Pressure Wave Projectile Timing for Impact and Return Control
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing devices for generating mechanical pressure waves using pneumatic systems for medical treatment lack precise control over projectile impact velocity and return frequency, leading to potential patient discomfort and inefficiencies.
Innovation Solution
A device with a double valve system that controls projectile movement by varying the time difference between valve activations, allowing for independent adjustment of forward and return movements, thereby controlling impact velocity and frequency without altering pneumatic pressure.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Speed
If pneumatic pressure is increased to accelerate the projectile toward the applicator, then the impact velocity increases, but the patient discomfort and potential harm increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements periodic action by using two valves (first valve for acceleration, second valve for return) that operate in alternating time phases. The first valve accelerates the projectile during a first activation time, then closes. After a delay time, the second valve opens to return the projectile during a second activation time. This periodic valve operation allows control of impact velocity through timing parameters rather than pressure alone, reducing patient discomfort while maintaining treatment effectiveness.
2Productivity
If pneumatic pressure is increased to accelerate the projectile for faster return movement, then the return frequency increases, but the impact velocity also increases causing patient discomfort
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies dynamics by making the system adjustable through variable parameters. The control device can independently adjust the activation time of the first valve, the delay time, and the activation time of the second valve. This dynamic control allows optimization of the return frequency by adjusting valve timing without necessarily increasing pneumatic pressure, thereby controlling impact velocity and reducing patient discomfort while improving productivity.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements parameter changes by using timing parameters (activation time, delay time, deactivation time) instead of pressure parameters to control projectile motion. By changing the temporal parameters of valve operation, the system can independently control impact velocity and return frequency, allowing high return frequency without proportionally high impact velocity, thus resolving the contradiction between productivity and patient comfort.
3Device complexity
If a single valve is used for pneumatic acceleration, then the device complexity is reduced, but the control precision over projectile movement is insufficient
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies segmentation by dividing the single valve function into two separate valves: a first valve dedicated to acceleration and a second valve dedicated to return movement. Each valve operates during specific time phases (first activation time and second activation time respectively), allowing independent control of acceleration and return processes. This segmentation provides precise control over impact velocity and return frequency without requiring overly complex valve mechanisms, as each valve has a specialized function.
4Speed
If the valve activation time is extended to increase impact velocity, then the treatment effectiveness improves, but the operational efficiency decreases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements preliminary action by introducing a delay time between the closure of the first valve and the opening of the second valve. During this delay time, the projectile coasts without active pneumatic influence, which allows the system to prepare for the return stroke. This preliminary timing arrangement enables the projectile to reach the desired impact velocity during the first activation time, then coast and be returned efficiently, optimizing both impact velocity and operational efficiency by avoiding excessive activation times.
Applied Scientific Principles
This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.
Function Achieved in This Case
Enables precise control over projectile impact velocity and frequency, reducing patient discomfort and improving operational efficiency by decoupling impact intensity from pneumatic pressure changes.
Implementation Method 1
A proven and widely described technique for accelerating the projectile is pneumatic. This technique involves applying pneumatic overpressure to a volume on one side of the projectile as it moves along a path
Implementation Method 2
the return movement is carried out with the help of a counter-pressure chamber, i.e. a storage volume into which the projectile moving towards the applicator displaces the air in front of it, thus essentially inflating this storage volume
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
AI summary
The invention relates to a device for treating the human or animal body with mechanical pressure waves, the device comprising: a projectile guided in the device along a movement path, an applicator at one end of the movement path, a pneumatic device for applying pneumatic pressure to the projectile to move it along the movement path, wherein the projectile is designed to strike the applicator to generate the mechanical pressure waves, the pneumatic device comprising a double valve arrangement for applying pneumatic pressure to the projectile in the direction towards the applicator during a first activation period and for applying pneumatic pressure to the projectile in the reverse direction during a second activation period, and a control device for controlling the double valve arrangement, wherein the device is designed toto maintain a time interval between the first and second activation times and to control the impact speed of the projectile when it hits the applicator by means of this time interval.