Patent Grant
10175701
The disclosures of the '010 and '516 applications and the '198 patent are hereby incorporated by reference.
This invention relates to manufacture of plastic articles and more particularly relates to pneumatic conveyance and processing of plastic resin pellets prior to molding or extrusion of those pellets into a finished or semi-finished plastic product.
In this patent application, injection and compression molding presses and extruders are collectively referred to as “process machines.”
The plastics industry is very diversified; there are thousands of different products, hundreds of materials, and dozens of processes, and all are very different from one another. The only thing all these differences share in common is that the source material is some type of plastic.
Equipment sold to this industry is, therefore, very diversified in design. Plastics factories have multiple process machines, sometimes several hundred in one location. Virtually all plastics fabricating operations require that each process machine, namely a molding press or an extruder, be supplied automatically with the required raw resin material on a continuous basis. This resin may be supplied in large boxes, called Gaylords, in fiber drums, in 50 pound bags, or more typically may be delivered by bulk truck or rail car, with the resin material then being transferred in bulk into storage silos. In all cases the resin material must be further distributed throughout the plant to each and every process machine. For that reason a great deal of design and capital expense is devoted to the automatic distribution of the raw resin material throughout the plant.
These resin distribution systems, more commonly referred to as “Loading Systems”, must deal with many variables. One set of variables includes the type, shape, size and consistency of the granular material.
Resin pellets, nominally about ⅛ inch in size, come in various shapes, with round, square, and cylindrical being the most common.
Flowing resin powder is also an option, and very fine but free flowing resin pellets and other granular materials may be conveyed as well.
The design variables to be considered for each customer include:
In all of these areas, system designers look to find improved methods and solutions whenever possible.
One of the most important considerations is to hold a correct velocity for the conveyed resin material. The type of resin material dictates the target conveying speed. To maximize the resin material transfer rate, a high conveying speed is preferred, and air speed in any case must be sufficient to keep the resin pellets suspended and moving in the air stream. But velocity must be limited so as not to damage the pellets. Hard brittle pellets can fracture and break when conveyed, resulting in excessive dust.
Softer pellets can skid along the conduit walls, causing “angel hair” as a result of the plastic resin melting at the point of high speed contact with the conduit wall; this leaves a thin film on the wall. Strings of very thin “angel hair” accumulate, effectively reducing diameter of the conduit and causing problems in the system.
Air speed and resin conveying velocity are directly related to pump capacity (rated CFM) and horsepower, as well as conveying line diameter. There is always a correct velocity “range” for each type of resin material. It is a design challenge to assure that resin material is conveyed within the correct velocity range.
Conveying distances affect system design. Conveying over short distances requires a less powerful vacuum source then over longer distances. Systems are generally sized to produce the best compromise for material velocity between the shortest and longest conveying distance.
Required conveying rate usually dictates line size (tube diameter), and this in turn dictates the CFM required to maintain correct velocity in a given diameter conduit. This means different tube sizes in the same system can be a problem if one vacuum pump is to draw air and resin through several different diameter conveying lines. Pumps have known CFM ratings. Pulling air through a small tube will result in higher velocity flow than pulling the same CFM through a larger tube.
Excessive velocity can damage pellets.
The type of vacuum pump to be selected is important. Regenerative blowers deliver wide ranging CFM depending on vacuum level. Positive displacement type pumps deliver high vacuum levels, and have a flatter CFM curve over their vacuum range. Regenerative blowers are quieter and generally cost less. Positive displacement blowers may require sound enclosures and tend to cost more, but are generally more reliable and more forgiving as respecting dust in the air.
The simplest systems use a fixed speed motor to drive the vacuum pump, and a single size conveying line to serve all receivers regardless of distance, rate requirement, or material.
Current resin central loading systems concerned with conveying granular plastic resin pellets from a storage area for molding or extrusion typically include a vacuum pump or pumps and multiple receivers.
In some systems, with many receivers, several small pumps are used.
It would be less expensive to use only one, or fewer, larger pumps. However, a larger pump may draw too much air with resulting damage to the material being conveyed. While a larger pump could load several receivers at once, there is a risk that an “open” line, namely a line pulling only air, and no resin material, would cause the vacuum to drop too much, and no resin would load. Also, when only one receiver is loading resin, air velocity might be too high, again with a risk of damaging the resin.
Nevertheless, in facilities that fabricate plastic products by molding or extrusion, it is common to use such vacuum loading systems to pneumatically convey pellets of thermoplastic resin, prior to molding or extrusion of those pellets into a finished or semi-finished product. The plastic resin pellets are typically purchased in 50 pound bags, 200 pound drums, or 1,000 pound containers commonly referred to as “Gaylords.”
A preferred approach for conveying plastic resin pellets from a storage location to a process machine, which approach is often used in larger facilities, is to install a central vacuum pump or even several vacuum pumps, connected by common vacuum lines to multiple “receivers.”
Vacuum pumps connected to the vacuum lines draw vacuum, namely air at pressure slightly below atmospheric, as the vacuum pump sucks air through the “vacuum” line. The suction moves large quantities of air which carries thermoplastic resin pellets through the “vacuum” line.
An alternative is to use positive pressure produced by a blower or the exhaust side of a vacuum pump. With such an approach, the positive pressure results in a movement of substantial amounts of air which may be used to carry the plastic resin pellets. However, the vacuum approach of drawing or sucking pellets through the system conduits is preferable to the positive pressure approach of pushing the resin pellets through the system conduits.
In practice, vacuum pumps are preferred and vacuum lines are desirable in part because power requirements to create the required vacuum necessary to draw plastic resin pellets through the lines are lower than the power requirements if the plastic resin pellets are pushed through the lines by a blower or by the exhaust side of a vacuum pump. When vacuum is used, the static pressure within the line may be not much less than atmospheric. When positive pressure is used, the dynamic pressure of the air flowing through the line must be relatively high in order to move an adequate quantity of plastic resin pellets.
As used herein, and in light of the foregoing explanation, the terms “vacuum pump” and “blower” are used interchangeably.
When one or more central vacuum pumps are connected to multiple receivers, a receiver is typically located over each temporary storage hopper, in which the plastic resin pellets are temporarily stored before being molded or extruded. A temporary storage hopper is typically associated with each process machine.
In current practice, the receiver is connected by a control wire to a central control system. The control system works by selectively opening a vacuum valve located in each receiver, allowing one or several vacuum pumps to work in sequence drawing “vacuum”, i.e. below atmospheric pressure air, to carry the pellets among and to multiple receivers as individual ones of the receivers, positioned over individual hoppers associated with the individual process machines, require additional plastic resin pellets. The receiver for a given hopper-process machine combination is actuated by opening the vacuum valve located in or near the receiver, causing the receiver to supply plastic resin pellets by gravity feed into the hopper from where the pellets may be fed further by gravity downwardly into the associated process machine.
Large, high capacity industrial vacuum pumps are reliable and are suited to heavy duty industrial use. Large high capacity vacuum pumps allow long conveying distances for the plastic resin pellets. Currently available large capacity vacuum pumps permit plastic resin pellets to be conveyed over distances of 200 feet or more using vacuum drawn by the pump. Use of such high capacity vacuum pumps results in a big rush of below atmospheric pressure air through the line, carrying the plastic resin pellets over a long distance.
Operators of plastic manufacturing facilities prefer to buy plastic resin pellets in bulk, in rail cars or tanker trucks. Bulk purchases result in cost savings. Plastic resin pellets delivered in bulk are typically pumped into large silos for storage. In a large manufacturing facility, the distance from a plastic resin pellet storage silo to a process machine may be several hundred feet, or more. Accordingly, when plastic resin pellets are purchased in bulk, a central vacuum-powered conveying system, powered by one or more large, high capacity industrial vacuum pumps, is a necessity.
Typically, large central plastic resin pellet conveying systems have one or more vacuum pumps, each typically from 5 to 20 horsepower. These central systems include central controls connected by wire to each receiver associated with each process machine in the facility. Typically eight, sixteen, thirty-two or sixty-four receivers, each associated with a process machine, may be connected to and served by the central plastic resin pellet vacuum conveying system. Of course, the higher the number of receivers served by the system, the higher the cost.
A factor to be considered in designing such a system is the speed of the plastic resin pellets as they flow through a conduit as the plastic resin pellets are carried by the moving air stream drawn by the vacuum pump. If air flow is too slow, the plastic resin pellets fall out of the air stream and lie on the bottom of the conduit, with resulting risk of clogging the conduit. If air flow is too fast, the plastic resin pellets can skid along the conduit surface. In such case, harder, more brittle plastic resin pellets may be damaged, resulting in dust within the conduit, which when drawn into the vacuum pump can damage the vacuum pump and render the system inoperative. Softer plastic resin pellets heat up and can melt from friction when contacting the conduit interior surface. This results in “angel hair”—long, wispy-thin strands of plastic film which eventually clog the conduit and cause the system to shut down.
For these reasons, pneumatic plastic resin pellet conveying systems must be designed to produce desired, reasonable conveying speeds for the plastic resin pellets.
Currently, conveying speed of the plastic resin pellets is most often controlled by controlling air flow, measured in cubic feet per minute, and varying the desired and designed cubic feet per minute based on conduit diameter, with a larger diameter conduit requiring more cubic feet per minute of air flow to maintain proper air flow speed through the conduit. Controlling air flow, measured in cubic feet per minute, is conventionally done by properly specifying the vacuum pump by capacity and, in some cases, by varying speed of the vacuum pump as the vacuum pump draws the air in a “vacuum” condition through the conduit, carrying plastic resin pellets in the moving, below atmospheric pressure air. Controlling cubic feet per minute of air flow is an indirect way of controlling plastic resin pellet speed as the plastic resin pellets flow through a conduit of a given diameter.
Typically, a 2 inch diameter conduit requires about 60 cubic feet per minute of air flow to convey typical plastic resin pellets. A 2½ inch diameter conduit typically requires about 100 cubic feet per minute of air flow to convey typical plastic resin pellets. To achieve these desired air flow volume flow rates, a conventional designer must carefully match the horsepower of a vacuum pump, which has a given cubic feet of air per minute rating, to a selected size conduit, taking into consideration the average distance the plastic resin pellets must be conveyed through the conduit from a storage silo to a receiver or loader. If this results in selection of a 5 horsepower blower/vacuum pump, then a given facility may require several such blowers/vacuum pumps, with each blower/vacuum pump supplying only a selected number of receivers.
A single plastic resin molding or extruding facility might theoretically require a 20 horsepower blower and the corresponding cubic feet per minute capability for the conveyance provided by the single blower to meet the total conveying requirements for plastic resin pellets throughout the facility. However, a single twenty horsepower blower would result in far too high a conveying speed for the plastic resin pellets through any reasonable size conduit. As a result, the conveying system for the plastic resin pellets in a large facility is necessarily divided and powered by three or four smaller blowers, resulting in three or four different, separate systems for conveyance of plastic resin pellets. Sometimes several blowers are connected to a single set of receivers, with one or more of the extra blowers turning “on” only when required to furnish the required extra cubic feet per minute of air flow. This is controlled by a central station monitoring all receivers and all blowers, with the central station being programmed to maintain all of the hoppers associated with the process machines in a full condition, wherever those hoppers are located throughout the facility.
Even with careful planning and design, results achieved by such pneumatic plastic resin pellet conveying systems are not consistent. Air flow speed and cubic feet per minute capacity of blowers often vary and are outside of selected design and specification values.
The instant invention provides an improvement to known pneumatic plastic resin pellet conveying systems, reducing the costs of those systems while providing consistent control of delivered cubic feet per minute of air. The invention also facilitates easy expansion of the pneumatic plastic resin pellet conveying system as the system grows. Such expandable systems are made feasible by an inventive air flow limiter embodying aspects of this invention.
In one aspect of this invention, air flow control devices, most desirably of the type newly disclosed herein and only slightly less desirably of the type disclosed in co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/185,016 entitled “Air Flow Regulator”, filed 20 Feb. 2014 in the name of Stephen B. Maguire, are added to each receiver so that the air pulled from any single receiver at the correct predetermined, preselected flow rate. This prevents excessive flow rates and “open” lines that dump too much air into the system.
Use of these air flow limiters allow one large pump to be used without risk to the system or to the resin being conveyed. An added advantage of a very large pump is that it can fill multiple receivers simultaneously with resin. As used herein, the term “receiver” denotes the type of apparatus disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,089,794; 7,066,689, and 8,753,432. The disclosures of these patents are hereby incorporated by reference.
The invention allows receivers to “load” the resin the instant there is demand for material by dropping the material downwardly into a gravimetric blender or directly into a process machine. The receiver need not wait in the “queue” to load because no sequencing of the receivers is required. Each receiver is always “ready to go.”
A central control station is not required, and neither is wiring from each receiver to a central control station, thus further reducing costs. As a result, there are one or several large vacuum pumps, with receivers that stand alone without need for a central control, and an air flow limiter on each receiver assures proper and constant flow rate. This facilitates reducing the speed of the vacuum pump, to hold the desired vacuum level in the lines. This is in contrast to running the vacuum pump at full speed all the time.
“CFM” is a term referring to a cubic foot of air regardless of the density of the air. “SCFM” refers to a cubic foot of air at standard temperature and pressure, namely 70° F. at sea level. The air flow limiter holds SCFM constant. This means that air flow through the air flow limiter will be faster when the air is thin, such as at high altitudes, and slower when the air is thick, such as at sea-level. However, in both cases (or any case), the air flow limiter maintains SCFM, namely air flow in standard cubic feet per minute, constant. Stated differently, so long as the SCFM is held steady, as is the case with an air flow limiter, the same weight of air, or number of air molecules, flows through the limiter regardless of conditions. Air flow rate through the limiter may change in terms of the speed of the air, but in all cases the quantity of air flowing, measured in standard cubic feet per minute, is constant.
“VFD” (Variable Frequency Drive) motors allow vacuum pumps to operate at different speeds, and therefore at different CFM rates, with the vacuum pump pulling different vacuum levels depending on preset information about each receiver being served, and/or making adjustments based on real time feedback of vacuum sensors located at various places in the system.
The addition of a SCFM (Standard Cubic Feet per Minute) air flow limiter in the air flow line allows oversized vacuum pumps to be used without risk of conveying at excessive velocity. SCFM limiters restrict air flow to a preset SCFM. This maintains the desired SCFM air flow at the inlet, which is critical for proper conveying for a given size conveying line. This concept is the subject of pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/185,016, referenced above.
Reading vacuum levels at various points tells the controlling processor if the line is open, which means only air (and no resin material) is present and air is flowing unrestrictedly. This signals a loss of resin material at the source. A high vacuum reading indicates a plugged or nearly plugged line. Normal conditions are present where material is flowing correctly at detected mid-vacuum levels.
One line size for all receivers assures the resin transport velocity is more likely to be in the acceptable range. However, most processes require the basic resin material be delivered at 50 times the rate of additives such as color concentrate. Virgin (or natural) resin pellets may have to be loaded at a rate of 1000 pounds per hour, requiring a 2.5 or 3 inch line size, while color is only required to be delivered at a rate of 20 to 40 pounds an hour. A smaller receiver is used for color, namely a receiver that loads perhaps 5 pounds at a time, while the receiver for the virgin resin material will be larger, perhaps loading 50 pounds of each load cycle. A 2.5 inch line on a 5 pound receiver would be too large. 1.5 inch line would be standard, and the use of 1.5 inch resin conveying line would be better, but this risks velocities that are excessive, resulting in trade-offs in design.
By placing a flow limiter at the pump suction intake, one can limit the maximum SCFM air flow to the design limit of the air flow limiter device; as noted this is disclosed and claimed in pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/185,016, referenced above.
In another embodiment one air flow limiter, as disclosed in the instant application, is in place as a single air flow limiter at the vacuum pump suction inlet with the vacuum pump being connected to a plurality of receivers all connected in a system. This provides a selected, correct rate of air flow in standard cubic feet per minute. In this embodiment, only a single air flow limiter is used at the vacuum pump inlet, as opposed to the alternative embodiment described above where one air flow limiter is used at each receiver.
An advantage of using only a single air flow limiter of the type disclosed herein is that the vacuum pump can be sized and operated for the longest distance over which resin is to be conveyed in a given locale. This can be done while still protecting shorter runs of the system from excessive resin material velocity, where less vacuum is required. One air flow limiter costs less than having an air flow limiter located at every receiver; this provides an advantageous aspect to this approach.
By adding an improved air flow limiter manifesting aspects of this invention to every receiver, plant operators can control air flow in cubic feet per minute to a maintained, constant value that is ideal for that particular receiver, considering conduit diameter and distance over which the plastic resin pellets must be conveyed through that conduit. Alternatively, by adding an improved air flow limiter manifesting aspects of this invention just to the suction inlet of the vacuum pump, a plant operator can control air flow in cubic feet per minute to a constant value that is ideal for the system as a whole, considering conduit diameter and distance over which the plastic resin pellets must be conveyed to the multiple receivers in the system.
Use of the improved air flow limiter in accordance with this invention allows pneumatic plastic resin pellet conveying systems to utilize a single large high horsepower vacuum pump. In accordance with one embodiment of the invention, each receiver in a facility is preferably fitted with an improved air flow limiter embodying the invention so the flow for each receiver in cubic feet per minute is self-limiting. This approach eliminates the need to match vacuum pumps or blowers to a specific material conduit size or conveyance distance. Using this approach, the improved flow limiter of the invention permits operators to run a very large vacuum pump or blower at a speed that will maintain a desired high level of vacuum throughout the entire vacuum (or pneumatic) plastic resin pellet conveying system.
Using larger than standard diameter vacuum conduits allows a significant vacuum reserve to exist in the plastic resin pellet conveying system, without the need for a vacuum reserve tank. Larger diameter conduits also mean there is little loss of vacuum over long distances, even at the most distant receiver to which plastic resin pellets are supplied by the system. A variable frequency drive control may be used to adjust the speed of the vacuum pump to maintain air flow at the desired standard cubic feet per minute rate through the air flow limiter.
With the air flow limiter aspect of the invention facilitating use of high horsepower vacuum pumps or blowers, designers utilizing the invention can now design to load multiple receivers at the same time without fear of dropping vacuum levels too low in parts of the pneumatic or vacuum plastic resin pellet conveying system.
In the plastic resin pellet conveying system aspect of the invention, no central control system is required. Using the improved flow limiter of the invention, each receiver preferably controls its own operation and is not wired to any central control facility. When the level of plastic resin pellets in the hopper of a process machine falls sufficiently low, a level sensor preferably tells the receiver to load the hopper of the process machine. Coupled to the level sensor may be a vacuum sensor, which preferably confirms that the main system has sufficient vacuum available to load the receiver. If too many other receivers are currently loading, and the vacuum level is sensed to be below the threshold for effective loading, then the receiver associated with the sensor will wait until vacuum readings rise. When available system vacuum is sufficient to assure adequate flow of plastic resin pellets into a given receiver, the vacuum sensor causes a vacuum valve preferably associated with the receiver to open the connection of the receiver to the conduit carrying the plastic resin pellets, and the receiver fills with resin pellets.
In accordance with one aspect of the invention, each receiver acts on its own sensed information. Use of the high horsepower vacuum pump means that several receivers can load simultaneously.
The improved air flow limiter aspect of the invention does several things to make such systems in accordance with the invention possible. By limiting cubic feet per minute of flow to the desired constant level, there is virtually no limit on the horsepower of the vacuum pump. The risk of a too high a conveyance speed of the plastic resin pellets through the conduit is eliminated. Additionally, if a receiver is not drawing in plastic resin pellets but is just drawing air as a result of the main supply of plastic resin pellets being exhausted, the empty conduit of the conveying system would ordinarily convey a substantial amount of air, which normally would drop the vacuum reserve of the entire pneumatic conveying system very rapidly. But with the air flow limiter of the invention such dumping of air into the conveying conduit is at least substantially reduced, and if the air flow limiter is at the suction intake of the vacuum pump, such dumping of air into the system is essentially impossible.
Further contributing to minimized air dump into the vacuum conduit is the ability of the receiver to detect system failure or absence of material being loaded, thereby stopping further load cycles and sounding an alarm.
In the improved air flow limiter aspect of the invention, the limiter preferably has a single moving part, namely a valve, which relies on two opposing forces, gravity in one direction and “lift” created by air flow in the opposite direction. Because the improved air flow limiter uses gravity to close the valve portion of the limiter, orientation of the air flow limiter is important. Air flow must be upward, essentially vertically through the air flow limiter, to counter the downward force of gravity.
The improved air flow limiter is desirably in the form of a tube with an air flow actuated valve within the tube. In a “no flow” condition, gravity holds the valve closed. However, as air flow through the limiter reaches a pre-selected design value, air flowing over and against a sail-like plate lifts an internal free floating valve. This shuts off air flow through the air flow limiter if the free floating valve rises sufficiently to contact a stop located within the tube. A detector senses that the free floating valve has contacted the stop located within the tube and provides a suitable signal indicating that air flow has been shut off through the air flow limiter as a result of air flow exceeding the pre-selected design value.
By adjusting the size and/or shape of the “sail”, and the weight of the free floating valve, desired air flow in standard feet per minute can be regulated very closely. Gravity as a force in one direction means the opening force is constant over the full range of motion of the valve device. (A spring, if one were used, would provide a variable force. However, use of gravity in the air flow limiter aspect of the invention eliminates that variable).
In the improved air flow limiter aspect of the invention, at the desired design standard cubic feet per minute of air flow, the valve opens as air lifts it. The valve would continue moving upwardly except for the fact that the valve reaches a point of air flow restriction, where the valve holds air flow steady at the desired design value. If the valve moves further upwardly towards a “closed” position, this reduces air flow and resulting force in the valve, causing the valve to drop in response to gravity. If the valve drops below the control level, this allows more air flow and consequently the valve rises as the air pushes the valve upwardly. As a result, the valve reaches the desired design valve equilibrium control point essentially instantly and very accurately.
Known air flow shutoffs are subject to “vacuum pull”, causing them to shut off completely once air begins to flow. This is because in known shutoffs, vacuum “pull” of the vacuum pump is always present. In the air flow limiter of the invention, a short vertical tube closes against a flat horizontal surface. In the air flow limiter of the invention, air flow is directed through the center of a short tube and escapes over the top edge of the short tube and then around open edges of a flat shutoff surface. A flat, desirably triangular or star-shaped plate is positioned in the air flow below and connected to the short tube. This plate acts as a sail in the air flow and will, as the designed desired standard cubic feet per minute air flow rate is exceeded, provide enough lift to raise the short tube against the shutoff plate.
At shut off, with vacuum above the flat shutoff surface and air at some pressure below the flat shutoff surface, most of the air pressure forces are against the walls of the short tube. Those forces are radially outwardly directed. Specifically, they are horizontal due to the configuration of the air flow limiter, and do not exert vertical force that would make the movable portion of the valve, namely the short tube, move in a vertical direction.
The surface of the end of the short tube, at the short tube end edge, is a horizontal surface and can provide a small vertical force when air travelling upwards impinges on the surface. For this reason, the air flow limiter of the invention uses a very thin wall short tube, to minimize this horizontal surface area of the short tube.
In the air flow limiter of the invention, air flow rate in cubic feet per minute can be adjusted by adding or subtracting weight from the floating valve, or by adjusting the surface area of the sail, or by adjusting the size or shape of the sail in the air flow.
Accordingly, in one of its aspects, the invention provides a resin delivery system and method that includes an air flow limiter having a preferably vertically oriented tube, a pair of open-ended preferably telescoping tubular internal segments within the tube, with an outer tubular segment preferably being fixed and the other preferably being slidably moveable along the fixed segment in the axial direction. The air flow limiter includes a detector, preferably utilizing an electromagnetic beam, most preferably a visible light beam or an infrared beam, to intersect the slidably moveable telescoping internal segment to determine when the slidably moveable tubular internal segment has contacted a stop and thereby has halted air flow through the air flow limiter due to air flow exceeding the pre-selected design maximum. The air flow limiter further includes a plate extending partially across the interior of the vertically oriented tube and positioned for contacting the moveable one of the telescoping tubular segments and limiting travel of the moveable telescoping tubular segment, with the plate covering the upper, open end of the moveable telescoping tubular segment upon contact therewith. In this aspect, the invention preferably yet further includes a sail positioned in the vertically oriented tube below the telescoping segments, a strut preferably connecting the sail and the moveable telescoping tubular segment, and a baffle preferably positioned to direct upward air flow within the tube through the telescoping tubular segments. The moveable telescoping tubular segment preferably moves vertically within the tube, unitarily with the sail, responsively to air flow upwardly through the tube against the sail.
The tubular segments are preferably cylindrical; the surface of the plate contacted by the moveable tubular segment is preferably planar; and the portion of the moveable tubular segment contacting the plate surface is preferably annular. The detector portion of the limiter preferably detects an electromagnetic beam, most preferably a visible light beam or an infrared beam to determine when the top portion of the moveable tubular segment has contacted the plate surface.
In a variation of terminology, a surface of the plate contacted by the moveable tubular segment is flat, the tubular segments are cylindrical, and the circular edge of the tubular segment contacting the plate service is annular and normal to the axis of the tubular segment.
In yet another one of its aspects, this invention provides a resin delivery system having at least one air flow limiter consisting of a vertically oriented tube, a tubular segment within the tube, which segment is moveable in the axial direction, a plate extending at least partially across the interior of the tube for contacting the movable tubular segment and defining a limit of travel of the moveable tubular segment, a sail positioned in the tube below the moveable tubular segment and being moveable vertically within the tube, a strut connecting the tubular segment and the sail, a baffle connected to and located within the tube defining a lower limit of travel of the moveable tubular segment upon contact of the strut with an upper extremity of the baffle, and a emitter-detector combination in which the emitter preferably emits an electromagnetic beam and the detector detects the electromagnetic beam when the electromagnetic beam is not attenuated by or reflected by the moveable tubular segment being in the position of having contacted the plate and reached the limit of travel of the moveable tubular segment. The moveable tubular segment is in sliding telescoping engagement with the tubular portion of the baffle, directing upward air flow within the tube, with the moveable tubular segment being moveable unitarily with the sail in response to upward air flow through the tube contacting the sail.
In yet another one of its aspects, this invention provides a resin delivery system that includes at least one air flow limiter having a vertically oriented tube with a sail assembly positioned in the tube and moveable therewithin responsively to air flow through the tube to regulate air flow through the tube and to stop air flow thorough the tube upon air flow exceeding a preselected value expressed in standard cubic feet per minute. An emitter-detector combination, preferably using an electromagnetic beam, provides the beam and projects it across the tube interior to intersect the vertically oriented moveable tubular assembly when the moveable tubular assembly is in a position of having stopped air flow through the air flow limiter due to air flow exceeding the pre-selected maximum design value.
In still yet another one of its aspects, this invention provides a method for conveying granular plastic resin by controlled air flow where air flow control involves the steps of providing a vertically oriented tube, positioning a moveable sail assembly including a sail within the tube, positioning a stop within the tube, and permitting the sail assembly to move responsively to air flow through the tube between a position at which air flows around the sail assembly and through the tube, and a position at which the sail assembly contacts the stop and blocks air flow through the tube. Upon the sail assembly contacting the stop and blocking air flow through the tube of the air flow limiter, a detector senses that the sail assembly is at the position contacting the stop and thereby blocking air flow through the tube.
In yet another one of its aspects, this invention provides a pneumatic resin delivery system utilizing air flow limiting apparatus including a vertically oriented first tube, a vertically oriented second tube which is moveable along and within the first tube, a baffle within the first tube for forcing air flow in the first tube through the second tube, a guide within the first tube for limiting the second tube to vertical co-axial movement within and relative to the first tube, a sail within the first tube being connected to the second tube and being moveable responsively to air flow within the first tube, and a stop within and connected to the first tube for limiting vertically upward travel of the second tube.
In still another one of its aspects, this invention provides apparatus for conveying granular plastic resin from a supply to receivers that retain and dispense the resin when needed by a process machine, where the apparatus includes a vacuum pump, a single air flow limiter connected to a suction head of the vacuum pump, a first conduit connecting the receivers to the air flow limiter, and a second conduit connecting the granular material supply to the receivers. In this embodiment of apparatus of the invention, suction created by operation of the vacuum pump draws granular plastic resin from the supply into the receivers through the second conduit and draws air from the second conduit through the receivers, the first conduit and the air flow limiter. The air flow limiter is oriented in a vertical direction for vertical flow of air upwardly therethrough. The emitter-detector combination are preferably oriented to provide a horizontal beam within and passing through a tubular housing portion of the air flow limiter with the beam preferably being perpendicular to the air flow limiter axis.
In yet still another aspect, this invention provides apparatus for conveying granular plastic resin material from a supply of resin material to receivers that retain and dispense the resin material when needed by a process machine, where the apparatus includes a vacuum pump, air flow limiters connected to outlets of the receivers, with the air flow limiters being vertically oriented for vertical flow of air drawn by suction therethrough, a first conduit connecting the air flow limiters to a suction head of the vacuum pump and a second conduit connecting the granular resin material supply to the receivers. In this apparatus aspect of the invention, suction created by operation of the vacuum pump draws granular plastic resin from the supply of granular plastic resin material into the receivers through the second conduit, and also draws air from the second conduit through the receivers, the air limiters, and the first conduit. In this second embodiment, at least one of the air flow limiters preferably consists of a tube, a tubular segment within the tube that is moveable in the axial vertical direction, a plate extending at least partially across the interior of the tube for contacting the moveable tubular segment and defining a limit of vertical travel of the moveable tubular segment, a sail connected to the moveable tubular segment and being moveable therewith within the tube, and a baffle connected to and within the tube defining a second limit of vertical travel of the moveable tubular segment, where the moveable tubular segment is in sliding telescoping engagement with the tubular portion of the baffle and the baffle directs air flow within the tube into the tubular segment. The moveable tubular segment moves unitarily with the sail in response to vertical air flow through the tube contacting the sail.
In this application, unless otherwise apparent from the context it is to be understood that the use of the term “vacuum” means “air at slightly below atmospheric pressure.” The “vacuum” (meaning air at slightly below atmospheric pressure) provides a suction effect that is used to draw granular plastic resin material out of a supply and to convey that granular plastic resin material through various conduits to receivers where the granular resin material can be temporarily stored before being molded or extruded. Hence, in this application it is useful for the reader mentally to equate the term “vacuum” with the term “suction”.
This invention is based on the flow limiter disclosed and claimed in pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/185,016 referenced above and adds at least a sensor to detect when the limiter has stopped flow, or to detect other flow conditions, according to the location of the sensor.
When air flow is below the design limit, the limiter remains fully open. The moment air flow exceeds the design limit the limiter closes instantly and fully to the point at which it properly stops flow. The movement is sudden and complete. There is no intermediate modulation of the limiter. It does not close gradually nor does any air flow close it partially. For this reason it is easy to detect closing. The preferred way to do this is to place a photo detection device on one side of the limiter, so that it can detect when a beam of light is either blocked, or reflected by the valve closing. A clear window may be used, or the detection device can be mounted into the tubular wall of the limiter.
Referring to the drawings in general and to
Vacuum drawing conduit 100 is connected to a plurality of receivers 16, each of which receives, retains and dispenses, as needed, granular plastic resin material to a machine, such as a gravimetric blender, or an extruder, or a molding press, as located preferably below a receiver 16. These machines are not illustrated in
Further illustrated in
In
During operation of the resin conveying systems shown schematically in
Referring to
As illustrated in
As shown in
The upper portion of baffle 52, defining fixed internal tubular segment 44, is adapted for sliding telescopic engagement with movable tubular segment 42. Fixed to movable tubular segment 42 is a first strut 48 preferably extending transversely across the upper portion of movable tubular segment 42 and preferably secured on either end to movable tubular segment 42, as illustrated in
Movable sail 34 is preferably planar and positioned fixedly on second strut 50 to remain perpendicular with respect to the axis of vertically oriented outer tube 32. Movable sail 34 is preferably of generally triangular configuration, as illustrated in
Movable sail 34 is positioned within generally vertically oriented outer tube 32 so that rectangular extremities 76 are closely adjacent to but do not contact the inner surface of vertically oriented outer tube 32, so long as sail 34 moves vertically up and down within vertically oriented external tube 32. The rectangular shape of extremities 76 with their outwardly facing planar surface assures minimal friction and consequent minimal resistance to movement of movable sail 34 in the event one of rectangular extremities 76 contacts the interior surface of vertically oriented tube 32, should sail 34 for some reason move laterally or otherwise and become skew to the vertical axis of tube 32.
Movable internal tubular segment 42 is telescopically movable, unitarily with sail 34, relative to and along fixed internal tubular segment 44. A lower limit of movement of movable tubular segment 42 is illustrated in
When air is flowing through air flow limiter 30, as illustrated generally in
If air flow upwardly through air flow limiter 30 reaches an extreme value, above an acceptable level of operation of the resin delivery system of which air flow limiter 30 is a part, the excessive force (resulting from the high volume of air flow contacting sail 34) pushes sail 34 upwardly to the point that upper annular edge 78 of movable internal tubular segment 42 contacts plate 46. In this condition, which is illustrated in
Once air flow stops through vertically oriented outer tube 32, gravity pulling downwardly on sail 34, connected movable internal tubular segment 42, and first and second struts 48, 50, causes these parts, which may be connected together and fabricated as a single integral assembly as shown in
With the self-regulating characteristic of air flow limiter 30, the assembly consisting of movable internal tubular segment 42, first and second struts 48, 50 and sail 34 may oscillate somewhat about the position at which air flow drawn by suction is at the desired level, as the vacuum pump drawing air through flow limiter 30 varies in cubic feet per minute of air drawn.
Desirably, ends of first strut 48, which is depicted as being horizontally disposed in the drawings, are mounted in movable tubular segment 42 in movable fashion such that first strut 48 can move slightly, rotationally, relative to movable internal segment 42. This is to provide a small amount of “play” in the event movable sail 34 and second strut 50, which is vertically oriented and connected to movable sail 34, become skew with respect to the vertical axis of vertically oriented exterior tube 32. Should this occur, the movable characteristic of first strut 48, being slightly rotatable relative to movable internal tubular segment 42, effectively precludes movable internal tubular segment 42 from binding with respect to fixed internal tubular segment 44 and thereby being restricted from what would otherwise be freely telescoping movement of movable internal tubular segment 42 relative to fixed internal tubular segment 44.
Desirably first strut 48 is rotatable relative to movable internal tubular segment 42, to provide maximum freedom of vertical motion of movable internal tubular segment 42 in the event movable sail 34 becomes skew to the axis of vertically oriented exterior tube 32, with consequent frictional force restricting vertical movement of movable sail 34.
Baffle 52 preferably includes two portions, the upper portion preferably being defined by fixed internal tubular segment 44 and a lower portion preferably being defined by conical portion 66 of baffle 52. A lower edge of baffle 52 is circular and is designated 84 in the drawings. Circular edge 84 fits closely against the annular interior wall of vertically oriented exterior tube 32 so that all air passing upwardly through air flow limiter 30, namely through vertically oriented exterior tube 32, is constrained to flow through the interior of baffle 52. The tight fitting of the circular lower edge of baffle 52 against the interior wall of vertically oriented exterior tube 32 forces all air entering flow limiter 30 from the bottom to flow through the interior of baffle 52, flowing upwardly through lower conical portion 66 of baffle 52.
The air then flows further upwardly through the interior of fixed internal tubular segment 44. Thereafter, if movable internal tubular segment 42 is spaced away from flow limiting horizontal plate 46, air flows along the surface of movable internal tubular segment 42, passing the upper annular edge 78 of movable internal tubular segment 42; air then flows around the space between edge 82 of flow limiting horizontal plate 46 and the interior annular wall of vertically oriented exterior tube 32. The air then flows out of air flow limiter 30 via open outlet end 56 formed in end cap 60.
In an alternate embodiment of the air flow limiter, baffle 52 may be constructed from two pieces that fit closely together, with the two pieces being in facing contact in the area where they define fixed internal tubular segment 44, but diverging one from another in the area where they define conical portion 66 of baffle 52. As illustrated in
In another alternative environment of the air flow limiter, baffle 52 is one piece, preferably molded plastic, as illustrated in
The assembly illustrated in
Referring to
Air flow limiter 30′ further includes a pair of concentric telescoping tubular segments 40, a moveable internal tubular segment 42, a fixed internal tubular segment 44, a flow limiting horizontal plate 46, first and second struts 48, 50, a baffle 52, and an inlet end 54 and an outlet end 56, all preferably the same as the air flow limiter illustrated in the other drawing figures and as described above. Other parts that are shown in
Air flow limiter 30′ in accordance with the invention includes a pair of housings 110, 112 mounted on either side of vertically oriented exterior tube 32, where housing 110 is provided generally for an emitter 114, and housing 112 is provided generally for a detector 116. Any suitable emitter-detector combination can be used. Preferably emitter 114 emits an electromagnetic beam 118 and detector 116 detects beam 118 when beam 118 impinges on detector 116. Emitter 114 and detector 116 are mounted within housings 110, 112 at the positions illustrated in
When air is permitted to flow through the air flow limiter, due to moveable internal tubular segment being below and not contacting flow limiting horizontal plate 46, electromagnetic beam 118 from emitter 114 is detected by detector 116. (The beam is indicated as 118 in the drawing.) Detection of electromagnetic beam 118 by detector 116 indicates that either there is some permissible flow through the air flow limiter 30 ‘ or the entire resin delivery system has been shut down, meaning there is no air flow entering air flow limiter 30’ at inlet end 54. However, the no air flow operation, or no air flow entering inlet end 54 is essentially of no interest, in that the air flow limiter of the invention, with the emitter-detector combination, is a self-limiting device as described above.
Air flow limiter 30′ preferably contains no springs. Air flow limiter 30′ preferably contains no sensors to provide operating feedback to a control device for regulation of air flow limiter 30′. No feedback control sensors are needed since because flow limiter 30′ is self-regulating and once in place, an air flow limiter is not subject to outside intervention or control. Air flow limiter 30′ preferably includes a tubular valve, closing against a flat surface, where the tubular valve is defined by movable internal tubular segment 42 closing against flow limiting horizontal plate 46. Movable internal tubular segment 42 is in the form of an open-ended cylinder and is connected to a plate in the form of movable sail 34 to move movable tubular segment 42 against flow limiting horizontal plate 46. Air flow limiter 30′ uses gravity alone to open the valve defined by the assembly of movable internal tubular segment 42, movable sail 34, and the connecting structure therebetween.
In the air flow limiter illustrated in
The air flow limiter of the invention functions equally well with a vacuum pump drawing air through air flow limiter 30′ from bottom to top by application of vacuum to outlet end 56 as depicted generally in
In the claims appended hereto, the term “comprising” is to be understood as meaning “including, but not limited to” while the phrase “consisting of” should be understood to mean “having only and no more”.
This patent application is a 35 USC 120 continuation-in-part of U.S. Ser. No. 14/593,010 entitled “Air Flow Limiter with Closed/Open Sensing filed 9 Jan. 2015 in the name of Stephen B. Maguire, published 20 Aug. 2015 as US 2015-0232289 A1, now allowed, the priority of which is claimed under 35 USC 120, which in turn is a continuation in part of U.S. Pat. No. 9,371,198 issued 21 Jun. 2016 in the name of Stephen B. Maguire and entitled “Air Flow Regulator”, the priority of which is also claimed through pending application Ser. No. 14/593,010. The instant application is also a 35 USC 120 continuation-in-part of U.S. Ser. No. 14/574,561 entitled “Resin Delivery System with Air Flow Regulator” filed 18 Dec. 2014 in the name of Stephen B. Maguire, published 20 Aug. 2015 as US 2016-0238016 A1, the priority of which is claimed under 35 USC 120.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1001510 | Curbey | Aug 1911 | A |
| 1418096 | Royer | May 1922 | A |
| 1579251 | Schossow | Apr 1926 | A |
| 2116912 | Richardson | May 1938 | A |
| 2161190 | Paull | Jun 1939 | A |
| 2351035 | Grant, Jr. | Jun 1944 | A |
| 2403689 | Sprague | Jul 1946 | A |
| 2601654 | Wright | Jun 1952 | A |
| 2655934 | Charles | Oct 1953 | A |
| 2718435 | Hudspeth | Sep 1955 | A |
| 2765812 | Werner | Oct 1956 | A |
| 2917077 | Ziege | Dec 1959 | A |
| 3111115 | Best | Nov 1963 | A |
| 3115276 | Johanningmeier | Dec 1963 | A |
| 3122162 | Sands | Feb 1964 | A |
| 3151628 | Heckert | Oct 1964 | A |
| 3164141 | Jones | Jan 1965 | A |
| 3209898 | Beebe et al. | Oct 1965 | A |
| 3239278 | Mueller | Mar 1966 | A |
| 3348848 | Lucking et al. | Oct 1967 | A |
| 3367362 | Hoffman | Feb 1968 | A |
| 3381708 | Chenoweth | May 1968 | A |
| 3434493 | Owens | Mar 1969 | A |
| 3468338 | Patterson | Sep 1969 | A |
| 3470994 | Schnell et al. | Oct 1969 | A |
| 3621873 | Kenann | Nov 1971 | A |
| 3667087 | Dakin | Jun 1972 | A |
| 3735777 | Katzer et al. | May 1973 | A |
| 3773300 | Hauser | Nov 1973 | A |
| 3794077 | Fanshier | Feb 1974 | A |
| 3861830 | Johnson | Jan 1975 | A |
| 3872884 | Busdiecker et al. | Mar 1975 | A |
| 3931953 | Allen | Jan 1976 | A |
| 3951461 | De Feudis | Apr 1976 | A |
| 3959636 | Johnson et al. | May 1976 | A |
| 3985262 | Nauta | Oct 1976 | A |
| 4005908 | Freeman | Feb 1977 | A |
| 4026442 | Orton | May 1977 | A |
| 4108334 | Moller | Aug 1978 | A |
| 4148100 | Moller | Apr 1979 | A |
| 4174731 | Sturgis | Nov 1979 | A |
| 4183467 | Sheraton | Jan 1980 | A |
| 4219136 | Williams et al. | Aug 1980 | A |
| 4221510 | Smith | Sep 1980 | A |
| 4262878 | O'ffill | Apr 1981 | A |
| 4269223 | Carter et al. | May 1981 | A |
| 4284261 | Benjamin | Aug 1981 | A |
| 4294020 | Evans | Oct 1981 | A |
| 4342443 | Wakeman | Aug 1982 | A |
| 4354622 | Wood | Oct 1982 | A |
| 4373838 | Foreman | Feb 1983 | A |
| 4402436 | Hellgren | Sep 1983 | A |
| 4402635 | Maruo | Sep 1983 | A |
| 4454943 | Moller | Jun 1984 | A |
| 4475672 | Whitehead | Oct 1984 | A |
| 4498783 | Rudolph | Feb 1985 | A |
| 4501518 | Smith | Feb 1985 | A |
| 4508091 | Wakeman | Apr 1985 | A |
| 4511291 | Quates, Sr. | Apr 1985 | A |
| 4525071 | Horowitz et al. | Jun 1985 | A |
| 4581704 | Mitsukawa | Apr 1986 | A |
| 4586854 | Newman | May 1986 | A |
| 4705083 | Rossetti | Nov 1987 | A |
| 4756348 | Moller | Jul 1988 | A |
| 4793711 | Ohlson | Dec 1988 | A |
| 4812086 | Kopernicky | Mar 1989 | A |
| 4830508 | Higuchi et al. | May 1989 | A |
| 4834385 | Jackson | May 1989 | A |
| 4842198 | Chang | Jun 1989 | A |
| 4848534 | Sandwall | Jul 1989 | A |
| 4850703 | Hanaoka et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
| 4962831 | Dundas | Oct 1990 | A |
| 4995422 | Chew | Feb 1991 | A |
| 5011043 | Whigham | Apr 1991 | A |
| 5054965 | Clark | Oct 1991 | A |
| 5110521 | Moller | May 1992 | A |
| 5116547 | Tsukahara et al. | May 1992 | A |
| 5132897 | Allenberg | Jul 1992 | A |
| 5143166 | Hough | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5147152 | Link | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5148943 | Moller | Sep 1992 | A |
| 5172489 | Moller | Dec 1992 | A |
| 5225210 | Shimoda | Jul 1993 | A |
| 5232314 | Hopkins | Aug 1993 | A |
| 5244179 | Wilson | Sep 1993 | A |
| 5252008 | May, III et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
| 5261743 | Moller | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5285930 | Nielsen | Feb 1994 | A |
| 5340949 | Fujimura et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
| 5341961 | Hausam | Aug 1994 | A |
| 5378089 | Law | Jan 1995 | A |
| 5415321 | Gehlert | May 1995 | A |
| 5423455 | Ricciardi et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
| 5575309 | Connell | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5575596 | Bauer | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5613516 | Landrum | Mar 1997 | A |
| 5651401 | Cados | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5669265 | Adler | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5704391 | McGowan et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5767453 | Wakou et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5767455 | Mosher | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5780779 | Kitamura et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5791830 | Fort | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5794789 | Payson | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5843513 | Wilke et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 6007236 | Maguire | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6036407 | Nester | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6076803 | Johnson | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6085777 | Welker | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6089794 | Maguire | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6102629 | Ishida | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6152656 | Curtis et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6158363 | Memory et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6199583 | Iacovella | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6227768 | Higuchi | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6379086 | Goth | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6386800 | van Eyck | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6413020 | Davison | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6419418 | Smith | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6447215 | Wellmar | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6497083 | Garwood | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6585004 | Porter | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6588988 | Zlotos | Jul 2003 | B2 |
| 6634375 | Olivas | Oct 2003 | B2 |
| 6644345 | Dulin | Nov 2003 | B2 |
| 6648558 | Shultz | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6786681 | Grasshoff | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6834755 | Jay | Dec 2004 | B2 |
| 6871618 | Masse | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6890129 | Fabbri | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6923601 | Goth | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6942133 | Frankeberger | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6981619 | Moretto | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7066689 | Maguire | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7080960 | Burnett | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7114889 | Kanou | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7117886 | Kajitani | Oct 2006 | B2 |
| 7137729 | Moretto | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7188434 | Moretto | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7191807 | DeMaison | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7192222 | Van Mullekom | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7231927 | Suehara | Jun 2007 | B2 |
| 7311474 | Ogasahara | Dec 2007 | B1 |
| 7318459 | Frankeberger | Jan 2008 | B2 |
| 7384018 | Moretto | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7472494 | Moretto | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7503128 | Moretto | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7662211 | Federico | Feb 2010 | B2 |
| 7766037 | Moenkhaus | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7766305 | Kim | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 8021462 | Moretto | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| D650888 | Moretto | Dec 2011 | S |
| 8070844 | Maguire | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 8092070 | Maguire | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8113745 | Aoki | Feb 2012 | B2 |
| D671563 | Moretto | Nov 2012 | S |
| D671564 | Moretto | Nov 2012 | S |
| 8322951 | Kvalheim | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8360691 | Moretto | Jan 2013 | B2 |
| 8408228 | Jimenez | Apr 2013 | B1 |
| 8412383 | Moretto | Apr 2013 | B2 |
| D688711 | Moretto | Aug 2013 | S |
| 8672194 | Moretto | Mar 2014 | B2 |
| 8753432 | Maguire | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 8763273 | Moretto | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8793900 | Moretto | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| D718791 | Moretto | Dec 2014 | S |
| 8905681 | Schneider | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 8914990 | Moretto | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 9181044 | Baker | Nov 2015 | B1 |
| 9365367 | Kraemer | Jun 2016 | B2 |
| 9371198 | Maguire | Jun 2016 | B2 |
| 9459183 | Schnakenberg | Oct 2016 | B1 |
| 9550635 | Maguire | Jan 2017 | B2 |
| 9550636 | Maguire | Jan 2017 | B2 |
| 9604793 | Maguire | Mar 2017 | B2 |
| 9637320 | Moretto | May 2017 | B2 |
| 9663263 | Moretto | May 2017 | B2 |
| 20020061232 | Zlotos | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020136609 | Maguire | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20030168618 | Coney | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20040115013 | Goth | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040221893 | Johnson | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20050012058 | Medina | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050039816 | Maguire | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050089378 | Gerber | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050265793 | Van Mullekom | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20080314461 | Moretto | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090031580 | Moretto | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090039106 | Moretto | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090090018 | Moretto | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090151800 | Salmento | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090295016 | Shinohara | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20110211919 | Rasner | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110299943 | Woolever | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20120201917 | Shinohara | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20130202370 | Moretto | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130209180 | Moretto | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20150175282 | Thompson | Jun 2015 | A1 |
| 20150232287 | Maguire | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150232289 | Maguire | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150232290 | Maguire | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20150308584 | Ehrne | Oct 2015 | A1 |
| 20150321860 | Maguire | Nov 2015 | A1 |
| 20160096693 | Hanaoka | Apr 2016 | A1 |
| 20160158967 | Maguire | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160167897 | Wiemers | Jun 2016 | A1 |
| 20160244275 | Maguire | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160272439 | Kelly | Sep 2016 | A1 |
| 20160280473 | Veselov | Sep 2016 | A1 |
| 20160292953 | Brown | Oct 2016 | A1 |
| 20160347557 | Tell | Dec 2016 | A1 |
| 20170174447 | Baker | Jun 2017 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 202302166 | Jul 2012 | CN |
| 3541532 | May 1986 | DE |
| 3923241 | Jan 1991 | DE |
| 4323295 | Feb 1995 | DE |
| 0318170 | May 1989 | EP |
| 0507689 | Oct 1992 | EP |
| 0587085 | Sep 1994 | EP |
| 0743149 | Nov 1996 | EP |
| 2109840 | May 1972 | FR |
| 2235775 | Jan 1975 | FR |
| 2517087 | May 1983 | FR |
| 203758 | Sep 1923 | GB |
| 271930 | Jun 1927 | GB |
| 2081687 | Feb 1982 | GB |
| 1235604 | Sep 1989 | JP |
| 4201522 | Jul 1992 | JP |
| 6114834 | Apr 1994 | JP |
| Entry |
|---|
| Sheet of 2 photographs of Mould-Tek gravimetric blender, circa 1993. |
| Sheet of 2 photographs of Motan gravimetric blender and feeding system with Maguire Products, Inc. controls, circa 1993. |
| Sheet of 3 photographs of UNA-DYN gravimetric blender, circa 1993. |
| Sheet of 2 photographs of Maguire Products, Inc. gravimetric blender with Conair hoppers and feeding system, circa 1993. |
| Sheet of 1 photograph of Hydracolor gravimetric blender, circa 1993. |
| Advertisement entitled “Machinery and Systems for Extrusion is Our Only Business” by Process Control Corporation, circa 1993. |
| Advertisement entitled “Weigh Blender Delivers Unmatched Accuracy” by Universal Dynamics, Inc., circa 1993. |
| Advertisement entitled “A Full Line-up of Blender Solutions . . . Priced Right” by HydReclaim, circla 1993. |
| Advertisement entitled “New From HydReclaim—Now Processors Can Economically Achieve Continuous Gravimetric Blending” by HydReclaim, circa 1993. |
| Article entitled “Control Loading Systems” from Plastics Technology, Oct. 1995, p. 41. |
| Advertisement “Introducing our 400 VME-II Gravimetric Blender” by HydReclaim Corporation, circa 1993. |
| Four page brochure entitled “Gravimix Better Quality through Research”, circa 1993. |
| Four page brochure entitled “Conomix Plus Volumetric Blender” dated Aug. 1993. |
| Four page brochure entitled “Conair Franklin Autocolor Y Mezclador” dated Mar. 1995. |
| Two-sided flyer entitled “GB 140 Series Compact Auto Weigh Blender” published by Conair Franklin in the United States, Jun. 1994. |
| Six page brochure entitled “Graviblend Precise Continuous Weigh Blenders” published by Ktron Vertech, Jun. 1991, United States. |
| Six page brochure entitled “Piovan Gravimetric Blenders MDW” published by Piovan Sri, Oct. 1993, Venezia, Italy. |
| One page two-sided flyer entitled “Gravimix, The New Gravimetric Blending Generation” published by Ferlin, De demsvaard, Holland, circa 1993. |
| Four page brochure entitled “When you Weigh it All Up . . . ” published by Ferlin Trading, Holland, circa 1993. |
| Thirty-two page catalog entitled “Maguire Color Blending Equipment” published by Maguire Products, Inc., 1993, United States. |
| Two page brochure entitled “Mould-Tek Bulk Handling Systems” published by Mould-Tek Industries, Inc. in Canada, circa 1993. |
| Brochure entitled “Plastic Molders and Extruders: published by Maguire Products, Inc., 1995”. |
| Five page brochure entitled “Blending power: GXB Blender the Better Alternative” of Mould-Tek, circa 1998. |
| Forty-four page two-sided brochure including cover and back pages entitled “Maguire: Auxiliary equipment for the plastics industry” of Maguire Products, Inc., Oct. 2000. |
| Two-sided color brochure entitled “Convey, Blend, Dry” published by Novatec, Inc., undated. |
| Three page two-sided color brochure entitled “Accuracy, flexibility and performance are at your fingertips with ConveyPacer III Series “S” Controller” of Mould-tek, 1999. |
| Seven page two-sided color brochure plus cover entitled “Exac-U-Batch Series Weigh Scale Blenders: Engineered to be the ultimate blend of precision and control!” of Mould-tek, 2000. |
| Three page two-sided color brochure entitled “We have the building blocks to integrate your entire plastics bulk handling system.” of Mould-tek, 1999. |
| Two page two-sided color brochure entitled “Model GXB-2202 Exac-U-Batch Gravimetric Scale Blender: Accurate weigh scale blending under precise computer control” of Mould-tek, 2000. |
| One page, two-sided color brochure entitled “Bulk handling power: the manufacturer of the world's most advanced blender gives you the same performance in bulk handling systems” of Mould-Tek, dated Apr. 1999. |
| Three page two-sided color brochure entitled “Portable Drying and Conveying Systems: Nomad™ Series Portable Dryers”, AEC Whitlock, 1998. |
| Two page two-sided color brochure entitled “Drying Systems: WD Series Dehumidifying Dryers” of AEC Whitlock, 1997. |
| 19 page document entitled “Model MLS—Clear Vu Eight Component Vacuum Loading System: Operation Manual” of Maguire Products, Inc. dated May 4, 1999. |
| One page two-sided color brochure entitled “Maguire Clear-Vu™ Loading System” of Maguire Products, Inc. |
| Four page two-sided color brochure entitled “Novatec Inc. Vacuum Loaders—Electro-Polished Stainless Steel Finish” of Novatec Inc., undated. |
| Eight page two-sided color brochure entitled “Novatec Inc. Material Conveying Solutions for the Plastics Industry”, 1999. |
| Two page two-sided color brochure entitled Maguire Model MPM Pre-Mixers of Maguire Products, Inc., Apr. 1997. |
| Two page two-sided color brochure entitled “WDMR Series Compact Dryers” of AEC Whitlock, 1998. |
| Two page two-sided color reprint entitled “10 most frequently asked questions about Dryers” by Joseph Dziediz, AEC/Whitlock, from Plastics Technology, Jan. 1998. |
| Two page two-sided color brochure entitled “Drying Systems: WD Series High Capacity Dehumidifying Dryers” of AEC Whitlock, 1997. |
| Five page two-sided color brochure entitled “AEC Auxiliaries as Primary”, AEC, Inc., 1999. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20170102716 A1 | Apr 2017 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 14593010 | Jan 2015 | US |
| Child | 15388043 | US | |
| Parent | 14185016 | Feb 2014 | US |
| Child | 14593010 | US | |
| Parent | 15388043 | US | |
| Child | 14593010 | US | |
| Parent | 14574561 | Dec 2014 | US |
| Child | 15388043 | US |
