Anti-fake bottle cap

Abstract

The invention relates to an anti-counterfeiting bottle cap, which comprises an inner sleeve, an outer sleeve, an inner cover, an outer sleeve and an outer cover, wherein the inner sleeve is configured to be jointed to a bottle opening; the inner cover is fixedly connected to the periphery of the inner sleeve, a mounting groove is formed in the outer circumferential surface of the inner cover, and a local weakening structure is arranged in the mounting groove or at the position, corresponding to the mounting groove, of the inner cover; the clamping hoop is mounted in the mounting groove; and the outer cover is arranged on the periphery of the inner cover, is jointed with the hoop, and can move upwards to apply an upward acting force to the hoop. According to the bottle cap, the local weakening structure is preset at the top of the inner cap mounting groove, so that the inner cap is irreversibly broken at the weak part when the bottle cap is subjected to cap pulling force, the bottle cap cannot be reassembled for use, and the safety and the anti-counterfeiting capability of a product are improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of packaging technology, and in particular to anti-counterfeiting bottle caps. Background Technology

[0002] In the field of anti-counterfeiting packaging for high-end alcoholic beverages and other soft drinks, preventing the illegal recycling and reuse of packaging has long been a technical challenge. Criminals typically use force to detach the bottle cap entirely from the bottle without damage, or simply remove the outer cap, then fill it with counterfeit products and reseal it. Because this type of counterfeiting does not damage the appearance of the cap and bottle, it is difficult for consumers to detect.

[0003] The fundamental flaw in existing bottle cap anti-counterfeiting technologies lies in the insufficient structural strength of the connection between the inner and outer components. Traditional connection methods (such as simple threads, locking points, or interference fits) often result in unexpected, reversible separation rather than irreversible structural damage when illegally removed. This means that key components of the bottle cap (outer or inner cap) can be completely removed and reused during counterfeiting, thus providing a possibility for counterfeiting. Summary of the Invention

[0004] Based on this, an anti-counterfeiting bottle cap is provided. By pre-setting a local weakening structure at the top of the inner cap mounting groove, the inner cap will irreversibly break at the weak point when the bottle cap is subjected to a cap-pulling force, ensuring that the bottle cap cannot be reassembled and used, thereby improving product safety and anti-counterfeiting capabilities.

[0005] This invention provides an anti-counterfeiting bottle cap, comprising: an inner sleeve configured to engage with a bottle neck; an inner cap fixed to the periphery of the inner sleeve, wherein an mounting groove is provided on the outer circumferential surface of the inner cap, and a locally weakened structure is provided in the mounting groove or at a position corresponding to the mounting groove; a clamp installed to the mounting groove; and an outer cap disposed on the periphery of the inner cap and engaging with the clamp, and capable of applying an upward force to the clamp while moving upward.

[0006] Preferably, the localized weakening structure is disposed at the top of the mounting groove.

[0007] Preferably, the locally weakened structure is formed as an inwardly recessed groove.

[0008] Preferably, the groove is annular to form an annular groove.

[0009] Preferably, the locally weakened structure is arc-shaped.

[0010] Preferably, the locally weakened structure extends through the inner cover.

[0011] Preferably, the outer peripheral surface of the clamp is provided with at least one first engagement boss, and the inner peripheral surface of the outer cover is provided with a second engagement boss corresponding to the first engagement boss. The second engagement boss is located below the first engagement boss, so that the second engagement boss can apply an upward force to the first engagement boss.

[0012] Preferably, the mounting groove is arc-shaped or annular.

[0013] Preferably, the cross-sectional shape of the locally weakened structure is U-shaped, V-shaped, or arc-shaped.

[0014] Preferably, the localized weakening structure is disposed on the inner circumferential surface of the inner cover and corresponds to the mounting groove.

[0015] The above-mentioned anti-counterfeiting bottle caps have the following beneficial effects:

[0016] By pre-setting a localized weakening structure at the mounting groove of the inner cap, the failure mode of the bottle cap under cap-pulling force is fundamentally changed. When the outer cap is pulled upwards, it transmits the force to the mounting groove of the inner cap through a clamp. Since the localized weakening structure constitutes the weakest point of strength at this location, the inner cap is forced to undergo irreversible fracture failure at this point, instead of the seamless separation of components in a traditional structure. This design ensures that the inner cap suffers permanent structural damage when the bottle cap is opened, thus preventing the bottle cap from being reassembled and used for secondary sealing. This blocks the technical path of cap-pulling counterfeiting, achieving one-time physical anti-counterfeiting and significantly improving product safety and brand protection capabilities. Attached Figure Description

[0017] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the installation of the anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0018] Figure 2 This is a cross-sectional view of the inner cover.

[0019] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the three-dimensional structure of the clamp.

[0020] Figure 4 This is the front view of the clamp.

[0021] Figure 5 This is a cross-sectional view of the clamp.

[0022] Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of the internal structure of the outer cover.

[0023] Figure 7 This is a cross-sectional view of the outer cover.

[0024] Explanation of reference numerals in the attached figures:

[0025] 100. Inner sleeve;

[0026] 200. Inner cover; 210. Mounting groove; 211. Locally weakened structure;

[0027] 300. Clamp; 301. First mating boss;

[0028] 400. Outer cover; 401. Second mating boss;

[0029] 500, bottle mouth;

[0030] 600. Outerwear. Detailed Implementation

[0031] To make the above-mentioned objects, features, and advantages of the present invention more apparent and understandable, specific embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Many specific details are set forth in the following description to provide a thorough understanding of the present invention. However, the present invention can be practiced in many other ways different from those described herein, and those skilled in the art can make similar modifications without departing from the spirit of the present invention. Therefore, the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments disclosed below.

[0032] The following is combined Figures 1 to 7 An anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to an embodiment of the present invention will be described.

[0033] like Figure 1 and Figure 2 As shown, the anti-counterfeiting bottle cap of the present invention includes: an inner sleeve 100, an inner cap 200, a clamp 300, and an outer cap 400.

[0034] The inner sleeve 100 is configured to engage with the bottle neck 500.

[0035] The inner cap 200 is fixed to the periphery of the inner sleeve 100. The outer peripheral surface of the inner cap 200 is provided with a mounting groove 210, and the mounting groove 210 is provided with a local weakening structure 211. Specifically, the inner cap 200 is engaged with the threaded outer wall of the inner sleeve 100, which is fastened to the bottle mouth 500, through the thread on its inner wall.

[0036] Install clamp 300 into mounting slot 210.

[0037] The outer cover 400 is disposed around the inner cover 200 and engages with the clamp 300, and can apply an upward force to the clamp 300 while moving upward.

[0038] This invention fundamentally changes the failure mode of the bottle cap when subjected to a cap-pulling force by pre-setting a local weakening structure 211 at the mounting groove 210 of the inner cap 200. When the outer cap 400 is pulled upwards, the outer cap 400 transmits the force to the mounting groove 210 of the inner cap 200 through the clamp 300. Since the local weakening structure 211 constitutes the weakest point of strength at this location, the inner cap 200 is forced to undergo irreversible fracture failure at this point, instead of the lossless separation between components in a traditional structure. This design ensures that the inner cap 200 suffers permanent structural damage when the bottle cap is opened, thus preventing the bottle cap from being reassembled and used for secondary sealing, blocking the technical path of cap-pulling counterfeiting, achieving one-time physical anti-counterfeiting, and significantly improving product safety and brand protection capabilities.

[0039] In an exemplary embodiment, the inner cover 200 and the clamp 300 can be joined together in a variety of ways, including but not limited to the following:

[0040] (1) Separate injection molding and post-assembly method: The inner cover 200 and the clamp 300 are formed as independent parts by injection molding. Subsequently, the clamp 300 is pressed into or snapped into the mounting groove 210 of the inner cover 200 on the assembly line to complete the mechanical fit. The advantages of this method are that the process is mature, the mold is simple, the production cycle is fast, and it allows the two parts to use materials with large differences in performance, which is convenient for optimization. For example, the inner cover 200 can be made of polypropylene (PP) or polyethylene (PE) with better toughness to facilitate the fracture control of the local weakening structure 211; while the clamp 300 can be made of materials with higher strength and rigidity, such as ABS or polycarbonate (PC) to ensure that it does not deform or get damaged during force transmission.

[0041] (2) Two-material injection molding: Using a two-color / two-material injection molding machine, the inner cover 200 is first injected and formed in one molding cycle. Then, the clamp 300 is directly injected and formed in the mounting groove 210 area of ​​the same inner cover 200 by changing the station or rotating the mold core within the mold cavity. The two form a mechanical interlock or molecular chain entanglement at the interface (if the materials are compatible), and the combination is firm. This method eliminates the subsequent assembly process, the consistency of the parts is extremely high, and a completely seamless fit can be achieved, avoiding the gaps or misalignments that may occur during separate assembly, and further ensuring the directness and accuracy of force transmission.

[0042] Regarding material selection, this invention is not limited to specific resins. The core principle of material selection is to meet functional requirements: the material of the inner cover 200 needs to have good injection molding properties, a certain degree of toughness, and controllable fracture characteristics; PP and PE are economical and common choices. The material of the clamp 300 needs to have higher rigidity, creep resistance, and wear resistance to reliably bear and transmit impact forces; engineering plastics such as ABS, PC, or reinforced nylon (PA) are all suitable. Through the rational selection and combination of the above manufacturing and material solutions, production costs and efficiency can be optimized while ensuring the reliable realization of anti-counterfeiting functions.

[0043] In an exemplary embodiment, a localized weakening structure 211 is disposed on top of the mounting groove 210.

[0044] Specifically, such as Figure 2 As shown, the mounting groove 210 is an annular groove formed around the outer circumference of the inner cover 200, having a bottom and two sidewalls. The local weakening structure 211 is located on the top sidewall of this annular groove, that is, the sidewall area closest to the upper end face of the inner cover 200. When the outer cover 400 is pulled up, the force exerted on the mounting groove 210 by the clamp 300 is mainly upward. Setting the weak point at the starting end of the force direction (i.e., the top) ensures that the material yield limit is reached first at that point, thus guiding the fracture to occur there. This design makes the failure location controllable and predictable, avoiding fractures in other unexpected parts of the inner cover 200 due to improper weak point placement, thereby ensuring the reliability of the anti-counterfeiting effect.

[0045] In an exemplary implementation, such as Figure 2 As shown, the locally weakened structure 211 is formed as an inwardly recessed groove.

[0046] The cross-sectional shape of the locally weakening structure 211 can be U-shaped, V-shaped, or arc-shaped. By removing part of the material to form this groove, the wall thickness at this location is significantly reduced, thereby creating a pre-designed mechanical weak point in the structure. The depth and width of this groove are precisely calculated to ensure sufficient structural strength during normal tightening and sealing, but its strength will be lower than that of other parts of the inner cover 200 and the connection strength between the inner cover 200 and the inner sleeve 100 when subjected to an upward pull-out force. Therefore, stress will concentrate at this groove, eventually causing the inner cover 200 to undergo brittle fracture or tearing along this groove, resulting in irreversible damage.

[0047] This inwardly recessed groove design allows for controlled processing, easy inspection, and clean fracture surfaces, making it a reliable and efficient way to achieve localized structural weakening.

[0048] In one embodiment, the groove is annular to form an annular groove.

[0049] Specifically, the groove extends continuously and without interruption around the top sidewall of the mounting groove 210, thereby forming an annular groove.

[0050] The introduction of this annular groove creates a continuous, circumferentially consistent predetermined fracture zone on the inner cap 200. Its advantage is that regardless of the initial force applied by the outer cap 400 when the cap is removed, or whether there are slight strength differences in the cap in the circumferential direction, the fracture will be guided to occur along this annular weak line. This ensures a high degree of reliability and consistency in the anti-counterfeiting effect; the inner cap 200 will fracture along this annular groove, forming a predictable failure pattern.

[0051] In another embodiment, the locally weakening structure 211 is arc-shaped.

[0052] Specifically, the local weakening structure 211 can be formed as at least one arc segment. For example, it can be multiple independent arc segments spaced apart on the circumference (such as four equidistant 80-degree arc segments), or it can be a single continuous arc segment (such as a 180-degree semicircle). This local weakening structure 211, composed of one or more arc segments, creates a strength weakening zone circumferentially on the top sidewall of the mounting groove 210, thereby forming a predetermined, non-uniform distribution of weak points.

[0053] When subjected to a pull-out force, fracture will deterministically initiate and propagate from the ends or central regions of these arc-shaped locally weakened structures 211. The design of multiple arc segments can guide the generation of multiple fracture initiation points, making the failure morphology more complex and the anti-counterfeiting effect more significant. This arc-shaped weakening scheme provides a flexible means of strength control, enabling reliable directional fracture while optimizing the balance between structural strength and anti-counterfeiting sensitivity by adjusting the number, length, and distribution of arc segments.

[0054] In addition to the groove, the localized weakening structure 211 can also penetrate the inner cover 200 to reduce the strength at that location.

[0055] Specifically, the localized weakening structure 211 can be one or more elongated slits. These are directly formed in the top sidewall region of the mounting groove 210 and completely penetrate the wall thickness of the inner cover 200. When subjected to a cap-removing force, the stress is highly concentrated at the tips of these slits, causing the inner cover 200 to break very quickly and definitively along this penetration line. This approach provides a more sensitive and severe anti-counterfeiting response, almost completely eliminating the possibility of the structure being accidentally left intact, further enhancing the absoluteness of the anti-counterfeiting measures.

[0056] In an exemplary implementation, such as Figures 3 to 5 As shown, the outer peripheral surface of the clamp 300 is provided with at least one first engaging boss 301. Figure 6 and Figure 7 As shown, the inner circumferential surface of the outer cover 400 is provided with a second engagement boss 401 corresponding to the first engagement boss 301. The second engagement boss 401 is located below the first engagement boss 301 so that the second engagement boss 401 can apply an upward force to the first engagement boss 301.

[0057] Specifically, at least one first engaging boss 301 is integrally formed or fixedly provided on the outer peripheral surface of the clamp 300. The first engaging boss 301 protrudes radially outward from the outer peripheral surface of the clamp 300 to serve as a point of force application. Correspondingly, a second engaging boss 401 is also integrally formed or fixedly provided on the inner peripheral surface of the outer cover 400. The second engaging boss 401 protrudes radially inward from the inner peripheral surface of the outer cover 400.

[0058] This spatial relationship forms the basis for force transmission. When an opening action occurs and the outer cover 400 is subjected to an upward pulling force, the outer cover 400 tends to displace upward relative to the inner cover 200 and the clamp 300. At this time, the second engaging boss 401 on the inner circumferential surface of the outer cover 400 moves upward accordingly. As the outer cover 400 continues to move upward, the second engaging boss 401 will exert a definite upward force on the first engaging boss 301, thereby driving the entire clamp 300 to move upward.

[0059] The first engaging boss 301 can be one, two, or more bosses evenly or non-uniformly distributed along the circumference of the clamp 300. The design of multiple bosses ensures a more balanced distribution of the lifting force and more stable force transmission. When the clamp 300 is subjected to this upward force, since it is installed within the mounting groove 210 of the inner cover 200, the force is completely and directly transmitted through the contact surface between the clamp 300 and the mounting groove 210 to the top area of ​​the inner cover 200 where the local weakening structure 211 is located, thereby triggering the predetermined fracture process.

[0060] The first engaging boss 301 and the second engaging boss 401 directly convert the axial displacement of the outer cover 400 into a lifting force on the clamp 300. The force transmission path is clear, efficient and irreversible, which is a key structural guarantee to ensure that the anti-counterfeiting mechanism is reliably activated.

[0061] In another embodiment, the outer peripheral surface of the clamp 300 is in close contact with the inner peripheral surface of the outer cover 400 through an interference fit or by providing a layer of high-friction material (such as a rubber ring or serrated surface). Relying on the large static friction between the two, when the outer cover 400 is pulled upward with a strong force, the friction is sufficient to drive the clamp 300 to move upward synchronously, thereby transmitting the force.

[0062] In an exemplary embodiment, the mounting groove 210 is arc-shaped or annular.

[0063] The mounting groove 210 is annular, meaning it is a complete annular groove extending continuously around the outer circumference of the inner cover 200. Correspondingly, the clamp 300 is also typically annular. This combination of the annular mounting groove 210 and the annular clamp 300 achieves a seamless, circumferential fit and support. When the force of pulling the cover acts on the clamp 300 through the outer cover 400, this force is evenly and without stress concentration transmitted to the entire circumferential bearing surface of the annular mounting groove 210 through the annular clamp 300, ultimately acting evenly on the locally weakened structure 211 at the top of the mounting groove 210, thus contributing to the fracture of the inner cover 200.

[0064] The mounting groove 210 is arc-shaped, meaning it is a segment or multiple arc-shaped groove that does not extend completely around the outer circumference of the inner cover 200. Correspondingly, the clamp 300 is also arc-shaped, and its curvature, length, and other dimensions match the shape and size of the arc-shaped mounting groove 210 to ensure precise installation and sufficient contact area. This matching design of the arc-shaped mounting groove 210 and the arc-shaped clamp 300 provides more flexible layout possibilities. It can not only be used to precisely position the installation angle of the clamp 300, but also to precisely align spatially with the similarly arc-shaped local weakening structures 211, thereby concentrating and directly guiding the destructive force to the preset arc-shaped weak area, achieving a controllable local fracture effect.

[0065] In addition to the outer peripheral surface of the inner cover 200, a localized weakening structure 211 can also be provided on the inner peripheral surface of the inner cover 200, corresponding to the mounting groove 210. Specifically, the localized weakening structure 211 is aligned with the top of the mounting groove 210, and it can achieve the aforementioned fracture effect.

[0066] The working principle and force transmission path of the anti-counterfeiting bottle cap of the present invention under two typical opening scenarios are described below to illustrate how it achieves irreversible damage.

[0067] Mechanism of Action: The core design of this anti-counterfeiting bottle cap lies in its structure, which ensures that any attempt to separate the outer cap 400 from the inner cap 200 or pull it off the bottle opening 500 will trigger an irreversible mechanical process. This process, through a precise force transmission design, ensures that the force is guided and concentrated at the pre-designed local weakening structure 211 on the inner cap 200, causing irreversible fracture. Therefore, regardless of the legitimacy of the opening intention, the bottle cap permanently fails after the first opening due to the damage to the critical structural component, preventing the packaging from being recycled and counterfeited.

[0068] Scenario 1: The bottle cap is forcefully pulled off.

[0069] When a force attempts to pull the bottle cap (including the outer cap 400 and the inner cap 200) as a whole from the bottle opening 500, the mechanical process is as follows: The upward force of pulling the cap first acts on the outer sleeve 600, and the outer sleeve 600 acts on the outer cap 400. Since the outer cap 400 is hooked and engaged with the first engagement boss 301 on the outer side of the clamp 300 through its inner second engagement boss 401, the force is directly transmitted to the clamp 300. The clamp 300 is installed in the mounting groove 210 of the inner cap 200, so the upward force is also acted on the inner cap 200 through the clamp 300, forming a tendency to pull the inner cap 200 upward. At the same time, the inner cap 200 is tightly screwed into the inner sleeve 100 fastened to the bottle opening 500 through the thread B on its inner wall, and the inner sleeve 100 forms a firm locking connection with the bottle opening 500 through its lower part. Therefore, the bottle neck 500 applies a downward restraining reaction force to the inner cap 200 through the inner sleeve 100. Under the combined action of these two opposing forces (an upward pull-out force and a downward restraining reaction force), the stress is highly concentrated in the mounting groove 210 area of ​​the inner cap 200. Since the top of this area has a pre-set local weakening structure 211, which is the weakest point, the inner cap 200 breaks at the local weakening structure 211.

[0070] Scenario 2: Only the outer cover 400 is forcibly pulled up.

[0071] When a force is applied only to the outer cap 400 in an attempt to remove it, the mechanical process is as follows: The outer cap 400 is directly subjected to an upward pulling force. This force is also transmitted to the clamp 300 through the engagement of the second engagement boss 401 of the outer cap 400 and the first engagement boss 301 of the clamp 300, and then acts on the mounting groove 210 of the inner cap 200. Although the engagement structure between the inner sleeve 100 and the bottle mouth 500 does not directly bear the pulling force at this time, the threaded engagement between the inner cap 200 and the inner sleeve 100 still provides axial constraint to the main body of the inner cap 200. Therefore, when the clamp 300 is subjected to an upward force and attempts to move the mounting groove 210 area of ​​the inner cap 200 upward, the rest of the inner cap 200 is locked by the inner sleeve 100, which causes the top area of ​​the mounting groove 210 (especially at the local weakening structure 211) to bear huge combined shear and tensile stress. Ultimately, similar to scenario one, stress concentration caused the inner cover 200 to fracture at the pre-designed local weakening structure 211.

[0072] In summary, through the clearly defined force transmission path and countermeasure design described above, this anti-counterfeiting bottle cap ensures that under any of the aforementioned opening methods, the inner cap 200 will inevitably suffer structural damage at the preset local weakening structure 211. This design ensures that the bottle cap can only be used once, achieving reliable one-time physical anti-counterfeiting.

[0073] The technical features of the above embodiments can be combined in any way. For the sake of brevity, not all possible combinations of the technical features in the above embodiments are described. However, as long as there is no contradiction in the combination of these technical features, they should be considered to be within the scope of this specification.

[0074] The embodiments described above are merely illustrative of several implementations of the present invention, and while the descriptions are relatively specific and detailed, they should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention patent. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make various modifications and improvements without departing from the concept of the present invention, and these all fall within the protection scope of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of this invention patent should be determined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A counterfeit-proof bottle cap, characterized in that, include: Inner sleeve, which is configured to engage with the bottle neck; The inner cover is fixed to the periphery of the inner sleeve. The outer circumferential surface of the inner cover is provided with a mounting groove. The inner cover is provided with a local weakening structure in the mounting groove or at a position corresponding to the mounting groove. The clamp is installed into the mounting slot; The outer cover is disposed around the inner cover and engages with the clamp, and is capable of applying an upward force to the clamp while moving upward.

2. The anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to claim 1, characterized in that, The localized weakening structure is located at the top of the mounting groove.

3. The anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to claim 1, characterized in that, The locally weakened structure is formed as an inwardly recessed groove.

4. The anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to claim 3, characterized in that, The groove is annular to form an annular groove.

5. The anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to claim 1, characterized in that, The locally weakened structure is arc-shaped.

6. The anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to claim 5, characterized in that, The locally weakened structure extends through the inner cover.

7. The anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to claim 6, characterized in that, The outer peripheral surface of the clamp is provided with at least one first engagement boss, and the inner peripheral surface of the outer cover is provided with a second engagement boss corresponding to the first engagement boss. The second engagement boss is located below the first engagement boss, so that the second engagement boss can apply an upward force to the first engagement boss.

8. The anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to claim 7, characterized in that, The mounting groove is arc-shaped or ring-shaped.

9. The anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to claim 1, characterized in that, The cross-sectional shape of the locally weakened structure is U-shaped, V-shaped, or arc-shaped.

10. The anti-counterfeiting bottle cap according to claim 1, characterized in that, The localized weakening structure is disposed on the inner circumferential surface of the inner cover and corresponds to the mounting groove.

Images