The defense community in Maryland is an R&D powerhouse. Use this database to see the innovative patents that are poised for commercialization.Data is provided by DoD Naval labs in Southern Maryland. Database funding supported by the DoD Office of Economic Adjustment through a Defense Industry Adjustment grant program.
|Abstract||A shape charge holder includes a platform where all the charges are symmetrically positioned about equidistance from each adjacent charge and about an equal distance from a center point. The center point is generally the centroid of the platform. The holder has an explosive bridge fixture which enables simultaneous detonation of at least three shape charges. The charges are angularly mounted in sockets having holes through the platform. When detonated, each jet formed by the exploding shape charge proceeds to a convergence point located orthogonal to the platform. The holder includes a supporting structure that establishes a standoff distance of the platform/charges from a target. In operation, the explosive fixture is attached to each charge and is filled with an explosive that extends to each charge. The explosive fixture includes a single igniter assuring that when the explosive is detonated, so are the shape charges.|
|Patent Number||8,904,935||Issue Date||2014-12-09||Link USPTO website|
This patent was granted in 1 year, 220 days, which is a faster than average speed.
It has 17 claims, which is fewer than average for this category.
Its proximity to basic research is much less than others in this category, and it displays a much slower than average technology cycle time.
This patent received far fewer citations from other patents, and references far fewer other patents, as compared to other patents in this category.
This patent had a faster than average grant time compared to others in this category.
Patent grant time can be influenced by many factors. Activities within the USPTO that are beyond the control of patent attornies can influence grant time, but short grant times can also indicate well-written patents and dedicated efforts to respond rapidly to USPTO office actions with strong arguments. Shorter grant times are preferable, and the scores for this section are inverse measures — higher scores are better.
This patent has fewer claims compared to others in this category.
The number of claims in a patent is correlated with its strength. Because greater claim counts increase the cost of a patent, more claims can indicate the importance an applicant assigns to a patent. Importantly, some may elect to file claims across multiple patents. A higher score in this metric indicates more claims, relative to others in this category.
This patent has received far fewer citations from other patents, than others in this category.
Citations from other patents are an important measure of the significance of a patent. More citations indicate that other technologies build on a patent. Higher scores in this metric are better, and indicate more citations from other patents.
This patent referenced many more citations to other patents, than others in this category.
A lower number of citations to other patents can be a sign of diminished patent strength. More citations indicate dependence on more other technologies. Higher scores in this category are better, and indicate fewer citations to other patents.
This patent has much less proximity to basic research compared to others in this category.
Proximity to basic research is measured by comparing the number of citations to non-patent literature among a cohort of patents. Because most non-patent citations are primary research papers, a higher count indicates greater proximity to basic research.