现货 1 日发货最少 3 年保修持证专业工程师提供免费专家支持批量折扣企业 Net 30 账期
配置配置系统
ZH-HANS
EnglishFrançaisEspañolDeutschItalianoPortuguêsNederlandsSvenska日本語한국어简体中文
报价
首页 / Case studies / UV bottle-cap code imaging
Application study · Packaging traceability

Invisible bottle-cap codes: create contrast with UV illumination

Two real source captures show code patterns on dark bottle-cap backgrounds under 365 nm ring illumination. They demonstrate an imaging approach for UV-responsive marks, without claiming a verified decode rate.

Prove the UV image first, then measure the reader performance.

  • Method365 nm UV ring illumination
  • EvidenceReal application-lab capture
  • SetupSource light identified; imaging kit proposed
  • AcceptanceValidate on your own parts
3D view of the inspection set-up: camera, lens, light and partDrag to rotate · scroll to zoom
3D illustration · real CAD where available
Walk through this setup 5 guided stops
From component to inspection

Understand each choice.

Choose a stop to frame the part in 3D and see why it belongs in this setup. The component notes and links remain available if 3D cannot load.

Camera and available lens CAD are published models. Lens and light envelopes use printed dimensions. The linked station uses its published base size and column height; carriage, brackets, fittings, parts and spacing are illustrative. Confirm load, travel, fasteners and clearances before ordering. Light paths explain the arrangement and do not simulate optical performance. The illustrated ring position keeps the drawn viewing envelope inside its central aperture; verify vignetting and illumination on the actual sample. Representative part geometry is illustrative, not reconstructed inspection evidence.

From the demo to your test bench

Build around the parts you can buy.

Explore each component, check its specifications and compare alternatives. The proposed quote includes the linked test station; its catalog listing includes two lighting holders.

Mount the optics with intent

The station is an optical test bench, with its two lighting holders included in the catalog listing. The 3D column and base follow the published height and footprint. Carriages, clamps and part supports are schematic: confirm camera screw pattern, lens support, light fasteners, permissible load and actual travel before ordering.

Configure the mounting station →

Complete the electrical system

Select a controller against the exact light voltage, drive mode and power, then confirm camera data/power/I/O cables and a suitable PC. These are not silently added to the proposed optical kit.

Lighting application-lab catalog capture

Evidence you can inspect

Visible in the images

One capture shows a bright dotted code; the other shows a separate code with adjacent digits.

What the source reports

The catalog calls these invisible bottle-cap code inspections under 365 nm illumination and names different ring versions.

How to use this evidence

No code payload, verifier grade, code standard, read rate, minimum module size or line speed is supplied.

What the camera saw

Cropped from the source test sheet; original test annotations are retained. Captures are not generated or enhanced. Drag the comparison slider or use the image buttons.

Source trial A: a dotted two-dimensional code appears bright against the dark cap under UV illumination.
Source trial A: a dotted two-dimensional code appears bright against the dark cap under UV illumination.
Separate source trial B: a smaller code and printed digits are visible under another UV ring version.
Separate source trial B: a smaller code and printed digits are visible under another UV ring version.

The challenge

An invisible or low-contrast mark must first produce a stable signal before a code reader can decode it.

Curved cap geometry and printing variation can alter brightness and module shape.

How it was solved

The catalog identifies two 365 nm UV-ring code-imaging examples. They are separate source trials, not a controlled before-and-after pair.

Try the current LS-RS7430-UV365 with the actual ink and cap. Confirm camera-side filtering, exposure and code-reader parameters before selecting production hardware.

Why it works

  1. 1

    A compatible UV-responsive mark can return a visible pattern against a darker cap surface.

  2. 2

    Code visibility is necessary for decoding; it does not demonstrate verifier grade, successful reads or regulatory traceability.

From image contrast to a production decision

What to validate on your part

A useful sample image is the starting point. These are the checks that turn the concept into a defensible inspection.

  1. 01

    Use production print variation

    Include faint, smeared, curved and partially missing marks across ink batches.

  2. 02

    Verify the code requirement

    Confirm the intended symbology, smallest module and any required verification standard.

  3. 03

    Measure read performance

    Test blind reads at final speed and cap-position variation; record no-reads and false decodes.

Explore your inspection requirements

How many pixels cover your feature?

Compare feature coverage, camera pixel requirements and exposure using your own planning inputs. These are calculated planning values, not inspection results or an accuracy specification.

Editable planning scenario. Adjust these example inputs for your application; they are separate from the source test and 3D setup. Motion allowance and target coverage are starting points to validate, not acceptance limits. Pixel count starts from the proposed camera's catalog resolution.

Object sampling0.04085 mm/px
Pixels across feature12.24 px
Horizontal pixels for target1000 px
Motion during exposure0.2448 px
Exposure ceiling from motion204.2 µs
Formulas and assumptions

The field, feature, speed and exposure start with neutral example values. They are not taken from the source test or the 3D illustration. Allowed motion starts at an editable 0.5-pixel example; it is not a recommended acceptance limit. Target coverage starts at an editable 5-pixel example; it is not a recommended detection or measurement threshold. The horizontal pixel count starts from the catalog Resolution row for MV-CS050-10GC. Use the effective width after cropping, binning or decimation if those modes are enabled.

  • Object sampling (mm/px) = field width (mm) / horizontal pixels.
  • Pixels across feature = feature width (mm) / object sampling (mm/px).
  • Horizontal pixels for target = field width (mm) × target pixels across feature / feature width (mm), rounded up to a whole pixel.
  • Motion (px) = speed (mm/s) × exposure (µs) / 1,000,000 / object sampling (mm/px).
  • Exposure for allowed motion (µs) = allowed motion (px) × object sampling (mm/px) / speed (mm/s) × 1,000,000.

The exposure result is the maximum duration from this motion allowance alone. At zero speed, motion sets no exposure limit; the camera, lighting, saturation and other constraints still apply. A shorter exposure does not itself guarantee a reliable inspection.

Field width and feature width refer to the same object plane. The motion calculation assumes uniform linear motion parallel to the field-width direction and a single exposure. It does not model perspective, vibration, rolling-shutter distortion, diffraction, defocus or optical distortion. A strobe may change the effective exposure.

The target result is a horizontal sampling requirement, not a camera recommendation or a change to the selected camera. It uses the effective image width after cropping, binning or decimation and does not determine the vertical resolution or sensor size. Pixel coverage alone does not establish detectability or measurement accuracy. Validate contrast, lens performance, working distance, illumination, calibration, camera exposure limits and the inspection algorithm on representative parts. Changing field width does not change the 3D model or certify that the proposed lens can achieve that field.

The set-up and the parts

照明365 nm UV ring illumination
EvidenceTwo independent source code captures
Current proposalLS-RS7430-UV365; source versions differ
Camera and lensSource versions not identified; current proposed parts below
3D spacingIllustrative, to be confirmed on the sample
Derived proposed field84.456 × 70.656 mm = sensor dimensions / 0.1x; source field not supplied
Mounting (proposed)LS-BT-XZ-G-6-6045; 600 mm column, 600 × 450 mm base, glass tray and two light holders

"Tested" identifies the part named in the source. "Our pick" is a proposed alternative or supporting part. The quote includes only cards marked "In proposed setup", with the quantities shown; other test arrangements are separate. Confirm colour, optics, controllers, power supplies, cables and mounting before ordering.

About this case study: the photos and camera images come from the application laboratory of the maker of the lighting and optics we sell, imaged on the parts shown; your results depend on your part, camera and set-up. This is an application-lab study, not a LumaSpec customer deployment. Source figures are reported results; proposed components require a fresh trial. The 3D scene illustrates the arrangement and does not simulate imaging performance.

More case studies

Start with your inspection requirement

Make the next trial specific.

Tell us the part size, smallest defect or tolerance, available working distance, material and line speed. Include what a good part and a reject look like.

Discuss your application配置系统