Connector Securing Element With Independent Multi-Direction Locking

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing connector securing elements, such as CPAs, face challenges in maintaining assembly, actuation, misuse, and holding forces, particularly in small connector systems, where unintentional release and disassembly forces are difficult to manage with traditional snap-in elements.

Innovation Solution

A securing element with independent first and second locking elements, arranged to function in different directions, allowing for controlled assembly, actuation, misuse, and holding forces, featuring a flexible first arm and rigid second arm, which can be locked in pre-engagement and end-engagement positions, enhancing connection security and requiring a tool for disassembly.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If a snap-in element with guide pins is used to maintain assembly and disassembly forces, then the holding force is improved, but the assembly force becomes excessively high and difficult to control

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveholding forceVSAvoidassembly force

Core Design Contradiction:

StrengthVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The securing element is divided into two independent locking elements: a first locking element for controlling assembly forces and a second locking element for controlling disassembly forces. This segmentation allows each locking element to be optimized independently, enabling the holding force to be maintained while reducing assembly force to acceptable levels.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different regions of the securing element are assigned different functional properties: the first locking element (with guide pins) is optimized for assembly operations with lower force requirements, while the second locking element (with elastic arms) is optimized for providing high holding force during disassembly. This local differentiation resolves the contradiction between assembly ease and holding strength.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

2Device complexity

If a single locking element is used to control both assembly and disassembly forces, then the device complexity is reduced, but the ability to independently control assembly and holding forces is lost

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvenumber of locking elementsVSAvoidindependent force control

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The locking mechanism is segmented into two independent locking elements that can be controlled separately. The first locking element engages with the connector housing during assembly, while the second locking element engages with the mating connector to provide enhanced holding force. This segmentation enables independent control of assembly and holding forces without excessive complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from a static single locking element to a dynamic multi-element system where the first and second locking elements engage at different stages. The first locking element provides initial guidance and positioning, while the second locking element activates during mating to provide additional holding force, creating a dynamic force control system.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

3Reliability

If guide pins are arranged in pairs in specially designed guide tracks to maintain forces, then the reliability is improved, but the manufacturing complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveforce maintenanceVSAvoidguide track design

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of using a single complex guide track system with paired guide pins, the invention segments the locking function into two independent elements with simpler respective guide structures. The first locking element uses basic guide pins for assembly guidance, while the second locking element uses elastic arms with simpler engagement features, reducing manufacturing complexity while maintaining reliability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Rather than designing complex guide tracks to accommodate paired guide pins, the invention inverts the approach by using the locking elements themselves to create the guiding function. The elastic arms of the second locking element provide both guidance and locking functions, eliminating the need for specially designed guide tracks and simplifying manufacturing.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

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 solution significantly increases the extraction force from the pre-engagement position, making disassembly more difficult and enhancing connection security during drop tests, while allowing space-saving and independent operation of locking elements, ensuring reliable connection maintenance.

Implementation Method 1

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectElastic deformation: Elasticity

Data Source

PatentUS20240372295A1Securing element for a connector, connector and connector arrangement

Publication Date: 2024.11.07 MD ELEKTRONIK GMBH

AI summary

A securing element for a connector includes a first and a second arm extending along a first direction. A base connects the first arm and the second arm at a free end. At least a first locking element is disposed on each arm such that the securing element is lockable to the connector in a second direction. At least one second locking element is disposed on each arm such that the securing element is lockable to the connector in a third direction.