Multi-Component Closure for Liquid-Tight Sealing After Repeated Opening
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing closures for cardboard packaging of liquids, particularly drinkable and perishable liquids, do not adequately address the need to reduce material usage while improving recycling compatibility and ensuring a secure, liquid-tight seal that remains intact after multiple openings and closings.
Innovation Solution
A multi-component closure system comprising a bottom part with a laminar support and a neck, a screw cap with a retaining ring and closure cap, and locking elements with varying thread pitches to ensure a liquid-tight seal and prevent unintended opening, allowing for easy disposal and recyclability.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If a traditional single-component closure is used, then the structure is simple and easy to manufacture, but the closure cannot maintain a secure seal after multiple openings and closings, and disposal is difficult
Solution Approach 1:
The closure is divided into multiple functional components: a bottom part with laminar support and neck, a screw cap with retaining ring, and a closure cap with hinge connection. Each component performs a specific function - the bottom part provides structural support and welding interface, the screw cap provides locking mechanism with first and second locking elements, and the closure cap provides sealing with the closure element. This segmentation allows each component to be optimized for its specific function while maintaining overall reliability after multiple operations.
Solution Approach 2:
Multiple components are combined into an integrated closure system where the bottom part, screw cap, and closure cap work together as a unified assembly. The retaining ring connects the screw cap and closure cap, while the hinge allows the closure cap to pivot between open and closed positions. This merging creates a closure that maintains seal integrity through multiple openings and closings while providing a coordinated locking and sealing mechanism.
2Loss of substance
If material usage is reduced to improve recyclability, then the ecological footprint is reduced, but the closure may become less durable and harder to assemble
Solution Approach 1:
The closure is segmented into components that can be made from different materials optimized for their specific functions. The bottom part with laminar support can be made from cardboard-compatible materials for welding to the packaging, while the screw cap and closure cap can use materials with appropriate mechanical properties for locking and sealing. This allows material usage to be minimized in each component while maintaining overall durability.
Solution Approach 2:
The closure utilizes composite construction where different materials are combined to achieve optimal performance. The bottom part may use cardboard or paper-based materials compatible with the packaging, while the screw cap and closure cap use materials providing mechanical strength and sealing properties. This composite approach reduces overall material consumption compared to traditional single-material closures while maintaining reliability.
3Ease of manufacture
If the closure is designed to be easily disposed of with the packaging, then recyclability is improved, but the closure may become harder to open and close multiple times
Solution Approach 1:
The closure is segmented so that the bottom part with laminar support is designed for welding to the cardboard packaging, enabling easy disposal with the packaging material. The screw cap and closure cap are designed as a separate operable assembly that can be opened and closed multiple times. This segmentation allows the disposal-oriented bottom part to be simplified for recyclability while the operable cap components maintain ease of use through their mechanical design.
Solution Approach 2:
The closure cap is connected via a hinge that allows dynamic movement between open and closed positions, enabling easy operation for multiple openings and closings. The hinge mechanism provides controlled motion while maintaining a secure sealed position when closed. This dynamic design ensures ease of operation despite the simplified construction needed for easy disposal and recyclability.
4Reliability
If locking elements with varying thread pitches are used to prevent unintended opening, then security is improved, but the device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The locking mechanism incorporates first and second locking elements with different thread pitches at different locations on the screw cap. The first locking element engages with the bottom part using one thread pitch, while the second locking element engages with the closure cap using a different thread pitch. This local differentiation provides enhanced security against unintended opening through variable mechanical engagement, while the overall structure remains relatively simple through the use of standard threading concepts applied at different locations.
Data Source
AI summary
A Multi-component closure is proposed, which comprises a bottom part with a laminar support and a neck arranged thereto in one piece, which comprises a neck opening, a restring enclosing the neck and a first locking element, which is designed in between a neck opening and the restring. A screw cap is provided with a retaining ring and with a closure cap attached via a hinge to the retaining ring, where the retaining ring is kept rotatable by the restring, and where the closure cap comprises at least a second locking element, which in a closed state acts together with the at least one first locking element, to close the neck opening with the closure cap in a liquid-tight manner and that in the closed state a turn of the screw cap around the neck in a first direction causes an opening of the screw cap.