A damping or return device for sliding door leaves

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional sliding door return devices are complex, prone to sticking and friction issues, and produce noise due to non-constant spring force, leading to partial closure or slamming problems.

Innovation Solution

A damping or return device using a rectilinear hollow body made of plastic with bidirectional shock absorbers and magnetized pivots, which engages and disengages smoothly to provide consistent force for optimal door movement, reducing friction and noise.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a conventional return device with L-shaped guide and pivot is used, then the door leaf can be returned to open position, but the device becomes complex and prone to sticking and friction issues

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedoor return functionVSAvoiddevice structure
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces the mechanical L-shaped guide and pivot system with a magnetic field-based system. Magnets embedded in the door leaf interact with a magnetic strip on the guide rail, eliminating mechanical contact and friction while providing smooth guidance and return force throughout the door's movement range.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces a magnetic field as an intermediary between the door leaf and guide rail. This magnetic field acts as a non-contact force mediator that guides the door movement and provides return force without physical contact, eliminating sticking and friction problems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If a conventional spring-based return mechanism is used, then the door can be returned, but the spring force is not constant causing slamming or incomplete closure

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedoor closure qualityVSAvoidreturn force consistency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSForce

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the force generation mechanism from elastic deformation (spring) to magnetic field interaction. The magnetic force between the magnets in the door leaf and the magnetic strip on the guide rail remains relatively constant throughout the door's movement, providing consistent return force that prevents slamming and ensures complete closure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If mechanical connection to return mechanism is used, then the door can be returned, but noise is generated during operation

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedoor return functionVSAvoidoperational noise
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent eliminates mechanical contact between the door leaf and guide rail by using magnetic field interaction. This non-contact system removes the source of mechanical noise generated by friction and impact in conventional systems, resulting in quiet door operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Reliability

If a complex multi-element device is used, then door guidance can be achieved, but manufacturing and assembly difficulty increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedoor guidanceVSAvoidassembly simplicity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges multiple functions into simpler components. The magnetic strip on the guide rail simultaneously provides guidance, return force, and positioning functions that previously required separate mechanical elements. This integration simplifies both manufacturing and assembly while maintaining reliable door guidance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The device ensures smooth, guided opening and closing of sliding doors without slamming, maintaining consistent force and minimizing noise and friction, while being lightweight and cost-effective.

Implementation Method 1

a damping or return device for sliding door leaves

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectDamping: Damping

Implementation Method 2

magnetized pivots

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectMagnetism: Magnetism

Data Source

PatentEP2994589B1A damping or return device for sliding door leaves
Publication Date: 2020.10.28 BORTOLUZZI SISTEMI SPA
  • EP2994589B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2994589B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2994589B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4

AI summary

A damping or return device (1) for sliding door leaves, particularly for furniture, constituted by a rectilinear hollow body (8a, 8b) made of plastic material, which is slideably associated with a profile that is integral with the top of the piece of furniture and can be coupled automatically and with a snap action to an entrainer (10a, 10b) that is fixed to one of the door leaves (2a, 2b) by way of an adapted carriage (11a, l ib, 14a, 14b), the rectilinear hollow body (8a, 8b) accommodating a bidirectional shock absorber and interacting selectively with a first or a second magnetized stroke limiting pivot (25a, 25b) which are associated with a first guide or with a second guide (6a, 6b).