The present invention relates to a closing device consisting of a plastic material for applying to a closed container consisting of a plastic film material, wherein said closing device comprises a lower part with a cylindrical outlet and a flange for attaching same to the container and a screw cap which is screwably fixed to the lower part. Said closing device further comprises a cylindrical perforator having external thread, which is open to both sides in the axial direction and travels in the outlet of the lower part, in the internal thread thereof, wherein means are located in the screw cap, which move the perforator downwards in a helical manner during the initial unscrewing movement of said screw cap and wherein said cylindrical perforator has cutting teeth on the cylindrical wall thereof at the end which is directed towards the container wall.
Closing devices of the type previously mentioned have to date only been applied to containers produced from laminated film material. These laminated films comprise at least three layers of different types of material. First of all, such a film consists of a cardboard layer, which provides the container with the necessary rigidity, an aluminum layer serving as an aroma barrier and a plastic layer which ensures the required denseness. In order to separate these three layers, the corresponding perforator of the aforementioned closing device must fulfill various functions. A plurality of saw teeth are often recommended for separating the cardboard layer, wherein a raised tooth cuts through the aluminum layer with a forward cutting edge and wherein a perforating tooth breaks through the plastic layer before the aforementioned cutting edge can continue to cut the plastic film. In the case of these containers consisting of laminated film material, the separation of the cardboard material generally represents a problem. Particularly if the partial press cut, which serves as a support and at least separates the cardboard layer to some extent, does not exactly correspond to the cutting line of the perforator, the teeth are then either too weak or in the case of a considerable number of teeth, the cardboard material comes between the teeth and said teeth can thereafter hardly produce a perforating effect.
The present invention relates, however, to a closing device, which is applied to a pure plastic film material. Such tubular receptacles, mostly referred to as pouches in the technical language, have not been opened to date by means of the aforementioned closing devices. On the contrary, an opening was already punched out and a closure including the outlet thereof was welded on the pouches so as to be correctly positioned or was shrink-wrapped between two film layers. Because the shelf-life of the filled food material or beverage is thereby solely dependent upon the impermeability of the closure, such closures were virtually used only in unproblematic areas, particularly in the area of cosmetics.
When using a closing device of the kind mentioned at the beginning of the application, the container pouch remains completely closed until the point of first being opened. An increased shelf-life is thereby provided. In addition, the plastic film in such applications according to the invention is substantially more robust and is designed having a greater wall thickness than the very thin plastic film layer in the case of a laminated film. This in turn gives rise to other demands being placed on the closing device. Initial trials with closing devices from prior art did not produce any reliable results.
Perforators as, for example, from the American patent publications U.S. Pat. No. 5,020,690 or U.S. Pat. No. 5,141,133 comprise a plurality of teeth. These teeth abutting one another basically form the shape of an annular saw blade. Such solutions have either led to a rondelle being completely cut out of the plastic film and falling into the container or as a result of the toughness of the film to individual teeth being broken off and falling into the container. Because the containers involved here typically relate to containers for beverages, this is totally unacceptable.
It has been assumed up until now that a plurality of teeth is advantageous because a plurality of perforations thereby arise. It has, however, actually been determined that a plurality of perforations do not provide an advantage per se. It has in fact been shown, that a plurality of teeth automatically leads to these teeth having to be relatively weak. This leads to the disadvantage previously mentioned above.
Based on this realization, further developments have accordingly been put into place, in which on the one hand the number of teeth was reduced and on the other hand the shape of the teeth was variably configured. A solution is therefore known, for example, from the European patent publication EP-A-1415926 having equally high teeth, which, however, are distributed over the periphery in a non-uniform manner. In addition, a closing device of the type mentioned at the beginning of the application is known from the American patent publication U.S. Pat. No. 6,279,779 having a perforator which comprises only a single tooth. This tooth is designed in a suitably strong manner and has different surfaces with a different effect. The one-tooth version has definitely not proven its worth. The procedures for severing the film as well as the perforation thereof, the subsequent cutting of the complete material and finally the folding away of the cut-out part have not been able to be optimized in a single element. The applicant therefore conducted trials with a perforator according to the WIPO patent publication WO2007/030965, wherein three teeth are present, which are distributed over the periphery and are minimally offset from a uniform distribution. Even though perforators of this type have proven their worth in many instances, cases frequently occur in which either the film is completely cut out and the corresponding rondelle fell into the receptacle or in other cases the films were cut only at three locations to an approximately equal width and the film remained hanging in an occluding manner over the opening. Based on these realizations, the applicant undertook elaborate trials to find an optimal solution, which reliably implements an opening incision in such a way that a flap-like rondelle, which stays in contact with the receptacle, remains hanging, said rondelle also being pushed out of the open area of the perforator by the teeth.
A closing device of the kind mentioned at the beginning of the application meets this aim, wherein said device is characterized by having exactly two equally high teeth which are arranged in an angular region of between 70° and 120° of the circumference. This has the effect that the plastic film to be cut open is pre-tightened by the two teeth and that said teeth subsequently begin to perforate and cut the film. After a short distance, the subsequent tooth then extends into the cutting area of the previous tooth and is thereby rendered inoperative. If the perforation of the film occurs virtually immediately upon first contact, the film still cannot completely be annularly cut out and consequently a plastic film rondelle does not fall into the container. If the perforation and the following incision occur relatively late, a sufficiently long incision is still produced, which ensures that the section of the subsequent tooth runs into the area of the section of the previous tooth and as a result a section is still achieved, which extends more than 180°; thus enabling the film to be cut open sufficiently wide to achieve a sufficient flow rate.
As previously mentioned, the closing device according to the invention is applied to a container consisting of a pure plastic film material. This one or multiple layer plastic film is substantially thicker than the plastic film which is used as an impermeability layer in the composite film consisting of diverse materials.
Whereas in the case of the thin film, wherein the perforation must foremost be done to ensure a reliable opening on account of the high elasticity of said film, this appears to no longer play a central role in the case of the film now being used. Experiments observed at a strong magnification have shown that apparently the film is slit open while forming swarf.
In light of this evidence, it is therefore an additional aim of the present invention to equip the teeth with swarf control means as in the case of a steel processing cutting plate. In solutions from prior art, this swarf has actually accumulated on the tooth tip and the torque output applied by means of said prior art was thus substantially higher than is the case with the now present solution.
A preferred exemplary embodiment of the subject matter of the invention is depicted in the drawings and subsequently described. In the drawings:
a-6c show various sectional views.
The plastic closing device is denoted in its entirety with the numeral 1. Said device comprises three components, of which two can be produced as one piece resulting from the manufacturing processes thereof, as is subsequently described in
In the cross-sectional view according to
As previously described, the perforator 5 and the lower part 2 are manufactured as one piece, just as is depicted in
In the assembled state as is shown in
Depending upon strength, elasticity and other factors, in particular with regard to the pre-tightening force on the plastic film of the pouch receptacle, the plastic film is sooner or later perforated. Said film is practically always perforated simultaneously by the cutting teeth 20, 21. The sectional views as depicted in
In
Because the resulting forces on the cutting teeth are substantially greater in this version than in the case of a plurality of small teeth, it is advantageous for the wall thickness of the cutting teeth 20, 21 to be selected to be larger than the wall thickness of the cylindrical pipe section 16 of the perforator. This can be seen most clearly in
It is known that plastic films can be obtained in many different qualities. Said films differ not only in the selection of the plastic materials used but also in thickness, stiffness, hardness, etc. With regard to the production of pouch receptacles, which are to have a comparable strength to those consisting of multilayered laminates comprising cardboard, such plastic films cannot be reliably opened with the plastic closing devices known to date. The stronger the film being used was, the greater the thickness of the teeth had to be, and in doing so the films could hardly be opened without too high of a torque being required for the operation, which then users could not be expected to produce. The pouch receptacles were in fact entirely manufactured from this relatively thick and hard material, wherein, however, an opening was press cut and sealed with a film section, which was substantially softer and could be cut with the usual plastic closing devices known until that time. The plastic closing device was in turn welded to the film section.
The trend is to move away from this technology and it has been shown that this is possible if the leading as well as the subsequent tooth is designed in the manner depicted in
It can be seen in
In contrast thereto, when severing the thicker film using the perforator comprising the newly designed teeth shapes, the load which has to be applied increases faster until the maximum pressure occurs on the film and the cutting action begins. The load now continuously decreases until the first succeeding tooth begins to have an effect and the additional effect of the further succeeding teeth can then additionally be seen in the region where the drop in load occurs. Despite the substantially harder film, the required force output remains practically the same. This astonishing result is due to the fact that the thicker film hardly ever tears but has accordingly to be cut much more, wherein the cutting characteristics resemble a cutting plate of a lathe tool. It can be microscopically determined that swarf forms at the same time the plastic is cut, and this swarf must be able to be routed into an area away from the teeth in order to prevent said swarf from moving in front of the actual cutting point of the teeth and thereby substantially increasing the torque.
A preferred exemplary embodiment of these newly configured teeth of a perforator is explained below with the aid of
In contrast to the solution first shown, wherein the teeth perform practically only a perforating action by means of a perforating tip 23 and thereafter the leading cutting edge 28 comes into operation, the two main teeth, namely the leading cutting tooth 20 and the subsequent cutting tooth 21, as well as the staggered succeeding teeth 24 all work in this case the same and have altogether a swarf-removing cutting effect. After the leading tooth and the subsequent tooth 20, 21 have come through the film, a succeeding tooth 24 must therefore take on their function. Said succeeding teeth are therefore disposed according to height in a descending step-like succession on account of the perforator 5 penetrating ever deeper into the container to be cut open during the screwing action. Said succeeding teeth also operate in a swarf-removing manner and thus said succeeding teeth are also equipped in each case with a respective swarf receiving space 25. It is appropriate for the swarf receiving spaces 25 which operate first to be larger that the swarf receiving spaces that subsequently become operative.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
10 2009 045 124.2 | Sep 2009 | DE | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP10/63560 | 9/15/2010 | WO | 00 | 6/12/2012 |