Lock design: Pins/wafers that operate rotating disk tumblers

[mh]

So here's how I imagine this:

[vov35]

I don't think it would really work with having the cuts in the disk in two directions, also I think you'd be able to wrap around near a full rotation with the spiral, creating much more possible positions.

Further, the end of the spiral could be far enough from the axis to allow the core to spin through with no key. just to make tensioning a bit more difficult.

[mh]

I don't think it would really work with having the cuts in the disk in two directions

Do you mean that rotating disk tumbler locks cannot be designed bi-directional?
Maybe have a look at Abloy's product line.

Cheers
mh

[FarmerFreak]

Thanks for the picture mh. I was having a hard time envisioning it correctly.

It looks like a really good idea. The only draw back that I can see, compared to not using pin, is that because the pins are thicker than just the disks. You will have less cuts on the key for the same length of a key as a traditional Abloy key. Other than that, I really like this setup. I can't think of any reason it wouldn't work or wouldn't be very secure.

[dls]

The serrations would be like steps the next one in the direction of opening would be higher than the previous one supporting it, they could also be steel they would also have to have their points very slightly chamfered so they dont mark to the pins too much creating a small notch that could be felt while picking.

[mh]

The serrations would be like steps the next one in the direction of opening would be higher than the previous one supporting it

Maybe you could also draw it?

Cheers
mh

[dls]

Good to see someone is thinking along my line, thats more or less how i was thinking except for the bidirection this could be good for making the plug and disk asemblely removeable with a core key left to remove and right to open.
The side bar could be deeper and the right gates would alow it to open the lock with shallow gates and the core key could allow it sidebar to move in further with deeper gates to the left, the sidebar itself could be what retains the core.

Why didnt i think of that

[dls]

As far as picking this lock goes you would have to lift at least one pin to its highest position to get some movement on the plug or it will just spin as there is no connection between the plug and disks the control disks which allow the side bar could be positioned in several positions and wouldnt have to be the highest cut either if the other cuts where lower adding to the variables as you couldnt rely on them being standard

[dls]

To increase the drill protection in this design the core which holds the discs could be tapered smaller near the front of the lock it would not be a real taper but more like a series of increasingly smaller counter bores with the disks having the same center and different diameter outer.
You could then use anti drill pins in front of the larger rear disks.
To drill you would have to drill deep and past these to get to the rear disks (something for abloy to consider maybe)
The sidebar would have to be redesigned and the rear of the plug would have to have a flange to prevent pulling out the front.

[vov35]

To increase the drill protection in this design the core which holds the discs could be tapered smaller near the front of the lock it would not be a real taper but more like a series of increasingly smaller counter bores with the disks having the same center and different diameter outer.
You could then use anti drill pins in front of the larger rear disks.
To drill you would have to drill deep and past these to get to the rear disks (something for abloy to consider maybe)
The sidebar would have to be redesigned and the rear of the plug would have to have a flange to prevent pulling out the front.

the number of differently sized disks would also make rekeying a more costly and complex process...

[dls]

i think two disk sizes would be enough the idea is to get hardend pins deeper in the core of the lock unlike the abloy idea of a hard disk in front and nothing to protect it. if the idea worked and someone tried to drill the lock they would get the first half of the disks out and the pins would give some protection to the second half which i think should have a second sidebar.
As for the cost thats the price of security
some fichet safelocks cost not far off 1000 euros or there abouts

[dls]

The floating wafer design would allow for more thicker wafers in a smaller space than the same in a normal wafer such as an l&f because there is no space between the wafers there could be ten wafers in twenty millimeters with eight differs thats about 100,000,000 differs if im right there would also be no need to diecast the plug from zamak

[vov35]

on the other hand if you do have space between the wafers, and apply a similar design for disks, they can be uniform AND drill resistant. Sure, you'd need to make your plug a couple cm longer, but it'd make the lock more affordable while keeping it reasonably sized and improve drill resistance.

[dls]

Space between the wafers would allow the attacker to more easily count and individually pick the wafers
It would also allow for sloppy key cutting which could allow a photo of the key to be used to make a key by a less experienced person.

The hole in the center of these wafers would be the same for all wafers and the distance between the left and right cuts on the key would be constant to match. The wafers would be retained in the plug by a circlip so it could be removed easily as a single component for service or replacement the disks could also be retained on the outside of the plug by a circlip for the same reason.

The circlip itself in the core would also add some drill protection to the plug as it is spring steel.

There could be a number of different disks designs with the same height cuts but different spacing between them on the circumfrence to add some more variables.
This would not add significantly to the production costs as i would assume the plugs will all be the same
The disks would be placed on the outside, the whole assembly would be placed in a jig and the key would be turned then a mill would cut the gates out of standard disks this would eliminate some assembly errors

[vov35]

so, I'm thinking this would be attacked with an overlifting attack.... all the pins would be raised to the lowest position, then the lock turned. Then pressure would be applied on the pins and it would be rotated back until all disks set. The friction of the pin would be enough to pull the disks across the sidebar but slip when it actually sets...