Could any ECE fags help me reverse engineer the component values for this patent's schematic? (US2015007812A1) It's an air ionizing device designed for plants.I'm not sure if this is illegal or not, but the company who sold this went defunct so I don't really care.>inb4 electroculture is a memeIf it's good enough for illegal weed growers it's good enough for me.
>>3001917Electroculture is a bug repellent.>keep bug off>plant grow gooder
>>3001917Component values are literally on there.>patentI really hate the mental illness that IP is. There is nothing novel in this most simple device, if anything it is a novel combination of several very common concepts.Then again AFAIK you can register a patent on anything. The patent office will gladly take your money and you'll just use it for marketing purposes anything. Your patent lasts until someone who can prove prior work files a complaint. But as I said: IP is infantile to begin with.Anyways. All this does:Power source (not even implemented a simple power path controler), oscillator to drive a transformer (very poorly I must say, not even sure if the thing resets), multiplier.>Air ionizing deviceI expect some electrolyte filled glass electrodes at output or something.>inb4 ZVS driverKYS
>>3001921I just have to double post. The thing is absolutely cancerous and it is very obvious the persom who did this is an imbecile and has neither education nor experience. Layout is poorly drawn and sometimes fails to convey intent, intent is only obvious because the whole thing is so painfully simple.>No phase dot on xformer
>>3001922Thanks for the warning.
>>3001917This is very bad, you'd be better off looking at the schematic of any commercial HVDC supply. That being said, if you're still on the level of asking for component values, you're very likely to get killed or start a fire building the high voltage output side. There are a lot of annoying pitfalls regarding the component selection and physical layout which the patent likely handwaves away as being known to a Person Skilled In The Art which are hard to learn unless you actually open one of these up.
>>3001917>US2015007812A1No. Tryhttps://patents.google.com/patent/US20150070812A1/en?oq=US20150070812A1>>3001921>There is nothing novel in this most simple device,You did notice that it was nebver a patent? It was only ever an application and it was abandoned.
>>3001917Build a Van de Graaff generator and run it from a water wheel.
>>3002039The fact that the company went out of business instead of being bought was also a clue that it was dogshit. In this day and age the only reason to try and develop anything novel and patent it is so some larger company comes along and pays you a fact stack of cash so they can add it to their Infinity Gauntlet.
