Dynamic Carry Multiple Level Counterbalance Counterthrust Frame Rucksack

Abstract

A framed rucksack that has multiple independent load bases/levels intended to minimise unwanted forces upon the human body and have it work with the human body rather than against it. This design consists of a conventional rucksack with frame, a waist/hipbelt securing point and shoulder straps for stability. The rucksack has multiple independent load suspension bases/levels at various height levels on the rear of the frame, these bases/levels are not dependent on each of the other separate load bases/levels, allowing the load to be divided into different portions/sizes. These different bases/levels counterbalance and counteract each other and are utilised to the advantage of the body.

Description

PRIOR DISCLOSURE

This is a full patent submission of the provisional application number 62318232. The invention was disclosed to several manufacturers post filing of the provisional. This application is over the statutory 12 month period of provisional extension benefit but is within 14 months of filing the provisional. The lateness is unintentional.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

As a rucksack is inherently linked to human locomotion, I find it necessary to describe the workings of human locomotion and stiff support rucksacks in a brief form. In this instance it is necessary to think of the body as a part of apparatus that the rucksack is working upon and is inherent to the new understanding of frame rucksacks and the new invention claimed in this patent.

General Stiff Rucksacks

Rucksacks and satchels are universally known to almost all humans, what is less well understood is the stiff support frame rucksacks that have waist/hipbelts, ie one with reinforcements that run the length of the rucksack, with a belt that can encircle the waist/hips. The purpose of this set up is to transfer the majority of the load from the shoulders, past the spine to the pelvis and to the weight carrying basis of the legs.

Rigid support rucksacks act as levers; the load is upon a stiff support that is suspended upwards on a waist/hipbelt, forming a pivot and keeping the stiff support upwards by the use of straps around the shoulders. When wearing a rucksack the body is under the influence of various new forces, there is weight to the rear of the body with nothing to stabilise it as the rucksack is vertically outside the stabilisation base of the feet. The load of the rucksack acts on the stabilisation base of the feet, this being the human body, the rucksack is counteracted and balanced by the hips, legs and feet down to the stability base of the feet, forming a balance angle. The human posture is forced forward and in an attempt to equalise the leverage and centre of gravity, the body stands forward in comparison to when not wearing a rucksack. The body also counteracts the thrust of the rucksack, which is into the back at the attachment point of the waist/hipbelt, by working against the thrust. Whilst walking with a rucksack on, the varying movements of the body induce frequential forces in the non dynamic rucksack that do not marry with the body's own movements, this leading to conflicting momentums, ie the body is pulled out of its natural movement and strained. Resonance between the force of the rucksack oscillations on the body and the effort the body has to use to counteract the rucksack can build up, as force is applied to the body by the rucksack, the body has to counteract the rucksack with a greater force. This means the rucksack rebounds to the other side with even greater force and the body has to impart even more force than prior to, to counter this thus increasing resonance of the rucksack.

Current rucksacks with rigid supports or frames commonly fall into two categories; low loading rucksacks that have their load bases in close proximity to the pivot point on the waist/hipbelt, or higher load rucksacks that have their load base significantly above the pivot point on the waist/hipbelt. Unfortunately these designs have problems of their own as there is a great deal of evidence and many testimonies to describe the problems with carrying different rucksack designs. The current understanding and explanation for the advantages and the widely known disadvantages of each of the two designs are these theories:

Low load rucksack thinking says that you are more stable due to a low centre of gravity; unfortunately these types of rucksack are known to strain the back, burden the body and are in conflict with the natural thrust and posture of the body. Low load rucksacks are recommended for rough and/or steep gradients.

Higher load rucksack thinking says that the load is less burdensome due to the angle of balance being more vertical and the weight being above the pivot, which exerts less torque on the back. The disadvantages of this type of rucksack are the general instability and lack of control of the rucksack and knee strain, which is reported fairly frequently. High level rucksacks are recommended for heavier loads.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

A rucksack designed to lessen the impact on the human body whilst wearing it.

This rucksack is specifically designed for locomotion and not static standing. Since locomotion induces by far the greatest force, it is beneficial to design a rucksack in this manner with locomotion in mind. This rucksack has the advantages of both high and low level carry types of rucksack, these being the stability and ease of carry, whilst reducing the disadvantages of each type of rucksack. This rucksack also has new characteristics that are distinct to it, which are benefits not seen in other types of rucksack. The potential instability excess and unwanted forces are stabilised. When loaded onto the apparatus of the human body, this rucksack and the body interact in a natural way, utilising the potential force of the rucksack for the benefit of the wearer, differing to the standard art of frame rucksacks.

This rucksack consists of a conventional frame of rigid support suspended on the hips via a waist/hipbelt, with shoulder straps for stabilisation. The waist/hipbelt encompasses the waist/hips of the wearer, providing an attachment point for the frame, to transfer the weight to the hips, bypassing the spine, shoulders and chest; this relieves the weight on the upper torso, allowing for an easier carry. This new invention incorporates multiple load bearing levels on the load bearing side of the rucksack. These levels carry the weight at separate heights in respect to the waist/hipbelt. The load bearing levels are independent of each other, that is that each level is separated by a space from the other levels when loaded. These multiple levels have an effect upon each other and a different effect each upon the human body, due to the differing angular forces each level has upon the attachment point at the waist/hipbelt.

DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 An illustration of human balance, the forces and factors involved therein.

FIG. 2 An illustration of human locomotion, the factors and processes therein.

FIG. 3 An illustration of the effects different types of rucksack have on the body when wearing them.

FIG. 4 An illustration of the effect a high level carry rucksack has on a person when worn in locomotion.

FIG. 5 An illustration of the effect a low level carry rucksack has on a person when worn in locomotion.

FIG. 6 An Illustration of the effect a dynamic counterbalance multiple level carry rucksack has on a person when worn in locomotion.

FIG. 7 An illustration of a 3 level dynamic counterbalance multiple level counterthrust rucksack.

FIG. 8 An illustration of a 4 level dynamic counterbalance multiple level counterthrust rucksack.

DESCRIPTION RELATING TO OUTLINED DRAWINGS

Note:

No prior understanding of the dynamics of such stiff back rucksacks upon locomotion seems prevalent. I believe the understanding of rucksack dynamics on the human body locomotion is something new and not already understood and is therefore supportive of my claim to a patent. If rucksack dynamics were understood they would utilise the following understanding to construct a rucksack similar to the one laid out in this patent. I have not seen a rucksack of required construction nor claimed understanding to demonstrate kinship with this design. Whilst there are rucksacks with dual compartments and straps, the compartment dividers are done with zips and drawstrings, the straps are often set at angles and not load bearing. The compartment dividers are certainly not of substantial design to be load bearing. Base compartments are called sleeping bag compartments and it is not recommended to load weight into the base of this compartment as it is thought that a higher centre of gravity is advantageous. Rucksacks are not sold on the basis of, nor designed in line with the following understanding outlined in this patent There are mechanics at work; the construction has definite effects on the body as seen in the advantages and disadvantages of prior designs.

As a rucksack is inherently linked to the human locomotion, I find it necessary to describe the workings of human locomotion and stiff support rucksacks in a brief form. In this instance it is necessary to think of the body as a part of apparatus that the rucksack is working upon and is inherent to the new understanding of frame rucksacks and the new invention claimed in this patent.

Human Apparatus

(See FIG. 1)

The muscles and joints of the feet, legs, hips and buttocks are primarily employed in balancing the torso, to do this the legs have to keep the centre of gravity (1) of the body in line (2) vertically within the base area (3) created by the feet, or else balance is lost and the person topples over. The torso does as much as a dynamic, yet large and solid block can do to help balance, largely by working with the legs to keep the centre of gravity and thrust within the base area of the feet. The thrust and weight are vertically above the hips, legs and feet, straight downwards. The feet are protruding forward from the legs to stabilise the torso to aid in the balance when the body is in locomotion forwards.

Human Locomotion (See FIG. 2)

Human locomotion when walking perambulates from one side of the body to the other as you walk; it is in fact a controlled falling, with the line (2) of the centre of gravity of the body (1) being outside the base area created by the feet (3) and the front leading leg arresting the fall with the action of the step as the balance angle (4) is leaning and the body has no way to counteract this. The torso thrusts downwards and forwards, the knees bend forward to absorb the thrust of the torso. As the right foot extends forward the left hip is backwards and the pelvis is at an angle, thus the torso above it is also at an angle. The shoulders and arms, being not directly joined to the pelvis, have a counterbalancing action to the leg and pelvis oscillations to aid balance, the right foot and left arm at opposed directions to the left foot and right arm. This leads to a perambulation of the human movement and hopefully smooth forward progression, without too much bouncing or shocks to the body. The torso rises and falls but has a forward momentum as well as a downward thrust. This perambulation can induce swaying in any load carried.

New Understanding

If the theories currently given for rucksack momentum were correct there would be very little difference between the two types of rucksack afore mentioned. High level rucksacks are less effort to carry due to the load being above the pivot, thrust on the back matching the balance leverage on the legs and the thrust of the torso when stationary. Lower level rucksacks are more stable because of the thrust and proximity at the hips, but this is more opposed to the natural posture of the body. The rucksacks trade blows between the ability to control the rucksack and the ease of carry. Less leverage gives an easier carry, but less control and stability, greater potential undulation and possible greater strain. More force on the body means more opportunity to control the rucksack, but more stresses. I believe the true reasons for the differing carry experiences are:

Of Low Level

(See FIGS. 3 & 4) The low level carry rucksack has little distance in between the pivot (8) and the load base (10), thus leading to limited potential oscillations (11) and the thrust at a similar forward momentum to the body, that being into the rear of the torso, giving the hips something to work against, which gives great control and stability. It is not the fact that the centre of gravity is marginally lower that gives the stability, just the control that the pelvis and thus the legs have over the rucksack.

The balance angle (4) of the rucksack however is quite large due to the low level, thus a greater counterbalance lean is required. The lever thrust (12) of the rucksack into the pivot point (8) is at 90 degrees, this, whilst giving the hips and buttocks the means to control the force, has drawbacks. The first drawback of the low level carry rucksack being the forcing of the pelvis forward in an unnatural manner (back problems being a common complaint in low level carry rucksacks) which does not marry to the natural balance angle (4) of the rucksack on the legs, nor the natural thrust of the torso. The second drawback is that the lever thrust (12) force is at its greatest at 90 degrees, this exerts the maximum amount of thrust into the pivot point on the hips (8). A bouncing effect is felt on the back as the thrust of the rucksack impacts the back in fluctuating measures of force which vary with perambulation. The thrust forward of the rucksack is completely contrary to the downward thrust of the torso, leading to the pelvis and knees being pushed forward and strained. The thing which should give the stability and control is the very thing that exerts the strain upon the body, or to say it another way, the force that is most contrary to the human body gives the body a grasp upon the rucksack. The posture of someone with a low level carry rucksack is the pelvis pushing backwards, counterbalancing the thrust into the pivot (8) of the hips, whilst leaning forward to counteract the balance angle (4). Walking poles have become a popular addition to equipment lists as they alleviate the problem of rucksack thrusts. Experiences of low level carry rucksacks are the ‘bouncing bomb’ effect with each step as the load impacts the back. This type of rucksack is so contrary to the motion of human body it is almost an exercise device and is not a fit apparatus for promoting ease of carry.

Of High Level

(See FIGS. 3 & 4)

The heightened balance angle (4) of the high level carry rucksack does decrease the lever thrust (12) on the hips as the weight is above the pivot (8), that is to say the lever thrust (12) is of a far less force than that in the low level carry rucksack, meaning the thrust is far less stressful to the body and hips. The thrust angle is also very similar to the balance angle (4) and natural downward thrust of the torso when the person is stationary, the angle of thrust of the rucksack on the back matching almost perfectly the natural balance angle (4) for the rucksack. Unfortunately the rucksack in its present form is a non-dynamic entity and these advantages give an unstable nature to the rucksack. Even though standing with a high level load carry rucksack is very easy, it is not really fit apparatus to walk with.

In the high level carry rucksack, as the load base (9) is higher above the pivot (8) the lever thrust (12) at the hips decreases as the angle thrust on the pivot (8) decreases. To achieve this decrease in angle, the distance from pivot (8) to load base (9) is substantially more, this means that there is a greater potential leverage on the body and greater potential oscillation (11) in the load of the rucksack. The body has to keep the rucksack upright so the angle of thrust is small so as to gain the benefit from the increased distance from the pivot (8). Because the thrust of the rucksack and balance angle (4) on the body match up, the thrust bypasses the hips completely. The thrust of the rucksack is behind the rear of the torso, unlike the thrust of the torso which is forwards in front of the torso and feet. This forces the control of the rucksack to be done by the knees, straining them as they are not formed to act in this role (knee strain is a common complaint with high level carry rucksacks), the knees are not given chance to act with the flexible shock absorbing characteristics seen naturally and are forced to act in a straightened stiff manner. That which makes the rucksack less stressful to carry is the very thing which make is unwieldy. The unstable effect felt by many people wearing the rucksack is the fact that the rucksack does not have natural forward impetus, due to the increased distance of the load base from the pivot and lack of control from the hips, the rucksack has a greater potential of leverage and oscillation (11). The instability is not because of a marginally higher centre of gravity, the posture of the person wearing the high level carry rucksack is leaning forward, trying to counteract the undulations of the rucksack using legs and feet. Higher load carry experiences are often described as the rucksack taking the wearer for a walk.

The improvement is as follows:

(See FIGS. 6, 7, & 8)

The direction of the force and momentum of the rucksack will act synchronously with that of the direction of the body in locomotion, they act as one. The dynamics mean a smooth constant momentum, that is to say lever thrusting (12) and oscillations (11) are subdued, with directed momentum that is both predictable and stable, with positive direction that resists wayward, unwanted forces influencing the rucksack at motions and directions contrary to the dynamics of the body, decreasing the effort and strain on the body.

The rucksack will have a stiff support frame (7) in the length of the rucksack. There will be a waist/hipbelt (5) to suspend the frame from, which will be situated at the base of the rucksack. This waist/hipbelt (5) will encompass the waist/hips of the wearer to provide an attachment point for the frame (7). The rucksack will have shoulder straps (6) that will run the length of the attachment side of the rucksack giving a means to control the apparatus from and provide stability. This is a fairly standard arrangement for a frame rucksack designed for carrying substantial weights.

The prior mentioned frame (7) will have multiple load bearing bases (9 & 10) attached to it on the load bearing side, situated at different levels of the rucksack length. These load bases or levels (9 & 10) as they could be called, have to bear the weight of the load upon them and transfer the force onto the frame (7) of the rucksack from the point of elevation of each particular load base/level (9 & 10) upon the frame (7). These load bearing bases/levels (9 & 10) must be situated with one load base/level (10) at the base of the rucksack directly adjacent the pivot point (8) of the frame (7) on the waist/hipbelt (5) on the hips/waist. This base/level (10) has to be opposite the pivot point (8) on the waist/hipbelt (5) to provide the necessary directional force. The rucksack must also have at least one load bearing base/level (9) situated higher on the length of the frame (7) to provide an alternate directional force. The load bases/levels (9) and (10) will be suspended as base/levels independent of each other, not exerting force on the other bases/levels, so there will be a gap between the bases/levels beneath and/or above, so the bases/levels are separate. The lowest base/level (10) adjacent the waist/hips will be loaded simultaneously with another base/level (9). The lowest base/level (10) has to accommodate at least 20% of the total weight but no more than 50% of the total carried weight for the benefit of the dynamics to be realised. The higher bases/levels (9) have therefore to accommodate 50-80% of the total weight of the load of the rucksack. There can be many higher bases/levels (9), but as already stated there has to be a one base/level at the waist/hipbelt and at least one level 20% higher up the length of the frame (7).

Counter weighting is used to control the rucksack, to achieve this (FIG. 6) the lower base/level (10) and higher base/level (9) load bases/levels have to be weighted correctly. The lower bases/levels (10) of the rucksack counter weighs the higher bases/levels (9) and the higher bases/levels (9) counter weight the lower bases/levels (10), subduing and constraining temperamental oscillations (11) that could be induced, so the rucksack becomes a stable mass. The rucksack achieves this by the motions of the bases/levels not being synchronised, forcing the bases/levels (9 & 10) and their motions into conflict. The force and energy in one base/level (9 & 10) is forced to act upon the other bases/levels (9 & 10) to try to achieve equilibrium in the rucksack. As the weight in one base/level (9 & 10) moves at a specific speed and direction, this momentum is dampened by the other bases/levels (9 & 10) differing speed and direction. Due to the turning circles of each base/level (9 & 10) from the pivot (8) being different, their mass and forces conflict and therefore the motions of each base/level (9 & 10) are arrested in their dominance. One base/level (9 & 10) cannot override nor dismiss the other bases/levels (9 & 10) mass speed and a dampening effect upon the motions takes place. The counter weighting also stops any resonance build up due to human perambulation, the energy and force are dampened with the counter weighting and the rucksack is arrested in its motions and oscillations (11) disrupted. There is no rhythmic increasing in oscillations (11) from one side to the other, one side does not force the body into greater counter action and thus a greater oscillation (11) on the next step on the opposing side of the rucksack does not occur. The swaying of the rucksack is stopped, there is no opportunity for oscillation (11) to increase in magnitude with each alternate step, amplifying forces during human locomotion.

When in forward motion the higher bases/levels (9) exert a downward thrust upon the pivot (8) on the hips/waist which will be in a similar direction to the thrust of the torso on the legs. The lower base/level (10) thrusts laterally into the pivot point (8) at the hips/waist, in a direction concurrent with forward locomotion. These differing angular forces mean each alternate directional thrust is at opposites to the directional thrusts of the other bases/levels (9 & 10). The force of thrust of each base/level (9 & 10) is brought into conflict against the other bases/level (9 & 10) and they therefore act against each other. The higher bases/levels (9) downward thrust is directed into the waist/hips by the forward thrust of the lower base/level (10), this means that the thrust from the higher base/level (9) is disconnected from the balance angle behind the torso and knees and is directed forward. This thrust is similar to the natural inertia of the body allowing the knees to absorb the shock in their intended use, alleviating the stress on them. The lower base/level (10) forward thrust is forced downwards by the downwards thrust of the higher bases/levels (9), this means that the thrust of the lower bases/levels (10) is angled down to a more similar base/level to the balance angle and thrust angle of the torso, the unnatural thrust and leverage on the pelvis is removed, meaning stress on the back of the torso is alleviated. The new thrust of the rucksack is firstly forwards into the rear of the torso, then secondly down in front of the feet, so as with each step the rucksack has a force forward and then a force downwards as the inertia subsides. This is synchronous with the controlled falling of the human torso when in locomotion, the rucksack has stabilised thrust forwards and downwards in front of the pelvis, knees and feet, meaning the rucksack gives a more natural force for the body to contend with.

The multiple load bases/levels (9 & 10) with their counter balanced weight and subdued directional thrust when combined in this rucksack give a stable directable motion, concurring with and not at odds to the motions of the human body and the controlled falling of the torso in walking locomotion. As the rucksack is far more stable and obedient to the characteristic of the torso whilst in motion, ie momentum being forwards and downwards in front of the feet, the body is therefore given the chance to exert its will over the rucksack. The body gives the rucksack positive impetus and direction so the mass and force of the rucksack are engaged in a predetermined manner. The body takes control over the rucksack and harnesses the stabilised weight with its directional thrust, then powers the bulk of the rucksack forward, developing a synchronous momentum between the rucksack and the body, determining its own course and that of the rucksack. As the rucksack is a large mass moving at speed, forces which could be induced in locomotion that are contrary to its momentum have to override this predetermined momentum first. Thusly the momentum of the rucksack will override and resist having induced in it random oscillations (11) and the frequential swayings by the wayward forces acting upon the rucksack that are contrary to the desired direction of motion. As the rucksack is powered forward this in turn leads to a stabilised forwards movement of the body and rucksack, with a direction which in turn leads back to a powering of the rucksack forward, the effect is semi gyroscopic. The rucksack has dynamic motion, powering through forces contrary to its own momentum and direction of movement and aiding its own progression.

These multiple levels lead to a counterbalancing and counteracting effect by each independent level onto the other levels. The weighted load base levels prevent any level attaining precedence by each level counteracting opposite motions, the potential forces of the rucksack are counterbalanced so the potential dominance of each level is curtailed giving stability to the rucksack. This counterbalance also counteracts any resonance build up due to the weights being in conflict, there is no opportunity for resonance synchronicity.

The thrust of the rucksack is counteracted by multiple directional thrusts from each level being different in angle, so when in motion the frequential lever thrust of the mass of the rucksack, which is caused by the rising and falling of the torso during human perambulation, counteract and subdue each other. The lever thrusts at the pivot at the waist/hipbelt are of a far less magnitude and at a better angle and motion for the body to deal with. The forces of each alternate level counteract the thrust from the other level(s) and subdue the frequential lever thrusting. The thrusts merge to form a new, constant stabilised directional thrust. The thrust behaves more like the torso does with the legs, in a forward and downward thrust, allowing the torso to counteract the force, the legs and hips are therefore allowed to carry and stabilize the torso and rucksack. The levels interact with the momentum of the body, the rucksack mimicking the thrusting of the torso, which leads to a less temperamental and more dynamic integrated carry system.

This dynamic integration aids the body by utilising the rucksack's own potential momentum in a directed way that is concurrent with the movements of the body rather than being contrary to them, providing new advantages to the wearer when in locomotion, which aids with forward progression. The levels will give an easier, more directional, well balanced momentum and thrust synchronising with and resisting forces counter to the body's natural balancing actions. The body is given the opportunity to control the dynamic rucksack as the body is not straining against nor disconnected from the rucksack and therefore the body can put its efforts into helping the wearer guide the rucksack forwards, the stabilised weight and potential force of the rucksack are harnessed by directional thrust and then controlled by the body, the rucksack is given positive impetus and direction. Rather than leaving the mass of the rucksack as an uncontrolled potential, the potential energy and force of the rucksack is stabilised by the counter weighting and gripped by the thrust and controlled. The weight of the rucksack if directed forward by the thrust in a similar direction as the body thrusts upon the torso, the body and rucksack act as one dynamic entity and not two contrary ones. Inducement of oscillations and frequential swayings are overridden by this predetermined powered direction and give a smooth predictable stable progression. As the rucksack resists the unwanted forces, this aids in the direction which in turn leads to the unwanted forces being resisted and so on, in a beneficial relationship.

The dynamics mean the potential forces of the rucksack are counteracted and utilised to the advantage of the wearer, to promote smooth forward progression. The rucksack now works in harmony with the torso and legs, rather than against them, thus relieving the burden on the wearer, the rucksack is now more stable, the motions of the rucksack more predictable meaning the body has greater control of the rucksack. The carry is far more natural, the body does not have to put effort into counteracting the wayward rucksack and the opportunity for potential injury is removed as the body is not straining or being pulled in directions that are opposed to the forward motion of human movement. As the wearer is far more stable the rucksack is safer to use and injuries/falls are reduced.

Claims

1. A rucksack comprising of a stiff supportive frame with a waist/hipbelt encompassing waist of the wearer for attaching the frame to and a stabilising apparatus for the shoulders to stabilise the rucksack with the waist/hipbelt bearing the weight of the rucksack;

with at least two separate load bearing containers each capable of suspending a load at a height without exerting loading on another container, that are to contain multiple items situated on the length of the back frame that are each capable of bearing significant weight of at least 5 kg, one of which is fixed at the base of the rucksack opposite the waist/hipbelt and at least one other higher up, with these levels giving different angular forces at the point of the waist/hipbelt, in which these differing angular forces will counteract and subdue each other;

one container has to be opposite the waist/hipbelt and one container with the lowest extremity at least 15% higher up the back length of the frame when the container is loaded with 5 kg.