Wiper Drive Support Element With Force-Triggered Breakage Control
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing wiper system support elements fail to effectively manage peak loads during collisions, potentially causing injuries by not adequately controlling the breakage behavior and energy absorption at the predetermined breaking point, which affects the HIC value and injury risk.
Innovation Solution
A support element with a predetermined breaking point and a gap that adjusts based on force, incorporating projections and elastic elements to control breakage behavior and reduce latency, allowing for improved force transfer and energy absorption.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Object-affected harmful factors
If the support element is designed with a predetermined breaking point for safety, then injury risk is reduced, but structural strength during normal operation is compromised
Solution Approach 1:
The support element is segmented into a first region (with the breaking point) and a second region (without the breaking point). This segmentation allows the first region to break at a predetermined load to reduce injury risk, while the second region maintains structural strength for normal operation and provides alternative load paths.
Solution Approach 2:
Different regions of the support element are assigned different structural qualities: the first region has reduced strength with a breaking point for safety, while the second region has enhanced strength to maintain overall structural integrity. This local differentiation resolves the contradiction between safety and strength.
2Reliability
If the support element is strengthened to maintain structural integrity, then normal operation reliability is improved, but breakage control during collision is worsened
Solution Approach 1:
By dividing the support element into functional regions with different strength characteristics, the design ensures that the weakened first region breaks predictably during collision (controlling breakage behavior) while the strengthened second region maintains operational reliability during normal use.
Solution Approach 2:
The structural parameters (strength, thickness, geometry) are changed locally in different regions. The first region has parameters optimized for controlled breakage, while the second region has parameters optimized for strength and reliability, resolving the contradiction between operational reliability and breakage control.
3Object-affected harmful factors
If the breaking point is designed for lower load, then safety is improved, but the support element weakens during normal operation
Solution Approach 1:
The support element is divided into a first region with a breaking point designed for lower load (safety) and a second region without a breaking point that maintains higher strength (operational reliability). The segmented design ensures that the safety-critical region breaks predictably while the reliability-critical region remains intact during normal operation.
Solution Approach 2:
Different local qualities are assigned to different regions: the first region has reduced strength quality for safety, while the second region has enhanced strength quality for operational reliability. This local differentiation allows the support element to be both safe during collision and reliable during normal use.
4Strength
If the support element absorbs more energy during breakage, then structural integrity is maintained, but HIC value increases
Solution Approach 1:
The support element is segmented into a first region that absorbs energy through controlled breakage (reducing HIC value) and a second region that maintains structural integrity. The segmentation allows energy absorption to occur in a controlled manner in the first region while the second region preserves overall structural integrity.
Solution Approach 2:
The potential harm of energy absorption during breakage is converted into a benefit by designing the first region to break in a controlled manner. The breakage of the first region absorbs energy that would otherwise be transmitted to the pedestrian, converting a harmful effect (energy transmission) into a beneficial one (energy absorption that reduces HIC value).
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 solution enhances the control of breakage behavior and reduces energy absorption, thereby improving the HIC value and minimizing injury risk by ensuring the support element breaks earlier and more predictably under peak loads, while maintaining structural integrity during normal operation.
Implementation Method 1
A specified gap lies between the support element and the surrounding structure at a contact portion of the support element, the width of said gap being dependent on a force that acts on the support element
Data Source
AI summary
The invention relates to a support element (105) for a wiper drive (100), comprising a receiving portion (130) for attaching the wiper drive (100), a bearing point (135) for fixing the support element (105) to a surrounding structure (110), and a predetermined breaking point (140). A specified gap (150) lies between the support element (105) and the surrounding structure (110) at a contact portion (142) of the support element (105), the width of said gap being dependent on a force that acts on the support element (105) such that the contact portion (142) comes into contact with the surrounding structure (110) only when a specified force acting on the support element (105) is exceeded.