This invention is a simple automatic shut-off device for gas stoves. It sits on the stove knob and uses a torsion spring and a low-power electromagnet to automatically turn the knob off after a set time, without using a motor. The user sets a timer, and when time expires the electromagnet releases a pin and the spring rotates the knob to the "off" position. This motor-free design reduces cost, power use, and installation complexity. It is intended for home kitchens, especially for busy cooks or those prone to forgetting a stove. The device aims to improve safety and convenience by preventing unattended cooking and fires, as well as saving energy and reducing wasted food. It is designed to fit most stove knobs with a universal adapter and to run a long time on battery power, making it a practical retrofit safety enhancement. The device includes a simple timer and universal knob adapter, so it can be easily added to nearly any gas stove. It attaches with a non-slip pad and works independently of the stove's electronics. By shutting off an unattended flame, it prevents overcooking and fires and contributes to energy conservation. This enhances kitchen safety, especially in homes with busy or forgetful residents.
Problem
Many home cooks accidentally leave their gas burners on, creating safety and waste issues. An unattended gas flame can cause fires, burned food, and wasted energy when stoves are left on too long. This invention targets that problem of unattended or forgotten cooktops, which existing built-in safeguards have not fully solved.
Target Customers
The device is aimed at residential gas stove users, especially those who might forget to switch off burners. This includes busy households, parents, elderly users, or people with memory challenges who need extra safety. Any home kitchen with a gas stove is a potential market, as well as property owners or landlords wanting to improve tenant safety.
Existing Solutions
Current approaches include stoves with built-in safety timers or sensors (though these are not universally available) and aftermarket gadgets that use motors or timers. The text notes aftermarket shut-off devices typically have motors and rechargeable batteries, making them costly or hard to fit on different stove models. Otherwise, families rely on manual checks or simple timers rather than automated hardware solutions.
Market Context
Gas stove users are the primary market, which is a large segment of home kitchens in many regions. The device is a safety add-on rather than an appliance itself, so it’s a niche within home kitchen accessories. It may appeal to the home and small business market (e.g., cooking-related businesses) that handle gas cooking. The context suggests broad applicability to any gas range, not limited to a narrow industrial domain, although exact market size or adoption rate is not given.
Regulatory Context
This is a consumer appliance safety device. There are no specific medical or vehicle regulations. It would need to follow standard electrical and gas appliance safety standards (like UL/CE for home devices in various regions), but is not in a heavily regulated sector like automotive or healthcare. The provided info does not list any regulatory certifications, so requirements are assumed to be routine for household products.
Trends Impact
The invention aligns with trends in home safety devices and energy efficiency. Smart home and kitchen gadgets that prevent accidents are growing in demand. It also touches on sustainability by reducing gas waste, fitting broader efficiency and environmental interests. Additionally, the focus on ease-of-use for elderly or memory-challenged users ties into aging population and accessibility trends. Overall, it supports current themes of safety automation and resource conservation.
Limitations Unknowns
The provided information does not clarify how well the device fits all stove knob types or its robustness in daily use. Actual cost, price point, and manufacturing considerations are not given. There is no data on user acceptance or market demand, nor detailed patent claim scope to assess how easily competitors could bypass it. It also does not address any potential installation hurdles or false activations. In short, many commercialization details remain unspecified.
Rating
The device addresses a clear safety need (forgotten stove flames), giving it high marks for problem impact. Its motor-free spring mechanism is practical, boosting feasibility and offering tangible advantages (cost, energy savings) over motorized options. However, the novelty seems incremental relative to existing timer solutions, and the patent’s breadth is unclear, limiting its defensibility. The potential market is broad (many gas stove users) but adoption depends on consumer acceptance. Overall, it is a useful, well-aligned invention with moderate uniqueness and scope.
Problem Significance ( 8/10)
High safety and waste issue: forgetting to turn off a gas stove can cause fires, burn food, and waste energy, so the problem is important.
Novelty & Inventive Step ( 7/10)
The idea (using a spring and electromagnet instead of a motor) appears to be a novel combination for stove safety, but it is an incremental mechanical innovation rather than a radical new system.
IP Strength & Breadth ( 5/10)
Without detailed claim information, the scope is uncertain; the concept is fairly specific (a mounting device with a spring), so patents could be narrow and possibly easy to design around.
Advantage vs Existing Solutions ( 7/10)
The device clearly improves on existing timers by avoiding motors and reducing power use, offering easy installation; these benefits are qualitative but meaningful.
Market Size & Adoption Potential ( 7/10)
Gas stoves are common worldwide, so the potential market is large. Adoption depends on consumer willingness to use an add-on, which is plausible but unproven.
Implementation Feasibility & Cost ( 9/10)
It uses simple, proven components (spring, electromagnet, timer), so development is straightforward and low-cost; manufacturing complexity should be low.
Regulatory & Liability Friction ( 8/10)
The device is a consumer appliance accessory, so it would face standard safety and electrical certification (e.g. UL/CE). It’s not in heavy-regulation industries, so regulatory friction should be modest.
Competitive Defensibility (Real-World) ( 5/10)
The concept is relatively simple, so competitors could replicate it or use alternative mechanisms; the patent may provide some protection, but a long-term moat seems weak.
Versatility & Licensing Potential ( 4/10)
This is mainly applicable to gas stove knobs (possibly other gas appliances). It’s a narrow use case, so licensing opportunities are limited to kitchen appliance makers.
Strategic & Impact Alignment ( 7/10)
It aligns well with home safety, energy efficiency, and support for elderly or forgetful users. It contributes to safety and conservation trends, which is a positive strategic fit.