Tool Box Door Reinforced With Flanges To Resist Prying

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Tool boxes with conventional sheet metal doors lack sufficient structural rigidity to resist prying and bending, leading to potential theft and damage during use, especially when used as a work surface, and thicker materials increase production costs and weight.

Innovation Solution

A reinforced door design featuring multiple flanges and flaps extending from the edges, providing additional strength and rigidity while allowing the use of thinner material, thus enhancing resistance to prying and flexing without increasing cost or weight.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If thicker material is used for the door, then resistance to prying and bending is improved, but production cost and weight increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresistance to prying and bendingVSAvoiddoor weight
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSWeight of stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The door is segmented into multiple functional regions: a flat central area for tool access and reinforced edge regions with flanges for structural strength. This segmentation allows the door to have sufficient strength at critical areas without requiring the entire door to be made of thick material, thus reducing overall weight and cost while maintaining resistance to prying and bending.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The door implements local quality by providing reinforced flanges only at the edges where structural strength is needed for prying resistance, while the central portion remains thin for cost-effectiveness. The flanges are strategically positioned at the perimeter to locally enhance strength without increasing the weight of the entire door.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Strength

If thicker material is used for the door, then resistance to prying and bending is improved, but production cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresistance to prying and bendingVSAvoidproduction cost
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The door structure is divided into a thin central region and reinforced edge regions with flanges. This segmentation allows manufacturing to use thinner, less expensive material for the majority of the door surface, while only adding material where structurally necessary, thereby reducing production cost while maintaining strength.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The door applies reinforcement locally at the edges through flanges rather than uniformly across the entire door. This local quality approach reduces the total amount of expensive thick material needed, lowering production costs while providing sufficient strength where it is most needed for prying resistance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Ease of manufacture

If conventional single rim design is used, then manufacturing is simple, but resistance to prying is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanufacturing simplicityVSAvoidresistance to prying
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The edge reinforcement is segmented into multiple flanges extending from the door at different orientations. This segmentation creates a more complex geometry that provides superior prying resistance compared to a single rim, while still being manufacturable through standard sheet metal forming processes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The door transitions from a conventional single-rim design to a multi-flange structure that extends in multiple dimensions and orientations. The flanges project outward and perpendicular to the door surface, creating a three-dimensional reinforced structure that significantly improves prying resistance while maintaining manufacturing feasibility.

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

4Adaptability or versatility

If the door is used as work space for high-impact activities, then tool box versatility is improved, but door flexing and potential injury risk increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvework space functionalityVSAvoiddoor stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The door is divided into a flat central work area and reinforced edge areas with flanges. The flat central region provides a stable surface for tool box use as a work space, while the reinforced edges with flanges prevent flexing and bending during high-impact activities, ensuring door stability and user safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The door implements local quality by providing reinforcement at the edges through flanges where structural support is needed to prevent flexing during work space use, while maintaining a flat, stable central area suitable for tool placement and work activities.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS9956682B1Tool box with a reinforced door
Publication Date: 2018.05.01 PHOENIX USA
  • US9956682B1 patent drawing
  • US9956682B1 patent drawing
  • US9956682B1 patent drawing

AI summary

A tool box having a reinforced door that withstands prying and resists flexing during use. The door includes a reinforced region including a first flange, a second flange and a third flange extending from the first edge of the door. At least one additional flap extends from an edge of the door adjacent to the reinforced region and is welded to the reinforced region to provide additional strength. In another embodiment, a second and a third additional flap is included on the door, and each additional flap may be welded to an adjacent flap or welded to the reinforced region. Multiple reinforced regions, each including at least one flange, may also extend from the door body to provide increased strength.