Kamen Pulse-Counted Lead-Screw Injection Mechanism
US 3,858,581Motor rotation, uniform-pitch lead screw, pulse counting, and timed motor intervals
How It Works: Step-by-Step Mechanical & Physical Breakdown
For an ideal uniform-pitch screw, a follower displacement can be described as , where is the rotation count and is the unreported thread pitch. The striker makes an electrical pulse for each rotation, so the source couples the same count to the controller. Claim 1 links that mechanical and electrical chain; Claims 2–5 add scheduling, clutch disengagement, signaling, and a scale. The source supports this causal relation, not numerical calibration for real medication delivery.
Interactive Real-Time Physical Simulation
Drag to rotate · Pinch to zoom · Shared controls update the displayed modelDetailed Component Architecture
1Motor and uniform-pitch lead screw
The basic kinematic reading is . The patent says the pitch is uniform but does not print , a motor speed, backlash, friction, or a safe operating load. The exhibit therefore uses normalized screw position only.
2Follower and plunger interface
The mechanism constrains the follower against co-rotation so a rotation of the screw produces longitudinal advance. The claim is about the relation of these parts, not an asserted flow or therapy metric.
3Striker, switch, and pulse counter
In the ideal source relationship . That identifies a countable motion event, but the patent does not turn it into a modern encoder accuracy or safety specification.
4Timing and clutch additions
The source describes timer and clutch functions as circuit and coupling relationships. It gives neither a validated alarm threshold nor a medically safe timing program, so the interactive treatment presents only state topology.
Governing Equations & Engineering Principles
Lead-Screw Rotation and Pulse-Count Relation (Nonclinical)
Mechatronics & Historical ControlClaim 1Rotation-Event Count
Claim 1 says the radially oriented striker reaches the pulse-emitting switch during each lead-screw rotation. The grant does not give a pulse frequency or a clinical setting.
This is a historical kinematic and event-count relation only. The source does not provide any dose, concentration, pressure, patient condition, safe delivery rate, clinical outcome, or medical recommendation.
Historical Context: The claim links a familiar mechanical actuator to countable electrical events and motor-state control; its archival value is the mechatronic architecture, not a present-day clinical protocol.
Interactive Schematic Sheet (Fig. 1)
Figure 1 shows the source device as an assembled object; the museum schematic does not treat it as a current clinical product.
Select Any Numbered Pin
Click pins on the schematic or select from the list below to inspect historical specifications.
Why It Still Matters
The grant is a compact early example of a familiar mechatronic pattern: turn a physical actuator state into countable electrical events, then use the count to decide the next machine state. The pattern appears in many nonmedical position-controlled machines. The archive presents the historical device's mechanism while refusing to turn a 1975 document into medical guidance.
Legal Claims Decoder (5 Numbered Claims)
The Historical Bottleneck
Why Prior Art Failed
- •The specification says a prior motor could deliver different amounts when viscosity differed.
- •It identifies wear and changing frictional resistance as factors that could affect a time-based prior device.
- •The source describes manual time-based control as inadequate for the repeated on/off behavior it sought.
- The front page prints five claims and six drawing figures.
- The reviewed source face retains the historical language; the interactive visual deliberately omits any dose, volume, flow, or therapy setting.