. The diffuser can be made by employing textured films and casting the linear prisms onto the smooth side of the film, by rotary screen printing a diffuse layer onto the polyester tie coat prior to casting the linear prisms onto the diffuse layer (in this embodiment the diffuse layer is sandwiched between the linear prisms and the substrate film), or by rotary screen printing a diffuse layer onto a carrier film and then casting linear prisms onto the diffuse layer. The prism and diffuse layer can be made of the same material and finish cured together, by adding particles into the tie coat prior to casting the linear prisms onto the tie coat, and by dispersing particles in the substrate sheet followed by casting linear prisms onto the substrate sheet.
The addition of the moth-eye structure to the window side of the light-redirecting films increases the system brightness by about 6% to 8%, which is significantly brighter (by 10% to 12%) than the previously known brightness-enhancing film systems with a similar pitch.
These improved results are believed to be due to a combination of microstructured optical effects. The uniform white light, such as a fluorescent bulb that causes this light to have a cool appearance because of the blue shift, has distribution coming from the diffuser that is incident on the first layer moth-eye surface. At angles of incidence of +/−60 degrees, 2% or less of the light is reflected at the first layer moth-eye to air interface. Plots of the reflectance are shown in
At angles of incidence that are greater than 75 degrees, a green and then a blue color can be observed. The color is a result of diffraction scattering as the short wavelengths enter the moth-eye structure from an angle that causes the aperture of the moth-eye elements to become diffractive and resonate. This diffraction scattered light is processed by the linear prism film differently than the light that passes through a non-moth-eye smooth surface. In this embodiment, the green to blue light is more uniformly distributed throughout the film, creating a more uniform illumination. A significant amount of green light is light piped by total internal reflection within the film and is partially filtered out of the light that becomes available to illuminate an LCD panel. Different size (frequency and amplitude) moth-eye structures can be used to create different illumination effects depending on the light source and optical components used in the illumination system. By changing the size of the moth-eye structures in the range from sub-wavelength to larger than wavelength scale structures, for example, moth-eye structures having a period of between about 0.15 and 10.0 micrometers, the diffraction properties of the surface can be optimized to help smooth the resulting light distribution and improve wide angle light distribution.
After the light has passed through the first moth-eye layer, it is redirected in a collimating fashion to about 42 degrees, and the 95 degree linear prism second surface of the first film layer through refraction collimates the light to approximately +/−30 degrees. Then the light enters the moth-eye surface on the first surface of the second layer film where it is further collimated by refraction. The majority of the light is at +/−30 degrees from the normal as it enters the moth-eye surface and passes through the moth-eye layer with little intensity loss. The light passes through the second layer film and is further redirected through refraction and recycling by the 95 degree linear prism structure. The 95 degree prism shape helps to recycle any of the light that is still traveling at wide angles of incidence. This light eventually emerges from the lighting system within a final +/−29 degree light distribution in both the X and Y axes.
If two crossed 75 degree linear prism films with moth-eye smooth surfaces are used in the illumination system, a light intensity distribution width of +/−18 degrees and an intensity of 2.63 can be achieved. The light intensity distribution X-profile and Y-profile for uniform light through a film with 90 degree, 75 degree and 95 degree prism films are shown.
The application of a moth-eye structure to the smooth surface of the linear prism films significantly improves the light-redirecting capability of the films by increasing light throughput at the moth-eye structured surface and redirecting wide incident angle light rays. Diffraction effects also play a significant role in the improved performance of the system. The resulting color of the backlight assembly is warmer in appearance than the same assembly without the addition of the moth-eye structures. This color shift can have a beneficial effect on the contrast within the final back light display.
As shown in
The moth-eye structure provides anti-reflection properties to the previously smooth light entrance surface of the substrate even at entrance angles that are near grazing incidence. The moth-eye structure is more effective than standard thin film anti-reflection coatings at wide angles of incidence, especially angles of incidence beyond 30 degrees up to 80 degrees. This characteristic causes many types of optical microstructure films, including linear prism films, to process light very differently than the standard linear prism light-redirecting films that have smooth entrance surfaces with or without standard anti-reflection thin film (vacuum deposited or liquid applied) coatings. The addition of the moth-eye structures helps to more efficiently recycle light and also redirects the normally reflected grazing angle incidence rays into the optical microstructure (such as linear prisms) sheet where the rays are refracted, reflected or retroreflected depending on the respective angles of incidence. This moth-eye improvement concept can be added to many types of brightness enhancement films (BEF). An advantage is that functional optical microstructures can be applied to both sides of a film or substrate.
A moth-eye anti-reflection surface is one in which the reflection of light is reduced by the presence of a regular array of small protuberances covering the surface. The spacing of the protuberances is less than the wavelength of light for which anti-reflection is sought. A moth-eye surface can be understood in terms of a surface layer in which the refractive index varies gradually from unity to that of the bulk material. Without such a layer the Fresnel reflection coefficient at an interface of two media is equal to ((n1−n2)/(n1+n2))2, where n1 and n2 are the refractive indices of the media. However, if there is a gradual change of index, net reflectance can be regarded as the result of an infinite series of reflections at each incremental change in index. Since each reflection comes from a different depth from the surface, each has a different phase. If a transition takes place over an optical distance of λ/2, all phases are present, there is destructive interference and the reflectance falls to zero.
When the height of the protuberance (h) is significantly less than the wavelength (λ), the interface appears relatively sharp and the reflectance is essentially that of a discontinuous boundary. As the ratio of h/λ increases, the reflectance decreases to a minimum value at about h/λ=0.4. Further increases in h/λ show a series of successive maxima and minima, but the value does not again approach that of a sharp interface. The details of the curve shown in
It is important that the spacing d between the peaks of the protuberances on the moth-eye surface is sufficiently small that the array cannot be resolved by incident light. If this is not the case, the array can act as a diffraction grating and, although there may well be a reduction in the specular reflection (zero order), the light is simply redistributed into the diffracted orders. In other words, we require that d<λ for normal incidence and d<λ/2 for oblique incidence if for reflection only, and that d<λ/2n in the case of transmission where diffraction inside the material is suppressed.
For a given moth-eye surface, where the height of the protuberances is h and the spacing is d, the reflectance is expected to be very low for wavelengths less than about 2.5h and greater than d at normal incidence, and for wavelengths greater than 2d for oblique incidence. Preferably, the spacing is as close as possible, and the depth as great as possible, in order to give the widest possible bandwidth. For example, a h/d ratio is preferably about three.
The moth-eye effect should not be confused with that of reducing the specular reflectance by roughening. Roughness merely redistributes the reflected light as diffuse scattering and degrades the transmitted wavefront. With the moth-eye structure, there is no increase in diffuse scattering, the transmitted wavefront is not degraded, and the reduction in reflection gives rise to a corresponding increase in transmission.
The moth-eye structure has many advantages. There is no extra coating process necessary. The structure can be transferred to the sheet by a pressure molding process, such as with a Fresnel structure. The reflection reduction does not depend on the wavelength. There is only a lower limit (on the ultraviolet side of the spectrum) set by the structure period. If the wavelength is too small compared to the period, the light is diffracted. In regard to angular dependence, with conventional anti-reflective coatings, the transmission curve shifts with the light incidence angle. With the moth-eye structure, the critical wavelength for diffraction shifts to higher values, but there are no changes above this wavelength. Another advantage for moth-eye structures is that there are no adhesion problems between lens and gradient layer because it can be one bulk material. From a high incident angle, the surfaces can appear blue or violet.
To form a moth-eye structure, the structure is first produced on a photoresist-covered glass substrate by a holographic exposure using an ultraviolet laser. A suitable device is available from Holographic Lithography Systems of Bedford, Mass. 01730. An example of a method is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,013,465, issued to Clapham et al. on Mar. 22, 1977, the teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference. This method is sensitive to any changes in the environment, such as temperature and dust, and care must taken. The structure is then transferred to a nickel shim by an electroforming process. In a preferred embodiment, the shims are about 300 micrometers thick or less.
The moth-eye structures can be made one dimensional in a grating type pattern. In this embodiment, the structure has a nearly rectangular profile, which means they have no gradient layers, but more of a one layer anti-reflective coating with a lowered refractive index in the structure region. Control of the grating depth is important as is control of thickness for the evaporated layers. Control of depth and thickness is achieved by maintaining uniformity of beam exposure, substrate flatness, and exposure time.
A two-dimensional structure is formed by two exposures with a linear sinus-grid, turned by 90 degrees for the second exposure. A third type of structure is formed by three exposures with turns of 60 degrees to provide a hexagonal or honeycomb shape.
When measured at a four inch (10.2 cm) distance from the display Photon Research Model No. PR650, the results with two 95 degree linear prism films each having a moth-eye structure on the previously smooth side show about the same brightness on axis as two 90 degree BEF films, a large improvement in brightness off axis in both vertical and horizontal axis and a warmer color to the light emerging from the display. In
Through analysis and experimental results, a preferred embodiment includes a 75 degree linear prism film that can be used as the first layer above a uniform light output diffuser to collimate the light to about a +/−30 degree angle. The prism grooves in this first layer are oriented parallel to the light source that illuminates the waveguide that is below the diffuser. On top of this film can be a 95 degree linear prism film that is oriented at 90 degrees with respect to the 75 degree film to collimate the light to about +/−25 degrees with a small percentage of the light at +/−30 degrees, as shown in
While this invention has been particularly shown and described with references to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the scope of the invention encompassed by the appended claims.
This application is a Continuation-in-Part application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/684,455, filed Oct. 6, 2000 (now U.S. Pat. No. 6,570,710), which is a Continuation-in-Part application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/438,912, filed Nov. 12, 1999 (now U.S. Pat. No. 6,356,389). The entire teachings of the above applications are incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2218227 | Winnek | Oct 1940 | A |
| 2232551 | Merton | Feb 1941 | A |
| 2248638 | Merton | Jul 1941 | A |
| 2310790 | Jungersen | Feb 1943 | A |
| 2474317 | McPhail | Jun 1949 | A |
| 3234376 | Ceglia | Feb 1966 | A |
| 3288990 | Stahlhut | Nov 1966 | A |
| 3846012 | Brown | Nov 1974 | A |
| 3908056 | Anderson | Sep 1975 | A |
| 4013465 | Clapham et al. | Mar 1977 | A |
| 4064433 | Korn | Dec 1977 | A |
| 4114983 | Maffitt et al. | Sep 1978 | A |
| 4120565 | Rabl et al. | Oct 1978 | A |
| 4154219 | Gupta et al. | May 1979 | A |
| 4233651 | Fabbri | Nov 1980 | A |
| 4242723 | Fabbri et al. | Dec 1980 | A |
| 4260220 | Whitehead | Apr 1981 | A |
| 4340276 | Maffitt et al. | Jul 1982 | A |
| 4414316 | Conley | Nov 1983 | A |
| 4420502 | Conley | Dec 1983 | A |
| 4497860 | Brady, Jr. | Feb 1985 | A |
| 4542449 | Whitehead | Sep 1985 | A |
| 4576850 | Martens | Mar 1986 | A |
| 4615579 | Whitehead | Oct 1986 | A |
| 4668558 | Barber | May 1987 | A |
| 4750798 | Whitehead | Jun 1988 | A |
| 4787708 | Whitehead | Nov 1988 | A |
| 4805984 | Cobb, Jr. | Feb 1989 | A |
| 4883341 | Whitehead | Nov 1989 | A |
| 4906070 | Cobb, Jr. | Mar 1990 | A |
| 5056892 | Cobb, Jr. | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5079675 | Nakayama | Jan 1992 | A |
| 5126882 | Oe et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5177637 | Tsukada | Jan 1993 | A |
| 5183597 | Lu | Feb 1993 | A |
| 5186530 | Whitehead | Feb 1993 | A |
| 5339179 | Rudisill et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
| 5396350 | Beeson et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
| 5550676 | Ohe et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
| 5581605 | Murakami et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5592332 | Nishio et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5600462 | Suzuki et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5629784 | Abileah et al. | May 1997 | A |
| 5629796 | Shanks | May 1997 | A |
| 5644431 | Magee | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5694246 | Aoyama et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5716681 | Williams | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5760960 | Lin et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5771328 | Wortman et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5779337 | Saito et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5812319 | Sonstroem | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5838404 | Ozeki et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5844720 | Ohara et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5851062 | Shinohara et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5854872 | Tai | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5917664 | O'Neill et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5919551 | Cobb, Jr. et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5940149 | Vanderwerf | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5944405 | Takeuchi et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5947578 | Ayres | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5971559 | Ishikawa et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5999685 | Goto et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6049649 | Arai | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6104854 | Masaki et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6151166 | Matsushita et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6164799 | Hirmer et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 20040190102 | Mullen et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 0 414 313 | Feb 1991 | EP |
| 0 685 681 | Dec 1995 | EP |
| 2049387 | Mar 1971 | FR |
| 1 529 021 | Oct 1978 | GB |
| 198 279 | Jun 1988 | GB |
| 289802 | Nov 1996 | TW |
| 325524 | Jan 1998 | TW |
| 331593 | May 1998 | TW |
| WO 0052527 | Sep 1900 | WO |
| WO 9610148 | Apr 1996 | WO |
| WO 9728468 | Aug 1997 | WO |
| WO 9833006 | Jul 1998 | WO |
| WO 9850805 | Nov 1998 | WO |
| WO 9950691 | Oct 1999 | WO |
| WO 0127663 | Apr 2001 | WO |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20040027676 A1 | Feb 2004 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 09684455 | Oct 2000 | US |
| Child | 10445375 | US | |
| Parent | 09438912 | Nov 1999 | US |
| Child | 09684455 | US |
