Interspersed Emitter Array for Structured Light 3D Sensing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional emitter arrays for structured-light 3D sensing face challenges in packing more emitters on a single die while maintaining sufficient depth-of-field and avoiding emitter overlap, which limits emitter size and spacing, affecting yield and depth-of-field capabilities.
Innovation Solution
An emitter array design with multiple groups of interspersed emitters, where the minimum emitter-to-emitter distance between adjacent emitters is less than the minimum intra-group distance, allowing for larger emitter sizes and extended depth-of-field, enabling closer packing without overlap, and facilitating independent lasing of each group.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Quantity of substance
If emitters are packed closer together to increase emitter density, then emitter density improves, but emitter overlap occurs and depth-of-field deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The emitter array is divided into multiple independently addressable groups (e.g., first group, second group, third group) that can be controlled separately. This segmentation allows the system to activate only the necessary groups for a given application, effectively reducing the active emitter count and maintaining depth-of-field while increasing overall emitter density on the die.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent transitions from a single-plane emitter arrangement to a multi-group interspersed configuration where emitters from different groups are distributed throughout the array. This dimensional reorganization allows closer packing while maintaining functional separation through independent addressing, resolving the conflict between density and depth-of-field.
2Measurement precision
If emitter size is increased to improve optical resolution, then optical resolution improves, but emitter spacing must increase reducing emitter density
Solution Approach 1:
By dividing the emitter array into multiple independently addressable groups, the system can operate with fewer active emitters at any given time. This allows each emitter to be larger for better optical resolution while the overall array maintains high density through the segmented architecture.
3Quantity of substance
If minimum emitter-to-emitter distance is reduced to increase emitter density, then emitter density improves, but manufacturing precision requirements worsen
Solution Approach 1:
The segmentation into independently addressable groups provides functional redundancy and flexibility. Even if manufacturing variations cause some emitters to be slightly misplaced, the system can compensate by selectively activating specific groups, reducing the stringency of manufacturing precision requirements.
4Quantity of substance
If emitter spacing is reduced to increase emitter density, then emitter density improves, but emitter overlap occurs reducing depth-of-field
Solution Approach 1:
The emitter array is divided into multiple independently addressable groups that can be activated selectively. This segmentation allows the system to use fewer emitters at any given time, maintaining larger effective spacing and depth-of-field while the physical array maintains high density through the interspersed multi-group configuration.
Data Source
AI summary
An optical device may include an emitter array including a plurality of emitter groups. Each emitter group may be independently addressable from other emitter groups, of the plurality of emitter groups, for independently lasing. Emitters of the plurality of emitter groups may be interspersed within the emitter array such that a minimum emitter-to-emitter distance within the emitter array is less than a minimum emitter-to-emitter distance within any of the emitter groups.