It is well known in the art to position such a protector around or at the foot of a support column in a storage racking system since the occurrence of accidental impact is not uncommon from the wheels disposed at the front of a fork lift. The usage of pallets facilitates the compact storage of goods in large volumes with relative ease of access, but the placement thereof on the racking demands reasonably accurate maneuvering of the fork lift: in the first instance to align the load with the selected rack, to elevate the same to the appropriate level and then to advance the fork lift to deliver and set down the load safely onto the rack at the correct distance from the front of the rack. It is also common to provide for the movement of the fork lift in the aisles formed between rows of racking and it is advantageous to define the limit of fork lift travel in order to avoid accidental damage by over travel by the fork lift.
Furthermore, some support columns include only one anchor fastener located there behind. In such a case, when a fork lift hits the column, the force could be significant enough to shear the anchor. When the hit occurs at an angle, the column may be subject to twisting about the anchor axis, thus damaging the column and most likely some other nearby sections of the storage rack.
The prior art contains a number of proposals for protecting rack columns from impact damage. For example U.S. Pat. No. 5,369,925 to Vargo discloses a sleeve arrangement extending part-circumferentially around the lower region of a column, the bottom end of the sleeve being embedded in an elastomeric flange, which in use is bolted to the concrete floor and surrounds said bottom end of the sleeve. An elastomeric cushion is provided around the top of the sleeve to interact with the column that is disposed within and embraced by the sleeve, the column standing freely on the floor. Any impact occasioned to the foot of the racking is taken by the sleeve which provides a dynamic buffer reaction from the elastomeric flange and the cushion. This column protector would be relatively expensive to produce in terms of bonding the elastomeric flange and the cushions to the sleeve. Furthermore, the amount of steel in the sleeve which is shaped, would be costly thereby compounding the overall price of the racking.
Another example of column protector is to be found in U.S. Pat. No. 6,672,017 to Larson who describes the provision of a collar and a foot bolted to the floor. Both the collar and the foot are ductile iron castings. The collar wraps around the base of the column in contact therewith to protect the column from impact, the castings not being damaged by such impact. A number of bolts are necessary to secure the foot to the floor and the very shape of the collar and the foot requires expensive casting.
The prior art outlined supra presents examples of column protector of some complexity and thus of high cost thereby adding to the overall cost of the racking system. Moreover, maintenance or replacement of the various elements comprising the column protectors would be of high cost and thus disadvantageous. Accordingly, there is a need for an improved dynamic storage rack column protector.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds