Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Mechanic
Having my own patent issued, I think you might understand that I know the process. Whether you choose to believe it or not is a problem that COULD exist within your own mind. Non Disclosure Agreements are required before you file a completed application and before, during and after the provisional application, which is supposed to precede the complete application by one year. So basically you are not at the point of having filed a completed application or NDAs would be unnecessary. Anyone can file a provisional application. My first one, a decade ago cost $100.
Not sure about the "20 year" term you are referring to when you mentioned waiting out the expiration date on previous patents (mine is 17.5 years). Assuming that is a fact (the 20 year term), it presents serious hurdles to overcome to surpass the rejection criteria of "obvious to someone educated in the art" as well as the "novelty" rejection criteria as well as the legal requirement for the applicant to disclose to the Patent Office any relevant information, that they uncover, at any time in the process, that could cause your own application to be rejected.
Actually "contracting the burn", assuming (again) your terminology is correct is the opposite of what Mazda is (and probably others are) doing with multiple injections after TDC where the burn is initiated then the pressure wave is "spread out" with multiple injections, after the combustion event has begun. The potential for preignition does not exist with high pressure injections of which a significant portion occur after ignition of the first of multiple injections.
Smokeys hot vapor setup is general knowledge today and any component has long passed any Patent protection time deadline. You state that transonic has problems, but you give nothing to support that position. I have no interest in transonic other than my belief that their system represents a significant step forward in the refinement process.
Also much risk means the potential for no reward and if you have no patent pending, you may never see one granted. There are even groups of foundation funded patent lawyers who will drag you through another legal nightmare, EVEN AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN GRANTED A PATENT, and have your patent rejected by a court process.
good luck with the process
Mech
|
I would just like to point out that NDAs apply to more than patents. I am under an NDA as partner and employee. Employees and partners can be beholden to an NDA for a period of time well beyond the life process of a patent. Also, secrecy in process is often better than a patent if your product has a technological lifespan and the market is not ready for the technology. What good is getting a patent when you will not go to market immediately? Why get protection when market life will be far less than patent life? The problem with most inventors is that they are not market savvy and they waste energy procuring a patent that, as you are correct, only allows them their day in court - nothing more. There are dangers of someone torpedoing your patent if you wait, but that is why there are lawyers and firms that do nothing more than reverse engineer and rip apart the patents of others who's work may stand in the way. I know, I worked for such a firm. The investment group I work for does not tinker with this aspect. They hire a legal firm out of Burbank to provide advice and services. I simply put in a request for disclosure of information the group does not consider critical at this point. The tests we ran on HHO a couple decades ago have nothing to do with a patent. They were just for groundwork. However, the group paid for the data and they "own" the data. It looks like I can recreate the work for disclosure to others but I am waiting on a few specifics. Again, this will be for spark ignited gasoline engines.
As to Transonic's problems? Simply look at the tightrope they must walk to keep their system from falling off the super critical point or entering into the zone where the injector life is measured in seconds. Also, their 58% thermal efficiency claims are being pushed by diesel engines with piezo injectors and 30,000 psi working pressures to the tune of 52% thermal efficiency. Even if they overcome the complexity and reliability issues, their market lead may have all but dried up by the time they can introduce their tech.
And, contraction of combustion is most beneficial to the single combustion phasing of a spark ignited engine as it allows minimal ignition lead times and a resultant increase in thermal efficiency. As to how it works in multi-injection schemes in diesel cycle engines? I forward no comment.