Grouped Locking Control for Single-Opening Access Security

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing access control systems often struggle to manage large numbers of locking elements efficiently, leading to security gaps and difficulties in monitoring all activated closure elements simultaneously, which can result in unauthorized access and theft.

Innovation Solution

The locking elements are divided into groups, with the control unit simultaneously opening all locking units of a selected group upon a predetermined signal, and then locking the unopened units after the first is opened, allowing unlocking only after the first element is closed and potentially after a short period, ensuring that only one element in a group can be opened at a time.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If all locking elements are unlocked simultaneously when a code is entered, then all authorized persons can access any locking element, but security gaps occur because it cannot be monitored which specific elements are opened and unauthorized access may occur

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccess convenienceVSAvoidsecurity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the locking elements into different groups (Group 1, Group 2, etc.) and assigns specific groups to different code levels. When a code is entered, only the corresponding group is unlocked rather than all locking elements simultaneously. This segmentation maintains operational convenience for authorized users while improving security by limiting access to specific groups only.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies different access rights and unlocking behaviors to different groups of locking elements based on their security requirements. Each group can have customized characteristics such as simultaneous unlocking, sequential unlocking, or requiring specific codes. This local quality approach allows high-security areas to have restricted access patterns while maintaining convenience for lower-security areas.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Productivity

If multiple locking elements are unlocked at the same time, then parallel access is enabled, but security gaps remain because all activated closure elements cannot be monitored simultaneously

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveparallel access efficiencyVSAvoidmonitoring capability
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

By dividing locking elements into monitored groups, the system can track which group is accessed and which specific element within the group is opened. This segmentation enables monitoring of parallel access operations while maintaining the efficiency of simultaneous unlocking for authorized users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The control unit receives feedback signals from locking elements when they are opened or closed. This feedback mechanism allows the system to monitor which specific elements are accessed even when multiple elements are unlocked simultaneously, thereby maintaining both parallel access efficiency and security monitoring capability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Ease of operation

If locking elements are unlocked for a prolonged period, then users have sufficient time to access elements, but security risks increase as the window for unauthorized access is extended

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccess time windowVSAvoidsecurity risk exposure
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements periodic or time-limited unlocking where locking elements are unlocked only for a specific duration after a valid code is entered. The control unit can automatically re-lock elements after a predetermined time period, thereby providing sufficient access time for authorized users while minimizing the security risk exposure window.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

4Reliability

If individual locking elements are controlled separately, then precise access control is achieved, but device complexity increases due to the need to manage each element independently

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccess control precisionVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system merges the control of multiple locking elements into group-based control units. Instead of managing each locking element independently, the control unit can lock or unlock entire groups with a single command. This merging reduces device complexity while maintaining precise access control through the hierarchical group structure and code-level assignments.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentEP2477161B1Method and device for securing areas
Publication Date: 2016.06.29 CZELLARY HARALD
  • EP2477161B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2477161B1 patent drawingFigure 2

AI summary

The closure elements (1-4) are provided with electrically actuated locking devices (1'-4') for closing door, window, shutter and furniture drawers. A control unit (10) is provided for opening and closing of locking units. The hedged closure elements that are secured with their respective locking units are divided into a number of groups. The signal output from code generator (C) is transmitted and the locking devices of all remaining unopened closure elements are adjusted immediately to its locking position, after opening closure elements in selected group. An independent claim is included for arrangement for securing variety of facilities.