Retaining Plate Locking Mechanism for High-Hold Launch Release

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing locking devices for securing components in satellites during launch are heavy, complex, and do not allow for sufficient freedom of movement after release, while maintaining a high holding force in the locked state.

Innovation Solution

A lightweight, low-complexity locking device with retaining plates that distribute holding force through multiple paths, allowing components to move freely with six degrees of freedom after release, using springs and a bolt mechanism for transition between locked and released states.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If traditional locking devices are used to secure components during launch, then high holding force is achieved, but weight and device complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveholding forceVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The locking device is divided into two separate retaining plates (first retaining plate and second retaining plate) that can independently engage with the first and second components. This segmentation allows each plate to be optimized for its specific function while reducing overall complexity compared to a single integrated locking mechanism.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The gap between the first and second components acts as an intermediary space that allows the retaining plates to apply force independently. This intermediate configuration enables the locking device to maintain holding force while reducing structural complexity by utilizing the existing gap rather than requiring direct contact between components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Strength

If traditional locking devices are used to secure components during launch, then high holding force is achieved, but weight increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveholding forceVSAvoidweight
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The locking device is divided into two separate retaining plates (first retaining plate and second retaining plate) that can independently engage with the first and second components. This segmentation allows each plate to be optimized for its specific function while reducing overall complexity compared to a single integrated locking mechanism.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The retaining plates apply force partially through the gap rather than requiring full contact between components. This partial action approach reduces the amount of material needed while still achieving sufficient holding force to prevent movement during launch.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Stability of the object's composition

If components are rigidly fixed during launch, then movement is prevented, but freedom of movement after release is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefixation stabilityVSAvoidfreedom of movement
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The locking device transitions from a static rigid fixation during launch to a dynamic configuration after release. The retaining plates can be positioned to provide firm fixation when needed, and after release, the components can move within the predefined gap, enabling adaptability and freedom of movement for subsequent operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The gap between components is pre-configured during assembly to define the boundaries of free movement. This preliminary arrangement ensures that when the locking device is released, the components can move freely within the predefined gap without requiring additional adjustment mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

4Device complexity

If a simple locking mechanism is used, then device complexity is reduced, but holding force decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice complexityVSAvoidholding force
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The locking device is divided into two separate retaining plates (first retaining plate and second retaining plate) that can independently engage with the first and second components. This segmentation allows each plate to be optimized for its specific function while reducing overall complexity compared to a single integrated locking mechanism.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The locking mechanism utilizes the spatial dimension of the gap between components to distribute force. By engaging with components on opposite sides of the gap, the retaining plates create a distributed force system that maintains holding force while keeping the mechanism simple and lightweight.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Data Source

PatentEP4431405B1Locking device for locking and releasing a first component relative to a second component
Publication Date: 2025.12.24 AIRBUS DEFENCE & SPACE GMBH
  • EP4431405B1 patent drawingFigure 1~2
  • EP4431405B1 patent drawingFigure 3~4
  • EP4431405B1 patent drawingFigure 5~6

AI summary

A locking device (100) for locking and unlocking relative movement between two components is described. The locking device (100) has two retaining plates (110, 120) between which two components (130, 140) are sandwiched. By pressing the two retaining plates onto the two components, relative movement between the two components is prevented. A positive fit on at least one retaining plate is pressed into a gap between the two components to block further degrees of freedom of movement between the two components in the locked state. When the locking device is moved from the locked state to the unlocked state, the two retaining plates are pushed away from the two components, and relative movement between the first component and the second component with six degrees of freedom is allowed within certain limits.