Well it’s happened. A few weeks ago
the USPTO published the utility patent application for my “Improved rotary
mower blade" design concept. Now the REAL work begins, the kind I’m totally
inexperienced at. That’s actually getting a mower maker to purchase the
licensing rights to get it into the marketplace. Here’s the page 1 abstract
from the published application and a photo of the prototype made from a
standard Neuton 14” blade next to another unmodified blade.
Months ago I applied for a
trademark for this logo my graphic artist son Geoffrey and I came up with.
Part of that REAL work is coming up
with some empirical test data on the comparison in performance, Eco Slice
modified vs standard Neuton 14” blade. I intend to modify a battery pack for my
Neuton EM 4.1 such that a logging meter measuring current, voltage and wattage
can be connected in series / parallel arrangement with it in use. Here's an image of another example of the type of meter needed.
We’ll test
with the Eco Slice and the standard blades alternately, running the mower
through as near to identical patches of grass as possible, video recording the
whole thing. Heretofore I’ve only performed the test subjectively comparing
relative audible motor pitch which of course resulted in a higher more
consistent pitch with the Eco Slice blade as the mower was pushed faster
through thick grass.
We'll see if my estimate of between 10% and 40% energy consumption savings is valid.
Wish me luck?
1 comment:
It took the USPTO over 2 years to make determination on my patent application and like I have shared on facebook, they either just didn't get what I was saying in the application or didn't buy it. That all was born of many years work with laboratory centrifuges and the centrifugal force I felt obligated to understand while working on them, work with rechargeable battery powered medical devices in later years at Hines VA and the time in and just before retirement spent taking over more food prep at home, specifically knife skills. Anyway, I managed to fall ill from concurrent infection by a couple of viruses, some unspecified bacteria and mononucleosis ~ the time I received the rejection. That all kept me from doing the testing work to include in response within the time limit allotted to respond to the rejection. They appeared unable to get the difference between a curved cutting edge running most of the length of the blade and in that distal ~ 1" of it which is all that modern rotary mowers, all of which by law rotate blades at ~ 3000 RPM, bring in contact with uncut grass in each pass across the front of the mower deck. That probably being unchangeable, any response would likely have failed to get me a patent anyway. Prior to all the rejection I had worked out a simple open sided box design from dowel and 1/4" plywood which would have velcroed to the Newton mower's battery chamber cover, a connector system allowing removable patch in of the series /parallel meter like the one in the post above with the meter velcroed to the bottom surface with a hole in the top surface such that a smartphone velcroed to the top surface could catch video of the meter readings in the comparative testing process.
Post a Comment