Cross Beam Zip Line Platform for Multi-Cable Throughput

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Traditional zip line designs are limited in accommodating multiple users simultaneously due to structural limitations, leading to long queues and reduced platform space, which discourages potential riders and affects ride dynamics.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a zip line system with a cross beam transversely mounted to a support structure, allowing multiple cables to be routed over a platform, increasing resistance to deflections and accommodating multiple users, thereby reducing queue times and enhancing platform space for user connection and disconnection.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If a single cable is used per tower, then the structure is simple, but the queue length increases and user throughput decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser throughputVSAvoidcable configuration
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The single cable system is segmented into multiple parallel cables (first cable and second cable) that operate independently. Each cable can accommodate a user simultaneously, dividing the user flow into separate channels and increasing overall throughput while maintaining individual cable simplicity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from a single-dimensional cable arrangement to a multi-dimensional configuration by adding cables in parallel. The platform is positioned to serve multiple cables at different spatial locations, enabling simultaneous user access across multiple dimensions of the system.

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

2Area of stationary object

If cables wrap around the pole, then the structure is compact, but the platform space for user connection is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveplatform spaceVSAvoidcable routing
Core Design Contradiction:
Area of stationary objectVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The cable routing is extracted from the pole-wrapping configuration and repositioned to extend from the pole to the platform at optimized locations. This separation allows the platform to be positioned further from the pole, increasing the available connection space while simplifying cable routing to direct extensions rather than wraps.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The platform serves as an intermediary element between the pole and the cables. By positioning the platform at an optimal distance and configuring cables to connect to it, the system gains additional space for user operations while maintaining efficient cable routing through the platform's strategic placement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Productivity

If multiple cables are mounted to a single pole, then cable capacity increases, but pole deflection affects ride dynamics

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecable capacityVSAvoidpole stability
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The load-bearing function is segmented from the pole to the platform. Each cable is independently supported by the platform structure, which distributes the loads across multiple attachment points. This segmentation prevents any single pole from bearing the cumulative deflection forces of multiple cables.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from a single-point support configuration to a distributed support configuration. The platform provides multiple attachment points for cables at different spatial locations, distributing the mechanical loads across a two-dimensional area rather than concentrating them at a single pole, thereby reducing deflection and improving stability.

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

4Area of stationary object

If a platform is positioned close to the pole, then structural efficiency is improved, but user connection space is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveconnection spaceVSAvoidstructural efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Area of stationary objectVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The platform positioning is optimized dynamically based on functional requirements. The platform is positioned at a distance that balances structural efficiency with operational needs, allowing sufficient space for user connection while maintaining adequate structural support. The cable routing is configured to achieve optimal tension and alignment from this positioned platform.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The platform acts as an intermediary that mediates between the structural pole and the operational cable system. Its positioned location provides the necessary buffer zone for user activities while maintaining structural integrity through proper cable anchoring and tensioning, optimizing both connection space and structural efficiency simultaneously.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS8985028B2Multiple cable zip line ride
Publication Date: 2015.03.24 EXPERIENCE BASED LEARNING
  • US8985028B2 patent drawing
  • US8985028B2 patent drawing
  • US8985028B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A multiple cable zip line ride is provided. The ride includes a support structure with a cross beam mounted to the support structure for routing and mounting of a plurality of cables of the zip line ride. The cables are mounted to the cross beam such that multiple users can travel simultaneously in the same direction along the cables. The cross beam provides for the mounting of additional safety cables and tensioning devices.