Configurable Window Restrictor Assembly Dynamics
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing window restrictor assemblies lack versatility, requiring multiple devices for different operational configurations, such as limiting window opening or holding it in place, and do not easily allow for full opening or closing for maintenance purposes.
Innovation Solution
A restrictor assembly with interengaging formations on multiple members that can be configured to allow sliding movement in one direction while holding against movement in the other, or holding against movement in both directions, by altering the interaction of these formations, allowing for enhanced versatility without the need for multiple devices.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If a restrictor assembly is designed to hold the window in a limited open position against further opening or closing, then safety and security are improved, but the ability to open the window fully for maintenance is reduced
Solution Approach 1:
The restrictor assembly incorporates a resilient bias that allows the second member to be dynamically disengaged from the track's interengaging formations. This enables the window to be held securely in a limited position during normal use, but allows full opening when sufficient force is applied to overcome the resilient bias, thus resolving the contradiction between safety and maintenance accessibility
Solution Approach 2:
The assembly changes its mechanical parameters by altering the engagement state between the interengaging formations. In normal operation, the formations are engaged to provide restrictive holding force. During maintenance, the resilient bias is overcome to change the engagement parameter, allowing full window movement. This parameter change resolves the contradiction by providing both secure holding and full opening capability
2Adaptability or versatility
If multiple restrictor devices are used to provide different operational configurations (limiting opening vs holding in place), then functional versatility is improved, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The restrictor assembly is designed as a universal device that can provide multiple operational configurations through a single integrated mechanism. The interengaging formations on the first and second members, combined with the resilient bias, enable the assembly to function both as a limiter and as a holder, eliminating the need for multiple separate devices and thus resolving the contradiction between versatility and complexity
Solution Approach 2:
The assembly uses dynamic engagement and disengagement of the interengaging formations to provide different operational modes. By allowing the second member to engage or disengage from the track based on applied force, a single device can adapt between limiting and holding functions, resolving the contradiction without requiring multiple static devices
Data Source
Figure 1A
Figure 1B
Figure 2
AI summary
A restrictor assembly for restricting the movement of a window comprises a first member (1) defining an elongate track (2), a second member (17) mounted for sliding movement along the track (2) and a third member (18) able to interact with the second member (17). The assembly is configurable in a first configuration in which the second member (17) can be moved along the track (2) into a first predetermined position partway along the track and is held against sliding along the track in one direction, but not in the opposite direction. The assembly is also configurable in a second configuration in which the second member (17) can be moved along the track (2) into a second predetermined position partway along the track and is held against sliding along the track in either direction.