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 .
Status of Application
This office action is in response to the most recent filings filed by applicants on 09/18/25. The most recent claims are a preliminary amendment made to claims submitted on 09/09/25:
Claims 1 and 21 are amended
Claims 4-5 and 22-26 are cancelled
No claims are added
Claims 1-3, 6-21 and 27-37 are pending
Note:
Regarding the claim limitations in the amended independent claims 1 and 21, applicants’ have amended the claims to remove the only processing step in the claim, “correcting…”. When the above claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, applicants are basically, collecting information in the “obtaining” step, transferring a signal to another apparatus in the “transmitting” step, and displaying information in the “displaying” step.
The two “wherein” limitations are simply further describing the information being displayed from processing done by another apparatus, however, no details related to the calculation are provided. So, it is unclear if the another information processing apparatus is part of the currently claimed system and the calculation it performs is part of the currently claimed system? Or is it part of a different system that is not claimed? In the latter case, the current system would simply serve as a display for information processed in the other system. If the applicant intends to claim the calculations performed by the “another information processing apparatus” then applicants will need to include those missing calculation steps as part of the claim to make the scope of the current claims.
As such, the claims are not processing the information collected and using the information for anything. The claims are recited at a high level of generality. The following office action is based on this broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim.
Further clarification is requested. Applicants are welcome to call the examiner to discuss the claims further.
In light of these notes, the amended claims, do not overcome previously presented rejections under 101 and 103. As is discussed below. This note is intended as a conversation starter to help applicants understand the examiner’s perspective. Applicants are welcome to call the examiner to discuss this further.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-21 and 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step One - First, pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Guidance on 84 Fed. Reg. 53, the claims 1-20 and 27-28 is/are directed to a method which is a statutory category.
Step One - First, pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Guidance on 84 Fed. Reg. 53, the claims 21 is/are directed to a device/apparatus which is a statutory category.
Under the 2019 PEG, Step 2A under which a claim is not “directed to” a judicial exception unless the claim satisfies a two-prong inquiry. Further, particular groupings of abstract ideas are consistent with judicial precedent and are based on an extraction and synthesis of the key concepts identified by the courts as being abstract.
With respect to the Step 2A, Prong One, the claims as drafted, and given their broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the Abstract idea grouping of “certain methods of organizing human activity” (business relations; relationships or interactions between people).
For instance, independent Method Claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea, as evidenced by claim limitations “obtaining, the first data containing information of the workpiece, information of the product, and information of a plurality of tools used for machining the workpiece to manufacture the product; transmitting, information to another information processing apparatus to instruct a job to generate second data by using the first data, the second data containing information of respective paths for the plurality of tools; and displaying, a status of information processing of the job on a display portion after the instructing of the job on a display portion by obtaining a status of information processing of the job after the job, wherein the displaying of the status information of the job includes displaying, a status of first information processing of calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool by using at least a part of the first data and a status of second information processing of calculating a path for the first tool by using at least a part of the first data that is performed after the first information processing, and wherein the displaying includes displaying, a status of third information processing performed together with the second information processing, the third information processing being information processing of calculating a path for a second tool, which is used after machining by the first tool, on a basis of the machined shape calculated in the first information processing.”
These claim limitations belong to the grouping of “certain methods of organizing human activity” because the claims are related to information management throughout the manufacturing process of a product - managing workpieces, tools and the product being manufactured (see specification [0004]). Information management in a manufacturing process for one or more human entities involves organizing human activity based on the description of “certain methods of organizing human activity” provided by the courts. The court have used the phrase “Certain methods of organizing human activity” as —fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
These claim limitations also belong to the grouping of “mental processes” because the claims are related to information management throughout the manufacturing process of a product - managing workpieces, tools and the product being manufactured (see specification [0004]). The court have used the phrase “mental processes” as — concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion).
Independent Claim 21 is/are recites substantially similar limitations to independent claim 1 and is/are rejected under 2A for similar reasons to claims 1 above.
With respect to the Step 2A, Prong Two - This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites “An information processing method comprising: to manufacture the product; displaying a status of information processing of the job on a display portion after the instructing of the job, wherein the displaying includes displaying, on the display portion, a status of first information processing of calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool included in the plurality of tools and a status of second information processing of calculating a path for the first tool that is performed after the first information processing; by the processor; A non-transitory processor-readable recording medium storing a program for causing a processor to execute the information processing method according to claim 1; An information processing apparatus comprising a processor configured to execute the program stored on the recording medium according to claim 17; An information processing apparatus comprising a processor, wherein the processor is configured to execute: An information processing method for generating processing data for manufacturing a product by processing a workpiece with a processing machine, the information processing method being performed by an information processing apparatus including a processor, the information processing method comprising: An information processing apparatus comprising a processor, wherein the processor is configured to execute processing to, by the processor, information to another information processing apparatus; by the processor, from the another information processing apparatus, wherein the displaying includes, by the processor from a user, by the processor, from the another information processing apparatus, to the another information processing apparatus, on the display portion, by the another information processing apparatus, by the another information processing apparatus, the another information processing apparatus,”, such that it amounts to no more than: adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f).
As a result, claims 1 do not provide any specifics regarding the integration into a practical application when recited in a claim with a judicial exception.
Similarly dependent claims 2-20 and 27-28 are also directed to an abstract idea under 2A, first and second prong. In the present application, all of the dependent claims have been evaluated and it was found that they all inherit the deficiencies set forth with respect to the independent claims. For instance, dependent claim 6 recites “wherein the displaying includes displaying, on the display portion, a status of fourth information processing of calculating a machined shape formed by the second tool, the fourth information processing being performed between an end timing of the first information processing and a start timing of the third information processing”. Here, the claim limitation shows displaying information which can be considered an additional element, but the additional element is still being recited such that it amounts to no more than: adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Similarly, claim 10 recites “wherein the preparing includes automatically setting the information of the plurality of tools on a basis of the information of the product.” Here, the claim limitation shows “automatically”, but does not show what is automatically processing the information. So, when the claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation, automatically can still be considered something that is automatically happening in the human mind. As such, the limitation is still very broad and part of the abstract idea. As a result, Examiner asserts that dependent claims, such as dependent claims 2-20 and 27-28 are also directed to the abstract idea identified above.
With respect to Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. First, the invention lacks improvements to another technology or technical field [see Alice at 2351; 2019 IEG at 55], and lacks meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment [Alice at 2360, 2019 IEG at 55], and fails to effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing [2019 IEG, 55]. For the reasons articulated above, the claims recite an abstract idea that is limited to a particular field of endeavor (MPEP § 2106.05(h)) and recites insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP § 2106.05(g)). By the factors and rationale provided above with respect to these MPEP sections, the additional elements of the claims that fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application also fail to amount to “significantly more” than the abstract idea.
As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element(s) of “An information processing method comprising: to manufacture the product; displaying a status of information processing of the job on a display portion after the instructing of the job, wherein the displaying includes displaying, on the display portion, a status of first information processing of calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool included in the plurality of tools and a status of second information processing of calculating a path for the first tool that is performed after the first information processing; by the processor; A non-transitory processor-readable recording medium storing a program for causing a processor to execute the information processing method according to claim 1; An information processing apparatus comprising a processor configured to execute the program stored on the recording medium according to claim 17; An information processing apparatus comprising a processor, wherein the processor is configured to execute: An information processing method for generating processing data for manufacturing a product by processing a workpiece with a processing machine, the information processing method being performed by an information processing apparatus including a processor, the information processing method comprising: An information processing apparatus comprising a processor, wherein the processor is configured to execute processing to, by the processor, information to another information processing apparatus; by the processor, from the another information processing apparatus, wherein the displaying includes, by the processor from a user, by the processor, from the another information processing apparatus, to the another information processing apparatus, on the display portion, by the another information processing apparatus, by the another information processing apparatus, the another information processing apparatus” are insufficient to amount to significantly more. Applicants originally submitted specification describes the computer components above at least in page/ paragraph [0033]-[0038], [0114]. In light of the specification, it should be noted that the components discussed above did not meaningfully limit the abstract idea because they merely linked the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (i.e., "implementation via computers"). In light of the specification, it should be noted that the claim limitations discussed above are merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f). (See MPEP 2106.05(f) - Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception - “Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible.” Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 235). Mere instructions to apply an exception using computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.).
The claim fails to recite any improvements to another technology or technical field, improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, use of a particular machine, effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, adding unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application, and/or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular environment. See 84 Fed. Reg. 55. Viewed individually or as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Further, it should be noted that additional elements of the claimed invention such as claim limitations when considered individually or as an ordered combination along with the other limitations discussed above in method claims 1 and 21 also do not meaningfully limit the abstract idea because they merely linked the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (i.e., "implementation via computers"). In light of the specification, it should be noted that the claim limitations discussed above are merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP 2106.
Similarly, dependent claims 2-20 and 27-28 also do not include limitations amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea under the second prong or 2B of the Alice framework. In the present application, all of the dependent claims have been evaluated and it was found that they all inherit the deficiencies set forth with respect to the independent claims. Further, it should be noted that the dependent claims do not include limitations that overcome the stated assertions. Here, the dependent claims recite features/limitations that include computer components identified above in part 2B of analysis of independent claims 1 and 21. As a result, Examiner asserts that dependent claims, such as dependent claims 2-20 and 27-28 are also directed to the abstract idea identified above.
For more information on 101 rejections, see MPEP 2106, January 2019 Guidance at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-01 -07/pdf/2018-28282.pdf
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 9, 11-15, 17-21 and 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagayama et al. (US 2017/0160716), further in view of Matthews et al. (US 2004/0143362).
As per claims 1 and 21: Nagayama shows:
An information processing method for generating processing data for manufacturing a product by processing a workpiece with a processing machine, the information processing method being performed by an information processing apparatus including a processor, the information processing method comprising (Nagayama shows: [0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths; [0040] When a portion of a drawn tool path is selected by a cursor, a numerical controller 100 according to Example 1 displays an argument of a cycle command related to the tool path in a different form from that of another argument. In addition, when a tool path other than the selected tool path is related to the argument, the tool path is displayed in a different form from that of another tool path; [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here):
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama shows:
An information processing apparatus comprising a processor, wherein the processor is configured to execute (Nagayama shows: [0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths; [0040] When a portion of a drawn tool path is selected by a cursor, a numerical controller 100 according to Example 1 displays an argument of a cycle command related to the tool path in a different form from that of another argument. In addition, when a tool path other than the selected tool path is related to the argument, the tool path is displayed in a different form from that of another tool path; [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here):
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama shows:
An information processing method for generating processing data for manufacturing a product by processing a workpiece with a processing machine, the information processing method being performed by an information processing apparatus including a processor, the information processing method comprising (Nagayama shows: [0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths; [0040] When a portion of a drawn tool path is selected by a cursor, a numerical controller 100 according to Example 1 displays an argument of a cycle command related to the tool path in a different form from that of another argument. In addition, when a tool path other than the selected tool path is related to the argument, the tool path is displayed in a different form from that of another tool path; [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here):
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama shows:
obtaining, by the processor from a user, the first data containing information of the workpiece, information of the product, and information of a plurality of tools used for machining the workpiece to manufacture the product (Nagayama shows: Fig. 10 and 11 and item 100 and [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known; wherein the CPU of figure 10 is the controller of the CNC and is the control device; [0016] A numerical controller according to an embodiment of the invention is a numerical controller. [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here; it would be considered by a person having ordinary skill in the art that toolpath data is inherently information on a trajectory of a tool when using end point coordinates of a path. [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known. In the machining program, a linear or arc motion, etc. can be implemented using Gxx (x is a numerical value) code of EIA/ISO code. For example, when a description of [0005] G00 X1. Y1., etc. [0006] is performed in the machining program, it is possible to output a command to move a tool to coordinates x1, y1, etc. wherein a machining program is established to have lines of code that cause the machine tool to follow the programmed toolpath of the machine code; [0043] The machining program creation unit 101 receives an input of a machining program);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama shows:
transmitting, by the processor, information to another information processing apparatus to instruct a job to generate second data by using the first data, the second data containing information of respective paths for the plurality of tools (Nagayama shows: Fig. 2, 4 and 5 and [0037] The correspondence relation management unit 105 performs a process of recording a correspondence relation between an argument of a cycle command inside the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101 and the tool path created by the tool path creation unit 103 in the information table 107; [0038] Stored in the information table 107 is the correspondence relation between the argument of the cycle command inside the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101 and the tool path created by the tool path creation unit 103. An example of the information table 107 is illustrated in FIG. 2; [0046] The correspondence relation management unit 105 associates the end point coordinates of the tool path, the argument of the cycle command used to determine the end point coordinates, and an execution block No. with one another, and records the point coordinates, the argument, and the execution block No. in the information table 107. Herein, the execution block No. refers to a unique number for individually identifying a plurality of tool paths when a series of tool paths are configured by a combination of the plurality of tool paths (see FIG. 2)); and
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama shows:
displaying, by the processor, a status of information processing of the job on a display portion after the instructing of the job on a display portion by obtaining a status of information processing of the job from the another information processing apparatus after the job to the another information processing apparatus (Nagayama shows: [0010] The numerical controller has a function of simulating movement of the tool by the input machining program, and displaying a result thereof, that is, a tool path on a screen; wherein a screen is a display[0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths, and specifies an argument of the cycle command corresponding to the selected tool path with reference to the information table, and the display unit displays the specified argument in a different form from a form of another argument in the machining program; [0039] The display unit 109 draws the machining program or the tool path on a display device on an instruction of the machining program creation unit 101 or the tool path creation unit 103. In addition, the display unit 109 displays the argument of the cycle command or the tool path specified by the correspondence relation management unit 105 in a different form from another one. [0059] the correspondence relation management unit 105 extracts all tool paths related to the argument A with reference to the information table 107. That is, all records including the argument A specified in S106 are selected from the information table 107. [0060] The tool path creation unit 103 allows the display unit 109 to display a tool path extracted herein in a different display form from that of another tool path. Typically, the selected tool path and the tool path extracted in S108 can be displayed in a different color, thickness, etc. from that of another one. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on “status” in the claim limitation above.),
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
“displaying, by the processor, a status of information processing of the job on a display portion after the instructing of the job on a display portion by obtaining a status of information processing of the job from the another information processing apparatus after the job to the another information processing apparatus”
Reference Nagayama shows in Fig. 10 and 11 and [0033] In the numerical controller 100, function units illustrated in FIG. 11 are logically implemented when a CPU illustrated in FIG. 10 executes a predetermined process according to a program; [0034] the numerical controller 100 includes a machining program creation unit 101, a tool path creation unit 103, a correspondence relation management unit 105, an information table 107, and a display unit 109, which reads on most of the claim limitation above. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on “status” in the claim limitation above;
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
“wherein the displaying of the status information of the job includes displaying, on the display portion, a status of first information processing by the another information processing apparatus of calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool by using at least a part of the first data and a status of second information processing by the another information processing apparatus of calculating a path for the first tool by using at least a part of the first data that is performed after the first information processing”
Reference Nagayama shows in Fig. 10 and 11 and [0033] In the numerical controller 100, function units illustrated in FIG. 11 are logically implemented when a CPU illustrated in FIG. 10 executes a predetermined process according to a program; [0034] the numerical controller 100 includes a machining program creation unit 101, a tool path creation unit 103, a correspondence relation management unit 105, an information table 107, and a display unit 109, which reads on most of the claim limitation above. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on “status” in the claim limitation above. Nagayama does not explicitly show “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool”.
Reference Matthews shows the above limitation at least in “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool” (Matthews: Fig. 1 shows CAM 122 outside CNC 132; Fig. 2 shows CAM 222 disposed outside CNC 234; [0035] In an alternative embodiment the CNC machine 234 has a personal computer (PC) connected to it, which is used instead of the CNC machine to run all or part of the other version of the CAM tool. The PC is also connected to DB 226 and is used to modify the G code; [0036] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention the decision points on selection of features, attributes, and processes are explicitly given in the form of rules. A rule includes a code fragment or function that when executed returns a "True" or "False" Boolean value. The code fragments or functions are stored in the DB 226. Using the selected features, attributes, and processes, cutting tools and machining operations, e.g., the tools cutting feeds and rotational speeds and tool path, are determined and a CNC program is generated to machine the part on a CNC machine; [0066] In addition the DB 720 includes a plurality of machining cycles, where each machining cycle includes a section of predetermined source code (for example, in C++), e.g., machining cycle 1 730 to machining cycle N 732, where N is an integer number. A process step via the generate CNC code module 714 will use a machining cycle to generate a CNC block of code, e.g., CNC code block 1 742 or CNC code block 2 744, where the CNC block of code includes the tool path (G-code). The CNC code blocks are inserted into the CNC program 740, which is used to machine the features on the part on a CNC machine; wherein the CAM is a separate computer, and has information that links tool path G-code to CNC code. Fig. 2 shows CAM 222 disposed outside CNC 234; [0035] In an alternative embodiment the CNC machine 234 has a personal computer (PC) connected to it, which is used instead of the CNC machine to run all or part of the other version of the CAM tool. The PC is also connected to DB 226 and is used to modify the G code. CAM software inherently manages target shapes when used in manufacturing [0005] The CAD design is stored in a database (DB) 116. The CAD design represents the finished product and is "what" is manufactured. The CAD design, in the form of a geometric model or 2D/3D representation of the finished part, is then electronically transferred to the manufacturing section 120. The CAD model alone normally has insufficient information to manufacture the part, and the manufacturing engineer must add information, such as tool selection and machining parameters, into the CAM tool in order to specify "how" the part is to be machined. The CAM tool may display a solid or 3D surface model of the part, hence allowing the manufacturing engineer full visualization of the finished machined part. The CAM model is stored in DB 124; wherein the CAM specifying how the desired shape of the CAD model is machined can be considered managing.
Reference Nagayama and Reference Matthews are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G05B19/00. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Matthews, particularly the “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool” (shown in Fig. 1, [0035]-[0036], [0066]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “display portion” (Fig. 10-11 and [0033]-[0034]), in order to provide for a system that that creates a map which links a machine code to a toolpath for display using CNC controllers as the processors for performing these actions, with the use of a separate CAM computer that accesses a shared database between the CNC and CAM computer to perform these functions because it would gain the stated benefits of Matthews, most notably that the information can be shared across a business so that specialized information is not retained by a select few individuals, but anyone that has access to the database and the CAM computer ([0035]). Furthermore, by offloading this processing of map creation to the CAM tool computer as opposed to the CNC controller computer, it would alleviate the processing of the CNC controller computer thus freeing it up to focus on machining control instead of shape design as performed by the CAM. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the known software that creates a map by linking the machine code to toolpath information so the two can be displayed together as taught by Nagayama, and implementing it by performing this mapping on a CAM computer that is separate from the CNC and storing it on a database that is shared between the CNC and CAM computer ns a known way to achieve predictable results, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A);
Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
“and wherein the displaying includes displaying, on the display portion, a status of third information processing performed together with the second information processing, the third information processing being information processing the another information processing apparatus of calculating a path for a second tool, which is used after machining by the first tool, on a basis of the machined shape calculated in the first information processing.”
Reference Nagayama shows in Fig. 10 and 11 and [0033] In the numerical controller 100, function units illustrated in FIG. 11 are logically implemented when a CPU illustrated in FIG. 10 executes a predetermined process according to a program; [0034] the numerical controller 100 includes a machining program creation unit 101, a tool path creation unit 103, a correspondence relation management unit 105, an information table 107, and a display unit 109, which reads on most of the claim limitation above. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on “status” in the claim limitation above. Nagayama does not explicitly show “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool”.
Both Nagayama and Matthews show “calculating the path for the first tool” in the claim above. Nagayama shows: [0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths; [0040] When a portion of a drawn tool path is selected by a cursor, a numerical controller 100 according to Example 1 displays an argument of a cycle command related to the tool path in a different form from that of another argument. In addition, when a tool path other than the selected tool path is related to the argument, the tool path is displayed in a different form from that of another tool path; [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here).
Reference Matthews shows the above limitation at least in “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool” and “calculating the path for the first tool” (Matthews: Fig. 1 shows CAM 122 outside CNC 132; Fig. 2 shows CAM 222 disposed outside CNC 234; [0035] In an alternative embodiment the CNC machine 234 has a personal computer (PC) connected to it, which is used instead of the CNC machine to run all or part of the other version of the CAM tool. The PC is also connected to DB 226 and is used to modify the G code; [0036] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention the decision points on selection of features, attributes, and processes are explicitly given in the form of rules. A rule includes a code fragment or function that when executed returns a "True" or "False" Boolean value. The code fragments or functions are stored in the DB 226. Using the selected features, attributes, and processes, cutting tools and machining operations, e.g., the tools cutting feeds and rotational speeds and tool path, are determined and a CNC program is generated to machine the part on a CNC machine; [0066] In addition the DB 720 includes a plurality of machining cycles, where each machining cycle includes a section of predetermined source code (for example, in C++), e.g., machining cycle 1 730 to machining cycle N 732, where N is an integer number. A process step via the generate CNC code module 714 will use a machining cycle to generate a CNC block of code, e.g., CNC code block 1 742 or CNC code block 2 744, where the CNC block of code includes the tool path (G-code). The CNC code blocks are inserted into the CNC program 740, which is used to machine the features on the part on a CNC machine; wherein the CAM is a separate computer, and has information that links tool path G-code to CNC code. Fig. 2 shows CAM 222 disposed outside CNC 234; [0035] In an alternative embodiment the CNC machine 234 has a personal computer (PC) connected to it, which is used instead of the CNC machine to run all or part of the other version of the CAM tool. The PC is also connected to DB 226 and is used to modify the G code. CAM software inherently manages target shapes when used in manufacturing [0005] The CAD design is stored in a database (DB) 116. The CAD design represents the finished product and is "what" is manufactured. The CAD design, in the form of a geometric model or 2D/3D representation of the finished part, is then electronically transferred to the manufacturing section 120. The CAD model alone normally has insufficient information to manufacture the part, and the manufacturing engineer must add information, such as tool selection and machining parameters, into the CAM tool in order to specify "how" the part is to be machined. The CAM tool may display a solid or 3D surface model of the part, hence allowing the manufacturing engineer full visualization of the finished machined part. The CAM model is stored in DB 124; wherein the CAM specifying how the desired shape of the CAD model is machined can be considered managing.
Reference Nagayama and Reference Matthews are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G05B19/00. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Matthews, particularly the “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool” (shown in Fig. 1, [0035]-[0036], [0066]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “display portion” (Fig. 10-11 and [0033]-[0034]), in order to provide for a system that that creates a map which links a machine code to a toolpath for display using CNC controllers as the processors for performing these actions, with the use of a separate CAM computer that accesses a shared database between the CNC and CAM computer to perform these functions because it would gain the stated benefits of Matthews, most notably that the information can be shared across a business so that specialized information is not retained by a select few individuals, but anyone that has access to the database and the CAM computer ([0035]). Furthermore, by offloading this processing of map creation to the CAM tool computer as opposed to the CNC controller computer, it would alleviate the processing of the CNC controller computer thus freeing it up to focus on machining control instead of shape design as performed by the CAM. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the known software that creates a map by linking the machine code to toolpath information so the two can be displayed together as taught by Nagayama, and implementing it by performing this mapping on a CAM computer that is separate from the CNC and storing it on a database that is shared between the CNC and CAM computer ns a known way to achieve predictable results, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claim 4: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the displaying includes displaying, on the display portion, a status of third information processing of calculating a path for a second tool that is used after machining by the first tool.
(Nagayama shows: [0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths; [0040] When a portion of a drawn tool path is selected by a cursor, a numerical controller 100 according to Example 1 displays an argument of a cycle command related to the tool path in a different form from that of another argument. In addition, when a tool path other than the selected tool path is related to the argument, the tool path is displayed in a different form from that of another tool path; [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here. Fig. 10 and 11 and item 100 and [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known; wherein the CPU of figure 10 is the controller of the CNC and is the control device; [0016] A numerical controller according to an embodiment of the invention is a numerical controller. [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here; it would be considered by a person having ordinary skill in the art that toolpath data is inherently information on a trajectory of a tool when using end point coordinates of a path. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on “status” in the claim limitation above.).
As per claim 5: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the second information processing and the third information processing are performed in parallel (Nagayama shows: [0076] When the tool path creation unit 103 detects that an indication, etc. by the pointer is performed on the screen to select one tool path on the screen, the operation proceeds to S302. [0078] The tool path creation unit 103 acquires coordinates in the graphic coordinate system of the position P on the screen indicated by the user in S301. The graphic coordinate system refers to a coordinate system used for the numerical controller 100 to display a modeled tool path on the screen. [0037] the correspondence relation management unit 105 performs a process of receiving an argument selection, and specifying all tool paths corresponding to an argument selected with reference to the information table; [0038] Stored in the information table 107 is the correspondence relation between the argument of the cycle command inside the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101 and the tool path created by the tool path creation unit 103; [0046] The correspondence relation management unit 105 associates the end point coordinates of the tool path, the argument of the cycle command used to determine the end point coordinates, and an execution block No. with one another, and records the point coordinates, the argument, and the execution block No. in the information table 107; [0091] The correspondence relation management unit 105 outputs the argument and the execution block No. of the selected tool path found in S403 to the machining program creation unit 101. Fig. 4 S107 and S108 and [0054] the correspondence relation management unit 105 specifies an argument A of a cycle command used to determine the selected tool path based on the information table 107. A process of specifying the argument will be described again below: [0056] The machining program creation unit 101 configures the argument A specified in S106 in a different display form from that of another argument, and allows the display unit 109 to display the machining program. Typically, the argument A can be displayed in a different color, size, thickness, font, etc. from that of another one).
As per claim 6: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the displaying includes displaying, on the display portion, a status of fourth information processing of calculating a machined shape formed by the second tool, the fourth information processing being performed between an end timing of the first information processing and a start timing of the third information processing.
Reference Nagayama shows in Fig. 10 and 11 and [0033] In the numerical controller 100, function units illustrated in FIG. 11 are logically implemented when a CPU illustrated in FIG. 10 executes a predetermined process according to a program; [0034] the numerical controller 100 includes a machining program creation unit 101, a tool path creation unit 103, a correspondence relation management unit 105, an information table 107, and a display unit 109, which reads on most of the claim limitation above. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on “status” in the claim limitation above. Nagayama does not explicitly show “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool”.
Reference Matthews shows the above limitation at least in “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool” (Fig. 1 shows CAM 122 outside CNC 132; Fig. 2 shows CAM 222 disposed outside CNC 234; [0035] In an alternative embodiment the CNC machine 234 has a personal computer (PC) connected to it, which is used instead of the CNC machine to run all or part of the other version of the CAM tool. The PC is also connected to DB 226 and is used to modify the G code; [0036] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention the decision points on selection of features, attributes, and processes are explicitly given in the form of rules. A rule includes a code fragment or function that when executed returns a "True" or "False" Boolean value. The code fragments or functions are stored in the DB 226. Using the selected features, attributes, and processes, cutting tools and machining operations, e.g., the tools cutting feeds and rotational speeds and tool path, are determined and a CNC program is generated to machine the part on a CNC machine; [0066] In addition the DB 720 includes a plurality of machining cycles, where each machining cycle includes a section of predetermined source code (for example, in C++), e.g., machining cycle 1 730 to machining cycle N 732, where N is an integer number. A process step via the generate CNC code module 714 will use a machining cycle to generate a CNC block of code, e.g., CNC code block 1 742 or CNC code block 2 744, where the CNC block of code includes the tool path (G-code). The CNC code blocks are inserted into the CNC program 740, which is used to machine the features on the part on a CNC machine; wherein the CAM is a separate computer, and has information that links tool path G-code to CNC code. Fig. 2 shows CAM 222 disposed outside CNC 234; [0035] In an alternative embodiment the CNC machine 234 has a personal computer (PC) connected to it, which is used instead of the CNC machine to run all or part of the other version of the CAM tool. The PC is also connected to DB 226 and is used to modify the G code. CAM software inherently manages target shapes when used in manufacturing [0005] The CAD design is stored in a database (DB) 116. The CAD design represents the finished product and is "what" is manufactured. The CAD design, in the form of a geometric model or 2D/3D representation of the finished part, is then electronically transferred to the manufacturing section 120. The CAD model alone normally has insufficient information to manufacture the part, and the manufacturing engineer must add information, such as tool selection and machining parameters, into the CAM tool in order to specify "how" the part is to be machined. The CAM tool may display a solid or 3D surface model of the part, hence allowing the manufacturing engineer full visualization of the finished machined part. The CAM model is stored in DB 124; wherein the CAM specifying how the desired shape of the CAD model is machined can be considered managing.
Reference Nagayama and Reference Matthews are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G05B19/00. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Matthews, particularly the “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool” (shown in Fig. 1, [0035]-[0036], [0066]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “display portion” (Fig. 10-11 and [0033]-[0034]), in order to provide for a system that that creates a map which links a machine code to a toolpath for display using CNC controllers as the processors for performing these actions, with the use of a separate CAM computer that accesses a shared database between the CNC and CAM computer to perform these functions because it would gain the stated benefits of Matthews, most notably that the information can be shared across a business so that specialized information is not retained by a select few individuals, but anyone that has access to the database and the CAM computer ([0035]). Furthermore, by offloading this processing of map creation to the CAM tool computer as opposed to the CNC controller computer, it would alleviate the processing of the CNC controller computer thus freeing it up to focus on machining control instead of shape design as performed by the CAM. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the known software that creates a map by linking the machine code to toolpath information so the two can be displayed together as taught by Nagayama, and implementing it by performing this mapping on a CAM computer that is separate from the CNC and storing it on a database that is shared between the CNC and CAM computer ns a known way to achieve predictable results, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claim 7: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the displaying includes displaying, on the display portion, a status of fifth information processing of simulating machining on a basis of information of the respective paths for the plurality of tools contained in the second data ([0010] The numerical controller has a function of simulating movement of the tool by the input machining program, and displaying a result thereof, that is, a tool path on a screen; wherein a screen is a display[0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths, and specifies an argument of the cycle command corresponding to the selected tool path with reference to the information table, and the display unit displays the specified argument in a different form from a form of another argument in the machining program; [0039] The display unit 109 draws the machining program or the tool path on a display device on an instruction of the machining program creation unit 101 or the tool path creation unit 103. In addition, the display unit 109 displays the argument of the cycle command or the tool path specified by the correspondence relation management unit 105 in a different form from another one. [0059] the correspondence relation management unit 105 extracts all tool paths related to the argument A with reference to the information table 107. That is, all records including the argument A specified in S106 are selected from the information table 107. [0060] The tool path creation unit 103 allows the display unit 109 to display a tool path extracted herein in a different display form from that of another tool path. Typically, the selected tool path and the tool path extracted in S108 can be displayed in a different color, thickness, etc. from that of another one. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on “status” in the claim limitation above.).
As per claim 9: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
Nagayama does not show “transferring” in the claim below:
further comprising transferring the second data after the fifth information processing.
Matthews shows: (CAM software inherently manages target shapes when used in manufacturing [0005] The CAD design is stored in a database (DB) 116. The CAD design represents the finished product and is "what" is manufactured. The CAD design, in the form of a geometric model or 2D/3D representation of the finished part, is then electronically transferred to the manufacturing section 120. The CAD model alone normally has insufficient information to manufacture the part, and the manufacturing engineer must add information, such as tool selection and machining parameters, into the CAM tool in order to specify "how" the part is to be machined. The CAM tool may display a solid or 3D surface model of the part, hence allowing the manufacturing engineer full visualization of the finished machined part. The CAM model is stored in DB 124; wherein the CAM specifying how the desired shape of the CAD model is machined can be considered managing).
Reference Nagayama and Reference Matthews are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G05B19/00. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Matthews, particularly the “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool” (shown in Fig. 1, [0035]-[0036], [0066]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “display portion” (Fig. 10-11 and [0033]-[0034]), in order to provide for a system that that creates a map which links a machine code to a toolpath for display using CNC controllers as the processors for performing these actions, with the use of a separate CAM computer that accesses a shared database between the CNC and CAM computer to perform these functions because it would gain the stated benefits of Matthews, most notably that the information can be shared across a business so that specialized information is not retained by a select few individuals, but anyone that has access to the database and the CAM computer ([0035]). Furthermore, by offloading this processing of map creation to the CAM tool computer as opposed to the CNC controller computer, it would alleviate the processing of the CNC controller computer thus freeing it up to focus on machining control instead of shape design as performed by the CAM. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the known software that creates a map by linking the machine code to toolpath information so the two can be displayed together as taught by Nagayama, and implementing it by performing this mapping on a CAM computer that is separate from the CNC and storing it on a database that is shared between the CNC and CAM computer ns a known way to achieve predictable results, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claim 11: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the first data contains information indicating a use order of the plurality of tools.
Reference Nagayama shows [0114] The invention is not restricted to the above-described embodiment, and modification such as replacement, omission, and addition of a component, changing of order, etc. may be performed within a scope not departing a subject matter. For example, Example 1 shows an example in which the numerical controller 100 performs both a process of changing the display form of the argument A corresponding to the selected tool path and a process of changing the display form of the tool path related to the argument A. However, the present embodiment is not restricted thereto, and the numerical controller 100 may perform only the process of changing the display form of the argument A corresponding to the selected tool path. This reads on “a use order” in the claim.
Also, Matthews shows [0043]: Each feature case 510 has one or more processes associated with it. To determine if a particular process 512 is applicable for a particular feature case 510, the accompanying rule 514 is evaluated to determine if it is "true". Each process has one or more process steps 516. The process step hierarchy is shown in FIG. 8. The process steps 516 describe, for example, the cutting tools, machining parameters, and machining cycles to be used in making the part on the CNC machine.
Reference Nagayama and Reference Matthews are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G05B19/00. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Matthews, particularly the “calculating a machined shape formed by a first tool” (shown in Fig. 1, [0035]-[0036], [0066]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “display portion” (Fig. 10-11 and [0033]-[0034]), in order to provide for a system that that creates a map which links a machine code to a toolpath for display using CNC controllers as the processors for performing these actions, with the use of a separate CAM computer that accesses a shared database between the CNC and CAM computer to perform these functions because it would gain the stated benefits of Matthews, most notably that the information can be shared across a business so that specialized information is not retained by a select few individuals, but anyone that has access to the database and the CAM computer ([0035]). Furthermore, by offloading this processing of map creation to the CAM tool computer as opposed to the CNC controller computer, it would alleviate the processing of the CNC controller computer thus freeing it up to focus on machining control instead of shape design as performed by the CAM. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the known software that creates a map by linking the machine code to toolpath information so the two can be displayed together as taught by Nagayama, and implementing it by performing this mapping on a CAM computer that is separate from the CNC and storing it on a database that is shared between the CNC and CAM computer ns a known way to achieve predictable results, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claim 12: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the first data contains information of respective machining types of the plurality of tools.
(Nagayama shows: Fig. 10 and 11 and item 100 and [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known; wherein the CPU of figure 10 is the controller of the CNC and is the control device; [0016] A numerical controller according to an embodiment of the invention is a numerical controller. [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here; it would be considered by a person having ordinary skill in the art that toolpath data is inherently information on a trajectory of a tool when using end point coordinates of a path. [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known. In the machining program, a linear or arc motion, etc. can be implemented using Gxx (x is a numerical value) code of EIA/ISO code. For example, when a description of [0005] G00 X1. Y1., etc. [0006] is performed in the machining program, it is possible to output a command to move a tool to coordinates x1, y1, etc. wherein a machining program is established to have lines of code that cause the machine tool to follow the programmed toolpath of the machine code; [0043] The machining program creation unit 101 receives an input of a machining program).
As per claim 13: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the workpiece is a first workpiece, the product is a first product, the plurality of tools are a first plurality of tools, and the job is a first job (Nagayama shows: [0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths; [0040] When a portion of a drawn tool path is selected by a cursor, a numerical controller 100 according to Example 1 displays an argument of a cycle command related to the tool path in a different form from that of another argument. In addition, when a tool path other than the selected tool path is related to the argument, the tool path is displayed in a different form from that of another tool path; [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here),
wherein the preparing includes preparing third data containing information of a second workpiece, information of a second product, and information of a second plurality of tools used for manufacturing the second product by machining the second workpiece (Nagayama shows: Fig. 10 and 11 and item 100 and [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known; wherein the CPU of figure 10 is the controller of the CNC and is the control device; [0016] A numerical controller according to an embodiment of the invention is a numerical controller. [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here; it would be considered by a person having ordinary skill in the art that toolpath data is inherently information on a trajectory of a tool when using end point coordinates of a path. [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known. In the machining program, a linear or arc motion, etc. can be implemented using Gxx (x is a numerical value) code of EIA/ISO code. For example, when a description of [0005] G00 X1. Y1., etc. [0006] is performed in the machining program, it is possible to output a command to move a tool to coordinates x1, y1, etc. wherein a machining program is established to have lines of code that cause the machine tool to follow the programmed toolpath of the machine code; [0043] The machining program creation unit 101 receives an input of a machining program),
wherein the instructing includes instructing a second job to generate fourth data by using the third data, the fourth data containing information of respective paths for the second plurality of tools (Nagayama shows: Fig. 2, 4 and 5 and [0037] The correspondence relation management unit 105 performs a process of recording a correspondence relation between an argument of a cycle command inside the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101 and the tool path created by the tool path creation unit 103 in the information table 107; [0038] Stored in the information table 107 is the correspondence relation between the argument of the cycle command inside the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101 and the tool path created by the tool path creation unit 103. An example of the information table 107 is illustrated in FIG. 2; [0046] The correspondence relation management unit 105 associates the end point coordinates of the tool path, the argument of the cycle command used to determine the end point coordinates, and an execution block No. with one another, and records the point coordinates, the argument, and the execution block No. in the information table 107. Herein, the execution block No. refers to a unique number for individually identifying a plurality of tool paths when a series of tool paths are configured by a combination of the plurality of tool paths (see FIG. 2)), and
wherein the displaying includes displaying a status of information processing of the second job on the display portion (Nagayama shows: [0010] The numerical controller has a function of simulating movement of the tool by the input machining program, and displaying a result thereof, that is, a tool path on a screen; wherein a screen is a display[0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths, and specifies an argument of the cycle command corresponding to the selected tool path with reference to the information table, and the display unit displays the specified argument in a different form from a form of another argument in the machining program; [0039] The display unit 109 draws the machining program or the tool path on a display device on an instruction of the machining program creation unit 101 or the tool path creation unit 103. In addition, the display unit 109 displays the argument of the cycle command or the tool path specified by the correspondence relation management unit 105 in a different form from another one. [0059] the correspondence relation management unit 105 extracts all tool paths related to the argument A with reference to the information table 107. That is, all records including the argument A specified in S106 are selected from the information table 107.[0060] The tool path creation unit 103 allows the display unit 109 to display a tool path extracted herein in a different display form from that of another tool path. Typically, the selected tool path and the tool path extracted in S108 can be displayed in a different color, thickness, etc. from that of another one).
As per claim 14: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the preparing includes displaying, on the display portion, a table containing information related to the first plurality of tools and the second plurality of tools (Nagayama shows: Fig. 2, 4 and 5 and [0037] The correspondence relation management unit 105 performs a process of recording a correspondence relation between an argument of a cycle command inside the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101 and the tool path created by the tool path creation unit 103 in the information table 107; [0038] Stored in the information table 107 is the correspondence relation between the argument of the cycle command inside the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101 and the tool path created by the tool path creation unit 103. An example of the information table 107 is illustrated in FIG. 2; [0046] The correspondence relation management unit 105 associates the end point coordinates of the tool path, the argument of the cycle command used to determine the end point coordinates, and an execution block No. with one another, and records the point coordinates, the argument, and the execution block No. in the information table 107. Herein, the execution block No. refers to a unique number for individually identifying a plurality of tool paths when a series of tool paths are configured by a combination of the plurality of tool paths (see FIG. 2). [0010] The numerical controller has a function of simulating movement of the tool by the input machining program, and displaying a result thereof, that is, a tool path on a screen; wherein a screen is a display[0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths, and specifies an argument of the cycle command corresponding to the selected tool path with reference to the information table, and the display unit displays the specified argument in a different form from a form of another argument in the machining program; [0039] The display unit 109 draws the machining program or the tool path on a display device on an instruction of the machining program creation unit 101 or the tool path creation unit 103. In addition, the display unit 109 displays the argument of the cycle command or the tool path specified by the correspondence relation management unit 105 in a different form from another one. [0059] the correspondence relation management unit 105 extracts all tool paths related to the argument A with reference to the information table 107. That is, all records including the argument A specified in S106 are selected from the information table 107.[0060] The tool path creation unit 103 allows the display unit 109 to display a tool path extracted herein in a different display form from that of another tool path. Typically, the selected tool path and the tool path extracted in S108 can be displayed in a different color, thickness, etc. from that of another one. Fig. 10 and 11 and [0033] In the numerical controller 100, function units illustrated in FIG. 11 are logically implemented when a CPU illustrated in FIG. 10 executes a predetermined process according to a program; [0034] the numerical controller 100 includes a machining program creation unit 101, a tool path creation unit 103, a correspondence relation management unit 105, an information table 107, and a display unit 109).
As per claim 15: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the preparing includes:
displaying, on the display portion, an interface image containing an image corresponding to the information of the first product and an image corresponding to the information of the second product (Nagayama shows: [0010] The numerical controller has a function of simulating movement of the tool by the input machining program, and displaying a result thereof, that is, a tool path on a screen; wherein a screen is a display[0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths, and specifies an argument of the cycle command corresponding to the selected tool path with reference to the information table, and the display unit displays the specified argument in a different form from a form of another argument in the machining program; [0039] The display unit 109 draws the machining program or the tool path on a display device on an instruction of the machining program creation unit 101 or the tool path creation unit 103. In addition, the display unit 109 displays the argument of the cycle command or the tool path specified by the correspondence relation management unit 105 in a different form from another one. [0059] the correspondence relation management unit 105 extracts all tool paths related to the argument A with reference to the information table 107. That is, all records including the argument A specified in S106 are selected from the information table 107.[0060] The tool path creation unit 103 allows the display unit 109 to display a tool path extracted herein in a different display form from that of another tool path. Typically, the selected tool path and the tool path extracted in S108 can be displayed in a different color, thickness, etc. from that of another one); and
preparing the information of the first product and the information of the second product by loading the information of the first product and the information of the second product that have operated in the interface image (Nagayama shows: Fig. 10 and 11 and item 100 and [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known; wherein the CPU of figure 10 is the controller of the CNC and is the control device; [0016] A numerical controller according to an embodiment of the invention is a numerical controller. [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here; it would be considered by a person having ordinary skill in the art that toolpath data is inherently information on a trajectory of a tool when using end point coordinates of a path. [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known. In the machining program, a linear or arc motion, etc. can be implemented using Gxx (x is a numerical value) code of EIA/ISO code. For example, when a description of [0005] G00 X1. Y1., etc. [0006] is performed in the machining program, it is possible to output a command to move a tool to coordinates x1, y1, etc. wherein a machining program is established to have lines of code that cause the machine tool to follow the programmed toolpath of the machine code; [0043] The machining program creation unit 101 receives an input of a machining program).
As per claim 17: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
A non-transitory processor-readable recording medium storing a program for causing a processor to execute the information processing method according to claim 1 (Nagamaya shows the non-transitory processor-readable medium in abstract). Please see prior art rejection of claim 1 above.
As per claim 18: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
An information processing apparatus comprising a processor configured to execute the program stored on the recording medium according to claim 17 (Nagamaya shows the apparatus in abstract). Please see prior art rejection of claim 17 above.
As per claim 19: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
further comprising a communication module configured to communicate with a server configured to perform the first information processing and the second information processing (Nagamaya shows: Fig. 10 and 11 and item 100 and [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known; wherein the CPU of figure 10 is the controller of the CNC and is the control device; [0016] A numerical controller according to an embodiment of the invention is a numerical controller. [0045] The tool path creation unit 103 reads the machining program created by the machining program creation unit 101, and calculates a tool path. The tool path creation unit 103 determines end point coordinates of each tool path based on an argument of a cycle command. A process of calculating the tool path is known, and thus a detailed description thereof is omitted here; it would be considered by a person having ordinary skill in the art that toolpath data is inherently information on a trajectory of a tool when using end point coordinates of a path. [0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known. In the machining program, a linear or arc motion, etc. can be implemented using Gxx (x is a numerical value) code of EIA/ISO code. For example, when a description of [0005] G00 X1. Y1., etc. [0006] is performed in the machining program, it is possible to output a command to move a tool to coordinates x1, y1, etc. wherein a machining program is established to have lines of code that cause the machine tool to follow the programmed toolpath of the machine code; [0043] The machining program creation unit 101 receives an input of a machining program).
As per claim 20: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
wherein the processor displays, on the display portion, a status of the first information processing and a status of the second information processing in the server ([0010] The numerical controller has a function of simulating movement of the tool by the input machining program, and displaying a result thereof, that is, a tool path on a screen; wherein a screen is a display[0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths, and specifies an argument of the cycle command corresponding to the selected tool path with reference to the information table, and the display unit displays the specified argument in a different form from a form of another argument in the machining program; [0039] The display unit 109 draws the machining program or the tool path on a display device on an instruction of the machining program creation unit 101 or the tool path creation unit 103. In addition, the display unit 109 displays the argument of the cycle command or the tool path specified by the correspondence relation management unit 105 in a different form from another one. [0059] the correspondence relation management unit 105 extracts all tool paths related to the argument A with reference to the information table 107. That is, all records including the argument A specified in S106 are selected from the information table 107. [0060] The tool path creation unit 103 allows the display unit 109 to display a tool path extracted herein in a different display form from that of another tool path. Typically, the selected tool path and the tool path extracted in S108 can be displayed in a different color, thickness, etc. from that of another one. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on status of the tool. [0088] FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating a concept of this evaluation scheme. Herein, an end point (X.sub.n, Z.sub.n) corresponds to the end point coordinates included in the record read in S402. A start point (X.sub.n−1, Z.sub.n−1) corresponds to end point coordinates included in a record read in a previous loop (processing of S402 to S405 corresponds to a loop process). A segment connecting the start point to the end point corresponds to the tool path of the execution block No. [0089] When a distance between the point P and the tool path indicated by the segment is less than or equal to a predetermined allowable value, the correspondence relation management unit 105 determines that the user has indicated the tool path. The correspondence relation management unit 105 specifies the tool path as the selected tool path, and the operation proceeds to S404. Otherwise, the operation proceeds to S405.).
As per claim 27:
further comprising:
obtaining, by the processor, the processing data for processing the workpiece generated on a basis of the job from the another information processing apparatus ([0010] The numerical controller has a function of simulating movement of the tool by the input machining program, and displaying a result thereof, that is, a tool path on a screen; wherein a screen is a display[0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths, and specifies an argument of the cycle command corresponding to the selected tool path with reference to the information table, and the display unit displays the specified argument in a different form from a form of another argument in the machining program; [0039] The display unit 109 draws the machining program or the tool path on a display device on an instruction of the machining program creation unit 101 or the tool path creation unit 103. In addition, the display unit 109 displays the argument of the cycle command or the tool path specified by the correspondence relation management unit 105 in a different form from another one. [0059] the correspondence relation management unit 105 extracts all tool paths related to the argument A with reference to the information table 107. That is, all records including the argument A specified in S106 are selected from the information table 107. [0060] The tool path creation unit 103 allows the display unit 109 to display a tool path extracted herein in a different display form from that of another tool path. Typically, the selected tool path and the tool path extracted in S108 can be displayed in a different color, thickness, etc. from that of another one. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on status of the tool. [0088] FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating a concept of this evaluation scheme. Herein, an end point (X.sub.n, Z.sub.n) corresponds to the end point coordinates included in the record read in S402. A start point (X.sub.n−1, Z.sub.n−1) corresponds to end point coordinates included in a record read in a previous loop (processing of S402 to S405 corresponds to a loop process). A segment connecting the start point to the end point corresponds to the tool path of the execution block No. [0089] When a distance between the point P and the tool path indicated by the segment is less than or equal to a predetermined allowable value, the correspondence relation management unit 105 determines that the user has indicated the tool path. The correspondence relation management unit 105 specifies the tool path as the selected tool path, and the operation proceeds to S404. Otherwise, the operation proceeds to S405.); and
transmitting, by the processor, the processing data to the processing machine so that the processing machine processes the workpiece on a basis of the processing data for processing the workpiece ([0010] The numerical controller has a function of simulating movement of the tool by the input machining program, and displaying a result thereof, that is, a tool path on a screen; wherein a screen is a display[0016] the correspondence relation management unit receives a selection of a selected tool path corresponding to one of the plurality of tool paths, and specifies an argument of the cycle command corresponding to the selected tool path with reference to the information table, and the display unit displays the specified argument in a different form from a form of another argument in the machining program; [0039] The display unit 109 draws the machining program or the tool path on a display device on an instruction of the machining program creation unit 101 or the tool path creation unit 103. In addition, the display unit 109 displays the argument of the cycle command or the tool path specified by the correspondence relation management unit 105 in a different form from another one. [0059] the correspondence relation management unit 105 extracts all tool paths related to the argument A with reference to the information table 107. That is, all records including the argument A specified in S106 are selected from the information table 107. [0060] The tool path creation unit 103 allows the display unit 109 to display a tool path extracted herein in a different display form from that of another tool path. Typically, the selected tool path and the tool path extracted in S108 can be displayed in a different color, thickness, etc. from that of another one. Also, Nagayama shows position tracking for the workpiece in at least ([0050]-[0054], [0078]-[0080]), reads on status of the tool. [0088] FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating a concept of this evaluation scheme. Herein, an end point (X.sub.n, Z.sub.n) corresponds to the end point coordinates included in the record read in S402. A start point (X.sub.n−1, Z.sub.n−1) corresponds to end point coordinates included in a record read in a previous loop (processing of S402 to S405 corresponds to a loop process). A segment connecting the start point to the end point corresponds to the tool path of the execution block No. [0089] When a distance between the point P and the tool path indicated by the segment is less than or equal to a predetermined allowable value, the correspondence relation management unit 105 determines that the user has indicated the tool path. The correspondence relation management unit 105 specifies the tool path as the selected tool path, and the operation proceeds to S404. Otherwise, the operation proceeds to S405.).
As per claim 28:
A processing machine that receives the processing data generated by the information processing method according to claim 27 and processes the workpiece on the basis of the processing data (Nagamaya shows the processing machine in abstract. Please see prior art rejection of claim 27 above).
Claim(s) 2-3, 8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagayama et al. (US 2017/0160716), further in view of Matthews et al. (US 2004/0143362) and Zhou et al. (US 2018/0299866).
As per claim 2: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews and Reference Zhou shows:
References Nagayama in view of Matthews does not show “an error”:
“wherein the displaying includes displaying, when an error has occurred in the first information processing, a corresponding image on the display portion”
Zhou shows ([0015] the first machining information comprises position information of the tool on the surface of the workpiece, and the second machining information comprises compensation information of the machining error associated with the characteristic of the machine tool; [0026] According to a second aspect of the present invention, a NC control apparatus is provided. the apparatus comprises: an acquiring unit, configured for acquiring a first NC code and a second NC code, wherein the first NC code comprises first machining information for controlling a tool to machine a workpiece, and the second NC code comprises second machining information for enhancing the first machining information; [0093] the compensation information may include thermal compensation information, tool wear compensation information, and so on. [0114] The second example of the second NC code is as follows: [0115] Date 2016/12/15/13/52/50 [0116] TW0.01 [0117] N1 R1.5vec[0.7071,0.7071,0] C.sub.p[-0.1001,0.0001,-0.2400] F0.9926 [0118] N2 vec[0.7001,0.7001,0.1400] C.sub.p[0.0843,-0.0254,0.0145] F1.1364 [0119] N3 vec[0.6917,0.6917,0.2075] C.sub.p[0.0042,-0.1645,0.0354] F1.0 [0120] N4 vec[0.6917,0.6917,0.2075] C.sub.p[0.1042,-0.1645,-0.0400] F0.892 [0121] . . . [0122] N20 R5vec[0.7071,0.7071,0] C.sub.p[0.0242,0.1645,-0.1543] F0.9923 Among them, a row of numbers and characters after the word Date are verification information (the last modified time of the G code matched with the second NC code in the above example is used as verification information); the number after the letter TW is the wear information of the tool; the letter N is followed by the block number information; the number after the letter R represents the radius of curvature; vec is followed by the unit vector represented by the tangent of the current point; C.sub.p is followed by the amount of tracking error compensation of the current point. F is followed by the feed rate optimization factor. In this example, the verification information is the last modification time of the G code, i.e., 15:52:50, Dec. 15, 2016. The tool wear amount is 0.01 mm. Since the radius of curvature is modal information, the radius of curvature from the first row to the 19th row is 15 mm, and the radius of curvature of the twentieth row is 5 mm; wherein the wear/compensation information is included in the same code as NC code, thus they are linked/mapped. [0128] During the NC system's machining process, the NC system's display interface still displays the existing G code, which facilitates the machine operator to set breakpoints for debugging, and the machine operator does not need to relearn a machining programming language; wherein the code is being displayed, and the compensation is a part of the code and thus is displayed).
Reference Nagayama and Reference Zhou are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G05B19/00. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Zhou, particularly the “an error” (shown in [0015], [0026], [0093]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “display portion” (Fig. 10-11 and [0033]-[0034]), in order to provide for a method of creating a map to link toolpath data and machine code so that information can be displayed using the map as taught by Nagayama and Matthews with the use of machine tool data that is compensation information for tool wear for a particular machine that gets mapped to the machine code and is displayed for a user as taught by Zhou, because it would gain the stated benefit of Zhou, namely “[0128] Compared with directly replacing the NC system or upgrading the configuration of the NC system, the joint action of two codes of the present invention does not need to modify the resolver of the existing NC system, but only needs to add the synchronous analytical function module of the second NC code. It can improve the processing performance”. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the system that maps machine code with toolpath data so that information can be displayed, and modifying it with the ability of Zhou to include mapped compensation information, including tool wear information, to the machine code in a known way to achieve predictable results, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Zhou, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claim 3: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
References Nagayama in view of Matthews does not show “an error” in the claim limitations below:
wherein the displaying includes displaying, when an error has occurred in the second information processing, a corresponding image on the display portion.
Zhou shows ([0015] the first machining information comprises position information of the tool on the surface of the workpiece, and the second machining information comprises compensation information of the machining error associated with the characteristic of the machine tool; [0026] According to a second aspect of the present invention, a NC control apparatus is provided. the apparatus comprises: an acquiring unit, configured for acquiring a first NC code and a second NC code, wherein the first NC code comprises first machining information for controlling a tool to machine a workpiece, and the second NC code comprises second machining information for enhancing the first machining information; [0093] the compensation information may include thermal compensation information, tool wear compensation information, and so on. [0114] The second example of the second NC code is as follows: [0115] Date 2016/12/15/13/52/50 [0116] TW0.01 [0117] N1 R1.5vec[0.7071,0.7071,0] C.sub.p[-0.1001,0.0001,-0.2400] F0.9926 [0118] N2 vec[0.7001,0.7001,0.1400] C.sub.p[0.0843,-0.0254,0.0145] F1.1364 [0119] N3 vec[0.6917,0.6917,0.2075] C.sub.p[0.0042,-0.1645,0.0354] F1.0 [0120] N4 vec[0.6917,0.6917,0.2075] C.sub.p[0.1042,-0.1645,-0.0400] F0.892 [0121] . . . [0122] N20 R5vec[0.7071,0.7071,0] C.sub.p[0.0242,0.1645,-0.1543] F0.9923 Among them, a row of numbers and characters after the word Date are verification information (the last modified time of the G code matched with the second NC code in the above example is used as verification information); the number after the letter TW is the wear information of the tool; the letter N is followed by the block number information; the number after the letter R represents the radius of curvature; vec is followed by the unit vector represented by the tangent of the current point; C.sub.p is followed by the amount of tracking error compensation of the current point. F is followed by the feed rate optimization factor. In this example, the verification information is the last modification time of the G code, i.e., 15:52:50, Dec. 15, 2016. The tool wear amount is 0.01 mm. Since the radius of curvature is modal information, the radius of curvature from the first row to the 19th row is 15 mm, and the radius of curvature of the twentieth row is 5 mm; wherein the wear/compensation information is included in the same code as NC code, thus they are linked/mapped. [0128] During the NC system's machining process, the NC system's display interface still displays the existing G code, which facilitates the machine operator to set breakpoints for debugging, and the machine operator does not need to relearn a machining programming language; wherein the code is being displayed, and the compensation is a part of the code and thus is displayed).
Reference Nagayama and Reference Zhou are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G05B19/00. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Zhou, particularly the “an error” (shown in [0015], [0026], [0093]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “display portion” (Fig. 10-11 and [0033]-[0034]), in order to provide for a method of creating a map to link toolpath data and machine code so that information can be displayed using the map as taught by Nagayama and Matthews with the use of machine tool data that is compensation information for tool wear for a particular machine that gets mapped to the machine code and is displayed for a user as taught by Zhou, because it would gain the stated benefit of Zhou, namely “[0128] Compared with directly replacing the NC system or upgrading the configuration of the NC system, the joint action of two codes of the present invention does not need to modify the resolver of the existing NC system, but only needs to add the synchronous analytical function module of the second NC code. It can improve the processing performance”. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the system that maps machine code with toolpath data so that information can be displayed, and modifying it with the ability of Zhou to include mapped compensation information, including tool wear information, to the machine code in a known way to achieve predictable results, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Zhou, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claim 8: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
References Nagayama in view of Matthews do not show “an error”
wherein the displaying includes displaying, when an error has occurred in the fifth information processing, a corresponding image on the display portion.
Zhou shows ([0015] the first machining information comprises position information of the tool on the surface of the workpiece, and the second machining information comprises compensation information of the machining error associated with the characteristic of the machine tool; [0026] According to a second aspect of the present invention, a NC control apparatus is provided. the apparatus comprises: an acquiring unit, configured for acquiring a first NC code and a second NC code, wherein the first NC code comprises first machining information for controlling a tool to machine a workpiece, and the second NC code comprises second machining information for enhancing the first machining information; [0093] the compensation information may include thermal compensation information, tool wear compensation information, and so on. [0114] The second example of the second NC code is as follows: [0115] Date 2016/12/15/13/52/50 [0116] TW0.01 [0117] N1 R1.5vec[0.7071,0.7071,0] C.sub.p[-0.1001,0.0001,-0.2400] F0.9926 [0118] N2 vec[0.7001,0.7001,0.1400] C.sub.p[0.0843,-0.0254,0.0145] F1.1364 [0119] N3 vec[0.6917,0.6917,0.2075] C.sub.p[0.0042,-0.1645,0.0354] F1.0 [0120] N4 vec[0.6917,0.6917,0.2075] C.sub.p[0.1042,-0.1645,-0.0400] F0.892 [0121] . . . [0122] N20 R5vec[0.7071,0.7071,0] C.sub.p[0.0242,0.1645,-0.1543] F0.9923 Among them, a row of numbers and characters after the word Date are verification information (the last modified time of the G code matched with the second NC code in the above example is used as verification information); the number after the letter TW is the wear information of the tool; the letter N is followed by the block number information; the number after the letter R represents the radius of curvature; vec is followed by the unit vector represented by the tangent of the current point; C.sub.p is followed by the amount of tracking error compensation of the current point. F is followed by the feed rate optimization factor. In this example, the verification information is the last modification time of the G code, i.e., 15:52:50, Dec. 15, 2016. The tool wear amount is 0.01 mm. Since the radius of curvature is modal information, the radius of curvature from the first row to the 19th row is 15 mm, and the radius of curvature of the twentieth row is 5 mm; wherein the wear/compensation information is included in the same code as NC code, thus they are linked/mapped. [0128] During the NC system's machining process, the NC system's display interface still displays the existing G code, which facilitates the machine operator to set breakpoints for debugging, and the machine operator does not need to relearn a machining programming language; wherein the code is being displayed, and the compensation is a part of the code and thus is displayed).
Reference Nagayama and Reference Zhou are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G05B19/00. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Zhou, particularly the “an error” (shown in [0015], [0026], [0093]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “display portion” (Fig. 10-11 and [0033]-[0034]), in order to provide for a method of creating a map to link toolpath data and machine code so that information can be displayed using the map as taught by Nagayama and Matthews with the use of machine tool data that is compensation information for tool wear for a particular machine that gets mapped to the machine code and is displayed for a user as taught by Zhou, because it would gain the stated benefit of Zhou, namely “[0128] Compared with directly replacing the NC system or upgrading the configuration of the NC system, the joint action of two codes of the present invention does not need to modify the resolver of the existing NC system, but only needs to add the synchronous analytical function module of the second NC code. It can improve the processing performance”. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the system that maps machine code with toolpath data so that information can be displayed, and modifying it with the ability of Zhou to include mapped compensation information, including tool wear information, to the machine code in a known way to achieve predictable results, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Zhou, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
As per claim 10: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
Regarding the claim limitations below, Nagayama and Matthews do not show “automatically setting”:
“wherein the preparing includes automatically setting the information of the plurality of tools on a basis of the information of the product.”
Zhou teaches: [0128] During the NC system's machining process, the NC system's display interface still displays the existing G code, which facilitates the machine operator to set breakpoints for debugging, and the machine operator does not need to relearn a machining programming language; wherein the code is being displayed, and the compensation is a part of the code and thus is displayed. [0114] The second example of the second NC code is as follows: [0115] Date 2016/12/15/13/52/50 [0116] TW0.01 [0117] N1 R1.5vec[0.7071,0.7071,0] C.sub.p[-0.1001,0.0001,-0.2400] F0.9926 [0118] N2 vec[0.7001,0.7001,0.1400] C.sub.p[0.0843,-0.0254,0.0145] F1.1364 [0119] N3 vec[0.6917,0.6917,0.2075] C.sub.p[0.0042,-0.1645,0.0354] F1.0 [0120] N4 vec[0.6917,0.6917,0.2075] C.sub.p[0.1042,-0.1645,-0.0400] F0.892 [0121] . . . [0122] N20 R5vec[0.7071,0.7071,0] C.sub.p[0.0242,0.1645,-0.1543] F0.9923 Among them, a row of numbers and characters after the word Date are verification information (the last modified time of the G code matched with the second NC code in the above example is used as verification information); the number after the letter TW is the wear information of the tool; the letter N is followed by the block number information; the number after the letter R represents the radius of curvature; vec is followed by the unit vector represented by the tangent of the current point; C.sub.p is followed by the amount of tracking error compensation of the current point. F is followed by the feed rate optimization factor. In this example, the verification information is the last modification time of the G code, i.e., 15:52:50, Dec. 15, 2016. The tool wear amount is 0.01 mm. Since the radius of curvature is modal information, the radius of curvature from the first row to the 19th row is 15 mm, and the radius of curvature of the twentieth row is 5 mm; wherein the wear/compensation information is included in the same code as NC code, thus they are linked/mapped.
Reference Nagayama and Reference Zhou are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Further, said references are part of the same classification, i.e., G05B19/00. Lastly, said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Zhou, particularly the “an error” (shown in [0015], [0026], [0093]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “display portion” (Fig. 10-11 and [0033]-[0034]), in order to provide for a method of creating a map to link toolpath data and machine code so that information can be displayed using the map as taught by Nagayama and Matthews with the use of machine tool data that is compensation information for tool wear for a particular machine that gets mapped to the machine code and is displayed for a user as taught by Zhou, because it would gain the stated benefit of Zhou, namely “[0128] Compared with directly replacing the NC system or upgrading the configuration of the NC system, the joint action of two codes of the present invention does not need to modify the resolver of the existing NC system, but only needs to add the synchronous analytical function module of the second NC code. It can improve the processing performance”. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the system that maps machine code with toolpath data so that information can be displayed, and modifying it with the ability of Zhou to include mapped compensation information, including tool wear information, to the machine code in a known way to achieve predictable results, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Zhou, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagayama et al. (US 2017/0160716), further in view of Matthews et al. (US 2004/0143362) and Guttmann et al. (US 2018/0365576).
As per claim 16: Regarding the claim limitations below, Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Matthews shows:
Reference Nagayama in view of Matthews does not show “electrode” in the claim below:
“wherein the first product and the second product are respectively a first electrode and a second electrode that are used to perform electric discharge machining on a metal material and processing the metal workpiece into a mold, and
wherein the preparing includes displaying an image of the first electrode, an image of the second electrode, and an image of the mold on the display portion.”
Guttman teaches: [0044], [0068]-[0070]: show the above limitations. [0070] In some embodiments, the one or more electrical current sensors may be configured to perform at least one of the following: detect and/or measure electrical current flowing between two electrodes; detect and/or measure changes over time in the electrical current flowing between two electrodes. In some examples, information captured using the electrical current sensors may be stored in memory units 210, may be processed by processing units 220, may be transmitted and/or received using communication modules 230, and so forth.
Reference Nagayama and Reference Guttman are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because the references generally relate to field of manufacturing. Said references are filed before the effective filing date of the instant application; hence, said references are analogous prior-art references.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application for AIA to provide the teachings of Reference Guttman, particularly the “electrode” (shown in [0044], [0068]-[0070]), in the disclosure of Reference Nagayama, particularly in the “workpiece” trajectory or path ([0004] A numerical controller that controls a machine tool according to an input machining program has been widely known. In the machining program, a linear or arc motion, etc. can be implemented using Gxx (x is a numerical value) code of EIA/ISO code. For example, when a description of [0005] G00 X1. Y1., etc. [0006] is performed in the machining program, it is possible to output a command to move a tool to coordinates x1, y1, etc..), in order to provide for a method that detects contact of a solid object with the surface of apparatus 200; detect contact of a solid object with a specific point and/or region of the surface area of apparatus 200; detect a proximity of apparatus 200 to an object. In some implementations, proximity sensors may be implemented using image sensors 260 and light sources 265, for example by emitting light using light sources 265, such as ultraviolet light, visible light, infrared light and/or microwave light, and detecting the light reflected from nearby objects using image sensors 260 to detect the present of nearby objects. In some examples, information captured using the proximity sensors may be stored in memory units 210, may be processed by processing units 220, may be transmitted and/or received using communication modules 230, and so forth as taught by Guttmann, so that the process of managing manufacturing process can be made more efficient and effective.
Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements in a similar manufacturing field of endeavor, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, given the existing technical ability to combine the elements as evidenced by Reference Nagayama in view of Reference Guttmann, the results of the combination were predictable (MPEP 2143 A).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by the amendments made to the previously presented claims.
Please see the Note above, applicants’ claims are recited broadly for the purposes of prior art and at a high level of generality for the 101 rejection and the additional elements are recited such that it amounts to no more than: adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
NPL Reference:
I. R. K. Al-Saedi, F. M. Mohammed and S. S. Obayes, "CNC machine based on embedded wireless and Internet of Things for workshop development," 2017 International Conference on Control, Automation and Diagnosis (ICCAD), Hammamet, Tunisia, 2017, pp. 439-444, doi: 10.1109/CADIAG.2017.8075699.
This paper focus on the integration of wireless technology and CAD/CAM system for CNC workshop development. A specific case study is described a system based on embedded wireless device and Internet of Things (IoT) concept with Bezier techniques for the proposed model. The focus of the case study is to show a complete stage of manufacturing process starting from modeling in CAD system passing through CAM system, transferring NC code, gathering machine data, monitoring whole process and finally manufacturing product. Using MATLAB and UG-NX software for modeling, Monitoring machining process using temperature, accelerometers and gyroscope sensors based on IoT concept. Transferring NC codes to CNC machines using FTP protocol and DNC software, real-time report demonstrate information about machine name, parts progress, time, operation condition and Machine Cycle Time depending on DNC network.
Foreign Reference:
(CN 111919182 A) Eiji et al. The NC program used in a processing machine can be converted into NC program which can ensure proper processing precision in other processing machines. The invention claims an NC program conversion processing method based on conversion system, the conversion system is used for executing conversion source NC program for processing processing in the conversion source processing machine to convert into a conversion destination NC program for performing processing processing in the conversion destination processing machine, in the NC program conversion processing method, receiving and (1) changing the rigidity of the destination processing machine, or (2) changing the input of the information related to the rigidity of the tool contained in the destination tool set; based on the information related to the received rigidity, converting the conversion source by the NC program (1424) into the conversion destination NC program (1425).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NANCY PRASAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3265. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM EST.
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, Patricia Munson can be reached on (571)270-5396. 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.
/N.N.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/PATRICIA H MUNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3624