In HU 227 230 B1 a closure cap provided with a valve and adapted for dispensing liquid from a storage container is disclosed. According to the document, a valve insert made of a resilient material is produced by injection moulding with opened valve flaps. The valve insert has a triangle like side wall, i.e. the side wall has an equivalent rotational symmetry as the valve flaps. The valve insert is inserted into a cap having the same symmetry as above. The inner wall of the receiving cap is provided with projections—so-called pressing ribs—to push the valve flaps at the halving line thereof into a closed state.
A similar closure cap similar is disclosed In HU 228 879 B1. As an additional feature, the valve flaps are provided with weakening grooves in order to improve the operation thereof.
A common disadvantage of the above described known solutions is that the valve insert has to be rotationally positioned before inserting into the cap, i.e. the sides of the valve insert and the cap have to be exactly parallel. Even a small error in the positioning may lead to large discrepancies in the operation of the closure cap. For example, an error in the rotational positioning can deteriorate the dispensing efficiency thereof.
Another disadvantage of the known solutions is that the valve insert and the receiving cap are produced separately. In the market, in most cases the valve insert constitutes a product manufactured separately. Therefore, a large quantity of valve inserts has to be packed in the same package, and these products have to be built into the cap of the partner manufacturer elsewhere. These soft articles can get damaged during the transportation, and the valve inserts have to be positioned one by one in another factory.
A further disadvantage of the known solutions is that the cap receiving the valve insert—the product of another factory—needs a very special configuration, i.e. the projections of pressing ribs in its internal periphery.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds