Failsafe optical wireless powering

Abstract

To provide a wireless laser power system having a safety system.SOLUTION: The failsafe wireless power transmission system comprises a transmitter (761) and a receiver (762), wherein the transmitter comprises a receiver function monitoring unit, a transmitter function monitoring unit and at least two sensors (767 to 772) and has at least one low emission state (773) and at least one high emission state (774), wherein the high emission state comprises higher emissions and a more complex safety system. The transmitter is prevented from switching from either the low emission state to the high emission state upon detection of a malfunction of the receiver control unit, a malfunction of the transmitter control unit, a likelihood of human-accessible emissions from the system being greater than a predetermined level, or a mismatch between results from at least two of the sensors.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 7

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a wireless laser power supply system, in particular a wireless laser with a safety system. Regarding power systems. [Background technology]

[0002] There are systems that transmit wireless power to charge electronic devices. The system can potentially expose the user to various fields (i.e. RF, laser, magnetic, electric or ultrasonic) ), so it is designed to prevent user exposure to such fields. This requires some kind of safety system.

[0003] Human exposure to such fields is governed by various standards, regulations and laws, such as: and is regulated. United States Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Volume 8, Chapter I, Subchapter 1040, ANSI Z136.1, IEC60825 standard series, and Recommendations and recommendations of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation.

[0004] The public, as found in these bulletins, which represent the knowledgeable opinions of world-renowned experts, The radiation levels considered safe for exposure are the few watts needed for most applications. For example, such a safety level is insufficient to allow the delivery of is not high enough for portable electronic devices, so to provide sufficient power, Measures must be taken to avoid exposure of people, animals and objects to the beam. For example, 10Wh When charging a mobile phone with a battery from empty to fully charged over a period of 2 hours , at least 5 watts of power must be transferred to the battery. W of power from the transmitter to the receiver, typically the energy beam from the transmitter to the receiver. The energy that needs to be transmitted from the transmitter to the receiver The amount of ionization energy is high because conversion efficiencies are typically well below 100%.

[0005] Such power levels substantially exceed those permitted by various standards, regulations and laws. However, even at such a power level, there is a risk of damage from the beam. A reliable safety system is built to ensure that no damage can be caused to persons or other objects. This does not apply if it is included.

[0006] for example, U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 21, Volume 8, Chapter I, Subchapter - J Part 1040 (revised April 2014) deals with performance standards for light-emitting products (laser products). It is.

[0007] For invisible wavelengths, Class I, Class III-b and Class IV lasers (Class II, IIa and IIIa are lasers from 400 nm to 710 nm, e.g., visible lasers. (This is for users only).

[0008] Of the invisible wavelengths, Class I is considered safe for general public use, and Class III b and IV are considered insecure.

[0009] According to U.S. CFR 21, Volume 8, Chapter I, Subchapter J, Part 1040 For example, the MPE (Maximum Permissible Exposure) for Class I lasers is 0.1 to 60 seconds of exposure. This is shown in the graph in Figure 1. 1. Maximum permissible exposure levels generally increase with wavelength and decrease with exposure duration. That is what it means. 2. Even if a person is exposed to the beam and the laser is turned off 0.1 seconds later, it still meets U.S. CFR 2 According to IEEE 1040, light of 1.25 W or less is transmitted at wavelengths greater than 2.5 μm, At shorter wavelengths, it can be much smaller. Without a reporting, reliable system, Only milliwatt laser powers are allowed, which when converted back to electricity is barely Delivers significantly less power than required to charge any portable electronic device (For example, a mobile phone requires 1 to 15W for a full charge.) However, laser light is scattered by fingerprints and dust and reflected or scattered by transparent surfaces. High power, such as for a typical phone that is charged using 1-12W of power. is transmitted, the laser-to-electrical power conversion inefficiency (efficiency is typically less than 50%) ) requires a laser output of 2 to 24 W.

[0010] Therefore, to charge such a typical phone, you need a Class IV laser. Class IV lasers require a laser with a high output. Class IV lasers are lasers that emit scattered radiation from the main beam. U.S. CFR 21, Volume 8, Chapter I, Subchapter - According to J Part 1040, 400n over 0.5W for exposure longer than 0.5 seconds Lasers from 1000 to 1400 nm are generally considered Class IV lasers, ensuring laser safety. Scattered radiation from such lasers, with the exception of scattering from absorbing elements specifically designed to Even lasers can be dangerous. Such lasers are required to have many safety features. Preventive warning and limiting features such as key locks, warning labels, etc. are required. Users of the device typically wear safety goggles and receive appropriate training. See FIG. 2, which shows an example of an advertising label.

[0011] On the other hand, such high-power lasers are equipped with safety systems that do not allow human access to the high power. If a laser is equipped with a laser system, it may be a Class I laser even if the power output is high. For example, a high-power laser may be enclosed in a protective housing that does not allow access to the laser beam. If it is included, it may be considered a Class I laser product and suitable for public use. For example, office laser printers are typically Class I laser products; It has an embedded high-power laser, whose beam penetrates into an inaccessible enclosure. It is sealed inside the chamber and is therefore inaccessible.

[0012] Therefore, without a flexible, comprehensive and robust safety system, Class IIIb or Class C Lasers in the Las IV range are not suitable for public use. There is general agreement that a comprehensive safety system is required to allow power transmission through As of the filing date of this application, such a system does not appear to have been commercialized. Systems designed for public use require training to identify and respond to problems. trained professionals in that they cannot rely on trained professionals. This is different from systems designed for public operation. To allow for this, it is necessary to reliably protect people, animals and objects from being exposed to potentially harmful radiation levels. It is necessary to establish a safety system that prevents this.

[0013] The prior art includes devices designed to protect users from unsafe radiation levels. However, the prior art systems are safety systems. It has no system or method in place to ensure its own reliability or functionality. That is, prior art systems are capable of reliable and fail-safe operation even under suboptimal conditions. Prior art systems do not appear to guarantee operation. It does not appear to have a subsystem to verify that it works correctly. The system of the technology is designed to prevent damage to or malfunction of certain components in the safety system. Finally, they are not equipped to identify and respond appropriately to Prior art systems have been developed to address a variety of variables that may individually or in combination represent potential hazards. It does not take into account environmental and internal factors or circumstances.

[0014] A sufficiently fast response time to allow the high power beam to be turned off before the MPE is exceeded Various safety systems are available that allow or deny access to the beam for people, animals and objects. Some prior art systems have a method for detecting potential objects or people. Safety and hazard detection systems intended to detect potential objects or persons within a beam directed in a direction When such an object is detected, the beam is quickly turned off or the beam is attenuated. Typically, such safety systems should provide a margin from potentially dangerous situations. are arranged neatly.

[0015] Includes safety systems designed to prevent users from exposing themselves to unsafe radiation levels. A few examples include:

[0016] In Patent Document 1, entitled "Wireless Laser Power Transmitter," which has a common inventor with the present application, A system is described that waits for a confirmatory safety signal from the receiver before transmitting. Indicates that the condition is actually met (e.g., the laser is being received by the receiver) This indicates that there is no object between the transmitter and receiver.

[0017] In some prior art documents such as patent document 2 or patent document 3, the safety system , the level of radiation that can potentially be emitted from a system in a given configuration is sometimes referred to as a safety margin. The engine is compared with the accessible emission limits set by safety standards. When the threshold is exceeded, the beam emission is terminated.

[0018] Some prior art systems use multiple systems to ensure safety. For example, Patent Document 2 discloses a method for controlling a beam using software and computer hardware. It performs complex calculations to determine whether it is safe to operate. The more complex it becomes, the more susceptible it is to breakdowns, malfunctions, anomalies and bugs.

[0019] When hardware and software become more complex, the selection of highly reliable components becomes more important. It becomes increasingly difficult and complex algorithms and software verification becomes questionable. Receive a safety confirmation signal ("OK signal") from the transmitter (this will allow the safety margin to be maintained) This may result in unpredictable interactions between transmitters and receivers from different manufacturers. (Safe operation in power beaming applications cannot be guaranteed during

[0020] Prior art safety systems often focus on "detecting objects in the beam." This takes into account the large amount of natural variation that may exist either within the system or within the surrounding environment. For example, in the above-mentioned Patent Document 3, The transmitter will indicate that the receiver has successfully received the laser beam before turning on the beam again. If the beam is blocked, the receiver turns off the confirmation signal and clears the beam. Such a system may turn off a specific potential dangers can be detected.

[0021] Prior art systems such as those in Patent Document 2 require a CPU, a camera, and an image processing program. It is a complex system that uses a variety of systems, but the system is able to respond to bugs and malfunctions. No indication of For example, in steps 139 and 140 of Figure 10 in D3, certain prior art Although the controller suggests using a continuous pump power to generate a gain medium If the controller fails or malfunctions at that point, The user remains on and the system disables the safety function normally performed by the controller. View.

[0022] Some prior art systems typically turn off the power to the laser. or by sending a code to the laser driver instructing it to reduce its power. Some prior art systems have When an indication of a potential hazard from a sensor typically indicates an object in the beam path, However, this one-sided method of switching to a low-emission state is not reliable. They often lack the necessary hardware and are not resilient to failures in the switch itself.

[0023] Other prior art systems that may be associated with safety issues include US Pat. Nos. 5,629,299; 5,729,316;

[0024] Therefore, publicly accessible and without the supervision of a professional operator Reliable fail-safe operation at the location to a level that allows safe operation of the system. A new system is needed to ensure safe operation.

[0025] The disclosure of each publication referred to in this section and in other sections of this specification is incorporated herein by reference. No. 6,229,693, the entire contents of which are incorporated herein by reference. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0026] [Patent Document 1] US Patent Application Publication No. 2010 / 0320362(A1) [Patent Document 2] US Patent Application Publication No. 2007 / 0019693(A1) [Patent Document 3] US Patent Application Publication No. 2010 / 0320362(A1) [Patent Document 4] U.S. Patent No. 5,260,639(A) [Patent Document 5] U.S. Patent No. 6,407,535(B1) [Patent Document 6] International Publication No. 1998 / 013909(A2) [Patent Document 7] US Patent No. 6,633,026(B2) [Patent Document 8] US Patent No. 8,748,788(B2) [Patent Document 9] US Patent Application Publication No. 2007 / 0019693(A1) [Patent Document 10] US Patent Application Publication No. 2010 / 0320362(A1) [Patent Document 11] US Patent Application Publication No. 2007 / 0019693(A1) [Patent Document 12] US Patent Application Publication No. 2010 / 0012819(A1) [Patent Document 13] US Patent Application Publication No. 2010 / 0194207(A1) [Patent Document 14] U.S. Patent No. 6,407,535(B1) [Patent Document 15] US Patent No. 6,534,705(B2) [Patent Document 16] US Patent No. 6,633,026(B2) [Patent Document 17] US Patent Application Publication No. 2006 / 0266917(A1) [Patent Document 18] U.S. Patent No. 6,967,462(B1) [Patent Document 19] US Patent No. 6,534,705(B2) [Patent Document 20] US Patent No. 8,399,824(B2) [Patent Document 21] US Patent No. 8,532,497(B2) [Patent Document 22] US Patent No. 8,600,241(B2) [Patent Document 23] U.S. Patent No. 5,771,114(A) [Patent Document 24] U.S. Patent No. 6,222,954(B1) [Patent Document 25] U.S. Patent No. 8,022,346(B2) [Patent Document 26] US Patent No. 8,399,824(B2) [Patent Document 27] US Patent No. 8,532,497(B2) [Non-patent literature]

[0027] [Non-Patent Document 1] D. Aslam et. Al, Physical Science International Journal,4(7):962-972,2014 [Non-patent document 2] Edmund B Nightingale, John (JD) Douceur, Vince Orgovan, in Proceedings of EuroSys. 2011, ACM, April 1, 2011 Summary of the Invention

[0028] The systems of the present disclosure include safety systems that utilize multiple electronic subcomponents. It differs from prior art systems in that it provides a reliable, fail-safe power transmission system. This system is designed to prevent various malfunctions that may occur in the system in a public environment, as well as Such a system is resilient to both various "failures" or potential hazards. , potential dangers to users, animals and property more completely than conventional prior art safety systems. and generally ensure that emission levels do not exceed safety thresholds under both normal and fault conditions. Such assurance cannot be based on professional intervention or supervision. This is possible in an automatic manner without any intervention.

[0029] The following three guidelines differentiate the disclosed system from existing prior art systems: can be. 1. The system of the present disclosure is self-diagnostic, a feature not commonly addressed by prior art systems. Detect and respond to multiple types of errors, problems, malfunctions, failures, anomalies and biases For example, an example system of the present disclosure may be configured to detect a malfunction in one of its components. can detect or predict a change in value or function from its nominal value or function It can detect faults in components and maintain safety system operation in the face of these failures. The system automatically responds in a manner similar to the above. 2. The system of the present disclosure is free from such errors, problems, malfunctions, failures, anomalies and biases. It is designed to be fully resilient. 3. The disclosed system, in addition to detecting objects near the beam, also refers to a human-accessible emission. It can also be estimated that human accessibility to the radiation released will exceed safety limits. The term potentially hazardous human-accessible release describes a human-accessible release that exceeds a safety limit. The system of the present disclosure is immune to loss, misconfiguration, dust, etc. phenomena such as component malfunction, noise, bias, and component aging. Taking into account the fact that actual problems or variations are inevitable in real systems. For example, reflections from surfaces give a continuous "leakage" from the system, which Furthermore, the disclosed system can collect a large number of measurements, data points, and Alternatively, the results of the calculations can be used to estimate the combined risk of multiple intrinsic or environmental factors. That is, the system will not detect a high risk even when one sensor or factor does not indicate a high risk. A complex risk indicated by two or more sensors or factors may require action to ensure safety. The risk can be determined by one or more sensors. The decision can be based on the deviation of the data from the expected normal range. Safety systems typically use a large number of data points and sophisticated algorithms. It is constructed using the concept of estimating the likelihood of a potentially hazardous human-accessible release by It is being done.

[0030] An example of an implementation of the current system is at least one transmitter and at least one receiver. A typical wireless power transmission system includes an external control unit. , further transmitters, power repeaters, and many of the functions for fail-safe operation are The signals are allocated differently between the transmitter, receiver and external module.

[0031] The transmitter emits a beam, typically directed by a beamformer, which redirects the beam towards the receiver. and a beam deflection unit for deflecting the beam.

[0032] The transmitter also includes a controller or transmitter control unit and at least one sensor. It is typical to include

[0033] The receiver also communicates with a controller or receiver control unit regarding the safe operation of the system. and at least one receiver sensor that can be used to provide information. In implementations, for example, if the reflector is incorporated into the receiver, the receiver sensor may be part Typically, it is implemented outside the receiver, and the transmitter measures some of the receiver data remotely. can be done.

[0034] The receiver also typically includes a voltage conversion circuit or circuitry capable of tracking and following the maximum power point. This also includes power conversion elements such as photovoltaic cells.

[0035] The system of the present disclosure uses at least two sensors, which are human-accessible. to the receiver, the transmitter, or the system to determine an estimate of the potential for emissions to exceed a threshold. The term sensor is used throughout this disclosure. To generate data relevant to the determination of the assessment of the potential for human-accessible radiation, to be used as a At least one component, but often multiple components, that make up the and the potential for human-accessible radiation exceeding the threshold used in processing such data. The following describes the algorithms and components that produce the output shown. position sensors, timers, time clocks, direction sensors, receiver orientation sensors, temperature sensors, Transmitter emitted power sensor, receiver received power sensor, communication link, wavelength sensor, transmitter impact sensor sensor, receiver shock sensor, beam shape sensor, time and date stored in computer memory A set of location-related data, humidity sensor, gas sensor, distance sensor, light sensor, watch This may be a checkdog circuit, as well as an indication from the control center via communication means. There may be two sensors measuring the same parameter, or these sensors may be different. For example, the current supplied to a laser diode may be measured to The control word for the laser driver is compared with the light output from the laser diode. In this example, all three of these values ​​give essentially corresponding values. The formula should be such that data from different sensors can be input and results can be compared. For example, the product of the current and voltage at the receiver divided by the temperature dependent efficiency The power output from the laser is compared to the power emitted by the laser. and one or more emission condition sensors for determining whether the device is in a normal or low emission condition. These states are defined here: A transmitter can be in at least two states: One is a low emission state and the other one or more states are high emission states.

[0036] Low emission is a term used throughout this disclosure and refers to the state in which known systems This threshold describes the condition of having a human-accessible release below a certain value. Typically, this is lower than the value defined by one known safety standard. It is used herein in its broadest sense and includes, inter alia, safety-related announcements, regulations, standards, recommendations and laws. Low release conditions typically involve the use of a variety of methods to achieve that safe or low human-accessible release. The complexity and potential error / failure / abnormality / malfunction / bug-prone components High probability that human-accessible releases will be below the threshold will be achieved by reducing the There are many different ways to make a system safe by having a releasable release. The simplest example of an emission or safety state is when the laser is turned off, but the present disclosure Other implementations include low power laser operation, high speed lasers that prevent the beam from staying in the same place for long periods of time, and The laser is targeted at a "beam block" and is then blocked, e.g. by a shutter. A diffuser is added into the beam to split it into multiple beams. do.

[0037] High emission state is a term used throughout this disclosure and is not intended to be used when the system is in a low emission state. Used to describe a condition that has emissions higher than the highest emissions allowable in Typically, a high release condition has a human-accessible release below a certain safety threshold. However, the overall emissions from the transmitter are higher than those in the low emission states. are usually protected by safety systems. High-emission conditions are typically more severe than low-emission conditions. A typical example of a high emission state is: The state of a beam from a transmitter, with a portion of such beam targeted at a receiver, Such beams are almost completely absorbed by the receiver. to ensure that no objects are found in the room and that releases do not exceed safety limits. Therefore, the human accessible release is low but the release is high. Safety systems typically operate using a combination of mechanisms, including a CPU or controller, are typically built around ASIC systems, described here as complex electronic systems. be.

[0038] A complex electronic subsystem consists of many electronic components, typically at least hundreds of thousands. A typical subsystem contains components and also executes code or scripts. This is the term used throughout this disclosure to describe such a composite electronics system. Examples of systems are processors, controllers, ASICs, and embedded computers. Such a system has a large number of possible states and is capable of handling all possible states of the product. For example, a processor may have more than 108 transistors. , so that, for example, a passing gamma particle may randomly affect the transistors of the transmitter. The processor may emit a random signal if such a signal occurs. There are always many states, and the results are unpredictable, as described in the article As such, it can be extremely difficult to test or even simulate.

[0039] To avoid confusion, the term failure as used in this disclosure is taken from the general meaning of the term. In addition to the permanent failures that are the explanation, there are also anomalies that are known to occur in complex systems. This also means including transient faults, also known as transient failures.

[0040] For example, the TMS320LF24xx from Texas Instruments Some controllers have a very long MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures). Testing component life, typically the time that elapses before a component fails permanently Such tests are performed by accelerating the time. Such tests involve localized heating or Typically, temporary outages that may be caused by noise are not taken into account. Consider a telephone system. The term MTBF refers to a failure that renders the telephone unusable. While this includes events that cause a malfunction, such as a phone firing, the term failure as used herein also includes , call interruptions lasting a very short period of time, or software that "hangs" the system. Furthermore, the failure of such a single component may result in a cooling fan or power failure. as a result of the failure of other components such as the power source, or as a result of an increase in environmental temperature. You can.

[0041] In Non-Patent Document 2, the total accumulated CPU time is calculated over five days, and the CPU is considered to have a fault. The rate was measured and found to be about 0.3%. The probability of a second failure is quite high.

[0042] In addition to measuring failures in the above literature, such systems also measure software bugs, memory leaks, memory failures, software and hardware malfunctions, and a variety of other problems Other errors such as

[0043] The disclosed system is highly reliable due to the diversity and interplay of factors that contribute to its safety level. In particular, compared to the prior art, such failures, bugs, memory leaks, gamma particle passage, and It is resilient to problems caused by noise.

[0044] The systems of the present disclosure also typically include at least one functional monitoring system. a transmitter function monitor unit associated with the transmitter and a receiver function monitor unit associated with the receiver; A functional monitoring system may monitor a complex electronic subsystem. This is a term used throughout this disclosure to describe a system that The performance monitor system may operate with a countdown to reset the system. In this case, the controller must reset the countdown before it expires. This indicates that the countdown is in good working order and is not in a bad state. When this occurs, the function monitor may send a restart signal to the controller. , other signals such as heat release or statistical analysis to determine the "health" of a composite component. In some cases, signal function monitoring should result in a robust function monitoring system. It is widely used.

[0045] The functional monitoring system must be reset repeatedly, for example after short intervals. This is often due to a countdown timer or as a result of an internal safety check. A "good health" signal from a composite component allows the implementation In some cases, verification of "good working condition" is based on the "interaction" between two components. For example, a functional monitor may ask a composite component to perform a task. and verify the output against a known output. Controller performance signatures such as output, voltage, or other signatures that indicate operational status By measuring the output of the component or calculating statistics of the output of the component, A basic example is when the output signal is not constant. "Check that the system is responding to input signals."

[0046] Functional monitors are used to monitor complex components such as controllers in transmitters or receivers. Such checks may be based on a timer that performs periodic checks. Alternatively, such a check could be For example, whenever a laser exceeds its characteristic wattage, or when a composite controller is used to perform a safety function. The check may be performed before or after a specific action, such as before using a component. based on external signals such as button presses, inherent mirror position, or (e.g., continuous at the end of the last check (automatically), by an external trigger, or at random intervals It can be triggered.

[0047] For each operation, the function monitor performs at least: 1. The presence of an OK signal from the controller or composite component, 2. The presence of any signals from the CPU / controller / composite component; 3. Signatures (e.g., correct current, voltage, temperature, or different combinations of such parameters) (matching and relationships, etc.), 4. A valid response from the CPU / controller (e.g., ping), or 5. Statistical fingerprinting of controller / CPU / composite component outputs Typically, at least some of the following are checked:

[0048] Other checks may be envisaged.

[0049] Functional monitors are typically characterized by their ability to detect malfunctions of multiple components. Typically, such functional monitors are designed to detect malfunctions at the expense of a small risk of false positives. It is configured to have a high probability of detection.

[0050] Possible failures, anomalies or malfunctions in the operation of composite components are monitored by a functional monitoring system. When indicated by the system, the functional monitor switches the system to any relevant high emission state. This prevents high-emission conditions from affecting the composite safety system and the composite components. , or a unique composite component, and the controller usually Because of their complexity, many safety-related actions occur during these high-emission conditions. High emission conditions are prone to adverse effects from failures and pose potential dangers to people, animals or property. Therefore, the system must be able to maintain low emissions in such situations. It is safe. The human-accessible release in the low release state is below the threshold, and such low The system is less likely to rely on a component that has a detected failure to maintain emissions. This is because it is difficult to pinpoint the exact component where the problem is located. Even if it is not known, it is still possible to prevent the system from switching to a high-emission state. The possibility of problematic components adversely affecting low-emission conditions is low. In many situations, functional monitors also If there is a problem, the system will switch to a low emission state, but in some redundant systems In such cases, such action does not need to be taken immediately. Further modifications or identification, e.g. self-test, reboot, user, operator or manufacturer signal to the system, to log the event, or to communicate the status to an external control unit. or at least some of the operating parameters of the system. You can modify the following.

[0051] Current systems also detect safety hazards, such as the possibility of a human-accessible release exceeding a threshold. response to safety-related events such as potential malfunctions, and to suspected malfunctions in safety systems; It differs in method from prior art systems.

[0052] The disclosed system switches to a low emission state and then, in a novel implementation, This prevents the system from switching from a low to a high emission state. Did the system check to verify that the conditions that caused the change were actually changed? or external intervention to the system, such as a human-initiated reset or an interrupt from a remote server. An example of the disclosed system is a system that can be used to deal with the above-mentioned malfunctions and In addition to detecting safety-related events and anomalies, If at least one of the following conditions is met, the switch from low to high state is Prevent. 1. At least a portion of the sensors detect whether human-accessible emissions from the system exceed a predetermined threshold. The condition that the sensor or sensors give a signal indicating the possibility of exceeding a potentially dangerous level. Such signals are generated from multiple sensors, providing data specific to dangerous, human-accessible release situations. In such an event, the system also It is normal for the system to switch immediately to a low emission state. 2. The inconsistency between the results from at least two sensors is due to the fact that neither of these sensors is an individual otherwise detected, even if it does not indicate a potential human-accessible release from the system. This is because if there is a problem with one of these sensors or if that sensor is responsible, These are conditions that may indicate a problem with the component. In such cases, a switch to a low emission state While switching may be optional or necessary, preventing switching from a low state to a high state is essential.

[0053] In the context of this disclosure, human-accessible release refers to release by any part of the human body or by a cat, dog, Fish, livestock, mice, lizards, mirrors, spoons, paper, glass, and metal objects, as well as reflective objects Electromagnetic interference from products that can be disrupted by pets and objects found in human-occupied areas, such as It is defined as emission.

[0054] A potentially hazardous human-accessible release is any human-accessible release that could cause harm to people or property. is a term used throughout this disclosure to describe accessible release or known safe Exceeding a threshold that is greater than, for example, 10%, 25%, or 50% of the total threshold.

[0055] The term likelihood, as used throughout this disclosure, describes a positive potential for occurrence. The level of likelihood must be determined in the context of the system behavior. Therefore, for example, laser power levels in high emission states may cause serious damage to personnel and property. If a high-power UV laser is used in a system that poses a risk, for example On the other hand, inadvertent exposure to radiation can occur, and systems that are highly susceptible to failure must be used. If a low-power infrared laser is used, which only causes minor skin burns, the system can be tuned to not be as liable for indicating such a fault. In addition, in systems that can operate continuously or in environments where people pass by, The level of possibility considered "high" is considered to be high in sealed, inaccessible environments such as the inside of a nuclear reactor. The level considered "high probability" may be lower than that of systems operating in the rear. One further reason for raising or lowering risk is that nearby people may see or feel the risk. The ability to avoid such risks by: The "high likelihood" level is defined as the risk to laboratory workers or For systems designed to be operated by trained personnel such as technicians, The use of untrained personnel, such as the general public, especially children, in a domestic environment is unintended. This is different from the system shown in the figure.

[0056] The term indicator signal refers to a signal that can be correlated with a human-accessible emission under reasonable operating conditions. is used throughout this disclosure to describe

[0057] The phrase inconsistency between measurements, in the context of this disclosure, refers to the inconsistency between results from one measurement: It is used to describe a condition that differs from the results that arise from other measurements in an abnormal manner. Such results can be correlated with system malfunctions. It can be either a constant value or a calculated result incorporating measured values.

[0058] The disclosed system responds to safety events and provides a safety system that is more responsive than prior art systems. An example of a system of the present disclosure follows a robust and reliable method of responding to indications of a fault in the system. It includes a method of responding to at least two independent or nearly independent safety-related events. The method may switch the system to a low emission state as needed, and then switch the system to a high emission state. This prevents switching to a state that does not allow high emission operation. By keeping the latch, the device can execute code that does not contain instructions that switch to a high radiation state. by keeping the shutter closed or partially closed, or by other methods known to those skilled in the art. This can be achieved by any other means that the system is This ensures that the device is in an emitting state or has no ability to switch to a high emitting state. This means preventing the device from switching to a high emission state after switching to a low emission state. Such prevention is preferably achieved by using a first method, and then, for example, For example, sensors can be used to detect that the system is in fact no longer in a high-emission state. Alternatively or additionally, the system may be shown to have no ability to switch to a high emission state. The first method may perform one or both of the above switching or prevention steps. If this is not possible, the system is in a low emission state or cannot switch to a high emission state. Alternatively, the second method may be used to ensure that the results of the first method are consistent. Regardless of the results, the second method may be used simultaneously or substantially simultaneously with the first method. In some situations, both switches will not bring the system to the same low emission state, In this case, there are at least two different low emission states: low laser power and off. Typically, it is desirable to provide a shorter recovery time than the other low-emission state, for example. There is a desirable low emission state, which is achieved after using the first switch. That is, the present system is typically more cost-effective than prior art systems. It is resilient to malfunctions caused by switching.

[0059] Rapid switchover to a low-emission state upon detection of a malfunction in redundant safety systems is required For example, if a transmitter contains two cameras, The receiver can be powered by a beam protected by a redundant safety system. These cameras detect objects in the beam path, while one camera detects objects passing by, e.g. The mirrors in cars project sunlight, temporarily flooding the sensors with light, causing temporary failures. In this situation, it is not necessary to quickly turn off the beam. However, in such cases, the problem is solved. The system should not be allowed to switch from a low state to a high state until the power is turned off. The disclosed system is able to make such distinctions and respond appropriately and efficiently.

[0060] Thus, according to one example of implementation of the device described in this disclosure, the optical power This is a wireless power transmission system that transmits a beam of radiation into a remote space. (i) a transmitter including a beam generator unit, a beam deflection unit, and a transmitter control unit; a transmitter having at least one low emission state and at least one high emission state; a transmitter having a high emission state, each high emission state having a higher emission than the highest emission of the corresponding low emission state; (ii) a receiver for receiving said optical power, said receiver incorporating a power conversion device; The vessel and (iii) a receiver control unit; (iv) Whether the transmitter is in at least one low emission state upon detection of a receiver control unit failure. and adapted to prevent the light source from switching from the first state to either of the at least one high-emission state. a receiver function monitor unit; (v) upon detection of a transmitter control unit failure, the transmitter transitions from at least one low emission state to a transmission adapted to prevent switching to either of the at least one high emission state; a transmitter function monitor unit; (vi) The possibility that human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system are greater than a specified level at least two sensors configured to provide a signal indicative of Including, The transmitter control unit controls whether human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system are within the predetermined range. when receiving at least one signal indicating a possibility of the signal being greater than a level, To prevent switching from at least one low-emission state to one of the high-emission states. Well adapted, The transmitter control unit is configured to: shall not give a signal indicating the possibility that a human-accessible release from the system may be greater than said predetermined level. If not, detecting an inconsistency between the results from at least two of the sensors will cause the transmission The vessel can be switched from at least one low-emission state to one of the at least one high-emission states. adapted to prevent substitution, The transmitter control unit further implements at least a first method and a second method, The first method and the second method are used substantially simultaneously or after the first method is used. the transmitter is in at least one low emission state by either using a The high-emission state is configured to prevent the lamp from switching from the normal state to either of the high-emission states.

[0061] In such a system, human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system are reduced to a predetermined level. If the transmitter receives at least one signal indicating a greater likelihood than may be used after the first method. Furthermore, (i) the transmitter function monitor unit transmits (ii) the receiver function monitor unit detects a receiver control unit failure; and (iii) a transmitter control unit detects a fault generated by at least two of the sensors. The second method detects inconsistencies between the results of the first method in at least one of the following cases: It may be used later.

[0062] Any such above-described system may include at least one emission status sensor. Any of the transmitter configurations may receive a signal from at least one of the emission state sensors. In such a situation, the first method may be used followed by the second method. The method further comprises using at least one emission state sensor after using the first method. to check whether the transmitter is operating in a high emission state, and then If operating in the out state, this may include continuing to use the second method.

[0063] According to yet a further implementation of the above-described system, at least two of the sensors The results may be measurements or may be calculations based on measurements.

[0064] Additionally, the inconsistency between the results from at least two of the sensors may be This can occur when at least two sensors are functionally independent. Exceeding a level indicates a possible malfunction of one of the sensors or It may even indicate a possible malfunction of the device that powers at least one of the sensors.

[0065] In a further implementation of the wireless power transmission system, at least one measurement value of the sensor is and at least one measurement value of the sensor is within the predicted normal range. a deviation from the normal range by more than a predetermined level, detected by at least one of the sensors; Furthermore, any of the predetermined levels may be signaled by at least one known safety level. It can be defined by a standard.

[0066] According to a further implementation of the wireless power transmission system, the transmitter is in at least one low emission state. to any of the at least one high emission state, (i) If the beam is human-accessible, the collisional ejection of the beam must be at least one known safe Keeping emissions at low enough levels to be below full standards; and (ii) maintaining the beam in an off state; and (iii) If the beam is human-accessible, the collisional emission of the beam is scanning the beam sufficiently rapidly so that the beam width is below the safety threshold of (iv) directing the beam towards a beam block; (v) moving a diffuser into the path of the beam; (vi) splitting the beam into multiple beams; may include at least one of the following:

[0067] In such cases, the at least one known safety standard may be a regulatory safety standard.

[0068] According to yet another implementation, human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system are reduced to a predetermined level. A signal indicating a probability greater than 1 is a combination of measurements taken by at least two sensors. The combination of these measures may result in human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system being greater than a predetermined level. If the measured values ​​of the at least two sensors indicate provided that no individual indication exists that human-accessible releases from the system are likely to be greater than the specified level. It's good to be able to get it.

[0069] Alternatively, the possibility that human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system are greater than a predetermined level may be reduced. These signals, which indicate the quality of the system, are calculated using measurements obtained by at least two sensors. The results of the test may result in human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system greater than a predetermined level. This may be given if it indicates a possibility.

[0070] According to yet another implementation of the present disclosure, a beam of optical power is transmitted to a receiver control unit, a receiver and transmitting to at least one receiver having a power conversion device. A wireless power transmission system is provided, which includes: (i) a transmitter having at least one low emission state and at least one high emission state; Thus, each high emission state has an emission higher than the highest emission of the low emission state, and the receiver The performance monitor unit detects that the transmitter is in the low emission state upon detection of a receiver control unit failure. and adapted to prevent at least one of the transmitters from switching to the high emission state. a transmitter having a beam generator unit and a beam deflection unit; (ii) a transmitter control unit; (iii) upon detection of a failure of the transmitter control unit, the transmitter controls at least one low-emission adapted to prevent switching from a high-emission state to any of the at least one high-emission state. a transmitter function monitor unit; (vi) The possibility that human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system are greater than a specified level at least two sensors configured to provide a signal indicative of Including, The transmitter control unit controls the transmitter upon receiving at least one of the signals indicating the possibility. Prevent at least one vessel from switching from a low-emission state to one of the high-emission states. It is adapted to The transmitter control unit detects whether the at least two sensors both indicate the possibility. and detecting a discrepancy between results from at least two of said sensors when no signal is applied. and the transmitter is switched from at least one low emission state to at least one high emission state. adapted to prevent switching between The transmitter control unit further controls the transmitter to transition from at least one low emission state to the high emission state. at least a first method and a second method for preventing the device from switching to either of the emission states; (a) using both the first method and the second method substantially simultaneously; or (b) configured to implement the first method followed by the second method; .

[0071] The optical power beam is transmitted to a receiver control unit, a receiver function monitor unit, and a power conversion unit. Another implementation of a wireless power transmission system for transmitting to at least one receiver having a device includes: (i) a transmitter having at least one low emission state and at least one high emission state; Thus, each high emission state has an emission higher than the highest emission of the low emission state, and the receiver The performance monitor unit detects that the transmitter is in the low emission state upon detection of a receiver control unit failure. and adapted to prevent switching from at least one of the high-emission states to either of the high-emission states. A transmitter; (ii) a transmitter control unit; (iii) upon detection of a failure of the transmitter control unit, the transmitter controls at least one low-emission adapted to prevent switching from a high-emission state to any of the at least one high-emission state. a transmitter function monitor unit; (vi) The possibility that human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system are greater than a specified level at least two sensors configured to provide a signal indicative of Including, The transmitter control unit is configured to: If the system does not provide a signal that a human-accessible release from the system may be greater than a predetermined level, In this case, when detecting a discrepancy between the results from at least two of the sensors, the transmitter Switching from at least one low emission state to at least one high emission state The device is adapted to prevent the

[0072] Finally, the beam of optical power is transmitted to the receiver control unit, the receiver function monitor unit and the power A method for transmitting to at least one receiver having a power conversion device is also provided. The law is (i) a transmitter having at least one low emission state and at least one high emission state; generating a beam of optical power with each high emission state being equal to the maximum of its corresponding low emission state; and the receiver function monitor unit detects a receiver control unit failure. upon detection of said transmitter switching from at least one of said low emission states to said high emission state; and (ii) Transmitter control unit failure by querying the transmitter function monitor unit determining whether a low-emission condition has occurred, and if so, determining whether the transmitter has transitioned from at least one low-emission condition to the low-emission condition; preventing switching to either of the at least one high emission state; and (iii) The possibility that human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system may be greater than a specified level. and using at least two sensors that provide signals indicative of the possibility of Including, The likelihood that human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system will be greater than the predetermined level is the transmitter enters at least one low emission state upon receiving at least one of the signals indicating to one of the high-emission states, If none of the at least two sensors provides a signal indicating the possibility, the sensor Any inconsistency between the results from at least two of the sensors is searched for, and the transmitter is and switching from one of the low emission states to one of the at least one high emission states. Prevented, The transmitter switches from at least one low emission state to one of the high emission states. At least a first method and a second method for preventing (a) using both the first method and the second method substantially simultaneously; or (b) Implemented to use the first method followed by the second method. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0073] [Figure 1] 1 shows a graph of maximum permissible exposure levels at various wavelengths and times. [Figure 2] An example of a laser safety warning label is shown below. [Figure 3] 1 illustrates a situation in a power transmission system that is potentially dangerous due to a combination of factors and that can be detected by an example system of the present disclosure. [Figure 4] 1 illustrates an example of a method of the present disclosure for responding to a safety-related event. [Figure 5] 10 illustrates an alternative example of the disclosed method for responding to a safety-related event. [Figure 6] 1 illustrates an example of a method of the present disclosure for maintaining safety upon detection of an anomaly, failure, or malfunction in a complex component. [Figure 7] 1 shows a schematic representation of an example of a complete power transmission system as described in this disclosure. [Figure 8] 1 illustrates an example of a power transmission system of the present disclosure adapted to achieve low emission conditions where minimal complex electronics are required. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0074] The disclosed system detects and assesses potential combinations of hazards arising from multiple sources. Now, referring to Figure 3, the combination of factors can lead to potentially dangerous A typical example of a situation is shown, which can be solved by an example of a system of the type described in this disclosure. The system of FIG. 3 projects a power beam 33 toward a receiver 31. The transmitter 32 is shown. A human eye 36 is shown near the receiver. The potential sources of danger are two separate but safe situations: a. A small, low power, harmless reflection 35 from the front of the receiver 31; b. Other small, harmless ghost emissions 34 from the transmitter 32 and can result from a combination of

[0075] For example, the presence of dust on the sensor can introduce uncertainty into the measurement of the two effects mentioned above. Each of these factors may be safe by itself, but when combined, they can lead to the following problems: As such, there may be points in space where emissions or reflections combine to dangerous levels. Here, the beam due to both of the above effects is shown impinging on the eye 36. The disclosed system attempts to detect, and in many cases predict, the potential for such phenomena to ensure safety. The device is configured to respond appropriately to the request.

[0076] The following notes highlight the potential hazards of the system shown in Figure 3 and how such risks may affect the system. The eye 36 is near the power beam 33. Since the object is not present anywhere in the beam path, the prior art safety In fact, in the scenario shown in Figure 3, There are no foreign objects in the beam path that the laser technology safety system detects.

[0077] Receiver 31 absorbs beam 33 almost completely as part of its normal operation.

[0078] Due to Fresnel reflections, a small portion of the beam 33 leaves the front face of the receiver 31 as a diffuse or It is reflected in the form of a reflection 35 which may be a specular reflection.

[0079] The reflected beam 35 is below the safety limit and does not cause any harm to the eyes 36. Not obtained.

[0080] The transmitter 32 emits a main beam 33 along with a small, safe, low-power ghost beam 34. Ghost beam 34 may be emitted, for example, from a slit inside transmitter 32 as a result of Fresnel reflection. It can be emitted from an optical component.

[0081] The ghost beam 34 is also randomly aimed at the eye 36 .

[0082] The ghost beam 34 is also safe and below the safety standard threshold.

[0083] However, the combination of ghost beam 34 and reflection 35 is particularly useful in situations such as This can be dangerous when noise is added to the situation.

[0084] The disclosed system does not rely on whether "something is in the beam path" or not, but on the general term In other words, it checks to see if "something is wrong." It can handle vague and indeterministic potential hazards and usually involves boundary conditions from various sensors. The combination of sub-threshold signals, such as the situation shown in Figure 3, is characterized by the accumulation of signal lines. In addition to simple types of situations like this, there are several other types of signals that give rise to them. The effect is, A confirmation signal is received but the timing between the laser transmission and the receipt of the confirmation signal is long; High / low temperatures of components and Interference with communication channels; Too low a signal-to-noise ratio and Too high a signal-to-noise ratio and Accumulation of errors and Loss of tracking signal or degradation of tracking signal; Spot sizes that differ from the predicted values ​​and Wavelength drift and Timing drift and The presence of various frequencies in the signal (e.g., periodic fluctuations in laser power), Boundary output measurements; Other suggestive signals may include:

[0085] Such signals do not indicate any particular hazard, but the combination of two or more such signals However, they may present a potential hazard or malfunction that could cause the safety subsystem to not function properly. The system analyzes such data to estimate the likelihood of potentially hazardous human-accessible releases. Such estimation can take many forms such as numeric values, binary representations or threshold changes. Such signals may be linear or nonlinear with respect to the potential for human-accessible exposure. It does not have to be monotonic, it just needs to be shown that it is. An alternative implementation of this concept is Determine the different "regimes" in which the margin varies as a function of various components. This may involve adjusting the temperature or compensating the measurements based on parameters such as temperature.

[0086] Complex assumptions, such as combined potential hazards, or potentially dangerous human access The evaluation of possible emissions typically involves the CPU, controller, and embedded computer systems. , ASICs, and other complex electronic circuits, all of which can fail. should be relied upon solely to determine whether a system is operating safely. However, these may be used alone or in combination to prevent the system from switching into high emission mode. It can be used in combination.

[0087] Referring now to Figure 4, an example of a method for responding to a safety-related event is shown. The method used by

[0014] prevents the system from switching to a high emission state and, if necessary, This allows the system to switch to a low emission state. Prior art systems generally have a high degree of reliability, as any safety-related event is sensed. Switching the beam to low power or off in certain situations, which is good in some cases. While this may be a valid practice, it may be necessary to make the system available in circumstances where it is invalid. The disclosed system has redundant safety systems, which limits the system to There is not necessarily an urgent need to switch to low emissions or turn them off immediately. The system is designed to address a situation that can be resolved without drastic measures to reduce emissions from the system. In step 40, the system If no safety-related events are found, the system continues checking using data from one or more sensors. , a safety-related event is detected. Such an event may be detected, for example, by a receiver function monitoring unit. Detecting malfunctions of the receiver control unit, transmitter control unit by the transmitter function monitor unit Detection of malfunctions, the possibility that human-accessible emissions from wireless power transmission systems may be greater than a predetermined level A signal provided by one or more sensors that indicates a potential, or a result resulting from at least two sensors In step 42, the system switches to a low emission state. This may involve, for example, determining whether there is a valid reason to access a history database. By accessing and comparing the data set with the current situation, statistical analysis can be performed on the data. or current data points regarding detected faults may result in a dangerous situation. The probability of switching to a low-emission state can be determined by predicting the probability of the strong switch. If there is no justification for taking any step, the system will In step 44, the system is designed to provide sufficient protection while allowing the system to function under high emission conditions. If there is a valid reason to switch to the low emission state in step 43, If so, the system may switch to a low emission state using a first switch or method. In step 44, the system switches to a high emission state. In step 45, the system prevents the first switch from occurring. The first Test for success of switchover. If successful in step 45, the second switchover or The method does not need to be used, and the system can be configured to immediately or periodically after a predetermined time interval. Continue searching for safety related events in step 40. If it is determined that the switchover was not successful, the system may select a second switchover or method. The second method is to switch to a low-emission state using (i) Demonstrate the possibility that human-accessible emissions from wireless power transmission systems may be greater than a specified level. receiving a signal by a transmitter; (ii) detecting a mismatch between results from at least two of the sensors; detecting; (iii) a transmitter function monitor unit detecting a transmitter control unit malfunction; , (iv) a receiver function monitor unit detecting a malfunction of the receiver control unit; It can be used when at least one of the following occurs.

[0088] In step 48, the method prevents the system from switching to a high emission state. That is, the method provides a second, different switchover method in response to a failure of the first switchover or method. It has the resilience of using a metric to determine whether the first switch was successful or not. This provides additional reliability by checking to determine if the

[0089] Referring now to Figure 5, an alternative method for responding to a safety-related event is shown. In the system, the system continuously or periodically checks for safety-related events. If no such condition is found, the system checks using data from one or more sensors. If a safety related event is detected in step 52, switch to low emission state. It is determined whether there is a valid reason to do so. This can be done, for example, by checking the access history database. By accessing and comparing the data set with the current situation, statistical analysis can be performed on the data. or current data points regarding detected faults may result in a dangerous situation. The justification for switching to a low-emission state can be determined by predicting the probability of the If no reason exists, the system will prevent switching to the high emission state in step 53. If there is a good reason, two different, usually functionally independent, methods may be used. are used simultaneously. In step 54, Method 1 switches the system to a low emission state. In step 55, method 1 further comprises: In step 57, which occurs substantially simultaneously with step 54, method 2 In step 58, method 2 switches the system to a low emission state. This method prevents the system from switching to the state where the failure of Method 1 and the failure of Method 2 occur. Both of these methods are used simultaneously, and both methods are flexible. This is because the probability of simultaneous failure is usually so small that it can be ignored.

[0090] Referring now to FIG. 6, detecting anomalies, failures or malfunctions in complex components At step 60, the system may include one or more The data from the sensors is used to check for faults. In step 62, the performance monitor determines if the system is operating in any high emission condition. In step 63, the function monitor operates switch #1 to prevent the system from Verify that the stem has stopped operating in a high emission state. If not, In step 64, switch #2 is turned on to prevent the system from operating in a high emissions state. If the high emission condition has actually ceased, the system will operate in step 60. Continue checking for fault detection. Verification step 63 and use of different independent switches 2 Both of these factors result in a highly reliable system and ensure that human-accessible emissions do not exceed a predetermined threshold. The risk of this happening is reduced.

[0091] The following is a method to detect a faulty sensor by comparing measurements from two different sensors. This is an example of how to do this. [Example]

[0092] Sensor 1 is a general-purpose sensor, and can calculate the transmitter and "Sense" the power lost between receivers. Sense value = [I LDD *γ]-[I pv *β] where: I LDD is the current supplied to the laser, I pv is the current collected from the PV, γ and β are correction factors (related, among other things, to efficiency).

[0093] Sensor 2 is a general-purpose sensor, which can also be calculated, for example, by calculating the function This "senses" the power lost between the transmitter and receiver. Sense value = [P TX ]-[P rx / μ] where: P TX is the power emitted from the transmitter (typically the power passing through the transmitter) It is calculated by measuring a small fraction of the power coming from the transmitter, which is typically (not released from P rx is the power collected from the PV, μ is a correction factor (typically receiver efficiency).

[0094] In theory, sensor 1 and sensor 2 should always give the same results, differing only in noise. do.

[0095] In reality, sensor 1 will give significantly different results than sensor 2, and the difference will be due to noise. If the time is long enough to determine that the sensor 1 or sensor There is reason to suspect that one of the two systems is defective. is considered a low-emission device even if none of the sensors indicate any potentially hazardous accessible emissions. Switches to the outgoing state.

[0096] The following shows the low emission using two different switches, namely Switch 1 and Switch 2. This is an example of a fail-safe method of switching between states. [Example]

[0097] 1. To bring the system to a known low emission state and / or, if necessary, Switch 1 is used to prevent the from switching to the high emission state. 2. The system actually switched to the low emission state and the system went from the low emission state to the high emission state. A sensor is used to verify that the power is switched to the outgoing state. 3. If the system has not yet switched to the low emission state, use switch 2 to do so. Switching to a low-emission state in this context is a positive indicator of the success of Switch 1. However, other methods also determine the success or failure of switch 1 before using switch 2. This method can be used to bring the system into a low emission state and / or A fail-safe mechanism is provided to prevent the system from switching from a low to a high emission state. In an alternative implementation, the controller simultaneously controls both Switch 1 and Switch 2. However, one side of the switch is usually used for recovery time, noise, and client high "costs" such as reduced service to clients, loss of track, or physical damage to systems; For example, a laser driver can be used to Turning off the laser is preferable to terminating power to the entire laser system. Turning off power to the system also shuts down the cooling system, potentially damaging the hardware. Therefore, in some systems, the second embodiment It may be more efficient to use a method.

[0098] Referring now to FIG. 7, a schematic representation of an example of an overall power transmission system described in this disclosure is shown. is shown.

[0099] A transmitter 761 is shown feeding a remote receiver 762. The receiver 762 The receiver incorporates a power conversion device (not shown in FIG. 7) and a receiver function monitor. The controller must detect the failure of the receiver controller (also not shown in Figure 7). (Some of the functional circuits may be located remotely at the transmitter.) The transmitter generator 763 and a beam deflection unit 764. In addition, the transmitter also includes various sensors. These also include at least two hazard sensors, e.g., 767 771, and at least one fault detector 772, and a function monitor 766. All or some of the items of the user are part of the transmitter control unit or Associated with knitting.

[0100] The control unit controls the beam generator 763 to change from a low emission state to a high emission state (773 and 774). ) from switching to the function monitor 766. At least one of the danger sensors 767 to 771 detects a danger. When this occurs, the control unit prevents the beam generator 763 from switching to a high emission state. If a possible fault is detected, the fault detector 772 or the hazard sensors 767-771 or characteristic failure patterns such as abnormal signal-to-noise ratios. The control unit prevents the beamformer 763 from switching to a high emission state.

[0101] Referring now to FIG. 8, a minimum of complex electronics is required to achieve low emission conditions. Examples of methods are given, namely, methods that depend on the defective component. Since this is unlikely, it can be safely used in the event of a fault detection. or may operate in a low power mode or at known eye-safe wavelengths. or may operate in a manner such that the emitted beam is a diverging or diverging beam 83. An alternative implementation uses a beam attenuator 84. The beam attenuator 84 blocks the beam 83. The light source 80 may be a shutter 84 that closes the aperture, or a diffuser (not shown in FIG. 8) that spreads the beam. Alternatively, it may be an attenuator (not shown in FIG. 8) that attenuates the beam. The implementation uses a beam deflection unit 82. The beam deflection unit 82 deflects the beam into a surrounding circular The boundary may be rapidly scanned or the beam may be directed towards beam block 85 . The beam block 85 can block, absorb, attenuate, or diffuse the beam. All of these methods can be used individually or simultaneously depending on the data parameters of the current situation. The system can be used to determine which of the above methods are incorporated at which time. Either of these methods may involve an algorithm to determine which is the best method to use. How to switch the system to a low emission state or how to prevent the system from switching to a high emission state Any of the methods, such as those in accordance with the methods of Figures 4, 5 and 6, can be used.

[0102] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the present invention is not limited by what has been particularly shown and described above. Rather, the scope of the present invention is not limited to any particular combination of the various features described above. Both combinations and subcombinations would occur to one skilled in the art upon reading the above description, but are not known in the prior art. This includes variations and modifications not included herein.

Claims

1. 1. A wireless power transmission system for transmitting a beam of optical power to a remote space, comprising: A transmitter including a beam generator unit, a beam deflection unit and a transmitter control unit. wherein the transmitter has at least one low emission state and at least one high emission state; a transmitter, each high emission state having an emission higher than the highest emission of said low emission state; a receiver for receiving said optical power, said receiver incorporating a power conversion device; a receiver control unit; Upon detection of a receiver control unit failure, the transmitter transitions from at least one low emission state to the low emission state. a receiver adapted to prevent switching to at least one high emission state a performance monitor unit; Upon detection of a transmitter control unit failure, the transmitter transitions from at least one low emission state to the low emission state. Transmitters adapted to prevent switching to at least one high emission state a performance monitor unit; indicating a likelihood of human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system being greater than a predetermined level. at least two sensors configured to provide a signal; Including, The transmitter control unit controls the wireless power transmission system to transmit human-accessible emissions to the predetermined receiving at least one of the signals indicating a likelihood of the signal being greater than a level; and preventing the device from switching from at least one low-emission state to any of the high-emission states. adapted to fit the needs of the The transmitter control unit is configured to: and providing a signal indicating the possibility that human-accessible emissions from the system may be greater than said predetermined level. If not, detecting an inconsistency between results from at least two of said sensors causes said transmitter The vessel can be switched from at least one low-emission state to one of said at least one high-emission states. adapted to prevent substitution, The transmitter control unit further controls the transmitter to transition from at least one low emission state to the high emission state. at least a first method and a second method for preventing the device from switching to either of the emission states; (i) using both the first and second methods substantially simultaneously; or (ii) to implement the second method after using the first method; The system is configured.

2. indicating a likelihood of human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system being greater than a predetermined level. When the transmitter receives at least one of the signals, the second method 10. The system of claim 1, wherein the system is used after the method of claim 1.

3. (i) the transmitter function monitor unit detects a transmitter control unit failure; (ii) the receiver (iii) a receiver function monitor unit detects a receiver control unit failure; and a control unit detecting a discrepancy between results from at least two of the sensors, 10. The method of claim 1, wherein in at least one case, the second method is used after the first method. system.

4. The system further includes at least one discharge status sensor; Any of the transmitter configurations may include a transmitter configured to receive a signal from at least one of the emission status sensors. The system of any one of claims 1 to 3, based on the results.

5. Using the second method after using the first method further comprises: and then detecting whether the transmitter is in a high emission state using at least one emission state sensor. Check whether the transmitter is operating or not, and then if the transmitter is operating in high emission state 5. The system of claim 4, further comprising: subsequently using the second method.

6. 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the results are generated from at least two of the sensors. The system described in

7. The results from at least two of the sensors are the result of a calculation based on measurements. The system according to claim 1 ,

8. The inconsistency between the results from at least two of the sensors is 8. The system of claim 1, wherein the sensors are functionally independent. Tem.

9. The inconsistency between results from at least two of the sensors may be 9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the level of the signal exceeds a predetermined level indicating a possibility of a malfunction. system.

10. The inconsistency between results from at least two of the sensors may be 10. The power supply for at least one of the devices according to claim 1, wherein the power supply exceeds a predetermined level indicating a possibility of malfunction.

10. A system according to any one of claims 1 to 9.

11. there is an expected normal range of measurements for at least one of the sensors; When the measurement value of at least one of the sensors exceeds a predetermined level from the expected normal range, a signal is given by at least one of said sensors when the sensor deviates from the 11. The system of any one of claims 1 to 10.

12. 1. The predetermined level is defined by at least one known safety standard.

10. The system of claim 1.

13. the transmitter is switched from at least one low emission state to at least one high emission state; Any method to prevent switching to (i) if the beam is human-accessible, the collisional emission of the beam is at least one Keeping emissions at low enough levels to be below known safety standards; (ii) maintaining the beam in an off state; (iii) if the beam is human-accessible, the collisional emission of the beam is at least scanning said beam sufficiently rapidly so that the beam is below one known safety standard; (iv) directing the beam towards a beam block; (v) moving a diffuser into the path of the beam; (vi) splitting the beam into a plurality of beams; The system of claim 1 , further comprising at least one of:

14. 14. The system of claim 13, wherein the at least one known safety standard is a regulatory safety standard. Stem.

15. indicating a likelihood of human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system being greater than a predetermined level. The signal is a combination of the measurements obtained by the at least two sensors. When there is a possibility that human-accessible emissions from the power transmission system may be greater than a predetermined level and, any of the measurements of the at least two sensors is a human activity signal from the wireless power transmission system. A claim given when there is no individual indication that accessible releases are likely to be greater than a given level.

15. The system of any one of claims 1 to 14.

16. indicating a likelihood of human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system being greater than a predetermined level. The signal is the result of a calculation using the measurements obtained by the at least two sensors. indicating a likelihood that human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system are greater than a predetermined level.

16. The system of claim 1, wherein:

17. The beam of optical power is transmitted to the receiver control unit, the receiver function monitor unit and the power conversion device.

1. A wireless power transmission system for transmitting power to at least one receiver having a device, 1. A transmitter having at least one low emission state and at least one high emission state, Each high emission state has an emission higher than the highest emission of the low emission state, and the receiver function monitors The transmitter unit may be configured to, upon detection of a receiver control unit failure, cause the transmitter to enter at least one of the low emission states. and adapted to prevent switching from either one of the high emission states to either of the high emission states, the receiver further comprises: a transmitter having a beam generator unit and a beam deflection unit; a transmitter control unit; Upon detection of a transmitter control unit failure, the transmitter transitions from at least one low emission state to the low emission state. Transmitters adapted to prevent switching to at least one high emission state a performance monitor unit; indicating a likelihood of human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system being greater than a predetermined level. at least two sensors configured to provide a signal; Including, The transmitter control unit, upon receiving at least one of the signals indicating the possibility the transmitter switches from at least one low emission state to one of the high emission states. adapted to prevent The transmitter control unit is configured to: and detecting a discrepancy between results from at least two of said sensors when no signal is applied. and the transmitter is adapted to transition from at least one low emission state to at least one high emission state. adapted to prevent switching between The transmitter control unit further controls the transmitter to transition from at least one low emission state to the high emission state. at least a first method and a second method for preventing the device from switching to either of the emission states; (i) using both the first method and the second method substantially simultaneously; or ii) using both the first method and the second method substantially simultaneously. The method is configured to implement the second method after the first method is used. Line power transmission system.

18. The beam of optical power is transmitted to the receiver control unit, the receiver function monitor unit and the power conversion device.

1. A wireless power transmission system for transmitting power to at least one receiver having a device, 1. A transmitter having at least one low emission state and at least one high emission state, Each high emission state has an emission higher than the highest emission of the low emission state, and the receiver function monitors The transmitter unit may be configured to, upon detection of a receiver control unit failure, cause the transmitter to enter at least one of the low emission states. a transmitter adapted to prevent switching from either of said high emission states to either of said high emission states. and, a transmitter control unit; Upon detection of a transmitter control unit failure, the transmitter transitions from at least one low emission state to the low emission state. Transmitters adapted to prevent switching to at least one high emission state a performance monitor unit; indicating a likelihood of human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system being greater than a predetermined level. at least two sensors configured to provide a signal; Including, The transmitter control unit is configured to: providing a signal indicative of said likelihood that human-accessible emissions from the system are greater than said predetermined level; If not, detecting a discrepancy between the results from at least two of said sensors The transmitter may transition from at least one low emission state to one of said at least one high emission state. A wireless power transmission system adapted to prevent switching.

19. The beam of optical power is transmitted to the receiver control unit, the receiver function monitor unit and the power conversion device.

1. A method for transmitting to at least one receiver having a device, comprising: In a transmitter having at least one low emission state and at least one high emission state, generating a beam of said optical power, wherein each high emission state is equal to the maximum emission of said low emission state; and the receiver function monitoring unit detects a malfunction of the receiver control unit. Upon detection, the transmitter transitions from at least one of the low emission states to one of the high emission states. adapted to prevent switching; Transmitter control unit failure occurred by querying the transmitter function monitor unit determining whether the transmitter has transitioned from at least one low emission state to the at least one low emission state if the transition has occurred; and preventing the laser from switching to either one of the high-emission states. At least two sensors are used to detect human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system. providing a signal indicating a probability greater than a predetermined level; Including, the likelihood that human-accessible emissions from the wireless power transmission system are greater than a predetermined level. and wherein the transmitter detects at least one low-emission signal upon receiving at least one of the signals indicating state to any of the high-emission states; If neither of the at least two sensors provides a signal indicative of the possibility, Any inconsistency between the results from at least two of the sensors is searched for, and the transmitter and switching from one of the low emission states to one of the at least one high emission states. Prevented, The transmitter switches from at least one low emission state to one of the high emission states. At least a first method and a second method for preventing (i) using both the first and second methods substantially simultaneously; or (ii) implemented to use the second method after using the first method; method.

Images