[LB012146], Memorandum, Richard Nott Dyer, April 24th, 1882
https://edisondigital.rutgers.edu/document/LB012146
→ View document with UniversalViewer
→ View document on Archive.org
→ Re-use this digital object via a IIIF manifest
Title
[LB012146], Memorandum, Richard Nott Dyer, April 24th, 1882
Editor's Notes
German appla No. 9##Memorandum of points for argument.##The Principal objection of Messrs Siemens and Halske to his application seems to be that it is for the application of generally known scientific principles and methods.##This objection is a weak one on its face, since a specific construction or combination, involving the application of well known laws to a new use not itself obvious or analogous to uses already madeof the laws, is undoubtedly patentable. And generally it may be stated that every invention, no matter how ingenious and meritorious, favors upon analysis to be only for the application of well known laws.##The more simple, practicable and valuable the invention is, the more clearly the [---th] of this proposition is seen.#In fact no improvement can be made, without laws being found in the text books of the science to which the improvement relates setting forth the principle upon which the improvement is based. The specific application of the laws, the discovery of their usefulness for a certain new purpose, and the constrruction of the means necessary for making the specific application come within the province of the inventor.##The first claim on the use of feeding conductors without lamps is the most improtant and it covers a construction which is highly efficient and ingenious.##So far as I know circuits have all been run straight off from the source of electrical energy.##But when lamp circuits were run in this way, for incandescent lamps arranged in multiple arc, it was found that the drop in pressure was very great in conductors of econominical size, and that the lamps at the outer end of the circuit were of less candle power than those near the generators. To make the candle power of all the lamps equal or practically equal, the feeding conductors are used They run from the generators to centers of consumption - that is each set of feeding conductors runs to the center or as nearly as possible to the center of a number of lamp circuits. There are no lamp circuits connected with the feeding conductors. The principal "drop" will occur upon the feeding conductors, say from eight to fifteen per centum while from the ends of the feeders to the lamps the "drop" will be small, say for instance, two percentum This last "drop" is not sufficient to make any visible differences in the lamps even when we compare lamps located farthest from the termination of the feeders with those placed directly at the ends of such feeders.##I cannot see how this specific arrangement of circuits, can be said to involve nothing but an obvious or unpatentable application of well known laws.##The idea of having the feeding conductors run to centers of consumption is one which is included in the spirit and perhaps in the terms of the first claim. However it seems to me that it would be well to include it in definite terms in the claim.##The 2d and 3d claims on the opening conductors, and the 4th claim on the use of the ground as a return are more open to the objections advanced by Siemens and Halske. Their arguments seems to be directed principally against these claims, and it is apparent, that they hope by overthrowing these claims to [serve] the rejection of the more important matters of specific arrangement and construction embodies in the case.##The 2d, 3d and 4th claims can be erased if it is considered that their retention endangers the other claims, since Mr Edison now considers them of little or no importance. Figures [1, 1a and 1b] might also be cancelled and the description relating thereto. I think that the erasure of these claims would knock the bottom out of the arguments advanced by Siemens and Halske.##In regard to the 5th claim, the idea is to arrange the circuits, so that those of all the lamps will be in circuits of the same resistance, or will be equidistant electrically from the central station. Figures 9, 10, 11 and 12 show a specific way of carrying out the principle illustrated by this diagram [art] G is the generator: 1, 2 a double and a single conductor: and [Zo1 Zo1, and Zo3] lamps arranged at three points. Lamp Z1 is nearest G on 2 but is farthest away fron G on 1. [Zop2 is farther from G on 2 but to the same extent nearer on 1. The distance lost or made up, by change of position, on one conductor, is made up or lost on the other. Hence the circuits of all the lamps will be the same in resistance and all the lamps will be equi-distant electrically from the generator. This arrangement could not be applied without change to a general system of electrical distribution, and for that reason the specific arrangement shown in figures 9, 10, 11 and 12 had to be devised. The 5th claim includes also the use of feeding conductors without lampos and service conductors with lamps##The difference between this claim and the 1st claim is the peculiar arrangement by which all aprts of the service circuit are made equi-distant electrically from the central station.##If not in case 9, and if it could be done without endangering the 1st and 5th claims, I would advise the insertion in this case of a claim the same in substance as the 12th claim of case no. 9 when first filed. This claim could be about as follows:##"The arrangement of conductors for a system of electrical distribution, consisting in laying service conductors around the separate blocks and connecting the service conductors of a series of blocks together by cross connections, and providing main or feeding conductors from the source of supply to such service conductors, substantially as set forth." However if this matter is considered as included in the present 5th claim, or if it's [inclusion] could prejudice the case in any way, it can be left out
Author
Mentioned
Date
1882-04-24
Type
Folder/Volume ID
LB012-F
Microfilm ID
81:583
Document ID
LB012146
Publisher
Thomas A. Edison Papers, School of Arts and Sciences, Rutgers University