You are on page 1of 3

US Patent Application: 13/676,677 Michael Mater Intercooler Assembly First Office Action Response December 15, 2013

When comparing my application to other patents I can see obvious distinctions and similarities between all of the applications. Below I have summarized to the best of my knowledge the key points and features of each application US 3881445- May 6, 1975     “Water to Air” Heat Exchanger. Finned tube heat exchanger with integral channels (numerous channels/ tubes) for cooling medium/ fluid. Mounted internally of Intake Manifold, for cooling the air longitudinally (along the length if the core) over the fins of the heat exchanger. Fluid flows from one end of the heat exchanger and then doubles back onto itself exiting at the same end of the heat exchanger that it entered from. The fluid flow essentially forms a “U” shaped path. Mounted Close to the walls of the intake manifold/ housing assembly for channelling affect of air flow around core. Does not Rotate. It is a fixed assembly. Does not have ability to control temperature/ heat exchange through mechanical means. Relatively small in size.

   

US4565177- Jan 21, 1986    “Water to Air” Heat Exchanger. Finned tube heat exchanger with integral channels (2 channels/ tubes) for cooling medium/ fluid. Mounted internally of Intake manifold, for cooling the air longitudinally (along the length of the core) over the fins of the heat exchanger.

Michael Mater- US 13/676,677

Page 1 of 3

  

Fluid flows from one end of the heat exchanger and then doubles back onto itself exiting at the same end of the heat exchanger that it entered from. The fluid flow essentially forms a “U” shaped path. Does not rotate. It is a fixed assembly. Does not have ability to control temperature/ heat exchange through mechanical means. Relatively small in size.

European patent EP 1775440- Jan 19, 2007  Is an “Air to Air” Heat exchanger. Is not designed for use with a liquid cooling medium. If the heat exchanger is designed for use in cooling air with a liquid cooling medium then they will mix based upon the design of the heat exchanger. This would essentially destroy the engine introducing a liquid coolant medium into the intake air charge. Tube heat exchanger with many integral channels for heat exchange of air. Mounted externally of intake manifold. Heat exchanger is designed for remote placement on vehicle/ engine. The heat exchanger has to be piped to, similar to an external radiator. Rotates around a center axis/ shaft. Has the ability to control heat exchange through the rate of spin. Does not have external fins to cool air charge. Charge air is cooled through the tube itself. Relatively large in size. Very similar to “Thermal Wheel” technology.

      

My intercooler design:         “Water to Air” Heat Exchanger. Finned tube with integral channels for cooling medium (fluid or coolant). Mounted internally of Intake Manifold, for cooling the air longitudinally (along the length of the core) over the fins of the heat exchanger. Fluid flows through the heat exchanger, entering one side and exiting on the other side. The cooling fluid flows straight through the heat exchanger. Rotates the entire tube/ heat exchanger itself. Has the ability to control heat exchange through the rate of spin. External fins to cool charge air. Relatively small in size.

Below I have created a table which illustrates the main similarities and differences between the designs:

Michael Mater- US 13/676,677

Page 2 of 3

Specification Type of Heat Exchanger Placement relative to intake Manifold Rotates Air cooled over external fins Relative Size (to other applications) Number of Cooling Channels/ Tubes

US 3881445 “Water to Air” Internal No Yes Small Numerous

US4565177 “Water to Air” Internal No Yes Small 2

EP1775440 “Air to Air” External Yes No Large Numerous

US 13/676,677 (Michael Mater) “Water to Air” Internal Yes Yes Small Numerous

In summary my application US 13/676,677 is the only “Water to Air” intercooler that also mechanically Rotates, integral to the intake manifold in order to cool the heated charge air from the supercharger/ turbocharger. The adaptation of the rotation system allows for greater heat exchange between the cooling fluid (liquid) and the charge air. With the adaption of a rotational system the ability to mechanically tune or program the rate of heat exchange becomes possible. This ability leads to more predictable performance of the intercooler and engine system while increasing engine efficiency. While there are similarities between all of the fore-mentioned intercooler designs, I believe the key factors between the designs illustrate a significant difference to validate the uniqueness of my application. I believe there is a much greater difference between my application and patents US3881445, US4561445 for example, in which the key difference in my view is the number of cooling channels. I see very little difference between those two patents while I clearly see the adaptation of a rotation system in my design which those patents do not possess. EP1775440 is also an intercooler/ heat exchanger that rotates however it is not designed for use with a cooling fluid. I would equate this patent to a thermal wheel or similar technology that can be easily seen/ explained here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_wheel I have also created a website in which I detail more of the specifics of my application/ intercooler design: http://www.variablerateintercooling.com/index.html

Sincerely, Michael Mater

Michael Mater- US 13/676,677

Page 3 of 3