In it for the Money help?

[T2B53]

Hello Freinds,

Have ben coming to otherpower for quite some time,and

have always ben involved in Electronics.Within the

last year or so have ben interested in windpower

and generators.Have built our own Pma's and selling

small 100-300 watters(lol)

We have also ben designing and testing  with diff

techniques and believe we have something very special.

Our prototype is testing exactly as we hoped and slowly

growing to completion.Were limited at moment as were

incurring all costs ourselves thus takes time.Which

leads me to my question someone might advise me on,

would it be best to try to sell the prototype and design?

Have already aquired law firm from patent office sending

me a patent kit,but fellow coworkers are saying can cost $1000.

Patent the thing and build them myself?

Otherthing worried about if can influence job market because

of more independence they dont send hitmen do they?  

Thanx all those that read as crazy as anything else ive seen on here.

I know alot of you guys,have read your posts,seen who replys.

Let me introduce myself to All...T2B53

[devoncloud]

I think that your patent is a waste of time, anyone that wants to steal it will do so anyway, and even witht a patent you really cannot do much to them.  I would just sell the thing.  If a patent is that important to you, sell four or five of them and put the money away and then put a pattent on it.  In the meantime, send yourself a certified letter with the plans and specs to yourself but do not open the letter, put it somewhere safe.  It will be proof of the date you made the idea, so if someone else tries to patent the idea before you do, you can prove the idea was yours.

No one is gonna take you out for building a wind generator man.  Last time I checked there was no elecronic mafia, but hey what do I know.

Devon

[T2B53]

Already have sent letters to my shop,myself,and son with pics and specs.

Thanx for your help,Hitman was a joke but can be powerful info

and hope someday to share with all for what its worth.

[wdyasq]

Patent law is a business.  They will take your money.  IF you are granted a patent, will it help you.  A 'US Patent' will protect you from those in the US from building your device - until they figure out a work-around. It will not protect you from builders in other countries from using your ideas until and unless you get an International papent - more money.

I have a friend who spent the money for a US patent.  It turns out his patent - 'The Cory Jib-Windmill' - is not something that can be efficiently built in an industralized country like the US.  It is also something that is well suited for low-tech building in developing countries - where there is little money.

The cost of patent in the mid-1970's was over $US6,000 - IIRC.  Many thousands of that was the 'search' for 'prior art'. If there is an existance of someone else building a device like your idea, it is not patentable.  Once one shows the device 'in the public' it can no longer be patented as I read the laws.

One must also activly defend the patent once they get that piece of paper for it to be credible - at least that has been what I have been told and seen.

HTH,

Ron

[Dan M]

A quick comment on patents.

If you have a patent it IS NOT illegal for someone to copy the design and sell it themselves.

All the patent does is gives you the right to sue if someone does that.

If you're still thinking about a patent the timeline gets important.  There is a limited amount of time (6 months, I think)from the first public demonstration until the design becomes "public domain" if the patent has not been applied for.  No amount of dated research, dated plans, registered letters, etc. will get around this.

What constitutes a "public demonstration" is fuzzy.  I don't think it's public just because someone can see it flying in your yard, unless this reveals critical design elements that you intend to patent (like blade shape for example).

As soon as you sell a unit it's definitely gone public and your countdown starts.

If you apply for the patent, make it as broad as you can and still get it issued.  Very specific patents tend to do nothing more than provide the details of your invention to the public and give you a cool certificate to hang on the wall.

Hope this helps,

-Dan M

[RatOmeter]

Another word on patents and paying for them.

My father was a charter member of the Oklahoma Inventors Congress and spent a lot of time dealing with inventions and the patent process.  His experience boils down to this statement (not necessarily his originally):

"The key is OPM (Other People's Money).  If you can get someone else to pay for the process of getting a patent, it may be worth patenting."

[T2B53]

Thanx to those who replied,

a patent doesnt sound like the way i'd want to go,

so if thats the case whom should be on my list

to try to sell the idea outright to?

Or possibly an investor to help me market it?

[Ungrounded Lightning Rod]

What constitutes a "public demonstration" is fuzzy.

That varies by country, and other things expose you.  In the US it's one year, unless all your disclosures are under non-disclosure agreements.  But a sale or offer to sell also starts the clock and your application must be in before the clock runs out.  In some other countries you have to have the application in before you sell or offer to sell.

I don't think it's public just because someone can see it flying in your yard, unless this reveals critical design elements that you intend to patent (like blade shape for example).

That sounds right to me.

[nack]

Another money model you might consider is to release the designs under an "open source" type license, like the GNU documentation license, then try and make money on hand-holding services.  The bottom line with patents is that the USPTO process and system is so fundamentally broken that they will issue almost any patent without proper verification of the novelty, utility, or lack of prior art - they have structured their office to reward the application reviewer for just signing it off, no matter how outrageous "it" might happen to be.  At this point the patent office has essentially become an arms dealer for IP firms that like to gamble on litigation.  If you think your invention is so hot that everyone will just HAVE to steal it, you might want to check out NoLo press' "Patent it yourself" to see how to go about applying for a patent before you go public, but be forewarned that unless you can stand up to multiple years of litigation against BIG money, the patent won't do you much good.

[T2B53]

Thanx again for all those that replyed,i appeciate it.

One day soon maybe youll see a very diff and weird

design mill that will put out almost twice the

output power for any given size using your

own magnet/coil arrangement you want or

the same output at half the orig.windspeed.

It doesnt like high winds,meant for city

low windspeed.I picture the traverse city

mill powering 400homes instead of 200.lol

[devoncloud]

intriquing.  I cant wait till you are ready for the unvailing!

Devon

[gibsonfvse]

One of these is Creative Commons; it is often mentioned in terms of the arts (such as music), but I believe it may be suited to designs, documentation, and the like.

[finnsawyer]

It sounds like you're concentrating the wind.  I've had a similar idea.  I'd like to know if you've done what I've been contemplating.  It has to do with the effect of a fluid flowing around a cylinder.  The structure would be fairly complex and there's no point in my duplicating your work.

[T2B53]

finsawyer,

no has nothing to do with fluid,will tell

you that much.....good luck on your idea!

i'll be reposting and keeping all interested

informed.....thanx

[finnsawyer]

You misunderstood me. Air acts like a fluid in many cases.  Since you mention a doubling of air speed it sounds like you have the airstream going around a cylinder as that is a well known effect.

[elvin1949]

geoM

your right  i studied flow enginering back in the 70's air is a fluid [thin of course but still a fluid]

i think he is having my old thought's

counter rotating

stacked "s" rotor's

one turning clockwise    one turning counterclockwise

put the mag' rotor on the bottom of the top rotor

put the stator on the top of the bottom rotor

draw power through slip ring's

when "s" roter's are turning 100 rpm's

genny is seeing 200 rpm's  simple

have fun

later

elvin

[wooferhound]

Uhh Ohh

Now you have given me a double counter rotating savinous with wind scoop idea.

[T2B53]

Those are all good idea's but mine's

more in general has to do with

vibrating fingers....!!

i'll be posting as testing progresses

[laskey]

Here's a design for ya, for free.  All I ask is that you name it after me if you try it and it works.

I'd forget about patenting almost anything.  You have to have enough money to pursue a lengthy law suit.

Cya,

Chris

[wooferhound]

Interesting Idea you have there, just not sure you are really getting more power by having counter rotating props inline like that.

Here is my idea about the double counter rotating savinous with wind a wind scoop.

[Ungrounded Lightning Rod]

Note that on a savonius the wind exits from the opposite of the side of the axle where it entered.  So you want your horn on the exit side to be in the middle, not the sides.

But it passes through when the blades are aligned with the wind.  That implies that a multi-bladed savonius (more like a waterwheel) might be a good idea.  It might get closer to the Betz limit, too.

But with a dual you need to swivel both the air guide and the rotor mounts to face the wind.  (Somebody has already done a one-rotor with a piviting air guide).  I thought the main point of a Savonius is that you are paying a thrid of your wind energy for not bothering with that.  B-)

[nack]

I may be misunderstanding something here, but wouldn't it be better to run the savonius rotors open, without the air guides?  It just seems to me that the guides would create very turbulent pockets at the rotor exit, which would tend to drag down the already sub-wonderful tip speed.  Also I am not so sure about the side by side mounting, that might allow the rotors to waste a lot of energy "talking" to each other - I think normally one observes a horizontal apacing of at least a few rotor widths to avoid problems with local turbulence created by the rotor itself.  I would probably go for counter-rotating stacked rotors, with concentric shafts.  The lower rotor set should use a hollow pipe for it's shaft, and the upper uses a solid axle, or a smaller pipe that passes through the center of the bottom rotor's axle.  Need bearings to support the whole thing at the top and bottom of the OD of the lower rotor axle.  Bearings for the upper rotor axle would be on the ID of the lower axle (also at top and bottom), and possibly a third one at top of structure (depends on axle rigidity and rotor side load).  This way you can have the couter rotation with a common rotational axis.

[elvin1949]

nack

you are correct

this is what i had in mind

i live in a doe class 1 wind area

my average wind speed is 9.5 mph

i need startup to be at around 3 mph wind's

so stacked counter rotating "s" roters that are short and fat [large diameter=high torque]

that let's you increase the diameter of the genny

keep the small coil's and "mags" just use more of them   this will increse the speed in "fps" of the "mags" past the coils

should give a low cutin and desent power

later

elvin

[finnsawyer]

In a design like this (stacked S rotors) it might be useful to consider an external support structure using pipe.  It will affect performance somewhat at least in certain wind directions, but it might be a reasonable trade off for strength and size.

[Wolvenar]

Lower wind speeds to start generating would be a great upside of this genny,because you will have doubled the RPM if the blades are turning opposite directions

the problem I see is trying to use these in a wind genny that is not positioned in a stationary direction. How will you keep it turned into the wind? I suppose you could use a tail like thing very far from the genny to avoid the blades..

the other problem will be in the noise and vibrations when one blade cuts behind the other.

It's a cool idea, prbably suited easier to VAWTs but may work with some ingenuity on HAWT

[hvirtane]

I'm not sure, if counter rotating s-rotors are

better than making them just the normal way.

I think that if you'll combine

the spiral vane idea by

http://www.windside.com

with the shape of the

vanes something similar as with

www.picoturbine.com

you might have a quite good machine...

As well Ed Lenz' 'Lenz turbine' seems to be

really interesting. I'm just trying to collect

some junk parts to make an experimental one.

I think that you would get easily enough speed

for a permanent magnet generator, direct drive,

if you'll just make an axial flux generator

with large disks, sos that the magnets are going

fast also with low RPM.

- Hannu