Latch Testing

Spring Loaded Draw Latch (P/N 4200-1061 and 4200-1062)

Introduction:
Paragon Medical uses latches on cases as a locking feature to attach lids and bases together.
Several variables influence the type of latch a design engineer will input into a set. In this latch
testing protocol, the force required to close the Spring Loaded Draw Latch was measured, and
the effects of varying the distance between the lid and the base on this force were observed.

Purpose:
The purpose of this testing is to gather force data of proven, off-the-shelf latches to be used on
Paragons cases and trays. Additionally, the purpose is to develop design application guides for
the Spring Loaded Draw Latch, which would be used by design engineers to determine how to
alter the variables of latches (i.e. the distance between the two components of the Spring Loaded
Draw Latch) in order to best match the intended applications of the latch.

Acceptance Criteria:
HE75, p. 90, Table 7.8: Closing this latch requires a Digit Touch, therefore, the maximum force
required to close the latch must not exceed 30 N.

Method:
The Spring Loaded Draw Latch shown in Figure 1 was assembled to a small metal case shown in
Figure 2. The case consisted of only a lid, base, and the latch for force testing purposes. A single
compression test was performed in order to determine the forces required to close the latch.

1
 Figure 1: One of the spring loaded draw latches used for testing

Figure 2: Complete test sample consisting of a lid and base assembled with the spring loaded
draw latch

To measure the force required to close the Spring Loaded Draw Latch, a test protocol was set up
in the Bluehill software for the Instron tensile testing machine. The test protocol performed a
compression of either 30mm (or 40mm for testing with shims greater than 0.762mm) at a

2
constant strain rate of 5 mm/s and recorded the load (N) throughout the test. The case was
secured into place underneath the Instron using fixed metal brackets to surround the case and
weights inside the case to weigh it down (see Figures 3 and 4).

Figure 3: Metal brackets used to secure the case so that it wouldnt move during testing and to
ensure the position of the latch remained the same for each test.

Figure 4: Weights inside a case to weigh it down and prevent it from moving during testing.

The case was positioned horizontally so that the open latch was sticking out perpendicular to the
Instron head as seen in Figure 5. A simple block-shaped device (Figure 6) was used to adapt the
Instron head in order to close the Spring Loaded Draw Latch during the test. The device was

3
attached to the Instron by aligning the holes in the device to be concentric with the holes in the
Instron head, then sliding a pin through to secure it. The device was carefully aligned with the
Spring Loaded Draw Latch so that the latch would be closed by the device during the test. The
case was lined up so that the latch would be contacted by the block at the latchs midpoint. This
position was chosen so that the testing would be representative of where most people would
close the latch. Also, the latch was centered horizontally with the block device, leaving equal
amounts of clearance on each side of the latch.

Figure 5: Complete test setup for closing the latch showing the horizontally-positioned case with
the opened latch positioned under the block-shaped device.

4
 Figure 6: Block-shaped fixture used with the Instron to close the spring loaded draw latch that
requires a Digit Touch to close.

The test method to close the latch was repeated with varying insert shims / spacers between the
lid and the base of the case in order to vary the distance between the top catch and main body of
the latch. This was done to determine the effect of varying this distance on the forces required to
operate the latch. The test was performed with shims of 0mm (no shims), 0.152mm, 0.457mm,
0.762mm, 1.651mm, 2.54mm, and 3.378mm. Figure 9 shows an example of the small shims used
for 0.152mm to 0.762mm, while Figures 10 and 11 show an example of the large shims used for
1.651mm to 3.378mm. The shims were placed under all four flanges of the lid surrounding the
latches to ensure an even lift around the entire case.

5
Figure 7: Small shims secured on the top of the tray for testing.

Figure 8: The larger shims secured to the lid for testing

6
 Figure 9: Closed case with the larger shims inserted between the lid and base

Results:
Throughout testing, the case heights were recorded for each shim height for each latch, and the
max force required to close the latch was recorded by the Instron. These latch distances and
average maximum force values are listed in Table 1.

7
 Table 1: Summary of the latch distances measured (mm) and the average forces recorded (N) for
each latch with each shim height during testing.
Latch 1 Latch 3 Latch 5 Latch 7 Latch 9 W.B. Latch

Shims Latch Avg. Latch Avg. Latch Avg. Latch Avg. Latch Avg. Latch Avg.
Dist. Force Dist. Force Dist. Force Dist. Force Dist. Force Dist. Force
(mm) (N) (mm) (N) (mm) (N) (mm) (N) (mm) (N) (mm) (N)

none 10.92 24.63 10.46 11.75 10.87 17.62 10.87 24.41 10.92 16.61 9.754 2.255
2 7 5 7 1 6 1 9 2 8

1 11.12 24.03 10.61 14.99 11.02 16.45 11.02 23.25 11.02 17.23 ----- -----
small 5 3 7 5 4 4 4 6 3 0

3 11.48 26.55 10.89 17.01 11.27 21.26 11.32 27.24 11.27 23.03 ----- -----
small 1 2 7 1 8 6 8 3 8 3

5 11.63 30.91 11.02 22.19 11.40 21.72 11.43 30.82 11.43 24.30 ----- -----
small 3 2 4 6 5 2 0 9 0 9

10 12.04 34.91 11.38 33.85 11.81 26.43 11.78 39.67 11.98 29.09 ----- -----
small 0 8 0 0 1 4 6 1 9 4

1 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 10.13 6.220
large 4

2 12.67 35.53 11.88 39.05 12.52 24.61 12.37 38.05 12.47 30.72 10.89 10.97
large 5 3 8 7 2 1 0 5 1 4 7 8

3 13.28 48.76 12.49 48.65 13.08 39.13 12.90 54.39 13.08 37.96 ----- -----
large 4 0 7 3 1 8 3 4 1 8

4 13.97 67.51 13.05 61.67 13.84 49.42 13.43 64.06 13.48 49.29 ----- -----
large 3 6 1 3 7 6 7 3

The data in Table 1 is plotted in Figures 10 through 16 to provide a visual representation of how
the force required to open the latch varied with respect to the distance between the latch catch
and latch body that was created by the shims. Figure 10 includes the latch distances (mm) versus
the average maximum force (N) for all six of the latches tested. The wash basket latch started
with a smaller initial latch distance, while the other 5 latches (which ideally should have had the
same initial latch distance) started with more similar latch distances (Figure 10). It can also be
seen that the curves for latches 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 varied greatly throughout testing.

8
 Figure 10: The average force (N) required to open all six latches tested at different distances
(mm) between the top catch and main latch.

Figures 11 through 16 below show individual plots of the latch distance (mm) versus average
maximum force (N) data for latches 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and the wash basket latch respectively. These
figures show more detailed views of the force data recorded for each latch during testing.

Figure 11: The average force (N) required to open latch 1 tested at different distances (mm)
between the top catch and main latch.

9
Figure 12: The average force (N) required to open latch 3 tested at different distances (mm)
between the top catch and main latch.

Figure 13: The average force (N) required to open latch 5 tested at different distances (mm)
between the top catch and main latch.

10
Figure 14: The average force (N) required to open latch 7 tested at different distances (mm)
between the top catch and main latch.

Figure 15: The average force (N) required to open latch 9 tested at different distances (mm)
between the top catch and main latch.

11
 Figure 16: The average force (N) required to open the wash basket latch tested at different
distances (mm) between the top catch and main latch.

The latches eventually began to deform over time because of the heavy pressure and force
applied multiple times. Specifically, the top catches were deformed from the large forces. Figures
10 through 15 show where this deformation occurs. The latch begins to deform when the slope
begins to decrease right before it bellies on the curve. Table 2 summarizes the distances at
which the latches began to deform. From the testing, one can conclude that any given latch can
begin to deform as early as 11.582mm and as late as 11.989mm. On average, the latch can be
expected to deform at a distance of 11.699mm. Therefore, the minimum value that still falls
within the standards for distance is 9.754mm and the maximum value before the latch
experiences deformation (per the testing) is 11.430mm.

Table 2: The distance values where the latches began to deform due to the intense forces they
underwent.
Latch # Latch Distance where Deformation Began (mm)

Latch 1 11.6332

Latch 3 11.5824

Latch 5 11.6840

Latch 7 11.6078

Latch 9 11.9888

Average Value 11.69924

12
Conclusions:
Closing this latch requires a Digit Touch, therefore, the maximum force required to close the
latch must not exceed 30 N. From the force data, it is revealed that the average max force
required to close the Spring Loaded Draw Latch is well below the acceptance criteria. Therefore,
in regards to regulations, all of the distances tested in this protocol would result in an acceptable
amount of force to open. However, the distance between the latch catch and the latch body may
be manipulated to require a more desireable force input. In addition, deformation of the latches
will occur before the maximum allowable force required to close the latch; therefore, positioning
of the Spring Loaded Draw Latch components should be designed to avoid deformation (see
Figure 17).

Figure 17: Trade-off curve for Spring Load Draw Latch with limit curves from HE75 and
deformation point.

New samples must be ordered to continue testing in order to determine the max forces required
to open cases assembled using the Spring Loaded Draw Latch. It has been determined that
deformation of the latches used on the closing portion of the test is too significant to continue
testing as the force data recorded would not be representative of latches in the field.

Drop Testing:
Latch 1 opened with a load of 8.7lb by being dropped directly on the side face from a height of
approximately 15in. Latches 3 & 4 did not open with a load of 11.25lb.

The cases were loaded with 11.25 lb of weight inside and dropped on several edges and faces of
the case from a height of 34 inches. Throughout all the drops, the latch remained attached and

13
intact. Only once did the latch fail, and it was after the case had been repeatedly dropped and had
endured significant damage and deformation to where the lid prevented the latch from retaining a
secure connection. From these results, it was understood that latch failure is highly improbable
due to a dropped case; therefore, we could not reasonably justify any minimum distance to be set
between the latch catch and latch body.

Since failure of the latch during a drop scenario is not a concern, the lower limit of the
positioning of the latch catch and latch body was determined through observation and what felt
secure. The minimum distance between the latch body and latch catch was determined by using
the force values measured from the Instron tensile testing machine on cases assembled with the
Spring Loaded Draw Latch. The force value was crossed with the average force curve (Figure
17) to find the minimum distance required for the latch to function appropriately.

14