DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/11/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 05/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not
persuasive or moot in view of new ground of rejection provided below which was necessitated based on
Applicant’s amendments to claims. The new ground of rejection for independent claim 1 is based on
Shiratsuchi, Radrich, and Gong. The same reasoning as applied to the independent claims also apply to their corresponding dependent claims.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiratsuchi (US 2018/0169854 A1) in view of Radrich (US 2019/0009410 A1), and further in view of Gong et al. (D. Gong, Y. Jia, Y. Cheng and N. Xi, "On-line and simultaneous calibration of wrist-mounted Force/Torque sensor and tool Forces/Torques for manipulation," 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Shenzhen, China, 2013, pp. 619-624) (Hereinafter Gong).
Regarding claim 1, Shiratsuchi teaches a method of obtaining information about a payload attached to a tool flange of a robotic arm, where the robotic arm comprises joints connecting a base of the robotic arm to the tool flange (See at least Para [0038] “The calibration device is a device required when the force information is used to control a mechanical device, for example, a robot, in such a robot system. Moreover, when the robot carries out the work, a hand, a tool, and sensors used for the work are mounted to the tip of the robot arm 1 to carry out the work, and are referred to as tool parts…” describes load is mounted to the tip of the robot arm which construed as payload attached to a tool flange of a robotic arm, Para [0046] “Moreover, in order to remove influence of an inertial force due to the gravity and the hand tip acceleration to obtain an accurate external force, an actual external force can accurately be calculated by accurately identifying the mass and the center-of-gravity position of the tool part, namely, a hand tip load with respect to the sensor…” describes accurately identifying the mass namely a hand tip load with respect to the sensor which construed as obtaining information about a payload attached to a tool flange of a robotic arm, Fig 3 shows robotic arm comprises joints connecting the robot base to the tool flange), and where the method comprises:
arranging the tool flange in different orientations (See at least Para [0114] “…the force information that are obtained when the tool part is rotated in accordance with the attitude command value…” describes arranging the tool flange in different orientation);
at each of the different orientations, obtaining a force and a torque on the tool flange caused by effects of gravitational force acting on the payload (See at least Para [0038] “…In this case, the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.” describes obtaining force and moment and a direction vector which construed as obtaining force and torque at different orientations, Para [0046] “… influence of an inertial force due to the gravity and the hand tip acceleration to obtain an accurate external force…” describes identifying center-of-gravity position of the tool part which construed as gravity acting on the payload at each of the different orientations creating different force and torque), the force and the torque being obtained using a force-torque sensor associated with the tool flange (See at least Fig 1 item 3, Para [0035] “a force sensor 3 is provided between the robot arm 1 and the tool part 4 as a force information sensor for acquiring force information in the robot system for carrying out the force control…” describes that a force sensor is provided between the robot arm and tool part, Para [0038] “The calibration device is a device required when the force information is used to control a mechanical device, for example, a robot, in such a robot system. Moreover, when the robot carries out the work, a hand, a tool, and sensors used for the work are mounted to the tip of the robot arm 1 to carry out the work, and are referred to as tool parts. On this occasion, in order to carry out the work through the force control, it is necessary to precisely know a contact state between the tool part on the hand tip side and the work subject. In this case, the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.”, Para [0063] “…when a sensor is mounted to the robot mechanical flange…”);
obtaining a mass of the payload based on forces on the tool flange in the different orientations
(See at least Para [0012], “calculate a mass and a center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load through use of the force information from which the bias value is removed”, Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…” which construed as obtaining a mass of the payload based on forces on the tool flange produced in at at least two of the different orientations), the forces being along one or more axes of a coordinate system (See at least Para [0018] “FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram for illustrating an example of a positional relationship between a mechanical flange coordinate system and the sensor coordinate system of the robot system according to the first embodiment of the present invention.”, Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…”);
obtaining a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on … and torques on the tool flange in the different orientations (See at least Para [0038] “…the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.” Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…” which construed as obtaining a pose of the payload based on torques on the tool flange produced in the different orientations), the pose of the payload being defined by a positional vector indicating a position of a center of mass of the payload in relation to a reference point of the tool flange (See at least Para [0012] “… and to calculate a mass and a center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load through use of the force information from which the bias value is removed; and an external force component calculation unit configured to subtract the bias value and the gravity action component of the hand tip load from the force information through use of the estimated bias value, and the mass and the center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load.”, Para [0065] “On this occasion, the homogeneous transformation matrix is a 4×4 matrix constructed by a rotation matrix R (3×3) and a position vector P representing a positional relationship defined in a reference coordinate system. For example, when a homogeneous transformation matrix wld Trob is expressed while the coordinate system serving as a reference is set to the world coordinate system Σwld and the coordinate system of interest is set to the robot coordinate system Σrob, the rotation matrix R, the position vector P, and the homogeneous
transformation matrix wld Trob are expressed as the following expressions (3) to (5).”, Para
[0108] “On this occasion, the force Fmdl that is estimated from the model can be defined as follows.
The center-of-gravity coordinate system ΣL is defined in the same axial directions as those of the
mechanical flange coordinate system Σmec, an external force vector caused by the mass, which is a
three dimensional vector of the axial forces with respect to the center-of-gravity coordinate system ΣL, is expressed as L f, a moment vector caused by the mass with respect to the same center-of-gravity
coordinate system ΣL is expressed as L m, and a gravity acceleration vector with respect to the center-
of-gravity coordinate system is expressed as L g…”), …
wherein arranging the tool flange in the different orientations comprises arranging the tool
flange in four different orientations relative to a direction of gravitational force such that(See at least Para [0093] “M_y_b obtained by this expression is the bias value M_bis_y of the moment about the Y axis to be obtained. When the convergence of the solution is slow, and an approximate solution is not obtained, angles may be selected by dividing 360 degrees by a divisor of 360, for example, 0 degrees and 180 degrees as θ in case of 2, and 0 degrees, 90 degrees, 180 degrees, and 270 degrees as θ in case of 4, and an average of My at respective angles may be obtained.” discloses arranging the tool flange in four different orientation with four different angles, Para [0095] discloses four cases of different angle for rotation), in at least one of the four different orientations (See at least Para [0093] “M_y_b obtained by this expression is the bias value M_bis_y of the moment about the Y axis to be obtained. When the convergence of the solution is slow, and an approximate solution is not obtained, angles may be selected by dividing 360 degrees by a divisor of 360, for example, 0 degrees and 180 degrees as θ in case of 2, and 0 degrees, 90 degrees, 180 degrees, and 270 degrees as θ in case of 4, and an average of My at respective angles may be obtained.” discloses arranging the tool flange in four different orientation with four different angles, Para [0095] discloses four cases of different angle for rotation), …
However, Shiratsuchi does not explicitly spell out …
obtaining a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload …
no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity, and wherein an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations,
Radrich teaches obtaining a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload (See at least Abstract – …the orientation or the installation, of the robot relative to the direction of gravity is determined…”, Para [0002] “The present invention relates to a method for determining an orientation of a robot relative to a gravitational direction…”, Para [0024] “indicating the mass matrix M(q,g.sub.model), the speeds or accelerations {dot over (q)}, {umlaut over (q)}, the generalized forces h(q, {dot over (q)}, g.sub.model), (the vector) of the gravitational (force or direction) g.sub.model, and model forces, in particular model joint forces T.sub.model. In a static kinetic model, the terms {dot over (q)}, {umlaut over (q)} can be omitted or can be equal to zero.”, Para [0025] “…at least essentially only because of the deviation between the gravitational direction or gravitational vector g.sub.model that is fundamental to the model and the actual current gravitational direction or gravitational vector g.sub.actual. It should be noted that the gravitational direction g.sub.model on which the model is based relative to the robot can be used in corresponding kinetic parameters of the model, such as masses, locations of center of gravity, and/or inertia sensors.”)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Radrich and include the feature of obtaining a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload in different orientations which will help with precise calculation, thereby balancing the robot arm more accurately (See at least Para [0009] “The object of the present invention is to improve the operation of a robot.”).
However, Shiratsuchi in view of Radrich does not explicitly spell out … no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity, and wherein an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations.
Gong teaches … no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity (See at least Page 622 Col 1 Last Para “As shown in Fig.4, though we can describe the orientation of the end-effector in the world coordinate system as rotations around OX ,OY and OZ respectively, the rotation around axis OZ has no effect on the response of E F in the F/T sensor since the direction of the gravity of e G is always vertically downward along OZ − . Actually, the only two parameters that can affect the result of E F in the F/T sensor are [ ] 90 ,90 α∈− ° ° (the angular between the axis of the end-effector and OZ) and [ ] 180 ,180 ϕ∈− ° ° (the angular between the plane XOY and e e e XOZ , see Fig.3).”), and wherein an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations (See at least Page 622 Col 1 Last Para “As shown in Fig.4, though we can describe the orientation of the end-effector in the world coordinate system as rotations around OX ,OY and OZ respectively, the rotation around axis OZ has no effect on the response of E F in the F/T sensor since the direction of the gravity of e G is always vertically downward along OZ − . Actually, the only two parameters that can affect the result of E F in the F/T sensor are [ ] 90 ,90 α∈− ° ° (the angular between the axis of the end-effector and OZ) and [ ] 180 ,180 ϕ∈− ° ° (the angular between the plane XOY and e e e XOZ , see Fig.3).”, discloses that the end effector orientation angle between -90 to 90 degrees or -180 to 180 degrees, Page 621 Col 2 Para 1 “…translate the wrist-mounted F/T sensor reading data into the forces and torques exerted on the gripper in every orientation of the end-effector…”, Page 621 Col 2 Para 5 “…The end-effector may have every different orientation in its work space when it performs an assigned task, and force control may be required at every orientation of the end-effector…”, discloses end effector having multiple orientation for performing assigned task).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Gong and include the feature of no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity and wherein an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations to perform calculation that will help move the robot arm precisely, thereby balancing the robot arm more accurately. Examiner notes that the specific rotation range are not integral to the device’s function, rather it is a result of other parameters chosen. One of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with the parameters, especially when the specifics are not disclosed, so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. “The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims... In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.” In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 4, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 1. Shiratsuchi further teaches wherein obtaining the pose comprises:
obtaining a torque difference, where the torque difference is based on a difference between at least two torques on the tool flange at the different orientations of the tool flange (See at least Fig 9, Para [0023] “FIG. 9 is an explanatory diagram for illustrating a bias estimation operation for a moment by the bias value estimation unit of the parameter estimation unit in the calibration device according to the first embodiment of the present invention, Para [0091] “In other words, a numerical model of the moment is defined as a phase difference φ when the bias component of the moment about the Y axis is denoted by M_y_b, a rotation angle about the Y axis from the reference attitude R.sub.k0 is denoted by θ, θ is to the horizontal axis, and the moment is assigned to the vertical axis. Moreover, the amplitude of the cosine curve is denoted by Am. When moment data acquired on this occasion is denoted by M_y, the following expression (8) holds.” discloses determining difference in moments (considered as torques));
wherein the pose is based on the torque difference and the mass (See at least Para [0131] “…when the attitude is specified by the offset position/attitude specification unit 208, only the acting external forces generated at this position can be calculated as offsets.” Which construed as pose based on torque difference, Fig 14 item 208 offset position/attitude specification, Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…” which construed as obtaining a mass of the payload based on forces on the tool flange produced in at different poses).
Regarding claim 5, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 4. Shiratsuchi further teaches wherein obtaining the pose comprises:
obtaining an initial guess of the pose of the payload (See at least Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…” which construed as obtaining a pose (here attitude is considered as pose) of the payload based on forces on the tool flange produced in at at least two of the different orientations, Para [0038] “…the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.”, Para [0064] discloses initial values can be treated as known which construed as initial guess);
for at least two different orientations of the tool flange, obtaining an expected torque on the tool flange caused by the payload having a pose corresponding to the initial guess (See at least Para [0038] “…In this case, the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.” describes obtaining moments (torque) at different orientations, Para [0091] [0092] [0101] disclose a numerical model being used which construed as initial values can be treated as initial guess);
determining an expected torque difference between at least two expected torques on the tool flange (See at least Fig 9, Para [0023] “FIG. 9 is an explanatory diagram for illustrating a bias estimation operation for a moment by the bias value estimation unit of the parameter estimation unit in the calibration device according to the first embodiment of the present invention, Para [0091] “In other words, a numerical model of the moment is defined as a phase difference φ when the bias component of the moment about the Y axis is denoted by M_y_b, a rotation angle about the Y axis from the reference attitude R.sub.k0 is denoted by θ, θ is to the horizontal axis, and the moment is assigned to the vertical axis. Moreover, the amplitude of the cosine curve is denoted by Am. When moment data acquired on this occasion is denoted by M_y, the following expression (8) holds.” discloses determining difference in moments (considered as torques)); and
determining a torque error comprising a difference between the torque difference and the expected torque difference (See at least Para [0098] discloses error data at a total of N attitudes which construed as torque error, Para [0131] discloses offset position/attitude specification unit 208 where only the acting external forces generated at this position can be calculated as offsets);
wherein the pose is obtained based on the torque error (See at least Para [0070] “Errors decrease as a rotation amount about the rotation axis Vec_rot from position/attitude serving as a reference increases…” describes minimizing torque error, Para [0067] discloses error minimization and increases the estimation accuracy of the bias which is construed as minimizing torque error).
Regarding claim 7, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 1.
However, Shiratsuchi does not explicitly spell out wherein the angle between each of the four different orientations is 120 degrees in relation to the three other orientations.
Gong teaches wherein the angle between each of the four different orientations is 120 degrees in relation to the three other orientations (See at least Page 622 Col 1 Last Para “As shown in Fig.4, though we can describe the orientation of the end-effector in the world coordinate system as rotations around OX ,OY and OZ respectively, the rotation around axis OZ has no effect on the response of E F in the F/T sensor since the direction of the gravity of e G is always vertically downward along OZ − . Actually, the only two parameters that can affect the result of E F in the F/T sensor are [ ] 90 ,90 α∈− ° ° (the angular between the axis of the end-effector and OZ) and [ ] 180 ,180 ϕ∈− ° ° (the angular between the plane XOY and e e e XOZ , see Fig.3).”, discloses that the end effector orientation angle between -90 to 90 degrees or -180 to 180 degrees, Page 621 Col 2 Para 1 “…translate the wrist-mounted F/T sensor reading data into the forces and torques exerted on the gripper in every orientation of the end-effector…”, Page 621 Col 2 Para 5 “…The end-effector may have every different orientation in its work space when it performs an assigned task, and force control may be required at every orientation of the end-effector…”, discloses end effector having multiple orientation for performing assigned task).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Gong and include the feature of the angle between each of the four different orientations being 120 degrees in relation to the three other orientations to perform calculation that will help move the robot arm precisely, thereby balancing the robot arm more accurately. Examiner notes that the specific rotation range are not integral to the device’s function, rather it is a result of other parameters chosen. One of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with the parameters, especially when the specifics are not disclosed, so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. “The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims... In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.” In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 8, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 1.
However, Shiratsuchi does not explicitly spell out wherein the angle between each of the four different orientations is between 1100 and 1300 relative to the other three orientations.
Gong teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the angle between each of the four different orientations is between 1100 and 1300 relative to the other three orientations (See at least Page 622 Col 1 Last Para “As shown in Fig.4, though we can describe the orientation of the end-effector in the world coordinate system as rotations around OX ,OY and OZ respectively, the rotation around axis OZ has no effect on the response of E F in the F/T sensor since the direction of the gravity of e G is always vertically downward along OZ − . Actually, the only two parameters that can affect the result of E F in the F/T sensor are [ ] 90 ,90 α∈− ° ° (the angular between the axis of the end-effector and OZ) and [ ] 180 ,180 ϕ∈− ° ° (the angular between the plane XOY and e e e XOZ , see Fig.3).”, discloses that the end effector orientation angle between -90 to 90 degrees or -180 to 180 degrees, Page 621 Col 2 Para 1 “…translate the wrist-mounted F/T sensor reading data into the forces and torques exerted on the gripper in every orientation of the end-effector…”, Page 621 Col 2 Para 5 “…The end-effector may have every different orientation in its work space when it performs an assigned task, and force control may be required at every orientation of the end-effector…”, discloses end effector having multiple orientation for performing assigned task)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Gong and include the feature of the angle between each of the four different orientations is between 110° and 130° relative to the other three orientations s to perform calculation that will help move the robot arm precisely, thereby balancing the robot arm more accurately. Examiner notes that the specific rotation range are not integral to the device’s function, rather it is a result of other parameters chosen. One of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with the parameters, especially when the specifics are not disclosed, so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. “The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims... In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.” In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claim(s) 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiratsuchi (US 2018/0169854 A1) in view of Radrich (US 2019/0009410 A1), Gong et al. (D. Gong, Y. Jia, Y. Cheng and N. Xi, "On-line and simultaneous calibration of wrist-mounted Force/Torque sensor and tool Forces/Torques for manipulation," 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Shenzhen, China, 2013, pp. 619-624) (Hereinafter Gong), and further in view of Jian et al. (US 2019/0084154 A1) (Hereinafter Jian).
Regarding claim 10, Shiratsuchi teaches a method of controlling a robotic arm, the robotic arm comprising joints connecting a base of the robotic arm to a tool flange of the robotic arm, the tool flange for holding a payload (See at least Para [0038] “The calibration device is a device required when the force information is used to control a mechanical device, for example, a robot, in such a robot system. Moreover, when the robot carries out the work, a hand, a tool, and sensors used for the work are mounted to the tip of the robot arm 1 to carry out the work, and are referred to as tool parts…” describes load is mounted to the tip of the robot arm which construed as payload attached to a tool flange of a robotic arm, Para [0046] “Moreover, in order to remove influence of an inertial force due to the gravity and the hand tip acceleration to obtain an accurate external force, an actual external force can accurately be calculated by accurately identifying the mass and the center-of-gravity position of the tool part, namely, a hand tip load with respect to the sensor…” describes accurately identifying the mass namely a hand tip load with respect to the sensor which construed as obtaining information about a payload attached to a tool flange of a robotic arm, Fig 3 shows robotic arm comprises joints connecting the robot base to the tool flange), and the tool flange being associated with a force-torque sensor configured to obtain force and torque associated with the tool flange (See at least Para [0032] “Moreover, the calibration device according to the present invention generates an approximate curve based on hand tip load position information and force information, which is output information of a force sensor, on the robot that are obtained when an attitude change is generated about an arbitrary axis passing through an origin of a sensor coordinate system…”), the method comprising:
obtaining a mass of the payload based on differences in forces at the tool flange at different
orientations of the tool flange (See at least Para [0012], “calculate a mass and a center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load through use of the force information from which the bias value is removed”, Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…”, Para [0085] “… As illustrated in FIG. 7, at least three attitudes rotated about the Y axis from the reference attitude R.sub.k0 are acquired…” which construed as obtaining a mass of the payload based on forces on the tool flange produced in at at least two of the different orientations), the forces being along one or more axes of a coordinate system (See at least Para [0018] “FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram for illustrating an example of a positional relationship between a mechanical flange coordinate system and the sensor coordinate system of the robot system according to the first embodiment of the present invention.”, Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…”), the forces resulting from the payload (See at least Para [0012], “calculate a mass and a center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load through use of the force information from which the bias value is removed”, Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…”, Para [0085] “… As illustrated in FIG. 7, at least three attitudes rotated about the Y axis from the reference attitude R.sub.k0 are acquired…” which construed as obtaining a mass of the payload based on forces on the tool flange produced in at at least two of the different orientations), where the different orientations of the tool flange comprise the tool flange in four different orientations relative to a direction of gravitational force such that, in at least one of the four different orientations (See at least Para [0093] “M_y_b obtained by this expression is the bias value M_bis_y of the moment about the Y axis to be obtained. When the convergence of the solution is slow, and an approximate solution is not obtained, angles may be selected by dividing 360 degrees by a divisor of 360, for example, 0 degrees and 180 degrees as θ in case of 2, and 0 degrees, 90 degrees, 180 degrees, and 270 degrees as θ in case of 4, and an average of My at respective angles may be obtained.” discloses arranging the tool flange in four different orientation with four different angles, Para [0095] discloses four cases of different angle for rotation) …
obtaining a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on … torques at the tool flange at the different orientations, … the torques resulting from the payload (See at least Para [0012] “…position information acquisition unit configured to acquire position information on the tool part…”, Para [0038] “…the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.” Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…” which construed as obtaining a pose of the payload based on torques on the tool flange produced in at least two of the different orientations), the pose of the payload being defined by a positional vector indicating a position of a center of mass of the payload in relation to a reference point of the tool flange (See at least Para [0012] “… and to calculate a mass and a center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load through use of the force information from which the bias value is removed; and an external force component calculation unit configured to subtract the bias value and the gravity action component of the hand tip load from the force information through use of the estimated bias value, and the mass and the center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load.”, Para [0065] “On this occasion, the homogeneous transformation matrix is a 4×4 matrix constructed by a rotation matrix R (3×3) and a position vector P representing a positional relationship defined in a reference coordinate system. For example, when a homogeneous transformation matrix wld Trob is expressed while the coordinate system serving as a reference is set to the world coordinate system Σwld and the coordinate system of interest is set to the robot coordinate system Σrob, the rotation matrix R, the position vector P, and the homogeneous transformation matrix wld Trob are expressed as the following expressions (3) to (5).”, Para [0108] “On this occasion, the force Fmdl that is estimated from the model can be defined as follows. The center-of-gravity coordinate system ΣL is defined in the same axial directions as those of the mechanical flange coordinate system Σmec, an external force vector caused by the mass, which is a three dimensional vector of the axial forces with respect to the center-of-gravity coordinate system ΣL , is expressed as L f, a moment vector caused by the mass with respect to the same center-of-gravity coordinate system ΣL is expressed as L m, and a gravity acceleration vector with respect to the center-of-gravity coordinate system is expressed as L g…”)…; …
and
However, Shiratsuchi does not explicitly spell out …
no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity, and where an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations,
obtaining a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload,…
controlling the joints based on a kinematic model of the robotic arm and information about the payload, where the information comprises the mass of the payload and the pose of the payload relative to the tool flange.
Radrich teaches obtaining a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload (See at least Abstract – …the orientation or the installation, of the robot relative to the direction of gravity is determined…”, Para [0002] “The present invention relates to a method for determining an orientation of a robot relative to a gravitational direction…”, Para [0024] “indicating the mass matrix M(q,g.sub.model), the speeds or accelerations {dot over (q)}, {umlaut over (q)}, the generalized forces h(q, {dot over (q)}, g.sub.model), (the vector) of the gravitational (force or direction) g.sub.model, and model forces, in particular model joint forces T.sub.model. In a static kinetic model, the terms {dot over (q)}, {umlaut over (q)} can be omitted or can be equal to zero.”, Para [0025] “…at least essentially only because of the deviation between the gravitational direction or gravitational vector g.sub.model that is fundamental to the model and the actual current gravitational direction or gravitational vector g.sub.actual. It should be noted that the gravitational direction g.sub.model on which the model is based relative to the robot can be used in corresponding kinetic parameters of the model, such as masses, locations of center of gravity, and/or inertia sensors.”)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Radrich and include the feature of obtaining a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload in different orientations which will help with precise calculation, thereby balancing the robot arm more accurately (See at least Para [0009] “The object of the present invention is to improve the operation of a robot.”).
However, Shiratsuchi in view of Radrich does not explicitly spell out … no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity, and wherein an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations.
Gong teaches … no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity (See at least Page 622 Col 1 Last Para “As shown in Fig.4, though we can describe the orientation of the end-effector in the world coordinate system as rotations around OX ,OY and OZ respectively, the rotation around axis OZ has no effect on the response of E F in the F/T sensor since the direction of the gravity of e G is always vertically downward along OZ − . Actually, the only two parameters that can affect the result of E F in the F/T sensor are [ ] 90 ,90 α∈− ° ° (the angular between the axis of the end-effector and OZ) and [ ] 180 ,180 ϕ∈− ° ° (the angular between the plane XOY and e e e XOZ , see Fig.3).”), and wherein an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations (See at least Page 622 Col 1 Last Para “As shown in Fig.4, though we can describe the orientation of the end-effector in the world coordinate system as rotations around OX ,OY and OZ respectively, the rotation around axis OZ has no effect on the response of E F in the F/T sensor since the direction of the gravity of e G is always vertically downward along OZ − . Actually, the only two parameters that can affect the result of E F in the F/T sensor are [ ] 90 ,90 α∈− ° ° (the angular between the axis of the end-effector and OZ) and [ ] 180 ,180 ϕ∈− ° ° (the angular between the plane XOY and e e e XOZ , see Fig.3).”, discloses that the end effector orientation angle between -90 to 90 degrees or -180 to 180 degrees, Page 621 Col 2 Para 1 “…translate the wrist-mounted F/T sensor reading data into the forces and torques exerted on the gripper in every orientation of the end-effector…”, Page 621 Col 2 Para 5 “…The end-effector may have every different orientation in its work space when it performs an assigned task, and force control may be required at every orientation of the end-effector…”, discloses end effector having multiple orientation for performing assigned task).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Gong and include the feature of no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity and wherein an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations to perform calculation that will help move the robot arm precisely, thereby balancing the robot arm more accurately. Examiner notes that the specific rotation range are not integral to the device’s function, rather it is a result of other parameters chosen. One of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with the parameters, especially when the specifics are not disclosed, so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. “The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims... In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.” In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
However, Shiratsuchi in view of Radrich and further in view of Gong does not teach …
controlling the joints based on a kinematic model of the robotic arm and information about the payload, where the information comprises the mass of the payload and the pose of the payload relative to the tool flange.
Jian teaches …
controlling the joints based on a kinematic model of the robotic arm and information about the payload, where the information comprises the mass of the payload and the pose of the payload relative to the tool flange (See at least Para [0058] “Specifically, for a five-axel robotic arm 2, the set of correction parameters (α and β) the no-load torque value G.sub.0(θ) and the maximum-load torque value G.sub.max(θ) may be calculated by the load estimation module 4, using a set of equations that are derived based on forward kinematic and that are associated with the joint angle and a torque outputted by the joint 21.” describes calculation is performed using equations derived based on forward kinematics).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Jian and include the feature of controlling the joints based on a kinematic model of the robotic arm and information about the payload, where the information comprises the mass of the payload and the pose of the payload relative to the tool flange, thereby enhance efficiency of robot movement (See at least Para [0003] “… In compliance control of a robotic arm, the robotic arm is subjected to an external load during operation (operated alone or by an operator in a man-machine operation), and some parameters associated with an output of the robotic arm need to be adjusted according to the external load in order to output a torque that can achieve gravity compensation, thereby ensuring normal operation under the external load.”).
19. Regarding claim 11, Shiratsuchi teaches a robot system comprising:
a tool flange for holding a payload (See at least Para [0038] “The calibration device is a device required when the force information is used to control a mechanical device, for example, a robot, in such a robot system. Moreover, when the robot carries out the work, a hand, a tool, and sensors used for the work are mounted to the tip of the robot arm 1 to carry out the work, and are referred to as tool parts…” describes load is mounted to the tip of the robot arm which construed as payload attached to a tool flange of a robotic arm, Para [0046] “Moreover, in order to remove influence of an inertial force See at least Para [0038] “The calibration device is a device required when the force information is used to control a mechanical device, for example, a robot, in such a robot system. Moreover, when the robot carries out the work, a hand, a tool, and sensors used for the work are mounted to the tip of the robot arm 1 to carry out the work, and are referred to as tool parts…” due to the gravity and the hand tip acceleration to obtain an accurate external force, an actual external force can accurately be calculated by accurately identifying the mass and the center-of-gravity position of the tool part, namely, a hand tip load with respect to the sensor…” describes accurately identifying the mass namely a hand tip load with respect to the sensor which construed as obtaining information about a payload attached to a tool flange of a robotic arm);
a force-torque sensor associated with the tool flange and configured to obtain force and torque associated with the tool flange (See at least Para [0032] “Moreover, the calibration device according to the present invention generates an approximate curve based on hand tip load position information and force information, which is output information of a force sensor, on the robot that are obtained when an attitude change is generated about an arbitrary axis passing through an origin of a sensor coordinate system…”)
a robotic arm comprising joints connecting a base of the robotic arm to the tool flange (See at least Fig 3 shows robotic arm comprises joints connecting the robot base to the tool flange), and
at least one controller configured to control the joints (See at least Para [0038] “The calibration device is a device required when the force information is used to control a mechanical device, for example, a robot, in such a robot system. Moreover, when the robot carries out the work, a hand, a tool, and sensors used for the work are mounted to the tip of the robot arm 1 to carry out the work, and are referred to as tool parts…” ) … and information about the payload, the information comprising a mass of the payload and a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange (See at least Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…” which construed as obtaining a mass of the payload based on forces on the tool flange produced in at at least two of the different orientations, which construed as obtaining a pose (here attitude is considered as pose) of the payload based on forces on the tool flange produced in at at least two of the different orientations; Para [0038] “…the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.” discloses moments which is construed as torque);
wherein the controller is configured to perform operations comprising:
obtaining the mass of the payload based on forces on the tool flange in different orientations (See at least Para [0012], “calculate a mass and a center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load through use of the force information from which the bias value is removed”, Para [0012] “…position information acquisition unit configured to acquire position information on the tool part…”, Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…” which construed as obtaining a mass and pose of the payload, Para [0038] “…the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.” discloses moments which is construed as torque), the forces being along one or more axes of a coordinate system (See at least Para [0018] “FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram for illustrating an example of a positional relationship between a mechanical flange coordinate system and the sensor coordinate system of the robot system according to the first embodiment of the present invention.”, Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…”);
obtaining the pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on … torques on the tool flange in the different orientations (See at least Para [0012] “…position information acquisition unit configured to acquire position information on the tool part…”, Para [0038] “…the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.” Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…” which construed as obtaining a pose of the payload based on torques on the tool flange produced in at least two of the different orientations), the pose of the payload being defined by a positional vector indicating a position of a center of mass of the payload in relation to a reference point of the tool flange (See at least Para [0012] “… and to calculate a mass and a center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load through use of the force information from which the bias value is removed; and an external force component calculation unit configured to subtract the bias value and the gravity action component of the hand tip load from the force information through use of the estimated bias value, and the mass and the center-of-gravity position vector of the hand tip load.”, Para [0065] “On this occasion, the homogeneous transformation matrix is a 4×4 matrix constructed by a rotation matrix R (3×3) and a position vector P representing a positional relationship defined in a reference coordinate system. For example, when a homogeneous transformation matrix wld Trob is expressed while the coordinate system serving as a reference is set to the world coordinate system Σwld and the coordinate system of interest is set to the robot coordinate system Σrob, the rotation matrix R, the position vector P, and the homogeneous transformation matrix wld Trob are expressed as the following expressions (3) to (5).”, Para [0108] “On this occasion, the force Fmdl that is estimated from the model can be defined as follows. The center-of-gravity coordinate system ΣL is defined in the same axial directions as those of the mechanical flange coordinate system Σmec, an external force vector caused by the mass, which is a three dimensional vector of the axial forces with respect to the center-of-gravity coordinate system ΣL , is expressed as L f, a moment vector caused by the mass with respect to the same center-of-gravity coordinate system ΣL is expressed as L m, and a gravity acceleration vector with respect to the center-of-gravity coordinate system is expressed as L g…”),
wherein the tool flange in the different orientations comprises the tool flange in four different orientations relative to a direction of gravitational force such that, in at least one of the four different orientations (See at least Para [0093] “M_y_b obtained by this expression is the bias value M_bis_y of the moment about the Y axis to be obtained. When the convergence of the solution is slow, and an approximate solution is not obtained, angles may be selected by dividing 360 degrees by a divisor of 360, for example, 0 degrees and 180 degrees as θ in case of 2, and 0 degrees, 90 degrees, 180 degrees, and 270 degrees as θ in case of 4, and an average of My at respective angles may be obtained.” discloses arranging the tool flange in four different orientation with four different angles, Para [0095] discloses four cases of different angle for rotation), …
However, Shiratsuchi does not explicitly spell out …
…based on a kinematic model of the robotic arm…
obtaining the pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload,…
… no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity, and where an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations,
Jian teaches …based on a kinematic model of the robotic arm (See at least Para [0058] “Specifically, for a five-axel robotic arm 2, the set of correction parameters (α and β) the no-load torque value G.sub.0(θ) and the maximum-load torque value G.sub.max(θ) may be calculated by the load estimation module 4, using a set of equations that are derived based on forward kinematic and that are associated with the joint angle and a torque outputted by the joint 21.” describes calculation is performed using equations derived based on forward kinematics)...
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Jian and include the feature of controlling the joints based on a kinematic model of the robotic arm and information about the payload, where the information comprises the mass of the payload and the pose of the payload relative to the tool flange, thereby enhance efficiency of robot movement (See at least Para [0003] “… In compliance control of a robotic arm, the robotic arm is subjected to an external load during operation (operated alone or by an operator in a man-machine operation), and some parameters associated with an output of the robotic arm need to be adjusted according to the external load in order to output a torque that can achieve gravity compensation, thereby ensuring normal operation under the external load.”).
However, Shiratsuchi in view of Jian does not teach ….
obtaining the pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload,…
… no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity, and where an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations,
Radrich teaches obtaining the pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload,… and a gravity vector of the tool flange at each of the different orientations (See at least Abstract – …the orientation or the installation, of the robot relative to the direction of gravity is determined…”, Para [0002] “The present invention relates to a method for determining an orientation of a robot relative to a gravitational direction…”, Para [0024] “indicating the mass matrix M(q,g.sub.model), the speeds or accelerations {dot over (q)}, {umlaut over (q)}, the generalized forces h(q, {dot over (q)}, g.sub.model), (the vector) of the gravitational (force or direction) g.sub.model, and model forces, in particular model joint forces T.sub.model. In a static kinetic model, the terms {dot over (q)}, {umlaut over (q)} can be omitted or can be equal to zero.”, Para [0025] “…at least essentially only because of the deviation between the gravitational direction or gravitational vector g.sub.model that is fundamental to the model and the actual current gravitational direction or gravitational vector g.sub.actual. It should be noted that the gravitational direction g.sub.model on which the model is based relative to the robot can be used in corresponding kinetic parameters of the model, such as masses, locations of center of gravity, and/or inertia sensors.”)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Radrich and include the feature of obtaining a pose of the payload relative to the tool flange based on the mass of the payload and a gravity vector of the tool flange at each of the different orientations which will help with precise calculation, thereby balancing the robot arm more accurately (See at least Para [0009] “The object of the present invention is to improve the operation of a robot.”).
However, Shiratsuchi in view of Jian and further in view of Radrich does not teach ….
… no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity(See at least Page 622 Col 1 Last Para “As shown in Fig.4, though we can describe the orientation of the end-effector in the world coordinate system as rotations around OX ,OY and OZ respectively, the rotation around axis OZ has no effect on the response of E F in the F/T sensor since the direction of the gravity of e G is always vertically downward along OZ − . Actually, the only two parameters that can affect the result of E F in the F/T sensor are [ ] 90 ,90 α∈− ° ° (the angular between the axis of the end-effector and OZ) and [ ] 180 ,180 ϕ∈− ° ° (the angular between the plane XOY and e e e XOZ , see Fig.3).”), and where an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations (See at least Page 622 Col 1 Last Para “As shown in Fig.4, though we can describe the orientation of the end-effector in the world coordinate system as rotations around OX ,OY and OZ respectively, the rotation around axis OZ has no effect on the response of E F in the F/T sensor since the direction of the gravity of e G is always vertically downward along OZ − . Actually, the only two parameters that can affect the result of E F in the F/T sensor are [ ] 90 ,90 α∈− ° ° (the angular between the axis of the end-effector and OZ) and [ ] 180 ,180 ϕ∈− ° ° (the angular between the plane XOY and e e e XOZ , see Fig.3).”, discloses that the end effector orientation angle between -90 to 90 degrees or -180 to 180 degrees, Page 621 Col 2 Para 1 “…translate the wrist-mounted F/T sensor reading data into the forces and torques exerted on the gripper in every orientation of the end-effector…”, Page 621 Col 2 Para 5 “…The end-effector may have every different orientation in its work space when it performs an assigned task, and force control may be required at every orientation of the end-effector…”, discloses end effector having multiple orientation for performing assigned task),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Gong and include the feature of no sensing axis of the force-torque sensor is parallel with gravity and wherein an angle between each of the four different orientations is between 100 and 140 degrees in relation to the three other orientations to perform calculation that will help move the robot arm precisely, thereby balancing the robot arm more accurately. Examiner notes that the specific rotation range are not integral to the device’s function, rather it is a result of other parameters chosen. One of ordinary skill in the art is expected to routinely experiment with the parameters, especially when the specifics are not disclosed, so as to ascertain the optimum or workable ranges for a particular use. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. “The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims... In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.” In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
19. Regarding claim 12, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 11. Shiratsuchi further discloses wherein the operations comprise providing instructions to a user, the instructions instructing the user to change an orientation of the tool flange relative to the direction of gravitational force (See at least Para [0021] “FIG. 7A and FIG. 7B are explanatory diagrams for illustrating an example of an operation in accordance with an attitude command value generated by an attitude-on-specified-axis generation unit in the calibration device according to the first embodiment of the present invention”, Fig 14 item 203 command value generation unit, command is construed as instruction, Para [0071] “…a user may determine the rotation axis in consideration of interference with a peripheral environment…” construed as user changes an orientation of the tool flange relative to the direction of gravitational force).
21. Regarding claim 14, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 11. Shiratsuchi further discloses an interface device comprising a display device for displaying a first representation of the tool flange, the first representation showing the tool flange in at least one of the different orientations (See at least Para [0125] discloses display unit configured to display the position information).
22. Regarding claim 15, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 14. Shiratsuchi further discloses wherein the display device is also for displaying a second representation of the tool flange, the second representation showing the tool flange at a different one of the different orientations than the first representation (See at least Para [0125] discloses display unit configured to display the position information).
24. Regarding claim 20, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 19. Shiratsuchi further discloses wherein the pose is obtained by the controller performing operations comprising:
obtaining an initial guess of the pose of the payload (See at least Para [0091], [0092], [0101] disclose a numerical model being used which is construed as using initial values that can be treated as initial guess, Para [0051] “…as an attitude at which the position information and the force information are acquired, an attitude is changed by rotation about an arbitrary axis of the sensor coordinate system…” which construed as obtaining a pose (here attitude is considered as pose) of the payload based on forces on the tool flange produced in at at least two of the different orientations, Para [0038] “…the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.”);
for at least two of the different orientations, obtaining an expected torque on the tool flange caused by the payload having a pose corresponding to the initial guess (See at least Para [0038] “…In this case, the contact state is expressed as magnitudes of forces and moments and a direction vector.” describes obtaining moments (torque) at different orientations, Para [0064] discloses initial values can be treated as known which construed as initial guess);
determining an expected torque difference between at least two expected torques on the tool flange (See at least Fig 9, Para [0023] “FIG. 9 is an explanatory diagram for illustrating a bias estimation operation for a moment by the bias value estimation unit of the parameter estimation unit in the calibration device according to the first embodiment of the present invention, Para [0091] “In other words, a numerical model of the moment is defined as a phase difference φ when the bias component of the moment about the Y axis is denoted by M_y_b, a rotation angle about the Y axis from the reference attitude R.sub.k0 is denoted by θ, θ is to the horizontal axis, and the moment is assigned to the vertical axis. Moreover, the amplitude of the cosine curve is denoted by Am. When moment data acquired on this occasion is denoted by M_y, the following expression (8) holds.” discloses determining difference in moments (considered as torques)); and
determining a torque error comprising a difference between the torque difference and the expected torque difference (See at least Para [0098] discloses error data at a total of N attitudes which construed as torque error, Para [0131] discloses offset position/attitude specification unit 208 where only the acting external forces generated at this position can be calculated as offsets);
wherein the pose is obtained based on the torque error (See at least Para [0070] “Errors decrease as a rotation amount about the rotation axis Vec_rot from position/attitude serving as a reference increases…” describes minimizing torque error, Para [0067] discloses error minimization and increases the estimation accuracy of the bias which is construed as minimizing torque error).
26. Claim(s) 13 and 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiratsuchi (US 2018/0169854 A1) in view of Radrich (US 2019/0009410 A1), Gong et al. (D. Gong, Y. Jia, Y. Cheng and N. Xi, "On-line and simultaneous calibration of wrist-mounted Force/Torque sensor and tool Forces/Torques for manipulation," 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Shenzhen, China, 2013, pp. 619-624) (Hereinafter Gong), Jian et al. (US 2019/0084154 A1) (Hereinafter Jian), and further in view of Fuerstenberger (DE102017009278A1).
27. Regarding claim 13, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 12. Shiratsuchi further discloses wherein the instructions instruct the user to rotate the tool flange around first and second axes (See at least Para [0021] “FIG. 7A and FIG. 7B are explanatory diagrams for illustrating an example of an operation in accordance with an attitude command value generated by an attitude-on-specified-axis generation unit in the calibration device according to the first embodiment of the present invention”, Fig 14 item 203 command value generation unit, command is construed as instruction, Para [0071] “…a user may determine the rotation axis in consideration of interference with a peripheral environment…” construed as user changes an orientation of the tool flange around an axis).
However, Shiratsuchi does not explicitly spell out all the elements of claim 12. Shiratsuchi further discloses … that are non-parallel to, and non-perpendicular to, the direction of gravitational force.
Fuerstenberger teaches … that are non-parallel to, and non-perpendicular to, the direction of gravitational force (See at least Para [0025] Line 235-239 “In one embodiment, the (joint) axis of the joint which connects or is connected to the adjacent member of the robot base is or is inclined against the direction of gravity at least during the detection of the joint and calibrator load(s) or in the first and optionally the additional pose(s), in one embodiment by at least 30°, in particular at least 45°, in one embodiment by at least 75°.”, discloses inclined against the direction of gravity by at least 30°, 45°, or 75° which is construed as non-parallel to and non-perpendicular to the direction of gravitational force, Para [0036] Line 369-370 “In one embodiment, the force-moment sensor 40 detects the resultant of the two tilting moments about axes perpendicular to each other and to the axis of rotation of the first joint 21.”, Para [0041], Para [0011] 89-100 “In one embodiment, a load can be a force and/or deformation in one or more, in particular three, directions. 91 axes and/or a (torque) moment about one or more, in particular three, axes, or a corresponding single- or multi-axis tension or 93 Stretching condition include, in particular, its. 94 In a further development, the or one or more of the joint sensors (to be calibrated) each detects, in particular electrically, a torque about or in the joint axis and/or at least one axis transverse to the joint axis or is designed to do so, in particular a joint torque sensor. Additionally or alternatively, in a further development, the calibration sensor detects, in particular electrically, a (tilting) torque about or in one or more axes or is designed for this purpose, in particular a forcetorque sensor. This allows for advantageous, particularly precise and/or flexible, calibration in one embodiment”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Fuerstenberger and include feature that let the tool flange rotate at a certain angle around an axis that is non-parallel and non-perpendicular to the direction of gravitational force in order to perform calculation that will help move the robot arm precisely, thereby balancing the robot arm more accurately.
27. Regarding claim 22, modified Shiratsuchi has all the elements of claim 11.
However, Shiratsuchi does not explicitly spell out wherein the operations comprise:
verifying the different orientations of the tool flange by determining whether at least one angle between the tool flange and the direction of gravitational force at a first orientation of the tool flange differs from at least one angle between the robot tool flange and the direction of gravitational force at a second orientation of the tool flange, the first orientation and the second orientation being different.
Fuerstenberger teaches wherein the operations comprise:
verifying the different orientations of the tool flange by determining whether at least one angle between the tool flange and the direction of gravitational force at a first orientation of the tool flange differs from at least one angle between the robot tool flange and the direction of gravitational force at a second orientation of the tool flange, the first orientation and the second orientation being different. (See at least Para [0025] Line 235-239 “In one embodiment, the (joint) axis of the joint which connects or is connected to the adjacent member of the robot base is or is inclined against the direction of gravity at least during the detection of the joint and calibrator load(s) or in the first and optionally the additional pose(s), in one embodiment by at least 30°, in particular at least 45°, in one embodiment by at least 75°.”, Para [0033] Line 341-343 “Fig. 1 342 shows a robot arrangement with a robot in different poses and a system for calibrating joint load sensors of the robot according to an embodiment of the present invention.”, Para [0036] Line 369-370 “In one embodiment, the force-moment sensor 40 detects the resultant of the two tilting moments about axes perpendicular to each other and to the axis of rotation of the first joint 21.”, Para [0041], Para [0011] Line 89-100 “In one embodiment, a load can be a force and/or deformation in one or more, in particular three, directions. 91 axes and/or a (torque) moment about one or more, in particular three, axes, or a corresponding single- or multi-axis tension or 93 Stretching condition include, in particular, its. 94 In a further development, the or one or more of the joint sensors (to be calibrated) each detects, in particular electrically, a torque about or in the joint axis and/or at least one axis transverse to the joint axis or is designed to do so, in particular a joint torque sensor. Additionally or alternatively, in a further development, the calibration sensor detects, in particular electrically, a (tilting) torque about or in one or more axes or is designed for this purpose, in particular a force torque sensor. This allows for advantageous, particularly precise and/or flexible, calibration in one embodiment”, Para [0017] Line 167-169 “In one embodiment, the first and the or one or more of the additional pose(s) are predetermined such that the joint load sensor is loaded differently in these poses due to gravity, in particular at different heights and/or directions.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the
filling date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Fuerstenberger to include feature that will verify the different orientations of the tool flange by checking at least one angle between the robot tool flange and the direction of gravitational force of a second orientation that differs from at least one angle between the robot tool flange and the direction of gravitational force of the first orientation in order for precise calculation, thereby providing safe movement of the robot arm.
27. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiratsuchi (US 2018/0169854 A1) in view of Radrich (US 2019/0009410 A1), Gong et al. (D. Gong, Y. Jia, Y. Cheng and N. Xi, "On-line and simultaneous calibration of wrist-mounted Force/Torque sensor and tool Forces/Torques for manipulation," 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Shenzhen, China, 2013, pp. 619-624) (Hereinafter Gong), Jian et al. (US 2019/0084154 A1) (Hereinafter Jian), and further in view of Kassow et al. (US 8614559 B2) (Hereinafter Kassow).
29. Regarding claim 16, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 11.
However, Shiratsuchi does not disclose an interface device comprising a display device for displaying a representation of the tool flange, where the representation indicates an actual orientation of the tool flange, and where the display device is also for displaying an arrow indicating a direction to rotate the tool flange.
Kassow discloses an interface device comprising a display device for displaying a representation of the tool flange, where the representation indicates an actual orientation of the tool flange, and where the display device is also for displaying an arrow indicating a direction to rotate the tool flange (See at least Fig 11(a), Fig 11(b)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Kassow and include a feature of a display device for representation of the tool flange, where the representation indicates an actual orientation of the tool flange, and where the display device is also for displaying an arrow indicating a direction to rotate the tool flange, thereby making the user interaction not only easy but also fast and help control the robot arm with ease and with more accuracy.
27. Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiratsuchi (US 2018/0169854 A1) in view of Radrich (US 2019/0009410 A1), Gong et al. (D. Gong, Y. Jia, Y. Cheng and N. Xi, "On-line and simultaneous calibration of wrist-mounted Force/Torque sensor and tool Forces/Torques for manipulation," 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Shenzhen, China, 2013, pp. 619-624) (Hereinafter Gong), and further in view of Fuerstenberger (DE102017009278A1).
27. Regarding claim 21, modified Shiratsuchi teaches all the elements of claim 1.
However, Shiratsuchi does not explicitly spell out verifying the different orientations of the tool
flange based on (i) at least one angle between the tool flange and the direction of gravitational force at a first orientation of the tool flange and (ii) at least one angle between the tool flange and the direction of gravitational force at a second orientation of the tool flange, the first orientation and the second orientation being different.
Fuerstenberger teaches
verifying the different orientations of the tool flange based on (i) at least one angle between the
tool flange and the direction of gravitational force at a first orientation of the tool flange (See at least Para [0025] Line 235-239 “In one embodiment, the (joint) axis of the joint which connects or is connected to the adjacent member of the robot base is or is inclined against the direction of gravity at least during the detection of the joint and calibrator load(s) or in the first and optionally the additional pose(s), in one embodiment by at least 30°, in particular at least 45°, in one embodiment by at least 75°.”, Para [0033] Line 341-343 “Fig. 1 342 shows a robot arrangement with a robot in different poses and a system for calibrating joint load sensors of the robot according to an embodiment of the present invention.”, Para [0036] Line 369-370 “In one embodiment, the force-moment sensor 40 detects the resultant of the two tilting moments about axes perpendicular to each other and to the axis of rotation of the first joint 21.”, Para [0041], Para [0011] Line 89-100 “In one embodiment, a load can be a force and/or deformation in one or more, in particular three, directions. 91 axes and/or a (torque) moment about one or more, in particular three, axes, or a corresponding single- or multi-axis tension or 93 Stretching condition include, in particular, its. 94 In a further development, the or one or more of the joint sensors (to be calibrated) each detects, in particular electrically, a torque about or in the joint axis and/or at least one axis transverse to the joint axis or is designed to do so, in particular a joint torque sensor. Additionally or alternatively, in a further development, the calibration sensor detects, in particular electrically, a (tilting) torque about or in one or more axes or is designed for this purpose, in particular a force torque sensor. This allows for advantageous, particularly precise and/or flexible, calibration in one embodiment”, Para [0017] Line 167-169 “In one embodiment, the first and the or one or more of the additional pose(s) are predetermined such that the joint load sensor is loaded differently in these poses due to gravity, in particular at different heights and/or directions.”) and (ii) at least one angle between the tool flange and the direction of gravitational force at a second orientation of the tool flange, the first orientation and the second orientation being different (See at least Para [0025] Line 235-239 “In one embodiment, the (joint) axis of the joint which connects or is connected to the adjacent member of the robot base is or is inclined against the direction of gravity at least during the detection of the joint and calibrator load(s) or in the first and optionally the additional pose(s), in one embodiment by at least 30°, in particular at least 45°, in one embodiment by at least 75°.”, Para [0033] Line 341-343 “Fig. 1 342 shows a robot arrangement with a robot in different poses and a system for calibrating joint load sensors of the robot according to an embodiment of the present invention.”, Para [0036] Line 369-370 “In one embodiment, the force-moment sensor 40 detects the resultant of the two tilting moments about axes perpendicular to each other and to the axis of rotation of the first joint 21.”, Para [0041], Para [0011] Line 89-100 “In one embodiment, a load can be a force and/or deformation in one or more, in particular three, directions. 91 axes and/or a (torque) moment about one or more, in particular three, axes, or a corresponding single- or multi-axis tension or 93 Stretching condition include, in particular, its. 94 In a further development, the or one or more of the joint sensors (to be calibrated) each detects, in particular electrically, a torque about or in the joint axis and/or at least one axis transverse to the joint axis or is designed to do so, in particular a joint torque sensor. Additionally or alternatively, in a further development, the calibration sensor detects, in particular electrically, a (tilting) torque about or in one or more axes or is designed for this purpose, in particular a force torque sensor. This allows for advantageous, particularly precise and/or flexible, calibration in one embodiment”, Para [0017] Line 167-169 “In one embodiment, the first and the or one or more of the additional pose(s) are predetermined such that the joint load sensor is loaded differently in these poses due to gravity, in particular at different heights and/or directions.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the
filling date of the claimed invention to modify Shiratsuchi with the teachings of Fuerstenberger to include feature that will verify the different orientations of the tool flange by checking at least one angle between the tool flange and the direction of gravitational force of an orientation that differs from at least one angle between the tool flange and the direction of gravitational force of an older orientation in order for precise calculation for safe movement of the robot arm.
Conclusion
28. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Development of a Torque Sensing Robot Arm for Interactive Communication (Hashimoto et al.) teaches joint torque sensing technique without reducing stiffness of the robot
Identification of the payload inertial parameters of industrial manipulators (Khalil et al.) teaches four methods to identify inertial parameters of the load of a manipulator
29. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
30. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHEDA HOQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-5310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am- 5:00 pm.
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, Ramon Mercado can be reached at 571-270-5744. 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.
/SHAHEDA HOQUE/Examiner, Art Unit 3658 /MICHAEL C ZARROLI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights