This invention is concerned with safety razors and more especially the invention is concerned with a safety razor blade unit in which there are two or more blades with substantially parallel sharpened edges disposed to contact the skin between a front guard surface and a rear cap surface as the blade unit is moved across the skin in the performance of a shaving stroke. A safety razor blade unit can be mounted permanently on a handle with the intention that the entire razor should be discarded when the blade edges have become dulled. Alternatively a safety razor blade unit may be detachably mounted to a handle so that the blade unit can be replaced on the handle when the blades have lost the sharpness required for efficient shaving. Replaceable blade units are commonly referred to as shaving cartridges. In modern safety razor blade units the blades are usually carried by a moulded plastics frame, and the blades can be supported to move within the frame, either independently of each other or in unison under forces imparted on the blades by the skin during shaving. The frame of the blade unit can itself define the guard surface which contacts the skin immediately ahead of the blades and/or the cap surface which contacts the skin directly behind the blades during a shaving stroke, but the guard and/or the cap may comprise an additional element carried by the frame. In one particular construction a guard element of elastomeric material e.g. with upwardly directed fins, with an array of cylindrical recesses or sockets, or with other forms of protrusions is provided on the guard and can have a beneficial influence by interacting with hairs and/or by producing a pleasant tactile sensation during movement over the skin, whereas the blade unit cap includes a strip of material containing a shaving enhancement product, such as a lubricant which gradually leaches out of the strip material during shaving.
There are many factors which influence the shaving performance of a safety razor, and there is a variety of characteristics which can be considered in making a determination of the performance, including the closeness of the shave produced, the comfort during shaving, and the safety level in terms of the numbers of small nicks and cuts suffered. Changing features to enhance one characteristic often have a counter-productive effect on other characteristics and in deciding upon a blade unit design for manufacture and marketing a compromise must always be reached as to the characteristics which the blade unit produced is to have. A very fundamental consideration in the design of a safety razor blade unit is the number of blades. In former years the vast majority of safety razors available on the market had a single blade, this despite the fact that there have been several proposals in patent specifications going back many years for safety razors to be equipped with two or more blades. More recently it has been common for safety razor blade units to have a pair of tandem blades, and during the last couple of years safety razors having blade units equipped with three blades have come onto the market. The reason for safety razors having more than one blade taking so long to become a commercial reality was the very poor comfort level found with early prototype razors fitted with a plurality of blades and in particular such razors suffered from unacceptably high drag properties and hence very poor comfort levels. As technology developed and detailed understanding of the shaving process improved, it was then found possible to reduce the drag and thereby to achieve an adequate level of comfort while having two blades, and continuation of this development process has resulted in razors with three blades now being in commercial production and available on the market.
The level of comfort obtained with any given safety razor blade unit is influenced strongly by the so-called shaving geometry, which is the relative positioning of the skin contacting components. Important parameters of the shaving geometry include the blade exposure which is the distance by which the tip of the blade edge projects above, or is retracted below, a plane which is tangential to the skin contacting parts next in front and next behind the blade edge, the blade tangent angle (also known as the blade shaving angle) which is the angle at which the plane of the blade is inclined to a plane which is tangential to the guard and the cap surfaces (the tangent plane), and the blade span which is the distance by which the blade edge is spaced from the skin contacting element immediately in front of the blade edge, as seen in a plane which is tangential to the blade edge and the skin contacting element in front of it. In a blade unit having two or more blades, the blade span of the or each blade after the forwardmost or primary blade will in general be the distance from the edge of that blade to the edge of the blade immediately in front of that blade. Thus, for these subsequent blades it is convenient to refer to the “inter-blade span”.
Quite naturally persons working in the field of research and development related to safety razors have studied the effect which changing the blade span can have on the comfort characteristics. Shown in
It has now been realised that the comfort benefits resulting from narrow spans as perceived during earlier laboratory trials can only be achieved in practice in a multi-bladed razor if satisfactory provision is made for clearance of debris between the blades. The effective clearance of shaving debris, i.e. cut hairs, shaving soap, skin particles, etc, from the underside of the first blade is usually ensured when there is a primary blade span of about 0.7 mm, but debris clearance between two blades is impeded by the more forward blade which inevitably occupies some of the space as it needs to be of a certain width and requires a blade support which carries the blade within the blade unit frame and further restricts the space between the blades. The need for good rinsing properties to facilitate the removal of shaving debris from a blade unit has been recognised for a long time, but as far as is currently known the extent to which blade unit performance has been directly influenced by the debris clearance efficiency or “rinsability”, especially in the area between successive blades, has gone unnoticed by practitioners working in the shaving field.
The Applicants have developed a method of measuring the rinsability of safety razor blade units to provide a quantative assessment which permits a direct comparison of the inter-blade rinsing efficiency, the measurements providing a “wash through index” value, the precise meaning of which will become clear from the following description of the measurement method which is given with reference to
Wash Through Index Measurement
A header tank 5 having a opening in the bottom wall 6 and an overflow outlet 7 at a predetermined height h of 185 mm above the bottom wall is provided.
The blade unit 2 to be tested is mounted to the underside of the bottom wall at the opening therein and the frame of the blade unit 2 is sealed to the bottom wall 6 around the opening. Prior to mounting the blade unit 2 in place for testing, all flow paths by which fluid can flow through the blade unit, from top to bottom, except by passing between two blades, are closed off by filling with suitable stopping material. In particular, the gap between the first blade and the guard is blocked (as satisfactory rinsing through the region is not generally a problem) and any gap between the final blade and the cap is blocked since any flow through this gap will not contribute to any material extent to the removal of shaving debris which collects principally in front of and beneath the blades. Water is supplied to the open top of the header tank 5 at a sufficient flow rate for the header tank to fill to the level of the overflow outlet 7, and when water starts to flow from this overflow outlet, the water which flows out through the opening in the bottom wall and through the blade unit during a certain period of time, in particular 10 seconds, is collected in a container 8 and is then weighed on a balance 9. The weight of water collected in the container is used to obtain a measure of the “wash through rate” in litres/min for the particular blade unit 2 being tested. To achieve a “normalised” measurement enabling results obtained with blade units of different shapes and sizes (length and width) and with different numbers of blades, to be compared directly, the test as described above is repeated but with the blade unit 2 replaced by a normalising plate having had cut therein a rectangular hole with a length equal to the length of the blades in the blade unit and a width equal to the distance between the sharpened edges of the first and the last blades in the blade unit. From the wash through rate obtained with the blade unit and the wash through rate obtained with the normalising plate corresponding to that blade unit, a “wash through index” value for the particular blade unit is calculated by the equation:—
For the purposes of the present specification the term “wash through index” is defined to be the value obtained by following the test procedure described above and by calculating the value by means of Equation (1).
The wash through indices have been determined for several razor blade units which are currently marketed. It will be appreciated that a high wash through index means good inter-blade rinsability and a low wash through index is indicative of poor inter-blade rinsability. Also, with larger inter-blade spans it can be expected that a higher wash through index can be achieved, although increasing the inter-blade span will detract from other important shaving performance characteristics, such as comfort, as well as having the detrimental effect of making the blade unit as a whole larger. Shown graphically in
It has now been realised that the best compromise as between the characteristics of rinsability and of comfort during shaving, which is available through selection of inter-blade span dimensions, has been missed by the prior art blade units and constructions which can achieve a superior overall shaving performance can be reached. Having regard to the foregoing there is provided in accordance with the present invention a safety razor blade unit comprising a frame with a guard and a cap and two or more blades with spaced substantially parallel sharpened edges, wherein the average inter-blade span is not greater than 1.25 mm, and the wash through index (as hereinabove defined) of the blade unit is not less than 0.20. The stipulated maximum average inter-blade span and minimum wash through index are depicted by dashed lines in
It is believed possible to achieve a wash through index of up to 0.35 and it is preferable for the wash through index to be at least 0.25. From a consideration of
Preferred embodiments of the invention have at least three blades and in such embodiments it is preferable for the individual inter-blade spans to be substantially equal. Especially good results have been observed with blade units having three blades with an average inter-blade span of 1.05 to 1.15 mm, more precisely about 1.10 mm, and a wash through index of more than 0.275, more especially above 0.30. In addition, it has been found possible for a four-bladed blade unit to be assembled without becoming unduly large, enabling enhanced closeness to be obtained whilst the specified preferred minimum wash through index of 0.25 is exceeded and a average inter-blade span less than 1.20 mm ensures adequate comfort during shaving.
In blade units embodying the invention it is preferable that the blade span of the first or primary blade be less than the inter-blade span, and the primary blade span will preferably be from 0.6 to 0.9 mm, most ideally substantially equal to about 0.7 mm. Conveniently, the blades are substantially planar metal strips having a width less than the average inter-blade span, and mounted on elongate supports which are narrower than, and do not protrude rearwardly of the rear edges of, the respective blade strips. Suitably each blade support has the form of a bar with parallel front and rear faces, a bottom face perpendicular to the front and rear faces, and a top face which is inclined at an angle of 65° to 75° e.g. about 67.5°, to the front face so that the blade mounted on the top face will be set in an upwardly and forwardly inclined orientation. The blades are preferably movable independently of each other and for this purpose the ends of the support bars can be guided in slots in the ends of the blade unit frame. Springs can be arranged to act on the blade support bars to urge the blade upwardly to a normal rest position.
To assist a clear understanding of the invention some currently preferred embodiments are described below with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:—
The safety razor blade unit illustrated in
Behind the elastomeric strip 14 the front frame member 11 defines a backstop 16 (or guard) which, as the skin contacting surface just before the first blade, serves an important role in establishing certain parameters of the shaving geometry of the blade unit, and in particular the blade span S1 of the first blade, which is measured from the top rear edge 17 of the backstop 16. The rear member 12 of the frame includes a cap 42 and carries a lubricating strip 18 incorporating a lubricant which is leached out of the strip on contact with water. The composition of the lubricating strip 18 may be as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,113,585, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference. Mounted within the central opening of the frame are three blade assemblies providing first, second and third blades 19, 20, 21 with parallel forwardly directed cutting edges 24, 25, 26. Each blade 19, 20, 21 consists of a substantially planar metal strip fixed, e.g., spot welded, to a support bar 28. The blade support bar 28 has parallel front and rear faces 30 and 31, a bottom face 32, which is perpendicular to the front and rear faces, and a top face 33 to which the blade is attached and which is forwardly and upwardly inclined, the angle between the front and top faces being about 67.5° so that the blade is inclined at an angle of about 22.5°.
The support bar 28 has downwardly directed legs 29 at its ends, these legs being slidably received in slots 35 formed in the inner faces of the frame ends 13. Springs 36 are positioned to act on the lower ends of the legs 29 and urge the blade support and blade upwardly to a normal rest position, the upward movement being limited by engagement of the blade with stop shoulders 37 formed on the frame ends 13. Thus, the blades 19, 20, 21 are supported in the blade unit frame 10 for vertical movement independently of each other under the forces encountered during shaving. Although the blade unit of
It should be noted that the support bars 28 are narrower than the blades they support and are confined within the width of the blades, this being an important contribution to achieving a wash through index value of at least 0.20 in accordance with the essential teaching of the present invention. The support bars 28 position the blades 19,20,21 so that, in their normal rest positions when the blade edges lie substantially in a common plane, the cutting edge 24 of the first blade 19 is spaced from the rear edge 17 of the backstop 16 at a primary span S1 of 0.7 mm, the cutting edge 25 of the second blade 20 is spaced from that of the first blade at an inter-blade span S2 of 1.11 mm, and the cutting edge 26 of the third blade is spaced behind that of the second blade at an inter-blade span S3 of 1.11 mm. Thus,
The wash through index for the blade unit of
The blade unit shown in
A blade unit with four parallel blades is illustrated in
Average inter-blade span=S2+S3+S4/3=1.18 mm.
The primary span S1 is 0.70 mm.
As shown in
The wash through index of the blade unit of
Of course the blades 19,20,21 and 22 in the blade unit of
Other details of the blade unit of
It will be appreciated that modifications to the specifically described embodiments which are given by way of non-limiting example only are possible without departing from the principles of the invention and it is the intention that the scope of the invention should be limited only by the claims which follow.
It will be appreciated that the blade units embodying the invention will be carried on razor handles when used for shaving, and so as not to detract from the rinsability characteristics the razor handle, and in particular the connection between the handle and the blade unit, should be arranged so as not to impede flow of rinsing water through the blade unit. Suitable forms of connection for attaching the particularly described blade units to a handle are those described in the prior applications Nos. WO 97/37819 and WO 98/36880, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
9922832.2 | Sep 1999 | GB | national |
This application is a divisional of U.S. application Ser. No. 12/330,661, filed on Dec. 9, 2008, now abandoned which is a divisional of U.S. application Ser. No. 11/217,985, filed on Sep. 1, 2005, which is a continuation (and claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. §120) of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/964,581, filed on Oct. 13, 2004, now abandoned which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/602,894, filed on Jun. 24, 2003, now abandoned which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/102,692, filed on Mar. 22, 2002, now abandoned which is a continuation of PCT/GB00/03690, filed on Sep. 26, 2000, which claims priority from United Kingdom application serial no. 9922832.2, filed on Sep. 27, 1999.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1920711 | Pelizzola | Aug 1933 | A |
3137940 | Curci | Jun 1964 | A |
3660893 | Welsh | May 1972 | A |
4168571 | Francis | Sep 1979 | A |
4170821 | Booth | Oct 1979 | A |
4177556 | Galli, Jr. | Dec 1979 | A |
4200976 | Gooding | May 1980 | A |
4302876 | Emmett | Dec 1981 | A |
4516321 | Francis | May 1985 | A |
4709477 | Ferraro | Dec 1987 | A |
4774765 | Ferraro | Oct 1988 | A |
4932122 | Shurland et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4941492 | Morgan | Jul 1990 | A |
5056222 | Miller et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5067238 | Miller et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
5084969 | Althaus | Feb 1992 | A |
5113585 | Rogers et al. | May 1992 | A |
5141694 | Butlin et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5191712 | Crook et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5222300 | Althaus et al. | Jun 1993 | A |
5224267 | Simms et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
5236439 | Kozikowski | Aug 1993 | A |
5249361 | Apprille, Jr. et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5253420 | Althaus et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5265337 | Lowder | Nov 1993 | A |
5313706 | Motta et al. | May 1994 | A |
5335417 | Genero et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5369885 | Ferraro | Dec 1994 | A |
5402574 | Milner | Apr 1995 | A |
5426851 | Gilder et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5497550 | Trotta et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5537749 | Cacioppo | Jul 1996 | A |
5666729 | Ferraro | Sep 1997 | A |
5671534 | Mayerovitch | Sep 1997 | A |
5689883 | Ortiz et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5711076 | Yin et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5813119 | Ferraro et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5893213 | Motta | Apr 1999 | A |
5953824 | Ferraro et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5953825 | Christman et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5966822 | Coffin et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6009623 | Orloff | Jan 2000 | A |
6014918 | Orloff | Jan 2000 | A |
6026577 | Ferraro | Feb 2000 | A |
6055731 | Zucker | May 2000 | A |
6082007 | Andrews | Jul 2000 | A |
RE36816 | Apprille et al. | Aug 2000 | E |
6112412 | Richard | Sep 2000 | A |
6122826 | Coffin et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6138361 | Richard et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6141875 | Andrews | Nov 2000 | A |
6161288 | Andrews | Dec 2000 | A |
6173498 | Warrick et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6182365 | Tseng et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6185823 | Brown et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6212777 | Gilder et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6216349 | Gilder et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6243951 | Oldroyd | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6276061 | Rozenkranc | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6295734 | Gilder et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6298559 | Kwiecien et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6301785 | Kwiecien et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6311400 | Hawes et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6397473 | Clark | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6434828 | Andrews | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6499218 | Rocha | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6502318 | Gilder | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6601303 | Gilder et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6671961 | Pragt et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
7007390 | Mislove | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7043842 | Taylor et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7047646 | Coffin | May 2006 | B2 |
7100284 | King | Sep 2006 | B2 |
20020088122 | Zuidervaart | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020144404 | Gilder et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20040060176 | Gilder et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040200074 | Gilder et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040221455 | Coffin | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050015991 | Follo et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050108882 | Gilder et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20060026842 | Gilder et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060101647 | Gilder et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060277759 | Follo | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070011880 | Pennell et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20090126196 | Gilder et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20100077619 | Follo et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100229398 | Coffin | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20110289779 | Volodin et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1155643 | Jul 1981 | CA |
0 073 852 | Mar 1983 | EP |
0 259 065 | Mar 1988 | EP |
0 336 355 | Oct 1989 | EP |
760734 | Mar 1997 | EP |
1 362 443 | Aug 1974 | GB |
2 087 288 | May 1982 | GB |
2 117 304 | Oct 1983 | GB |
2 354 474 | Mar 2001 | GB |
2007083084 | Apr 2007 | JP |
WO 9217322 | Oct 1992 | WO |
WO 9509071 | Apr 1995 | WO |
WO 9629183 | Sep 1996 | WO |
WO 9725190 | Jul 1997 | WO |
WO 9733728 | Sep 1997 | WO |
WO 9733729 | Sep 1997 | WO |
WO 9737819 | Oct 1997 | WO |
WO 9835795 | Aug 1998 | WO |
WO 9836880 | Aug 1998 | WO |
WO 9838017 | Sep 1998 | WO |
WO 9914020 | Mar 1999 | WO |
WO 9916591 | Apr 1999 | WO |
WO 9916592 | Apr 1999 | WO |
WO 9939883 | Aug 1999 | WO |
WO 0037227 | Jun 2000 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100269351 A1 | Oct 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12330661 | Dec 2008 | US |
Child | 12795791 | US | |
Parent | 11217985 | Sep 2005 | US |
Child | 12330661 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10964581 | Oct 2004 | US |
Child | 11217985 | US | |
Parent | 10602894 | Jun 2003 | US |
Child | 10964581 | US | |
Parent | 10102692 | Mar 2002 | US |
Child | 10602894 | US | |
Parent | PCT/GB00/03690 | Sep 2000 | US |
Child | 10102692 | US |