Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 75

Thread: PatEF; the "Ef" for efficiency

  1. #31
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Clearwater, Fl
    Posts
    7,190
    Manolis - I understand patents, design, FMA, etc and if you leach other talent to prove out your design then you compensate those people in some manner such as by giving then access to alpha and beta versions, discounts on the product or even the final product at no charge. Your walking a fine line demanding that people check your work for you and apply for patents before they reply to a forum discussion in order to protect themselves in case you turn their thoughts into big profits and you do not do the honorable thing and compensate them.

    What are you intentions toward rewarding those who take the time to review your concepts and provide input that you will benefit from? Myself I usually get $150 an hour for consultation on a project gone off track or for a second opinion (plus travel, lodging and Per Dium if I come to your site) so consider how that can add up with all the folks who try to help you by providing consulting service here.

  2. #32
    apriliaforum expert millietant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Used to be sunny Durham, now dull and rainy Midlands, England
    Posts
    1,728
    Rocky - I just wouldn't bother any more. Manolis clearly just knocks back any form of constructive questioning or criticism of his ideas - and generally not in a particularly polite/friendly way. Maybe this is not his intention, but the language and brevity of non-technical responses, really creates an "I know better than you" aura around all of his responses.

    He also asks the same questions and posts the same info on other sites, and treats responses with what I perceive to to be the same level of disdain (although I accept my perception may be wrong, but it's what I read into all of the responses) so I'm not sure what impact you may think any of your comments have.

    Personally, I've given up even trying to think of any responses and can't be bothered to put the time into reading the technically wordy posts - I have a life to live with my family and friends and I'm not getting any younger

    I think you're banging your head against a brick wall.
    Cheers,

    "I am a selfish, self-righteous tosser", a "fucking loser" and now an "absolute fucking idiot"

    Me - '03 RSV Mille, '89 FJ 1200 x 2, & '75 TL 125 & Schweizer S300 CBi Helicopter
    Wife - '01 FZ1 (Fazer 1000), '86 VF 750 Interceptor and '07 CRF 230F
    Kids - '03 Fazer 600, GY 125 and CRF 100 off roaders, '10 Reiju RS2 50 Matrix Pro

  3. #33
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Clearwater, Fl
    Posts
    7,190
    Millietant - I am only giving this a passing curiosity. If he is honestly crowd sourcing for R&D feedback to develop a real product I am fine with that however I will have no respect for a leach or shady character profiteering by trying to tie up concepts that others may benefit from by filing frivolous patents or abusing the good hearted folks in these forums.

    As I indicated, for many of us who do consult for a living, our time is worth money so I am not devoting thousands of dollars worth of my time reviewing his drawings or going over his math.

    I did want out in the open though what value someone is getting when a professional consultant or even a knowledgeable person provides feedback to a question as there can be a very large value there. I don't do field work any more however the charge for me going out on site and reviewing a situation will usually be around $2,000 a day. The last time I went out in the field the VP of the firm responsible for the problems they had died while reading the report on all the failure points. It was several thousand pages long, very exact and left no doubt as to the depth and extent of the issues that were found. That consultation cost the person that ordered it about $30,000 and unfortunately gave one of those responsible a fatal heart attack as the situation impacted the daily lives of millions of people and just overwhelmed him. I asked that another consultant be assigned to work through the follow-up for remediation as the death really didn't and still doesn't sit well and really bothers me.

    Anyways everyone's time has value.

  4. #34
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    150
    Hello all.

    This “strictly technical discussion” unveils a long existing problem and proposes a solution.


    The problem:

    In the state-of-the-art CVT’s of scooters and sleds there is a significant design flaw related with the rear pulley spring arrangement:
    the spring force on the movable half of the rear pulley increases at the longer transmission ratios (while it should decrease substantially), spoiling the efficiency of the transmission, overheating the CVT compartment, wearing of the V-belt, etc.


    The solution:

    With the PatEf arrangement of the springs, this design flaw is corrected.



    A pure technical problem and a simple/cheap solution for it.


    Just think how many thousands of tons less CO2 would be emitted, per day, to the air.


    The rest are thin air.

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  5. #35
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Clearwater, Fl
    Posts
    7,190
    Then produce the vaporous product if your that committed to saving the environment and protecting people from a serious design flaw or forget about it. If you need the services of a test engineer to go over the design then you should contract one to review your design.

    If its that cheap and simple what more is there to talk about? Do it and stop filing wasteful patents to lock up concepts for several years blocking others from moving forward with this for another decade or so.

    You either intend to actually do this or you don't. Posting more drawings about a project going nowhere is not a sufficient answer.

  6. #36
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    150
    Hello all.

    Rockynv wrote:
    stop filing wasteful patents to lock up concepts for several years blocking others from moving forward with this for another decade or so”



    If a patent is “blocking others from moving forward”, it is usually a good patent, a useful patent (and not a wasteful one).

    The “others” can negotiate and agree on the royalties to be paid to the owner / inventor in order to use his invention / idea / solution and move forward.

    This is the way the current Intellectual Property System (Patenting System) works.




    By the way, the following:



    is from an international patent application (WIPO PCT) filed by Honda, and shows a mechanism (actually a second variator) in the rear pulley of a scooter CVT.

    For those confused, the following drawing may help:




    The problem Honda tries to solve with the additional variator in the rear pulley, is the reduction of the over-clamping of the V-belt at the high speeds (so, the problem is not imaginary; it is a real problem and the CVT makers around the world try to solve it for many decades now; a search in the patent offices suffices).


    The PatEf:



    deals with exactly the same problem with the abovementioned invention of Honda.


    The solution of Honda is a second variator in the rear pulley; at high speeds the centrifugal forces on the weights (which move along proper ramps) of the second variator, counterbalance a part of the force applied by the spring onto the movable half of the rear pulley.

    The PatEf solution is the re-arrangement of springs in the rear pulley.


    Compare the two solutions in terms of:
    cost,
    complication,
    reliability,
    weight,
    space required,
    etc.


    And since this discussion started as a strictly technical one,
    a fundamental difference between the two solutions, as regards their functionality, must be clarified:

    Honda’s solution is a “speed sensitive” mechanism (it needs high rpm (revs) in the driven pulley to work),
    while the PatEf solution is a “transmission-ratio sensitive” mechanism: it does not matter how fast the driven pulley spins.

    This makes the PatEf proper not only for scooters, sleds, ATV’s and the similar, but also for CVT’s for bicycles, for CVT gearboxes for machines like laths, mills etc.

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  7. #37
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Clearwater, Fl
    Posts
    7,190
    Again empty words with no substance. Make it or stop yammering about it. People who just file patents to be a nuisance say the same things you do unfortunately. Their intent is to get the people who really do intend to contribute by actually making something to pay them extortion in order to bring a real product to market. The only way to prove your honorable intent is to bring the product to market and not just keep trying to rope us in to being your proof that these are your original ideas when you take people to court.

    When you have something real to say with a working model to test please let us know.

  8. #38
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    150
    Hello all.

    Rockynv writes:

    Empty words with no substance.



    3.5 years ago it was presented in the Aprilia Forum the PatEff project of pattakon (PatEff with double “f”; it is different than the PatEf project).

    The following drawing is from the US patent application publication for the PatEff (the complete patent application is available at the US-PTO):



    Compare this patent drawing with the colored drawing used in the post #36, above.


    The PatEff patent application of pattakon was withdrawn by the applicants as anticipated by the WO2009/096385 of Honda (shown in the post #36, above).


    But there is more:

    According the International Search Report for the abovementioned patent application of Honda:



    their invention (that with the second variator in the rear pulley) is anticipated by a patent application of Mitsubishi Belting, Ltd, and by a patent application of ToyotaMotor Co, Ltd.


    Honda, Mitsubishi, Toyota (and Suzuki) in the same page!


    It seems the R&D engineers of the above four car and motorcycle makers are stupid, because they consider as important the reduction of the over-clamping of the V-belt in the CVT’s.


    And there is more:

    Rocknv “buried” the PatEff, 3.5 years ago, at http://www.apriliaforum.com/forums/s...ters-ATV-s-etc writing:

    “Then eliminate the variator and sliding clutch sheeve making them both fixed and put a double sheeve with a sliding center in the middle controlling it with a shift mechanism. My FMC Tractor uses that system and has been running reliably since 1952 with no need to replace any of the drive faces. It has only required an occasional belt change through many years of heavy duty useage.”

    The above post was for the PatEff which is actually the WO2009/096385 invention of Honda, which, in turn, is anticipated by an invention of Mitsubishi and by an invention of Toyota, as the above Search Report shows.


    When a guy rejects “at a glance” a solution / invention/ idea proposed / presented by an unknown, it may, or it may not, be OK.

    But something is going heavily wrong when a guy rejects so easily, and so categorically, an invention coming actually from Honda, Mitsubishi, Toyota and Suzuki.

    Empty words with no substance.



    Fortunately, from the ashes of the PatEff project, it was born the PatEf project of pattakon (with single “f” this time), for which this thread was started.

    Don’t listen to others.
    Don’t listen to me, either.
    Just study the unique characteristics of the PatEf by yourselves and think.

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  9. #39
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    150
    Hello all.


    Here is the Issue Notice for the patent granted for the PatBox CVT:





    by the USA patent Office.


    More at http://patft.uspto.gov/ and http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatBox.htm





    Thanks
    ManolisPattakos

  10. #40
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Clearwater, Fl
    Posts
    7,190
    Do you have any intention of making them or are you just filing in the hopes that a major manufacturer who has already spent years on something similar will offer to pay you a nuisance fee raising the cost of any machine that might benefit?

    You potentially harm everyone on the planet by filing nuisance patents in the hopes you'll come close to something a major manufacturer was already working on since they then have to add the cost of paying you off to the cost of the final product that they have already developed and are selling or in the process of bringing to market.

    People who do this are considered Patent Trolls who make their living by filing patents close enough to what they understand is being developed by others so that they will get a nuisance payoff from the manufacturer rather than have their product potentially delayed for years or having to be scrapped. The hope of the nuisance filer is to get a quick payoff without having to go to court and never have to manufacture the product. The telling sign of these folks is they talk their designs up filing numerous patents but don't actually manufacture them. That's why the TC Heartland Decision was rendered in May of 2017 which makes it harder for Patent Trolls to win these cases in the US by preventing the cherry picking of courts with a known history of siding with the Patent Trolls.

    This is a very large International problem that is needlessly driving up the costs that consumers pay for products everywhere. You call them good patents while the industry and courts take a very different view on the matter so that they are actively passing new laws to deal with the people who file them and limit their activity.

    A German filer tried to do this to a friend of mine a few years back claiming rights to a similar design and even had a similar but just slightly different patent to his filed so that the friend had to stop production along with delivery of existing orders for over a year and prove in court how he had been continually making similarly designed products for over 20 years. It cost him hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars and almost put him out of business. Since he had to stop manufacturing and had his assets frozen during the litigation (including the customers cash in advance payments in order to get a discount), he did not have enough product to fulfill the orders nor funds available to give refunds so he when it was all over he had to manufacture new product at higher cost losing even more since he was now delivering a product that cost double what the items purchased almost 2 years prior did. He is proud of the fact that despite what this Patent Troll tried to do he was able to finally either deliver a better product at no additional charge or give a refund with interest to all his customers who were harmed. He is still recovering from almost two years unable to manufacture his core product. He lost too many good employees whom he had to lay off while this was happening.

    Prove that your not just another one of these con-men by bringing these products to market and making them available for purchase or by releasing the patents into the public domain.

  11. #41
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    150
    Hello all.

    The patenting system is what it is, not what it “should be” according someones.

    And works like it works pushing the technology forwards by rewarding the inventors:


    Quote from https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/.../ucm447307.pdf (US-PTO):
    “Patents.
    A patent is a property right issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to an inventor “to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling the invention throughout the United States or importing the invention into the United States” for a limited time, in exchange for public disclosure of the invention when the patent is granted. Generally, the term of a new patent is 20 years from the date on which the application for the patent was filed in the United States. A company may apply for a patent from the USPTO anywhere along the development lifeline of a drug and can encompass a wide range of claims. However, many other factors can affect the duration of a patent”


    End of Quote.


    It does not matter whether the inventor is the Apple, or the Toyota, or a homeless independent poor guy.

    When the patent is granted, nobody else - without exceptions - is allowed to make or use or offer for sale or sell the invention without the written permission of the inventor.

    The creators of the Patenting System were far more wise and clever than people who think we should "kill" the independent inventors for the sake of the big companies / of the makers. Because they knew that the independent inventors is the basis of the technological progress of the world.
    The manufacturers / makers have plenty of resources but not necessarily the good ideas nor the good will for changes / for risking.


    And this system does work:

    you can judge it from the billion dollars Samsung paid to Apple for infringing Apple's patents (no matter how smart or stupid those patents are).

    or, by the case of Antonov against Toyota: despite the size of Toyota, Toyota was not allowed to use the invention of Antonov in their PRIUS hybrid.



    By the way:

    If you file a patent application in the USPTO (or in the UK-IPO or elsewhere) and pay the required fees, the Patent Examiners will be the same either you are an independent poor inventor, or the General Motors, and the rules on which the patent application will be Searched and Examined and granted or withdrawn will be the same EXACTLY either the applicant is a teenager from Africa, or the head of the R&D of Honda.


    So:

    Don’t listen to other.

    Don’t listen to me either.

    If you have a good / promising idea, consider the option to protect it by a patent.

    And if you need some help in the formalities, don’t hesitate to drop me an e-mail.

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  12. #42
    apriliaforum expert yzr750's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    4,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockynv View Post
    Do you have any intention of making them or are you just filing in the hopes that a major manufacturer who has already spent years on something similar will offer to pay you a nuisance fee raising the cost of any machine that might benefit?

    You potentially harm everyone on the planet by filing nuisance patents in the hopes you'll come close to something a major manufacturer was already working on since they then have to add the cost of paying you off to the cost of the final product that they have already developed and are selling or in the process of bringing to market.

    People who do this are considered Patent Trolls who make their living by filing patents close enough to what they understand is being developed by others so that they will get a nuisance payoff from the manufacturer rather than have their product potentially delayed for years or having to be scrapped. The hope of the nuisance filer is to get a quick payoff without having to go to court and never have to manufacture the product. The telling sign of these folks is they talk their designs up filing numerous patents but don't actually manufacture them. That's why the TC Heartland Decision was rendered in May of 2017 which makes it harder for Patent Trolls to win these cases in the US by preventing the cherry picking of courts with a known history of siding with the Patent Trolls.

    This is a very large International problem that is needlessly driving up the costs that consumers pay for products everywhere. You call them good patents while the industry and courts take a very different view on the matter so that they are actively passing new laws to deal with the people who file them and limit their activity.

    A German filer tried to do this to a friend of mine a few years back claiming rights to a similar design and even had a similar but just slightly different patent to his filed so that the friend had to stop production along with delivery of existing orders for over a year and prove in court how he had been continually making similarly designed products for over 20 years. It cost him hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars and almost put him out of business. Since he had to stop manufacturing and had his assets frozen during the litigation (including the customers cash in advance payments in order to get a discount), he did not have enough product to fulfill the orders nor funds available to give refunds so he when it was all over he had to manufacture new product at higher cost losing even more since he was now delivering a product that cost double what the items purchased almost 2 years prior did. He is proud of the fact that despite what this Patent Troll tried to do he was able to finally either deliver a better product at no additional charge or give a refund with interest to all his customers who were harmed. He is still recovering from almost two years unable to manufacture his core product. He lost too many good employees whom he had to lay off while this was happening.

    Prove that your not just another one of these con-men by bringing these products to market and making them available for purchase or by releasing the patents into the public domain.
    Completely agree with you there, he doesn't even have to bring it to market, just investing in a working prototype would show at least some willingness to actually back his own ideas.
    Anybody can draw concepts, I've got heaps of them, getting things working in real life is a completely different matter.
    Judging from the fact that he completely ignores any questions and just keeps repeating the value of his designs, I'm siding with patent troll..........
    seesecurity.com.au

  13. #43
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    150
    Hello all.


    This thread started as a technical discussion about the PatEf system, a quite simple arrangement of springs that, as explained, can reduce more than 10% the fuel consumption of your scooters at cruising by reducing the unnecessary over-clamping of the V-belt at the longer transmission ratios.

    Together with the better mileage, it offers a better efficiency, a higher maximum speed and a longer range.


    The only objection one can read in this discussion, is that the springs of the PatEf can disassemble during operation. As shown, they cannot.


    Then the discussion changed direction to patents, to whether it is proper to allow an independent inventor who believes he has a good idea to patent and own it, etc, etc. . .


    Then it turned to “patent trolling” !

    Reasonably he guys who wrote about patents, patent trolling etc, should have some patents of their own to show.




    Quote from aprevious post:

    Rocknv “buried” the PatEff, 3.5 years ago, at http://www.apriliaforum.com/forums/s...ters-ATV-s-etc writing:

    “Then eliminate the variator and sliding clutch sheeve making them both fixed and put a double sheeve with a sliding center in the middle controlling it with a shift mechanism. My FMC Tractor uses that system and has been running reliably since 1952 with no need to replace any of the drive faces. It has only required an occasional belt change through many years of heavy duty useage.”

    The above post was for the PatEff which is actually the WO2009/096385 invention of Honda, which, in turn, is anticipated by an invention of Mitsubishi and by an invention of Toyota, as the above Search Report shows.


    When a guy rejects “at a glance” a solution / invention/ idea proposed / presented by an unknown, it may, or it may not, be OK.

    But something is going heavily wrong when a guy rejects so easily, and so categorically, an invention coming actually from Honda, Mitsubishi, Toyota and Suzuki.

    Endof Quote.


    After the above quote I was betting he would never write again.
    But it seems it is an addiction.

    As the Rotary Valve is an addiction for Mark Walker.



    Quote from https://markwalkermotorcycles.com/ :



    Mark Walker:

    “In the early 90’s I was travelling back from a Canberra Drag race and pulled into Bundanoon, I met a bloke in the bar, and he asked me what I had in the trailer, I said “My drag bike, a home built 2lt V-Twin” and he was very interested in my work and he happened to mention he was into Hot Rods and he said he had an unusual head at home, he said it had a cylinder in it, rotating and no valves, and I nearly dropped my coffee on the floor because at the time, I was building my own wooden models to build my own rotary valves,

    so as you can imagine I was so keen to look at what this piece was,

    so I followed him back to this old falling down weather board cottage, the house was chock with car parts and all around the yard and he directed me down to this old shed and he got up on an oil drum and lifted down this head wrapped in a blanket and he unfolded the blanket.

    I wasn’t imagining much, but I went wobbly as it was a genuine Dunstan Rotary Valve, made in Melbourne by Dunstan himself, stamped no 29.

    This changed my whole concept of cylinder heads, it was a cast aluminium head, water-cooled with a beautifully cast iron rotor cylinder down through the centre of it with slots both sides for the ports and floating bronze seals.



    Since that awakening I have learn’t alot about David Dunstan and his heads.

    The type of head I am using on Big Ned is a Roland Cross design valve, he started his work in the early 20’s in England.



    2 Great Pioneers : Roland Cross and Aspen which you can research yourself.


    I have spent my life working on, modifying and building Poppet Valve engines and then converted over to a new religion… “Rotary Valves”.
    When you realise the advantages of a Rotary Valve over a Poppet Valve are staggering…. They are an addiction.

    End of quote.




    Now the discussion is about whether the inventors can, or cannot, put their idea in production, or make and test prototypes, or whether they can sell it to the manufacturers.

    Even if they cannot,after 20 years the idea will be free to be used by anybody (the scooter and sled manufacturers included) without paying any royalties.


    So,

    are there any technical objections?

    If yes, please write them down, or file a patent application to protect them, and then come and talk.

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  14. #44
    apriliaforum expert yzr750's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    4,135
    Quote Originally Posted by manolis8 View Post
    Hello all.

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos
    I built a rotary valve head for a 125 honda single 30yrs ago, ran it on my dyno with some good results as well, spent 80,000 quid on a patent back in 1985 and couldn't afford to fight infringements. A large corporation are still manufacturing that product to this day. A patent is only worth the amount you have to pay the lawyers in my experience.
    It's all very well coming up with all these ideas, putting them in to practice is the real test. Make it, test it, find the faults and then you wont have to troll the internet for free technical advice...............
    seesecurity.com.au

  15. #45
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    150
    Hello Yzr750

    Can you, please, provide the number of your rotary valve US patent?


    I don't want to infringe your patent with the recent patents US9,677,434 and GB2,525,704 granted for the PatRoVa rotary valve of pattakon.





    If you need more info than contained at http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatRoVa.htm, please let me know.

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Stick with the RS or go for a restricted 400!??
    By technoandy in forum RS125 Euro-archive
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-23-2003, 09:12 AM
  2. Giving up on the RS, traded it for a CBR250RR
    By Tokyo Rider in forum RS125 Euro-archive
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-21-2003, 02:29 AM
  3. The coolest Sprockets in the World...and now for Aprilia
    By micah apriliaforum com in forum SL1000 Falco Forum (all years)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-29-2002, 08:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •