Reinforced Container Neck With Gussets and Structural Rings
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional wide mouth containers face challenges in balancing structural strength with manufacturing and shipping costs, as thick walls are needed for dense materials but increase costs and weight, while thin walls may not withstand external forces, limiting stacking and increasing costs.
Innovation Solution
The design incorporates a neck portion with upper and lower structural rings and gussets, a shoulder, waist section with reinforcement ribs, and a base with a larger diameter to enhance structural integrity without significant material addition, allowing for improved stacking and durability.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Strength
If thick walls are used to provide sufficient structural strength for dense materials, then the container can withstand external forces and enable stacking, but manufacturing costs and container weight increase
Solution Approach 1:
The container wall is segmented into multiple functional zones: a mouth portion with greater thickness for structural support during handling, a body portion with reduced thickness for weight reduction, and reinforcement features (ribs, flanges) strategically placed at stress concentration points. This segmentation allows the container to achieve sufficient overall strength without uniformly thick walls, reducing total material usage and weight.
Solution Approach 2:
The container employs local quality by varying wall thickness and adding reinforcement features only where structurally necessary. The mouth portion has greater thickness to handle opening/closing forces, the base includes reinforcement ribs to support stacking loads, and the body portion uses thinner walls. This localized reinforcement approach provides sufficient strength at critical points while minimizing overall material consumption and weight.
2Strength
If thick walls are used to provide sufficient structural strength, then the container can withstand external forces, but manufacturing costs increase
Solution Approach 1:
The container is designed with segmented wall thickness zones that can be efficiently manufactured using injection molding or blow molding processes. The mold includes corresponding cavities for the mouth portion, body portion, and base reinforcement features, allowing all elements to be formed in a single manufacturing step. This segmentation strategy provides structural strength where needed while keeping manufacturing costs low through process efficiency and reduced material consumption.
Solution Approach 2:
The container uses local quality by implementing reinforcement features (ribs, flanges, varied wall thickness) only at specific locations requiring additional strength. This approach minimizes overall material usage, reducing material costs, while providing sufficient structural integrity at critical points. The design optimizes the balance between manufacturing cost and structural performance.
3Ease of manufacture
If thin walls are used to reduce material costs, then manufacturing costs decrease, but the container may be unable to withstand certain external forces and stacking
Solution Approach 1:
The container applies local quality by using thinner walls in the body portion where structural demands are lower, reducing material costs. Meanwhile, the mouth portion maintains greater thickness to withstand opening/closing forces, and the base includes reinforcement ribs to support stacking loads. This localized thickness variation allows the container to achieve adequate structural strength for stacking and handling while using less material overall, reducing manufacturing costs.
Solution Approach 2:
The container segments the wall structure into zones with different thickness requirements: a thinner body portion for cost reduction and a thicker mouth/base portion for structural strength. Strategic reinforcement features are segmented and placed only where needed. This segmentation enables the container to meet structural strength requirements for stacking and handling while minimizing material usage and manufacturing costs.
4Ease of operation
If the container mouth is large enough for hand access, then ease of operation improves, but structural strength may be compromised
Solution Approach 1:
The container uses local quality by providing a large mouth opening for ease of hand access and operation, while simultaneously reinforcing the mouth portion with greater wall thickness and structural features. The reinforced mouth area withstands the forces generated during opening, closing, and handling operations, compensating for the structural weakness that would otherwise result from the large opening. This allows the container to maintain both ease of operation and sufficient structural strength.
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
This design enhances the container's ability to withstand external forces and maintain structural integrity during shipping and handling, enabling higher stacking heights and reduced material usage, thus lowering costs and improving shipping options.
Implementation Method 1
heating a tube of a material until the material is above a glass transition temperature of the material
Implementation Method 2
pressing the tube against the mold using a pressurized gas
Data Source
AI summary
A container includes an outlet defining an opening that is in fluid communication with an interior portion of the container, the outlet having a central axis. The container also a neck portion having an upper structural ring lying in a first plane that is substantially perpendicular to the central axis, and a lower structural ring lying in a second plane that is substantially perpendicular to the central axis, wherein the first plane and the second plane being separated by a vertical distance. The neck portion may have a gusset extending between the upper structural ring and the lower structural ring, and the gusset may have a plane of symmetry, wherein the central axis lies in the plane of symmetry. The container further includes a shoulder beneath the neck portion, a waist section beneath the shoulder, and a base beneath the waist section.