Composite Decking Plank With Slip-Resistant Cushioning Surface

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional decking planks require flat laying and may not be suitable for suspension without bending, often lacking slip resistance, cushioning, and resistance to fungi and fire, while also posing risks of splinters and slippage.

Innovation Solution

A decking plank design featuring a reinforced plastic core with a soft elastomer layer providing cushioning and slip resistance, potentially resembling real wood or stone, with integrated heating and hidden electrical components, and a structure that allows for secure interlocking without adhesives.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If conventional decking planks are designed with a hard outer shell to provide structural support, then strength is improved, but slip resistance and cushioning are worsened

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural supportVSAvoidslip resistance and cushioning
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent inverts the conventional decking structure by placing the soft elastomer layer on the exterior surface instead of the interior. This reversal allows the soft layer to directly contact users' feet, providing slip resistance and cushioning, while the hard plastic core remains embedded within to provide structural support. The soft layer acts as an outer protective covering rather than an inner cushion, fundamentally changing the traditional hard-outer/soft-inner configuration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent employs a composite structure combining a hard plastic core material with a soft elastomer covering layer. The plastic core provides rigidity and structural integrity, while the elastomer layer contributes flexibility, slip resistance, and cushioning properties. This composite approach allows the decking plank to simultaneously achieve contradictory properties of hardness for support and softness for safety and comfort.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

2Object-affected harmful factors

If decking planks are made with a soft inner portion for cushioning, then comfort is improved, but structural strength for suspension is worsened

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecushioning effectVSAvoidsupport beam capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The patent inverts the conventional arrangement by embedding the hard plastic core within the soft elastomer layer rather than having the soft material surround the hard core. This inversion ensures that the hard core forms the primary load-bearing structure capable of withstanding bending moments when suspended between joists, while the soft elastomer layer provides cushioning as an outer covering.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies different material properties to different regions of the decking plank. The hard plastic core is positioned in the interior where structural strength is required to support suspension loads, while the soft elastomer material is applied to the exterior surface where cushioning and slip resistance are needed. This spatial differentiation of material qualities optimizes both structural and safety functions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Strength

If decking planks use conventional hard materials for durability, then strength is improved, but slip resistance and user safety are worsened

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovedurabilityVSAvoidslip resistance
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent inverts the traditional material arrangement by making the soft elastomer layer the outermost surface rather than the inner cushioning layer. This reversal allows the soft, slip-resistant material to directly contact users' feet, providing enhanced traction and safety, while the hard plastic core remains embedded within to provide durability and structural integrity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent combines hard plastic and soft elastomer materials in a composite structure where each material's properties are optimally utilized. The hard plastic core provides durability, rigidity, and structural strength, while the soft elastomer covering layer provides slip resistance, cushioning, and user safety. This composite approach resolves the contradiction between hardness for durability and softness for safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

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 offers slip-resistant, splinter-free, and fungi-resistant decking with enhanced comfort and safety, capable of withstanding bending moments and incorporating heating for cold weather use, while reducing material costs and weight.

Implementation Method 1

the or one layer has a cushioning effect

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectCushioning effect: Elasticity

Implementation Method 2

one or the layer having a top surface with a relief; whereby one or the layer forms an outer slip resistant covering layer

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectFriction: Friction

Data Source

PatentEP1951971B1Decking plank
Publication Date: 2015.02.25 DOUGLASS JAMES EDWARD
  • EP1951971B1 patent drawingFigure 1A~1F
  • EP1951971B1 patent drawingFigure 2~5
  • EP1951971B1 patent drawingFigure 6~8

AI summary

A decking plank (1) comprising a core (2) which acts as a support beam,- one or more layers (3,4) bonded to said core without the use of releasable attachment means and one or the layer being an outer slip resistant covering layer with a relief ; characterised in that at least one of said layers (3) is relatively soft compared to said core which is relatively hard; whereby the core acts as a support beam and said at least one layer has a cushioning effect.