Double Safe Child Resistant Cap with Push-Pull Valve

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current child-resistant safety caps for containers with potentially dangerous substances, such as medications, often rely on a single mechanism that may not be sufficiently secure against accidental access by children, as they typically require only one intuitive motion to open.

Innovation Solution

A double safe child-resistant cap system that incorporates two distinct and disparate mechanisms: a first safe mechanism requiring compound movements like press and twist, squeeze and twist, or slide and lift, and a second safe mechanism involving a push-pull valve that requires inverting the cap and connecting a coupling rod to a receiver, ensuring multiple steps are necessary to access the contents.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a single child resistant mechanism is used in the cap, then the device complexity is reduced and ease of operation is improved, but the safety reliability is insufficient against accidental access by children

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety reliabilityVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The cap is divided into two functionally independent child resistant mechanisms: a first mechanism (press-and-twist, squeeze-and-twist, or slide-and-lift) that secures the cap to the container, and a second mechanism (push-pull valve with coupling rod) that controls access to the container contents. This segmentation allows each mechanism to be optimized for its specific function while collectively providing enhanced safety through multiple protective layers.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Reliability

If a single child resistant mechanism is used in the cap, then the ease of operation is improved, but the safety reliability is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety reliabilityVSAvoidease of operation
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The operational sequence is segmented into distinct steps: first operating the cap securing mechanism (press-and-twist, squeeze-and-twist, or slide-and-lift), then operating the valve mechanism (inserting coupling rod, pushing valve down, pulling valve up). This segmentation ensures that each action is simple and intuitive, while the combination of multiple simple actions creates a sufficiently complex sequence that prevents accidental access by children.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Reliability

If two distinct child resistant mechanisms are incorporated in the cap, then the safety reliability is enhanced, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety reliabilityVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The push-pull valve mechanism is nested within the cap structure, with the coupling rod receiver integrated into the cap body and the valve stem moving within the container opening. This nesting arrangement allows the second child resistant mechanism to be housed within the overall cap assembly without requiring separate external components, thereby minimizing the increase in device complexity while maintaining dual-mechanism safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

4Reliability

If two distinct child resistant mechanisms are incorporated in the cap, then the safety reliability is enhanced, but the ease of operation deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety reliabilityVSAvoidease of operation
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The operational sequence is segmented into distinct steps: first operating the cap securing mechanism (press-and-twist, squeeze-and-twist, or slide-and-lift), then operating the valve mechanism (inserting coupling rod, pushing valve down, pulling valve up). This segmentation ensures that each action is simple and intuitive, while the combination of multiple simple actions creates a sufficiently complex sequence that prevents accidental access by children.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The cap must be fully removed from the container (first mechanism operated) before the valve mechanism (second mechanism) can be accessed and operated. This preliminary action requirement ensures that both mechanisms must be deliberately operated in sequence, preventing accidental access while maintaining clear, step-by-step operation instructions for legitimate users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS10239673B1Double safe child resistant cap
Publication Date: 2019.03.26 DEJONGE ASSOCIATES INC
  • US10239673B1 patent drawing
  • US10239673B1 patent drawing
  • US10239673B1 patent drawing

AI summary

A double safe child resistant cap for medicine containers includes a cap with a cap main structure having a side wall and a top, and including: a) a first safe child resistant cap mechanism requiring compound movement to unlock; and b) a second safe child resistant cap mechanism including (i) a coupling rod attached to said cap main structure top and extending upwardly and (ii) a push-pull valve connected to said container for dispensing therefrom, said push-pull valve having a force-fit coupling rod receiver, wherein said push-pull valve has a down closed position and an up position, which is an open position to permit dispensing. Another embodiment includes a dosage cup with the coupling rod in place of a cap top coupling rod.