Stackable Sports Training Apparatus with Locking Bar Connectors

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing training apparatuses for athletes are often heavy, bulky, difficult to transport, and prone to tipping or sliding, limiting their portability and effectiveness in providing varied and challenging training configurations.

Innovation Solution

A lightweight, stackable training apparatus comprising a base cone and a nose cone with bar connectors that can be easily assembled and disassembled to form various configurations, featuring locking mechanisms and a design that prevents tipping and sliding, allowing for efficient use on different surfaces.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional training apparatus are made heavy and bulky, then they are more stable and resist tipping, but they become difficult to transport and store

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovestabilityVSAvoidportability
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The training apparatus is divided into separate modular components (supporting structures, bars, connectors) that can be independently handled and transported. Each supporting structure can be separately moved and reconfigured, eliminating the need to transport a single heavy unit while maintaining stability when assembled.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The bars are designed to nest within the supporting structures when not in use, and the supporting structures themselves can be nested or stacked together. This nesting capability allows the apparatus to occupy minimal storage space while maintaining full functionality when deployed, resolving the contradiction between stability and portability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

2Ease of operation

If supporting structures are made narrow for easy access, then athlete access to space under the bar is improved, but the structures become prone to tipping over

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveaccessibilityVSAvoidstability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The supporting structures have non-uniform geometry with wider bases for stability and narrower upper portions for accessibility. The base diameter is specifically designed to be larger than the upper section, creating different local qualities that simultaneously provide both stability and ease of access for athletes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The supporting structures are pre-configured with bar connectors at optimized heights and positions that inherently provide stability while allowing easy access. The connectors are positioned to create optimal training configurations without requiring additional adjustment, eliminating the need for athletes to navigate around unstable narrow structures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Adaptability or versatility

If training apparatus are made complex to provide varied configurations, then training effectiveness for different skill levels is improved, but setup and teardown time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetraining configurationsVSAvoidsetup time
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The apparatus features dynamically reconfigurable components where bars can be quickly connected and disconnected from multiple supporting structures in various arrangements. The standardized connectors enable rapid reconfiguration from one training drill to another without complex assembly procedures, providing versatile training configurations while minimizing setup time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The supporting structures are designed with universal bar connectors that can accommodate different bar configurations and training scenarios. Each supporting structure can serve multiple functions depending on how bars are connected, allowing a single set of components to provide varied training configurations for different skill levels without requiring additional specialized equipment.

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

4Reliability

If supporting structures are made wide for stability, then resistance to tipping is improved, but access to the space under the bar is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovestabilityVSAvoidaccess space
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSArea of stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The supporting structures employ varying widths at different heights, with wider bases providing stability and narrower upper sections creating adequate access space. This graduated width profile allows the structure to be stable when viewed from below while providing sufficient clearance for athletes to move freely underneath the bars during training exercises.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

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 apparatus provides a versatile, portable, and stable training solution that can be easily configured to challenge athletes of all levels, enhancing agility and puck control training while minimizing setup and teardown time.

Implementation Method 1

the configuration of the structures so that the outer surface of the upper portion of the walls of the first supporting structure that extends into the interior space of the second supporting structure frictionally engages the inner surface of a portion of the walls of the second supporting structure

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectFriction: Friction

Data Source

PatentUS10532260B2Sports training apparatus
Publication Date: 2020.01.14 DEL MONTE DION
  • US10532260B2 patent drawing
  • US10532260B2 patent drawing
  • US10532260B2 patent drawing

AI summary

An apparatus for training athletes having two supporting structures. The first structure has a base that can rest on a surface and walls that extend upward from the base to an upper end, defining an interior space. The walls incorporate a bar connector above the base designed to connect to and support one end of a bar. The walls have supporting elements above the base and below the upper end of the walls. The second structure has walls that are configured so that the lower end of the walls can engage the supporting elements of the first structure so that the second structure is supported by the first structure above the supporting elements. The second structure has a bar connector at the same height as the height of the bar connector of the first structure configured to connect to and support the other end of the bar.