http://news.google.com/patents/about?id=zY6SAAAAEBAJ&dq=Balmar (http://news.google.com/patents/about?id=zY6SAAAAEBAJ&dq=Balmar)
It is possible to using Reverse Engineering by patent search to aid in your co-gen design, many times the solutions are already there, some off the shelf, some need modification, others need new fabrication...but the teachings are a short cut to our own success.
Taking a look at the above patent teaches a complete co-gen, for elec/heat/cooling.
What I find really helpful is looking at the prior art sections for issued patents, it's a hierarchy of already solved solutions(standing on the shoulder of giants).
This is a great example of prior teachings for controls for everything from speed to out-puthttp://news.google.com/patents?q=U.S.+Pat.+No.+5%2C512%2C813&btnG=Search+Patents (http://news.google.com/patents?q=U.S.+Pat.+No.+5%2C512%2C813&btnG=Search+Patents)
Lloyd
its hard to imagine how they could get patent protection for the truck apu system, i don't see anything they have there that wasn't already in
the open domain anyway.
none the less, interesting though.
bob g
Somewhere in the application, you just stick the words "on the internet." If you do that, something completely unpatentable magically becomes a new invention with legal protection. If that fails, claim there's a business method involved and you've got it.
I know of some electronics patents that are so outrageously prior and public art (electronics) that it is laughable. The US Patent office seems happy to just take the money and let the courts/lawyers deal with it.
My point wasn't about the validity of the patent, or the patent process, or even what the patent office might do..
Instead it's about learning from the patent, and all the prior art that they have to list.
Don't focus on the patent just what you can learn.
The thing about patents...everyone can practice the patent for their own use....you just can't sell a product that infringes the patent.
So it's a learning tool, and education at someone else s expense...so use it that way...no discussion on the validity of the patent needed.
Lloyd
Since the supreme court ruling on "obviousness" in 2003 (I think ?) I can assure you it is MUCH harder to get a patent and the patent examiners now make the most absurd links to combinations of features from totally diverse applications and say that you have not invented anything. Basically, since 2003 not 1 patent application of many has been awarded at my place of work and the lawyers are now making 10x more money than before.
After the patent is granted, you are still fully responsible to defend your patent in court against any violators, at your own cost. It is game where those with deep pockets will always win, no matter which side they are on.