Optical see-through free-form head-mounted display   

Abstract: A see-through free-form head-mounted display including a wedge-shaped prism-lens having free-form surfaces and low F-number is provided.

This application claims the benefit of priority of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/214,117, filed on Apr. 20, 2009, the entire contents of which application are incorporated herein by reference.

This invention was made with government supports under contract numbers 0644446 awarded by the U.S. National Science Foundation, 60827003 awarded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and 2009AA01Z308 awarded by the Hi-Tech Research and Development Program of China. The U.S. and Chinese governments have certain rights in the invention.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to a see-through free-form head-mounted display, and more particularly, but not exclusively to a wedge-shaped prism-lens having free-form surfaces configured to provide a low F-number heretofore unachieved.

Optical see-through head-mounted displays (OST-HMD) find myriads of applications from scientific visualization to defense applications, from medical visualization to engineering processes, and from training to entertainment. In mixed or augmented reality systems, OST-HMDs have been one of the basic vehicles for combining computer-generated virtual scene with the views of a real-world scene. Typically through an optical combiner, an OST-HMD maintains a direct view of the physical world and optically superimposes computer-generated images onto the real scene. Compared with a video see-though approach where the real-world views are captured through cameras, it has the advantage of introducing minimal degradation to the real world scene. Therefore an OST-HMD is preferred for applications where a non-blocked real-world view is critical.

On the other hand, designing a wide field of view (FOV), low F-number, compact, and nonintrusive OST-HMD has been a great challenge, especially difficult for a non-pupil forming system. The typical eyepiece structure using rotationally symmetric components has limitations in achieving low F-number, large eye relief, and wide FOV. Many methods have been explored to achieve an HMD optical system which fulfills the above mentioned requirements. These methods include applying catadioptric techniques, introducing new elements such as aspherical surfaces, holographic and diffractive optical components, exploring new design principles such as using projection optics to replace an eyepiece or microscope type lens system in a conventional HMD design, and introducing tilt and decenter or even free-form surfaces. (H. Hoshi, et .al, “Off-axial HMD optical system consisting of aspherical surfaces without rotational symmetry,” SPIE Vol. 2653, 234 (1996). S. Yamazaki, et al., “Thin wide-field-of-view HMD with free-form-surface prism and applications,” Proc. SPIE, Vol. 3639, 453 (1999).)

Among the different methods mentioned above, free-form surfaces demonstrate great promise in designing compact HMD systems. In particular, a wedge-shaped free-form prism, introduced by Morishima et al. (Morishima et al., “The design of off-axial optical system consisting of aspherical mirrors without rotational symmetry,” 20th Optical Symposium, Extended Abstracts, 21, pp. 53-56 (1995)), takes the advantage of total internal reflection (TIR), which helps minimize light loss and improve the brightness and contrast of the displayed images when compared with designs using half mirrors. It is challenging, however, to design a free-form prism based OST-HMD offering a wide FOV, low F-number, and sufficient eye relief.

The concept of free-form HMD designs with a wedge-shaped prism was first presented by Morishima et al. in 1995, and the fabrication and evaluation method were explored by Inoguchi et al. (“Fabrication and evaluation of HMD optical system consisting of aspherical mirrors without rotation symmetry,” Japan Optics \'95, Extended Abstracts, 20pB06, pp. 19-20, 1995). Following these pioneering efforts, many attempts have been made to design HMDs using free-form surfaces, particularly designs based on a wedge-shaped prism (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,699,194, 5,701,202, 5,706,136. D. Cheng, et al., “Design of a lightweight and wide field-of-view HMD system with free form surface prism,” Infrared and Laser Engineering, Vol. 36, 3 (2007).). For instance, Hoshi et al. presented an FFS prism offering an FOV of 34° and a thickness of 15 mm; Yamazaki et al. described a 51° OST-HMD design consisting of a FFS prism and an auxiliary lens attached to the FFS prism; and more recently Cakmakci et al. designed a 20° HMD system with one free-form reflecting surface which was based on rational radial basis function and a diffractive lens. (“Optimal local shape description for rotationally non-symmetric optical surface design and analysis,” Opt. Express 16, 1583-1589 (2008)). There are also several commercially available HMD products based on the FFS prism concept. For instance, Olympus released their Eye-Trek series of HMDs based on free-form prisms. Emagin carried Z800 with the optical module WFO5, Daeyang carried i-Visor FX series (GEOMC module, A3 prism) products; Rockwell Collins announced the ProView SL40 using the prism technology of OEM display optics.

Existing FFS-based designs have an exit pupil diameter that is typically from 4 to 8 mm with a FOV typically around 40 degrees or less. In most of the existing designs, the size of the microdisplays is in the range of 1 to 1.3 inches, which affords a focal length of 35˜45 mm for a typical 40-degree FOV. Even with an exit pupil up to 8 mm, the F/# remains fairly high (greater than 4) and eases the optical design challenge. A large size microdisplay, however, offsets the advantage of compactness using a free-form prism. In the more recent designs, smaller microdisplays, typically around 0.6″, were adopted, which requires a focal length of ˜21 mm to achieve a 40-degree FOV. The reduced focal length makes it very challenging to design a system with a large exit pupil. As a result, most of the designs compromise the exit pupil diameter. Thus, commercially available products on average reduce the pupil diameter to about 3˜5 mm to maintain an F/# greater than 4. There are a few designs that achieve a larger pupil by introducing additional free-form elements or diffractive optical elements. For instance, Droessler and Fritz described the design of a high brightness see-through head-mounted system with an F/# as low as 1.7 by using two extra decentered lenses and applying one diffractive surface. (U.S. Pat. No. 6,147,807). The existing work shows that it is extremely difficult to achieve a very fast (low F/#) and wide field of view HMD design with a single wedge-shaped free-form surface prism.

Accordingly, it would be an advance in the field of optical see-through head-mounted displays to provide a head-mounted display which has a wide field of view and low F/#, while also providing a compact, light-weight, and nonintrusive form factor.

SUMMARY

In one of its aspects, the present invention provides a free-form prism-lens for use in an optical see-through head-mounted display. The prism-lens may include a first free-form surface configured to receive light from a micro-display and configured to transmit the received light into the body of the prism-lens, and a second free-form surface configured to receive the light transmitted into the body of the prism-lens from the first free-form surface and configured to totally internally reflect the received light at the second surface. In addition, prism-lens may also include a third free-form surface configured to receive the light reflected by the second free-form surface and configured to reflect the light out of the prism-lens and may have an f-number less than 3.5. The prism-lens may optionally include an auxiliary lens disposed proximate the third free-form surface. The auxiliary lens may be configured to minimize the shift and distortion of rays from a real-world scene by the second and third surfaces of the prism-lens.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The foregoing summary and the following detailed description of the preferred embodiments of the present invention will be best understood when read in conjunction with the appended drawings, in which:

FIG. 1 schematically illustrates a layout of an exemplary optical see-through head-mounted display system in accordance with the present invention;

FIG. 2 schematically illustrates the layout of FIG. 1 showing the local coordinate system at each optical surface;

FIG. 3 schematically illustrates the optical paths of the rays of different object fields and different pupil positions in an exemplary free-form-surface prism-lens see-through head-mounted display, with the incident angles of the rays on surfaces 1 and 1′ depending on their field and pupil positions and controlled to satisfy TIR conditions and avoid stray light;

FIGS. 4A-4D schematically illustrate a starting point for an exemplary design of the present invention, with FIG. 4A showing the optical layout in the YZ plane, FIG. 4B showing MTF plots, FIG. 4C showing ray fan plots of center fields, and FIG. 4D showing ray fan plots of marginal fields;

FIG. 5 schematically illustrates the system layout and sampled fields definition during different design stages of an exemplary optical see-through head-mounted display;

FIG. 6 schematically illustrates the layout of an exemplary free-form surface prism-lens system of the present invention having three free-form surfaces;

FIG. 7 illustrates a distortion plot of the free-form surface prism-lens system of FIG. 6;

FIGS. 8A-8D illustrate the performance of the free-form surface prism-lens system of FIG. 6, with FIG. 8A showing the polychromatic MTF plot of the center field of the virtual imaging system, FIG. 8B showing the polychromatic MTF plot of marginal fields of the virtual imaging system, FIG. 8C showing the ray fan plots of the center fields, and FIG. 8D showing the ray fan plots of the marginal fields;

FIGS. 9A-9D illustrate the incident angle on the TIR surface, with FIG. 9A showing the incident angle on surface 1′ as the ray pupil position varies from the bottom to the top, FIG. 9B showing the incident angle on surface 1′ as the field of the ray changes from the lowermost to the uppermost in the meridian plane, FIG. 9C showing the incident angle on surface 1 as the ray pupil position varies from the bottom to the top, and FIG. 9D showing the incident angle on surface 1 as the field of the ray changes from the lowermost to the uppermost position in the tangential plane;

FIGS. 10A-10D schematically illustrates the design of an auxiliary lens to be used with the free-form surface prism-lens system of FIG. 6, with FIG. 10A showing see-through by the FFS prism-lens, FIG. 10B showing distortion caused by the FFS prism-lens, and FIG. 10C showing the design layout of the see-through system;

FIG. 11 illustrates a distortion plot of the optical see-through system of FIG. 10;

FIGS. 12A-12B illustrate polychromatic MTF plots of the optical see-through system of FIG. 10 with an ideal lens;

FIG. 13 schematically illustrates the layout of the see-through HMD by coupling the FFS prism-lens system and auxiliary FFS lens of FIG. 10; and

FIG. 14A illustrates a photo without pre-warping the input image, and FIG. 14B a photo after pre-warping the input image taken through a fabricated prototype of the FFS prism-lens of FIG. 6.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The desire to achieve an optical see-through head-mounted display having a compact, light-weight, and nonintrusive form factor argues for a design having as few optical elements as possible. Accordingly, exemplary designs of the present invention provide a single-element prism-lens 110, 710 which has sufficient optical power on its own to deliver light from a micro-display 130 to a user, FIGS. 1, 6. However, providing a single optical element, such as the prism-lens 710, in which all the optical power resides can lead to greatly increased aberrations with accompanying loss in resolution and image quality, especially for low F/# systems. Despite these challenges, as a result of the lens design procedures and work described below, the present invention provides a single-element prism-lens 710 based on a 0.61″ microdisplay 130, which offers a diagonal FOV of 53.5°, an F/# of 1.875, an exit pupil diameter of 8 mm, and an eye relief of 18.25 mm. In addition, in order to maintain a non-distorted see-through view of a real-world scene, a cemented auxiliary lens 120, 720 may be provided for use in conjunction with the prism-lens 110, 710.

Turning first to the design of the wedge-shaped free-form prism-lens 110, design began with development of the display system specifications. An optical see-through HMD 100 typically consists of an optical path for viewing a displayed virtual image and a path for viewing a real-world scene directly. As shown in FIG. 1, the optical system 100 of our OST-HMD design may include a wedge-shaped free-form prism-lens 110 cemented to an auxiliary free-form lens 120. The prism-lens 110 serves as the near-eye viewing optics that magnifies the image displayed through a microdisplay 130 while the auxiliary free-form lens 120 is an auxiliary element attached to the prism-lens 110 in order to maintain a non-distorted see-through view of a real-world scene.

As shown in FIG. 1, the wedge shaped free-form prism-lens 110 may include three surfaces labeled as 1, 2, and 3, respectively. For the sake of convenience, the surface adjacent to the exit pupil is labeled as 1 in the refraction path and as 1′ in the reflection path. We set the center of the exit pupil as the origin of the global coordinate system and the rest of the surfaces were specified with respect to this global reference. We further adopted the convention of tracing the system backward, namely from the eye position to the microdisplay 130.

The overall system was set to be symmetric about the YOZ plane, but not the XOZ plane. A ray emitted from a point on the microdisplay 130 is first refracted by the surface 3 next to the microdisplay 130. After two consecutive reflections by the surfaces 1′ and 2, the ray is transmitted through the surface 1 and reaches the exit pupil of the system 100. The first surface (i.e., 1 and 1′) of the prism-lens 110 is required to satisfy the condition of total internal reflection for rays reflected by this surface 1′. The rear surface 2 of the prism-lens 110 is coated as a half mirror in order to facilitate the optical see-through capability. The rays from the microdisplay 130 will be reflected by the rear surface 2 while the rays from a real-world scene will be transmitted. An auxiliary lens 120 may be cemented to the wedge-shaped prism-lens 110 in order to counteract the ray shift and distortion caused by the prism-lens 110. The front surface of the auxiliary free-form lens 120 may match the shape of the rear surface 2 of the prism-lens 110. The back surface 4 of the auxiliary free-form lens 120 may be optimized to minimize the shift and distortion introduced to the rays from a real-world scene when the auxiliary free-form lens 120 is combined with the prism-lens 110.

TABLE 1 Specifications of FFS Prism-lens HMD System Parameter Specification LCD Size 0.61 in (15.5 mm) diagonally Active display area 12.7 mm × 9.0 mm Resolution 800 × 600 pixels Virtual imaging system Type folded FFS prism-lens Effective focal length 15 mm Exit pupil diameter 8 mm Eye relief >17 (18.25) mm F/# 1.875 Number of free-form surfaces 3 Augmented viewing system Type Free-form lens Number of free-form surfaces 2 Other parameters Wavelength 656.3-486.1 nm Field of view 45° H × 32° V Vignetting 0.15 for top and bottom fields Distortion <12% at the maximum field Image quality MTF > 10% at 30 lps/mm

The overall specifications of the system are summarized in Table 1. Our goal was to achieve a very compact, lightweight, and wide FOV design using a wedge-shaped free-form prism-lens 110. A small size microdisplay 130 with high resolution was thus preferred. Based on the size, resolution, availability and cost, a pair of 0.61-inch Emagin OLED displays were selected, with a resolution of 800×600 pixels and a 15 μm pixel size. We further targeted an HMD system 100 with a diagonal full FOV of at least 50°, which corresponds to a focal length no more than 16.6 mm. A 15 mm focal length was selected, which offers a reasonable balance between FOV (53.5° diagonally) and angular resolution (3.2 arc minutes per pixel). In the design of visual instruments, especially binocular HMDs, a large exit pupil is typically preferred to account for the swiveling of the eyes in their sockets without causing vignetting or loss of image. A large pupil offers better tolerance of the interpupilary distances (IPD) among different users without the need to mechanically adjust the IPD of the binocular optics. A large pupil, however, often not only compromises the compactness and weight of the optical system 100, but also imposes limitations on the FOV due to the dramatically increased challenge of designing low F/# systems. Taking into account these factors, we set the exit pupil diameter to be 8 mm, which leads to a system 100 with a F/# of 1.875. In designing HMD systems, a large eye relief is desired to accommodate users wearing eyeglasses, but it affects the compactness of the viewing optics. A minimum of a 18 mm eye relief was set to accommodate users wearing low-profile eyeglasses. Balancing between image uniformity and system compactness, we set the limit of the vignetting to be less than 15% at the top and bottom of the visual fields.

Among the aberrations of an optical system, distortion causes the warping of the displayed image without reducing image sharpness, which allows computational or electronic correction. In designing conventional HMDs it is common to optimize the system 100 to minimize the optical aberrations that reduce image quality and cannot be compensated electronically or computationally. In a free-form optical system 100, however, the distortion can be very large and irregular if it is left without any constraints. We thus set a distortion limit of 12% at the maximum field angle and planned to correct the residual distortion using computational methods. In terms of other types of aberrations, the modulation transfer function (MTF) was selected to evaluate the overall image sharpness and was set to be no less than 10% across the entire visual field at a spatial frequency of 30 lps/mm. With the specifications established, development continued with design of the free-form elements 110, 120.

Free-form optical surfaces offer more degrees of freedom to optical designers than conventional rotationally symmetric optical surfaces, such as a spherical or aspherical surface, and achieve usually lower wavefront errors and distortion than that achievable with the same number of rotationally symmetric surfaces. A significant benefit in our OST-HMD design lies in its ability to yield display optics with an eyeglass-like form factor. An optical design using free-form surfaces, however, may cause a dramatic increase in the complexity of the design and optimization process. An inadequate method of representing and optimizing a free-form surface may lead to discouraging and unpredictable results. Key issues in the process of designing a FFS HMD include 1) a free-form surface representation and design strategy; 2) total internal reflection condition; and 3) structure constraints to form a valid prism-lens 110.

Free-Form Surface Representation and Design Strategy

Selecting a suitable method for a free-form surface representation is very important. Different representation methods not only have different impacts on the ray tracing speed and the convergence of optimization, but also offer different degrees of design freedom. A suitable representation method shall 1) provide adequate degrees of freedom; 2) require a reasonable amount of ray tracing time; and 3) offer reliable convergence in the optimization process. Ray tracing speed is a particular concern in designing a free-form prism-lens 110, as a larger number of fields need to be sampled when optimizing a free-form optical system than need to be sampled in a rotationally symmetrical optical system. Speed becomes a more serious problem when a global optimization is necessary. Although most of the commercially available optical design software, such as CODE V® (Optical Research Associates, Pasadena, Calif.), offers the ability to model free-form surfaces in user-defined methods, the ray tracing speed of user-defined representations typically is much slower than the standard methods available in the software packages.

By taking into account the speed and convergence factors, the following design strategy was adopted in our design process. In the case when we lacked a starting point for an FFS surface, we started to optimize the surface with a spherical type to obtain the correct first-order parameters. The spherical surface was then converted to an aspheric type by adding a conic constant and a 4th order or higher aspheric coefficients. Following an intermediate state of optimization, the ASP-type surface was then converted to an AAS-type surface for better correction by directly adding asymmetric coefficients up to the 10th order. To avoid loss of information, use of aspheric terms higher than the 10th order was not pursued, because the AAS surface has only up to the 10th order of rotationally symmetric coefficients in CODE V®. Optimization with the AAS type surface helped to create a good starting point. The AAS surface was then converted to the XYP-type through a fitting algorithm (e.g., a least square fitting method) for final stage of optimization. High precision was required for the fitting algorithm to avoid a significant deviation from the starting design produced by the AAS surface type.

Total Internal Reflection Constraint

As mentioned above, all the rays striking the first surface 1′ of the prism-lens 110 from inside should be totally reflected off. The first surface 1′ cannot be coated with a reflective film, because it is shared by both a refractive and reflective path of the same rays. Therefore, the incident angles of all the rays striking the first surface 1′ from the microdisplay 130 should be larger than the critical angle, θc, set by the TIR condition

θc=arcsin(1/n)   (1)

where n is the refractive index of the material for the FFS prism-lens 110. For example, if the index of the material is equal to 1.5, all the incident angles should be larger than 41.82°. Rays incident on the first surface 1′ of the prism-lens 110 at a smaller angle may be transmitted through the prism-lens 110 without the benefit of reflection off the rear surface 2 (and subsequent refraction at the first surface 1) and may directly enter the eye, which leads to stray light and a reduction in the image contrast observed by the user. If the TIR condition is met, however, after two consecutive reflections by the front and rear surfaces 1′ and 2, respectively, the same ray is returned back and to be transmitted through the front surface 1. To ensure transmission of the ray after the two consecutive reflections, the incident angle of the ray should be smaller than the critical angle set by Eqn. (1) to avoid the TIR effect.

It was impractical to constrain the incident angle of every ray incident on the surface of interest during the optimization process. An adequate and practical control method was required. Without loss of generality, we made two assumptions: (1) the local departure of the surface 1′ from a spherical surface was sufficiently small compared to the primary radius of curvature of the surface so that the surface normal of every point on surface 1′ could be adequately approximated by a line passing through to the center of the primary curvature of the surface (as shown in FIGS. 3); and (2) the primary curvature of the surface 1 is concave, as shown in FIG. 3. Under these assumptions, we could prove that the top marginal ray, R1u, which corresponds to the ray from the maximum object field in the positive Y-direction (i.e. P1) passing through the top edge of the pupil, had the smallest incident angle among all the rays striking the surface 1′ from the microdisplay 130 side. As shown in FIG. 3, the incident angle on surface 1′ increased gradually as the ray from the same object field shifted from the top to the bottom of the pupil (e.g. from R1u to R1b); the angle also increased as the ray intersecting the same pupil position shifted from the top to the bottom of the object fields (e.g., from R1u to R2u). Therefore, the constraint on the incident angle was written as

θ1b1′>arcsin(1/n)   (2)

where θ1b1′ is the incident angle of the top marginal ray, R1u, on surface 1′ from the maximum object field in tangential plane of the microdisplay 130.

We could further prove that after the two consecutive reflections the top marginal ray, R2u, of the maximum object field in the negative Y-direction (i.e. P2) had the largest incident angle on the surface 1 when the surface 1 was tilted counterclockwise about the X-axis (i.e., the tilt angle, θ1>0); otherwise the bottom marginal ray R1b, of the maximum object field in the positive Y-direction (P1) has the largest incident angle when the surface 1 was tilted clockwise. Therefore, the constraint used to avoid TIR condition on surface 1 was written as:

θ 1  b = { θ 1  b   1 < arcsin 

Download full PDF for full patent description/claims.




You can also Monitor Keywords and Search for tracking patents relating to this Optical see-through free-form head-mounted display patent application.
###


Other recent patent applications listed under the agent :