Inline Shock Absorber Coil Spring Cycle Wheel Suspension

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Telescopic front suspension forks for two-wheeled vehicles face issues such as high stiction, reduced stability during compression, limited leverage ratio, and undesirable braking reactions due to their design, which affects handling and traction.

Innovation Solution

A wheel suspension assembly with a shock absorber in an inline configuration and a coil spring, utilizing a multi-bar linkage system with a trailing configuration of fixed and floating pivots, which allows for increased mechanical trail and variable leverage ratio, reducing stiction and improving stability and traction.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If telescopic fork stantions are made larger to support fore/aft loads, then load bearing capacity is improved, but stiction increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveload bearing capacityVSAvoidstiction
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The suspension system is divided into separate functional components: a telescopic fork for steering and a linkage system for suspension. The fork stantions only need to handle steering loads while the linkage components (links, pivots, shock absorber) handle the suspension loads, segmenting the load paths and reducing the size and stiction of the fork stantions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

A shock absorber with inline configuration and coil spring is introduced as an intermediary component between the wheel assembly and the fork. This shock absorber directly absorbs impact forces, reducing the load transmission through the fork stantions and their bushings, thereby reducing stiction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Device complexity

If telescopic fork compresses linearly to absorb bumps, then shock absorption is simplified, but leverage ratio is lost

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesuspension mechanism simplicityVSAvoidleverage ratio
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The linkage system creates a dynamic leverage ratio that changes as the suspension compresses and extends. The mechanical trail and leverage ratio are not fixed but vary with suspension position, allowing the system to adapt to different loading conditions and provide optimal performance across the full range of motion.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Stability of the object's composition

If fork stantions are angled slacker for better angle of attack stability, then bump absorption is improved, but bushing load and stiction increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveangle of attack stabilityVSAvoidbushing load and stiction
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The functions of angle of attack stability and shock absorption are segmented into different components. The fork stantions maintain a steeper angle for stability while the linkage system (links and pivots) provides the angle of attack adjustment and bump absorption, separating the stability function from the shock absorption function.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

4Device complexity

If telescopic fork is used for front suspension, then steering integration is simplified, but mechanical trail reduces during compression

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesteering integrationVSAvoidmechanical trail
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The mechanical trail is made dynamic through the linkage system. As the suspension compresses and extends, the linkage geometry changes to maintain or increase mechanical trail, providing stability during compression while maintaining steering integration through the fork.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

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 reduces stiction and enhances stability during braking, cornering, and shock absorption, providing better handling and traction compared to traditional telescopic fork systems.

Implementation Method 1

a shock absorber having an inline configuration, a coil spring

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectElasticity: Elasticity

Implementation Method 2

shock absorber with an inline configuration and a coil spring

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectDamping: Damping

Data Source

PatentUS10518839B2Inline shock absorber with coil spring for a cycle wheel suspension assembly
Publication Date: 2019.12.31 SPECIALIZED BICYCLE COMPONENTS INC
  • US10518839B2 patent drawing
  • US10518839B2 patent drawing
  • US10518839B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A trailing link multi-bar suspension assembly for a cycle having improved stability includes a first arm having a first arm fixed pivot and a first arm shock pivot. A shock link has a shock link fixed pivot and a shock link floating pivot. A shock absorber has an inline configuration, a coil spring, a first shock mount and a second shock mount. A wheel carrier has a wheel carrier first pivot and a wheel carrier second pivot spaced apart from one another, and a wheel mount that is adapted to be connected to a wheel. A control link has a control link floating pivot and a control link fixed pivot, the control link floating pivot being pivotably connected to the wheel carrier second pivot, and the control link fixed pivot being pivotably connected to the first arm control pivot.