Compact Power Tool Chuck With Dual-Phase Jaw Clamping

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing power tool chucks have insufficient holding force and add significant axial length to power tools, making them inefficient for retaining tool bits.

Innovation Solution

A power tool chuck design featuring a chuck body with radial slots and jaw assemblies, a clamping ring, and a dual-phase clamping mechanism that applies different clamping forces through angled interfaces and thread configurations, utilizing springs and bevel gears to enhance holding force and reduce axial length.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Force

If existing power tool chucks are used, then the tool structure is simple, but the holding force on tool bits is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveholding forceVSAvoidchuck structure complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ForceVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent employs dynamic jaw assemblies that can move between radial and axial positions, transitioning from a static to dynamic structure. The jaws are spring-biased and can be actuated to provide enhanced clamping force when needed, while maintaining structural simplicity during normal operation. This dynamic capability allows the chuck to adapt its complexity based on operational requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The chuck is divided into modular components including the chuck body, jaw assemblies, springs, and actuation mechanisms. Each jaw assembly operates independently with its own spring and clamping interface, allowing the system to achieve high holding force through distributed modular elements rather than a single complex structure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Length of stationary object

If existing power tool chucks are used, then the chuck design is simple, but the axial length added to power tools is significant

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaxial lengthVSAvoidchuck design complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Length of stationary objectVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent utilizes axial movement of the jaw assemblies as a third dimension to achieve radial clamping action. By allowing jaws to move axially within the chuck body and then engage radially, the design compacts the clamping mechanism in the axial direction while maintaining effective radial holding force, thereby reducing overall axial length.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Solution Approach 2:

The jaw assemblies are nested within the chuck body, with springs and actuation mechanisms integrated into the existing structure. The clamping ring and jaw assemblies are received within the chuck body, creating a compact nested arrangement that minimizes axial protrusion while maintaining functional complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

3Force

If existing power tool chucks are used, then the manufacturing process is simple, but the holding force on tool bits is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveclamping forceVSAvoidmanufacturing complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ForceVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent employs two different clamping force parameters through the first and second clamping interfaces. The first interface provides initial clamping at a lower force level, while the second interface engages to provide enhanced clamping force. This parameter differentiation allows the manufacturing process to use standard components with varying force characteristics rather than requiring custom high-force components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The spring-biased jaw assemblies provide preliminary clamping force before the actuation mechanism is engaged. This preliminary action ensures basic holding capability is achieved through simple spring loading during manufacturing, while the full clamping force is activated only when the actuation mechanism is engaged during use.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Force

If a dual-phase clamping mechanism is implemented, then the holding force is improved, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveholding forceVSAvoidclamping mechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ForceVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The first and second clamping interfaces are merged into a unified jaw assembly structure that engages the tool bit sequentially. The clamping ring and jaw assemblies work together as an integrated system, with the first clamping interface engaging initially and the second interface providing enhanced clamping, rather than requiring separate independent mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The spring-biased jaw assemblies automatically engage and provide clamping force without requiring external actuation for basic operation. The dual-phase clamping is achieved through the natural sequence of spring compression and jaw engagement, with the actuation mechanism simply triggering the pre-configured spring-loaded jaws rather than requiring complex active control systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

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 design provides improved holding force and reduced axial length, integrating clutch settings with the chuck sleeve to minimize component count and overall tool length, allowing for efficient tool bit retention and operation.

Implementation Method 1

The jaw assembly may be biased away from clamping the tool bit by at least one spring. The at least one spring may comprise a first spring biasing the jaw assembly away from the chuck body in a direction substantially transverse to the axis.

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectCompression spring: Spring

Implementation Method 2

The clamping ring may be threadably connected to the chuck body. Relative rotation between the clamping ring and the chuck body may cause the jaw assembly to clamp the tool bit at the first clamping force and the second clamping force.

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectThread mechanism: Screw

Implementation Method 3

A first gear is received in the body and rotatable by rotation of the sleeve or the output spindle. A second gear is received in the body, meshed with the first gear, and coupled to at least one of the plurality of jaws, the second gear configured to rotate and cause the at least one jaw to move radially.

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectGear mechanism: Gear

Implementation Method 4

The clamping ring and each jaw assembly together define a first clamping interface configured to cause the jaw assembly to clamp the tool bit a first clamping force up to a first maximum clamping force during a first phase of clamping, and a second clamping interface configured to cause the jaw assembly to clamp the tool bit at a second clamping force that is greater than the first maximum clamping force during a second phase of clamping.

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectFriction: Friction

Data Source

PatentUS11148209B2Power tool chuck
Publication Date: 2021.10.19 BLACK & DECKER CORP
  • US11148209B2 patent drawing
  • US11148209B2 patent drawing
  • US11148209B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A chuck including a chuck body that supports a plurality of jaws. An outer sleeve is axially fixed with respect to the chuck body. A nut is coupled to the outer sleeve, and the nut is movable axially and radially relative to the chuck body. The nut interacts with the jaws such that when the outer sleeve rotates, the nut moves axially and radially relative to the body.