Patent Application
20150143756
When considering any prior art in field 52/12 it is notable that some inventors, myself among them, who taught the use of expanded metal as a water receiving area of a gutter guard, illustrated that the expanded metal was positioned so that, what is known in the expanded metal industry as the LWD: “long way of the diamond” is parallel to water flow off of a roof structure. I taught, by illustration, this in U.S. Pat. No. 6,951,077, Hileman taught this in U.S. Pat. No. 4,592,174 (FIG. 5), and Jones taught this in U.S. Pat. No. 5,592,783 (FIG. 3). A product currently on the market: Leaf Solution®, invented by this applicant, employs expanded metal overlain my micro mesh and in this product the expanded metal's diamond shaped openings are also positioned so that their LWD is parallel to water flow. Not every type of expanded metal employs diamond shaped openings but the same changes in water directing properties of expanded metal openings that occur when you re-position a diamond shaped expanded metal opening, in relation to oncoming water flow, hold true when repositioning any geometrically shaped expanded metal opening. For the purpose of this application, the term “LWO”: “Long way of the opening” will be used going forward.
Other prior art in the field that teaches the use of expanded metal as a water receiving area of a gutter guard illustrates the expanded metal is positioned so that the LWO is perpendicular rather than parallel to water flow. Examples of this are found in U.S. Pat. No. 4,036,761 (FIG. 1), U.S. Pat. No. 4,959,932 (FIG. 1).
In the LWO pattern (the openings being formed by 6 sidewall members) utilized in an embodiment of the present invention there are four possible positions the pattern may be positioned to in relation to oncoming water flow: these positions are shown in the attachment accompanying this Specification titled “Sidewall Positions” and will be described in detail later in this application.
Referring now to Exhibit 1 “Sidewall Positions” and viewing four possible positions an LWO opening could be in while facing oncoming water flow, which position, if overlain by screen, would be the most effective water-redirecting position of the expanded metal to use? Or, are each of the positions equally effective? Or, would NONE of them work very well at capturing and redirecting water down into an underlying gutter? Further teaching present within this application points readily to the best answer but, can someone “skilled in the art” make the correct choice without reading my application any further and, instead, only draw on the teaching of prior art? As noted earlier: Prior Art's comments on the matter counsel to ensure sidewall members are angled away from water flow (I teach the opposite in the present invention).
Prior Art has taught to, whenever practical, NOT position side walls in the manner the present invention teaches in any instance where the angle or bevel of sidewalls is mentioned.
An example of such Prior Art teaching is found in Mr. Ealer's 2006/0230687 [0009]; “The strands and non-circular holes are sized and shaped to prevent leaves and debris from falling into a gutter”. To achieve that purpose you would want to angle the sidewalls away from the roof, not toward the roof as I teach. Otherwise, pine needles and smaller debris would be channeled, captured, and held within the air opening by sidewalls angled toward them as they come off of the roof. This is why LWO gutter guards employ sidewalls that are either perpendicular to or angle away from a roof's edge: doing so enables, as Prior Art teaches: sidewalls to act as a slide to deflect or encourage forward progression of debris.”
Products in the field that do exhibit a LWO pattern of expanded metal overlain with screen are not installed at angles in line with roof pitch but, instead, mostly flat. The manufacturers and installers are very likely aware that such products fail at taking water when installed in-line with roof pitch. The experience and conventional wisdom of Prior Art manufacturers and those “skilled in the art” was that expanded metal gutter guards overlain with fine screen should not be angled with roof pitch. This is understandable because it is very likely that those before me also grabbed a LWO pattern to experiment with and found it to “not work” if overlain by screen unless the product is mostly flat within a gutter. Why would this be the case?: When expanded metal LWO “sections” (typically 3 or 4 foot lengths with widths of 3 to 9 inches) are created for use as gutter guards they are stacked in a box and then taken to other machines that perform secondary operations such as applying screen overlayment or fastening members. The “sections” may be withdrawn from the box in 1 position on one occasion and in an entirely different position another time depending on who stacked the LWO “sections” and how they stacked them at the time. Until this present teaching of the present invention, there have been no directions or reasons given for which position an LWO segment should be in when being subjected to secondary operations. Any old position would do.
I experimented with LWO positions with no conjectured results In mind just to see what might be discovered. Unless, as was the case with me, someone thought to try flipping the particular segment of expanded metal I picked up upside down and then turn it 180 degrees it no effective gutter guard (consisting of an LWO pattern overlain by screen) would have ever been created by secondary operations. LWO patterns/overlain by screen will always yield poor performance . . . at least in 3 out of 4 LWO positions. I am not saying some folks don't manufacture LWO patterned/overlain by screen gutter guards anyway, but I am saying that such gutter guards don't work very well. Why then are they made? Well my belief is that once I introduced “micro-mesh” gutter guards to the marketplace their success was astounding and scores of “copy cats” began to appear that had the appearance of my original Leaffilter because they too employed micro-mesh or fine screen but very few come close to Leaffilter's performance. People buy gutter guards on wishes and hopes that the sales pitch they heard is true but most of what is bought turns out to be a major disappointment. But gutter guards continue to sell, especially a micro-mesh gutter guard, regardless of performance. Not all micro mesh gutter guards are created equal.
My Leaffilter product (the first micro-mesh) is now the largest selling dealer-installed product in the nation. It's largest dealer hits around $40 million per year. That is a record in our industry. That is the good news! The sad news (for me) is that I sold the company before Consumer Reports tested gutter guards and rated it Number One and I don't even get a Christmas card from my old friends at Leaffilter anymore. But, that's ok, I done it before and with my latest gutter guard maybe I can “done it again” (If patent rules allowed the insertion of a “smiley face” I would post one here). I have tried to create gutter guards that actually work and though I may not be a master of marketing I am, I think, very good at inventing gutter guards. Not because I am so smart but because the Lord has helped me to discover the things I teach.
Consumer Reports recognized my technology as the best available. It is. Still, I, as the “Father of Micro-Mesh gutter guards” wasn't able to glean or confidently predict the “correct” position an LWO segment should be in from Prior Art or from intelligent conjecture: I just kept flipping and turning and bending sidewalls and observing and eventually “accidentally” discovered what is now taught in this application. Isn't that how most inventions occur?
The new art of the present invention teaches a new method or combination of expanded metal with fine screen that offers an expanded metal/overlain by screen gutter guard which allows copious amounts of water flow-through (through the screen down into the gutter) even when the new invention is installed at pitches as steep as 12/12. Prior Art teaching in 52/12 and products in the field cannot achieve that.
It is important to note that sidewalls of expanded metal openings are created by a punching die that creates sidewall members that have a narrow edge and a broader edge. Below are listed several identifiable elements or characteristics of expanded metal openings and the sidewalls that perimeter and form them:
1. Relative length of one sidewall compared to others that are connected and form perimetered opening 2. Degree of parallel or perpendicular position of a sidewall length with regards to oncoming water flow 3. angle of bevel of a sidewall member toward or away from water flow width of the top edge of a sidewall member in relation to width of the bottom edge of the member (“narrowness” of the edge). The more “knife-like” and less blunt an edge is, the better it will capture and redirect water. I do not teach “narrowness” alone as much as I teach: “choose the narrower edge of the sidewall” to face oncoming water:
4. A narrow edge (contacting the underside of a fine screen) that captures and channels water down the sidewall to the somewhat broader terminating edge (bottom edge) of the sidewall yields great water channeling effects. Reverse the position and water channeling is diminished.—(New Art or new teaching not present in 52/12 to the best of my knowledge). Given these factors or elements: there are at least 4 possible LWO patterns or sidewall positions that might face oncoming water flow that are achievable in different combinations when considering factors #3 and #4 listed above. Referring to the Attachment (Exhibit 1) entitled: “Sidewall Positions and Properties” there is shown four possible positions of a six-sided sidewall membered LWO pattern in relation to oncoming water flow, looking at the photos; your eyes are representative of water flowing off a roof and toward the gutter guard:
Position 1: Sidewalls angled away from oncoming water flow with the top edge of the sidewalls contacting the underside of an overlying screen being broader than the sidewall's bottom edge. Also note the smallest sidewall member appears almost welded to and almost level with the largest sidewall member.
Position 2: Sidewalls angled toward oncoming water flow with the top edge of the sidewall contacting the underside of an overlying screen being broader than the sidewall's bottom edge. Also note that the adjoining point of the smallest sidewall member with the longest sidewall member appears very broad and flat and the smallest sidewall member appears slightly above the longer sidewall member.
Position 3: Sidewalls angled toward oncoming water flow with the top edge of the sidewall contacting the underside of an overlying screen being narrower than the sidewall's bottom edge. Also note that the longest sidewall member is positioned slightly above the smallest sidewall member at their point of adjoining.
Position 4: Sidewalls angled away from oncoming water flow with the top edge of the sidewall contacting the underside of an overlying screen being narrower than the sidewall's bottom edge. Also note the longest sidewall member is positioned well above the smallest sidewall member.
On the surface, it might seem obvious to simply overlay one of the four possible expanded metal patterns with a screen and thereby achieve a viable gutter guard able to shed debris and redirect water downward into an underlying gutter. But experimentation will show that it isn't obvious to simply overly an expanded metal pattern with screen thinking a viable gutter guard will be achieved. Absent an overlying screen, any of the four positions will allow plenty of water into an underlying gutter but when overlying screen is added significant differences among the LWO positions begin to show.
One gutter guard presently on the market:
Diamond Back Gutter Cover™ whose sales literature is shown in EXHIBIT 2 in this application overlies an Expanded Metal LWO pattern with screen however: the product's literature seems to show sidewalls angled away from water flow. One more example of a LWO pattern overlain by fine screen is a product on the market: Sentinel® Gutter Debris Shield which is manufactured under U.S. Pat. No. 5,956,904 and whose product photo is shown in EXHIBIT 3. The Sentinel product shows that “broad edges”, rather than narrow edges of the sidewalls face upward and would be the first part of the expanded metal to contact water. In the above two instances: an LWO pattern with sidewalls angled away from oncoming water flow off of a roof and overlain by fine screen and a LWO pattern whose broad edges contact the underside of an overlying screen, water flow-through is significantly inhibited in comparison to the present invention which positions sidewall members differently.
A recent “screen over LWO expanded metal” entry in the gutter guard market is Ultra Klean Gutter Guard whose product photo is shown in EXHIBIT 4. As is seen in both Diamond Back and the Sentinel product, the longer sidewalls present in the expanded metal patterns are not perpendicular to water flow as is the case with the present invention. Referring to
When I invented the Leaf Solution product (the first micro-mesh over expanded metal gutter guard which preceded the above mentioned gutter guard products) I was unaware, at the time, that expanded metal positioned in the manner I had chosen: LWO parallel to water flow, allowed a water overflow that could be significantly reduced if the expanded metal was positioned so that two things occurred. First, the sidewalls of the expanded metal walls that make up a diamond shaped (or any shaped) expanded metal opening should be angled upward and toward oncoming water flow. That property was not and is not existent in the Leaf Solution product or the Sentinel or Diamond Back products. Second, the expanded metal should be positioned so that the LWO is perpendicular to oncoming water flow with at least one longer or longest sidewall being perpendicular to water flow. Improper size and angling and beveling of expanded metal side walls and failure to ensure narrow, rather than broad edges, of expanded metal sidewalls are atop the sidewalls is in large part the reason for “less than could be achieved” water flow-through performance of expanded metal gutter guards overlain by screen: “less than could be achieved” in comparison to the teaching of the present invention.
I discovered by experimenting with the Leaf Solution product at Roll Former® Company in Chalfont Pa. that if I repositioned the products underlying support base (the expanded metal that supports overlying micro mesh) so that the LWO was parallel to oncoming water flow, as it is in some Prior Art, the Leaf Solution product directed or pulled a bit more water downward through the overlying micromesh.
As stated earlier, other prior art had already taught, at least by illustration, positioning the LWO perpendicular to water flow. Though it may exist in the language of a patent, I have found no specification addressing this advantage offered by positioning expanded metal openings so that their LWO is perpendicular to water flow. I am guessing that other manufacturers or inventors did as I did: took whatever expanded metal was readily available and shaped it into a gutter guard without considering or noting the ability of “LWO perpendicular to water flow” products To redirect more water flow downward into an underlying rain gutter that “LWO parallel to water flow” products.
However, what no other prior art has taught and no product presently on the market, that I am aware of, employs is a gutter guard that utilizes expanded metal openings in combination with overlying micromesh filtration in which you would find that LWO expanded metal openings are both perpendicular to oncoming water flow and whose majority of sidewall members are angled upward and toward oncoming water flow and whose sidewalls present their narrow edge, rather than their broader edge, toward oncoming water flow while ensuring the LWO pattern used positions longer or the longest sidewall member perpendicular to oncoming water flow. It is the narrow edge of sidewalls, present in an LWO-perpendicular-to-water-flow-opening, angled upward and toward oncoming water flow”, in combination with an overlying micro mesh or other filtering method art that this application presents as new art.
The new art of the present invention teaches a new method or combination of expanded metal with fine screen that offers an expanded metal/overlain by screen gutter guard which allows copious amounts of water flow-through (through the screen down into the gutter) even when the new invention is installed at pitches as steep as 12/12. Prior Art teaching in 52/12 and products in the field utilizing Expanded Metal/overlain by micro-mesh or fine screen cannot achieve that.
However, as noted; only one of the four possible positions of a LWO pattern, if overlain by a fine screen will exhibit little, if any, water run off past a gutter if the expanded metal/fine screen combination is installed on a gutter in-line with a roof's pitch.
It is also important to note that in the event the sidewalls of a LWO pattern are angled either away from or toward water at angles greater (or less than) 45 degrees it is possible that none of the four positions will achieve a gutter guard that allows significant water flow-through if pitched with a roof. The reason for this is that, although a sidewall may correctly present it's narrow edge on top of the sidewall and although the sidewall may be angled toward water flow: it may be angled too obtusely or too acutely.
There are simple “expanded metal only” (not overlain by micro-mesh or other filter) gutter guard products on the market whose expanded metal openings are both LWO perpendicular to oncoming water flow and whose majority of sidewall members angle upward toward water flow. But there are none on the market or described or illustrated in prior art where it is found that these three properties exist: 1. The expanded metal openings are LWO perpendicular to oncoming water flow 2. The majority of the sidewalls or the largest linear portion sidewall members of the expanded metal openings are angled upward toward oncoming water flow; the top edge of sidewalls faces toward rather than away from oncoming water flow. And: 3. The expanded metal as described in criteria one and two above is overlain by micromesh or other filtering membrane.
There is a range of angle that seems to best capture and redirect oncoming water flow.
Additionally, I am conjecturing (having not yet tested my conjecture) that there is an ideal ratio of narrow top edge to wider bottom edge of a sidewall that best captures and redirects water downwards. I am fairly confident, before testing, that an “inverted pyramid” shaped sidewall will not perform as well as having a narrower type and wider bottom edge or a consistently narrow sidewall. This is just conjecture but as I am rushing to submit this application I will just let the statement be present on record untested.
Gutter Guard inventors (not “knock-off” or copy-cat artists but real inventors) are ever seeking to improve the water permeability of their products, this new art, though easily achieved by repositioning of the underlying expanded metal supporting structure, has not been obvious. I remember the reaction of Bob Schultz, mechanical engineer and part owner of Roll Former Corporation® who has designed many, if not the majority of gutter guard roll forming machines on the market today. When I showed Bob what the repositioning of expanded metal beneath a micro mesh overlay accomplished, he was speechless for a moment: the amount of water this new art redirects downward through itself over prior art is very significant. Anytime I can teach Bob how to do something with a gutter guard he didn't know how to do I feel like I am walking with engineering giants. The same holds true with Jim Zauderer of Global Expanded Metals who manufactured the first expanded metal gutter guard: Jim couldn't identify which of the four positions would work best or explain why that would be the case, either, when we were discussing my prototype of the present invention. In fact, Jim stated something along the lines of: “Alex, (Edward) if we knew how you do what you did we wouldn't be having this discussion”. I have to smile when I write that, and be grateful to the Lord. Jim is a good guy and an honest guy which isn't always the case in our industry.
I mention Jim and Bob because they are two of the most knowledgeable and respected men today in the field of gutter guards and definitely qualify as “experts in the field”. I know that even their expertise and experience doesn't rise to the technical definition of “someone skilled in the art” but still thought the conversations were worth noting.
A product currently on the market today: Micro CS® offered by Gutter Helmet®, whose product literature is included in this application, utilizes a micro mesh cloth overlying a supporting base of a planar surface out of which arises multiple louvers: concaved semi-circles or hoods with open air faces that do face the oncoming flow of water. This art offers a feature: an angled element facing oncoming water flow just as the present invention offers but the difference between the two arts are significant both visually and also in the area of water permeability. Only a small segment of the “hoods” of the Micro CS product contact the under-surface of the cloth and not nearly as much open air space is provided in this art. The louvers or hoods are positioned in linear rows, not in honey-combed fashion as the openings in expanded metal are, and side by side comparisons illustrate that the Micro CS product redirects much less water through it than the new art described in this application: it just has too much solid metal between open-air-space openings with only one water directing plane arising out of and above an open air space rather than six; as an embodiment of the present invention teaches.
The invention employs concepts related to and, in some instances, extrapolated from prior art disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 7,104,012 to Bayram, U.S. Pat. No. 7,730,672 to Knudson, U.S. Pat. No. 7,448,167 to Bachman, U.S. Pat. No. 7,748,171 to Barnett, U.S. Pat. No. 7,740,755 to Wilson and Rassor, U.S. Pat. No. 6,935,074 to Gramling U.S. Pat. No. 7,752,811 to Pavlansky, and U.S. Pat. No. 7,658,036 to Banks.
Referring to
An embodiment of the invention: an insertable gutter guard filter 34, is secured to the rain gutter by inserting the rear portion 34f of the gutter guard filter beneath a roof covering or shingles 35 and by ensuring downward extending plane and engaging element 34e is positioned behind upward extending clip 29c of gutter hanger 29. A top solid plane 34d of the invention will rest on the top front lip of the rain gutter. To ensure little or no gap exists between plane 34d and the front top lip of the rain gutter, the invention's downward extending planes 34b and/or 34e may be bent upward and/or upward extending clip 29c of the gutter hanger may be bent downward.
Once installed, the invention serves as a debris blocking water channeling gutter guard in the following manner: rain 5d will flow off of a roofing membrane 35 contacting a micro max sheer cloth (“sheer cloth” as defined in paragraphs 2 and 3 under the heading SHEER CLOTH found in the DESCRIPTION OF AN EMBODIMENT of this application). The close, but not too close, proximity of the threads within the sheer or “micro max” cloth allow the water coating and adhering to each thread to join in a single heavier column of water spanning the open air space between them which encourages the water to “let go” and cease adhering to the threads and continuing forward water flow along the threads and, instead, drop downward. Were the threads too close or to far from one another, this column of water would not form. The water becomes more attracted to the shared central column of water between the threads than it is to the threads themselves and when the column of water is heavy enough it forms and becomes it's own downward (away from the horizontal plane of the cloth) flow path.
Additionally, any water that does cling to the underside of the sheer cloth is interdicted by the angled and upward extending sidewalls 2a of the expanded metal openings: the water forms a greater adhesive bond with the angled sidewalls than to the cloth and begins to channel down the sidewalls and drop into an underlying gutter. The sidewalls are angled toward water flow and their top edge is narrower than or of the same width as their bottom edge. When the angle of the sidewalls is not acute enough (less than 20 degrees) or oblique, or too acute (greater than 70 degrees) or the sidewalls are angled away from water flow; less water releases from the cloth. The 20 to 70 degree angle offers both the underside and top side of the expanded metal sidewalls as water flow paths to oncoming water that the water will more readily adhere to than the sheer cloth (or any other similar filtering method) it previously adhered to. When the angle is not quite acute enough, or at 90 degrees or greater, the water tends to “see” or be attracted to only one side of an expanded metal sidewall because only one side is readily or immediately available for contact by water. For example: if the sidewall is at a 90 degree angle, oncoming water “sees” and readily contacts the top narrow plane of the sidewall and only has to dip slightly to adhere to the downward extending face of the sidewall facing it, but the backside of the sidewall which is “hidden” from the view of the oncoming water does not present such a readily available or alternative water flow path so any water not captured an redirected downward by the top and front side of the sidewall tends to remain clinging to the sheer cloth and keep flowing forward. Oblique or slightly acute angles also readily offer one side, rather than two sides, of a sidewall to oncoming water.
It has also been noted in testing that sidewalls that have more length: a deeper extension downward of the sidewall, channel more water by discouraging less forward underflow of water. Shallow depth sidewalls make it more probable that water will “loop” around the bottom of the sidewalls and back up to the underside of cloth and keep on forward flowing.
Any water that would not be redirected downward through the water receiving area of sheer cloth (or other filtering membrane) that overlies expanded metal with properly angled sidewalls will be interdicted and directed downward by downward extending inseam or plane 29. Plane 27 is solid or mostly solid and further directs water that contacts it downward and away from the front lip of the gutter. Vertical columns of water tend to form between plane 27 and the overlying water receiving area of the invention that provide more attractive water flow paths to water than are present when water simply free falls down through the water receiving area.
Side by side testing of the present invention which employs sidewalls angled as described has shown it to be demonstrably more effective at capturing and redirecting water downward and at self-cleaning itself of shingle or other oil that may deposit on the invention.
Any water receiving area of any alternative embodiment of the present invention illustrated or described within this application will operate by the same principles described above in this section: “OPERATION OF THE MAIN EMBODIMENT”. Alternative embodiments shown are mostly structural reconfigurations that may make the present invention more readily adaptable to certain circumstances present at installation sites: certain alternative embodiments may allow for easier installation or more water capture and redirection in certain environments. For example:
With this invention a gutter guard system is provided for a gutter which includes an expanded metal water receiving and water re-directing area overlain by a filtering membrane. The expanded metal is expanded “The Long Way of the Diamond” in relation to the expanded metal's longest edge and in relation to a building's fascia board and oncoming water flow off of a building's roof: the openings defined by sidewalls existent in the expanded metal have a length greater than width and the length is parallel to oncoming water flow.
At least two sidewalls of any expanded metal opening angle upward and into oncoming water flow. The sidewalls have top edges that are narrower than or equal to the width of the bottom edges of the sidewall. The expanded metal opening is then overlain by a filtering membrane.
Positioning the expanded metal “Long Way of the Diamond” in relation to oncoming water flow and ensuring at least two of the expanded metal openings' sidewall members are angled upward and forward into water flow, rather than parallel or nearly parallel to it as well as ensuring narrow edges of the sidewalls face oncoming water flow creates strong downward flowing water flow paths in conjunction with overlying micro mesh or other filtering membrane materials.
a is a view of an expanded metal opening “expanded vertically to the long side”, also termed: “short way of the diamond”
b is an exploded view of a segment of an expanded metal gutter guard employing an expanded metal pattern composed of openings “expanded vertically to the long side”
a is a view of an expanded metal opening “expanded horizontally to the long side”, also termed “long way of the diamond”
b is an exploded view of a segment of an expanded metal gutter guard employing an expanded metal pattern “expanded horizontally to the long side”
a is a view representative of angles of tilt and water flow paths that exist in sidewall members of an expanded metal opening “expanded vertically to the long side”
b is a view of an expanded metal opening “expanded vertically to the long side” showing water flow paths along it's top surface
c is a view of micro mesh filtration cloth
a is a view of side wall members of an expanded metal opening “expanded horizontally to the long side” illustrating water flow paths
b is a view of an expanded metal opening “expanded horizontally to the long side” illustrating water flow path patterns that initiate on the top surface of side wall members of the expanded metal opening
c is a view of micro mesh filtration cloth
a is a view of an isolated side wall member of an expanded metal opening “expanded horizontally to the long side” illustrating angles of tilt and bevel existent in itself and associated side wall members.
a is a view of a side wall member of an expanded metal opening “expanded horizontally to the long side in a corrugated embodiment
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
The “horizontal expansion of the long side” also known as “Long Way of the Diamond” or; “LWD” method of expanded metal punching is employed by some manufacturers of expanded metal: referring to
However, simply utilizing “LWD” patterned expanded metal (the expanded metal openings would have their longest dimension parallel to a roof line or fascia board) as a gutter guard or water receiving area for water coming off of a roof does not result in much, if any improvement in water redirection downward. I say this because whenever “LWD” openings are created they are created with angled sidewalls that may be pointed toward or away from oncoming water flow and the top edge and bottom edge of the sidewall may be either narrow and “sharp” or broad and flat. The present invention teaches that the LWD sidewalls must be placed not solely in a position parallel to water flow and then overlain by micromesh; the present invention additionally teaches that two or more of the sidewalls composing the diamond openings must be angled upwards toward oncoming water flow off of a roof and that it is preferable if the top edge angling toward water fall is also a narrower rather than broader width.
Referring to the drawings wherein like reference numerals represent like parts throughout the various figures, reference numeral 2 (
Referring to
This angle is in reference to the horizontal top surface of the flat sheet of metal or plastic from which it was formed. This same angle of tilt exists in sidewalls s2,s3,s4,s5,s6.
Referring to
Utilizing expanded metal that has been “horizontally expanded to the long side” allows the expanded metal pattern (
Overlying such vertically expanded opening with micro mesh (
There is one known gutter guard company recently formed and doing business as Diamondback™, that does utilize metal horizontally expanded to the long side, or LWD, overlain with a fine, but not sheer, stainless steel mesh screen but a critical flaw in the product that inhibits it from redirecting water flow as effectively as the present invention is that the majority of sidewalls of the LWD openings are angled away from, not toward oncoming water flow. I point to this as a “critical flaw” or critical difference between the product and the present invention because of a readily demonstrated ability of the present invention's much greater Ability to capture and redirect forward flowing water downward due to the present invention's unique positioning of the sidewalls of a LWD pattern: ie; forward into oncoming water flow. water than the Diamondback gutter guard. Diamond back advertising also describes the mesh as “having openings not too small, not too large” the openings being 2/100 inch. This type of larger diameter thread mesh with comparatively (to sheer micro mesh employed by the present invention) much larger air space openings allows pine needle tips and quite a bit of other small organic debris as well as shingle grit to pass through the mesh and into the gutter and does not exhibit the capabilities and improvements existent within the present invention that are described within this specification and have been shown to materialize only with the utilization of what is described in this specification as “sheer” micro screen or micro mesh or micro cloth.
In prototype, overlying expanded metal openings that have been “horizontally expanded to the long side” (
As noted earlier: a product currently marketed as Leaf Solution® employs a micro mesh but not a sheer micro-mesh screen overlying an expanded metal pattern employing openings expanded “the short way of the diamond” or SWD and it has been shown to have far less ability to capture and redirect water downward into an underlying gutter than prototypes of the present invention. Leaf Solution employs many elements of my U.S. Pat. No. 6,951,077 which teaches a filter method overlying a supporting skeleton of expanded metal that employs downward extending inseams. At the time I invented Leaf Solution, to the best of my knowledge; neither I nor anyone else had yet discovered or tested combining micro-mesh or filtering methods with expanded metal expanded “the long way of the diamond.” The Leaf Solution product, which employs a “short way of the diamond” pattern tested against the present invention, which employs a “long way of the diamond” pattern offers a convincing demonstration of the “long way of the diamond's” greater ability to redirect water flow downward and self clean of oil, provided the sidewalls of the LWD method are angled upward and toward oncoming water flow.
“Long way of the diamond” patterned gutter guard devices with no overlying filtering membrane have been offered in the past and so have “short way of the diamond” patterned gutter guards. Both patterns; “long way” and “short way” of the diamond take equal amounts of water in medium or heavy rains when not overlain by a filtering method. In light rains, SWD gutter guards should tend to track more water forward rather than downward but once water volume reaches a certain point, enough strong downward flow paths off of the sidewalls into the rain gutter are established and SWD gutter guards perform pretty much the same as LWD gutter guards. However, a “long way of the diamond” patterned gutter guard overlain by a sheer micro-screen filtering method has never been disclosed in Prior Art Applications and never offered for sale or marketed to the best of my knowledge. I don't believe anyone knew of the significant difference such a pattern choice offers when in combination with an overlying filtering method: When I first tested the combination I was greatly surprised at how much more water the sidewalls of the diamonds (overlain by micro-mesh) were able to capture and redirect downward into an underlying gutter compared to gutter guards, such as my Leaf Solution invention, that employed a “short way of the diamond” underlying skeleton overlain by micro-mesh or other filtering membranes.
Without being overlain by micro-mesh or screen, expanded metal gutter guards show no difference in their ability to receive water off of a roof and redirect it's forward flow downward into an underlying rain gutter. In fact, “long way of the diamond” gutter guards are more subject to trapping and holding debris than “short way of the diamond” gutter guards because the “LWD”
Greater depths or downward extending vertical lengths (
Vertical height of the sidewall can't be made too long because more surface area gathers more oil and pollen deposits that must be cleaned by down flowing water. Vertical height of the sidewall can't be made too short because an underflow of water will occur in which water will sheet on the underside of the micro screen and shallow expanded metal and cling to both their undersides and flow forward. The preferred dimensions of expanded metal openings that have been “horizontally expanded to the long side” are ones in which the horizontal width (
Referring to (
Referring to (FIG. 6,6a) it is illustrated that sidewalls such as s4 composing the expanded metal opening may be corrugated 4m.
Referring to (
Referring to
1. The pattern should be formed of more than 4 sidewall members.
2. At least two sidewall members (in the pattern shown in
3. At least one of the two sidewall members (S1 and S5) that are perpendicular to oncoming water flow OWF should be as long as any other sidewall member present in the LWO pattern or, preferably: the longest sidewall member of the LWO pattern as S5 is in the pattern shown.
4. The longest sidewall member, that is perpendicular to water flow, should “stack” atop or be in line with, not beneath, the sidewall member immediately behind it (in
5. Each of the sidewall members present a narrow and/or narrowest top edge angled toward on-coming water flow.
Referring to (
Referring to
Warp knitted cloth has so far proven to be the most effective at water capture and redirection, when employed as taught in my earlier patents and in this specification, but is not, to date, a type of weave that can be achieved in metallic threaded cloths.
When employing metallic threaded cloth; non uniform warp and weft screens or cloths overlying standard expanded metal that has been expanded “the long way of the diamond” allows the present invention to capture the greatest amount of oncoming rainwater flowing toward it than filtration cloths and micro screens utilizing more uniform warp and weft construction which are now commonly employed by gutter guard devices available in the market place today. However, whether using uniform or non-uniform warp and weft, ensuring the mesh or screen is sheer by utilizing small diameter threads and achieving at least 35% open air space will enable the sheer cloth to counter-intuitively become very water permeable even when the cloth is held at an angle while receiving on-coming water. Typically, non sheer multi threaded cloths of more than 80 threads per inch will shed water much like a tent cloth does when held at an angle, sheer cloth much more readily directs the water downward through itself although it may appear solid.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to (
Referring to (
Referring to (
Referring to (
Referring to (
However, unlike previously tested fine and micro screens and cloths that require a point of contact by a downward extending object on their underside to break the forward flow or sheeting of water, the unusually sheer 120 mesh that employed 0.056 and 0.057 diameter warp and fill threads, respectively, exhibited very little forward channeling of water when the sheer mesh cloth is tilted at angles. This is an important discovery because most gutter guards are tilted at angles more in line with roof pitch to facilitate the falling away of leaves and other debris: Any micro screen or cloth that possessed an intrinsic, unilateral-non-assisted-by-other structures, capability of breaking forward water flow while screening fine debris would enhance any prior art method's ability to capture forward flowing water and redirect it downward if such prior art employed fine or other filtering screens or cloths. The reason it would enhance is that the more easily and readily water is directed downward, the less opportunity there is for pollutants in the water to settle on screen and underlying surfaces and, for already deposited organic oil or scum accumulations present from pine needles and other debris, the more readily such pre-water flow existent pollutants will be cleaned and washed off of the screen and underlying surfaces.
For the purpose of this specification the term “sheer” will mean any cloth or micro screen composed of no fewer than 80 threads per inch, such threads exhibiting diameters At least 15% smaller than commonly used thread diameters used and published in catalog offerings by companies that manufacture micro screen or cloth products. As an example, most steel wire cloth manufacturers publish available thread diameters of approximately 0.08 mm for their manufacture of 120 mesh wire cloth. However, the “sheer” cloth I requested and tested, and not commonly offered, is composed of threads with diameters of 0.056 and 0.057 Which are approximately 30% smaller than the standard 0.08 mm thread found in 120 mesh stainless steel micro screen.
Of any micro screen cloth I've ever tested over the years, none has ever shed oil as this “sheer cloth” embodiment does. Pouring car oil or other oils on the cloth have almost no effect on it's ability to take water from it's top surface and direct it downward. Water almost instantaneously pushes through the oil and drops down through the cloth even when the cloth is tilted at angles. The “pour oil on it” test is a very good indicator of how well a product will or will not avoid water proofing in the field from leached shingle oil and other oil based pollutants.
Referring to (
Referring to
It is understood that the present invention is not limited to any particular shape of thread. Threads with grooves, spiral grooves, or intermittent depressions or compressions serve to capture and channel water in unique ways and such threads may be utilized within embodiments described within this specification. Threads of different composition may offer desirable features such as interweaving copper threads with stainless steel to thwart moss or mildew growth. Varying thread sizes may allow for extremely sheer and high numbered thread count micro screens to be employed by this invention, for example: warp threads with diameters of 0.057 mm could be employed at 120 threads per inch for strength while weft threads of 0.03 mm diameter could be employed to achieve 300 threads per inch which may serve to screen or filter certain organisms from entering a rain gutter/gutter guard combination utilized for rain harvesting.
Referring to (FIG. 24,25) 2a2 recessed, downwardly depressed or embossed channels or wells are shown existing within the body of a metal plane expanded horizontally to the long side. It is also illustrated that elements 19 may be placed within these wells and then, referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
It is also illustrated that a rain gutter 33 is installed by means of gutter hanger 29 which utilizes rear clip 29b to loop over an upward extending plane 31c of receiving channel 31b.
Referring to
Referring to
Any amount of water that follows around reverse curve 22 will be directed to contact the water receiving area of upward extending plane 34a where it will fall through and downward contacting solid plane 34b and continuing to flow down plane 34c and into the underlying rain gutter. Planes 34a, 34b, and 34c comprise insertable filter element 34 which is shown inserted into the filter element receiving channel of embodiment 22 of the invention. Plane 34b rests on the top lip of rain gutter 34.
Referring to (
Referring to
This application is related to U.S. Ser. No. 13/400,229 Abandoned
