Scallop Cap Closure With Alternating Wall Thickness
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Closures for large water containers are bulky and heavy due to thick walls, which makes them prone to cracking and deformation, limiting their ability to provide a reliable seal and are wasteful in material usage.
Innovation Solution
A closure design with alternating recessed regions and full-depth wall sections around the shoulder portion, reducing material usage while maintaining structural integrity, and featuring elongated vertical ribs and a score line for easy removal, along with an offset weld joint for enhanced strength.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Weight of moving object
If the wall thickness of the closure is reduced to decrease weight, then the closure becomes weaker and more prone to cracking under stress
Solution Approach 1:
The closure employs varying wall thicknesses in different regions: thinner walls in non-critical areas to reduce weight, and thicker walls in critical areas (shoulder portion, snap bead region, base) to maintain strength and prevent cracking. This localized differentiation allows weight reduction while preserving structural integrity where needed.
Solution Approach 2:
The closure is divided into multiple sections with different wall thicknesses rather than using a uniform thickness throughout. The shoulder portion has reduced thickness compared to the base and snap bead regions, creating segmented thickness zones that optimize both weight and strength requirements for different functional areas.
2Loss of substance
If the wall thickness is reduced to save material, then the closure becomes more susceptible to deformation when urged onto the container neck
Solution Approach 1:
Thicker walls are provided in regions subject to high stress during application (base, shoulder transitions, snap bead area) to resist deformation, while thinner walls are used in less critical regions. This localized thickness variation maintains dimensional stability where needed while reducing overall material consumption.
Solution Approach 2:
The closure utilizes a composite wall structure with varying thickness zones rather than uniform thickness, creating a composite structural design that optimizes both material efficiency and resistance to application-induced deformation.
3Reliability
If the snap bead diameter is increased to ensure engagement with the container neck, then the seal quality is limited by the diameter difference between the snap bead and the external snap formation
Solution Approach 1:
The snap bead region is provided with increased wall thickness to ensure robust engagement with the container neck's external snap formation, while other regions have reduced thickness. This localized reinforcement maintains reliable engagement without compromising seal quality through excessive diameter differences.
Data Source
AI summary
The present invention is directed to a closure for a container. In one of the embodiments provided herein, the closure is provided with a roof portion, a shoulder portion that merges with the roof portion, and a skirt portion depending from the shoulder portion. Provided on the shoulder portion are recessed regions and full-depth regions. The recessed regions and full-depth regions alternate around the shoulder portion and are provided for improving a number of manufacturing, costs, and structural factors. In another embodiment provided herein, the closure is provided with a cylindrical skirt depending substantially from a roof portion, the cylindrical skirt having an inner wall with a plurality of narrow, elongated, vertical stand-off ribs thereon, the ribs having an upper edge below a tension ring and a lower edge below the upper edge and an elongated length causing the lower edge to be positioned about 50% to 25% above a bottom edge defined by the cylindrical skirt and measured against the entire length of the cylindrical skirt.