Next Patent: Anti-slip multi-layer yoga mat
Next Patent: Anti-slip multi-layer yoga mat
[0001] This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. provisional patent application No. 60/473,235, filed on May 23, 2003, and which is related to U.S. provisional patent application No. 60/479,565, filed on Jun. 17, 2003. The priority of the prior applications is expressly claimed and their disclosures are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
[0002] This invention relates to sinks, and in particular to sinks for use in any setting where it is desirable to separate liquids from solids. More specifically, this invention relates to a novel double-basin sink.
[0003] Many kitchens include a food preparation area on a counter or island for preparing vegetables and other items. Most such food preparation areas include a prep sink that is used for washing food before serving or cooking. Known prep sinks typically include a single, relatively small square or rectangular sink. While helpful, it is often the case that there is a need to use the sink in the prep area while a vegetable or salad is draining after being washed. It is also often the case that it would be more convenient to be able to wash and drain foods without the need for using a separate colander, and without tying up a prep sink while the food is being washed or is draining after being washed.
[0004] This invention solves the problem by providing a double basin sink that includes an integral colander between the two sink basins, permitting water or other liquid from a first sink basin to drain to a second sink basin while retaining the solid in the first sink. In one embodiment, the integral colander comprises a foraminous wall separating the two sink basins. In another embodiment, the integral colander comprises one sink with a foraminous bottom surface that communicates with a second sink. The second sink is preferably below the level of the first to facilitate draining, and is connected to a drain like a normal sink.
[0005] This double basin sink with an integral colander could be used in kitchens or any other setting where it is desirable to conveniently separate liquids from solids. For example, the double sink with an integral colander could be used in bathrooms, laundry rooms or in industrial applications, such as parts cleaning.
[0006] The nature, principle and utility of the present invention will be clearly understood from the following detailed description when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
[0007]
[0008]
[0009]
[0010]
[0011]
[0012]
[0013]
[0014]
[0015] The drawings are for illustrative purposes only and are not drawn to scale. The same numbers are used for the same part or portion throughout the drawings.
[0016]
[0017] The colander wall
[0018] As shown in
[0019]
[0020] In another embodiment an attachment is provided that slips over the side wall and which includes differently sized openings, or which temporarily covers the openings
[0021]
[0022] Second sink
[0023] As with the previous embodiment described, a cover can be provided which includes differently sized openings or which temporarily covers the openings in the foraminous bottom wall
[0024] In the second embodiment the openings
[0025] The upper and lower sinks can be square, rectangular, round, oval, or any desired shape that provides a common wall between the two sinks. The invention can be formed of any suitable material such as, but not limited to, metal, ceramic, enameled metal, porcelain, stone, resin, clay, wood, concrete, glass, plaster, paper or polymeric materials.
[0026] The sink basins may be made of one or more material while the foraminous surface may be made of a different material. The invention is preferably a metal casting, but any other method of shaping the material into the desired configuration will achieve the advantages of the invention.
[0027] While the invention has been described by reference to the illustrated embodiment, those of skill in the art will appreciate that there can be numerous modifications to the illustrated embodiments that are nonetheless within the scope of the invention. Thus the scope of the invention should be determined by the appended claims and their legal equivalents, rather than by the examples given.