Access door with integral crop deflector for a combine harvester and method of manufacturing the same

Brian Gorge, Colona, IL (US); Manish Singh, Pune (IN)

USPTO: us-12667049 · published 2026-06-30 · patents · A01D 41/1261· A01F 7/067· A01F 12/26· B29C 49/04· B29C 49/4273· B29L 2031/724

Access door with integral crop deflector for a combine harvester and method of manufacturing the same

Brian Gorge, Colona, IL (US) , Manish Singh, Pune (IN) This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-01 04:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification patents A01D 41/1261A01F 7/067A01F 12/26B29C 49/04B29C 49/4273B29L 2031/724

keywords access doorcombine harvestercrop deflectorintegral ribscut line ridgeone-piece manufacturing

0 comments

The pith

An access door for combine harvesters is formed as one piece that includes rigidity ribs, a protruding crop deflector, and a ridge marking a cut line to create a smaller door while keeping the deflector.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The patent presents a design for an access door where the body, multiple ribs on the inner surface, and a deflector are all created together in a single manufacturing process. A ridge crosses the ribs to show where the door can be cut smaller yet still keep the deflector attached. The top surface of the deflector sits at an angle under 90 degrees to the main body plane. A reader would care because the approach aims to cut down on separate parts and assembly steps in farm equipment production.

Core claim

The access door comprises a body with top, bottom, and sides, a plurality of ribs integrally formed in the inner surface for rigidity, a deflector integrally formed with the body and protruding from the inner surface with its top surface in a second plane at less than 90 degrees to the body plane, and a ridge integrally formed that intersects the ribs to define a cut line allowing a smaller access door to be formed from the body while retaining the deflector, with the deflector width no greater than the body width.

What carries the argument

The ridge intersecting the ribs that defines a cut line for resizing the door while retaining the integrally formed deflector.

If this is right

A single molded door size can be trimmed along the ridge to fit multiple harvester models while preserving the deflector function.
The integral ribs add rigidity directly in the molding step without added components.
The deflector remains at a fixed angle under 90 degrees to the body after any resizing cut.
Fewer separate parts are required during combine harvester assembly.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

This approach may reduce inventory needs by allowing one molded part to serve multiple door sizes through post-mold cutting.
The design could extend to other agricultural equipment panels that need both structural ribs and angled deflectors.
If the angle constraint proves critical for crop flow, it sets a clear limit for any future resizing variants.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that the manufacturing process can form the ribs, deflector, and ridge together in one piece and still produce a rigid, functional door without needing extra reinforcement or separate assembly.

What would settle it

A physical test or field observation showing that the integrally formed deflector separates from the body or that the door lacks sufficient rigidity when installed and used on a combine harvester.

read the original abstract

1 . An access door for a combine harvester, comprising: a body having a top, a bottom, a first side, and a second side, the body including a height defined between the top and the bottom and a width defined between the first side and the second side; a plurality of ribs integrally formed in an inner surface of the body for adding rigidity thereto; a deflector integrally formed with the body and protruding from the inner surface of the body, the deflector comprising a top surface; a ridge integrally formed in the body, the ridge intersecting the plurality of ribs and defining a cut line for forming a smaller access door from the body, the smaller access door retaining the deflector; wherein, the deflector comprises a width that is less than or equal to the width of the body; wherein, the body is defined within a first plane and the top surface is defined within a second plane, the second plane being disposed at an angle less than 90° from the first plane.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This is a utility patent claiming an integral molded access door with ribs, deflector, and cut-line ridge for combines, but it supplies no test data or validation.

read the letter

This patent describes a combine harvester access door where the body, stiffening ribs, protruding deflector, and a ridge that marks a cut line for a smaller door are all formed as a single piece. The deflector sits at an angle under 90 degrees to the door plane, and its width is at most the body width. The manufacturing route is referenced via B29C plastic-forming codes.

The concrete new element is the ridge intersecting the ribs so that trimming produces a smaller door that still carries the deflector. That geometry is spelled out clearly in the claims.

The description is straightforward about the intended rigidity and deflection functions. It avoids separate assembly steps by making everything integral, which is a practical manufacturing point.

The obvious limitation is the total absence of any performance numbers, prototype results, or even basic checks on whether the molded deflector stays rigid or actually moves crop better than a bolted-on part. The patent simply states the features and the manufacturing class; it does not demonstrate that the integral construction delivers the claimed benefits.

This document is aimed at mechanical designers in agricultural equipment or at patent examiners and attorneys mapping prior art in farm machinery. A reader looking for a specific geometric solution to simplify door fabrication might extract the idea, but there is no analysis, data, or broader implication to discuss.

I would not bring it to a reading group, would not cite it in technical work, and would not send it for scientific peer review. It is a standard utility patent filing, not research.

Referee Report

0 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a utility patent claiming an access door for a combine harvester. The body includes integrally formed ribs on its inner surface for rigidity, an integrally formed deflector protruding from the inner surface with its top surface lying in a plane at an angle less than 90° to the body plane, and an integrally formed ridge intersecting the ribs that defines a cut line allowing formation of a smaller door while retaining the deflector. The deflector width is specified as less than or equal to the body width, and the construction is enabled by manufacturing processes under B29C classifications.

Significance. If the integral formation produces the claimed structure, the design could reduce part count and assembly steps in combine harvesters while maintaining rigidity and providing crop deflection. The ridge feature adds modularity for door sizing. The patent explicitly describes a parameter-free geometric configuration (angle <90°, width relation) that supports the central structural claim without additional fitted elements.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The abstract/claim 1 repeats 'wherein' clauses in a manner standard for patents but could be rephrased for improved flow if the manuscript is adapted for journal presentation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment and recommendation to accept the manuscript. The review accurately captures the key features of the claimed access door, including the integral ribs, deflector, and ridge for modularity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; design patent with no derivations

full rationale

This is a utility patent enumerating structural features of a mechanical access door (integral ribs, deflector, ridge) and a manufacturing classification (B29C). No equations, predictions, fitted parameters, or derivation chains exist. The central content is a legal claim set for a physical design, not a testable hypothesis or model whose truth depends on unverified inputs. No self-citations, ansatzes, or reductions to inputs by construction are present. The document is self-contained as a specification and receives the default non-circularity finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The patent rests on standard engineering assumptions about material behavior and molding processes rather than new scientific axioms or entities.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Blow molding (B29C 49/04) can produce the described integral ribs, deflector, and angled planes in a single body without defects.
Inferred from the cross-category classifications; no explicit validation provided in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5763 in / 1203 out tokens · 39738 ms · 2026-07-01T04:31:34.618712+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith.Foundation.RealityFromDistinction reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

An access door for a combine harvester, comprising: a body having a top, a bottom, a first side, and a second side... a plurality of ribs integrally formed in an inner surface of the body for adding rigidity thereto; a deflector integrally formed with the body and protruding from the inner surface of the body...

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.