Control Barrier With Angled Supports To Reduce Tripping

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing control barriers pose a tripping hazard to pedestrians due to their support elements, which are often perpendicular to the ground and can be narrow and curved, increasing the risk of accidents, especially in construction or roadwork settings.

Innovation Solution

A control barrier design featuring a barrier wall with a vertically oriented first section, an inclined second section forming an overhang, and a continuous rail that extends from one side edge to the other, positioned to space pedestrians away from the support elements, thereby reducing the risk of tripping. The rail can be at waist or knee height and is designed to be at least 50% of the distance of the ground engaging support element's extension, ensuring pedestrians walk safely around the barrier.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If support elements extend perpendicularly from the barrier wall along the ground, then the barrier is stable and easy to support, but pedestrians face a tripping hazard

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebarrier stabilityVSAvoidtripping hazard to pedestrians
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The support elements are designed to extend at an angle (e.g., 45 degrees) from the barrier wall rather than perpendicular to it, changing the spatial dimension of support element orientation. This angular configuration reduces the protrusion into pedestrian pathways while maintaining ground engagement for stability, thus resolving the contradiction between barrier stability and pedestrian safety.

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

2Adaptability or versatility

If the barrier path is narrow and curved to circumvent working areas, then the barrier effectively defines safe pedestrian paths, but the risk of pedestrians tripping over support elements increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebarrier path configurationVSAvoidtripping hazard
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The support elements are made rotatable about a vertical axis, allowing dynamic adjustment of their orientation. This enables the barrier to adapt to different path configurations (narrow or curved sections) while keeping support elements angled away from pedestrian flow, maintaining both adaptability and reduced tripping hazard.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Reliability

If support elements extend further from the barrier wall, then the barrier is more stable on the ground, but the tripping hazard to pedestrians increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveground stabilityVSAvoidtripping hazard
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The support elements are configured with asymmetric extension - they extend further from the barrier wall in directions away from pedestrian pathways while extending less or not at all in directions toward pedestrian paths. This asymmetric configuration maximizes ground stability where needed while minimizing tripping hazards in pedestrian zones.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

Data Source

PatentEP2295643B1Control barrier
Publication Date: 2014.03.26 MELBA PRODS
  • EP2295643B1 patent drawingFigure 1~3
  • EP2295643B1 patent drawingFigure 4A~4B
  • EP2295643B1 patent drawingFigure 5

AI summary

A control barrier comprising a barrier wall and at least one ground engaging support element connected to said barrier wall. The barrier wall has a first section extending substantially vertically when the ground engaging support element is disposed on substantially flat ground, a second section extending at an inclined angle from a top edge of said first section forming an overhang over the ground when the ground engaging support element is disposed on substantially flat ground, and a continuous rail extending from a first side edge of said barrier wall to a second side edge of said barrier wall wherein said rail is disposed on said barrier wall in a plane that is furthest away from the plane of said first section in a direction that is perpendicular to the plane of said first se ction.