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 mechanical firing adapter for an igniter, such as an M81, to enable remotely firing the igniter using a robot, such as a MTRS. MTRS are used in the disposal/disruption of IEDs. Igniters are generally used with a shock tube, a type of fuse that is used with explosive charges, like shape charges. The adapter has a base plate with a first area to secure the igniter, a second area to withdraw the igniter's pull-rod by the attached pull-ring, and a compound assembly that interfaces with a robot. The pull-ring is attached to a sled that moves rearward when a clinching force is applied to opposing paddles, which causes the connected angled articulating struts to spread open. The paddles are moved closer by a remote controlled robotic jaw, and this closing movement causes the sled to move rearward, pulling out the pull-rod, which sets off the explosive.|
|Patent Number||9,021,956||Issue Date||2015-05-05||Link USPTO website|
This patent was granted in 2 years, 2 days, which is a slower than average speed.
It has 21 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 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 slower 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.