DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is in responsive to the applicant’s arguments filed on 9/16/25.
2. The present application is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
3. Claims 1-12 and 14-39 are currently pending.
4. Claims 1, 12 and 14-15 are amended. Claims 6, 8-9 and 17 are original.
5. Claims 2-5, 7, 10, 16, 18-38 are previously presented. Claim 39 is new.
Response to Arguments
Response: 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C. § 103
6. Applicants argue:
The applicant argues that the Ishibashi reference doesn’t teach the amended limitation of
claim 1 that states “obtaining evaluation values for the wire when the movable unit is moved,
the evaluation values being obtained for multiple changes of the fixed position and/or the
length within a search range” (Remarks: pages 12-14)
7. Examiner Response:
The examiner notes that the Ishibashi reference teaches the recent amendment shown above in section 6 of the current office action. In paragraph [0037] of the Ishibashi reference it teaches that the movement of the wire rod that’s attached to the robot is matched to the movement of the robot. This process allows for the ability to check for interference between the wire rod and other equipment. The examiner considers the checking for interference between the wire rod and other equipment to be the evaluation values, since interference between the wire rod and other equipment is checked based on the movement of the robot. Also, the examiner notes that the shape of the wire rod changes as the robot moves to a different position. The examiner considers the initial position of the wire attached to the rod as being the fixed position and the movement of the wire when the robot moves as being the changing of the fixed position and/or length.
Also, in paragraph [0012] of the Ishibashi reference, it teaches that a calculation unit performs a calculation process of a coordinate change calculation of a fixed point. This demonstrates that the fixed position of the wire rod is changed and that evaluation values for the wire rod are obtained.
8. Examiner Response:
The examiner notes that the applicant’s arguments regarding claim 14 are the same arguments as shown for claim 1 and are rejected using the same teachings.
The examiner’s response regarding the applicant’s arguments to the newly added claim is shown below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the
basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 10-12, 15, 19-20, 23, 25, 27-33, 35-36 and 38 is/are rejected under 35
U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ishibashi (JP H07182017) (from IDS dated 12/1/20).
With respect to claim 1, Ishibashi discloses “An information processing method executed by a processor” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0001] “The present invention relates to a method for simulating a robot operation using a computer, and more particularly to a simulation method for predicting a shape change of a wire rod attached to a robot”)];
“obtaining a fixed position of a wire relative to a movable unit when the wire is installed in the movable unit and/or a length of the wire relative to the movable unit when the wire is installed in the movable unit, wherein the fixed position and/or the length are values related to the wiring design for the movable unit” as [Ishibashi (paragraph 0006] “In order to solve the above-mentioned object, the present invention provides the coordinates of a plurality of fixed points supporting a wire rod attached to a robot, tangent vectors at the fixed points, Recognizes the length of the line material between adjacent fixed points, converts the coordinate position of the fixed point and tangent vector based on the amount of movement of the movable part of the robot, and converts the fixed point and tangent vector after conversion”, Ishibashi (paragraph [0037] “As described above, according to the method for simulating a wire rod of the present invention, the movement of the wire rod attached to the robot, such as a power cable, a pneumatic hose, and a hydraulic hose, is matched with the movement of the robot. Therefore, it is possible to check the interference between the wire rod and other equipment, thereby enabling more accurate simulation and high-accuracy offline programming.”, The examiner considers the initial position of the wire attached to the rod as being the fixed position and the movement of the wire when the robot moves as being the changing of the fixed position and/or length.)];
“obtaining evaluation values for the wire when the movable unit is moved, the
evaluation values being obtained for multiple changes of the fixed position and/or the
length within a search range” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0007] “The simulation method of the present invention constructed as described above predicts the movement of the shape of the wire rod attached to the robot accurately and with high accuracy, so when actually installing and operating the robot”, Ishibashi paragraph [0024] “Next, the shape of the wire rod between the adjacent fixed points is approximated as a cubic curve expression of a vector represented by Pi (t) = A + Bt + Ct 2 + Dt 3, and the position vector of the adjacent fixed point at the operated position From Se (i), Se (i + 1), the properties of the line material, for example, the clamp factor α determined by the minimum bending radius, and the tangent vectors Qe (i), Qe (i + 1) at the fixed point, before and after the operation The coefficient of the cubic curve is obtained on the condition of the length L (i) of the wire rod between the adjacent fixed points that does not change in (Step 5).”, Ishibashi paragraph [0037] “As described above, according to the method for simulating a wire rod of the present invention, the movement of the wire rod attached to the robot, such as a power cable, a pneumatic hose, and a hydraulic hose, is matched with the movement of the robot. Therefore, it is possible to check the interference between the wire rod and other equipment, thereby enabling more accurate simulation and high-accuracy offline programming”, The examiner considers the checking for interference between the wire rod and other equipment to be the evaluation values, since interference between the wire rod and other equipment is checked based on the movement of the robot. Also, the examiner notes that the shape of the wire rod changes as the robot moves to a different position. The examiner considers the initial position of the wire attached to the rod as being the fixed position and the movement of the wire when the robot moves as being the changing of the fixed position and/or length.
“and outputting an information of the fixed position and/or the length satisfying a predetermined condition based on the evaluation values” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0020] “First, as an initial setting, as shown in FIG. 5, the position vector Ss (i) of the fixed point where the cable 4 is supported in the standard posture of the robot 1 and the tangent vector Qs (i) at the fixed point are adjacent to each other. The length L (i) of the wire rod between the fixed points to be read is read (step 1).”, The initial setting of the position of where the cable is supported on the robot is known, which demonstrates that the information about the fixed position is outputted)];
With respect to claim 2, Ishibashi discloses “setting, by the processor, an initial value of the fixed position and/or an initial value of the length of the wire based on user operation” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0010] “The input device 2 for reading input data such as the coordinate data of the fixed point or the change amount of the movable part of the robot and sending it to the simulator main body 1 and the data to be output such as the processing result are written out from the simulator main body 1 to the outside”)];
“setting, by the processor, search conditions based on user operation” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0012] “The simulator body 1 includes a storage unit 4 that stores input data such as fixed point coordinate data read from the input device 2 and movable part change amount data, the shape of the robot, and interference conditions between the robot work space and other equipment. A definition unit 5 that defines various conditions such as a calculation unit 6 that performs various calculation processes such as a coordinate change calculation of a fixed point, a coefficient calculation of a curve expression representing the shape of a linear material based on input data, and an interference check, In addition, the control unit 7 includes a control unit 7 that extracts and decodes instructions constituting the program stored in the storage unit 4 one by one and gives necessary instructions to the respective devices.”, The examiner considers the input data from an input device to be the user operation, since the input data is based on the input by a user. Also, the examiner considers the conditions that are defined within the definition unit to be the search conditions, since these conditions are used to calculate a coordinate change of a fixed point)];
“the search conditions including range of changing the fixed position and/or the
length” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0012] “A definition unit 5 that defines various conditions such
as a calculation unit 6 that performs various calculation processes such as a coordinate change
calculation of a fixed point, a coefficient calculation of a curve expression representing the
shape of a linear material based on input data, and an interference check”)];
With respect to claim 10, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor searches the
wire model having the length and/or the fixed position that satisfy the predetermined conditions by a genetic algorism” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0012] “The simulator body 1 includes a storage unit 4 that stores input data such as fixed point coordinate data read from the input device 2 and movable part change amount data, the shape of the robot, and interference conditions between the robot work space and other equipment. A definition unit 5 that defines various conditions such as a calculation unit 6 that performs various calculation processes such as a coordinate change calculation of a fixed point, a coefficient calculation of a curve expression representing the shape of a linear material based on input data, and an interference check, In addition, the control unit 7 includes a control unit 7 that extracts and decodes instructions constituting the program stored in the storage unit 4 one by one and gives necessary instructions to the respective devices”)];
With respect to claim 11, Ishibashi discloses “A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium configured to store a control program for executing processes of the information processing method according to claim 1.” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0010] “As shown in FIG. 1, an apparatus for realizing a simulation method according to the present invention supports a simulator main body 1 as a central processing unit”, Having a central processing unit (CPU) demonstrates that there’s a computer-readable recording medium, since a medium is embedded within a processor and a processor is embedded within a CPU)];
With respect to claim 12, Ishibashi discloses “A robot device comprising a wire having fixed position and a length output by, an information processing method and satisfying the predetermined condition” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0001] “The present invention relates to a method for simulating a robot operation using a computer, and more particularly to a simulation method for predicting a shape change of a wire rod attached to a robot”, Ishibashi paragraph [0006] “In order to solve the above-mentioned object, the present invention provides the coordinates of a plurality of fixed points supporting a wire rod attached to a robot, tangent vectors at the fixed points, Recognizes the length of the line material between adjacent fixed points, converts the coordinate position of the fixed point and tangent vector based on the amount of movement of the movable part of the robot, and converts the fixed point and tangent vector after conversion)];
The other limitations of the claim recite the same substantive limitations as claim 1 above, and are rejected using the same teachings.
With respect to claim 15, Ishibashi discloses “An information processing apparatus” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0009] “FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram showing the configuration of an apparatus for realizing a simulation method according to the present invention”)];
The other limitations of the claim recite the same substantive limitations of claim 1 above, and are rejected using the same teachings.
With respect to claim 19, Ishibashi discloses “a user interface unit that receives user operation for setting the initial value of at least one fixed position of the wire provided in the movable unit and/or the initial value of the length of the wire” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0011] “For example, the input device 1 includes a keyboard, the simulator body 1 includes a workstation, and the output device 3 includes a display device.”, Ishibashi paragraph [0012] “The simulator body 1 includes a storage unit 4 that stores input data such as fixed point coordinate data read from the input device 2 and movable part change amount data, the shape of the robot, and interference conditions between the robot work space and other equipment”, By having an input device and a display device where a user can input data and see the results of the data that has been simulated, demonstrates that there’s a user interface)];
With respect to claim 20, Ishibashi discloses “a user interface unit that receives user operation for setting a search conditions including the physical constraints to be satisfied by the wire in association with the motion of the movable unit” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0012] “The simulator body 1 includes a storage unit 4 that stores input data such as fixed point coordinate data read from the input device 2 and movable part change amount data, the shape of the robot, and interference conditions between the robot work space and other equipment.”, The examiner considers the interference to be the physical constraints, since the physical constraints can include interference, see paragraph [0065] of the specification)];
With respect to claim 23, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor sets range of changing the fixed position and/or the length based on an allowable range to the length of the wire and/or an allowable range to the fixed position in the robot.” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0006] “In order to solve the above-mentioned object, the present invention provides the coordinates of a plurality of fixed points supporting a wire rod attached to a robot, tangent vectors at the fixed points, Recognizes the length of the line material between adjacent fixed points, converts the coordinate position of the fixed point and tangent vector based on the amount of movement of the movable part of the robot, and converts the fixed point and tangent vector after conversion Based on the value of the coordinate position and the length of the line material between the adjacent fixed points, the coefficient of the curve formula representing the shape of the line material between the adjacent fixed points is calculated, and the robot is operated. It is a method for simulating a wire rod characterized by predicting deformation of the attached wire rod material generated by following”, The examiner considers the length of the line material to be the allowable range of the wire, since the deformation of the attached wire rod material is based on the length of the line material)];
With respect to claim 25, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor obtains the evaluation values based on changes of a radius of curvature of the wire” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0007] “The simulation method of the present invention constructed as described above predicts the movement of the shape of the wire rod attached to the robot accurately and with high accuracy, so when actually installing and operating the robot”, The shape of the wire rod changes with the movement of the robot)];
With respect to claim 27, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor outputs the information of a the fixed position and/or the length with the highest evaluation value or up to at least second rank of the evaluation value” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0020] “First, as an initial setting, as shown in FIG. 5, the position vector Ss (i) of the fixed point where the cable 4 is supported in the standard posture of the robot 1 and the tangent vector Qs (i) at the fixed point are adjacent to each other. The length L (i) of the wire rod between the fixed points to be read is read (step 1).”, Ishibashi paragraph [0026] “Next, the obtained coefficient is substituted into the cubic curve, and the shape of the wire rod is simulated and displayed (step 6).”, The position of the fixed points where the cable(wire) is supported on the robot is set, where the shape of the wire rod is simulated and displayed)];
With respect to claim 28, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor outputs the information of the fixed position and/or a length having satisfied the predetermined conditions for a longest time” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0020] “First, as an initial setting, as shown in FIG. 5, the position vector Ss (i) of the fixed point where the cable 4 is supported in the standard posture of the robot 1 and the tangent vector Qs (i) at the fixed point are adjacent to each other. The length L (i) of the wire rod between the fixed points to be read is read (step 1).”, Ishibashi paragraph [0026] “Next, the obtained coefficient is substituted into the cubic curve, and the shape of the wire rod is simulated and displayed (step 6).”, The initial setting of the position of where the cable is supported on the robot is known, which demonstrates that the information about the fixed position is outputted)];
With respect to claim 29, Ishibashi discloses “displaying a process of simulation of the wire”. as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0009] “FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram showing the configuration of an apparatus for realizing a simulation method according to the present invention, FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of the overall configuration of a robot targeted by the simulation method according to the present invention, and FIG. FIG. 4 is a flowchart for explaining the simulation method according to the present invention,”, Ishibashi paragraph [0026] “Next, the obtained coefficient is substituted into the cubic curve, and the shape of the wire rod is simulated and displayed (step 6).”)];
With respect to claim 30, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor changes the fixed position and/or the length by using a genetic algorism” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0012] “A definition unit 5 that defines various conditions such as a calculation unit 6 that performs various calculation processes such as a coordinate change calculation of a fixed point, a coefficient calculation of a curve expression representing the shape of a linear material based on input data, and an interference check”, The examiner considers the calculation unit that performs various calculation processes to be the genetic algorism that is used in changing the holding position and/or a length, since the a calculation that the calculation unit performs is the coordinate change calculation of a fixed point)];
With respect to claim 31, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor sets range of changing the fixed position and/or the length based on types of the wire.” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0005] “The present invention has been made in view of such problems of the prior art, and the shape of the wire material such as a power cable, a cooling water hose, and a pneumatic hose attached to the robot during the simulation of the robot.”, Ishibashi (paragraph [0006] “In order to solve the above-mentioned object, the present invention provides the coordinates of a plurality of fixed points supporting a wire rod attached to a robot, tangent vectors at the fixed points, Recognizes the length of the line material between adjacent fixed points, converts the coordinate position of the fixed point and tangent vector based on the amount of movement of the movable part of the robot, and converts the fixed point and tangent vector after conversion Based on the value of the coordinate position and the length of the line material between the adjacent fixed points, the coefficient of the curve formula representing the shape of the line material between the adjacent fixed points is calculated, and the robot is operated. It is a method for simulating a wire rod characterized by predicting deformation of the attached wire rod material generated by following”)];
With respect to claim 32, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor sets the fixed
position of the wire in the movable unit based on relative coordinates with respect to the movable unit or numbers or names appropriately allotted to positions on the movable unit” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0006] “In order to solve the above-mentioned object, the present invention provides the coordinates of a plurality of fixed points supporting a wire rod attached to a robot, tangent vectors at the fixed points, Recognizes the length of the line material between adjacent fixed points, converts the coordinate position of the fixed point and tangent vector based on the amount of movement of the movable part of the robot, and converts the fixed point and tangent vector after conversion Based on the value of the coordinate position and the length of the line material between the adjacent fixed points, the coefficient of the curve formula representing the shape of the line material between the adjacent fixed points is calculated, and the robot is operated.”)];
With respect to claim 33, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the movable unit is a robot device” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0001] “The present invention relates to a method for simulating a robot operation using a computer”)];
“and the processor can receive a movement of the movable unit specified as a movement executed in a simulation by user.” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0010] “As shown in FIG. 1, an apparatus for realizing a simulation method according to the present invention supports a simulator main body 1 as a central processing unit, and a filament material in a standard posture of a robot represented by coordinates on a reference coordinate axis. The input device 2 for reading input data such as the coordinate data of the fixed point or the change amount of the movable part of the robot and sending it to the simulator main body 1 and the data to be output such as the processing result are written out from the simulator main body 1 to the outside. Output device 3.”)];
With respect to claim 35, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor changes the fixed position and/or the length within a predetermined range and obtains an evaluation value by moving the movable unit every time when the fixed position and/or the length and/is changed.” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0006] “Recognizes the length of the line material between adjacent fixed points, converts the coordinate position of the fixed point and tangent vector based on the amount of movement of the movable part of the robot, and converts the fixed point and tangent vector after conversion”, Ishibashi (paragraph [0007] “The simulation method of the present invention constructed as described above predicts the movement of the shape of the wire rod attached to the robot accurately and with high accuracy, so when actually installing and operating the robot”, Ishibashi paragraph [0024] “Next, the shape of the wire rod between the adjacent fixed points is approximated as a cubic curve expression of a vector represented by Pi (t) = A + Bt + Ct 2 + Dt 3, and the position vector of the adjacent fixed point at the operated position From Se (i), Se (i + 1), the properties of the line material, for example, the clamp factor α determined by the minimum bending radius, and the tangent vectors Qe (i), Qe (i + 1) at the fixed point, before and after the operation The coefficient of the cubic curve is obtained on the condition of the length L (i) of the wire rod between the adjacent fixed points that does not change in (Step 5).”, Ishibashi paragraph [0037] “As described above, according to the method for simulating a wire rod of the present invention, the movement of the wire rod attached to the robot, such as a power cable, a pneumatic hose, and a hydraulic hose, is matched with the movement of the robot. Therefore, it is possible to check the interference between the wire rod and other equipment, thereby enabling more accurate simulation and high-accuracy offline programming”, The shape of the wire rod changes with the movement of the robot. The examiner considers the checking for interference between the wire rod and other equipment to be the evaluation values, since interference between the wire rod and other equipment is checked based on the movement of the robot)];
With respect to claim 36, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor obtains a load to the wire as an evaluation value.” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0012] “ The simulator body 1 includes a storage unit 4 that stores input data such as fixed point coordinate data read from the input device 2 and movable part change amount data, the shape of the robot, and interference conditions between the robot work space and other equipment”, Ishibashi (paragraph [0013] “In addition to the input data, the storage unit 4 stores intermediate result data of the processing process, processing result data to be output, and the like.”, The examiner considers the storing of the movable part change amount data to be the load that is sent to the processor, since the processor obtaining a load to the wire is storing data)];
With respect to claim 38, Ishibashi discloses “presenting re-setting a range in which
the fixed position and/or the length are/is changed, in a case where the processor cannot obtain the fixed position and/or the length that are/is satisfied the predetermined condition.” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0012] “A definition unit 5 that defines various conditions such as a calculation unit 6 that performs various calculation processes such as a coordinate change calculation of a fixed point, a coefficient calculation of a curve expression representing the shape of a linear material based on input data, and an interference check”)];
With respect to claim 39, Ishibashi discloses “wherein the processor is configured to automatically obtain the evaluation value for the wire by changing the fixing position and/or the length and then moving the movable unit.” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0001] “Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a method for simulating a robot operation using a computer”, Ishibashi paragraph [0012] “The simulator body 1 includes a storage unit 4 that stores input data such as fixed point coordinate data read from the input device 2 and movable part change amount data, the shape of the robot, and interference conditions between the robot work space and other equipment. A definition unit 5 that defines various conditions such as a calculation unit 6 that performs various calculation processes such as a coordinate change calculation of a fixed point”)];
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness
rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35
U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3, 7, 14, 16, 34 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Ishibashi (JP H07182017) (from IDS dated 21/1/20) in view of Nishimura et al. (JP 2003114706).
With respect to claim 3, Ishibashi discloses “generating, by a processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of the fixed position and/or the initial value of the length of the wire” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0001] “The present invention relates to a method for simulating a robot operation using a computer, and more particularly to a simulation method for predicting a shape change of a wire rod attached to a robot”, Ishibashi paragraph [0007] “The simulation method of the present invention constructed as described above predicts the movement of the shape of the wire rod attached to the robot accurately and with high accuracy, so when actually installing and operating the robot, There is no need to recreate the robot operation program data or correct the teaching operation, and the teaching work can be made more efficient”, Ishibashi paragraph [0012] “The simulator body 1 includes a storage unit 4 that stores input data such as fixed point coordinate data read from the input device 2 and movable part change amount data, the shape of the robot, and interference conditions between the robot work space and other equipment.”)];
“wherein the processor outputs the wire model having a length and/or a holding position that satisfy the predetermined condition based on the first wire model and/or the second wire model” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0019] “Next, a method for simulating a filament material according to the present invention will be described using the robot 1 shown in FIG. 2 as a model and using FIGS.”, Ishibashi paragraph [0020] “First, as an initial setting, as shown in FIG. 5, the position vector Ss (i) of the fixed point where the cable 4 is supported in the standard posture of the robot 1 and the tangent vector Qs (i) at the fixed point are adjacent to each other. The length L (i) of the wire rod between the fixed points to be read is read (step 1).”)];
Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field
endeavor of modeling the movement of a robot.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi of generating, by a processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of a holding position and/or the initial value of a length of the wire by incorporating generating, by a processor, at least one second wire model having a length and a holding position different from those of the first wire model as taught by Nishimura et al. for the purpose of displaying a robot as a three-dimensional model in a display.
Ishibashi in view of Nishimura et al. teaches generating, by a processor, at least one second wire model having a length and a holding position different from those of the first wire model.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Nishimura et al. teaches by displaying a robot as a three-dimensional model in a display, the ability to determine whether the robot interferes with an installation can be accomplished, so that the motion space of the robot is not restricted when it’s moving an object. (Nishimura et al. (paragraph [0005] – [0006])).
With respect to claim 7, the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. discloses the method of claim 3 above, and Nishimura et al. further discloses “wherein the processor generates a length and/or a fixed position of the second wire model based on search ranges of a length and/or the fixed position set by user operation” as [Nishimura (paragraph [0017] “A plurality of robot coordinate values for determining a workpiece delivery path are set on the basis of a workpiece delivery path setting operation 32executed while moving a robot three dimensional model displayed on a display 28 by a driving operation 29 of the robot three dimensional mode”)];
With respect to claim 14, the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. discloses the method of claim 12 above.
While Ishibashi teaches a robot device comprising a wire having a holding position and a length output, Ishibashi doesn’t teach “An article manufacturing method configured to manufacture articles from workpieces manipulated by the robot device according to claim 12”
Nishimura et al. discloses “An article manufacturing method configured to manufacture articles from workpieces manipulated by the robot device according to claim 12.” as [Nishimura (paragraph [0006] “In the machining facility by the articulated general-purpose robot 1, the robot 1 grips an unmachined workpiece W set in a workpiece delivery part 17, the workpiece W gripped by the operation of the robot 1 is machined by a machining tool T, and the machined workpiece W is transferred to the workpiece delivery part 17.”)];
Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field
endeavor of modeling the movement of a robot.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi of having a robot device comprising a wire having a holding position and a length output by incorporating an article manufacturing method configured to manufacture articles from workpieces manipulated by the robot device according to claim 12 as taught by Nishimura et al. for the purpose of displaying a robot as a three-dimensional model in a display.
Ishibashi in view of Nishimura et al. teaches An article manufacturing method configured to manufacture articles from workpieces manipulated by the robot device according to claim 12.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Nishimura et al. teaches by displaying a robot as a three-dimensional model in a display, the ability to determine whether the robot interferes with an installation can be accomplished, so that the motion space of the robot is not restricted when it’s moving an object (Nishimura et al. (paragraph [0005] – [0006])).
With respect to claim 16, the claims recite the same substantive limitations as claim 3 above, and are rejected using the same teachings.
With respect to claim 34, Ishibashi discloses the method of claim 33 above.
While Ishibashi teaches simulating the movement of a robot, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose “wherein the movement executed in the simulation can be specified in a teaching point format, a robot program format, or identification information of robot control data”
Nishimura et al. discloses “wherein the movement executed in the simulation can be specified in a teaching point format, a robot program format, or identification information of robot control data” as [Nishimura et al. (paragraph [0016] “The robot three dimensional model data 23, the workpiece three dimensional model data 24, and the tool three dimensional model data 25 is a wire frame model format created by CAD software or the like. Three dimensional model data in a surface model format, a solid model format, or the like, which is created by another personal computer or the like, is taken into the personal computer 18 via an appropriate medium, or is directly created by CAD software or the like installed in the personal computer 18.”, The examiner notes that the phrases “teaching point format” and “robot program format” are not defined within the claim or the specification. The examiner considers the wire frame model format to be the robot program format, since the robot three dimensional model data 23, the workpiece three dimensional model data 24, and the tool three dimensional model data 25 is a wire frame model format)];
Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field
endeavor of modeling the movement of a robot.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi of simulating the movement of a robot by incorporating wherein the movement executed in the simulation can be specified in a teaching point format, a robot program format, or identification information of robot control data as taught by Nishimura et al. for the purpose of displaying a robot as a three-dimensional model in a display.
Ishibashi in view of Nishimura et al. teaches wherein the movement executed in the simulation can be specified in a teaching point format, a robot program format, or identification information of robot control data.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Nishimura et al. teaches by displaying a robot as a three-dimensional model in a display, the ability to determine whether the robot interferes with an installation can be accomplished, so that the motion space of the robot is not restricted when it’s moving an object (Nishimura et al. (paragraph [0005] – [0006])).
With respect to claim 37, Ishibashi discloses “generating, by the processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of the fixed position and/or the initial value of the length of the wire” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0009] “FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of the overall configuration of a robot targeted by the simulation method according to the present invention, and FIG. FIG. 4 is a flowchart for explaining the simulation method according to the present invention, and FIG. 5 is an initial setting of position vectors in the standard posture of the robot.”, Ishibashi (paragraph [0037] “As described above, according to the method for simulating a wire rod of the present invention, the movement of the wire rod attached to the robot, such as a power cable, a pneumatic hose, and a hydraulic hose, is matched with the movement of the robot.”, The examiner considers the simulation of the wire rod at it’s initial position to be the first model, since the simulation of the wire rod is just beginning)];
While Ishibashi teaches generating, by the processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of the fixed position and/or the initial value of the length of the wire, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose “generating, by the processor, at least one second wire model having different values of the length and the fixed position from those of the first wire model”; “and indicating a spot which may be highly possible to be broken in the second wire model”
Nishimura et al. discloses “generating, by the processor, at least one second wire model having different values of the length and the fixed position from those of the first wire model” as [Nishimura (paragraph [0013] “Rotary table 3 which can be driven to rotate around a vertical S-axis with respect to a base 2, a first arm 4 which is supported by the rotary table 3 so as to be driven to swing around a horizontal L-axis, and an intermediate swing member 5 which is supported by a tip of the first arm 4 so as to be driven to swing around a horizontal U-axis parallel to the horizontal L-axis; A second arm 6 supported at a distal end of the intermediate swing member 5 so as to be capable of rotating about an R axis perpendicular to the horizontal U axis; a wrist arm 7 supported at a distal end of the second arm 6”, Nishimura (paragraph [0017] “The robot three dimensional model drive program 20 is for moving the robot three dimensional model displayed on the display 28 by the three dimensional model composite display program 19 in the same manner as the actual movement of the robot 1 based on the robot three dimensional model drive operation 29”, The robot has different components that move on a different axis, where the robot is modeled in 3D. The examiner considers the modeling of the components of the robot to be the second wire model, since the components of the robot move on a different axis when the robot is in motion of moving a workpiece)];
“and indicating a spot which may be highly possible to be broken in the second wire model.” as [Nishimura (paragraph [0052] “In this case, it is preferable that interference (contact or the like) between the three dimensional model of the surrounding object and the three dimensional model of the robot on the display can be automatically detected by comparing the coordinate values of the two models, and that a warning can be output when this interference phenomenon is detected.”, The examiner considers the interference of the robot with equipment to be a spot which may be highly possible to be broken in the second wire model, since the movement of the robot will be affected based on the interference with the equipment)];
Claim(s) 4-6 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Ishibashi in view of Nishimura et al. in further view of Takeda (U.S. PGPub 2016/0132623).
With respect to claim 4, the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. discloses the method of claim 3 above.
While the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. teaches generating, by a processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of a holding position and/or the initial value of a length of the wire, Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. do not explicitly disclose “generating, by the processor, evaluation value for the first wire model and the second wire model based on a result of a simulation that simulates a motion of a device model corresponding to the movable unit and a motion of the first wire model and the second wire model associated with the motion of the device model in a virtual environment; wherein the processor searches based on the evaluation value”
Takeda discloses “generating, by the processor, evaluation values for the first wire model and the second wire model based on a result of a simulation that simulates a motion of a device model corresponding to the movable unit and motions of the first wire model and the second wire model associated with the motion of the device model in a virtual environment” as [Takeda (paragraph 0040] “Further, the simulation unit 13 calculates the maximum torsion amount of the wire-shaped member based on the time-series position data of the plurality of focus points 33, and calculates a wire-shaped member arrangement orientation (target arrangement orientation) such as to decrease the maximum torsion amount. The user may arrange the wire-shaped member in conformity to the target arrangement orientation. For example, it is possible to decrease the maximum torsion amount of the wire-shaped member at the time of actual operation of the robot by the user arranging the wire-shaped member with the wire-shaped member being rotated through a predetermined angle at wire-shaped member arrangement unit so as to impart initial torsion to the wire-shaped member.”, The simulation unit calculates a wire-shaped member arrangement orientation to decrease the maximum torsion amount. A user can arrange the wire-shaped member in conformity to the target arrangement orientation after the simulation. This demonstrates that the length and a holding position of the first wire model and second wire model was evaluated after the simulation)];
“wherein the processor searches based on the evaluation value” as [Takeda (paragraph [0040] “Further, the simulation unit 13 calculates the maximum torsion amount of the wire-shaped member based on the time-series position data of the plurality of focus points 33, and calculates a wire-shaped member arrangement orientation (target arrangement orientation) such as to decrease the maximum torsion amount. The user may arrange the wire-shaped member in conformity to the target arrangement orientation. For example, it is possible to decrease the maximum torsion amount of the wire-shaped member at the time of actual operation of the robot by the user arranging the wire-shaped member with the wire-shaped member being rotated through a predetermined angle at wire-shaped member arrangement unit so as to impart initial torsion to the wire-shaped member.”)];
Ishibashi, Nishimura et al. and Takeda are analogous art because they are from the same
field endeavor of modeling the movement of a robot.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. of generating, by a processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of a holding position and/or the initial value of a length of the wire by incorporating generating, by the processor, evaluation value for the first wire model and the second wire model based on a result of a simulation that simulates a motion of a device model corresponding to the movable unit and a motion of the first wire model and the second wire model associated with the motion of the device model in a virtual environment; wherein the processor searches based on the evaluation value as taught by Takeda for the purpose of simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot.
Ishibashi in view of Nishimura et al. in further view of Takeda teaches generating, by the processor, evaluation value for the first wire model and the second wire model based on a result of a simulation that simulates a motion of a device model corresponding to the movable unit and a motion of the first wire model and the second wire model associated with the motion of the device model in a virtual environment; wherein the processor searches based on the evaluation value.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Takeda teaches by simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot, the ability to grasp the torsioned state of each part of the longitudinal direction of the wire shaped member can be accomplished, to know the potential conflicts for the robot (Takeda (paragraph [0005] – [0006])).
With respect to claim 5, the combination of Ishibashi, Nishimura et al. and Takeda discloses the method of claim 4 above, and Ishibashi further discloses “wherein the movable unit is a robot device and the processor simulates motions of the robot device and a motion of the first wire model and/or the second wire model associated with the motion of the robot device in a virtual environment” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0007] “The simulation method of the present invention constructed as described above predicts the movement of the shape of the wire rod attached to the robot accurately and with high accuracy”, Ishibashi paragraph [0017] “For example, even when the robot moves and deforms following the movement of the robot, when the wire 4 is positioned on the track of the robot arm as shown in FIG. The simulation method can be applied without causing a substantial difference.”)];
With respect to claim 6, the combination of Ishibashi, Nishimura et al. and Takeda discloses the method of claim 4 above, and Ishibashi further discloses “wherein the search conditions include a definition of a passable area of the wire model in the virtual environment.” as [Ishibashi (paragraph [0012] “A definition unit 5 that defines various conditions such as a calculation unit 6 that performs various calculation processes such as a coordinate change calculation of a fixed point, a coefficient calculation of a curve expression representing the shape of a linear material based on input data, and an interference check”)];
With respect to claim 17, the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 16 above.
While the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. teaches generating a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of the fixed position and the initial value of the length of the wire and generating at least one second wire model having a length and a fixed position different from those of the first wire model, Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. do not explicitly disclose “a user interface unit configured to output a motion of a device model corresponding to the movable unit and a motion of the second wire model associated with the motion of the device model in a virtual environment”
Takeda discloses “a user interface unit configured to output a motion of a device model corresponding to the movable unit and a motion of the second wire model associated with the motion of the device model in a virtual environment.” as [Takeda (paragraph [0016] “The robot model and the wire-shaped member model represent a three-dimensional shaped robot and a wire-shaped member, respectively, and may be generated using CAD data or the like of the robot and the wire-shaped member inputted via an unillustrated input unit”, Takeda paragraph [0029] “The display unit 14 includes a display monitor, and a display control unit for displaying an image on the display monitor. The display unit 14 displays the three-dimensional wire-shaped member image representing the profile of the wire-shaped member using the time-serial position data of each mass point 3 obtained via the simulation executed by the simulation unit 13.”)];
Ishibashi, Nishimura et al. and Takeda are analogous art because they are from the same
field endeavor of modeling the movement of a robot.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. of generating a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of the fixed position and the initial value of the length of the wire and generating at least one second wire model having a length and a fixed position different from those of the first wire model by incorporating a user interface unit configured to output a motion of a device model corresponding to the movable unit and a motion of the second wire model associated with the motion of the device model in a virtual environment as taught by Takeda for the purpose of simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot.
Ishibashi in view of Nishimura et al. in further view of Takeda teaches a user interface unit configured to output a motion of a device model corresponding to the movable unit and a motion of the second wire model associated with the motion of the device model in a virtual environment.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Takeda teaches by simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot, the ability to grasp the torsioned state of each part of the longitudinal direction of the wire shaped member can be accomplished, to know the potential conflicts for the robot (Takeda (paragraph [0005] – [0006])).
Claim(s) 18 and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Ishibashi in view of Takeda (U.S. PGPub 2016/0132623).
With respect to claim 18, Ishibashi discloses the apparatus of claim 15 above.
While Ishibashi teaches generating, by a processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of a holding position and/or the initial value of a length of the wire, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose “a user interface unit configured to output the wire model having a length and/or a holding position that satisfy the predetermined conditions”
Takeda discloses “a user interface unit configured to output the wire model having the length and/or the fixed position that satisfy the predetermined conditions” as [Takeda (paragraph [0029] “The display unit 14 includes a display monitor, and a display control unit for displaying an image on the display monitor. The display unit 14 displays the three-dimensional wire-shaped member image representing the profile of the wire-shaped member using the time-serial position data of each mass point 3 obtained via the simulation executed by the simulation unit 13.”)];
Ishibashi and Takeda are analogous art because they are from the same
field endeavor of modeling the movement of a robot.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi of generating, by a processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of a holding position and/or the initial value of a length of the wire by incorporating a user interface unit configured to output the wire model having a length and/or a holding position that satisfy the predetermined conditions as taught by Takeda for the purpose of simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot.
Ishibashi in view of Takeda teaches a user interface unit configured to output the wire model having a length and/or a holding position that satisfy the predetermined conditions.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Takeda teaches by simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot, the ability to grasp the torsioned state of each part of the longitudinal direction of the wire shaped member can be accomplished, to know the potential conflicts for the robot (Takeda (paragraph [0005] – [0006])).
With respect to claim 21, Ishibashi discloses the method of claim 1 above.
While Ishibashi teaches generating, by a processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of a holding position and/or the initial value of a length of the wire, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose “outputting, by the processor, that there exists no length and/or holding position in a case where a length and/or a holding position satisfying the predetermined conditions does not exist”
Takeda discloses “outputting, by the processor, that there exists no length and/or fixed position in a case where a length and/or a fixed position satisfying the predetermined conditions does not exist” as [Takeda (paragraph [0034] “When the maximum value of the torsion amount is +50° and the minimum value is −10°, for example, the average value is +20°. Then, a value of torsion amount such as to cancel the average value, i.e., −20° is displayed. The torsion amount as displayed represents the target arrangement orientation (degree) of the wire-shaped member.”, The examiner considers the cancelling of the average value to be the length and/or holding position that doesn’t exist where it doesn’t satisfy the predetermined conditions, since cancelling the average value, the degree of the target arrangement orientation of the wire shaped member will be at an angle 0 degrees)];
Ishibashi and Takeda are analogous art because they are from the same
field endeavor of modeling the movement of a robot.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi of generating, by a processor, a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of a holding position and/or the initial value of a length of the wire by incorporating outputting, by the processor, that there exists no length and/or holding position in a case where a length and/or a holding position satisfying the predetermined conditions does not exist as taught by Takeda for the purpose of simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot.
Ishibashi in view of Takeda teaches outputting, by the processor, that there exists no length and/or holding position in a case where a length and/or a holding position satisfying the predetermined conditions does not exist.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Takeda teaches by simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot, the ability to grasp the torsioned state of each part of the longitudinal direction of the wire shaped member can be accomplished, to know the potential conflicts for the robot (Takeda (paragraph [0005] – [0006])).
With respect to claim 22, Ishibashi discloses the method of claim 1 above.
While Ishibashi teaches generating, by a processor, a first wire model corresponding to
the wire based on the initial value of a holding position and/or the initial value of a length of the wire, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose “obtaining at least one of diameter, density, mass, Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and attenuation factor of the wire as a characteristic of the wire”.
Takeda discloses “obtaining at least one of diameter, density, mass, Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and attenuation factor of the wire as a characteristic of the wire” as [Takeda (paragraph [0017] “As illustrated in FIG. 2, the wire-shaped member model 2 is formed of a plurality of mass points 3, and a plurality of spring elements 4 connecting the mass points 3 together. The mass point 3 includes a first mass point 31 and second mass points 32, which are located on a plane 20 perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the wire-shaped member. The first mass point 31 is located at the diametrical center of the plane 20. The second mass points 32 are located around the first mass point 31 at circumferentially uniform intervals so as to define an outer circumferential surface of the wire-shaped member. The first mass points 31 and the second mass points 32 are located at uniform intervals along the longitudinal direction the wire-shaped member. Each mass point 3 has mass information, three-dimensional position information (position data), and three-dimensional speed information. The mass of each mass point 3 may be of a value equal to the mass of the wire-shaped member divided by the number of the mass points.”, Fig. 2)];
Ishibashi and Takeda are analogous art because they are from the same
field endeavor of modeling the movement of a robot.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi of obtaining at least one of diameter, density, mass, Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and attenuation factor of the wire as a characteristic of the wire by incorporating obtaining at least one of diameter, density, mass, Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and attenuation factor of the wire as a characteristic of the wire as taught by Takeda for the purpose of simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot.
Ishibashi in view of Takeda teaches obtaining at least one of diameter, density, mass, Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and attenuation factor of the wire as a characteristic of the wire.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Takeda teaches by simulating the behavior of a wire-shaped member arranged on a robot, the ability to grasp the torsioned state of each part of the longitudinal direction of the wire shaped member can be accomplished, to know the potential conflicts for the robot (Takeda (paragraph [0005] – [0006])).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi in
view of Nishimura et al. in further view of Kawakita et al. (U.S. PGPub 2002/0161535).
With respect to claim 8, the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. discloses the method of claim 3 above.
While the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. teaches generating a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of the fixed position and the initial value of the length of the wire and generating at least one second wire model having a length and a fixed position different from those of the first wire model, Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. do not explicitly disclose “wherein the physical constraints include a value of a minimum radius of curvature of the second wire model.”
Kawakita et al. discloses “wherein the physical constraints include a value of a minimum radius of curvature of the second wire model.” as [Kawakita et al. (paragraph [0097] “A curvature value calculation process is a process which finds the curvature radius R of each of the door opened state and door closed state of a virtual single wire 11 (see FIG. 16) that simulates a wire bundle 1 through a computer calculation process using finite element method, and is provided with a parameter input step (step S01) for inputting parameters in a computer as shown in FIG. 3, an initial state determining process (step S02, S04) for determining the initial shape of each structural component required for calculations in the finite element method”, Kawakita et al. paragraph [0123] “Next, at step S03, as shown in FIG. 9, based upon coordinate positions corresponding to the actual states of door panel 4 of door 3 and body panel 6 of body 5, these finite element models are formed.”, Kawakita et al. paragraph [0134] “Next, at step S07, based upon the opening and closing angles of door 3 inputted at step S01, the curvature radius R of center line 8 of wire bundle 1 is calculated with respect to each of the opening state and the closing state of door 3 based upon center line 8 of wire bundle 1 in the virtual model.”, The examiner considers the closing state to be the minimum radius of curvature, since the closing angle of the door is going to be smaller than the opening angles of the door. Also, the examiner considers one of models of the open and closed states of the door to be second wire model, since the models of the open state and the closed state are not exactly the same)];
Ishibashi, Nishimura et al. and Kawakita et al. are analogous art because they are from
the same field endeavor of modeling a wire.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. of generating a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of the fixed position and the initial value of the length of the wire and generating at least one second wire model having a length and a fixed position different from those of the first wire model by incorporating wherein the physical constraints include a value of a minimum radius of curvature of the second wire model as taught by Kawakita et al. for the purpose of designing a wire harness to be placed on a desired application subject.
Ishibashi in view of Nishimura et al. in further view of Kawakita et al. teaches wherein the physical constraints include a value of a minimum radius of curvature of the second wire model.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Kawakita et al. teaches by designing a wire harness to be placed on a desired application subject, the ability to estimate the flexure life of a wire bundle can be accomplished, so that when the inner conductor section has a disconnection prior to the occurrence of a crack on an insulating layer, the connection of wire bundle can be fixed (Kawakita et al. (paragraph [0002], paragraph [0022])).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi in
view of Nishimura et al. in further view of Iimori (U.S. PGPub 2006/0052990).
With respect to claim 9, the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. discloses the method of claim 3 above.
While the combination of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. teaches generating a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of the fixed position and the initial value of the length of the wire and generating at least one second wire model having a length and a fixed position different from those of the first wire model, Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. do not explicitly disclose “wherein the physical constraints include a value of a maximum load at an end portion of the second wire model.”
Iimori discloses “wherein the physical constraints include a value of a maximum load at an end portion of the second wire model.” as [Iimori (paragraph [0091] “For the frequency-dependent load, a force applied to points of constraint on a wire harness or a wire protecting member as an object under prediction of the bending life is set at an optional value”)];
Ishibashi, Nishimura et al. and Iimori are analogous art because they are from
the same field endeavor of modeling a wire.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi and Nishimura et al. of generating a first wire model corresponding to the wire based on the initial value of the fixed position and the initial value of the length of the wire and generating at least one second wire model having a length and a fixed position different from those of the first wire model by incorporating wherein the physical constraints include a value of a maximum load at an end portion of the second wire model as taught by Iimori for the purpose of predicting bending life spans of wires.
Ishibashi in view of Nishimura et al. in further view of Iimori teaches wherein the physical constraints include a value of a maximum load at an end portion of the second wire model.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Iimori teaches by calculating natural frequencies for the pre-vibration shapes and calculating shapes stresses in individual finite elements of the finite element models, the ability to accurately predict the bending life span of wires and reduce the development period of an environment where vibrations occur can be accomplished, in order to know the life span of wires (Iimori (paragraph [0008] - [0009], paragraph [0015])).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi in
view of Kawakita et al. (U.S. PGPub 2002/0161535).
With respect to claim 24, Ishibashi discloses the method of claim 1 above.
While Ishibashi teaches obtaining a holding position of a wire to a movable unit in which
the wire is installed and/or a length of the wire, Ishibashi does not explicitly disclose “wherein the processor sets at least one of a setting of a minimum radius of curvature of the wire, a setting of a maximum load of the wire, a setting of an object that should not come into contact with the wire, and a setting of an area where the wire can pass as a constrain imposed on the wire by moving of the movable unit.”
Kawakita et al. discloses “wherein the processor sets at least one of a setting of a minimum radius of curvature of the wire, a setting of a maximum load of the wire, a setting of an object that should not come into contact with the wire, and a setting of an area where the wire can pass as a constrain imposed on the wire by moving of the movable unit.” as [Kawakita et al. (paragraph [0097] “A curvature value calculation process is a process which finds the curvature radius R of each of the door opened state and door closed state of a virtual single wire 11 (see FIG. 16) that simulates a wire bundle 1 through a computer calculation process using finite element method, and is provided with a parameter input step (step S01) for inputting parameters in a computer as shown in FIG. 3, an initial state determining process (step S02, S04) for determining the initial shape of each structural component required for calculations in the finite element method”, Kawakita et al. paragraph [0134] “Next, at step S07, based upon the opening and closing angles of door 3 inputted at step S01, the curvature radius R of center line 8 of wire bundle 1 is calculated with respect to each of the opening state and the closing state of door 3 based upon center line 8 of wire bundle 1 in the virtual model.”, The examiner considers the closing state to be the minimum radius of curvature, since the closing angle of the door is going to be smaller than the opening angles of the door.)];
Ishibashi and Kawakita et al. are analogous art because they are from
the same field endeavor of modeling a wire.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi obtaining a holding position of a wire to a movable unit in which the wire is installed and/or a length of the wire by incorporating wherein the processor sets at least one of a setting of a minimum radius of curvature of the wire, a setting of a maximum load of the wire, a setting of an object that should not come into contact with the wire, and a setting of an area where the wire can pass as a constrain imposed on the wire by moving of the movable unit as taught by Kawakita et al. for the purpose of designing a wire harness to be placed on a desired application subject.
Ishibashi in view of Kawakita et al. teaches wherein the processor sets at least one of a setting of a minimum radius of curvature of the wire, a setting of a maximum load of the wire, a setting of an object that should not come into contact with the wire, and a setting of an area where the wire can pass as a constrain imposed on the wire by moving of the movable unit.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Kawakita et al. teaches by designing a wire harness to be placed on a desired application subject, the ability to estimate the flexure life of a wire bundle can be accomplished, so that when the inner conductor section has a disconnection prior to the occurrence of a crack on an insulating layer, the connection of wire bundle can be fixed (Kawakita et al. (paragraph [0002], paragraph [0022])).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishibashi in
view of Iimori (U.S. PGPub 2006/0052990).
With respect to claim 26, Ishibashi discloses the method of claim 1 above.
While Ishibashi teaches displaying the simulated wire rod, Ishibashi does not explicitly
disclose “displaying a position where change of the radius of curvature of the wire is largest as a spot where a possibility of being broken is highest”.
Iimori discloses “displaying a position where change of the radius of curvature of the wire is largest as a spot where a possibility of being broken is highest” as [Iimori (paragraph [0101] “According to the bending life span predicting program 59a, the micro-computer 51 predicts a bending life span of the electric wire and/or the wire protecting member induced by vibrations, causes the display device 53 and the printing device 54 to display and print the prediction result, and stores the result in the storing device 55.”, Iimori paragraph [0115] “Subsequently, in a step S4, a maximum stress is retrieved from those stresses recorded in the result file, for each electric wire and/or wire protecting member under prediction of the bending life. In a step S5, a predicting function to the electric wire and/or wire protecting member under prediction of the bending life is read out.”, The examiner considers the maximum stress for the wire to be the spot where there’s a possibility of the wire being broken, since the maximum stress of the wire is the stress of bending the wire)];
Ishibashi and Iimori are analogous art because they are from
the same field endeavor of modeling a wire.
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ishibashi of displaying the simulated wire rod by incorporating displaying a position where change of the radius of curvature of the wire is largest as a spot where a possibility of being broken is highest as taught by Iimori for the purpose of predicting bending life spans of wires.
Ishibashi in view of Iimori teaches displaying a position where change of the radius of curvature of the wire is largest as a spot where a possibility of being broken is highest.
The motivation for doing so would have been because Iimori teaches by calculating natural frequencies for the pre-vibration shapes and calculating shapes stresses in individual finite elements of the finite element models, the ability to accurately predict the bending life span of wires and reduce the development period of an environment where vibrations occur can be accomplished, in order to know the life span of wires (Iimori (paragraph [0008] - [0009], paragraph [0015])).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BERNARD E COTHRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5594. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM -5:30PM EST M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ryan F Pitaro can be reached at (571)272-4071. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BERNARD E COTHRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2188
/RYAN F PITARO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2188