The table below is a tabulation of relevant prior art:
Telemark-capable ski bindings historically employed a means to retain the toe of a ski boot with a “duckbill”. The “duckbill” is a portion of boot sole jutting out from the front of the boot that is inserted into the toe piece of the binding meant to retain the boot laterally and in a forward direction longitudinally. A means to retain the boot in the rearward longitudinal direction was typically in the form of a heel clamp and a cable or rod assembly in combination with some form of compression or extension spring. An example of this is the ski binding in U.S. Pat. No. 5,499,838A Hauglin, 1996 Mar. 19. This arrangement binds the boot to the ski laterally and longitudinally but allows the heel of the boot to rotate upward off of the ski facilitating the telemark style turn and touring capability. The toe box portion of the boot is semi-rigidly held. While the “duckbill” is held firmly, the rear of the toe box is allowed some upward movement through a bellows in the toe box and a flexible soled boot. The heel retention hardware cannot be released or removed for ascent since it is needed to bind the boot in the rearward longitudinal direction.
When alpine touring bindings became popular it was clear that this type of telemark binding was not as efficient in climbing or touring mode due to the resistance of the heel retention system as well as the resistance to flex the sole of the boot at the toe box since it is rigidly held at the “duckbill”. Many bindings are available that attempt to address this problem. Some of these keep the same retention system and but simply add a means for the “duckbill” cage to rotate freely when touring and be held down when descending. An example of this is U.S. Pat. No. 7,216,888B1 Walker, 2007 May 15. This adds considerable complexity and weight to the binding. In my experience these arrangements are prone to having snow build up and pack in under the rotating binding while climbing, especially in wet snow conditions. The mechanisms for switching from ascent to descent modes are also prone to icing making them difficult to manage in certain conditions. Another approach has been to take advantage of the benefits of alpine touring technology. A combination of an alpine touring toe piece of the type commonly known as a tech binding with a traditional rod and compression spring rear or heel retention system in U.S. Pat. No. 8,354,697B2 Lengel, 2013 Sep. 17, is an example of this. While this approach is straight forward, I have found that the heel retention hardware which rests on the ski during ascent, collects snow to an extreme degree while climbing in deep and sticky snow conditions. While the heel retention hardware can be removed to alleviate this, that adds removing and replacing the heel retention hardware on every ascent to descent change. I have also found that this setup has a different telemark turn dynamic than traditional telemark bindings. This is due to the immediate engagement of the heel retention hardware upon raising the heel. Another example is a tech binding toe piece combined with a boot sole coupling for retention and telemark turn tension as in patent EP3096845B1 Mouyade, 2016 Jan. 26. This also adds complexity, snow packing issues, and a different telemark turn dynamic in addition to requiring the boot to have a special sole to cooperate with the retention and tensioning system. Another attempt to make a tech style toe piece work in combination with an additional coupling device can be seen in U.S. Pat. No. 9,233,925B2 Indulti, 2016 Jan. 12. Here a sole retaining device is added to the tech toe coupling to simulate the boot sole retention characteristics of a traditional telemark binding for descent. This arrangement restricts the range of motion of the heel portion of boot and also results in different telemark turn dynamic in comparison to traditional telemark bindings.
One embodiment of my ski binding system combines the conventional tech alpine touring toe piece with an over the toe box adjustable restraint and a rotational tensioner that provides the necessary rotational resistance for a telemark turn. The adjustable restraint can be loosened or released for ascent when the rotational tension is not needed. Prior to descent the heelless toe box coupling can be tightened to provide the needed tension to execute telemark style turns. The design and shape of the presented embodiment reduces snow compaction problems under the ski boot. Other embodiments are described that have alternate designs for adjustability and alpine turn capability for descent.
Several advantages of one or more aspects are as follows: a lightweight telemark ski binding system that has no heel coupling that can collect snow while climbing, that has no heel coupling that has to be removed to prevent snow collecting while climbing, has a coupling in the front to eliminate having to reach behind the boot to release, provides a skiing dynamic or feel that is more like traditional telemark bindings, that does not require any specific heel or sole type of the ski boot, and can rotate freely without tension while ascending. Other advantages of one or more aspects will become apparent upon examination of detailed description and drawings.
One embodiment of my ski binding system is shown in
Operation for Descent or Telemark Turns
Operation for Ascent or Climbing
While the toe coupling shown is an alpine touring tech toe, there are other conventional toe couplings that would cooperate with the independent telemark tension assembly, for example a traditional three pin 75 mm cross country toe coupling. Like the tech toe, some have releasability features to enhance safety. Since these are already well known the details of their operation is not discussed. Likewise, there are many types of heel elevator assemblies that are well known and would cooperate with the independent telemark tension assembly. The adjustable restraint could be made with many types of strap and buckle combinations. The ladder strap with a buckle closure is just one of many possible adjustable retaining systems.
There are other ways to make the binding system accommodate different boot sizes as well. One embodiment was presented that would allow adjustment for boot size when the binding system is mounted to a ski but there are other possibilities. For example, mounting slots could be used on the mounting brackets and other spring mount parts in place of holes. Alternately, mounting hardware could be fitted with multiple sets of mounting holes for various mounting positions.
There are many variations possible with regards to mounting the mandrel and mandrel bolt including but not limited to integrating the boot shim with the mandrel bolt brackets and the toe piece shim. Another variation would be to replace the boot shim with a removable crampon for climbing on firm or icy snow pack surfaces.
The description above makes evident some advantages of some embodiments of this ski binding system in addition to those stated above:
(a) Simplicity
(b) Cost
(c) Adjustability
(d) Boot compatibility
The Ski Binding with Heelless Telemark coupling provides an embodiment of a lightweight, simple binding system that reduces the problems caused by undesirable snow collection under the boot and in the bindings' mechanisms. Additionally, the binding system embodiment is easy to use with only a single buckle on top of the boot toe box to change from ascent to descent mode. The telemark tensioner can be easily adjusted with the ladder strap and buckle assembly on the fly for skier preference and conditions. The telemark tensioners' simplicity will make it cost competitive to produce. The lack of a rear or heel coupling makes this embodiment compatible with some ski boots that have ski and walk mode mechanisms on the rear of the boot where a rear coupling can interfere.
While a detailed and specific description of one embodiment has been presented, there are many possible variations and alternatives for component design, shape and materials. For example, the boot and toe piece shims could be made of many kinds of plastic or aluminum in many different shapes. The buckle system could be replaced by another style of buckle system and the wire rope loop could be replaced with webbing that would conform to the shape of the boot bellows. Also contemplated is a method for blocking the torsion spring leg movement to provide an alternate alpine descent mode. These potential variations in size, shape, materials, form, assembly, and use can be made without altering the concept set forth in this specification.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4116463 | Zoor | Sep 1978 | A |
4166634 | Kirchmeyr | Sep 1979 | A |
4227715 | Kirchmeyr | Oct 1980 | A |
4322090 | Loughney | Mar 1982 | A |
4533154 | Bernard | Aug 1985 | A |
4553771 | Bernard | Nov 1985 | A |
4682785 | Jungkind | Jul 1987 | A |
4722613 | Jungkind | Feb 1988 | A |
4887833 | Bailey | Dec 1989 | A |
5190309 | Spitaler | Mar 1993 | A |
5318320 | Ramer | Jun 1994 | A |
5338053 | Hauglin | Aug 1994 | A |
5499838 | Hauglin | Mar 1996 | A |
5669622 | Miller | Sep 1997 | A |
5803480 | Hauglin | Sep 1998 | A |
5897127 | Hauglin | Apr 1999 | A |
5924719 | Girard | Jul 1999 | A |
5944337 | Girard | Aug 1999 | A |
5947507 | Quintana | Sep 1999 | A |
6017050 | Girard | Jan 2000 | A |
6234514 | Dubuque | May 2001 | B1 |
6390494 | Gignoux | May 2002 | B2 |
6402184 | Hauglin | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6431578 | Pedersen | Aug 2002 | B2 |
6685213 | Hauglin | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6923465 | DuBuque | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6986526 | Haughlin | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7207591 | Riedel | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7216888 | Walker | May 2007 | B1 |
7216890 | Walker | May 2007 | B2 |
7219917 | Walker | May 2007 | B2 |
7246812 | Ayliffe | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7306255 | Walker | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7306256 | Walker | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7318597 | Walker | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7384057 | Steffen | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7568719 | Sauter | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7681905 | Hauglin | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7922188 | Kogler | Apr 2011 | B2 |
8167331 | Wollo | May 2012 | B2 |
8191918 | Pupko | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8328225 | Prigge | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8534697 | Lengel | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8763209 | Kavarsky | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8763210 | Vincent | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8827302 | Fritschi | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8925956 | Harkin | Jan 2015 | B1 |
9126099 | Ritter | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9233295 | Indulti | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9452343 | Schroer | Sep 2016 | B2 |
9545560 | Chen | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9827481 | Ritter | Nov 2017 | B2 |
10016672 | Mouyade | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10035058 | Ritter | Jul 2018 | B1 |
10058763 | Bombard | Aug 2018 | B2 |
10537150 | Bruel | Jan 2020 | B2 |
10946265 | Zoor | Mar 2021 | B2 |
20030155742 | Riedel | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20040164519 | Quellais | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040262886 | Girard | Dec 2004 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
3096845 | Jan 2016 | EP |