Yet another MInelab patent - June 18th 2015

[Qiaozhi]

This new one references Paul Moody's (Moodz) Australian innovation patent.
Enjoy!

[moodz]

A reposte ... I enjoyed reading it ... the proof reader must have been asleep though because some paragraphs are poorly worded. Unfortunately this seems to be an overly complex attempt at duplicating my idea .. however any damping method using a current controlled sink / source (depending if you are damping a +ve or -ve flyback) with a switch ( diode or any other form of switch to coil ground ) and a negative feedback loop is a copy of my idea.

moodz

[Davor]

A good idea is indisputably a good idea, and most naturally it will end up in a marketing leader patent, regardless of whoever invented it first. I'm only a bit surprised they did not "discover" a self-biassing of an acceleration MOSFET yet. That would require some dramatical not finding of prior art that would be unheard of at marketing leader R&D.
Moodz, I respect you immensely, and I simply can't seem to understand what evil force made you file a patent.
Let me guess, the next marketing leader patent will involve moodz' discrimination. Or not, it is not patented yet - such strain on their R&D would be unheard of <sarc off>

[Teleno]

Moodz, they essentially copied your idea and try to obfuscate in order to hide it.

Their claim "controlling the T/R switch to control a characteristic of the back-emf decay to reduce a duration of the period of the back-emf decay" is broader than justified by the description because the embodiments only disclose one way to "control" the T/R swicth (your damping MOSFET) and it is your way: " [0111] ... to switch on the T/R switch configured as a constant current source".

What they've done is to file your idea in a more general language in order to make it broader in scope, but no working alternatives are given. It's a bogus patent, they should pay you royalties.

The alternative they propose is unfeasible. Their control loop regulates the delay for turning the damping MOSFET on, the constant current sink being fixed (yours is chaged by the control loop). A very cumbersome approach because you need resolution in the nanoseconds or better. The addition of a damping resistor spoils everything because it introduces an exponential decay, which is precisely what the "unwanted signal" problem they pretend to be solving.

In the end they'll implement your circuit with a dummy parallel resistor in the Mohms range, a fixed delay and then claim it's not your idea.

Certainly your patent can be improved (try a virtual ground at the source of the damping MOSFET and measure current instead of voltage), but not the way Minelab pretends to.