Chain Guide Reinforcing Ribs for Injection Molding

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing chain guides face challenges in increasing durability and reducing weight and material cost while maintaining resin flow uniformity and preventing dimensional errors during injection molding, due to reinforcing ribs that concentrate bending stresses and impede resin flow.

Innovation Solution

A chain guide design with reinforcing ribs positioned near support points and an intermediate zone without ribs, featuring first and second inclined ribs that cross each other, optimizing resin flow and stress distribution to enhance durability and reduce material usage.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If the thickness of the support wall portion or reinforcing ribs is increased, then the rigidity and durability of the chain guide is improved, but the weight increases and material cost rises

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproverigidityVSAvoidweight
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by positioning reinforcing ribs specifically at the support points where bending stresses are concentrated, rather than uniformly throughout the guide main body. This localized reinforcement provides the necessary rigidity at critical areas while minimizing material usage and weight in non-critical areas.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the reinforcing structure by creating distinct zones: support points with reinforcing ribs and intermediate portions without ribs. This segmentation allows the structure to have high rigidity where needed while maintaining low weight in between, resolving the contradiction between strength and weight.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Strength

If the number of reinforcing ribs is increased, then the rigidity and durability of the chain guide is improved, but the material cost rises and resin flow uniformity deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovedurabilityVSAvoidmaterial cost
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses local quality by concentrating reinforcing ribs only at the support points where they are most needed for durability, rather than distributing them uniformly. This reduces the total quantity of material required while maintaining durability at critical locations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by providing reinforcement only where necessary (at support points) rather than throughout the entire structure. This partial reinforcement achieves the required durability while minimizing material consumption and cost.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Strength

If reinforcing ribs are provided throughout the guide main body, then the rigidity is improved, but the resin flow becomes non-uniform causing dimensional errors and internal strains during injection molding

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproverigidityVSAvoiddimensional accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by restricting reinforcing ribs to specific locations (support points) rather than throughout the entire guide main body. This localized approach minimizes interference with resin flow paths while maintaining rigidity where structurally necessary, thereby reducing dimensional errors and internal strains.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the structure into reinforced zones (support points) and non-reinforced zones (intermediate portions), creating a pattern that allows resin to flow uniformly through the non-reinforced areas while still providing necessary rigidity in the reinforced areas.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

4Volume of moving object

If the installation space is reduced, then the chain guide becomes more compact, but the rigidity and durability become difficult to maintain

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesizeVSAvoiddurability
Core Design Contradiction:
Volume of moving objectVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses local quality by concentrating reinforcing ribs at the support points within the compact guide main body. This allows the overall size to be reduced while maintaining durability at the critical load-bearing locations through targeted reinforcement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the reinforcement strategy to place ribs only at support points, enabling a compact design where material is distributed efficiently to maintain durability without increasing overall volume.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS9086121B2Chain guide
Publication Date: 2015.07.21 TSUBAKIMOTO CHAIN CO
  • US9086121B2 patent drawing
  • US9086121B2 patent drawing
  • US9086121B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A chain guide is provided in which durability is increased, weight can be reduced, material cost is reduced, the uniformity of resin orientation is improved, dimensional errors, errors in shape, internal strains, and defects are reduced, and bending rigidity such as rigidity against deflection and torsion is augmented with a simple configuration. The chain guide is provided with reinforcing ribs at a guide main body. The reinforcing ribs include first inclined reinforcing ribs and second inclined reinforcing ribs that cross each other. A zone in which the reinforcing ribs are not present is provided in the intermediate portion between two support porting.