Fluid-Ejecting Shock Absorber for Compact Impact Protection
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current shock absorption systems, such as foams and hydraulic devices, fail to optimally absorb energy across a range of impact severities due to non-ideal force profiles and space constraints, leading to inadequate protection in both high and low impact scenarios, particularly in space-constrained applications like helmets.
Innovation Solution
A shock absorbing device comprising collapsible chambers with orifices that eject incompressible fluid in response to impact, allowing for a controlled and consistent force distribution through the use of non-distensible bags and distensible containers, which can be oriented and sized to manage force and energy absorption effectively.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Force
If rigid hydraulic shock absorption devices are used, then force control and energy dissipation are improved, but device size and space requirements increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The shock absorption system is divided into multiple collapsible chambers (first collapsible chamber, second collapsible chamber) that can be distributed throughout the protective device. Each chamber independently absorbs energy through fluid ejection, allowing the total energy absorption capacity to be distributed across multiple smaller units rather than requiring one large rigid hydraulic device.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent uses collapsible chambers with flexible walls that can compress and expand. These flexible chambers replace rigid hydraulic cylinders, significantly reducing the device volume while maintaining the fluid-based shock absorption mechanism. The chambers can be packed into compact spaces and expand only when needed for impact absorption.
2Volume of moving object
If foam materials are used for shock absorption, then device size is reduced, but force profile control deteriorates due to material compaction
Solution Approach 1:
The patent employs fluid-based shock absorption where incompressible fluid is ejected through orifices from collapsible chambers during impact. This hydraulic mechanism provides superior force profile control compared to foam, as the fluid ejection rate can be precisely controlled through orifice sizing and chamber design, maintaining consistent force output without the compaction issues that plague foam materials.
3Force
If car suspension hydraulic shock absorbers are used, then force control is optimized, but device complexity and hardware size increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts only the essential shock absorption function from complex car suspension systems. Instead of using metal pistons, cylinders, and intricate valve mechanisms, the invention uses simple collapsible chambers with orifices that eject fluid. This extracts the core hydraulic damping principle while eliminating the complex hardware, making the system suitable for space-constrained applications like helmets and protective gear.
4Volume of moving object
If air bags are used for shock absorption, then device size is reduced, but force control deteriorates due to gas compressibility
Solution Approach 1:
The patent uses incompressible fluid instead of compressible gas in the collapsible chambers. This hydraulic approach maintains consistent force control throughout the compression stroke, as the incompressible fluid cannot be compressed like gas. The fluid ejection through orifices provides predictable and controllable force profiles, eliminating the force control issues associated with air bag compressibility.
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 provides improved force modulation and energy absorption, reducing the risk of injury by distributing impact forces more evenly across the duration of an impact, as demonstrated by enhanced Helmet Performance Scores and reduced Head Acceleration Response Metrics in impact testing.
Implementation Method 1
a first orifice configured to eject a fluid from the first reservoir space in reaction to the impact force
Implementation Method 2
Mitigation of damage to biological tissues and inanimate objects as a result of physical impact
Data Source
AI summary
A shock absorbing device is disclosed comprising a first collapsible chamber having a first reservoir space, a first wall configured to receive an impact force, and a first orifice configured to eject a fluid from the first reservoir space in reaction to the impact force; and a second collapsible chamber having a second reservoir space, a second wall configured to receive at least a portion of the impact force, a second orifice in communication with the first orifice and the second reservoir space, and at least one ejection orifice in communication with the second reservoir space and configured to eject the fluid from the second reservoir space in reaction to the said received at least a portion of the impact force.