Vented Mascara Wiper Segmentation for Filling Pressure Reduction
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
The existing wiper designs for mascara containers create an airtight seal that hinders air venting during filling, leading to increased filling pressures, energy consumption, and safety concerns due to the small diameter of the filling tube required to allow air escape, which complicates and costs the manufacturing process.
Innovation Solution
A modified wiper with recessed venting means, such as grooves on the outer wall, allowing air to escape around the sides without passing through the lower orifice, enabling a larger filling tube diameter and reducing the need for high filling pressures, achieved through a 'raised wiper' filling method where the wiper is only partially seated, allowing air to escape through interruptions in the airtight seals.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If the wiper is fully seated in the bottle neck to create an airtight seal, then the wiper's retention and sealing function is improved, but air cannot escape during filling requiring a small diameter filling tube which increases flow resistance and filling pressure
Solution Approach 1:
The wiper is segmented into multiple sections: an upper section with outer diameter equal to the bottle neck inner diameter for sealing, and a lower section with smaller outer diameter than the lower orifice to allow air passage. This segmentation allows the wiper to simultaneously provide airtight sealing at the upper portion while permitting air escape through the lower portion during filling operations.
Solution Approach 2:
Different sections of the wiper have different diameters to perform different functions locally. The upper section provides sealing contact with the bottle neck, while the lower section provides an open passage for air escape. This local differentiation of geometry allows the wiper to fulfill multiple contradictory requirements in different spatial zones.
2Reliability
If a small diameter filling tube is used to allow air escape through the wiper, then the airtight seal is maintained, but the resistance to flow increases significantly requiring higher filling pressures and energy consumption
Solution Approach 1:
The wiper geometry is segmented to separate the sealing function (upper section) from the air passage function (lower section). This allows air to escape through the lower section's open space rather than forcing it through a small filling tube, dramatically reducing flow resistance and energy consumption during filling while maintaining the airtight seal through the upper section.
Solution Approach 2:
The wiper's outer diameter parameter is changed along its length, transitioning from a smaller diameter at the lower end to a larger diameter at the upper end. This parameter change enables the lower section to provide adequate air passage area while the upper section maintains sealing contact with the bottle neck, eliminating the need for high filling pressures.
3Use of energy by moving object
If the filling tube diameter is increased to reduce flow resistance, then energy consumption decreases, but air cannot escape through the wiper requiring a fully seated wiper position which complicates the filling process
Solution Approach 1:
The wiper is designed with segmented diameters where the lower section has a smaller outer diameter than the lower orifice, creating an annular gap for air escape. This segmentation eliminates the need for complex filling procedures or wiper repositioning, as air can escape continuously through the lower section while the wiper remains in its standard seated position.
Solution Approach 2:
The lower section of the wiper extends beyond what would be minimally required for sealing, creating an intentional gap between the wiper's lower outer surface and the lower orifice. This excessive action in terms of geometry design provides the necessary air passage without requiring any modification to the filling process or wiper positioning.
4Reliability
If the wiper is designed with a uniform outer diameter equal to the bottle neck inner diameter, then the airtight seal is maximized, but the filling tube must be small diameter which increases flow resistance by approximately 27%
Solution Approach 1:
The wiper is segmented into upper and lower sections with different diameters. The upper section maintains full contact with the bottle neck for airtight sealing, while the lower section has a reduced diameter to accommodate air passage. This segmentation resolves the conflict between sealing effectiveness and filling productivity by providing dedicated zones for each function.
Solution Approach 2:
The wiper exhibits local quality variation in its outer diameter along its length. The upper portion has quality optimized for sealing (larger diameter for full contact), while the lower portion has quality optimized for air passage (smaller diameter creating gap). This local differentiation enables both high sealing reliability and high filling productivity simultaneously.
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
This solution decreases the resistance to flow by approximately 27%, reduces the pressure and energy required for filling, and increases filling line speed and safety by allowing air to escape without disrupting the wiper's retention, thus enhancing the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the filling process.
Implementation Method 1
air to escape around the sides without passing through the lower orifice
Data Source
AI summary
A vented wiper for a mascara bottle or other packaging and modified filling methods for containers that have vented wipers. During filling of a container, the vented wiper allows air to vent from the container, other than through the interior of the wiper.