1. Technical Field
The invention relates generally to providing a combination of cap and plastic container that provides a snug fit while remaining easily removable. More specifically, the invention relates to providing an inexpensive, injection molded cap for an inexpensive, blow molded container that nevertheless provides a good seal.
2. Related Art
In offering food products to the consumer, convenience and cost are two considerations that receive a lot of attention. This applies not only to the food product itself, but also to the packaging in which it is marketed. The vast majority of products are either wrapped in a plastic film or provided in a disposable container. If the product is packaged in a quantity greater than a single serving, there may be both an original seal, designed to seal in freshness and offer evidence of tampering, as well as an overcap used to re-close the package between uses.
Thin, plastic snap-on caps are often used to provide closure for disposable food containers once a sealing closure has been removed.
Injection molding can be used to make the overcaps inexpensively. Examples of containers on which these are used include paperboard containers having a plastic or metal rim (used, for example, with oatmeal or roasted nuts) and plastic tubs (for soft cheeses and butter). Typically, the overcap 120 has a rounded ridge 122 on the inside, which snaps over a similar ridge 112 on the container 110. In some cases, the fit of the cap to the container is not a prime concern, as the product does not quickly stale, such as with butter. When maintaining freshness is important, such as with products that stale quickly, a tight seal of overcap to container is desirable. In these applications, the container is typically made of a heavier material, such as paperboard, and often the rim of the container is made of a material, such as a metal, for which the manufacturing tolerances are small. The downside of this approach is the cost, as these techniques are more expensive than molded plastic.
Blow molding is a commonly used technique for forming thin-walled plastic containers. In one version of this molding technique, a thick-walled tube of plastic (shaped similarly to a test tube) is first heated and placed inside a mold. The tube is then inflated by injecting air into it, so that the tube expands to fit the inside of the mold. The mold is chilled to cool the plastic quickly. Blow molding techniques have made inexpensive containers possible, although it is not possible to meet tight tolerances with just blow molding. When a blow-molded bottle needs a tight lid, e.g., for soft drinks, the neck of the bottle is formed by another technique, allowing a tighter fit to the lid.
Because blow molding a container and injection molding a snap-on cap are inexpensive methods of producing a lidded container, it would be desirable to manufacture a lidded container by these processes. However, it is difficult to produce an injection molded snap-on cap to fit the variations that can be produced by blow molding a container.
Of course, many different shapes of lid and containers are possible. For instance,
In order to provide an inexpensive method of packaging snack foods, it would be desirable to design a better snap-on overcap that can be used with a blow-molded container in order to provide packaging for a snack product. Since packaging for such a product is considered a disposable, it is desirable to keep the costs of such a combination container/overcap low. At the same time, although it is not necessary for the overcap to protect the product during shipping, it should be sufficiently well fitting that the product remaining after an initial opening of the container can be protected from absorbing too much moisture, which can cause degradation of the product.
The invention discloses a combination of a snap-on overcap and a blow-molded plastic container that are designed to act together to provide a reclosable seal after removal on the original freshness seal. This reclosable seal is designed to prevent a loss of freshness to the porous product stored within, regardless of variations in the manufacturing process. Instead of a rounded ridge on the container, the ridge has a flattened section on its lower half. On the inside of the snap-on cap, the ridge has two flat surfaces. The upper flat surface is designed to fit snugly against the flat surface on the ridge of the container, even at the extreme range of small container/large cap. Interferences between the container and cap at points other than the intended flat surfaces can cause the closure to become point-to-point, rather than the desired surface-to-surface, so other portions of the inside of the cap are designed to not touch the container, preventing interferences. The design has been shown to dramatically reduce the absorption of moisture by an enclosed product, demonstrating that a desirable seal is formed.
The invention as well as a preferred mode of use, further objectives and advantages thereof, will be best understood by reference to the following detailed description of illustrative embodiments when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
a shows an overcap having an ideal fit to the container.
b and 2c show an overcap having respectively a very loose and a very tight fit to the container.
a and 3b show prior art containers with lids or overcaps.
a, 4b, and 4c show an embodiment of the innovative container and overcap.
An embodiment of the innovative invention will now be described with reference to
Overcap 430 is injection molded, using a low-density polyethylene. The cap has a generally flat upper surface 432, with a ridge 434 running near the outer edge to provide additional strength. A flange 436 extends generally perpendicularly to the upper surface 432, but preferably “toes inwardly” about 3 degrees. On the inside of the flange 436, a raised ridge has upper- and lower-facing flat surfaces 440, 442. Surface 440 of cap 430 and surface 420 of container 410 are designed to mate with each other, forming a sealing surface, rather than a point-to-point seal as in the past. The cap must be sized so that the surface 440 of the cap will extend against the surface 420 of the container, even at the extreme range of small container/large cap. Additionally, interferences at other points between the container and cap can cause the closure to become point-to-point, rather than the desired surface-to-surface. The design must be adjusted so that surfaces 442 and 444 on the inside of flange 436 never cause interference with the container, even at the extreme range of large container/small cap. Note also that surface 446 is not a continuation of sealing surface 440, but angles away from the container to prevent interference here. The calculations necessary to ensure a proper fit are explained below.
The calculations necessarily start with the nominal, or designed, greatest diameter of the container rim, along with the manufacturing tolerance for the container TCNTR and the manufacturing tolerance for the cap TCAP. These numbers will be used to determine two design measurements of the overcap. The measurements are shown graphically in
The inventors determined experimentally that for the tightness they wished to achieve with the overcap, ODRIM and IDPEAK should have an overlap OVR=0.015 inches (0.381 mm) on each side, so that in cross-section there is a total of 0.030 inches (0.762 mm) difference in these two measurements. This figure should be achievable with the smallest container and the largest overcap, the combination most likely to have too loose a lid. As we determined above, the smallest container that meets the tolerance will have a value of ODRIM=3.113 in. (79.059 mm). Therefore; IDPEAK+, the value on the largest container, should equal ODRIM−−(2·OVR), or 3.113−0.030=3.083 inches (79.059−0.762=78.297). Since this is the largest value, IDPEAK+, IDPEAK.NOM=IDPEAK+−TCAP=3.083−0.007=3.076 inches (78.297−0.178=78.119 mm). Thus, the formula IDPEAK.NOM=((ODRIM.NOM+TCNTR)−(2·OVR))−TCAP will assure at least an overlap of OVR in the worst-case scenario. Of course, one of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the amount of desired overlap can be increased or decreased, depending on the desired fit.
To avoid interference in a large container with small overcap combination, it is necessary that IDFLANGE− is never smaller than ODRIM+. ODRIM+ is 3.143 inches (79.832 mm). This means that IDFLANGE− should be at least 3.143 inches (79.832 mm). Given the tolerance of 0.007 inches (0.178 mm) inches for the overcap, the value for IDFLANGE.NOM=IDFLANGE−+TCAP=3.143+0.007 inches=3.150 inches (79.832+0.178=80.010 mm). The final formula for calculating clearance is IDFLANGE.NOM≧ODRIM.NOM−TCNTR+TCAP.
We now have nominal values for the three measurements shown. Table 1 below shows the range of sizes that these dimensions can take, given the tolerances.
The space between the container and the overcap, ODRIM−IDFLANGE, are shown for various points with the allowed tolerance in Table 2 below. As this table shows, the space between the container and overcap will go to zero only in the single scenario of the largest container and smallest cap. Of course, this is a minimum value of IDFLANGE; any increase in IDFLANGE will increase the clearance so that there is always space. After determining this value, the inventors then worked with cutouts of the container and overcap to see the areas where interference was most likely. After their tests, they relieved the portion of surface 440 that is closest to the base of the overcap, forming surface 446.
Similarly, the amount of overlap (ODRIM−IDPEAK) in the various sizes of containers and overcaps is shown in Table 3, where it is clear that there is always sufficient overlap to maintain the desired seal.
It is desirable to have a slight “toe-in” of the flange with the base of the overcap, rather than a ninety-degree angle. Preferably, the angle made by the flange and the base on the inside of the overcap is about 87° or about three degrees of toe-in. The toe-in can be achieved by one of two methods, depending on the manufacturer's preference. It is known that plastics will shrink as they cool, and the hotter they are when taken out of the mold, the more they will shrink. In one embodiment, the toe-in can be achieved by molding the overcap with a 90° angle between the base and flange, then remove the overcap from the mold at a point that will cause enough shrinkage to create the 3° toe-in. Alternatively, the overcap can be cast so that it is made with a 3° toe-in, then allowed to remain in the mold until cool enough that the angle will not change.
Test Results
In summary, the disclosed combination of container and overcap, even though made by different processes with a relatively large variability in the container can still provide a well-fitting lid at low costs. The seal has been designed to be surface-to-surface, rather than point-to-point and the overcap has been designed to maintain this relationship.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2780259 | Nalle, Jr. | Feb 1957 | A |
3077284 | McLaughlin | Feb 1963 | A |
3128903 | Crisci | Apr 1964 | A |
3480177 | Elliot | Nov 1969 | A |
3739976 | Elliot | Jun 1973 | A |
3892351 | Johnson et al. | Jul 1975 | A |
3927820 | Wagner et al. | Dec 1975 | A |
4042143 | Biggins | Aug 1977 | A |
4044941 | Knudsen | Aug 1977 | A |
4059181 | Greenfield, Jr. et al. | Nov 1977 | A |
4133447 | Bouchet | Jan 1979 | A |
4154360 | Smith | May 1979 | A |
4209107 | Crisci | Jun 1980 | A |
4453646 | Harrild | Jun 1984 | A |
4474304 | Jacobs | Oct 1984 | A |
4500010 | Schutz | Feb 1985 | A |
4504009 | Boik et al. | Mar 1985 | A |
4691501 | King | Sep 1987 | A |
4738373 | DeParales | Apr 1988 | A |
4856674 | Berney | Aug 1989 | A |
5127523 | Herdlicka | Jul 1992 | A |
5592766 | Mygatt | Jan 1997 | A |
5779086 | Barrash | Jul 1998 | A |
5860549 | Allers et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5950638 | Crosta | Sep 1999 | A |
6047851 | Freek et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6116453 | Przytulla | Sep 2000 | A |
6179158 | Koda | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6196451 | Helms | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6237791 | Beck et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6544613 | Varadarajan | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6547093 | Archibald et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20050082304 A1 | Apr 2005 | US |