Single-Valve Shock Damping With Bypass Refill Cavitation Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing single valve shocks face issues with pressure balancing, limited movement range, and flow control, including risks of cavitation and requiring large shaft diameters for optimal control.

Innovation Solution

A single valve shock system with a single electronic valve that includes an inner body, piston, piston shaft, zones, a single semi-active base valve, and refill check valve, along with bypass shims and backup plates to control compression and rebound damping, reducing the risk of cavitation and optimizing flow control.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If a single base valve is used to control compression and rebound damping, then device complexity is reduced, but pressure balancing becomes difficult and cavitation risk increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevalve system complexityVSAvoidpressure balancing reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The single base valve is segmented into multiple functional zones (compression zone, rebound zone, bypass zone) that operate independently at different pressure ranges. This allows one valve to perform multiple functions that would traditionally require separate valves, maintaining pressure balance while reducing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The single base valve is designed as a multi-functional component that handles both compression and rebound damping control, as well as pressure balancing and cavitation prevention. This universal design reduces the number of components while maintaining reliable pressure control through integrated functionality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Adaptability or versatility

If a large shaft diameter is used to optimize control range in compression, then compression control range is improved, but rebound flow control becomes limited and rod reaction force increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecompression control rangeVSAvoidrebound flow control efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The invention introduces a bypass flow path that operates in parallel to the main piston flow. This bypass dimension allows rebound flow control to occur through a separate pathway with its own valve settings, decoupling the shaft diameter requirements for compression control from rebound flow control requirements.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The flow control system is segmented into main piston flow paths and bypass flow paths. The bypass path with its dedicated valve allows independent optimization of rebound flow control without being constrained by the shaft diameter optimized for compression control.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Adaptability or versatility

If the shock is designed for large rebound control range, then rebound adaptability is improved, but compression control range is limited and shaft diameter must be large

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverebound control rangeVSAvoidshaft diameter requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The bypass flow path provides an additional dimension for rebound control that is independent of the main piston shaft diameter. This allows large rebound control range to be achieved through the bypass valve settings rather than through increasing shaft diameter, which would compromise compression control.

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

4Adaptability or versatility

If N2 pressure is increased to optimize control range, then compression control is improved, but rod reaction force increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol rangeVSAvoidrod reaction force
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSForce

Solution Approach 1:

The pressure control system is segmented into different pressure zones handled by different valve mechanisms. The base valve handles low-pressure rebound control while the bypass valve handles high-pressure compression control, allowing N2 pressure to be optimized for compression without excessively increasing rod reaction force during rebound operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

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

Enables effective control of compression and rebound damping without cavitation, allowing for smaller bore sizes and improved tuning of damping characteristics, while preventing shim overstress and enhancing flow control.

Implementation Method 1

risks of cavitation

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectCavitation: Cavitation

Implementation Method 2

control of compression and rebound damping

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectDamping: Damping

Data Source

PatentUS20260002574A1Single valve shock
Publication Date: 2026.01.01 FOX FACTORY INC
  • US20260002574A1 patent drawing
  • US20260002574A1 patent drawing
  • US20260002574A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A single valve shock system is described. The single valve shock system includes a single base valve, such as a single semi-active base valve provided between at least one zone of an inner body and a reservoir of the shock. The single valve shock system may also include a refill check valve provided between the at least one zone of the inner body and the reservoir, wherein the refill check valve is in communication with the single base valve to provide the bypass flow to the inner body.