[Oeva-list] Smell Test?

Tue Jan 26 11:10:56 PST 2010

Inventors are naturally proud of their inventions---and millions of
inventors have gone as far as applying for patents, with millions of patents
being issued.

We all have ideas, some zany, some reasonable and a few, really great.  We
shouldn’t discourage ideas, prototyping and pushing the limits of what is
possible.

But even when designs have been shown to be feasible and to “work”, they
often come out to have limitations, perform poorly or not cost effective
compared to the alternatives.

OEVA members are not averse to diving into and pioneering use of new
technologies, trying them out before anyone else and even investing BIG in
them.

Examples include: ThunderSky LiIon and Evercel NiAir(?) batteries, APEX
Drive Labs’ brushless motors, ALLTRAX, Synkromotive and Café Electric motor
controllers and more.

Many or most of these endeavors proved worthwhile and led to production
quality products that many of us now use, but in some instances big money
was invested and people got burned.  We have had presentations by new
product developers, some with patented devices (e.g. the APEX brushless
motor) that received a lot of interest by our members.

In my opinion, we should be somewhat careful about who we allow to present
to our membership specifically because to do so can lend an air of
legitimacy and credibility to new product developers.  Yes, caveat emptor,
but I don’t think we want to be giving forum for developers who have a
concept that has no independently verifiable data available----we have
gotten burned even with that data---e.g. the first early ThunderSky
batteries tested fine.  I, for one, will not attend an OEVA meeting that
invites a speaker who uses an astrological link as part of the explanation
for why his motor is so great ( Point#2 of Evergreen’s “Invention
Notes/Description” page links to:
http://www.aloha.net/~johnboy/star.htg/David.gif ).  Symmetry is great, but
engineers expect better than this kind of an explanation.

Sincerely,

Myles Twete, P.E. – Electrical Engineering and Control Systems Design

P.S. – For those who’ve not been in OEVA for 15-yrs or longer, the most
interesting EV development/innovation to a few of us at the time was the
prospect of using flywheel or electro-mechanical energy storage instead of
electro-chemical batteries.  There were at least 3 companies working on this
technology at this time and looking into EV applications including SATCON
(supplied flywheel storage unit for Chrysler’s “Patriot” EV), American
Flywheel Systems (in Seattle, now p/o the successful Trinity/AFS company)
and others I can’t recall.  The technology was mature at that time including
flywheel dynamic and structural designs, vacuum tech, brushless
motor/generator, inverter and magnetic bearing suspension technology.  A
colleague of mine who owned a successful magnetic bearing company at the
time confidently stated in 1993 at a job interview I had with him that
within 2 years we’d be seeing EMB’s (electro-mechanical batteries) in EVs
and that the electro-chemical battery (ECB) would be history.  Energy and
power density forecast curves for EMB’s were shown to far outstrip the gains
predicted by ECB’s.  Fast forward 16+ years and where are we?  Can we go out
and buy an EMB for a car?  For a boat?  Yes and no----you could probably
purchase an AFS/Trinity system (intended for UPS server backup power), but
its size, weight and cost may make it prohibitive compared to the
alternatives---what went wrong with EMB’s?  Answer: On paper and in the lab,
these design concepts were amazing.  But outside the lab, where cost,
size/weight, vibration, temperature fluctuations, power-up/down, overload
and safety issues and other concerns play in, none of the designs have gone
to market for EVs.  Does that mean EMB’s were/are a bad idea?  No.  Does it
mean they are impractical?  Not likely, given the right design and
manufacturing approach to make them safe, reliable, performing and
inexpensive.  I personally believe that there are some great designs for
EMB’s out there that have been demonstrated in the lab, but are either
stymied to go into production due to patents (held by AFS/Trintity, Satcon,
Beacon Power or others) that deny others from using the technology without
licensing.  In short, a technology can be mature, high performing and have
great applicability and yet due to cost or other constraints, become
undesirable or impractical compared to the alternatives.  Widespread use of
flywheel energy storage, which was hailed in a 1973 Scientific American
article as the next big thing, is a key example of this as related to making
EVs able to have 200+ mile range and recharge within minutes.

From: oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org [mailto:oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org] On
Behalf Of Oliver
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 8:28 AM
To: Oeva-list at oeva.org
Subject: Re: [Oeva-list] Smell Test?

I’m confused.  I thought this group promoted innovation. Have any of you
tested Carey’s design and found it not to work?  He has obviously spent an
enormous amount of time, energy and personal funding getting to this point,
and is proud of his invention.  You respond by telling him to remove the
link?  WTF?

Keep at it Carey – the world is NEVER as flat as they tell you!

My 2 cents.

-Oliver

  _____  

From: oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org [mailto:oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org] On
Behalf Of Rob Stewert
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 8:19 AM
To: carey at evergreenelectricvehicles.com
Cc: Oeva-list at oeva.org
Subject: Re: [Oeva-list] Smell Test?

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Bob Stewert

Portland, OR

rbstewert at gmail.com

On Jan 26, 2010, at 7:27 AM, Carey Dahlen wrote:

Smell Test? 

I have never been attacked like this in all my life! I had to ask my self
what in the hell is going on here. It has become quite clear I am not
communicating effectively; this whole thing has hit a nerve, spiraling out
of control. 

I would never insult the intelligence of this worthy association. 

I see a group of people who are trying to influence positive change in the
electric vehicle industry in our region. I am also. I have only been a
member of this group for a short time. I’ve read your messages, Like me, I
see you are all problem solvers! 

Damage Control! In order to stop the bleeding and put an end to all this
nonsense, let me make the following crystal clear! 

My design has absolutely nothing to do with the smoke and mirrors of so
called “Free Energy” or free energy machines period! I will not be
associated with scams or be labeled as a charlatan! I am a hard working
honest Christian man! 

I have never even heard of Joseph Newman or Bruce DePalma. Nor, do I care
what they do! or claim! it must be preposterous. 

I should stop right here and let the dust settle! 

But the amount of character assignation was way over the top. A man is not a
man if he does not defend himself. To imply my work is not legitimate and
that I am some sort of bottom feeder seeking to steal away funding is just
plain wrong! 

I am a legitimate researcher and will continue to do legitimate research! 

If anything I have been naïve. 

My simple basic 3D design is based on mature electric motor and electric
generator science working with-in the laws of physics and conservation. 

It takes power to make power! 

My design is 100% about increasing output efficiency with a new frame or
platform, which will allow for more options in the field of Power
Generation! 

What is wrong with a hybrid motor generator? 

I have no disclaimer. I will back up my claims. My story is my description
of how I came up with the hybrid concept. The “Star of David” configuration
accurately lays out component locations, giving designers and builders an
easy overview of the expandability of the machines design. 

To date I have followed all the rules. After conceiving my hybrid design, I
began to search the web and the USPTO’s data base to see if anyone had
already patented this concept. I paid my patent attorney for a professional
patent searcher. The professional search came up with about a dozen similar
designs but, did not exclude me from moving forward. I then built my first
prototype and used the data to draft my patent application. I have paid all
the required fees and my patent documents will be published by the USPTO
March 2010. 

I will have my petition filed this week with the USPTO to take advantage of
the pilot program for green technologies. I am actively seeking funding to
take my design to the next level, full size working models that I can use to
produce the needed data to substantiate or verify my claims. That’s how the
system works! 

I realize for the most part I did not communicate properly in the beginning.

Let the record show I was the one to introduce this new concept and shared
my abstract with this group at no cost or obligation because I am excited
about everything I have accomplished in this field! 

I am Proud of all my accomplishments! 

Sincerely, 

Carey Dahlen, Master Electrician - General Supervising Electrician #5522S
for the Great State of Oregon. 

Carey Dahlen, CEO 
EverGreen Electric Vehicles, LLC

3D Propulsion, LLC 
Website; evergreenelectricvehicles.com 
Email; carey at evergreenelectricvehicles.com

Business; 541-227-9063

_______________________________________________
Oeva-list mailing list
Oeva-list at oeva.org
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/oeva-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20100126/c8cb1c91/attachment-0001.html 