In-Ground Stand with Triangular Spade Base for Top-Heavy Pot Stability

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

There is a need for flower pot stands that provide rigidity and stability while maintaining an aesthetic appeal, especially for top-heavy pots that require elevation without lateral displacement, and existing solutions fail to address the balance between functionality and landscape aesthetics.

Innovation Solution

A customizable in-ground stand with a base, pole, and retention ring that includes spades and prongs for secure positioning, allowing for adjustable support elements and interchangeable components to accommodate various pot sizes and shapes, ensuring stability and aesthetic integration.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Stability of the object's composition

If the stand uses a simple structure, then it maintains aesthetic appeal, but it lacks rigidity and stability for top-heavy pots

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvestand stabilityVSAvoidstand structure

Core Design Contradiction:

Stability of the object's compositionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The stand is divided into multiple functional segments: an above-ground portion for aesthetic appeal, a below-ground portion for stability, and support elements (spades/prongs) for anchoring. This segmentation allows each part to be optimized independently - the above-ground portion remains simple and aesthetic, while the below-ground portion provides the necessary structural complexity for stability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The stand extends into the below-ground dimension to achieve stability, rather than relying solely on above-ground structural complexity. By anchoring support elements in the soil, the stand gains stability from a third dimension (depth), allowing the above-ground portion to remain simple and aesthetically pleasing.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Strength

If the stand is made rigid to support top-heavy pots, then it provides stability, but it becomes difficult to install and adjust

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvestand rigidityVSAvoidinstallation ease

Core Design Contradiction:

StrengthVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The stand incorporates adjustable and removable components, including interchangeable support elements (spades or prongs) and adjustable above-ground portions. This dynamic design allows the stand to be easily installed and adjusted during setup, then provides rigid stability once assembled. The ability to remove and reconfigure components facilitates easy installation while maintaining structural integrity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

3Adaptability or versatility

If the stand uses fixed components, then it provides stable support, but it cannot accommodate various pot sizes and shapes

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvepot size accommodationVSAvoidcomponent variety

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The stand is designed with universal components that can accommodate multiple pot sizes and shapes. The retention ring can expand or contract to fit different diameters, and interchangeable support elements (spades or prongs) can be selected based on soil conditions and pot requirements. This multi-functional design allows a single stand system to serve multiple purposes without requiring excessive component variety.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The retention ring incorporates dynamic elements that allow it to adapt to different pot diameters through expansion and contraction. This dynamic adjustment mechanism enables the same component to universally fit various pot sizes, reducing the need for multiple fixed-size rings while maintaining adaptability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

4Stability of the object's composition

If the stand extends deeply into the ground for stability, then it resists lateral displacement, but it increases installation difficulty

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvelateral stabilityVSAvoidinstallation ease

Core Design Contradiction:

Stability of the object's compositionVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The anchoring function is extracted as separate, removable support elements (spades or prongs) that can be independently installed into the ground. This separation allows the main stand structure to remain simple while the extracted anchoring components provide the necessary deep-ground stability. The support elements can be inserted into pre-dug holes or driven into the ground, reducing overall installation difficulty compared to installing a single deep-anchored structure.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Data Source

PatentUS11346494B2Customizable in-ground stand for elevated object retention

Publication Date: 2022.05.31 IRON GARDEN PRODUCTS LLC

AI summary

Disclosed is a customizable in-ground stand that retains its position in response to off-center, leaning, and/or top-heavy forces imposed onto it by a retained object. The stand includes an elongated tube. The stand includes an interchangeable retention ring with a downward extension that attaches to a top of the elongated tube, and with a length of tube that extends laterally in front of the elongated tube as an incomplete ring from the downward extension. The stand further includes an interchangeable base with a rod that attaches to a bottom of the elongated tube, and with support members that extend outwards from each side of the rod. Each of the support members has a vertical triangular plate that extends perpendicularly from the rod and that narrows to a particular point towards a bottom of the rod, and a lip that extends perpendicularly over each vertical triangular plate.