User:Gtorrisi/homework3.html: Difference between revisions

From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Gtorrisi (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Gtorrisi (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 7: Line 7:


<br><font size=4>Obvious</font>
<br><font size=4>Obvious</font>
<br>In light of the prior art of both Graham and Glencoe (listed above), Graham's new patent, no. '798, is obvious.
<br>In light of the prior art of both Graham and Glencoe (listed above), Graham's newer patent (number 2,627,798)
, is obvious.  One of the main issues addressed in patent '798 is that the shank of the plow would contact and wear against the fixed upper plate in his previous design in patent no. '811.  This upper plate was difficult and expensive to replace.  The shank in Graham's original patent is hinged beneath the shank such that when the plow hits an object and flexes, the shank will end up contacting the fixed upper plate.  In his new design, this problem is fixed by placing the pivot point above the shank so that when it flexes, the shank pivots away from the upper plate, rather than into it.  This alone is a fairly obvious fix of the original design.  When analyzing the kinematics of patent '811, it can be easily seen how there will be interference between the shank and the upper plate during operation.  Without drastically changing the design, the easiest solution is to change the location of the pivot point, namely to place it at the end above the shank, exactly where he has placed it in his patent no. '798.

Revision as of 21:38, 3 February 2011

Patent in Question:
Clamp for Vibrating Shank Plows patent number 2,627,798

Prior Art:
Glencoe Clamp patent number 2,739,518
Vibrating Plow and Mounting Therefor patent number 2,493,811


Obvious
In light of the prior art of both Graham and Glencoe (listed above), Graham's newer patent (number 2,627,798) , is obvious. One of the main issues addressed in patent '798 is that the shank of the plow would contact and wear against the fixed upper plate in his previous design in patent no. '811. This upper plate was difficult and expensive to replace. The shank in Graham's original patent is hinged beneath the shank such that when the plow hits an object and flexes, the shank will end up contacting the fixed upper plate. In his new design, this problem is fixed by placing the pivot point above the shank so that when it flexes, the shank pivots away from the upper plate, rather than into it. This alone is a fairly obvious fix of the original design. When analyzing the kinematics of patent '811, it can be easily seen how there will be interference between the shank and the upper plate during operation. Without drastically changing the design, the easiest solution is to change the location of the pivot point, namely to place it at the end above the shank, exactly where he has placed it in his patent no. '798.