Interesting HRA on ebay

[Adrian]

Looks like a Phill but it's probably from China:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160426572423&fromMakeTrack=true&ssPageName=VIP:watchlink:top:en

[cowboy]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

very pricey for 1 gge hr will it pass us standerds? still cheaper than fuelmaker having 10000 hr s I still like my compresser at 9 gge hr I only put 1 hr on it for every 9 hrs it would take to pump the same # gge with fuelmaker or this . has this got oil in it or does it run dry like fuelmaker?

[Gerben]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

Very interesting indeed. I doubt it will pass US standards, but you never know. It's not that expensive for 1 GGE/hr, similar to an FMQ. No oil lubricated compressor would run 10,000 hrs without maintenance, so it has to be a dry running compressor.
The supplier is Chen Industrial: www.chenindustrial.com

[BobBaldwin]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

I saw a new HRA at the AFVi this week in Las Vegas and they are testing theirs now and hope to have it released by fall. Very nice looking unit. They are expecting a price point of $3500-$4000.

[lcovelli]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

I saw a new HRA at the AFVi this week in Las Vegas and they are testing theirs now and hope to have it released by fall. Very nice looking unit. They are expecting a price point of $3500-$4000.

Very nice price point there, thanks BobBaldwin.. Do you have any pictures or websites?

[Amfuel]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

Any compressor with over 50 cu/ft/hr would not be legal to install indoors. That is about 0.42 gge/hr. The capability of the FM Phill system. (Legal Limit) The Chen specs don't match up to the design so be very careful, you may get a box with a plastic cover and a hose. (I've heard of that scenario before.) It is likely a Chinese knock off and inferior. Any company can claim the world if they can't be found next month.

[Dick]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

Sure looks like a Phill knock off or copy. Surprised that BRC is not threatening patent infringement.

[BobBaldwin]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

Here you go lcovelli:

NatGasCar, LLC is the company name. http://www.natgascar.com/products.php

[HRAguy]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

Here are the allowable NFPA 52 Residential flow rates.

Chapter 10 CNG Residential Fueling Facilities
10.1 Application.
10.1.1 This chapter applies to the design, construction, installation, and operation of a residential fueling facility (RFF).
10.1.2 The capacity of an RFF shall not exceed 5 Scf/min (0.14 standard cubic meter/min) of natural gas.
10.1.3 Storage of CNG shall be prohibited.
Exception: CNG shall be permitted to be stored in the vehicle fuel supply container.

The FMQ 2 has about a 2 scf/m (1 gge) flow and the Phill was about half of that.

The flow on this "new home refueler" looks like it should be fine.

[John Mitton]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

HRAguy, you really ought to lend your expertise to the NatGasCar folks. I also visited with them this week in Vegas and they seem to be on the right track.

[HRAguy]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

I very much doubt that there would be any infringement, the vast majority of the FuelMaker patents are related to the design of the compression module itself, and most of them expire in 2011 or 2012. Those “FuelMaker” Patents are actually sublicensed from Sulzer. .

The remaining Patents that would relate to this new HRA product are the Blowback detection, dryer, breakaway, and mounting arrangement patents which not expire for another 10-20 years. Fortunately, they are all relatively easy to design around.

If BRC were to make any challenges, it would be a costly undertaking with very little chance of success. (in my opinion) Even if they did somehow manage to get a favorable court ruling, they would only be awarded a percentage of the profits of this new start-up company. Since this new HRA is probably still several years away from being highly profitably, and the patents expire in 2019 – 2013, it would not make much sense to go through the trouble of nuisance suit. (only the lawyers would profit)

It is also very unlikely that Honda will do much to support BRC, in-fact according to the purchase agreement between BRC and Honda, it looks like Honda is walking away from the whole CNG industry. (at least for the next 36 months)

************************************************** *************
Under the Honda Agreement, entered into on April 30, 2009 by MTM, American Honda Motor Co., Inc. and 2045951 Ontario Inc. (the "Sellers"), MTM will make payments totaling $4,403,040 to the Sellers in exchange for certain assets and technology. As part of the transaction, each of the Sellers has agreed that for 48 months following the closing of the transaction each Seller will not, anywhere in the world, engage or participate in (whether as owner, operator, member, interest holder, trustee, manager, consultant, strategic partner or otherwise) the business of manufacturing, marketing, distributing or selling compressed natural gas refueling systems for motor vehicles in residential and commercial markets.

Then again, I could be wrong.
I do know the HRA Patents very intimately, and know both the good and bad of them. (remember these patents were also written well before the product was ever released, some of the “protected” design was either unworkable in production or obsoleted in the Gen 1.5 HRA)

[jschaub]

Re: Interesting HRA on ebay

If BRC were to make any challenges, it would be a costly undertaking with very little chance of success. (in my opinion) Even if they did somehow manage to get a favorable court ruling, they would only be awarded a percentage of the profits of this new start-up company. Since this new HRA is probably still several years away from being highly profitably, and the patents expire in 2019 – 2013, it would not make much sense to go through the trouble of nuisance suit. (only the lawyers would profit)

Success in this context can be measured many ways. It depends what your end game is.

I have not looked at the patents and have no opinion on their validity or breadth.

But speaking in general terms, some companies assert patents with hopes of huge damage awards. Some companies assert or threaten to assert patents with hopes of having the alleged infringer agree to a license. And some companies assert patents with the hope of driving actual or potential competitors out of business. The latter is sometimes achieved by the patent holder getting the Court to issue an injunction to prevent the alleged infringer from selling its product while the Court sorts through the issues. Small companies with limited funds and narrowly focused product lines may not be able to withstand a protracted litigation with huge attorneys fees, particularly when they are no longer receiving revenue from the products alleged to infringe.