Copyright vs Patent (intellectual property)

[Russ]

I see where you're coming from, but don't see that as solid grounds for splitting hairs.

1. OP makes it sound like he's developed his "approach"/algorithm/magic formula/whatever for his entire industry. Heck, with a 90% savings who wouldn't want it?
2. Who's to say whether or not his customer "absorbed all the development costs"? Who cares? If I magically came up with an operating system that was an order of magnitude "better" than Vista, I might charge everybody for it too. Doesn't matter how much "it cost" me to make.

Like I said in the last post (and others have been alluding to), depends on how you sell it to your customer.

It's not a magic formula haha, or anything like that. It's just a different way of looking at the machines.
A few years ago I came up with Rapid Recovery, which is now utilized by the biggest manufacturer in the industry. Balancing a customer's needs with the abilities of the machines is all I do.
And to allude to some of the 'more cynical' posters, no it's not hot idle. I sell a fully automated hot idle for around $3,500.
No more babysitting a machine when they have so many other things to do.

 

[Pierre]

It's not a magic formula haha, or anything like that. It's just a different way of looking at the machines....

---------------------------------
"You're ripping us off!", Steve shouted, raising his voice even higher. "I trusted you, and now you're stealing from us!"

But Bill Gates just stood there coolly, looking Steve directly in the eye, before starting to speak in his squeaky voice.

"Well, Steve, I think there's more than one way of looking at it. I think it's more like we both had this rich neighbor named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it."
---------------------------------

 

[Clay B.]

---------------------------------
"You're ripping us off!", Steve shouted, raising his voice even higher. "I trusted you, and now you're stealing from us!"

But Bill Gates just stood there coolly, looking Steve directly in the eye, before starting to speak in his squeaky voice.

"Well, Steve, I think there's more than one way of looking at it. I think it's more like we both had this rich neighbor named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it."
---------------------------------

That is so sadistically funny. Sad part is they are still at it.

 

[Tom Jenkins]

I see where you're coming from, but don't see that as solid grounds for splitting hairs.

1. OP makes it sound like he's developed his "approach"/algorithm/magic formula/whatever for his entire industry. Heck, with a 90% savings who wouldn't want it?
2. Who's to say whether or not his customer "absorbed all the development costs"? Who cares? If I magically came up with an operating system that was an order of magnitude "better" than Vista, I might charge everybody for it too. Doesn't matter how much "it cost" me to make.

Like I said in the last post (and others have been alluding to), depends on how you sell it to your customer.

The amount of savings has nothing to do with patentability. The three criteria I listed earlier are all the patent office cares about.

As to "who cares" who absorbed all the development costs, the answer is all the lawyers in the country. That defines who is at risk and whether or not the development was a work for hire.

The Microsoft example was on point - I didn't assume any development risk or cost, the Microsoft shareholders did. They have intellectual property rights to Windows, I don't. The programmers who came up with the search engine puppy or that stupid clippy were doing work for hire - they don't get protperty rights either.

 

[parky]

I agree with almost the last 3 replies, the one about microsoft is a good one, they financed windows & then sold a product (same as a machine developed "for Sale", when a supplier writes code for a customer where that customer has paid the development cost then it should become their property, I'm not saying that code developed there should not be used elsewhere as you have to give the developer some credit & possibly save a bit on development on other projects (as long as it is reflected in the price).

However in the case of a £1,000,000 plant the cost of the software could be in the order of £100,000 to £200,000, that is a big chunk paid for by the customer in other words when quoted, it probably contained an algorithym to calculate the number of I/O, x bytes per minute etc.

or more likely a wet finger in the air "yep thats about right" + a good 20% just incase.

I worked for systems houses for 20 odd years, we were not machine builders just designed, built & programmed control systems, we never protected code, all source code was supplied to the customer, after all they paid for it.

Quite frankly I don't see that anybody in the realms of control systems claiming that the plc software is so good that it's worth protecting, in many a case it's far quicker to start from scratch than to decipher someone elses code.

As far as I'm concerned, it's the application & what it does that can be protected (by patent) not the code as once you know what it does anybody with a good knolwege can write code.
PLC code is a string of already written functions whether it be simple logic or more complex maths.
If somewone writes a function that takes two variables number crunches it & returns a value how can you copyright that, it's probably been done a million times before.
I still believe that if you modify an application you purchased to improve it or change it's function to suit your process then there should be no comeback, however if you try to re-sell it for financial gain then that is another matter.

 

[surferb]

I stand corrected.

The amount of savings has nothing to do with patentability. The three criteria I listed earlier are all the patent office cares about.

As to "who cares" who absorbed all the development costs, the answer is all the lawyers in the country. That defines who is at risk and whether or not the development was a work for hire.

The Microsoft example was on point - I didn't assume any development risk or cost, the Microsoft shareholders did. They have intellectual property rights to Windows, I don't. The programmers who came up with the search engine puppy or that stupid clippy were doing work for hire - they don't get protperty rights either.

 

[krk]

I have this feeling of deja vu .....

 

[Russ]

I have this feeling of deja vu .....

Of course. I wrote that post when I worked out a safe way to rapidly cool down the units (automatically). Over the past 8 years (almost) I've helped out clients do cool down these pieces of equipment manually, adjusting the logic myself. Cooling down the machines is necessary for numerous reasons. Unfortunately, whenever the unit is shut off the plants are out of production (weekends/holidays), and if the client can save a lot of time by rapidly cooling the machine down then they're going to want to do that. I added a key switch, and now one of my clients can enable this function without the need to contact a plc guy to help. In fact they used it this past weekend.
The tens of thousands should have been 60k, but I figured you'd get the idea. I find it to be a sore spot. You can call me a nervous nancy if you'd like, but I feel I have good reason to be concerned. Unless of course 60K doesn't mean much to you?
I reposted the question because I thought that there might be some new idea's. This isn't a static group.

The routine that sold for 60K is a data collection routine. While it's nifty, it doesn't save the clients money. The thing I just did can save this client a bunch of money. If it can save them a good amount of coin, then anyone with an RTO can reap benefits from this.
Last time I looked there are a lot of these things out there. Hence the concern about protecting this from competition.

 

[Clay B.]

Maybe I miss something

You said you created a routine to cool down a RTO. Is that a RTO as in Oxidizer. Used to burn off solvents in exhaust air?

If that is the case I am confused as to why you would want a rapid cool. I know this is off topic I am just curious if that is what you are talking about.

 

[Russ]

You said you created a routine to cool down a RTO. Is that a RTO as in Oxidizer. Used to burn off solvents in exhaust air?

If that is the case I am confused as to why you would want a rapid cool. I know this is off topic I am just curious if that is what you are talking about.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Cooling down an RTO takes time (with normal shut down rates)... If a plant is down for 2 days on the weekend, that time has to be maximized. Some of the things I've used ACD for.

Hot face inspections,
fixing hot spots
washdowns
essentially any service that requires the combustion blowers to be shut down to minimize heat migration through the combustion duct, possibly damaging wiring/blowers/scanners. That's the other role of the blowers. Which is why during an extended power outage removing the scanners is important (heat migration can hurt them).

even such things as inlet/outlet duct cleaning could benefit from ACD, since personel inside would feel the effects of heat migration (due to the combustion blowers running). Then again the combustion chamber access door can be opened with them running. However it's a really dumb(read bad/dangerous/etc.) idea to open the hatch with the temp > 500F. So being able to cool the unit down below that temp quickly is important.
On top of which.. if the installation used structured block instead of that ceramic saddle (block is much better in many situations) ya don't want to hit the hot face with air that's much cooler (amb-ient temps) when the chamber is much above 500F, unless fracturing the block is exciting to ya.

This past weekend a gas meter was installed on one of the units (it had failed a few months ago), since they shut power off to the unit the comb blower was going to be off, they put the unit into ACD. It allowed the plant to safely shut down power without risking damage to their equipment. They had finished the job by the time I arrived on site (about 10 hours after shutdown).
To a plant time is money. Saving time saves them money. They'd much rather pay contractors for work on Saturday, than on Sunday. (or should that be hahaha).

 

[timbo_uk]

You said you created a routine to cool down a RTO. Is that a RTO as in Oxidizer. Used to burn off solvents in exhaust air?

If that is the case I am confused as to why you would want a rapid cool. I know this is off topic I am just curious if that is what you are talking about.

I think he meant Return On Investment,(<EDIT> No he didnt!</EDIT>) rather that Regenerative Thermal Oxidiser. (I have one too )

BUT, if he means the later he now has my attention too!
Our RTO runs 24/7. Keeping it up to temperature during weekend days (we have weekend night shifts) uses a lot of gas. I have been toying with idea of monitoring the cooldown time and the re-heat time as to whether we can add a timer to shut off at 6am Saturday, but be ready for operation by 8pm.

 

[Russ]

I think he meant Return On Investment, rather that Regenerative Thermal Oxidiser. (I have one too )

BUT, if he means the later he now has my attention too!
Our RTO runs 24/7. Keeping it up to temperature during weekend days (we have weekend night shifts) uses a lot of gas. I have been toying with idea of monitoring the cooldown time and the re-heat time as to whether we can add a timer to shut off at 6am Saturday, but be ready for operation by 8pm.

The standard belief is that if the unit is going to be down for less than 36 hours than it'd be much better to place the unit into Idle mode.
A honda supplier runs one shift a day, and has an oxidizer. What I did for them was setup an automated Idle Mode. At the end of the shift the unit automatically goes offline (15hz fan speed), isolation damper closed (if you have one, else All source dampers are closed), and the combustion chamber temp set at 1000F.
Now they have ceramic saddle, which doesn't need a burner ramp, however it's well known that they have overshoot. So.. at the conclusion of the Idle Mode time (preset in the program and fully adjustable by the plant) the unit will do a controlled ramp, which will prevent overshoot, and then it will automatically soak the block for X time (also adjustable and currently set at 15min). Then it will go online.
This works great. They also have a weekend Idle mode, cause they don't run on the weekends. It will automatically come out of Idle mode a few hours before Monday's shift begins and auto-ramp, soak, and then go online.
The plant has much more important things to do with their time than babysitting a machine. It's worked great for them, and is saving them over $75/year in gas consumption alone. (there are a number of other costs, but the most obvious is the gas consumption).

 

[timbo_uk]

Russ,

Just missed your post whilst typing mine!
Did your RTO not have a Automatic Cool Down Mode? Ours has from the factory anyway?

Idle mode? Thats what ours is missing I think. Our Normal operation temperature is just over 820C, if I could automatically change setpoint to (EG) 400c when not required, the surely energy savings here! The only modes we have are run, shutdown or cooldown.

What make are you working with, ours is Eisenmann.

(For those who are now totally lost, http://www.eisenmann.de/EN/download/Exhaust_Air_Purification.pdf)

 

[timbo_uk]

Ahh, basically what I was thinking.

Side stepping slighting (OT???) We are a gravure printing plant, and for customer reasons they are trying to go to more waterbased inks. But I have now spotted ("them upstairs" not even thought about this bit) that the RTO very rarely gets to auto thermal due to the reduced solvent loading going in; this in turn is cuasing the need for the Gas burner to be on for more and more. Thats not good for the monthly gas bill!

Going more back on topic, your "system" sounds great, have you thought about going alone and getting round all companies with an RTO and supplying your services. Some government (envioromental dept must have a record of them) Maybe a small fixed fee, then a % of customers savings?

 

[Russ]

Russ,

Just missed your post whilst typing mine!
Did your RTO not have a Automatic Cool Down Mode? Ours has from the factory anyway?

Idle mode? Thats what ours is missing I think. Our Normal operation temperature is just over 820C, if I could automatically change setpoint to (EG) 400c when not required, the surely energy savings here! The only modes we have are run, shutdown or cooldown.

What make are you working with, ours is Eisenmann.

(For those who are now totally lost, http://www.eisenmann.de/EN/download/Exhaust_Air_Purification.pdf)

I've heard of Eisenmann, but I've never had the pleasure to work on them. Looks like they're now doing a variation on the Reeco RL (bought by Durr in 2000, though Reeco started doing rotary valves in the 90s). I wonder if it achieves 99% DRE? The RL's are well known for 99% DRE, though they had to work out some fun kinks (which fortunately they've done). Also the big problem with rotary valves is power outages damaging the internal structure because of heat migration. Those can be a real pita. Though I do like their burner placement, but then again don't like it from a maintenance issue and also a heat migration issue (could be really bad). Unfortunately I'm not a fan of compressed air in systems. They're much more of a headache than any hydraulic system I've worked with (oh the stories lol). Luckily the principles are the same for all of these units. Durr's gone to a small gear box controlled by a VFD to index their rotary valve systems. The rotary valve units should be good in obtaining a 'self sustain' mode (though I think you call it 'auto thermal'). When the loading gets high the cc temps can get pretty dang high.
My personel favorite system is the Reeco starship (I love the look of the thing, too bad they used saddle haha). I've played with a variety of systems: Durr/Reeco/Salem/Englehard(sic), though now they're all durr. I've worked with 2 tower, 3 tower, and 5 tower units. Even a Huntington 6 tower once, but that was long ago (slc 5/01 to boot!). Durr's Rotary valve system isn't bad. Though to be honest I still prefer the tower systems, cause they last forever. One of the units I work on was installed in 1989, and it just obtained a 99% DRE last year.
The units I've worked on typically have online/offline/shutdown. The shutdown is also a 'cool down' in that the fan typically runs at minimum speed for X time, or until X temp is reached. Now almost all the units have an 'idle mode' which works well.
It's funny that you mention the fee and %. Because that's exactly what I'm hoping to do. Right now utility conservation is critical to a plants bottom line. Almost all of the routine I've written were done to help the plant save time/money/keep in production as long as possible with minimal downtime, or to recover very quickly from an inadvertent shutdown.
I have my own consulting company, and am looking to do this very thing in a similar way to what you've mentioned.