Retainer and Nut Assembly Structure for Low-Force Centering

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing retainer and nut assemblies face limitations in production rate, tooling longevity, installation force, and centering accuracy, often requiring high installation forces and potentially leading to premature failure of bending tooling and inadequate alignment with panel apertures.

Innovation Solution

The design includes a retainer with first and second legs extending from a base wall, featuring apertured portions with dimples or shoulders, and a nut coupled to the second leg, facilitating faster production, reduced installation forces, and improved centering through a humpbacked and comb-like configuration, allowing for efficient assembly and tooling longevity.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If conventional retainer designs are used, then structural simplicity is maintained, but production rate is constrained and tooling fails prematurely

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproduction rateVSAvoidretainer structure complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The retainer is divided into multiple functional segments: a base wall portion, a first leg with a first aperture, a second leg with a second aperture, and intermediate portions connecting them. This segmentation allows each portion to be optimized independently for its specific function while maintaining overall structural integrity, enabling faster production and reduced tooling stress

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different portions of the retainer are given different local properties: the base wall has specific thickness for stability, the legs have varying thicknesses for flexibility and strength, and the intermediate portions have optimized geometry for bending operations. This local quality optimization enables improved production rates without compromising overall structural simplicity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Duration of action of stationary object

If conventional retainer designs are used, then manufacturing is simplified, but bending tooling experiences premature failure

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetooling lifeVSAvoidmanufacturing simplicity
Core Design Contradiction:
Duration of action of stationary objectVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The retainer design incorporates specific parameter optimizations: the intermediate portions have controlled thicknesses and geometries that reduce bending stresses during manufacturing. The base wall thickness, leg dimensions, and aperture placements are all optimized to distribute tooling forces more evenly, extending tooling life without adding manufacturing complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Force

If conventional retainer designs are used, then installation is straightforward, but high installation forces are required

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinstallation forceVSAvoidinstallation ease
Core Design Contradiction:
ForceVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The retainer design incorporates dynamic characteristics through its leg and intermediate portion geometry, allowing the structure to flex and adapt during installation. This dynamic behavior reduces peak installation forces by distributing loads more evenly across the retainer structure, while maintaining ease of operation through straightforward installation procedures

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

4Manufacturing precision

If conventional retainer designs are used, then assembly is simple, but centering accuracy with panel apertures is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecentering accuracyVSAvoidretainer structure complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The retainer design employs asymmetric geometry in the intermediate portions and leg configurations to achieve precise centering with panel apertures. The non-symmetric placement of apertures, varying leg dimensions, and optimized intermediate portion shapes provide inherent alignment features that improve centering accuracy without adding complex centering mechanisms

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

Data Source

PatentUS11415164B2Retainer and a retainer and nut assembly
Publication Date: 2022.08.16 ALPHAUSA
  • US11415164B2 patent drawing
  • US11415164B2 patent drawing
  • US11415164B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A retainer comprises first and second legs extending away from a base wall. In one embodiment, the first leg includes a dimple array surrounding an aperture and projecting from an inboard surface of the first leg. In another embodiment, the first leg has a necked portion having a set of first shoulders extending away from a first base, and a first apertured portion extending away from the set of first shoulders. The second leg has a necked and stepped portion having a step extending away from a second base, and a shouldered portion extending away from the step and having a set of second shoulders extending laterally outwardly, and a second apertured portion extending away from the second shoulders. The retainer of either embodiment may be coupled to a nut to produce a retainer and nut assembly.