Orthodontic Aligner Mark Placement on Irregular 3D Surfaces
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing methods face challenges in consistently producing legible marks on orthodontic aligners due to their irregular and uneven surfaces, making it difficult to differentiate between aligners in a series.
Innovation Solution
A computer-implemented method and system that models the aligner's surface as a tessellated surface, calculates normals for each tile, disqualifies tiles outside a specific angle range, identifies markable areas, and optimizes the orientation of a marking device to ensure legible marking of objects such as stage numbers, case numbers, arch locations, and logos on the aligners.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Loss of information
If marking is applied to the irregular surface of aligners, then identification information can be provided on each aligner, but the legibility and consistency of the marks deteriorate due to uneven surfaces
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by analyzing the 3D surface geometry of the aligner and selecting specific locations with favorable surface properties (within acceptable angle ranges from the beam axis) for marking. The system evaluates local surface normals and disqualifies regions that would produce illegible marks, thereby ensuring high-quality marks are placed only on suitable portions of the irregular surface.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent employs preliminary action by pre-calculating the 3D model of the aligner surface, determining surface normals for each tile, and identifying markable areas before the actual marking process. This advance planning allows the system to select optimal marking locations that ensure legibility and consistency, avoiding the need for trial-and-error marking attempts.
2Ease of manufacture
If the marking device operates on irregular surfaces, then marks can be placed on aligners, but the marking efficiency and consistency deteriorate
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary 3D modeling and surface analysis to pre-identify markable areas before the marking process. By calculating surface normals and determining acceptable marking regions in advance, the system eliminates trial-and-error attempts during actual marking, thereby significantly improving marking efficiency and consistency.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements feedback by using the calculated surface normals and geometric information to guide the marking process. The system continuously evaluates whether selected locations meet the marking criteria (angle ranges, surface orientation) and adjusts the selection of marking locations accordingly, ensuring consistent results across multiple aligners.
3Loss of information
If multiple aligners are marked manually, then each aligner can be differentiated, but the time and labor required increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The system applies self-service by automatically selecting optimal marking locations and guiding the marking device through the process. The computer-implemented method autonomously analyzes the 3D model, identifies markable areas, calculates precise marking coordinates, and controls the marking device, eliminating the need for manual intervention and significantly reducing the time required to mark multiple aligners.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces manual mechanical marking operations with an automated computer-controlled system. The computer-implemented method uses algorithms to analyze surface geometry, select marking locations, and control the marking device, substituting human judgment and manual operation with automated computational processes that are faster and more consistent.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
A computer-implemented method (100) for marking an object (20) on an aligner (10). The aligner surface is modeled. The method (100) includes calculating a normal (110) for each tile (94) in a tessellated surface (86) and disqualifying a tile (94) from being selected. For tiles (94) not disqualified, a patch (114) is identified that produces a markable area (186). The method (100) includes selecting an object (20) to be marked, calculating a location (176) of the object (20) in the markable area (186), and providing the location (176) of the object (20) to a marking device (62). Disqualifying includes comparing an angle between a normal (224) and an orientation of the beam (68) to an origin of the calculated normal (224) on each tile (94). Disqualifying includes disqualifying the at least one tile (94) when the angle is outside of a range of -90° to +90°. Identifying the patch (114) includes separating the patch (114) into at least two smaller patches, and one of the two smaller patches of tiles (94) is the markable area (186).