The following is tabulation of some prior art that presently appears relevant:
Cardboard boxes have been prevalent in the packaging industry since its patent in 1856 and rose to prominence as a shipping material in the 1870s. Corrugated cardboard boxes are light weight compared to Wooden boxes, thus being more convenient to handle and print for packaging and protecting commodities.
For packaging heavy items or stacking heavy items, corrugated cardboard boxes may not be suitable and can become deformed due to their inadequate endurance to mechanical stresses. Cardboard has a number of drawbacks, including costs, strength in humid conditions, and increasing numbers that cause environmental degradation.
Even though it is indispensable to our daily lives, the cardboard box goes largely unappreciated. Cardboard is used to ship over 90 percent of all products in the US. More than 100 billion cardboard boxes are produced in the United States alone every year, weighing approximately 40 million tons. The fastest-growing contributors to the pile of cardboard are e-commerce companies and the number is only expected to grow as online shopping continues to surge.
Cardboard is the single largest component of municipal solid waste around the world. It is estimated that over 24 million tons of cardboard is discarded each year. When paper decomposes, it emits methane gas which is dozens more toxic than CO2.
Each ton of cardboard paper produced consumes 17 trees, 380 gallons of oil, 7000 gallons of water, 4,000 kWh of energy, and 9 cubic yards of landfill space.
There is a limited resource of trees in the world and we need every last one of them to preserve suitable oxygen levels, reduce carbon dioxide, and help maintain the rain formation cycle in the world. Trees produce oxygen and protect the planet from further global warming. The 17 trees that would be saved could absorb a total of 250 pounds of carbon dioxide from the air each year while producing enough oxygen for 51 people.
Combining all the energy consumed, more than one ton of CO2 emissions could be reduced for every ton of cardboard that we do not produce. There is no doubt that deforestation and desertification are contributing to the deterioration of the environment, climate, and the habitat of this planet. We are facing crucial challenges to mitigate these adverse processes for future generations and become more eco-friendly. Every step in the manufacturing process of cardboard also produces tons of hazardous gasses that are emitted into the air every day. Pulp and paper is one of the largest industrial polluters to air, water, and land worldwide.
While recycling cardboard boxes can help, it still requires half the time and energy it takes to make a brand new box, which makes recycling cardboard in bulk a time-consuming and inefficient solution to a more severe problem. Avoiding the production of cardboard in the first place is more effective than recycling it.
The growing focus and pressing challenge towards sustainability by businesses and consumers are not only the environmental benefits but also the cost advantages. Cardboard boxes will last for a limited time depending on the weight and shapes of the items, adverse weather, faulty transportation, etc. One solution to tackle this environmental issue is to utilize reusable packaging products. Reusable packaging containers are made from stronger materials, allowing them to last 20 years and replace over 100 cardboard boxes in their lifetime. Durable and cost-efficient reusable packaging products can reduce storage and shipping costs for companies in almost any industry.
Paper generates 50 times more water pollutants and 70 percent more air pollutants during production than plastics. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions and energy, plastic is preferable to paper and cardboard—it takes 90 percent less energy to recycle a pound of plastic than a pound of paper. There are many advantages to using plastics over paper when it comes to transporting goods. Plastics could be used to make the panels under my panel interlocking mechanism.
As alternative to cardboard boxes, reusable boxes are easily cleaned, collapsible, and reusable. It is an economically feasible tool that has been used for many years. Due to complex channels in the market, returning reusable boxes to the supplier is getting more complicated. They are not interchangeable, particularly when the boxes are made to specific dimensions or standards.
For those collapsible alternatives to cardboard boxes, the sizes cannot be adjusted to Different specifications. In addition, courier services and delivery companies price the shipping costs based on guidelines of dimensional packaging from the higher of the two measurements: package weight or package size. Storing numerous boxes for many businesses and individuals is not realistic due to the area the boxes occupy.
For businesses that are using routine transportation routes to deliver products, Cardboard boxes that are only used once or twice result in major expenses for business operations. Reusable boxes can cut down enormous costs for this type of business.
Consumers who receive their shipments from e-commerce companies usually discard the cardboard boxes. The boxes come in a variety of sizes, possibly containing protective materials for the product. Although consumers may keep some boxes at home, shipping items becomes problematic when the items do not match the sizes of the cardboard boxes.
My panel interlocking mechanism allows modular panels to be produced in standard sizes, assembled to standard-size boxes, and disassembled for easy storage. Since all the panels are in modular specifications and standard sizes, the panels can be circulated, stored, cleaned, recycled, and reused. For all businesses and individual consumers, the most important benefit in adopting the modular interlocking panel boxes is to significantly reduce packaging costs due to the reusable features.
One reason cardboard boxes are popular is because people like clean and disposable boxes. My mechanism designs smooth and sleek surfaces all over the panels. After each usage, if they get dirty, individual consumers can easily rinse and dry them. For industries under specific regulations, my design is suitable for centralized washing and drying.
My mechanism presents the simplest designs using modular panels to build and expand surfaces. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 8,863,473 (2014), U.S. Pat. No. 5,979,693 (1999), U.S. Pat. No. 5,743,421 (1998), U.S. Pat. No. 5,429,259 (1995), U.S. Pat. No. 4,470,647 (1984), U.S. Pat. No. 4,050,604 (1977) all introduced panel interconnection methods; some designs are limited to creating a single sized box; some mechanism require thick panels to make it interlock; some designs need panels in a variety of sizes; while others require additional accessories to hold the box together. All the methods and panels mentioned above have limitations for wide usage and circulation in the society.
The following U.S. Pat. No. 5,888,114 (1999), U.S. Pat. No. 5,466,058 (1995), U.S. Pat. No. 5,123,533 (1992), U.S. Pat. No. 3,203,149 (1965), U.S. Pat. No. 3,184,013 (1965) are becoming more complicated. The tedious work required for the assembling these boxes deters consumers' interest in the packaging. The configurations of panels are so uneven or irregular that they're not fit for easy cleaning.
Another major mechanism for reusable boxes is collapsible boxes. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 6,648,159 (2003), U.S. Pat. No. 5,555,989 (1996), U.S. Pat. No. 4,793,507 (1988), U.S. Pat. No. 4,491,231 (1985), U.S. Pat. No. 3,249,284 (1966) are all devices that require all major pieces to connect before folding up. The configurations are predetermined before connecting the pieces into an enclosure, therefore limiting the applications to unitary product transportations. Their blueprints are not as simple and compact as my designs, and the interchangeability in reusing boxes mentioned above is obviously restricted.
None of the methods or devices mentioned above could help consumers use simple modular panels with my mechanism to assemble and dissemble reusable boxes in various sizes and dimensions. Additionally, none of the existing methods is suitable for mass production under industrial standards, accepted to circulate and reuse as an alternative to cardboard boxes in society, or mitigate environmental concerns.
Based on the previous shortcomings of assembling and dissembling enclosures or boxes from panels, components, and collapsible devices, my mechanism discloses a far more efficient and practical way for alternatives. This type of panel in my design is versatile for building boxes in a plurality of sizes and dimensions, allowing the consumer to use panels in the minimal number of dimensions to meet their specifications. Furthermore, my mechanism can extend to other applications such as furniture and assembly toys, partitions, makeshift houses, etc.
Cardboard boxes are used extensively throughout the package industry; ninety percent of all products are packed using cardboard boxes. Producing cardboard boxes requires enormous amounts of natural resources such as trees, fresh water, and energy. Even though a great percentage of cardboard boxes are recycled, it still takes half the amount of all the resources compared to producing new cardboard. The process of producing cardboard and decomposition in landfills emits harmful pollutants to air, water, and soil. Finding an alternative to cardboard boxes is crucial to become more ecofriendly and preserve our habitat.
Predecessors have made many attempts to replace or substitute the hundreds of billions of cardboard boxes produced each year. However, the existing replacements are limited to several business fields, none of which have been successful in establishing their design nationwide. Their products are not versatile and cannot be interchangeable, widely circulated, or reused.
Generally speaking, the ideal alternative to cardboard boxes should be easily assembled and disassembled. Consumers should be able to create a box at their own discretion without difficulty and machinery should mass produce, assemble, and dissemble them without difficulty as well.
A primary example of my mechanism is using one type of panel to build boxes of multiple sizes. Rectangular panels comprise of a sheet rolled groove along each edge. The groove consists of an opening with a smaller outer width toward the opening compared to the inner width of the grooves. All the grooves on the panels have the same configuration. Regarding assembly, two grooves from separate panels can be pressed into one another. The grooves are made at the desired flexibility and will adjust depending on the attachment or removal from a separate panel. When attached, groove A is held by groove B with a smaller width of the outer opening and both sides of the groove opening which point inward.
My modular panel interlocking mechanism designs a living hinge along the groove, thus allowing grooves on both connecting panels to turn 45 degrees and interlock to complete the 90 degree dihedral angled connection for the box. Six same sized panels with a 90 degree corner interlocking all 12 corner lines complete the box construction.
Another example is to allow the panel groove and living hinge to stretch straight to connect to another panel. A bigger surface can be constructed by interlocking a panel and a groove. When creating a 90 degree corner, turn the living hinges on both panels and interlock them together. Repeat the steps to complete the box.
One of the advantages of groove interlocking is that both grooves will stay interlocked due to their flexibility and tension. If a similar sized cross rod is inserted into and along the groove, the entire structure will be more durable. As such, the grooves either on the flat surface or on the dihedral corners between the panels are reinforced by this design. Another reinforcing method is simply adding a third groove onto or into the existing interlocked grooves. In the case of trihedral corners on the boxes, a specifically made right angled trihedral corner piece, with rods protruding along three dihedral corner lines, can be pressed onto or into the trihedral corners. The three right angled rods' protrusion will simultaneously lock into the three grooves from the trihedral corner, thus reinforcing the box corners. For more resistant connections, fasteners or bolts can be used to permanently anchor the grooves together with extra strength. The reinforcing benefits in my mechanism greatly strengthen the enclosures with only a few accessories.
Because my mechanism uses panels to build enclosures, it can also apply to other variations aside from boxes. Assembly toys, for example, can use the interlocking and reinforcing method to create buildings, toy vehicles and crafts, toy figures and characters, etc. Additionally, my method can be applied to furniture because of its flat surface and dihedral corner compositions. The wood joinery can be replaced with my interlocking methods, as well as extending reinforcing rods downwards as supporting legs to the floor. Other applications that can use my mechanism include crates, containers, makeshift houses, partitions, tents, show booths, rescue shelters, interior decorations, flat surface expansions, and many others.
In the drawings, closely related figures have the same number but different alphabetic suffixes.
One embodiment of my modular panel 20 interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
One cubic box 21 which is not illustrated in both
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
An additional embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
A ramification of the above embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Another ramification of the above embodiment of my modular panel interlocking mechanism is illustrated in
Advantages
Accordingly, the reader will see that the panel interlocking mechanism for building enclosures is simple, convenient, and practical. Substituting cardboard boxes with my panels can cut down on pollution and preserve a great deal of precious natural resources. It also becomes more economical for consumers and businesses while generating new product lines.
Although the description above contains many specificities, these should not be construed as limiting the scope of the embodiments but as merely providing illustrations of some of several embodiments. For instance, the reinforcing rod can be modified to include a cover to smooth out the outer surface. The mechanism allows panels to connect into flat or curved surfaces instead of enclosures. Panels don't necessarily have to be rigid, they can be soft sheets and rolled. Other additions on panels can include cushions, double panels, corrugated panels, multiple layers, construction materials, etc. Building permanent structures is within reach by using my mechanism and further fastening the grooves together by bolts or glue or many other fastening devices. Modular panels can also be in shapes beyond rectangle or square; they can be triangular, circular, circular sector, or many other shapes. They can also be a combination of panels connected by creases or hinges for folding up and building an enclosure by interlocking at key structural points under my mechanism.
The grooves attached to panel edges can also come in various forms or shapes other than continuous. Some possibilities include sectional or even in shape of pits, or buttons along the panel edges, so long as the interlocking mechanism on panels has similar configurations. Therefore, the scope of the embodiments should be determined by the appended claims and their legal equivalents, rather than by the examples given.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2135437 | Bangert | Nov 1938 | A |
2142420 | Sullivan | Jan 1939 | A |
2960254 | Kiba | Nov 1960 | A |
3184013 | Pavlecka | May 1965 | A |
3203149 | Soddy | Aug 1965 | A |
3249284 | Wood | May 1966 | A |
4050604 | Flanders | Sep 1977 | A |
4083464 | Burnett | Apr 1978 | A |
4230227 | Kowall | Oct 1980 | A |
4470647 | Bishoff | Sep 1984 | A |
4491231 | Heggeland | Jan 1985 | A |
4685892 | Gould | Aug 1987 | A |
4793507 | Delplanque | Dec 1988 | A |
4836787 | Boo | Jun 1989 | A |
4874341 | Ziegler | Oct 1989 | A |
5016813 | Simons | May 1991 | A |
5123533 | Uitz | Jun 1992 | A |
5197404 | Haley | Mar 1993 | A |
5429259 | Robin | Jul 1995 | A |
5466058 | Chan | Nov 1995 | A |
5509720 | Croom | Apr 1996 | A |
5555989 | Moran, Jr. | Sep 1996 | A |
5632071 | Maunder | May 1997 | A |
5715948 | Hung | Feb 1998 | A |
5743421 | Gonzalez | Apr 1998 | A |
5749512 | Gingras-Taylor | May 1998 | A |
5871384 | Kichijo | Feb 1999 | A |
5888114 | Slocum | Mar 1999 | A |
5979693 | Bane, III | Nov 1999 | A |
6004182 | Pasin | Dec 1999 | A |
6648159 | Prutkin | Nov 2003 | B2 |
8387856 | Lachance | Mar 2013 | B1 |
8584858 | Golias | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8668542 | Bruzgul | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8763811 | Lantz | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8863473 | Weber | Oct 2014 | B2 |
20020092787 | Cheng | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020193046 | Zebersky | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030098256 | Lu | May 2003 | A1 |
20040232145 | Antal, Sr. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050223652 | Mower | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20080066393 | Sorensen | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080124008 | Meager | May 2008 | A1 |
20120175377 | Masci | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20160194068 | Savian | Jul 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20180353872 A1 | Dec 2018 | US |