Can End Countersink Structure for Thin-Gauge Pressure Resistance
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing can ends made from thinner metal gauges deform under pressure changes during food processing due to insufficient resistance to both internal and external pressures.
Innovation Solution
A can end design featuring a center panel, annular portion with an annular ridge and countersink, and a chuck wall, allowing for reduced material thickness while maintaining structural integrity.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Loss of substance
If can ends are made from thinner metal gauges to reduce material usage, then material consumption decreases, but the can ends deform under pressure changes during processing
Solution Approach 1:
The patent modifies the geometric parameters of the can end structure, specifically the depth and profile of the annular countersink and the configuration of the chuck wall. These parameter changes allow thinner material to achieve the same structural performance, resolving the contradiction between material reduction and pressure resistance
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces a three-dimensional annular countersink structure that extends into the can end body, creating additional structural support in the vertical dimension. This dimensional addition compensates for the reduced material thickness, maintaining strength while using less material
2Reliability
If can ends are made from thicker metal gauges to resist pressure deformation, then structural integrity improves, but material consumption increases
Solution Approach 1:
By optimizing the countersink depth ratio (depth relative to blank thickness) and chuck wall geometry, the patent achieves high pressure resistance with reduced material. The specific parameter ranges disclosed (countersink depth 0.040-0.125 inches, chuck wall height 0.015-0.035 inches) demonstrate how precise parameter control reduces material needs while maintaining strength
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies enhanced structural features locally at critical stress points - the annular countersink at the periphery and the reinforced chuck wall at the sealing interface. This localized strengthening allows the rest of the can end to use thinner material, reducing overall consumption while maintaining integrity
3Strength
If the annular countersink depth is increased to improve structural strength, then pressure resistance improves, but manufacturing complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent specifies optimal parameter ranges for the annular countersink (depth 0.040-0.125 inches, radius 0.100-0.300 inches) that balance structural strength with manufacturability. These parameter definitions provide clear manufacturing targets that simplify the formation process while achieving the desired strength improvement
Data Source
Figure 1~2
Figure 3
Figure 4~4A
AI summary
A can end (12) including a center panel (14), an annular portion (16) disposed about the center panel (14), a standard chuck wall (18A) disposed about the annular portion (16), and a curl (20) extending radially outwardly from the standard chuck wall (18A). The annular portion (16) includes an enhanced annular countersink (110).