Motor Vehicle Door Lock with Freewheeling Lever Mechanism

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing motor vehicle door locks face challenges in bridging large gaps while ensuring reliable operation and anti-trap protection with complex kinematics and lack of explicit anti-trap protection mechanisms.

Innovation Solution

A motor vehicle door lock design featuring a simple kinematic system where the second lever freewheels relative to the first lever during the lowering movement, allowing the first lever to compress an erecting element, and only engages to assist in closing the rotary latch once the lowering movement is complete, providing mechanical separation and anti-trap protection without additional sensors.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Length of moving object

If a complex kinematic system with multiple levers and sliding blocks is used to bridge large gaps, then the gap bridging capability is improved, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegap bridging capabilityVSAvoidkinematic system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Length of moving objectVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The closing movement is segmented into two distinct phases: lowering movement (first lever only) and closing movement (both levers engaged). This segmentation allows the system to bridge large gaps effectively while keeping the mechanical structure relatively simple by activating additional components only when needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from a static lever configuration to a dynamic one where the second lever is selectively engaged only during the closing phase. This dynamic reconfiguration allows the mechanism to adapt its complexity based on operational requirements, maintaining simplicity during lowering while providing enhanced capability during closing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Force

If the first lever continuously acts on the second lever during lowering movement, then the closing force is improved, but the risk of premature closing and trap situations increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveclosing forceVSAvoidanti-trap protection
Core Design Contradiction:
ForceVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The lowering movement is completed as a preliminary action before the closing movement begins. During this preliminary phase, only the first lever acts on the erecting element, positioning the system for subsequent closing without applying full closing force that could cause premature engagement or trap situations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system maintains continuous useful action by seamlessly transitioning from lowering movement to closing movement. The erecting element continues to be acted upon throughout both phases, ensuring uninterrupted functionality while controlling the timing and magnitude of force application to prevent harmful effects.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

3Reliability

If additional sensors and control systems are added to provide anti-trap protection, then the safety is improved, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveanti-trap protectionVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The mechanical system provides its own anti-trap protection through the inherent characteristics of the two-phase operation. The separation of lowering and closing movements, combined with the specific engagement timing of the second lever, creates built-in protection against trap situations without requiring external sensors or electronic control systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The erecting element serves as an intermediary mechanism that mediates between the motor drive and the locking mechanism. It naturally limits force transmission during lowering movement and only allows full force transmission when properly positioned, providing passive safety without additional control systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

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

This design effectively bridges large gaps with a reduced number of components, ensures reliable operation, and provides enhanced anti-trap protection by preventing premature closing and allowing increased torque for secure locking, all without the need for additional sensors.

Implementation Method 1

the first lever, which is then driven, act upon the second lever in order to close the rotary latch

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectElastic deformation: Elasticity

Data Source

PatentUS11643852B2Motor-vehicle door lock
Publication Date: 2023.05.09 KIEKERT AG
  • US11643852B2 patent drawing
  • US11643852B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A motor vehicle door lock, more particularly a flap lock or a hood lock includes a locking mechanism substantially consisting of a rotary latch and a pawl. There is also a motorized closing aid which has a motor and also a first lever, which is acted upon by the motor, and a second lever. The two levers are hinged to each other. During the lowering of a flap or hood, the second lever first of all carries out a movement, which is controlled by the rotary latch, while simultaneously freewheeling in relation to the first lever. Only following the freewheeling does the first lever, which is then driven, act upon the second lever, in order to close the rotary latch.