Magnetic Fishing Lure Sinker Positioning via Stepped Passage

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing lures with movable sinkers face issues where the sinker either remains stuck at the front during casting or separates from the retainer during water movement, leading to inadequate center of gravity shift, especially under aggressive fishing actions, and are limited in using non-magnetic materials like tungsten due to magnetic retainer requirements.

Innovation Solution

A lure design featuring a passage with a stepped portion and inclined catching surface, where at least the rearmost sinker is made of a magnetic material, allowing reliable rearward movement and holding in the front section after landing, using a combination of magnetic and non-magnetic sinkers to prevent attraction issues and enhance stability.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the retainer is provided at the front end surface of the passage, then the sinker is held in the front section, but the sinker may remain on the retainer at casting and the retainer may be damaged

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesinker holding reliabilityVSAvoidsinker damage to retainer

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The passage is divided into a first path and a second path separated by a stepped portion. The retainer is positioned only in the first path, creating distinct functional zones: the first path for sinker holding during swimming, and the second path for sinker movement during casting. This segmentation prevents the sinker from remaining on the retainer during casting while eliminating direct impact damage.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

2Ease of operation

If the retainer is provided on the circumferential wall of the passage, then the sinker is easily separated at casting, but the sinker may be separated from the retainer during water movement

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesinker movement ease at castingVSAvoidsinker holding reliability during swimming

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The retainer is positioned at a specific location (front section of the first path) rather than distributed on the circumferential wall. This localized positioning creates a focused magnetic field that reliably holds the sinker during swimming while the stepped portion structure allows easy separation during casting by providing a clear transition path to the second path.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

3Force

If a relatively large retainer is used, then the magnetic attracting force increases and the sinker is hardly separated, but the weight of the retainer increases and the center of gravity deviation is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvemagnetic attracting forceVSAvoidretainer weight

Core Design Contradiction:

ForceVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The excessive magnetic force problem is resolved by extracting the retainer from the second path and confining it to the first path. This allows using a smaller, lighter retainer that provides sufficient magnetic holding force during swimming without preventing sinker movement during casting, as the stepped portion creates a natural movement barrier.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

4Reliability

If all sinkers are made of magnetic material, then they can be held by the retainer, but non-magnetic materials like tungsten cannot be used

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesinker holding reliabilityVSAvoidmaterial selection flexibility

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The passage is divided into two paths with different functional requirements. The first path has a retainer requiring magnetic material, while the second path has no retainer allowing non-magnetic materials. This local quality differentiation enables using magnetic sinkers where needed and non-magnetic sinkers where magnetic properties are not required, expanding material selection flexibility.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

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 lure ensures stable casting and swimming by reliably moving the sinker rearward during casting and holding it in the front section post-landing, allowing for effective center of gravity deviation and accommodating non-magnetic materials like tungsten, enhancing durability and versatility.

Implementation Method 1

a retainer (e.g. magnet) attracting the sinker by a magnetic attracting force

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectMagnetic attracting force: Magnetism

Implementation Method 2

the sinker moves backward away from the front section of the passage due to an inertial force

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectInertial force: Inertia

Data Source

PatentEP3045040B1Fishing lure

Publication Date: 2017.11.29 DUEL

Figure 1~2
Figure 3
Figure 4

AI summary

A lure (1) according to the present invention includes a body (2), a passage (3) extending in the body (2), the passage (3) having a bottom, a single sinker or two or more individual sinkers (51, 52) stored in the passage (3) to be movable in a forward and rearward direction, and a retainer (6) capable of attracting the sinker (51) by a magnetic attractive force, the retainer (6) being made of a magnet or a magnetic material, wherein a stepped portion (4) having a catching surface opposed to the front of the body (2) is provided in the middle of the passage (3), and a surface of the retainer (6) constitutes the catching surface.