Water tolerant touch sensor

• US 7,116,315 B2
• Filed: 03/14/2003
• Issued: 10/03/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 03/14/2003
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Elo Touch Solutions, Inc.
• Original Assignee: Tyco Electronics Corporation (TE Connectivity Ltd. (United Kingdom))
• Inventors: Dews, Chris, Sharp, Jeffrey L.
• Primary Examiner(s): CHANG, KENT WU
• Application Number:
  US10/389,391
• Publication Number:
  US 20040178998A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,299 Days
• Field of Search: 345/173, 345/177, 178/18.01, 178/18.02, 178/18.04, 178/18.03
• US Class Current: 345/177
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 3/0436 in which generating transducers and detecting transducers are attached to a single acoustic waves transmission substrate

Abstract

A method, computer readable medium, and touch sensor system for reducing the effects of contaminants on an acoustic touch sensor. Acoustic energy is transmitted across the touch sensor substrate. Any perturbations in the acoustic energy induced by environmental events, such as valid touches or contaminants, are sensed and analyzed. If the perturbation exhibits a monotonic growth over a time period, it is considered to be a valid touch. If the perturbation exhibits a non-monotonic growth over the time period, it is considered a contaminant.

Claims

1. A method of reducing the effects of contaminants on a touch sensor substrate, comprising:

receiving acoustic energy transmitted across the substrate;

determining the presence of a perturbation within the acoustic energy induced by an environmental event;

analyzing a growth of the perturbation over a time period; and

identifying the environmental event as a contaminant if the pertubation exhibits non-monotonic growth, and identifying the environmental event as a touch if the perturbation exhibits monotonic growth.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the acoustic energy is generated from a Rayleigh wave.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the acoustic energy comprises a plurality of parallel wave components transmitted across the substrate, at least one of which exhibits the perturbation, the method further comprising identifying a coordinate of the location of the perturbation on the substrate based on the at least one parallel wave component.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the time period is predetermined.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the time period is below the level of human perception.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the time period is equal to or less than 30 milliseconds.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein the perturbation growth is only analyzed if the perturbation is above a threshold level.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein the contaminant is liquid.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein the perturbation comprises an attenuation in the acoustic energy.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein the environmental event is identified as a contaminant if the perturbation exhibits significant non-monotonic growth.

11. The method of claim 1, wherein the environmental event is identified as a touch if the perturbation exhibits convincingly monotonic growth.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein the environmental event is identified as a contaminant if the perturbation exhibits simple non-monotonic growth, and is identified as a touch if the perturbation exhibits simple monotonic growth.

13. The method of claim 1, wherein receipt of the acoustic energy comprises monitoring a plurality of acoustic scans across the substrate during the time period, the analysis of the perturbation growth comprises comparing the perturbations during the plurality of acoustic scans.

14. The method of claim 13, wherein the analysis of the perturbation growth further comprises:

identifying the perturbation growth as non-monotonic if any perturbation during an (i+k)^th acoustic scan is less than a perturbation during an i^th acoustic scan, where i is the current acoustic scan and k is a positive integer; and

identifying the perturbation growth as monotonic otherwise.

15. The method of claim 14, wherein the perturbation comparison comprises calculating the differences between the maxima of the absolute values of the perturbations.

16. The method of claim 14, wherein the perturbation comparison comprises calculating the differences between waveforms of the perturbations.

17. The method of claim 1, wherein the substrate is transparent.

18. The method of claim 1, wherein the substrate is opaque.

19. A computer readable medium for reducing the effects of contaminants on a touch sensor substrate, the computer readable medium storing instructions, which when executed, comprise:

analyzing a growth of a perturbation within a signal over a time period, the perturbation being induced by an environmental event associated with the substrate; and

identifying the environmental event as either a contaminant if the perturbation exhibits non-monotonic growth, and identifying the environmental event as a touch if the pertubation exhibits monotonic growth.

20. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the instructions, when executed, further comprise identifying one or more coordinates of the location of the perturbation on the substrate.

21. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the time period is predetermined.

22. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the time period is below the level of human perception.

23. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the time period is equal to or less than 30 milliseconds.

24. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the perturbation growth is only analyzed if the perturbation is above a threshold level.

25. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the contaminant is liquid.

26. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the perturbation comprises an attenuation in the signal.

27. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the environmental event is identified as a contaminant if the perturbation exhibits significant non-monotonic growth.

28. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the environmental event is identified as a touch if the perturbation exhibits convincingly monotonic growth.

29. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the environmental event is identified as a contaminant if the perturbation exhibits simple non-monotonic growth, and is identified as a touch if the perturbation exhibits simple monotonic growth.

30. The computer readable medium of claim 19, wherein the instructions, when executed, further comprises initiating a plurality of acoustic scans across the substrate during the time period, the analysis of the perturbation growth comprises comparing the perturbations during the plurality of acoustic scans.

31. The computer readable medium of claim 30, wherein the analysis of the perturbation growth further comprises:

identifying the perturbation growth as non-monotonic if any perturbation during an (i+k)^th acoustic scan is less than a perturbation during an i^th acoustic scan, where i is the current acoustic scan and k is a positive integer; and

identifying the perturbation growth as monotonic otherwise.

32. The computer readable medium of claim 31, wherein the perturbation comparison comprises calculating the differences between the maxima of the absolute values of the perturbations.

33. The computer readable medium of claim 31, wherein the perturbation comparison comprises calculating the differences between waveforms of the perturbations.