This Application is a Section 371 National Stage Application of International Application No. PCT/EP2013/051198, filed Jan. 23, 2013 and published as WO 2013/110635 on Aug. 1, 2013, not in English, the contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
The invention concerns a drainage body surface unit according to the preamble of claim 1.
WO 2011/042415 A1 discloses a trench drain, the drainage body of which is composed of two drainage body surface units as shown in
The known drainage body surface units have bases 1, 1′ from which spacer elements 10, 10′ protrude. These have tapering casing surfaces which, in the embodiment shown in WO 2011/042415 A1, are fitted with beads for reinforcement or stabilisation.
Such trench drains should firstly require as little material usage as possible, which not only reduces costs but also facilitates transport and construction. Secondly, the completed, installed trench drains should have as high a stability as possible.
The invention is based on the object of refining a drainage body surface unit of the type cited initially to achieve an improved stackability and as high a stability as possible with minimum material usage.
This object is achieved by the drainage body surface unit explained in claim 1.
In particular this object is achieved with a drainage body surface unit with conical spacer elements which are connected via a base and stand at an angle α to the vertical, and in cross section have undulating casing surfaces comprising successive wave peaks and troughs, in that the wave peaks transform into the wave trough via transitional regions, wherein the transitional regions have a smaller material thickness than the wave troughs.
This construction guarantees that firstly as a high stability is possible is guaranteed with low material usage, since the transitional regions contribute relatively little to stability against vertical forces. Secondly the stackability i.e. the volume assumed by several drainage body surface units stacked on each other for storage or transport, is improved.
The transitional regions preferably connect the wave peaks to the wave troughs via constant surfaces which are free from kinks and jumps. This gives maximum stability and also entails advantages for injection moulding.
The wave peaks preferably have a smaller material thickness than the wave troughs. Surprisingly it has been shown that if the wave troughs have a greater material thickness than the wave peaks, both make similarly high contributions to the bending stability of the spacer elements. The bending stability means the stability against the force which presses the casing surface outward under the effect of a vertical force on the spacer elements.
The wave peaks and the wave troughs are preferably formed as tubular portions with arcuate contour in the circumferential direction. This shape firstly gives a particularly high bending stiffness and secondly the design and calculation are still simple.
The spacer elements are preferably dimensioned such that when the drainage body surface units are stacked, a gap remains between the outer faces of the spacer elements of a lower drainage body surface unit and the inner faces of the spacer elements of an upper drainage body surface unit. This guarantees that the conical spacer elements do not seize on stacking. It should be pointed out here that the phrase “a gap remains” does not mean that the outer faces and inner faces of the spacer elements may never touch under any circumstances. Rather it means that contact points (or lines) indeed exist between these surfaces but the surfaces are not in complete contact with each other.
Preferably the angle α which determines the conicity of the spacer elements is 8° to 12°, preferably around 10°. This relatively acute angle has proved advantageous firstly with regard to the resulting bending strength, i.e. the resistance to vertical loads, and secondly spacer elements with such a form or the drainage body surface units constructed therefrom can still be stacked together and hence transported and stored easily.
The spacer elements preferably have a height of 500 to 700 mm, preferably 550 to 650 mm, in particular however 600 to 610 mm. With such dimensioning, a sufficient strength is guaranteed with acceptable material usage.
The ratio of the material thickness of the transitional regions to the material thickness of the wave peaks is 0.3 to 0.9, preferably 0.34 to 0.82.
The invention is now explained below in more detail with reference to the enclosed drawings. The drawings show:
In the description which follows, the same reference numerals are used for the same parts and those with the same effect.
As evident from
The wave peaks 12 are connected to the wave troughs 14 via transitional regions 13.
The conicity is defined according to
In the exemplary embodiment shown here, the wave peaks 12 and wave troughs 14 are formed via “tubular portions” with tangential transitions which are arranged evenly around the circumference of a circle. This is shown diagrammatically in
In the transitional regions 13 with cross-section area E2, the tangent β2 points more in the direction toward the centre axis M and therefore, because of said force conditions (bending), need transfer substantially only thrust loads. This transitional region 13 is formed with a smaller cross-section i.e. thinner than the regions of the wave peaks 12 and the wave troughs 14. These transitional regions are shown again diagrammatically in
Furthermore the figures, in particular
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
10 2012 100 552 | Jan 2012 | DE | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP2013/051198 | 1/23/2013 | WO | 00 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2013/110635 | 8/1/2013 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3789615 | Maroschak | Feb 1974 | A |
7473053 | Brochu et al. | Jan 2009 | B1 |
20120255624 | Canney et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
454536 | Oct 1974 | AU |
2863952 | Jan 2007 | CN |
201292616 | Aug 2009 | CN |
201649312 | Nov 2010 | CN |
2 258 792 | Feb 1993 | GB |
WO 2011042415 | Apr 2011 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Germany Office Action from German Application No. DE 10 2012 100 552.4, dated Sep. 4, 2012. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT/EP2013/051198, dated Apr. 5, 2013. |
English translation of Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/EP2013/051198, dated Jul. 29, 2014, 6 pages. |
First Office Action for Chinese Patent Application No. 201380006352.1, dated May 4, 2015, 5 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20140369757 A1 | Dec 2014 | US |