Splitboard Heel-Locking Device Foot-Activated Lever Mechanism

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Snowboarders face challenges in accessing backcountry terrain due to difficulties in climbing uphill in deep, fresh snow with traditional snowboards, as existing technologies do not provide efficient heel-locking mechanisms for splitboards, leading to awkward engagement and safety concerns during touring and riding modes.

Innovation Solution

A heel-locking device for splitboards that allows quick heel engagement with a lever mechanism, providing resistance profiles to prevent accidental unlocking or locking, enabling foot-activated locking and forward release in falls, ensuring uninterrupted touring and enhanced safety.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If a traditional heel-locking mechanism is used, then the binding is secure to the splitboard, but the engagement process is awkward and requires simultaneous crouching and lever flipping

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveheel engagement easeVSAvoidengagement mechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The heel-locking mechanism is divided into two independent functions: a lever for unlocking and a foot-activated locking mechanism. This segmentation allows the rider to unlock with the lever while locking is automatically triggered by foot pressure, eliminating the need for complex coordinated movements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The locking mechanism is designed to be self-activating through foot pressure. When the rider applies pressure to the heel pad, the lock bar automatically engages with the binding baseplate without requiring manual intervention beyond the initial lever position, making the system serve itself.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Adaptability or versatility

If the lever can be partially rotated, then the rider has more control positions, but accidental partial rotation may cause unintended unlocking or locking

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelever position flexibilityVSAvoidaccidental unlocking prevention
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The mechanism incorporates preliminary protective actions through resistance profiles and engagement thresholds. The lock bar requires a minimum force threshold to engage, and the lever has a detent system that prevents engagement unless fully rotated, preemptively blocking accidental activation from partial rotations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #9Preliminary anti-action

Solution Approach 2:

The resistance to lever rotation changes based on the rotation angle, creating zones of high resistance that prevent accidental engagement. The system transitions from a low-resistance unlocked state to a high-resistance locked state only when the lever is fully rotated, using parameter changes in mechanical resistance to ensure reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of operation

If the heel-locking device requires foot pressure to engage, then the rider can lock while standing, but the release force may accidentally trigger during normal use

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestanding locking capabilityVSAvoidfalse release prevention
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The lever must be flipped to the locked position before foot pressure can engage the locking mechanism. This preliminary action sets up a conditional state where normal foot pressures during touring or riding will not trigger locking, as the lever position acts as a prerequisite gate.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The heel pad has a curved or contoured surface that distributes foot pressure, ensuring that only pressures applied in a specific orientation (downward on the pad) will trigger the locking mechanism, while pressures from other directions during normal use will not activate it.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #14Spheroidality (Curvature)

4Object-affected harmful factors

If the lock bar is made of flexible material, then it can deflect to release in falls, but it may not provide sufficient locking force in normal use

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefall release capabilityVSAvoidlocking force
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The lock bar's material properties are selected to provide high stiffness and strength for normal locking operations, while its geometric design (thin profile, strategic placement) allows it to deflect under extreme loads from falls. The parameter of flexibility is optimized for the specific fall-release function without compromising overall locking strength.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS10814210B2Heel-locking device for snow glide board bindings
Publication Date: 2020.10.27 SPARK R&D IP HOLDINGS LLC
  • US10814210B2 patent drawing
  • US10814210B2 patent drawing
  • US10814210B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A mechanism for locking the heel portion of a snow glide board boot binding. The heel-locking device locks and unlocks by rotating a lever. The heel-locking device allows the rider to lock their boot binding hands-free to the snow glide board by pressuring the back of the boot binding baseplate with their boot while the heel-locking device is in the locked position. Once locked, the rider must rotate the lever to a predetermined position to unlock the boot binding.