Two-wheeler lock forced guidance mechanism

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing bicycle locks with safeguards against unauthorized opening using the hammer blow method are structurally complex and require additional installation space, making them costly and difficult to manufacture.

Innovation Solution

A bicycle lock with a security element that uses mechanical or electromechanical means for forced guidance, eliminating the need for spring pretensioning and additional blocking devices, and featuring a control section that interacts with a gate to move the security element, ensuring secure positioning without risk of unauthorized opening.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If spring pretensioning and additional blocking devices are used to prevent unauthorized opening, then security against hammer blow method is improved, but device complexity and installation space increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity against unauthorized openingVSAvoidstructural complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent removes the spring pretensioning mechanism and additional blocking devices from the lock system. Instead, it uses a single securing element with a control section that interacts with a gate driven by mechanical or electromechanical means through forced guidance, thereby eliminating unnecessary components while maintaining security functionality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The gate-driven forced guidance mechanism serves multiple functions: it controls the movement of the securing element, prevents unauthorized opening attempts, and eliminates the need for separate blocking devices. This multi-functional approach reduces overall device complexity while maintaining security.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Reliability

If spring pretensioning and additional blocking devices are used to prevent unauthorized opening, then security against hammer blow method is improved, but manufacturing cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesecurity against unauthorized openingVSAvoidmanufacturing cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

By extracting and removing the spring pretensioning mechanism and additional blocking devices, the patent reduces the number of parts that need to be manufactured, assembled, and quality-checked, thereby lowering manufacturing costs while maintaining security functionality through the simplified gate-driven forced guidance system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

3Device complexity

If forced guidance with gate is used to move security element, then device complexity is reduced, but security against forced opening must be maintained

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural simplicityVSAvoidsecurity against forced opening
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The gate acts as an intermediary mechanism between the drive means and the securing element. It provides forced guidance that controls the movement of the securing element, ensuring that it can only be moved through the proper unlocking sequence, thereby maintaining security while enabling structural simplification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the control parameter from spring force to gate-driven positional control. The securing element's movement is controlled by the gate's position rather than elastic force, allowing for simpler structure while maintaining security through precise control of the securing element's states.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

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 simplifies the lock's structure, reduces manufacturing costs, and prevents unauthorized opening, providing reliable security against forced opening methods while minimizing battery consumption for electromechanical models.

Implementation Method 1

a torque-proof manner to an eccentric drive device in order to drive said connecting link when the lock cylinder is rotated

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectEccentric mechanism: Eccentric

Implementation Method 2

the lock comprises two security elements, the control sections of which engage with a respective link, the links being designed in such a way that when the control element is moved, the security elements are offset in opposite directions to one another

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectMechanical conversion through forced guidance:

Data Source

PatentEP2357124B1Two-wheeler lock
Publication Date: 2014.05.07 ABUS AUGUST BREMICKER SOEHNE KG
  • EP2357124B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2357124B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2357124B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

The two-wheeler lock (10) has a fuse element with a control section, which is interacted with a connecting link by restraint guidance to displace the fuse element. The connecting link is driven by mechanical or electromechanical unit. The fuse element is shifted perpendicularly to the adjustment direction of a safety lock.