Secure Enclosure Door Overlap and Composite Construction
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional secure enclosures, such as ATM safes, are costly to design for resistance against both conventional wedge attacks and explosive attacks, with existing solutions failing to provide adequate protection at a low cost.
Innovation Solution
A secure enclosure design featuring a door with overlapping portions that extend towards the end wall, covering parts of the sidewalls, and a composite construction with a central high-density concrete layer, which resists wedge attacks by directing the wedge force inward and restricts sidewall deflection during gas attacks, thereby enhancing security without significant cost increases.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If ATM safes are strengthened to withstand explosive attacks, then resistance to explosive attacks is improved, but cost increases significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by providing reinforcement only at specific vulnerable locations (door, corners, and areas around apertures) rather than strengthening the entire safe uniformly. This targeted approach to explosion resistance reduces material costs while maintaining protective effectiveness at critical points.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent employs composite construction combining steel plates with concrete filling in the safe body and door. This composite material approach provides enhanced explosion resistance through the combined properties of steel (strength) and concrete (mass and energy absorption) while being more cost-effective than solid steel construction of equivalent protective level.
2Ease of manufacture
If conventional safes are designed without considering explosive attacks, then cost is reduced, but resistance to wedge attacks is compromised
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements preliminary action by incorporating anti-wedge features (such as recesses and protrusions) during the initial design and manufacturing phase. These features are built into the door and frame structure from the outset, preventing wedge attack vulnerabilities before they can be exploited, while maintaining cost-effectiveness through simple geometric modifications rather than complex mechanisms.
3Reliability
If the door and internal corners are strengthened for explosion resistance, then explosive attack resistance is improved, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent uses composite materials (steel and concrete) to achieve explosion resistance through material properties rather than complex structural configurations. The concrete-filled steel construction provides inherent explosion resistance through mass and energy absorption characteristics, avoiding the need for elaborate reinforcement geometries.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent modifies physical parameters (material composition, density, and distribution) rather than structural complexity to achieve explosion resistance. By changing the material parameters of the door and body construction, the patent achieves protective performance without increasing device complexity.
Data Source
AI summary
A secure enclosure comprises: a pair of opposing sidewalls; an upper wall coupled to the pair of opposing sidewalls; a lower wall opposite the upper wall and also coupled to the pair of opposing sidewalls; and an end wall coupled to the upper and lower walls and the opposing sidewalls, so that the pair of opposing sidewalls, the upper wall, the lower wall, and the end wall together form a body defining an opening. The secure enclosure also comprises a door leaf hingeably coupled to one of the opposing sidewalls for securely closing the opening. The door leaf is arranged to engage with the pair of opposing sidewalls and includes an overlapping portion so that when the door leaf is in the closed position, the overlapping portion extends towards the end wall and covers a portion of a sidewall abutting the door leaf.