Measuring and testing – Dynamometers – Responsive to force
Reexamination Certificate
2000-06-06
2002-03-26
Fuller, Benjamin R. (Department: 2855)
Measuring and testing
Dynamometers
Responsive to force
Reexamination Certificate
active
06360615
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND
1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to strain gauges, specifically to a device that generates effects, such as sounds or lights, in response to strain, such as caused by body position or movement.
2. Description of Prior Art
Toys
Toys with good play value allow variation and flexibility in play, as well as providing freedom for imagination and creativity. Interactivity, that is, the ability of a toy to respond to a user's action by emitting an effect, results in good play value. Sound effects have been used during play activity for many years, the sounds assisting the child to engage in imaginary activity or play. Children commonly act a role in the context of physical activity, and sound is ideally directly linked to this physical activity. Examples of toys with sound effects are crying dolls or pop guns. Lights have also been linked to play activity. Examples are light-sabers, glow-in-the-dark stars or necklaces, and hand held flashlights used to play light tag.
Wearable signal generating toys are especially advantageous and have been discovered to have particularly good play value. The benefits of wearability are that the toy interfaces well with the child's activity, that is, by adding to and enhancing the activity without any hindrance.
Signal generating wearable toys are known. One example with a sound effect device is described in Martin, U.S. Pat. No. 5,648,753 (1997). This patent is for a toy that can be worn on the arm. It has a transmitter that directs an infrared signal to a receiver that in turn plays a sound effect. In the embodiments described in the Martin patent, to play a sound effect the user must depress trigger switches. This has the disadvantage that it is disruptive for a child to manually push buttons on an object and play at the same time. Such prior art designs do not allow the user to control sound effects while playing with the toy in a more natural, realistic manner. Furthermore, the Martin device has the disadvantage that the sound effect is played to completion once the buttons are pushed, a disadvantage shared with most sound-making toys on the market. It is not possible to stop the sound once it starts, so the effect is not under the user's control.
Another such device is described in Spraggins, U.S. Pat. No. 4,820,229 (1989). Spraggins describes a wearable effect emitting gauntlet that can be worn on the arm. The effect consists of emitted lights and sounds to simulate lasers and phasors. This device is controlled by mechanical switches. The sounds are not linked to the child's natural movement during play, but must be activated by the hand not wearing the gauntlet. Furthermore, the sound loudness is not correlated with the degree of movement, nor can the light and sounds emitted reflect the speed of movement. Finally, a drawback of all switch-activated devices is that the area of the control switch is rather small. A distributed switch, i.e., one with a larger active area, would be more desirable.
Yanofsky, WO 9604053 (1996), describes a wearable toy glove that produces sounds stored in memory, with different sounds generated by different switches, pressure contact, or electrical contact. The tone generator includes a CPU which converts values stored in memory into an analog wave-form sent to a speaker to produce the recorded sound. The Yanofsky toy can be worn only on the hands. The glove may be cumbersome to wear, especially for small children. Furthermore, the device is not sensitive to very small movements.
Ferber, U.S. Pat. No. 5,455,749 (1995) describes a wearable article, such as a shirt, onto which current carrying materials have been printed. A battery, a current-operated sound and/or light emitting module, and a control means for controlling the operation of the current operated module can be mounted on the shirt. The emissions are unrelated to body position.
Rawson, U.S. Pat. No. 5,436,444 (1995) describes a sound-generating wearable motion monitor with possible toy applications. The Rawson device is based on a laser, optical fiber, and photo-receiver. The physical movement of this optical fiber generates a signal that is output to an amplifier. This technology is expensive and unlikely to withstand use by children. Furthermore, the device only emits a noise-like signal whose amplitude and average frequency mimic the motion, not noises that would delight children. Finally, the device is difficult to miniaturize so that it can be, for example, worn on a finger.
Reinbold et al., U.S. Pat. No. 6,033,370 (2000) describe an interactive force feedback device with toy applications. The device is a capacitive force sensor comprising a plurality of layers forming a force sensing detector whose output signal responds to pressure. The device is incorporated into objects such as squeeze balls or shoes for sensing applied force. This device is not wearable, nor is it sensitive to delicate movements: it is designed to measure significant forces.
Gastgeb et al., U.S. Pat. No. 4,904,222 (1990) describe toy swords and drumsticks that emit sounds and lights when they are repeatedly waved. The effects are produced by a piezoelectric element incorporated in the body of the toy that gives a transient voltage when flexed/bent. The toy is connected by a cable to the effect emitters, which generate one sound that varies in loudness proportionally with the oscillation of the sword or drumstick and another tone that varies when the frequency of the electrical signal exceeds 300 hertz. The toy is not wearable, but hand-held. It has the disadvantage that piezoelectrics cannot generate a d.c. response, so the signal must be oscillatory. Thus, static positions cannot generate sounds. Furthermore, the effects are produced only by flexing a stiff member, which is disadvantageous for many applications.
It would be further desirable that the effect emitting device could be incorporated into a variety of existing devices to make them more interactive. The effect emitting device thus incorporated should be inexpensive.
Rehabilitation
After an injury, a person may require rehabilitation to help regain the use of a limb. Rehabilitation and training are facilitated by feedback, which may be in the form of sound or light signals, small electric shocks, a temperature change, or touch by an actuator. Feedback is particularly useful if the intensity of the feedback signal is correlated with the magnitude (or other characteristics) of the motion. Such interactive devices allow a person to monitor his or her progress.
Devices that attach to the limb and provide audio feedback are known. A considerable number of biofeedback devices related to rehabilitation have been patented, and often these make use of sounds to provide feedback. However, such biofeedback systems are often immobile and complicated, or they are controlled by computer. Furthermore, many rehabilitation devices deliver a fixed feedback signal when a threshold is exceeded. For these devices, the intensity of the signal does not depend on the characteristics of the motion. Burdea et al., in U.S. Pat. No. 5,429,140 (1995), describe a rehabilitation system that employs a force feedback system, such as a force feedback glove, to simulate virtual deformable objects. This system is complex and comprises numerous components. Furthermore, this system is costly. Finally, this system is not readily wearable or portable.
Dempsey, U.S. Pat. No. 4,557,275 (1985) teaches a biofeedback system for rehabilitation therapy. The system includes a plurality of mercury switches arranged to respond to change in position of a body member. Circuitry responds to the closing of the switches to give distinct signals. The signal processing circuitry is housed within a console. Audible signals are delivered by headphones, and visible signals are provided by colored lamps. The Dempsey switches are complex and bulky, and the mercury poses a potential health hazard. The system does not provide feedback based on the extent of movement, but rather whether the movement has crossed some threshold that caus
Allen Andre
Fuller Benjamin R.
Nixon & Vanderhye P.C.
TechnoSkin, LLC
LandOfFree
Wearable effect-emitting strain gauge device does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Wearable effect-emitting strain gauge device, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Wearable effect-emitting strain gauge device will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2875751