Asymmetric Door Hinge Brackets for Heavy Load Stability

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing door hinges struggle with stability, particularly with heavy doors, as they deform under high loads and lack sufficient support, leading to dimensional instability and elasticity issues.

Innovation Solution

The door hinge design features a first hinge bracket extending shorter than the second in the receiving space, with an adapted step shape and an O-shaped second hinge bracket, providing enhanced support and stability through a closed perimeter opening, allowing for reliable connection and reduced deformation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If the hinge brackets extend over the same length in the receiving spaces, then the manufacturing is simplified, but the stability under heavy loads deteriorates due to deformation of fork arms

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanufacturing simplicityVSAvoiddimensional stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies asymmetry by making the first hinge bracket shorter than the second hinge bracket in the vertical direction within the receiving space. This asymmetric design allows the first hinge bracket to be optimally sized for its specific load requirements, preventing deformation under heavy loads while maintaining manufacturing feasibility through standardized components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements local quality by providing a step-shaped receiving space with different heights at different locations. The receiving space has a first height region corresponding to the shorter first hinge bracket and a second height region corresponding to the longer second hinge bracket. This localized adaptation ensures each hinge bracket receives appropriate support where needed, enhancing dimensional stability without compromising manufacturing simplicity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Ease of manufacture

If the hinge brackets are made with U-shape for ease of manufacture, then the manufacturing is easier, but the stability deteriorates due to elasticity remaining between legs and connecting web under heavy loads

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanufacturing easeVSAvoidload-bearing strength
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses asymmetric design where the second hinge bracket has an O-shape with a closed perimeter opening while the first hinge bracket has a different configuration. This asymmetric approach allows the second bracket to provide enhanced structural strength and rigidity under heavy loads, eliminating the elasticity problem associated with U-shapes, while the overall design remains manufacturable.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

3Adaptability or versatility

If the hinge brackets extend over the full vertical area for adjustability, then the adaptability is improved, but the dimensional stability deteriorates in heavy door applications

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveadjustabilityVSAvoiddimensional stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by creating a step-shaped receiving space with differentiated height regions. The first height region accommodates the shorter first hinge bracket while the second height region accommodates the longer second hinge bracket. This localized structural adaptation provides optimal support at each position, ensuring dimensional stability under heavy loads while maintaining the necessary adaptability for installation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

4Stability of the object's composition

If the receiving space is made with step shape to accommodate different lengths, then the stability is improved, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedimensional stabilityVSAvoidstructural complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements local quality through the step-shaped receiving space, which provides differentiated support heights at specific locations within the overall structure. Rather than making the entire device complex, the complexity is localized only to the receiving space geometry, while the hinge brackets themselves remain relatively simple components. This targeted approach improves dimensional stability without substantially increasing overall device complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentEP2634335B1Door hinge for a covered assembly between door frame and door wing
Publication Date: 2019.11.13 SIMONSWERK GMBH
  • EP2634335B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2634335B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2634335B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4

AI summary

The hinge has hinge brackets (5, 6) whose ends are pivotally mounted at vertical rotation axes (A', A'') on receiving spaces of fastening parts (3, 4). One of the hinge brackets extends in one of the receiving spaces of one of the fastening parts along vertical direction (z) over shorter length than the other hinge bracket. The receiving space of the fastening part exhibits a stage form with stages (11) above and below the former hinge bracket, where the stage form is adjusted to length of the hinge brackets.