Rotatable Mandoline Food Pusher for Large and Delicate Foods

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing food pushers struggle to efficiently handle and process large or delicate foods, such as carrots and strawberries, due to limitations in design, including small circular through-bores and the need for precise manual dexterity to avoid crushing soft foods.

Innovation Solution

A food pusher with a jaw-shaped wall portion and a spring-biased system that allows for a larger open area and rotatability, enabling the handling of large vertical foods and gentle pressing of delicate items, with a non-circular cross-section and a tubular support for easy rotation and positioning.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Volume of moving object

If a circular through-bore design is used in the food pusher, then the structure is simple and compact, but the minimum cross-dimension of the open area is limited to about 4cm, preventing processing of large vertical foods

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveopen area sizeVSAvoidpusher structure
Core Design Contradiction:
Volume of moving objectVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The pusher wall is segmented into multiple sections: a first pusher wall with jaw-shaped portions and a second pusher wall, creating distinct functional zones. This segmentation allows the open area to be enlarged while maintaining structural integrity and providing specialized areas for different food types.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The circular symmetry is broken by introducing jaw-shaped wall portions with specific geometries (e.g., 45-degree angles, varying thicknesses). This asymmetry creates an enlarged open area with minimum cross-dimension exceeding 4cm while providing mechanical advantage for gripping and pushing various food shapes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

2Ease of operation

If manual pressure is applied to push soft food down towards the work surface, then the food can be positioned for slicing, but there is a risk of crushing delicate foods such as tomatoes and strawberries

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefood positioningVSAvoidfood crushing
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The biasing mechanism automatically applies the necessary downward force to push food onto the work surface without requiring manual pressure from the user. The spring-loaded system self-regulates to provide consistent, controlled force that positions food for slicing while preventing crushing of delicate items.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The biasing force parameter is dynamically adjusted based on food type and density. The spring mechanism allows the pushing force to adapt automatically, applying lighter pressure to delicate foods and heavier pressure to harder foods, eliminating the need for user judgment and consistent manual force application.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Adaptability or versatility

If the food pusher is fixed in orientation, then the structure is simple, but it cannot accommodate both right- and left-handed users or handle various food orientations effectively

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepushing orientationVSAvoidpusher mechanism
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The food pusher transitions from a fixed structure to a rotatable mechanism that can be oriented in multiple directions. The rotatable connection allows the pusher to adapt to different user preferences (right- or left-handed operation) and different food orientations while maintaining a relatively simple overall structure through standardized rotational joints.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

4Area of stationary object

If a larger diameter pusher is used to accommodate large vertical foods, then more food types can be processed, but the overall size and cost of the mandoline arrangement increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing capacityVSAvoidmandoline size
Core Design Contradiction:
Area of stationary objectVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of increasing the pusher diameter in all directions, the invention extends the jaw-shaped wall portions in specific directional dimensions. This selective dimensional expansion provides the necessary open area for large vertical foods while maintaining a compact overall footprint that does not significantly increase the mandoline's size or cost.

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

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 solution allows for effective processing of large and delicate foods without crushing, providing a wide range of orientations for easy use by both left- and right-handed users and minimizing friction and wedge-shaped slicing issues.

Implementation Method 1

a bias which is adapted to push the second pusher wall down towards a work surface

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectSpring bias: Spring

Data Source

PatentEP3207841B1Food pushers and food holder systems and mandolines incorporating the same
Publication Date: 2019.05.08 DKB HOUSEHOLD UK
  • EP3207841B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3207841B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3207841B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A mandoline (10) has a food holder (38) and a food pusher (40), the food holder (38) being slidable along the body (10) and the food pusher being rotatably mounted on the food holder, the food pusher having a first pusher wall (70) and a second pusher wall (72), the second pusher wall (72) being in the form of a substantially flat plate and the first pusher wall being arranged perpendicular to the second pusher wall and being jaw-shaped in nature.