This invention relates to supports for tubular objects and specifically to an improved clamp for supporting a pipe or a bundle of cables.
It is common to use clamps for anchoring pipes to horizontal, vertical, or other surfaces in buildings, manufacturing plants, and other facilities.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,118,215 (hereinafter the '215 patent) discloses a pipe clip having flexible struts extending from a base portion. Strap segments extending from the struts include parallel closure tongues for enclosing and holding a pipe therein. In order to provide protection against excessive forces acting on an inserted pipe, hooks are provided on a lower end of each strap segment. The hooks interact with stop bosses on a base plate to protect the lower end portions and struts against overelongation.
Although the pipe clip of the '215 patent provides an adequate device for supporting a pipe on a horizontal surface, some deficiencies become apparent when the clip is mounted to a vertical surface. A first disadvantage is that, for a vertical mounting, the protection against overelongation of the struts relies upon one point of contact between a hook and a corresponding stop boss. With the clip anchored to a wall and supporting a pipe running horizontally across the wall, a hook on the downward side of the pipe clip engages a stop boss on the base plate. However, this is the only point of reinforcement for the struts as the hook on the opposite lower strap segment is not engaged with the opposite stop boss.
A second disadvantage of the pipe clip shown in the '215 patent involves the integrity of the clip as a pipe is supported therein. Particularly in a vertical installation as described above, the integrity of the clip remaining closed relies upon the frictional hold of the teeth on the parallel closure tongues. It should be apparent that, in the case of impacts upon the clip, the closure tongues could be forced apart, thereby causing the strap segments to open and causing the inserted pipe to fall out. This is a serious problem as some pipes are quite heavy, being constructed of iron or steel, and when full of liquids typically exert a tremendous amount of force on the strap segments and connecting struts.
Therefore, what is needed is a pipe support that overcomes the deficiencies of the prior art, including improved protection against overelongation of the various portions of the support and an improved arrangement for keeping the support closed around the inserted pipe.
The invention is a pipe clamp having a base portion, flexible legs, and an arcuate arm connected to each of the legs. The arcuate arms include inner and outer arcuate surfaces with the inner arcuate surfaces defining a substantially circular pipe-receiving opening. The pipe clamp includes a closure arrangement for closing the arcuate arms and a locking arrangement for securing the arms in the closed position. The clamp is especially useful for securing pipes to a vertical surface. Arm supports extending from the base portion cooperate with posts extending outwardly from the arcuate arms to buttress and support the arcuate arms. The arm supports also brace the flexible leg on the upper side of the vertically mounted clamp to provide further support and bracing for the arcuate arms.
With reference to
Referring to
With reference to
Referring to the top and bottom views of the pipe clamp 10 in
In operation, the pipe clamp 10 of the present invention may be mounted on a surface in any angular orientation, including horizontal, vertical, or something in between. Mounting the bottom side 20 of the base portion 12 on a horizontal surface and insertion of a pipe within the pipe-receiving opening 37 urges the posts 44 toward the post-receiving notches 48.
The pipe clamp 10 of the present invention is especially useful when mounted to a vertical surface 66, as shown in
With reference to
Although the description above contains many specificities, these should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention but as merely providing illustrations of some of the presently preferred embodiments of this invention.
Thus the scope of the invention should be determined by the appended claims and their legal equivalents, rather than by the examples given.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3913187 | Okuda | Oct 1975 | A |
4291855 | Schenkel et al. | Sep 1981 | A |
4527760 | Salacuse | Jul 1985 | A |
4624432 | Salacuse | Nov 1986 | A |
4802646 | Cattani | Feb 1989 | A |
4955574 | Freier | Sep 1990 | A |
5094578 | Light et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5118215 | Freier | Jun 1992 | A |
5277387 | Lewis et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5572776 | Murphy et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5697585 | Hungerford, Jr. | Dec 1997 | A |
5794896 | Hungerford, Jr. | Aug 1998 | A |
6164605 | Drake et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6460813 | Gretz | Oct 2002 | B1 |