Wearable Device Strap Latching Mechanism Design

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing wearable devices face challenges in providing a secure and easily removable strap system that allows for different looks and functionalities while maintaining a strong and reliable connection.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a rigid insert with a latching surface and a co-molded elastomeric strap system that integrates with a latching mechanism in the device housing, featuring a peg and pass-through portion design for secure attachment and easy removal, without moving parts interacting with the latching mechanism.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If a traditional strap fastening system is used, then the strap can be attached to the wearable device, but the connection may not be secure enough under pull-out forces

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelatching connection strengthVSAvoidstrap attachment reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The strap system is divided into distinct components: a rigid insert with latching surface, a flexible strap body, and a separate latching mechanism in the device housing. This segmentation allows each component to be optimized independently - the rigid insert provides structural strength, the flexible strap provides comfort, and the latching mechanism provides secure attachment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The latching surface is pre-configured with specific geometric features (width ≥8mm, included angle 20°-50°) that enable it to engage with the latching mechanism before any load is applied. This preliminary geometric configuration ensures that when the strap is attached, the latching connection is already optimized to resist pull-out forces effectively.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If a secure latching mechanism is implemented, then the strap connection is reliable, but the strap system becomes more complex with moving parts

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestrap attachment reliabilityVSAvoidstrap mechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The complex latching mechanism is extracted from the strap itself and placed entirely within the device housing. The strap portion is simplified to contain only the rigid insert with latching surface, which has no moving parts. This extraction reduces strap complexity while maintaining reliable latching through the housing-embedded mechanism.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The rigid insert with latching surface is designed to automatically engage with the latching mechanism in the device housing simply by being inserted into the receptacle. No additional actuators, springs, or moving parts are needed in the strap - the geometry itself provides the self-latching function, reducing complexity while maintaining reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

3Ease of operation

If moving parts are used in the strap to interact with the latching mechanism, then the strap can be easily removed, but the manufacturing process becomes more difficult

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestrap removal easeVSAvoidstrap manufacturing ease
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The rigid insert is merged with the strap body through co-molding or integration, creating a single-piece construction. This eliminates the need for separate manufacturing processes for the insert and strap, simplifying production while maintaining the ease of removal through the latching surface geometry that allows simple insertion and extraction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

4Strength

If a robust latching connection is designed to resist pull-out forces, then the strap is secure, but the strap end profile becomes larger and less streamlined

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepull-out force resistanceVSAvoidstrap end profile
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSShape

Solution Approach 1:

The latching strength is achieved not by increasing the strap end size in all dimensions, but by optimizing the latching surface geometry in specific dimensions - particularly the width (≥8mm) and the included angle (20°-50°). This dimensional optimization provides high pull-out resistance while maintaining a streamlined, low-profile appearance from the front view of the strap end.

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

Data Source

PatentUS11425973B2Wearable device straps and attachment hardware therefor
Publication Date: 2022.08.30 FITBIT INC
  • US11425973B2 patent drawing
  • US11425973B2 patent drawing
  • US11425973B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Low-profile latching mechanisms and related mechanical interfaces for allowing straps and other fastening accessories for limb-wearable devices are provided. The mechanisms in question allow for a very strong, yet easily releasable, connection to be made between a strap accessory and a device housing, with very little of the mechanism being visible.