Patent Application
20240252874
The present invention relates to a resistance machine for exercising. In particular, the machine is compact, lightweight, and modular to allow for ease of transportation and storage. The multifunction machine is also capable of providing variable, constant, and high resistance for many types of resistance training methods, such as powerlifting.
Currently, resistance training usually requires a user to have access to weighted plates, an Olympic bar, and racking equipment to perform high resistance exercises. The overall system for performing these resistance exercises is bulky, heavy, costly, and requires durable flooring such as concrete. Many powerlifters do not have the means to own such a machine. Therefore, there remains a need for a system which allows users to perform high resistance exercises without the need for heavy or expensive equipment and which is lightweight, compact, and portable.
Many inventions have attempted to provide various features of the compact, lightweight, variable, and high resistance machine, but no inventions to date contain all the features that the machine delivers to the user. The demand for personal fitness equipment is at an all-time high, yet there is no product that delivers high, variable, and constant resistance while being lightweight, compact, portable, multifunctional, and cost-efficient.
There are currently several electromechanical resistance machines available, such as Tonal Systems' U.S. Pat. No. 10,881,890 B2, which aim to give users an all-in-one gym in a compact form factor. These machines are effective in delivering these features, yet they are inherently unable to match the portability that a fully mechanical system offers. Mechanical systems have no reliance on power sources, and so there is no location of use limitation created. Electromechanical systems are also often more expensive given the complex nature of the design and the expensive components used to create high resistances from electrical sources.
Other inventions attempt similar designs as those suggested in this patent, but they fail to deliver all aspects of the lightweight, variable, and portable resistance machine. A first conceptually similar invention is ICON Health & Fitness' U.S. Pat. No. 10,441,840 B2. The invention delivers resistance in a collapsible form factor wherein the user stands upon a platform and pulls on cables connected to an upright cable arm system. The invention is compact, portable, and cost-efficient, but the upright cable arms prevent high resistances from being possible without significant structural weight being added to the frame. The upright frame also creates challenges in delivering a variety of different exercises to the user. Additionally, the invention does not have a well-defined plan to deliver resistance, although it mentions the use of a flywheel resistance mechanism. While able to be lightweight and compact, the flywheel resistance mechanism is not practical in terms of delivering high or constant resistance to users. Flywheels are also only able to provide resistive forces and do not store energy, thereby only providing the user with a resistance on the concentric portion of an exercise and no resistance on the eccentric portion of an exercise.
Another similar invention to the invention disclosed in this patent is Maxpro Fitness LLC's compact high resistance fitness device (patent US 2021/0339078 A1). The described device provides the user with high and variable resistance in a portable, lightweight, and cost-effective form factor. The device is small enough to be integrated into other products to create a comprehensive exercise experience for the user. However, the disclosed invention does not have a detailed plan to provide constant resistance to the user. The patent mentions frictional and non-momentum-based resistance sources, however, these sources are either not constant or not mechanical. Like flywheels, a frictional resistance source does not store energy and is unable to wind the spooling device back into the device. Therefore, a separate spring and clutch mechanism is required to disengage the frictional resistance source and wind the inelastic cable back onto the device's spool. When using a mechanism such as this, the user does not feel any resistance on the eccentric phase of the exercise. A majority of muscle breakdown occurs during the eccentric phase of an exercise, so an invention lacking resistance during this phase has limited use for most, if not all, experienced weightlifters.
Yet another conceptually similar invention is Gymflex Fitness's U.S. Pat. No. 7,591,763 B1. This machine offers users a multifunction, cost-efficient, portable, and lightweight resistance machine by providing the user with a convertible bench with spooled elastic resistance bands beneath the bench. However, the invention is not capable of delivering variable, constant, or high resistances to users. The lack of these capabilities limits the number of users that will find the invention useful because users are unable to progress in their training due to the fixed resistance levels that the device provides.
A first objective of the invention is to provide a lightweight resistance machine wherein a user can perform high resistance exercises such as the bench press, deadlift, or squat. The invention aims to allow users to perform these exercises without the need for heavy equipment or special environments, such as concrete floors. A lightweight system that provides high resistance enables users to perform any number of exercises in any environment, making it possible to own a portable home gym, even in spaces otherwise not suited for heavy exercise equipment.
A second objective of the invention is to provide a compact resistance machine. As mentioned previously, current high resistance equipment is both heavy and bulky. For a user to own high resistance equipment, one must also have the space to store and use the equipment. This is an insurmountable obstacle to owning exercise equipment for many that live in smaller homes and apartments. Compacting a high resistance machine into a small, portable, and lightweight package makes owning exercise equipment possible for many users who have little available space. For a resistance machine to be considered portable, it must provide the full functionality of the machine without relying on external supports, such as wall mounts.
A third objective of the invention is to provide a variable resistance system. To be compatible with several different workouts and user experience levels, the resistance system must be able to increment resistance in small amounts, such as 5 lb increments. Additionally, to improve user experience and decrease the time necessary to change resistance levels, the system may also provide larger resistance increments, such as 25 lb increments.
A fourth objective of the invention is to provide a modular system. Providing a modular system allows users to add resistance modules to equipment and achieve higher levels of resistance than what is achievable with a single resistance machine. This provides the user with flexibility to choose what resistance levels are appropriate for them. Additionally, the resistance machine can remain lightweight and portable without increasing the weight of a single machine. Modularity is also an objective of the machine itself, not just the resistance mechanism. By allowing parts of the machine to be added and removed based on a common attachment method across the parts, the user is able to customize the type and size of the machine based on the user's preferences. The modular system is also easily upgraded when new parts are developed.
A fifth objective of the invention is to provide an easily modifiable system. Maintaining ease of modification allows the user to quickly transition between exercises, maximize the efficiency of the user's workout, and make the user experience as positive as possible. The number of modular accessories should be limited in order to minimize equipment transition time and needed space for the resistance machine. It is also critical to allow the user to seamlessly select different levels of resistance without the need to disassemble modularized equipment. This modifiability is also intended to be applied to the location of resistance modules, not just their inclusion or exclusion. By allowing the machine and modules to fit together in a variety of positions, a greater number of workouts can be achieved with fewer pieces of equipment, and the same equipment can be used by users of all body sizes.
A sixth objective of the invention is to provide an “all-in-one” resistance machine where most, if not all, traditional resistance exercises are possible. Giving the user as many exercise options as possible increases the likelihood that the user will purchase the invention to replace weight-based equipment. It is desirable to allow users to perform both the stated high resistance exercises and lower resistance exercises such as chest flies, lateral raises, and curls.
A seventh objective of the invention is to provide the user with constant resistance. Constant resistance provides the user with concentric, eccentric, and isometric resistance phases, allowing the user to effectively breakdown and build muscle more efficiently than could be achieved with conventional, nonlinear resistance spring-based mechanisms. Machines lacking any of the aforementioned resistance phases reduces the user's ability to build muscle, thereby limiting the use of the machine and likelihood for experienced lifters to buy the machine. A constant resistance source allows the user to perform a wider variety of exercises and most accurately emulates the feel of a traditional exercise system that utilizes gravitational resistance.
An eighth objective of the invention is to be cost effective. Users are more likely to buy a system that is priced within their budget, so a cost effective design is critical to the potential success of a product. In general, fully mechanical systems will be more cost effective than electromechanical systems because of the high cost of electrical components, particularly if the electrical components are the resistance providing components.
A ninth objective of the invention is to provide the user with a safe lifting experience. Because the resistance sources of the invention are non-gravitational, they do not require large and heavy equipment to control the motion of the equipment. Therefore, it is more feasible to implement a safety mechanism which halts or disengages resistance in an emergency situation. Providing a safe lifting experience is critical to building and maintaining trust with users.
A tenth objective of the invention is to be sustainable and recyclable. Designs that utilize materials that are easily recyclable, such as metal, are preferable to those which do not. Additionally, designs that are self-sufficient and do not require external power sources are preferred because they are able to operate without requiring the emission of environmentally damaging byproducts to use the machine.
An eleventh objective of the invention is to be easily understood by our audience. Those design options which more closely resemble existing power lifting equipment will be readily understood by weightlifters, and therefore have an advantage over novel-seeming designs. While the resemblance to current weightlifting equipment will be beneficial to audience acceptance and willingness to engage with the machine, its physical functions and means of use are far more important to the design. A design which functions and feels similar to current weightlifting equipment while not giving up any of the core advantages of the technology is most desirable. This will decrease the learning curve for the audience to start getting value from the machine and increase their likelihood to use the machine.
A twelfth objective of the invention is to be easy to use. To ensure the user has a good experience using the machine, and is likely to continue using it and recommend it to others, the machine must be easy to use. This means that during set up, use, cleanup, and transport, the user should have no difficult actions to overcome. This includes actions that are needlessly physically, dexterously, or mentally difficult. Any features of the design outside of those explicitly meant to be challenging for the user that take away from the user's experience should be minimized.
To achieve these objectives, a novel resistance mechanism that utilizes lightweight resistance elements is designed. The resistance mechanism is designed to be as small as possible and be connected to a platform, bench, seat, overhead structure, or other structure. The user then interfaces with the structure to perform exercises. The combination of the resistance mechanism and the structure constitutes a resistance machine. The user stands, sits, or lays on the structure and interacts with at least one inelastic cable that contains the tensile force provided by the mechanism. Because the resistance force created by the mechanism is non-gravitational, the user's weight must be entirely contained within the structure to ensure that the system is stable. Otherwise, the resistance is not internal to the overall system and external forces will dominate the response of the resistance machine. The machine is preferably modularized to allow the user to build a system specific to their needs, with modules that allow the user to perform different exercises. For example, a bar accessory is used to combine the forces of two separate resistance mechanisms, thereby allowing the user to double the overall resistance by interacting with two resistance mechanisms at once. Additional accessories, such as a bench, can be combined with the system to allow the user to perform exercises that involve the use of benches. This design creates a fully modular environment wherein the user can quickly modify the resistance system to perform specific exercises.
A diverse set of complexities arise when designing the resistance mechanism contained within the modular resistance machine. Foremost, the lightweight and variable resistance must be designed. Lightweight and variable resistance can be provided in various manners including, but not limited to, electromagnets, electrically powered motors, resistance bands, and springs. For a lightweight, portable, and high resistance machine, the following design objectives are of the greatest importance: minimizing the overall weight and volume, maximizing the overall resistance, and maximizing the independence of the overall system. To achieve these goals, two high-level approaches to the design of the lightweight resistance system are apparent: an electromechanical approach or a mechanical approach.
The electromechanical approach involves the conversion of electrically powered resistance devices, such as electromagnets or motors, into mechanical forces that the user interacts with. This approach greatly simplifies the mechanical design of the system due to the inherently variable nature of the mechanical force provided by electrical devices. To vary resistance, one must vary the power supplied to the resistance device. From a mechanical design perspective, this is advantageous because the design is compact and has few dynamically moving parts. Therefore, there are fewer chances for part failure. However, a power source is required to operate an electromechanical resistance machine. Additionally, the ability to output high resistance is proportional to the supplied electrical power, therefore causing faster battery drain at higher resistances. For a resistance machine attempting to provide high resistances in a portable system, these design limitations are not ideal because they create a dependence on available electrical power. Relying on electrical power also creates an expensive system due to the high cost of electromagnetic components that are able to supply high resistance and the constant use of electricity when exercising.
In the mechanical approach, a system must be designed to interface with the engagement of the mechanically based resistance devices. Unlike electromechanical systems, fully mechanical systems are not inherently compact or variable. Many more design considerations must be accounted for to create a small, lightweight, variable, and high resistance mechanism. Although the fully mechanical system creates more mechanical design challenges, it operates independently from external conditions. Therefore, the mechanical system is a more desirable and sustainable design approach as compared to the electromechanical approach due to the mechanical approach's ability to be an autonomous resistance machine. Additionally, mechanical components are cheaper than electronic components and do not require any programming logic to control, decreasing the cost of development and the product.
An additional possibility for generating internal resistance is using a form of friction pads or flywheels, which would resist motion. This was not selected due to its lack of obvious ways to provide eccentric, concentric, and isometric phases to the motion of exercise. Friction pads or flywheels generate resistance from dissipative forces, thereby only generating resistance in the concentric phase of an exercise. Elastic potential energy in the form of springs can provide all of the resistance phases of an exercise. These phases are desirable during powerlifting and other weighted exercises, so springs were determined to be more desirable.
Instead of using resistance bands or helically coiled springs, a design utilizing constant force springs is more compact than other designs. A constant force spring consists of a thin strip of metal that is formed into a coil about its central axis, each layer of the coil having essentially the same radius due to the thinness of the metal. The act of uncoiling the spring generates stress in the metal that is transferred to the object uncoiling the spring in the form of linear force. The generated stress is dependent on the radius, width, thickness, and material properties of the metal spring, and because the aforementioned factors are all constant throughout the spring's extension, the generated force from the spring is constant. Gravity also exerts a constant force in static conditions, and weightlifters are accustomed to gravity as their primary method of resistance generation. By using a mechanism that generates a constant force, the lifting experience will be more similar to weights than other resistance devices such as helically coiled springs or resistance bands, thereby creating a more familiar and better lifting experience for the user. Because constant force springs are compact, have high resistance to weight ratios, are recyclable, and output constant resistance, designs using constant force springs are recognized as the best mode for our purposes.
Constant torque springs may provide an even better solution than constant force springs. Constant torque springs consist of a constant force spring wherein the otherwise linear extension of the spring is captured by a secondary rotational axis which re-coils the spring onto itself. The secondary rotational axis is referred to as the takeup drum and the spring's central rotational axis is referred to as the storage drum. This results in the spring's torque generation being increased and restrained to two compact axes as opposed to an axis and a linear space to extend into. This second axis can then be attached to the output shaft to provide constant torque to a system. The constant torque spring is therefore more compact, lightweight, and is easier to work with than a constant force spring.
To provide the user with variable resistance, some form of resistance adjusting mechanism must be implemented. There are a variety of possible designs that can achieve the objectives of a compact, lightweight, variable, and high resistance machine. However, two possible design routes with the highest potential were envisioned to achieve the goals of the resistance mechanism: one high resistance generation source with variable output, or many smaller resistance generating sources that are optionally combined to one another.
The first possibility is to use one or more high resistance constant torque springs to produce all of the resistance for the machine. While this would produce the high resistance desired for the machine, it must also be variable. To achieve variable resistance, a transmission system would utilize variable gear ratios to adjust resistance levels. The transmission would consist of either a continuously variable transmission or a traditionally designed transmission. A traditionally designed transmission contains two gear sets on shafts positioned opposite one another, each with a series of differently sized gears. By shifting the position of a belt connecting the two sets of gears, different gear ratios between the two shafts are achieved. By altering the gear ratio, different amounts of torque are transferred to the output shaft, and therefore, the resistance output is adjusted. Similarly, a continuously variable transmission has an input and output shaft, but instead of a series of two sets of gears along the two shafts, each shaft has a variable pulley that can be adjusted to have larger and smaller effective radii. This arrangement allows the adjustable pulleys to output any gear ratio between their two extreme sizes. In either design, attaching a spool to the output shaft transfers force to the user. The user may change the resistance level via a dial that adjusts the transmission gear ratio. This design would contain few, relatively small components, be self-contained, and thus be compact, lightweight, variable and produce high resistances.
While a transmission system has many advantages, it would suffer from being not easily understood by the target audience, complex in its design, difficult to maintain and manufacture, and potentially expensive. Because of this, other possibilities are considered. Instead of a single very high resistance source being used, a series of smaller springs are considered for design. This opens up several interesting design possibilities.
The first possible design consists of a series of springs lined up near the input shaft, but not yet engaged with it. A pin could then be used to engage a group of modules with a level of variance down to the individual module size. These pinnable modules would act similarly to existing pin-based weight racks, and so would be familiar to weight lifters. They would also be relatively lightweight because all springs would be contained in a single space and not require any sophisticated mechanisms to engage the springs, resulting in very little material being used.
Similarly, another mechanism design is considered in which the springs are engaged or disengaged by sliding them along a rail with a spool positioned at the end of the rail. To engage springs, they are slid along the rail towards the spool. Each spring has a takeup shaft with a female end and male end that attach to adjacent springs, or the spool itself. When the springs are attached to the spool via the female and male connection ports, they provide resistance to the spool's rotation. The user pulls an inelastic cable wound around the spool, thereby rotating the spool and engaging the resistance of the springs that are attached. This design allows the modules to act more like traditional weights, where placing them in contact with the shaft would result in their engagement. However, the design would have a limited rail length, and therefore, there is a limit to the resistance that can be provided by the mechanism.
To remove resistance limitations and further increase the design's similarity to traditional weightlifting systems, the rail system could be removed from the design. Instead of using the rail to support the connections between springs, the springs are placed in separate enclosures, referred to as resistance plates (as shown in
When designing the overall form factor for the resistance machine, there are several approaches to the design that fall under two main categories: a machine with an integrated resistance mechanism or a machine with a detachable resistance mechanism. An integrated resistance mechanism has many benefits including being easily understandable, compact, and an increased ability to implement safeties. The integrated machine would have few separable products, so users would have no confusion in which product they need to purchase. It is also easy to design a compact machine due to the resistance mechanism integration. Additionally, because the resistance mechanism is integrated into the resistance machine, there are more opportunities to implement safety features to protect the user in an emergency. However, there are many drawbacks to an integrated system including the machine being more difficult to configure, recycle, and upgrade as well as fewer possible exercises and an imposed limit to the resistance provided by the machine. Inherently, the integrated system is not modular, and the system must provide the ability to perform a wide array of exercises wherein the user may stand, sit, or lay on the machine. As compared to a modular machine, it is difficult to achieve support for all exercises because parts will have multiple functions. Lack of modularity also makes the system more difficult to configure for the exercises because the multi-function parts need to be reconfigured for different exercises. In addition, it is difficult to modify the resistance mechanism because it is integrated into the design. Therefore, the resistance providing parts, which are most likely to fatigue, are less accessible to be replaced and recycled. The machine is also not easy to upgrade because it is inseparable, and therefore, resistance mechanisms or structural components cannot easily be swapped out. Finally, because the resistance mechanism is likely internal to the system, resistance provided by the machine is limited to what the resistance devices in the system can provide.
In comparison, a detachable resistance mechanism takes advantage of a modular design to make the system easy to configure, recycle, and upgrade as well as provide many possible exercises and have no limit to the resistance provided by the machine. The detachable resistance mechanism allows it to be used with any structure, so a modular approach to the machine can be taken wherein each structure has a specific purpose. This removes limitations on the machine's configurations so that the machine may be easy to configure while providing many exercises. The modular design also makes it easy to replace and recycle individually fatigued components because they are separable from the system. In the same vein, upgrades to outdated components can easily be made to add features to the machine without requiring users to purchase fully new systems. With a detachable resistance mechanism, there is no prescribed limit to resistance provided by the machine. Resistance can be added modularly, depending on the resistance mechanism, or resistance mechanisms with different resistance levels could be quickly swapped in or out to increase or decrease the total resistance of the machine. However, the modular resistance machine is also less readily understood because there may be several products that the user could have the option to purchase. Additionally, there is less opportunity to implement safeties in the system because the system is separable. Given the benefits of the detachable resistance mechanism and the belief that the drawbacks are more easily designed or marketed around than the integrated resistance mechanism, the detachable resistance mechanism is recognized as the best mode for the resistance machine form factor.
The resistance plate form factor may be attached to a structure to form a resistance machine using different approaches. One approach that closely resembles traditional weightlifting systems is attaching a resistance mechanism to either ends of a barbell. Each end of the barbell would have a spool connected to it wherein resistance plates could be added or removed. The ends of the inelastic cables, which are wound around the spools are attached to another structure, such as a platform, wherein the user contains their weight. When the user pulls the barbell, the spools unwind, rotating the shaft and engaging the resistance of the springs. This assembly closely resembles standard barbell weights wherein weighted plates are added to the barbell to increase resistance. While this arrangement would most closely resemble traditional weightlifting, the resistance mechanism would need to be designed to be used with multiple different attachment types, such as handles, curl bars, or hex bars. Therefore, the machine would require non-standard parts, increasing development time and manufacturing costs while decreasing the user's ability to purchase other attachments that they may prefer.
Instead of attaching the resistance mechanism to a barbell, another approach affixes the resistance mechanism to an external structure wherein the user contains their weight, such as a platform. An attachment is connected to the end of the inelastic cable to interface with the user. The user then pulls the attachment away from the resistance mechanism to engage resistance. This is a more flexible design as the mechanism could be designed to have a generic attachment point at the end of the inelastic cable which would allow the barbell to be switched out with other accessories, opening the design up to allow many other exercises. The mechanism could also be designed with an easy to engage and disengage attachment point at the base of the spool to allow it to readily move from one structure to another. By allowing the resistance mechanism to move freely between structures, users can change the direction of resistance for different workouts. Additionally, the structure the resistance mechanism is attached to is easily swapped out with another, thereby creating a modular system that is easily upgradeable. Because of these benefits, this design is recognized as the best mode for the resistance machine.
To decrease the size and weight of the resistance plates, an additional transmission system could be incorporated into the spool or the resistance plates themselves. By doing so, a gear ratio could be utilized to either increase the resistance provided by the springs or decrease the extension of the springs. Therefore, smaller springs that undergo less stress could be used to generate the same resistance. However, the mechanical advantage gained or minimized by the transmission system cannot be over utilized because the springs may require an extension length or resistance output that is impractical to achieve. The transmission system therefore is a potentially useful tool to balance spring extension length, force output, fatigue life, and size.
When using the machine, the user will hold a bar or other attachment that is connected to one or more inelastic cables, each of which are attached to one or more resistance mechanisms. The springs within the resistance mechanism will provide resistance to the inelastic cable's unspooling, and thus, resistance to the user's movement of the bar or handle. This process is necessary for the function of the machine, but there are instances where the user may not want resistance to moving the bar or handle. Primarily, resistance is not desirable when the user is setting up their workout. Oftentimes, the user will want to adjust the end position of the inelastic cable to be at the starting point of an exercise position. For example, a squat exercise begins with the bar on the user's shoulders whereas a deadlift exercise starts with the bar low to the ground, approximately nine inches off the ground. With weights, the user must exert effort to lift the bar and all the weights to these starting positions or have a series of pulleys connecting the bar to weights contained within a machine. However, with non-gravitational resistance, it is not necessary to require the user to set up workouts with exerted effort.
There are two immediately clear methods to change the starting position of the inelastic cable: add a secondary inelastic cable extension to the end point of the spooled inelastic cable (
The second option for inelastic cable position adjustment would be some method for the user to engage and disengage the spool from the resistance plates to allow the inelastic cable to unspool with little resistance. In the disengaged state, the bar could be repositioned with little effort, and when the user's position was set, they could re-engage the resistance plates to begin the workout. This design would require fewer parts from the user's perspective and may be easier for the user to change starting positions between workouts. Disengagement of the resistance plates could be achieved with a clutch or similar means of disconnecting serial shafts from one another. Actuation of the clutch mechanism could be achieved through direct force of the user via a physical switch or through a remote interface that would require the addition of low power consumption electronics (
Importantly, the resistance machine needs to be safe to use. In the case of an emergency, a user needs to be able to disengage resistance. Additionally, it is preferable that the resistance machine is able to disengage resistance without the input of a user in a dangerous situation. It is therefore potentially useful to add small, low-power electronics to the resistance machine to add sensors, actuation, and logic to the machine for safety. A combination of a rotary sensor and clutch mechanism could act as a safety device to automatically disengage resistance when the rotation exceeds a certain speed, presumably resulting from the user dropping a bar or handle attachment unexpectedly. Disengaging the resistance in this situation would stop the user from being hit with an attachment with great force. Likewise, a braking mechanism could be used to stop the rotation of the spool in a similar situation. The added safety features would allow each user to act as their own spotter and make working out significantly safer for those working out alone, such as those who may be doing so with an at home gym.
Another feature which may improve the resistance machine is a mechanism to control the angle of force to mimic gravitational force while the machine is in use. A common problem with cable-based workout machines is that the generated force is fixed to a specific external point. Gravity always acts towards the center of the Earth, so when a user lifts with free weights, the user is able to follow a non-straight lifting path without feeling forces that act perpendicular to gravitational force and therefore, the user's lifting path. However, when resistance is generated from a fixed point, the force vector will always act towards the anchor point. This means that if a user does not follow a straight lifting path from the fixed point, the user will need to counteract forces perpendicular to the user's lifting path. Often, this results in the user over correcting towards the straight path, which causes a back and forth “wobble” while the user lifts. This wobble is undesirable because it causes discomfort and forces the user to utilize muscle groups that are not intended to be used for certain workouts.
To resolve the wobble phenomena, there are several solutions which can be implemented. One solution uses a rail mechanism to attach resistance mechanisms to the structure. The rail mechanism has an attachment point that slides along the rail with low friction. When the resistance mechanisms are fixed to the attachment point and a user pulls the inelastic cable at an angle, the entire resistance mechanism will slide along the rail toward the angled force. The resistance mechanism will continue sliding until the force is angled directly upward in the user's lifting path. Allowing the resistance mechanism to slide prevents the exertion of perpendicular forces on the user, therefore allowing the user to focus on lifting with proper form and targeting the correct muscle groups. An added benefit of this design is that it only requires a single attachment point along the entire length of the structure instead of potentially requiring a series of attachment points to change resistance mechanism positions, thereby simplifying the set up and changing of workouts. The rail's attachment point should also be optionally locked into a stationary position because there may be exercises wherein the user will want a fixed resistance mechanism position.
In nearly all the aforementioned resistance mechanism designs, an inelastic cable is wound around a spool to transfer rotational motion to translational motion. However, to provide resistance to the user, there may be designs where neither of these components are necessary. It is apparent to those skilled in the art that rotational motion can be transferred to translational motion using many different mechanisms, including rack and pinions, slider and cranks, and the like. Additionally, there are exercises wherein translational motion is not desirable and only rotational motion is required, such as quadricep curls, hamstring curls, hip abductor curls, hip adductor curls, biceps curls, and the like. For these exercises, a spool mechanism is unnecessary because rotational torque can be transferred directly from the constant torque springs to the rotational component that the user interfaces with, such as a rotary leg pad. In a rotation only configuration, the resistance mechanism would need to be fixed to the structure that the user contains their weight on. In addition, the shaft containing the torque of the resistance mechanism would need to be connected to the rotary component in a manner which resists the motion of the user throughout the exercise.
In an exemplary approach to the resistance machine, three main structures are used to deliver exercise positions to the user: a platform, bench, and overhead extension. Each of these structures are detachable from one another to allow the user to configure the system for different workouts or for transportation. At least one resistance mechanism is optionally attached to either the platform or overhead extension to position the direction of resistance for different exercises. A rail system is fixed to both ends of the platform to allow for a translatable attachment point to the resistance mechanism. The platform has feet to offset itself a distance from the ground. The overhead structure connects underneath the platform in the offset space created by the platform's feet. The bench connects on top of the platform, directly on the face in which a user may stand. The platform, bench, and overhead structure are all able to fold separately into smaller configurations to allow for easy transport and storage. This system yields a fully compact, lightweight, variable, and high resistance machine that is modular and easily configured by users to set up exercises or to transport the machine.
The accompanying drawings are incorporated in and constitute a part of the specification. The drawings, together with the general description given above and the detailed description of the exemplary embodiments and methods given below, serve to explain the principles of the invention. The objects and advantages of the invention will become apparent from a study of the following specification when viewed in light of the accompanying drawings, in which like elements are given the same or analogous reference numerals and wherein:
It is to be understood that the disclosed embodiments of the invention are not limited to the detailed arrangements shown. The invention is capable of achieving similar results in other arrangements not shown. Additionally, the terminology used to describe the arrangements is for description only. The following terms and their associated meanings are explicitly defined below for the reader.
The following list of components are referenced in the figures:
As used herein, similar reference numerals indicate similar elements. When more than one of the same elements are mentioned, lower case letters are used after the numbers to indicate each of the elements. For example, 66a indicates a first resistance plate and 66b indicates a second resistance plate, with each resistance plate having different features.
To engage the resistance within the resistance plates 66, the resistance plates 66 must also have a connection to fix the resistance plate encasing 63 to adjacent encasings. The resistance plate encasing 63 directly adjacent to the spool assembly 62 must have a similar connection to the spool encasing 57. As shown in
Although
Not shown in
Although certain presently preferred embodiments of the invention have been specifically described herein, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art to which the invention pertains that variations and modifications of the various embodiments shown and described herein may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Accordingly, it is intended that the invention be limited only to the extent required by the appended claims and the applicable rules of law.
This application claims the priority of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63/441,981, filed Jan. 30, 2023, which is incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 63441981 | Jan 2023 | US |
