Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Tesla, Inc.' started by Steph, Feb 27, 2012.
Will this be on the Model S?
Sounds pretty cool anyway
We've talked about exactly this here before. Can TMC claim prior art?
They'd better be careful with the terminology though. It might start a whole thread.
Yes, good find.
This would be useful if IBM's lithium-air cells work out. Lithium-air cells tend to have horrible cycle life and power, which makes them more suitable in this kind of "hybrid" arrangement.
In the patent application:
 During step 311, if controller 107 determines that the current SOC of battery pack 103 is not greater than the second preset minimum (step 315), then the current SOC of metal-air battery pack 101 is determined (step 317) and compared to a third preset minimum SOC, i.e., SOCMA-Min (step 319). Preferably the third preset minimum is set at the absolute minimum SOC that the metal-air battery pack is allowed to reach. Typically this minimum is selected to prevent irreparable damage to the metal-air battery pack (e.g., 10% SOC, 5% SOC, 0% SOC or some other value). As long as the SOC of the metal-air pack is above this minimum (step 321), then the metal-air battery pack is used to charge the non-metal-air battery pack 103 (step 323).
That would take care of the bricking possibilities
This idea was already presented by the Technical University Munic half year ago. They are using a zinc-air battery as a range extender to the primary Lithium-Ion battery. I think, this kind of idea are not be possible to patent (maybe except in america).
An idea cannot be patented I believe. Only the working prototype. Much more difficult than just having an idea... Here in Canada anyway.
Another acronym. Now we have a BER-EV
Yes - I was about to say the same thing. The patent system is broken here.
US Patent Application 20120041624 - Electric Vehicle Extended Range Hybrid Battery Pack System
Application 20120041624 Filed on December 8, 2010. Published on February 16, 2012
Who knows, maybe they bought the patent, made it better and are filing with the new concept.
These guys are good
Maybe some journalist will pick-up this story and go in the field ask some questions and write an article somewhere.
Would sure create a nice hype!
You can't patent a pure idea, but you certainly can patent something that can be built, and there is no requirement for a working prototype. Claims typically refer to "apparatus" and "means" ("method").
This is the first filing, and no change to listed inventors.
When you file a patent in the US, you can ask for publication to be delayed. This is most likely what happened this time. The filing date (8 Dec 2010) is the important one (for protection, as well as invalidation via prior art).
The USPTO typically only checks their own database for prior art. If you have published evidence of an invention that predates the patent submission then you pretty much have to go to court to get it invalidated (sometimes the patent owner just backs off, so they can keep the patent in the hopes that it will deters others, even if it won't deter you).
Good patents have claims structured so that even if one or more claims are invalidated, the other claims are unaffected. This will restrict the coverage of the patent but it may still be sufficient for the patent holder's purposes.
That sounds fairly quick, actually. I've had a patent take three years to get processed.
MUTE - TUM ELECTRIC MOBILITY: Range Extender
I guess those are primary zinc airs?
They are only up to publication stage at the moment. I guess another year or so before it even gets examined.
Publication is typically 18 months from the earliest filing date... since this app claims the benefit of a provisional filed 10 Aug 2010, it is right on time. (It is also one of many applications claiming the benefit of that provisional).:biggrin: