The conventional battery contact in today's market may use one of several ways to provide pressure between the battery and a metallic contact plate to ensure good contact between them. One common form is by way of compression spring and another is by way of a metallic spring plate. Both ways have the disadvantage of high cost. A compression spring needs rivets or other mechanical means to affix it to a small metallic plate, which in turn is affixed to the battery holder. Production costs increase as a result of additional components and processing steps. For the metallic spring plate to provide good elasticity, material costs become high and the production cost is thus not substantially different from that of compression spring assembly.
Another problem with existing battery contacts is the ease of deformation. In the case of a compression spring, if it is incorrectly used (e.g. inserting the battery in the wrong direction) the spring can be deformed thereby losing its function. In the case of a metallic spring plate, since it can only be deformed to a relatively small extent it can easily be excessively deformed resulting in poor contact.
Therefore, it is desirable to provide a low cost contact plate with reliable performance and with simple structure. It is desirable to substitute conventional compression spring contacts and metal spring plate, whilst in operation being no different from that of conventional battery contacts or where it is in fact safer and more reliable. For example by providing a contact where the user will not be able to touch the easily deformed portion of the battery contact and will not touch any sharp point or edge.
Accordingly it is an object to provide a battery contact and holder which overcomes the abovementioned disadvantages or goes at least some way to providing the identified benefits or which will at least provide the public with a useful choice.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds