Architectural Covering Mount With Rotary Extension Mechanism

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing architectural covering mounting systems, such as headrails, face difficulties in accessibility and operation due to complex extension mechanisms that are expensive and prone to breakage, and require numerous components.

Innovation Solution

A mounting element with an elongate mounting member and an extension mechanism featuring a rotatable actuator that converts rotation into translational movement, allowing easy operation between retracted and extended states, and a battery assembly for powering the extension mechanism, enabling a secure and tool-free installation of architectural coverings.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If a complex extension mechanism with numerous components is used, then the mounting element can achieve extended functionality, but the device complexity increases and reliability decreases due to fragile components

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveextended functionalityVSAvoidnumerous components

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The mounting element is divided into modular components: an elongate mounting member and a separate extension mechanism with distinct functional elements (actuator, conversion mechanism, abutting element). This segmentation allows each component to be optimized independently while reducing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of using a complex motorized or multi-component extension mechanism, the patent inverts the approach by using a simple rotatable actuator that converts rotational movement into translational movement through a conversion mechanism. This inverted simplification reduces component count while maintaining extended functionality.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

2Adaptability or versatility

If a complex extension mechanism with numerous components is used, then the mounting element can achieve extended functionality, but the manufacturing cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveextended functionalityVSAvoidmanufacturing cost

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The mounting element is divided into modular components: an elongate mounting member and a separate extension mechanism with distinct functional elements (actuator, conversion mechanism, abutting element). This segmentation allows each component to be optimized independently while reducing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces expensive, complex motorized extension mechanisms with simpler, more cost-effective components including a basic rotatable actuator and conversion mechanism. This substitution significantly reduces manufacturing costs while maintaining the essential extended functionality.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #27Cheap short-living objects (Disposable)

3Adaptability or versatility

If a complex extension mechanism is used, then the mounting element can achieve extended functionality, but the ease of operation decreases due to difficult accessibility

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveextended functionalityVSAvoiddifficulty to access

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The actuator is positioned and oriented such that its rotation axis is substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the mounting member, allowing operation from a different spatial dimension. This dimensional repositioning improves accessibility while maintaining extension functionality.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of using a complex motorized or multi-component extension mechanism, the patent inverts the approach by using a simple rotatable actuator that converts rotational movement into translational movement through a conversion mechanism. This inverted simplification reduces component count while maintaining extended functionality.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

4Adaptability or versatility

If numerous components are used in the extension mechanism, then extended functionality is achieved, but the reliability decreases due to fragile components prone to breakage

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveextended functionalityVSAvoidprone to breakage

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The mounting element is divided into modular components: an elongate mounting member and a separate extension mechanism with distinct functional elements (actuator, conversion mechanism, abutting element). This segmentation allows each component to be optimized independently while reducing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces expensive, complex motorized extension mechanisms with simpler, more cost-effective components including a basic rotatable actuator and conversion mechanism. This substitution significantly reduces manufacturing costs while maintaining the essential extended functionality.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #27Cheap short-living objects (Disposable)

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 simplifies the operation and reduces the complexity of mounting architectural coverings by providing a user-friendly extension mechanism and a self-sufficient power source, enhancing reliability and reducing component count while ensuring secure mounting between opposing surfaces.

Implementation Method 1

a conversion mechanism configured to convert a rotation of the actuator into a translatory movement of the rotation axis along the longitudinal direction from the retracted state to the extended state and vice versa

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectRotational to translational conversion:

Implementation Method 2

mounting an architectural covering between opposing mounting surfaces, e.g. by a force fit (frictional fit) and/or form fit

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectFrictional fit: Friction

Implementation Method 3

mounting an architectural covering between opposing mounting surfaces, e.g. by a force fit (frictional fit) and/or form fit

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectForce fit: Mechanical Force

Data Source

PatentUS10934771B2Mounting element for mounting an architectural covering between opposing mounting surfaces

Publication Date: 2021.03.02 HUNTER DOUGLAS IND BV

AI summary

A mounting element for mounting an architectural covering between two opposing mounting surfaces may include an elongate mounting member, and an extension mechanism operable between: i) a retracted state, and ii) an extended state in which the mounting element can be fastened to the architectural recess. The mounting element may also include an actuator rotatable about a rotation axis which is not parallel to the longitudinal direction, and a conversion mechanism to convert a rotation of the actuator into a translatory movement of the rotation axis along the longitudinal direction and vice versa. The extension mechanism is arranged to abut one of the opposing mounting surfaces in the extended state when the mounting element is mounted between the opposing mounting surfaces.