Patent Application
20250195936
This invention is generally related to resistance exercise devices for muscles surrounding the major joints of the body, and provides multiple axis resistance exercise for the ball-and-socket joints of a user, particularly the shoulder and hip.
Most resistance exercise devices target the ball-and-socket joints with single, fixed plane-of-motion exercise. Comparison of shoulder and hip joint anatomy and function provide insight for resistance training protocol. The shoulder and hip are both multiaxial joints. They control the multiple axis movement of the four extremities.
In contrast to the shoulder, the hip has distinct, heavy-grade structure and dynamic function. Forces transmitted through the hip joint can reach a magnitude of eight times body weight during sprinting and jumping. The musculature and other structures in and around the joint must stabilize these large forces generated during movement. The muscles of the hips are the most powerful in the body, which is consistent with the primary missions of the hip musculature, i.e.—full body weight translational movement, and stabilization of the joint and upper body, even under heavy load, and at high joint angular velocity.
Stability of the hip is dependent on both active and static mechanisms. Active control of hip joint alignment and compression is provided by dynamic tension in surrounding musculature. Static stability is provided by capture of the femoral head in the heavy-grade, joint socket. Together, these mechanisms provide deep socket compression stability of the femoral head. Heavy-grade, deep socket design enhances stability of the hip joint even under heavy load, resulting in somewhat limited range of motion in comparison to the shoulder.
The shoulder has some of the same characteristics as the hip, but with important differences. Whereas the hip is designed for strength and stability, the shoulder is designed for range of motion, flexibility, and performance. By reducing shoulder joint structural weight and restraint (in contrast to the hip), the shoulder's range of motion is markedly enhanced. With its wide range of motion, the shoulder is an ideal representative model for applying multiple axis resistance exercise.
The shoulder is the most mobile joint in the human body, with 360 degrees of motion in circumduction, and 180 degrees of motion in all simple radial planes of movement of the joint. The three dimensional range of movement of the shoulder can be mapped as a virtual hemisphere, centered at the glenohumeral joint. The remarkable range of motion of the shoulder is made possible by minimal static stabilization of the joint. The static stabilizers include bone and non-elastic capsuloligamentous structures. Since the joint capsule and ligaments surrounding the joint are redundant in length, they provide restraint and stability only at wide ranges of motion. The bone structure of the shoulder joint consists of the head of the humerus which glides or rolls in the narrow and shallow glenoid fossa of the scapula. The stability of the glenohumeral or shoulder joint is comparable to the stability of a golf ball (i.e. the humeral head) resting on a golf tee (i.e. the glenoid process).
The biomechanical tradeoff for the tremendous range of motion of the shoulder is minimal static stability. So the shoulder is the most mobile joint, and mutually, it is the least stable joint in the human body as well.
Enhanced dynamic stability, provided by the elastic and contractile dynamic stabilizers of the joint, i.e. the surrounding musculature, compensates for minimal static stability in the shoulder. From the side view, with the humerus at 90 degrees of abduction, one sees a 360 degree radial array of muscles and muscle fibers originating on the trunk, scapula, and clavicle, spanning the shoulder complex, converging and inserting circumferentially into the proximal humerus. Conceptually, each radial plane of muscle fibers can be recruited to move the shoulder in the coplanar plane of motion. This radial array of muscles and muscle fibers about the shoulder also provides coordinated stabilizing radial traction forces throughout the range of motion, in any or all directions simultaneously, for maintaining optimal dynamic alignment of the joint. Therefore, the 360 degree radial array of muscle fibers surrounding the shoulder is the basis for both movement in all radial planes of motion, and for stabilization of the joint in any direction, position, plane, or part of its range of motion. The unique and extensive reliance on radial musculature for 360 degree-motion and -stability means that strength training has the potential to provide more effective performance enhancement to the shoulder than any other joint.
The musculature and nervous system respond to training with specific adaptation to specific imposed demand. Training in any specific plane of motion stimulates an increase in strength, stability, and therefore performance in that specific plane of training, with little enhancement of performance in other planes of musculature and motion.
Therefore, in order to optimize strength and stability in multiple planes of motion, the shoulder must be strength trained in multiple planes of movement. For ideal performance gains, for optimal restoration of function after injury, and for maximum protection from instability, the shoulder should be trained in an exponential number of planes of motion throughout its 360 degree radial array of planes of motion about multiple axes.
Six out of ten strength training machines target the shoulder because of the many planes of resisted motion that must be implemented for adequate shoulder training and injury rehabilitation. Theoretically, one should be able to exercise the shoulder in every conceivable plane of shoulder motion. However, exercise machines of the past, including the most sophisticated rehabilitation and strength testing devices, have never been capable of practically reproducing the remarkable number of planes of motion of the shoulder. In fact, most shoulder exercise machines are manufactured to build strength in only one or a few standard planes of motion.
Since most prior art strength training machines (and lines of machines) permit exercise in only one or a few planes of motion, specific adaptation (i.e. enhanced strength and stability) occurs only in the same limited number of planes. On past shoulder strength training equipment, the angular distances are large between the conventional, standard radial planes of training. This means performance carryover between these planes of training is minimal. When training is limited to these few conventional planes of exercise, relative excess training of the musculature occurs in the few conventional planes of resistance exercise, and relative under training occurs in planes oblique to the conventional planes of exercise. In this way, repetitive training in a limited number of fixed planes of resistance by the prior art paradigm, builds asymmetric strength in the musculature surrounding the shoulder. Asymmetric strength can predispose the joint to instability and injury.
Consequently, training with past equipment leaves the shoulder with less than optimal strength and stability gains, and vulnerable to injury. The limited number of planes of resistance provided by the prior art is a reflection of the unwritten (and erroneous) prior art paradigm that resistance exercise performed through a few standard planes of motion is adequate for building optimal multi-planar strength and stability in the shoulder.
Past exercise machines and equipment, though prolific, employ similar past methods of strength training and assessment. For the purpose of this disclosure, the four most important strength training and assessment modalities in use today are: (1) free weights; (2) electromechanical strength training and assessment devices; (3) fulcrum-flexible-linkage strength training machines; and (4) cable functional strength training machines.
Free weights are one of the oldest and simplest tools for strength training and assessment. Free weights are most effective when lifted vertically in a straight line or plane, particularly in compound joint movement. As with all modes of exercise, free weights have limitations. A misconception in the industry is that free weights provide a more functional form of resistance than machines. For example, studies have reported kinetic and kinematic similarities between certain ballistic free weight lifting techniques and sprinting-jumping movements. But utilizing these strength training techniques has not been shown to directly improve functional performance of similar and dissimilar athletic movements in controlled longitudinal studies any more effectively than conventional techniques. The reason for this is that training has very specific effects. Strength training builds strength only in the specific plane and speed of motion of training. And because strength training does not precisely replicate functional, complex multi-planar movement (e.g. skilled athletic movements), it cannot directly enhance performance of functional, complex multi-planar movement.
Shoulder press exercises with free weights, as a specific example, do not closely simulate any true functional movement, skill, or ballistic motion; nor do free weights closely simulate dynamically varying forces encountered in the real world, and no more so than when performing press exercises with other modes of resistance training. So there is little or no greater direct effect on performance when shoulder resistance exercise is performed with free weights as opposed to machines.
In critical comparison to training with presently available machines, training an individual in the skills of lifting free weights has only marginal (if any) added effect on functional performance enhancement for the vast majority of real-world skilled, precision, ballistic, impact, and/or high-performance movements.
Further, in terms of strength assessment, past standard methods do not provide comprehensive physiologic, multiple plane strength data. For example, the standard measure of upper body strength, especially in power sports, has long been the standard horizontal chest or bench press utilizing free weights. (In practice, this frequently results in a misplaced emphasis on building strength in a single plane of motion as the primary goal of shoulder strength training.) Although it is an expedient way of measuring strength in a single plane of movement, the bench press does not accurately measure overall functional strength or stability. A more accurate way to measure overall functional strength and functional stability of the shoulder is to assess strength in multiple planes of radial motion. But there are few strength assessment devices specifically designed for assessing radial strength of the shoulder in multiple planes.
Strength testing devices manufactured today are designed by the model originally established by Cybex, Biodex, and Chattecx active dynamometers, brand names well-known in the strength training and injury rehabilitation industry. These are electromechanical strength training and assessment devices with microcomputer-based feedback and strength evaluation systems. These machines were originally designed to assess knee strength and angular motion in a single plane of movement. Although these machines can be adapted to assess shoulder strength, like free weights, they are not practical tools for assessing strength in multiple planes of motion.
Machines that employ fulcrum-flexible-linkage resistance mechanisms (such as Nautilus and Cybex International machines) provide full and equal tangential resistance through the full arc and range of motion in the plane of exercise. This makes these machines significantly more effective than free weights for isolated resistance training (such as biceps curls), or for any exercise involving an arc of movement. This type of machine can provide isotonic or dynamic variable resistance exercise (e.g. with variable cammed pulleys). These are proven-effective strength building resistance mechanisms and are advantages that free weights cannot provide in an arc of exercise. The major disadvantage of past conventional fulcrum-flexible-linkage machines is that they cannot provide resistance exercise in more than one or a few planes of motion.
A well-known exercise method called functional training is intended to enhance strength in functional and athletic movements. Cable linkage functional training is performed with machines utilizing an unconstrained user interface (i.e. a handhold or handholds) directly attached to the end of a weighted flexible linkage or cable. These devices are also called free cable devices, and are descendants of the well-known cable-cross or cable column type apparatus. Cable functional training equipment (such as that manufactured by Free Motion Fitness and others) operates in a similar manner to past cable strength training equipment, and therefore, is subject to the same limitations. Because of the mechanics of the handhold-cable-pulley mechanism utilized in these machines, cable-cross and free cable functional training cannot provide full and equal tangential resistance through a full arc of motion of exercise, as can fulcrum-flexible-linkage machines. Additionally, past cable machines cannot provide precise alignment and stabilization of the trunk and shoulder in an exponential number of planes of exercise (for precise, reliable targeting of the exponential planes of muscle action across the joint).
There is disagreement about the influence that any form of strength training may have on injury prevention, specific skills, and sports performance. There is significant consensus that strength training indirectly improves performance by enhancing joint strength and stability. The idea that strength training can directly enhance actual functional performance is controversial at best.
Generally, strength and stability gains from resistance training do not directly enhance performance. The strength and stability gains resulting from resistance training must be transferred indirectly to functional movement through the process of integration. Integration can be conceptualized as the process of transferring strength, proprioception, muscular coordination, and stability gains from simple, less functional movements, to more complex movements. Neural pattern integration can also be described as the transfer of enhanced simple pattern neuromuscular function (e.g. as a result of resistance training) into more complex purposeful movement patterns resulting in true functional performance enhancement.
Training in multiple, simple, radial neuromuscular patterns and planes of motion about a joint increases strength and stability more effectively than training in a few fixed planes provided by the prior art. The advantage of resistance training in simple patterns and planes of motion is that the resulting neuromuscular gains are easily integrated indirectly into functional movement, with little or no adverse effect on neuromuscular performance.
It is unlikely that one can directly improve athletic performance by replicating a complex athletic movement using free weights or cable functional training machines. Because the plane of resistance provided by these modes of exercise can not coincide precisely with that of any real-world skill or sport movement, and because the resistance vector cannot replicate the full and equal tangential resistance or velocity throughout the full functional arc and range of motion, this equipment has limited positive direct effect on performance. Functional and athletic motion is largely too variable, complex, and/or unpredictable for machines or any resistance training method to duplicate, including free weights and cable machines. If the combined dynamic training variables of a complex strength training movement do not exactly replicate the actual movement, the training may even be counter-productive in terms of performance enhancement. This may be secondary to interference with established complex neural patterns of movement. Attempting to replicate a particular complex functional motion with strength training does not result in a direct improvement in performance because of the specificity and complexity of the neuromuscular mechanism of movement and the mechanical limitations of strength training equipment. Thus, there is a clear need for strength training and strength testing equipment that provides resisted motion in the 360 degree radial array of simple planes of motion of the shoulder and other joints about multiple axes, as provided by the present invention.
The instant invention is based on a revolving, integrated, radial assembly structure (revolving assembly) that provides improved structural support for functional components of a multiple axis, resistance exercise device. This revolving assembly has a central revolving axis that is coincident with a line that passes through a musculoskeletal joint of a user positioned in user station of the device. Said revolving assembly has a user actuated lever or handle (user interface) that aligns with and provides for engagement by said joint and associated extremity of the user. Said user interface is both operationally fixed on the periphery of revolving assembly, and operationally linked to a resistance mechanism. As a result of the equidistant, revolving relationship of user interface to and about the joint and associated extremity of the user, user interface can be operationally engaged by said extremity and joint of the user at any rotational position of revolving assembly. Revolving assembly provides a unique radial plane of motion and radial plane of resistance exercise for the joint and extremity of the user at any incremental rotational position of revolving assembly. Further, revolving assembly can be fixed or positioned in any of an infinite number of rotational positions. Therefore, revolving assembly and user interface can provide an infinite number of radial planes of resistance exercise for a joint and associated extremity of a user.
The invention also ideally incorporates and includes a Countermass (or counterweight) in the revolving assembly of the multiple axis resistance exercise machine derived from the gravitational effect of any mass (or weight) within the circular revolving assembly that provides opposing gravitational and rotational effect to the mass of functional components (i.e. drive assembly, user interface, etc.) and any radial structure that provides direct support for these components. All mass that is considered countermass in revolving assembly is designated diametric counterweight. Precise diametric counterweighting results in gravity neutrality of revolving assembly. The radial structure of the revolving assembly may include this diametric radial counterweight, which provides both direct radial structural support for revolving circle, and diametric counterweight for both functional components (i.e. user interface and drive assembly) and direct radial structural support thereof.
Finally, the invention ideally includes overload rollers and braking/locking mechanism(s). The overload rollers are substantially fixed to stationary frame elements, may have compliant material contact surface (like plastic or rubber) providing smooth contact with and full overload support for integrated revolving assembly structure. The braking/locking mechanism(s) of the invention provide user with engageable/disengageable braking or locking function, preventing revolution of revolving assembly when engaged, and permitting free revolution of revolving assembly when disengaged by the user. Functionality may be provided by loaded spring, hydraulic, pneumatic, or other tension or compression mechanism.
Reference will now be made to the drawings wherein like parts are designated by like numerals, and wherein
The present invention is an integrated revolving assembly structure 15 that optimizes structural support for revolving components of a multiple axis resistance exercise device. This revolving assembly unit in
This integrated revolving assembly is analogous in function to (and can replace) a revolving arc 63 and revolving assembly 15 as specified in preferred embodiment of U.S. Pat. No. 8,157,710, “Multi-Axis Resistance Exercise Devices and Systems” (Gautier1—incorporated herein by reference). In the present disclosure all terms in italics refer to documentation and parts specified in Gautier1. Preferred embodiment of Gautier1 is illustrated in Gautier1
Basic Embodiment—The following description of the basic embodiment of this invention details its common structure and function among different possible designs. Differential construction and function of example designs are described separately below in Alternate Embodiments of Present Invention **.
Describing the basic integrated revolving assembly structure 15, starting from the center of revolution in
Centrally (i.e. at circular center of integrated revolving assembly structure 15), radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7 are substantially fixed to (and revolve in unison on) central horizontal revolving shaft 1, providing central unitization of these three components.
Peripherally, vertical plane revolving circle 2 is substantially fixed along its central edge to the peripheral edge of radial strut 6 and peripheral edge of diametric radial counterweight 7, circumferentially unitizing the periphery of radial structure. Vertical plane revolving circle 2 revolves in unison with radial components and central horizontal revolving shaft 1. Like the cylindrical centerline of central horizontal revolving shaft 1, circular centerline of vertical plane revolving circle 2 is collinear with and operationally fixed on central horizontal revolving axis 205 of the device.
Central and peripheral unitization of radial and circular elements provides substantially greater strength of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 compared to previously described revolving arc 63 and revolving assembly 15 of embodiments in Gautier1, as will be detailed. Central horizontal revolving shaft 1, radial strut 6, diametric radial counterweight 7, and vertical plane revolving circle 2 are unitized (integrated) at both central and peripheral levels of structure. They act collectively as an integrated, central weight bearing, circular unit that revolves on central horizontal revolving axis 205.
Centrally converging radial components make it possible to employ a substantial, weight bearing central horizontal revolving shaft 1. By design intent, integrated components permit the full inertial weight of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 (including overhead drive assembly 3) to be entirely supported and balanced by central horizontal revolving shaft 1 on a low profile structural frame 40.
By contrast, it is not possible to employ a weight bearing central horizontal revolving shaft 1 in an open revolving arc 63 as in Gautier1. By definition, said open revolving arc 63 is one in which there are no radial structural components. An open revolving arc 63 provides certain advantages to multiple axis devices in Gautier1, as will be described for comparison.
Referring to the basic embodiment of the present invention in
There are many user interface designs employed in strength training machines, whether fixed plane-of-motion or multiple plane exercise machines as described here and in Gautier1. Generally, each user interface provides a different biomechanical exercise. The present invention provides a new integrated revolving structure on which virtually any existing user interface may be implemented. In the present disclosure, a generic user interface (i.e. a press-row lever user interface) is illustrated for demonstrating how this integrated revolving assembly structure 15 works.
The primary purposes of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 is to provide 1) stable revolving and static structural support, and 2) gravity neutral counterbalancing of the weight of radial strut 6, overhead drive assembly 3, and user interface 4. Stability of both structural support and counterbalance must be provided under maximal exercise load, and at any of the infinite number of incremental angles of revolution of integrated revolving assembly structure 15.
As in previous revolving structures in Gautier1, integrated revolving assembly structure 15 may be disengageably fixed in rotational position by a mechanical brake or clamp, or when actively restricted by the user.
In order for a user to exercise in any plane of compound shoulder motion on a multiple axis strength training device, one can refer to Gautier1, Compound Shoulder Multi-Axis Exercise Machines, column 20, lines 40-67. The instructions in the following 2 paragraphs are for use of a multiple axis compound shoulder resistance exercise machine, and are a general adaptation from Gautier1:
To perform compound shoulder press/pushing resistance exercise (in any plane)—the integrated revolving assembly structure 15 is revolved and locked in to any incremental rotational position (see
To perform compound shoulder row/pulling resistance exercise (in any plane)—the integrated revolving assembly structure 15 is revolved and locked in to any incremental rotational position; the user is positioned in the user station/seat with anterior chest against the vertical back of seat (i.e. facing the opposite direction with respect to press/pushing exercise); with user interface in starting position in front of the user at a user-selected distance from shoulders permitting arms of user to be forward extended; and with user's hands engaged with handles as at the start of an ordinary row exercise; the user pulls the user interface against resistance through the plane of motion back to the shoulders of the user.
Radial elements, like radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7, provide direct support for peripheral components like vertical plane revolving circle 2 and overhead drive assembly 3. By definition, direct support is structural support provided by a radial component unitized centrally to central circular structure (i.e. weight bearing central horizontal revolving shaft 1), and unitized circumferentially to peripheral circular structure (i.e. vertical plane revolving circle 2). Previous embodiments of revolving assembly 15 in Gautier1 provide only indirect support to peripheral components by open revolving arc 63 alone (i.e. without direct radial support).
Diametric radial counterweight 7 serves two roles in the present invention. It has a functional role providing ballast to counterbalance the weight of overhead drive assembly 3 and radial strut 6, thereby rendering integrated revolving assembly structure 15 gravity neutral. (Note that vertical plane revolving circle 2 is symmetric about central horizontal revolving axis 205, and by itself, it is gravity neutral and does not require counterbalancing.) In addition, diametric radial counterweight 7 also serves in a structural role, providing direct radial support for vertical plane revolving circle 2, and thereby for overhead drive assembly 3 as well. Filling two roles streamlines complexity and cost of the apparatus by reducing the number of separate parts required for different purposes.
Novel design enables diametric radial counterweight 7 to perform dual roles. As illustrated in
By contrast, Gautier1 describes a revolving counterweight 13 that is a peripheral component in an open revolving arc 63. Revolving counterweight 13 is not a radial structure and is not unitized both centrally and peripherally to revolving assembly 15, and therefore it cannot serve a radial structural or direct support role.
Structurally, diametric radial counterweight 7 and radial strut 6 act independently as diametric radial struts (or like spokes of a wheel), centering and holding center line (and horizontal axis of revolution) of vertical plane revolving circle 2 in collinear alignment with central horizontal revolving axis 205.
Note that the shape of diametric radial counterweight 7 and of radial strut 6 does not affect their function. Three different contours of diametric radial counterweight 7 are shown in
These radial components (i.e. radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7) comprising integrated radial structure may take any shape or may include any number of separate elements (including radial and non-radial elements), with the only requirement being that the sum of mass or weight of elements constituting diametric radial counterweight 7 in lower hemisphere (i.e. below counterbalance horizon 30), must counterbalance (or approximately counterbalance) the weight of overhead assembly 3, along with radial and other elements constituting radial strut 6 in upper hemisphere (i.e. above counterbalance horizon 30). For complete description, see Counterbalance Horizon below.
Centrally, diametric radial counterweight 7 is continuous (unitized) along its radial or long axis with long axis of radial strut 6 (i.e. they are longitudinally continuous) as illustrated in
In addition to full-diameter stability provided by longitudinal continuity of radial components, circumferential unitization of radial strut 6 to diametric radial counterweight 7 by vertical plane revolving circle 2 provides a second structural mechanism for stabilization of radial strut 6 by diametric radial counterweight 7. This is by way of a combination of circumferential compression strength (strut effect), and circumferential tensile strength (barrel ring effect) of circumferential integration. This adds significant circumferential strength under radial, peripheral/circumferential, lateral, compression, and tensile load, or any combination thereof. For heavy applications, this provides advantages over previously described open and structurally lighter revolving arc 63 of Gautier1. This is because in previous embodiments the weight of the overhead drive assembly 11 is supported peripherally not centrally by the open, lighter revolving arc 63 alone.
Long axis of horizontal boom 64 is fixed perpendicularly to periphery of vertical circular planar surface of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 (
Since horizontal boom 64 is unitized perpendicularly to longitudinally continuous radial elements, it follows that long axis of boom 64 is also coplanar with long axis of longitudinally continuous radial elements. This is illustrated in
Of note,
It is also important to note that in the preferred embodiment of Gautier1, the connection point of boom 64 and revolving arc 63 may be considered a bifurcation of materials, since a single boom element bifurcates into two separate force-bearing or -transmitting elements distally. The bifurcation of materials is comprised by each side of revolving arc 63, each of which diametrically emanates from base of the perpendicular boom 64. This means that resultant torque transmitted along boom 64 (created by movement of loaded user interface, and analogous to resultant torque 80 in
In the present embodiment in
It is by design intent that structural integrity of this novel integrated revolving assembly structure 15 is due to unitized or integrated structural relationships, not only between radial and circular components, but also between radial and horizontal orthogonal component(s). A significant contribution to stability of horizontal boom 64 (and overhead drive assembly 3) is provided by boom's structural coplanar relationship with longitudinally continuous radial elements spanning the diameter of vertical plane revolving circle 2. As revolving arc 63 of Gautier1 has no radial support structure, Gautier1 cannot provide equal support to boom 64.
Vertical plane revolving circle 2, serves as a structural element, and also serves a functional role as a continuous, peripheral revolving surface for engagement of peripheral functional components. The unitization of central, radial, circular (circumferential), and coplanar structure results in improved structural stability of vertical plane revolving circle 2. This in turn provides enhanced operation and stability of: 1) overhead drive assembly 3, for stable, reliable reproduction of fixed or dynamic plane of motion of user interface under heavy load and at any angle in relation to the user; 2) overload support rollers 17 (See Overload Support Rollers below); and 3) braking or locking mechanism 16, which, along with overload support rollers 17, requires significant peripheral stability of vertical plane revolving circle 2 for precision engagement and stabilization of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 (See Braking or Locking Mechanism below. Braking or locking mechanism 16—as illustrated in
A final structural theme of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 is seen in Circular Plane View in
Therefore, the enhanced strength of this integrated revolving assembly structure 15 relies on central, radial, peripheral/circumferential, coplanar, and diagonal unitization of structural elements, specifically: 1) central unitization of central edge of radial strut 6 and central edge of diametric radial counterweight 7 to the full or partial circumference of central horizontal revolving shaft 1, making the use of a weight bearing central shaft possible for an integrated revolving assembly structure 15; 2) the combination of both central and peripheral unitization of both radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7, each radial component providing independent radial support (i.e. acting as spokes of a wheel) to vertical plane revolving circle 2 and integrated revolving assembly structure 15; 3) circumferential unitization of the peripheral edges of radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7 by vertical plane revolving circle 2, providing the added strength of circumferential strut and circumferential barrel ring effects to periphery of radial components; 4) longitudinal continuity along with peripheral unitization of radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7, which diagonal structure spans and stabilizes the full diameter of vertical plane revolving circle 2; 5) perpendicular coplanar unitization of horizontal boom 64 and continuous longitudinal structure of radial elements (radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7); and 6) diagonal unitization of peripheral edge of radial strut 6 (as well as boom 64) with peripheral edge of counterweight 7 by way of two mirror image arcs of vertical plane revolving circle 2 (
Integrated revolving assembly structure 15 of the present invention may be cut, forged, material formed, or it may be constructed from separate parts, substantially joined to form a revolving single unit.
In summary, the present invention is an integrated revolving assembly structure 15 comprised by the unitization of circular (circumferential) and radial structure at central and peripheral levels, and unitization of coplanar as well as diagonal structure, providing greater strength than previous embodiments. This integrated revolving assembly structure 15: 1) is supported centrally (not peripherally) for added structural strength; 2) can accommodate many different user interface designs, providing multiple plane and multiple axis exercise; and 3) can replace previous revolving assembly designs.
The present invention employs central weight bearing support for integrated revolving assembly structure 15 by way of central horizontal revolving shaft 1 and radial structure. Central horizontal revolving shaft 1 and its conveying components are compact, located centrally, and capture, align, and convey all forces transmitted centrally by way of radial structure to frame of the device, including forces generated during exercise and the weight of entire integrated revolving assembly structure 15.
By contrast, revolving assembly 15 in Gautier1 provides only peripheral support to revolving components. Without a central weight bearing support system (i.e. central horizontal revolving shaft 1 and radial structure), open revolving assembly 15 requires a large stationary frame structure like a stationary arcuate guide 14 with a wide diameter similar to or greater than the diameter of revolving arc 63 in order to capture, align, and convey open revolving assembly 15 by way of rollers 62. Rollers 62 are employed as the sole revolving surfaces capturing revolving assembly 15. Therefore, all forces, including the weight of revolving assembly 15 and forces generated during exercise must be transmitted peripherally, i.e. outwardly and radially through rollers 62 to the stationary arcuate guide 14 and frame of the device.
Weight bearing central horizontal revolving shaft 1 and its conveying components serve the identical purposes of (and can replace) stationary arcuate guide 14 and rollers 62 of Gautier1 on multiple axis strength training devices.
The open revolving arc 63 is generally a lighter grade structural embodiment of a revolving assembly 15, to meet certain light grade specifications such as: 1) supporting lighter overhead assemblies; 2) providing less obstructed visibility through the structure of the machine; and 3) providing less obstructed physical access to the weight stack through the open revolving arc 63 from the user position on the device.
But the tradeoff for this light grade open revolving arc 63 is the requirement for a relatively large and heavy stationary frame element (stationary arcuate guide 14) to constrain revolving assembly 15. Without central radial stabilization as provided in the present invention, this large peripheral structural restraint is mandatory for proper function of revolving assembly 15.
Unitized radial structure centralizes the combined forces of exercise and weight of revolving structure, translocating them to a central point of force transmission and stabilization at the low height of central horizontal revolving axis 205. This low center point of force transmission enables a lower profile, lower weight, and lower cost support frame as compared to stationary arcuate guide 14. In
For some embodiments the open revolving arc 63 structure is required and adequate. But others, because of the amount of weight that is used for exercise, or because of implementation of specialized training methods, require radial structure for stable operation.
When engaged, braking or locking mechanism 16 immobilizes and prevents revolution of integrated revolving assembly structure 15. Two analog braking or locking mechanisms 16 are illustrated.
A braking or locking mechanism 16 could be implemented on any embodiment of the present invention. An analog braking or locking mechanisms 16 is implemented in order to disengagably fix integrated revolving assembly structure 15, overhead drive assembly 3, and user interface 4 at any incremental angle of revolution. The ability to reorient user interface 4 at any of an infinite number of angles in relation to the user provides exercise in any of the infinite planes of motion of the shoulder or other joint. In this way, the brake or locking mechanism plays an essential role in the infinite adjustability function of the device, i.e., the capability to provide exercise in any of an infinite number of fixed planes of motion. An analog braking or locking mechanism 16 permits the user to quickly select (and exercise in) any of the infinite radial planes of motion of the shoulder or other join.
The braking or locking mechanism 16 may be a non-analog mechanism comprised by an incremental index plate and spring loaded locking pin, as is employed in many devices in the patent record. As well, a braking or locking mechanism 16 may have analog function employing spring-tensioned lever, cable, hydraulic, or other tension/compression mechanism.
Braking or locking mechanism 16, in
Operation: Brake mechanism works by constant spring loaded tension that pulls downward on brake lever 16b (spring is not illustrated), which keeps brake pad 16c engaged in compression frictional contact with braking surface of vertical plane stationary circle 22. This maintains static rotational position of integrated revolving assembly structure 15. To operate the mechanism, the user pulls down on proximal handle 16a, overcoming spring loaded, downward force on brake lever 16b. This pivots and raises brake lever 16b, disengaging brake pad 16c from contact surface of vertical plane stationary circle 22. The user maintains downward pressure on proximal handle 16a and simultaneously revolves integrated revolving assembly structure 15 and user interface 4 to desired angular position for new exercise. Once in position, user releases downward pressure on proximal handle 16a. Brake lever 16b is pulled downward by tension of loaded spring, and brake pad 16c then re-engages braking surface of vertical plane stationary circle 22, locking integrated revolving assembly structure 15 and user interface 4 into new rotational position for exercise.
Operation: To operate hydraulic brake lever mechanism 120, the same procedure is followed for operating spring loaded, brake lever and pad mechanism 110. The difference is that constant downward tension is applied to brake lever 16b by hydraulic spring-compression cylinder 100 instead of loaded spring.
Central horizontal revolving shaft 1 of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 makes it possible to employ a central braking or locking mechanism. A central braking or locking mechanism is one in which the lever mechanism of braking and locking mechanism 16, including proximal handle 16a, brake lever 16b, and brake pad 16c, are operationally fixed by way of said pivot mechanism on stationary structure of the machine, and brake pad 16c or caliper frictional brake 101 engages the central horizontal revolving shaft 1. Note that revolving arc 63 of Gautier1 is constructed by an open, light structural design employing stationary arcuate guide 14. It has no radial structure or central shaft, which means a central braking mechanism cannot be employed in Gautier1.
Additionally, the difference between braking or locking mechanisms described in the present invention and those in Gautier1 (i.e. revolving are locking mechanism 40 as in
It is also notable that, although a braking or locking mechanism 16 can be employed on all embodiments, it is not required on all embodiments of this integrated revolving assembly structure 15, since exercise can be performed on many of these devices without actually locking integrated revolving assembly structure 15 at a specific point of rotation. With its central weight bearing design (instead of peripheral weight bearing design) it is possible to employ user-guided and -defined, or program-defined dynamic transition (i.e. intra-repetition transition) of plane of motion of exercise by a motive force, centrally or peripherally applied, on any embodiment of this invention.
In previous embodiments, the weight of overhead or drive assembly 11 is held by indirect radial support provided by a light construction, open revolving arc 63 as specified in Gautier1. (Revolving arc 63 is analogous to vertical plane revolving circle 2 of present invention.) Indirect radial support is provided generally by a structural revolving arc or circle, without support of a physical radial strut between the point of support provided by revolving arc and the axis of revolution of the arc (e.g. at a weight bearing central shaft).
In the present invention, a primary structural role of vertical plane revolving circle 2 is to provide indirect radial support to hold the weight of overhead drive assembly 3. For further structural support, radial strut 6 provides direct radial support to vertical plane revolving circle 2 and overhead drive assembly 3 as well. Without direct radial support, overhead drive assembly 3 must rely solely on indirect support provided by an open revolving arc, like revolving arc 63 in Gautier1. Indirect support alone is not adequate for certain specialized and heavy applications of the present invention.
The user interface 4, usually a lever or levers, of certain embodiments are relatively long, and when in operation (especially when moving heavy weight) may produce significant asymmetric torque around overhead drive assembly 3. These moment forces must be counteracted by stiffness of integrated revolving assembly structure 15. The weakest point of structural attachment of functional parts and user interface 4 of multiple axis strength training machines is the vertical plane revolving circle 2 (or its equivalent, revolving arc 63 of Gautier1). This is because revolving arc 63 and vertical plane revolving circle 2 are made of relatively thin material in relation to the torques produced by these machines during operation. This problem is resolved with a radial support mechanism, like the implementation of a radial strut 6 and weight bearing central horizontal revolving shaft 1. This resolves the problem because a substantial direct radial connection (i.e. radial strut 6) between the weight bearing central horizontal revolving shaft 1 and the overhead drive assembly 3 prevents (asymmetric) torque from deforming or bending vertical plane revolving circle 2 and traveling circumferentially around vertical plane revolving circle 2. Bending that occurs in vertical plane of open revolving arc 63 of Gautier1 with heavier overhead assemblies that transmit larger (asymmetric) forces, is critical because it results in measurable angular deviation of what should be a fixed path of motion of user interface 4. By solving this critical problem with a unitized radial structural element (radial strut 6) which is substantially supported by a unitized weight bearing shaft (central horizontal revolving shaft 1), heavier functional components and larger resistance forces can be employed in multiple axis strength training machines.
The present invention employs peripheral overload rollers 17 (
It is the dual role of peripheral overload rollers 17 (i.e. structural support along with overload and damping function) that is novel to revolving structure, multiple axis strength training devices. So any damping component employed at the periphery, or at the central or intermediate structural level of a revolving structure (e.g. employed for damping at a horizontal revolving shaft 1 or conveying components thereof) is anticipated by this disclosure.
Although peripheral overload rollers 17 are capable of supporting the full inertial weight of integrated revolving assembly structure 15, they are not employed for capturing and holding the weight of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 per se. That function is performed by central horizontal revolving shaft 1 in ordinary operation of the present invention. By contrast, rollers 62 in Gautier1 must collectively capture and hold entire weight of revolving assembly 15 at all times.
These are key functional differences between peripheral overload rollers 17 and rollers described in previous devices, which is reflected in form and implementation. For example, the design of Gautier1 requires many rollers 62 (at least three, usually more) for capturing and conveying revolving assembly 15 in the preferred embodiment. By contrast, only one or two peripheral overload rollers 17 are required in most embodiments of the present invention. As well, peripheral overload rollers 17 are only required on inferior, peripheral surface of vertical plane revolving circle 2 and integrated revolving assembly structure 15. Counterweight Horizon
The concept of a counterbalance horizon is used to empirically counterbalance symmetric and asymmetric radial components of integrated revolving assembly structure 15, in order to make it a gravity neutral revolving structure. The total revolving inertial mass of overhead drive assembly 3 along with the mass of radial strut 6 and any other radial, support, or peripheral component of overhead drive assembly 3 and vertical plane revolving circle 2 is included in mass to be counterbalanced.
Since vertical plane revolving circle 2 is gravity neutral by itself in the present invention, only functional components (e.g. a peripheral or radial counterweight) and structural components (e.g. radial supports) contribute to center-of-mass estimation of integrated revolving assembly structure 15.
Determining specifications for counterbalancing: By convention, when long axis of radial strut 6 is vertical and perpendicular to floor surface, and overhead drive assembly 3 is above radial strut 6, as in
Referring to
By convention, when estimating counterbalance, overhead drive assembly 3, radial strut 6, and revolving assembly structure 15 are in standard position. For center of mass estimation, mass in upper hemisphere of vertical plane revolving circle 2 comprises mass of radial strut 6 and mass of overhead drive assembly 3. By way of example, radial strut 6 (as an isolated element) is symmetric in its own structure in the preferred embodiment, and its center of mass lies at the midpoint of its long axis or longitudinal centerline. A symmetrically structured element like radial strut 6 is simply balanced with equal or similar symmetric mass within diametric radial counter weight 7. To balance the mass of overhead drive assembly 3, since it is not symmetric about central horizontal revolving axis 205, certain assumptions must be made about the location of its center of mass. For ease of calculation, it can be assumed that the center of mass of the entire overhead drive assembly 3 is best estimated to be a few inches above or at the same radial distance to the upper or outer radial edge of boom 64.
The radial distance of center of mass of overhead drive assembly 3 is measured from central horizontal revolving axis 205 to a point just above upper or outer radial edge of boom 64. For this example, it is assumed that this distance is equal to 1 meter, and mass of overhead drive assembly 3 is 50 kg.
Calculating moment or torque (T) of overhead drive assembly 3, where: F=force converted from mass of 50 kilograms (kg); d=1 meter (m) radial distance to center of rotation; N=Newtons of force; and Nm=Newton-meters:
Since weight of radial strut 6 is already counterbalanced by symmetric structure method, this means all that is required is an added torque of 490 Nm to fully counterbalance the overhead drive assembly 3 and mass in upper hemisphere. Therefore, counterbalance weight is increased by adding material on distal end of diametric radial counterweight 7. But radial distance of this counterweight center of mass to central horizontal revolving axis 205 can be no greater than inner radius of vertical plane revolving circle 2. So the mass that must be added along diametric radial counterweight 7 can be positioned with center of mass at a radial distance of 0.9 m, and can be calculated as:
So a center of mass of 56 kg in ballast must be added at a radial distance of 0.9 m along diametric radial counterweight 7 from central horizontal revolving axis 205.
As in this example, by using the symmetric structure method of estimating counterbalance, about half of all required counterweight can be accurately determined with no calculation.
Note that radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7 may each be represented by one or more radials or spokes (or by structure that may take any form) on each respective side of counterbalance horizon line 30, as in
But because there are many possible overhead drive assemblies 3 for the different embodiments of multiple axis strength training devices (as described in Gautier1), there are also different specifications for weight and structured support of these assemblies. Some of these assemblies are not symmetric about a single horizon. For this reason, the simple method described for estimating center of mass for symmetric embodiments can be modified for estimating center of mass for asymmetric revolving assembly embodiments as well.
If a conceptual line is constructed called horizon bisector line 31 that is in the same plane as, and is perpendicular to counterbalance horizon line 30 (
Counterbalance horizon line 30 and horizon bisector line 31 divide vertical plane revolving circle 2 into four equal quadrants: NW, NE, SW, SE (
In order to counterbalance asymmetric upper hemisphere mass (i.e. to balance upper hemisphere mass that is asymmetric about horizon bisector line 31), a diagonal mirror image of the component is placed in the diagonal quadrant of lower hemisphere. This rule alone will balance most asymmetric overhead drive assemblies 3 and radial structural elements of integrated revolving assembly structure 15. Generally, in revolving assembly structures with asymmetric mass, it is easier to empirically balance asymmetric components within upper hemisphere in a diagonal mirror image method within lower hemisphere in order to obtain gravity neutrality.
These methods of empirically counter balancing most radial structure in a revolving assembly for a strength training device (i.e. symmetric structure method and diagonal mirror image method) are uniquely applicable to the present invention.
Four specific embodiments of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 are described by way of example (not limitation). They are:
By definition, a single planar integrated revolving assembly structure 15 or 15a is characterized by single planar alignment of radial and circular elements comprising it (
By definition, an offset planar integrated revolving assembly structure 15 or 15b (offset planar embodiment, in
Offset planar embodiment provides the same integrated radial structure, and the same horizontal boom 64, with long axis of boom 64 in coplanar alignment with unitized radial components. Note that in
Diametric radial counterweight 7 serves dual roles, and is in the same plane as radial structure of offset planar integrated revolving assembly structure 15b. By keeping entire radial structure intact (including diametric radial counterweight 7), all of the relatively heavy radial structure remains unitized and coplanar, retaining the substantial stability of the device. But as importantly, offsetting the bulk and weight of counter weight and radial structure away from user improves operation and safety for many embodiments.
By offsetting vertical plane revolving circle 2 from radial structure, a completely open vertical plane revolving circle 2 is provided. An open vertical plane revolving circle 2 is one without obstruction of sight and of movement of user and user interface in and through vertical plane revolving circle 2. That is, there is no obstruction caused by radial structural elements or counterweight within vertical plane revolving circle 2. Open vertical plane revolving circle 2 permits full or partial range of motion of user interface and arm(s) or body of the user within vertical plane revolving circle 2. This enables the user, user interfaces, and pivot points of user interfaces to be closer to (and even inside) the circular structure of vertical plane revolving circle 2 during exercise than in a single planar embodiment, as in Embodiment 1.
During exercise on a butterfly or posterior deltoid embodiment of this device, the user interfaces may be moved through a horizontal or lateral arc of motion of a two- to three-foot or greater radius of exercise (i.e. an arc of motion with radius measuring two to three feet from axis of shoulder motion to the end of user interface and user's extremity). So the fixed pivot point of the user interface (on boom 64) closest to radial structure must be at least incrementally greater than three horizontal feet (normal distance) from the center of central horizontal revolving shaft 1. Placing the user interface pivot point on the boom 64 at this distance prevents collision of the distal part of user interface or a user's extremity with radial structure during exercise.
Additionally, in a butterfly or posterior deltoid exercise device, the radius of exercise is a critical specification because the greater the radius of exercise, the further overhead drive assembly 3 must be offset out along free end of boom 64, and therefore, the longer the free end of boom 64 must be, to accommodate clearance of the distal part of user interface or user's extremity during exercise. The greater the offset normal distance of overhead drive assembly 3 from radial structure (coinciding with a longer boom 64), the greater will be the overhung load on boom 64 created by weight of overhead drive assembly 3.
These issues are mitigated by innovative construction of offset planar integrated revolving assembly structure 15b. Offsetting vertical plane revolving circle 2 from radial structure provides two separate, parallel, and horizontally offset, vertical/radial support elements (i.e. longitudinally continuous radial structure (i.e. unitized radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7) and vertical plane revolving circle 2) for boom 64 and overhead drive assembly 3, as in
Integrated horizontal struts 11 provide outrigger structural strength effects. Vertical plane revolving circle 2 is peripherally unitized to radial strut 6 and other radial structure by way of horizontal struts 11, enabling horizontal struts 11 and vertical plane revolving circle 2 to provide substantial offset lateral, vertical, and radial support (i.e. outrigger support) to boom 64 and overhead drive assembly 3.
It is important to note that there are embodiments of the multiple axis, resistance training device concept that would benefit from (or require) both the open concept revolving arc 63 (and revolving assembly 15) structure of Gautier1, in combination with the structural strength of integrated radial support of the present invention. This is accomplished in this embodiment (Embodiment 2) by offsetting vertical plane revolving circle 2 from radial structure of the device by way of horizontal struts 11. In this embodiment, vertical plane revolving circle 2 is completely open, with no obstruction of either exercise movement or line of sight inside or through vertical plane revolving circle 2.
By definition, an asymmetric integrated revolving assembly structure 15 or 15c is one in which the radius of circular structure is asymmetric to the radius of radial structure in revolving assembly. This embodiment may be employed with a coplanar or offset planar circular element, or one that is stationary in relation to revolving radial structure as in
Integrated revolving assembly structure 15 fills the same role in asymmetric embodiment (Embodiment 3) as it does in other embodiments. In an asymmetric integrated revolving assembly structure 15c, the vertical plane stationary circle 22 is primarily constructed as a continuous circumferential surface for engagement of brake or locking mechanism 16. Like a vertical plane revolving circle 2, it is a weight bearing support structure for overhead drive assembly 3 in its capacity as part of the brake or locking mechanism 16.
In asymmetric embodiment (Embodiment 3), the circular element providing a continuous circular surface for engagement of a braking or locking mechanism 16 may be substantially attached (unitized) to integrated revolving assembly structure 15, thereby revolving with it (i.e. it becomes a vertical plane revolving circle 2). Or it may be a vertical plane stationary circle 22 with which a revolving braking or locking mechanism 16 engages, as in
By definition, a horizontal integrated revolving assembly structure 15 or 15d is one that revolves in the horizontal instead of vertical plane (
As in description of basic embodiment, note central, peripheral, circumferential and diagonal unitization of radial and circular structure. As well, radial elements (i.e. radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7) act independently as diametric radial struts (i.e. as spokes of a wheel), and same radial elements are unitized centrally forming a single longitudinally unitized strut spanning the diameter of horizontal integrated revolving assembly structure 15 or 15d. Diametric radial counterweight 7 provides radial structural support in this embodiment (Embodiment 4), and it provides counterweight function as well. Importantly, midplane 70 contains long axis of boom 64 and long axis of radial elements, illustrating common perpendicular-coplanar relation (and unitization) of horizontal radial elements and vertical boom 64.
As in basic embodiment and others, horizontal plane revolving circle 2 serves as a structural element (by circumferentially unitizing radial structure), and also serves as a continuous revolving surface for engagement of a braking or locking mechanism, as well as for engagement of overload support rollers.
A horizontal integrated revolving assembly structure 15d is required for certain embodiments of this invention, as in Y-axis embodiments in Gautier1. Looking at Gautier1 FIG. 10a, which shows a Y-axis embodiment of a multiple axis strength training device, the revolving assemblies 15a & b employ a circular element that revolves in the horizontal plane (analogous to horizontal plane revolving circle 2 in
In a horizontal plane revolving assembly 15, during exercise on the device, all forces generated by the user through the arc of resisted movement of lever arm of the user interface 20 (
The connection point of boom 64 and circular component (revolving arc 63) of revolving assembly 15 (
Note that boom 64 in
Note also that the embodiment shown in Gautier1
The coplanar relationship between boom 64 and radial elements of horizontal integrated revolving assembly structure 15 is critical for providing optimal structural strength. Without this component relationship, it is not possible to provide the equivalent added strength for distributing and dissipating resultant torque 80 within horizontal integrated revolving assembly structure 15.
The applicant has authoritative knowledge of design intent in Gautier1. Divergent design intent is apparent when comparing the present integrated revolving assembly structure 15 with analogous revolving assembly 15 described in Gautier1. Design intent is indicated by a combination of: 1) structural form, 2) grade of construction and materials, and 3) functional purpose of component design.
For example, in contrast to the peripheral revolving counterweight 13 of Gautier1 (which is always coplanar with revolving arc 63, and cannot provide radial structural support; see
The light grade design intent for revolving assembly 15 of Gautier1 includes light grade revolving arc 63, radial stabilizer 120, and spokes 82. In Gautier1, when examining revolving assembly 15 in
Although open design permits unlimited visibility and movement of user and user interface within and through central space of the circular revolving arc 63 during operation of the device, open design makes revolving arc 63 inherently more flexible than a centrally supported, radially reinforced, weight bearing grade, unitized revolving assembly structure 15 of the present invention. Unavoidable flexibility under heavier loads, and implementing high-speed resisted motion even under ordinary loads, in open revolving arc 63 of Gautier1 makes this light grade design less suitable for certain specialized training methods and heavy embodiments of multi-axis strength training devices.
The unitized radial structure of integrated revolving assembly structure 15 includes radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7 unitized together centrally, and with the vertical plane revolving circle 2 peripherally. This unitized radial and circumferential structure enables implementation of a very stable central horizontal revolving shaft 1. Central horizontal revolving shaft 1 enables full central weight-bearing, that is, weight-bearing at the circular center of integrated revolving assembly structure 11. Unitized radial structure enabling full central weight-bearing design stabilizes vertical plane revolving circle 2 and allows for a lighter and smaller frame structure of a multi-axis resistance exercise machine, without the requirement for a relatively heavy and wide-diameter stationary arcuate guide 14 structure, as described in Gautier1.
There is polar difference in the design intent of Gautier1 and the present invention. Gautier1 employs light revolving components and a heavy stationary arcuate guide 14 which provides substantial peripheral weight-bearing structural support. The present invention employs central structural support for integrated revolving assembly structure 15. In Gautier1, peripheral weight bearing structural design permits a lighter grade, open revolving arc 63. The present invention requires minimal stationary frame structure by comparison.
But to stabilize increasingly heavy overhead assembly embodiments, even adding heavier grade materials to open revolving structure and to peripheral weight-bearing structure at some point cannot practically compensate for unavoidable flexibility of open revolving arc 63 under ordinary and heavier applied loads. Therefore, a new design, as in the present disclosure, must be implemented in order for multiple axis strength training machines to operate under the heavy loads of certain embodiments.
In Gautier1, the theme in the description of open revolving arc 63 and revolving assembly 15 is one of light grade construction, when compared to the heavier grade of construction of the present invention. The reason that light grade construction is employed in Gautier1 is that these embodiments require an open revolving assembly to limit visual and physical obstruction within and through revolving arc 63. But the unavoidable tradeoff for light construction is reduced structural strength and stability of revolving arc 63 and revolving assembly 15.
Dedicated and iterative application of lighter, open design in all embodiments of revolving arc 63 in Gautier1 is evidence that central and radial weight bearing support structure within or offset from revolving arc 63 is not a part of the design intent in Gautier1. Gautier1 does not describe or claim weight bearing central and radial unitized structure within revolving assembly 15, or offset from revolving arc 63 (analogous to integrated revolving assembly structure 15 in present disclosure).
A radial stabilizer mechanism 120 in Gautier1 is illustrated in
Note that, although radial stabilizer 120 is a radially aligned component and could be compared with radial strut 6 of present invention, unlike radial strut 6, it is not unitized to a diametric radial counterweight (or any diametric radial component). This also means that unlike radial strut 6 (which is unitized longitudinally with diametric radial counterweight 7) of present invention, radial stabilizer 120 plays no part in counterweight mechanism as does radial strut 6 (through unitization of radial and circumferential structure). This is consistent with the fact that no offset counterweight mechanism is described or claimed in Gautier1.
Radial stabilizer 120 is illustrated in
Radial stabilizer mechanism 120 of Gautier1: 1) may not be unitized to boom 64 (by way of outrigger boom 101) in its intended form; 2) is illustrated as a medium or lighter grade radial component and is not described or claimed as a structural weight-bearing element; 3) is not unitized longitudinally (axially) to any other radial element centrally on revolving axis 205 (as radial strut 6 is unitized longitudinally and centrally with diametric radial counterweight 7 in present invention); 4) does not play a supporting role in counterweight mechanism (as does radial strut 6 in present invention as described); and 5) is not described as being integrated or unitized into a greater radial structure, or with any other radial component (e.g. radial spokes), since radial stabilizer 120 revolves on separate bearing 22 centrally, independent of any other radial component that revolves on revolving axis 205.
Radial stabilizer mechanism 120 is not intended to be a substantial weight-bearing component, but instead is a lighter grade radial support that maintains vertical planar alignment of revolving arc 63 in Gautier1. Spokes 82 employed in Gautier1 also perform the light grade role of maintaining vertical planar alignment of revolving arc 63, and as well, were not designed for, and do not provide substantial structural weight-bearing support.
The relatively light grade requirement of maintaining vertical alignment of revolving arc 63 is accomplished by preventing lateral tilt and twist of revolving arc 63. This entails stabilizing the long (and tall) vertical fulcrum of revolving arc 63, which fulcrum hinges on rollers 62 residing in the base of stationary arcuate guide 14. This is the primary purpose for both radial stabilizer 120 and spokes 82 in Gautier1. Note that correcting tilt or twist (or maintaining vertical planar alignment) at the top and along the revolving sides of revolving arc 63 at relatively long distance from horizontal axis and vertical axis fulcrum hinges (which fulcrum hinges are at base of revolving arc 63 and are oriented horizontally resulting in tilt, or vertically resulting in twist) with a horizontal force provided by radial stabilizer 120 and spokes 82, is a very light task when compared to the task of bearing full weight of entire revolving assembly structure 15 required of radial strut 6 and diametric radial counterweight 7 in the present invention. Again, design intent is indicated by a combination of structural form, grade of materials, and functional intended purpose of component structure.
Note that integrated radial structure (i.e. unitized horizontal central revolving shaft 1, vertical plane revolving circle 2, radial strut 6, and diametric radial counterweight 7) is required in order to provide the heavy grade design intent provided by the present invention.
This offset configuration of the center pivot point provides mechanical advantage for spokes 82 for their purpose of maintaining vertical alignment of revolving arc 63. Offset configuration also triangulates forces generated during operation and provides added stability. In fact, triangulation of points of stabilization in this description, refers to horizontal stabilization provided by offset center pivot mechanism. (Note that the description does not mention a weight-bearing function for spokes 82.) That is, this third point of triangular stabilization is not designed to be a point of weight-bearing structure, but instead is designed to be a point of horizontal stabilizing force in order to maintain vertical planar alignment of revolving arc 63 during operation of the device. Note also that this description of offset center pivot point states that there are other components that carry the weight of the revolving assembly—the arcuate guide 14.
Spokes 82 are arranged in a “Y” pattern as seen in side view in
All drawings in Gautier1, including those that illustrate spokes 82: 1) show a counterweight that is coplanar with revolving arc 63; 2) show that counterweight is not a radial structure but is a peripheral component, attached on periphery of revolving arc 63; and 3) do not illustrate (nor does Gautier1 describe or claim) an offset radial counterweight.
It is important to note also that embodiments in Gautier1 employing spokes 82 all employ stationary arcuate guide 14 in order to capture and support full weight of revolving assembly 15 because spokes 82 are not employed for compression weight-bearing of revolving assembly 15.
Note that radial stabilizer mechanism 120 and spokes 82 are described separately in Gautier1, and are not claimed to be integrated or unitized, consistent with the theme that these radial structures described are not integrated into a radial structural weight bearing unit and do not provide the synergistic additive strength of unitized construction, as do heavy or weight bearing grade components described in the present disclosure. As well, they are of light, non-weight-bearing grade materials as illustrated and described, and are employed for light loads relative to loads that are carried by unitized radial structure of the present invention. Most importantly, no radial components in Gautier1 are described or claimed as weight bearing or counterweight bearing components. Note as well that radial stabilizer 120 and spokes 82 are not included or described in preferred embodiment, so employing radial structure is not a priority for weight bearing structural design in Gautier1.
When compared, it is clear that the design intent of Gautier1 is not the same as the design intent of the present invention. The tradeoff for employing light grade elements in revolving assembly 15 is that a heavy stationary arcuate guide 14 is required to capture and carry the full weight of open revolving assembly 15.
Gautier1 does not describe integrated or unitized radial and circumferential structure in a revolving assembly 15. Unitizing radial and circumferential components as in the integrated revolving assembly structure 15 of the present invention, provides significantly improved, full central weight bearing strength and stability for revolving multiple axis strength training devices.
Many changes and modifications can be made with the design of the present invention without departing from the spirit thereof, which is best described limited only by the scope of the appended claims.
This Non-Provisional application is based on my provisional application No. 63/604,384 filed on Nov. 30, 2023 entitled “Integrated Revolving Assembly Structure for Multi-Axis Resistance Exercise Device,” the full disclosures of same being incorporated by reference herein.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 63604384 | Nov 2023 | US |
