The innovation disclosed herein relates to an improved tool profile of a tool for use in a tool/fastener system. More specifically, the present innovation relates to improving the contact zone of a tool while maintaining a clearance for fastener corners, which provides better tool protection than that presently available.
The art has long recognized that the world is not a perfect place, and that in the normal course of using fasteners, variations in both tool and fastener may lead to wear and other unfavorable conditions. Most often, the main focal point of innovations aimed at improving these conditions are directed to effects as may be seen on fasteners, such as, for example, providing a tool with “safe pockets” to avoid engaging the corners of fasteners. Thus, often primary attempts at innovation are to preserve the integrity of the fastener, and it may be only subsequent attention, and only indirect focus, that may be directed to innovation concerning aspects of a tool that performs the fastening.
As is to be appreciated, fastener corners may present point contacts in an operation of fastening, and if contacted, may wear and damage a fastener, such as for example a fastener being rounded. In other fastener settings, the obverse may be true. For example, counter-sunk screws present a fastener with a contact area that may be considered to be an obverse mirror of a hex head screw. Improper tool use may create a situation in which a proper standard tool no longer makes the appropriate contact as it was designed to do. In fasteners of a counter-sunk screw type, the “rounding” that occurs evidences itself in the corner areas of the fastener being worn away, typically in a radial manner, as an improper tool (typically undersized) cannot have enough force to rotate the screw, and instead slips in place, rotating around the central axis of the tool. Of course, the usefulness of the analogy may stop there, as the single radius at the central axis of the tool is not particularly useful in an obverse setting. There are various methods of removing such stripped counter sunk fasteners which may utilize a number of concepts to have force apply as initially designed even as the features of the fastener may no longer exist for normal use. Improving the zone of contact is such an approach.
Prior attempts at innovation have focused on one or more profile elements of a mating profile between the tool and fastener. Other innovations, of course, are possible, as none of these innovations on their own pre-empt the idea of making a better fastening tool/fastener system, or even pre-empt all mating contours of a fastener/fastening tool system. A concept that may be redirected in a novel manner from an obverse condition is exemplified in the disclosed innovation. That concept recognizes that real world effects are unavoidable. That concept also realizes that many attempts at innovation still focus on the fastener wear as a first consideration. That concept instead approaches innovation by focusing on improvements with the tool. Additionally, it is to be appreciated from the provided disclosure, that the concept of the innovation provides an emphasis on full parametrization.
Some prior art exists that also focus on the tool, albeit in different aspects such as considerations of manufacturing costs of the tool. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 6,354,175 to Dobson et al., teaches the use of a concave and convex pair of radii in forming a profile. This innovation is related to improving manufacturing costs, and emphasizes holding both radii to be equal. As only some of the profile features are taught to be in proportion, the profile is only semi-parametric.
Another aspect wherein a tool has a more primary focus is displayed in tools that may be utilized for fastener placement in limited space zones. Advances of this sort tend to deal with improvements of the material of the tool. Other improvements may be directed to multiple aspects, for example, US Publication No. 2003/0126960 to Chen, A., features both convex and concave portions, but emphasizes a uniform thickness of a peripheral wall of the tool in order to minimize tool stress, with a view that changing tool thickness is to be avoided.
Many innovations in this area may include a sense of “real world” by including in their considerations that tolerances exist (and have been set up as standards in the art). Another aspect of the disclosed innovation is to treat these tolerances not only as development guidelines of the relative sizes of parts making up the tool/fastener system, but to also take into account how mismatches in tolerances (for example, high side tolerance on a tool mated with low side tolerance of a fastener) impact the tool side of the tool/fastener system. Innovation is achieved with this different focusing. Prior innovation, as may be evidenced in patent U.S. Pat. No. 5,284,073 to Wright, et al., (which is commonly owned) has addressed portions of innovative aspects that are more fully brought to bear in the disclosed innovation herein. For example, an innovation as exemplified in the commercially available Wright Drive 1.0, provides a focus on the landing contact area of the tool in the tool/fastener system. In that system, point contact (no matter where the point contact may be on a fastener, and no matter how a corner of a fastener may be protected in a tool by providing a tool with “pocket recesses”) is modified to provide a zone of contact.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,092,203 to Mader is similar in that a flank angle is interposed adjacent to a mid-flat region in view of tolerances that may exist. As may be gleaned from the Mader reference, a lack of parametrization leads to different performance for different sized fasteners. The solution pursued in Mader was to introduce an additional flat zone; partially parametric (in a compounded fashion) by way of a flank angle as a function of tolerances related to both separate fastener size and of fastening tool.
It is to be appreciated that even with employing convex and concave profiling, innovation may distinguish from, and between, prior art. Prior art exists that may employ convex and concave profiling for a tool's mating surface that is intended to engage a fastener. While this may be so, it is to be appreciated that innovation may aim for different effects, such as for example constant wall thickness with a more sinusoidal profiling (as discussed above), and teaches a different innovative aim. Alternative items of prior art have tended to focus on modifying a pure sinusoidal profiling for different effects or purposes. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,406,868 to Foster teaches to different offsets of placement of convex and concave profile portions. Foster teaches limitations as found in U.S. Pat. No. 4,930,378 to Colvin (herein Colvin '378), that include induced stress risers at profile points of intersecting flats and arcs. Foster introduces a factor “S” that is not parametric to the profile. Other profiles may exist of course for other purposes. Colvin '378 provides a profile with a radial element interposed between a face flat and a flank angle flat. However, Colvin '378 teaches this radial portion to be variable (and not parametrized) along a “Z” dimension of a fastening tool.
For another example, U.S. Pat. No. 7,661,339 to Wu includes notches that may serve to engage a fastener surface in conditions in which a fastener may slip from its original placement (for example, due to a rounded condition of a fastener). While sharing a general notion of convex and concave curvatures, this innovation sets out a different selected profile to achieve an innovative improvement in a different manner.
U.S. Pat. No. 9,718,170 to Eggert et al., shows subtle innovation. Similar to Wright and Mader, Eggert teaches to an additional angled flat zone along with a radiused “safe zone” for fastener corner clearance. The innovation in Eggert appears to be based on positioning the inclined flat zone of the profile by varying a degree of rotation apart from any tolerance consideration. (See Col. 4, Lines 1-26 therein.)
Additional innovation in enlarging the contact zone between tool and fastener (while, for example, maintaining a safe “pocket” clearance for fastener corners) is obtained by the present disclosure. By focusing on mating from more than nominal tolerances, taking insight into expanding a zone of contact, and developing the innovation to be scalable (that is, fully parametric), many advantages over the conventional state of the art are achieved.
It is an object of the present invention to provide a multi-sided drive for hexagonal fasteners having drive surfaces which are parametrically designated so as to improve a contact area between a tool and a fastener during driving over a full range of expected standard tolerances.
It is another object of the present invention to provide a multi-sided drive as described above which eliminates sharp arcuate angles in the fastener corner clearance recess, and which are likewise parametrically designated.
It is another object of the present invention to provide a multi-sided drive as described above which reduces and more uniformly distributes the internal stress that is exerted on the socket during driving due to the selected parametric profile.
Another object of the present invention is to provide a multi-sided drive as described above having a shape which lends itself to efficient reproduction and which facilitates longer forging punch life due to the selected parametric profile having as its basis, a prior innovation commonly owned.
These and other objects and advantages will become apparent from the following description of a preferred embodiment of the invention taken together with the accompanying drawings.
Reference is made it to the following drawings, which are summarized as follows.
The present invention is directed to an improved profiling ratchet wrench as shown in the enclosed figures. Referring now to the drawings wherein the drawings are for the purpose of illustrating preferred embodiment(s) of the present innovation and not for purposes of limiting the same, the present innovation will be discussed in greater detail.
The socket wrench 10 comprises of a generally cylindrical body 30 which is provided at one end with a substantially square socket 32 (as shown in
The aim of the different profiling is to provide robustness across the possible spectrum of real world items in both tools and fasteners, which may adhere to standard sizing and standard tolerancing, but would be different from an exact nominal number.
A prior innovation, commonly owned U.S. Pat. No. 5,284,073 to Wright, et al., (herein incorporated by reference in its entirety) discusses designing socket wrench openings and the like to avoid breakage of the wrench and/or deformation of a fastener to which the tool is put to use. For protecting the tool, it is desirable to minimize the stress exerted on the socket and the like. It is likewise desirable to distribute, as uniformly as possible, the stress exerted on the tool. Stress analysis indicates that important points of high stress exist when a tool engages the flank or face of a hexagonal or double hexagonal fastener or the like (or a comparable polygonal fastener as known in the art). It should be understood and appreciated that an area of stress is where the tool driving surface meets the fastener face. It should also be understood and appreciated that it is desirable that this surface be as large as possible to more uniformly distribute the stress throughout the socket. Prior innovation indicated that it may be important that the drive surface be, as nearly as possible, parallel to the fastener face to minimize peak stress. Such was achieved by orienting the drive surface at an angle which took into account a position of the tool when it engages the fastener, based on tolerances and free swing.
The disclosed innovation advances from this prior innovation with a different profile aspect. Parametric location of the revised feature maintains the relative benefits of the prior innovation and improves upon the contact area as will be discussed herein.
Other important areas of stress concentration were taught to be at an outer edge where the driving surface of the tool ceases to contact the fastener, which previously was considered to be at the corner of the fastener. Because there is an abrupt contact pressure area at the corner of the fastener which results in an abrupt stress peak, it is desirable that a driving surface not contact the fastener at the corner thereof. Another area of stress concentration is the portion of the tool adapted to receive the corner of the fastener. In conventional tool design, this area is a sharp arcuate angle which acts to concentrate the stress exerted on the tool.
Importantly, the claimed profile for a fastening tool permits longer forging punch life in the manufacture of the tool. In this respect, in the practical business of manufacturing tools, industry standards set certain tolerances which must be met and which affect the manufacture of the tools.
Generally, tool openings are tested with gauges which establish the maximum and minimum opening sizes. In the art, it is generally well known that the corners of the forging punches can wear faster than the flat engaging surfaces of the punch. It has been known to use as large a punch as possible so as to give a reasonable amount of wear on the corners before they become undersized. This results in the across flats dimension being on the large size if the punch is a hexagon design because the across the flats dimension is fixedly linked to the across the corners dimension of the punch. The present innovation enables a punch having a reduced across the flat dimension wherein the initial size of the punch can be dimensioned to lie in the midsize of the gauging range. As set forth above, the included angle of the driving surfaces of the wrench (as reflected in the parametric profile of the two radii, as will be discussed in greater detail herein) are oriented to compensate for the rotation that occurs between the wrench and fastener in the process of engagement. The parametric profiling is chosen so as to produce close to parallel engagement between the engaging surface of the tool and the flat portion of the fastener over the range of acceptable fastener sizes, as well as standard tolerances for those fastener sizes. Thus, in addition to providing a tool opening which reduces and distributes more evenly the internal stress exerted on the tool during driving, the present design facilitates reproduction of the tool, as well as forging punch life.
It has been determined that the range of replacing an angled flat section of a profile contour with a selected radial contour, at a selected point of the overall contour provides unexpected improvement in mating zone dimensions. Placement of the selected radial contour is driven by considerations of rotational impacts of tolerance variations (per industry standard tolerance allowances) for both portions of the fastening system. In other words, placement of the replacing curvature has been evaluated based on tolerances that are permitted for fasteners as well as tolerances permitted for fastening tools. By evaluating impact zones across the full range of conditions, a particular configuration is determined.
Referring now to the figures,
As should be appreciated, each of the profile configuration points can be realized as a scalable factor tied to a fastener element.
Referring to
Turning to
The profile includes a plurality of uniformly spaced corner recesses 46 disposed peripherally and radially about said central opening axis 16, wherein each recess 46 is parametrically sized to accept a fastener corner, each corner recess profile being part of a circle having a radius of curvature 140 of approximately 0.071 multiplied by the Wright number 110 and having a center located symmetrically about the center 115 of the central axis typified by a first center located at an “X” Cartesian dimension 160 of 0.254 multiplied by the Wright number and an “Y” Cartesian dimension 170 of 0.441 multiplied by the Wright number. Each uniformly spaced side 36 transitions symmetrically about the center of the corner recess typified by a two transitions, the first typified by a symmetrical transition 120 (located at the top flat at an “X” Cartesian dimension of 0.173 multiplied by the Wright number), to a top second radius 130 of curvature of 0.209 multiplied by the Wright number. A second transition typified by 150 has the radius of curvature flowing from the top flat (as pictured) having a tangent point to the radius of curvature of the pocket 140 with an “X” Cartesian dimension 150 of 0.234 multiplied by the Wright number.
Turning to
Turning to
Turning to
Turning back to
Turning now to
Turning now to
Turning now to
Turning now to
Turning now to
Turning now to
It is to be appreciated that while the Dossier (U.S. Pat. No. 4,581,957) reference may include some parametrization, the Dossier reference does not teach or go far enough. For example, the Table in Dossier provides for a constantly changing R2 (and changing X dimension of the face flat transition point to R2) based on different spans of actual tolerances, instead of teaching to a set standard maximum tolerance range (as may be dictated by industry standards), or a fully parametric profile. Dossier also does not recognize that its profile may be substantially affected by a choice of R1 (i.e., pocket radius). The present innovation not only recognizes these limitations, but advances parametrization to encompass a full profile, without holding back and limiting to situations that may not include tolerance or tolerance effects.
Thus, the disclosed innovation provides a fully parametric profile for a tool opening design which avoids contact with most any fastener corner that would produce high stress concentrations. In addition, the disclosed innovation provides a fully parametric profile for a tool opening design wherein the corner clearance recesses avoid sharp surfaces by providing parametrically controlled transitions from rounded corner pockets, to rounded driving surfaces to flat portions of the profile further reducing stress concentrations.
The disclosed innovation has been described with respect to a preferred embodiment. Modifications and alterations will occur to others upon the reading and understanding of this specification. It is intended that all such modifications and alterations be included insofar as they come within the scope of the patent as claimed or the equivalence thereof.
This application claims the benefit of and/or priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/795,639 filed on Jan. 23, 2019 and U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/958,761 filed on Jan. 9, 2020, the entireties of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2777353 | Willis | Jan 1957 | A |
3079819 | Wing | Mar 1963 | A |
3125910 | Kavalar | Mar 1964 | A |
3242775 | Hinkle | Mar 1966 | A |
3273430 | Knudsen et al. | Sep 1966 | A |
3354747 | Grimm et al. | Nov 1967 | A |
3466956 | Bowers | Sep 1969 | A |
3495485 | Knudsen et al. | Feb 1970 | A |
3675516 | Knudsen et al. | Jul 1972 | A |
3885480 | Andersen | Sep 1975 | A |
3908488 | Andersen | Sep 1975 | A |
4010670 | Lejdegard | Mar 1977 | A |
4100824 | Marschke | Jul 1978 | A |
4361412 | Stolarczyk | Nov 1982 | A |
4512220 | Barnhill, III et al. | Apr 1985 | A |
4581957 | Dossier | Apr 1986 | A |
4598616 | Colvin | Jul 1986 | A |
4882957 | Wright et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
4930378 | Colvin | Jun 1990 | A |
5012706 | Wright et al. | May 1991 | A |
5082125 | Ninni | Jan 1992 | A |
5092203 | Mader et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5284073 | Wright | Feb 1994 | A |
5406868 | Foster | Apr 1995 | A |
5481948 | Zerkovitz | Jan 1996 | A |
D372409 | Wright et al. | Aug 1996 | S |
5904077 | Wright et al. | May 1999 | A |
D451352 | Wright | Dec 2001 | S |
6354175 | Dobson et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
D476868 | Wright et al. | Jul 2003 | S |
6698315 | Wright | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6725746 | Wright | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6904833 | Wright | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6907805 | Wright et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
7174811 | Wright | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7340982 | Wright et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7484440 | Wright | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7661339 | Wu | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7788994 | Wright et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7841261 | Milligan et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
9718170 | Eggert et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
10442059 | Milligan et al. | Oct 2019 | B2 |
20100011915 | Badger | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20140196578 | Milligan et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20190134787 | Milligan et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
602687 | Mar 1960 | IT |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200230786 A1 | Jul 2020 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62958761 | Jan 2020 | US | |
62795639 | Jan 2019 | US |