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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-12, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furutani et al. (US 2015/0137727) in view of Kobayashi (US 2014/0265954) and Simarco et al. (US 2009/0218437).
Regarding claim 1,
Furutani discloses (Fig. 6):
a servo actuation system (Fig. 6, ¶0031),
the servo actuation system comprising a motor (5), a controller (1b) and an inverter (3, ¶0026); wherein the controller (1b) comprises a position controller (39), a velocity controller (41, 17, 20) and a current controller (22), and wherein the position controller (39) outputs velocity demands (40) to the velocity controller (41, 17, 20, ¶0101), the velocity controller (41, 17, 20) outputs current demands (21) to the current controller (22, ¶0041-¶0042), and the current controller outputs voltage demands (23) to the inverter (3, ¶0043, via 26); and wherein the inverter (3) outputs inverted voltage demands to the motor (5, ¶0043); the method comprising:
Furutani does not disclose:
A method of actuating a moving part of a missile
the moving part comprising at least one of a fin, a wing, or a moving seeker gimbal of the missile,
(i) determining a parameter downstream of the inverter:(ii) calculating a limiting value from the parameter and a defined supply power limit; and (iii) applying the limiting value in the controller to ensure that the power drawn by the servo actuation system remains within the defined supply power limit.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1):
determining a parameter downstream of the inverter (Fig. 1, Iu, Iv, Iw, ¶0040):(ii) calculating a limiting value (Glimit) from the parameter (Iu, Iv, Iw currents) and a defined supply power limit (¶0046, battery power, Lin);and(iii) applying the limiting value (Glimit) in the controller to ensure that the power drawn by the servo actuation system remains within the defined supply power limit (limits voltage command, ¶0048, 0051).
Simarco teaches (Fig. 2):
A method of actuating a moving part of a missile (¶0021)
the moving part comprising at least one of a fin (Fig. 2, fin, 14, ¶0021), a wing, or a moving seeker gimbal of the missile,
Regarding claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 2,
Furutani and Simarco disclose the above elements from claim 1.
They do not disclose:
wherein step (i) comprises estimating a motor voltage downstream of the inverter.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1);
wherein the motor voltage is estimated from the voltage demands output by the current controller (Fig. 1, from Du,. Dv, Dw, ¶0038)
Regarding claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 3,
Furutani and Simarco disclose the above elements from claim 2.
They do not disclose:
wherein the motor voltage is estimated from the voltage demands output by the current controller.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1);
wherein the motor voltage is estimated from the voltage demands output by the current controller (Fig. 1, from Du,. Dv, Dw, ¶0038)
Regarding claim 3, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 4,
Furutani and Simarco disclose the above elements from claim 2.
They do not disclose:
wherein step (ii) comprises calculating a motor current limit from the estimated motor voltage and the defined supply power limit.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1);
wherein step (ii) comprises calculating a motor current limit from the estimated motor voltage and the defined supply power limit (limits motor current by limiting voltage command in 45, ¶0054).
Regarding claim 4, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 5,
Furutani and Simarco disclose the above elements from claim 4.
They do not disclose:
wherein step (iii) comprises applying the motor current limit upstream of the current controller.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1);
wherein step (iii) comprises applying the motor current limit upstream of the current controller (limiting voltage limits current, ¶0054).
Regarding claim 5, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 6,
Furutani and Simarco disclose the above elements from claim 5.
They do not disclose:
wherein step (iii) comprises applying the motor current limit to the current demands output by the velocity controller.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1);
wherein step (iii) comprises applying the motor current limit to the current demands output by the velocity controller (limits voltage command which is from the current command in 43 and 45, ¶0054).
Regarding claim 6, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 7,
Furutani discloses (Fig. 6):
wherein step (i) comprises measuring the motor current downstream of the inverter (4, ¶0042).
Regarding claim 8,
Furutani and Simarco disclose the above elements from claim 7.
They do not disclose:
wherein step (ii) comprises calculating a limiting voltage from the measured motor current and the defined supply power limit.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1);
herein step (ii) comprises calculating a limiting voltage from the measured motor current and the defined supply power limit (Fig. 1, Glimit, limits voltage command, ¶0048, 0051).
Regarding claim 8, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 9,
Furutani and Simarco disclose the above elements from claim 8.
They do not disclose:
wherein step (iii) comprises applying the limiting voltage downstream of the current controller.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1);
wherein step (iii) comprises applying the limiting voltage downstream of the current controller (Fig. 1, Glimit, limits voltage command, ¶0048, 0051).
Regarding claim 9, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 10,
Furutani and Simarco disclose the above elements from claim 9.
They do not disclose:
wherein step (iii) comprises applying the limiting voltage to the voltage demands output by the current controller.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1);
wherein step (iii) comprises applying the limiting voltage to the voltage demands output by the current controller (Fig. 1, Glimit, limits voltage command, ¶0048, 0051).
Regarding claim 10, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 11,
Furutani and Simarco disclose the above elements from claim 1.
They do not disclose:
further comprising compensating for variations in a supply voltage by:(iv) measuring the supply voltage upstream of the inverter;(v) determining the inverter duty cycle against a nominal voltage: (vi) scaling the inverted voltage demands output by the inverter to compensate for deviations in the supply voltage away from the nominal voltage.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1);
further comprising compensating for variations in supply voltage by:(iv) measuring the supply voltage upstream of the inverter (Vin, ¶0040);(v) determining the inverter duty cycle against a nominal voltage (Du, Dv, Dw, ¶0040) : (vi) scaling the inverted voltage demands output by the inverter to compensate for deviations in the supply voltage away from the nominal voltage (¶0048, ¶0051).
Regarding claim 11, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 12,
Furutani discloses (Fig. 6):
wherein the controller utilizes field-oriented control to control motor torque and field flux (¶0040).
Regarding claim 14,
Furutani discloses (Fig. 6):
a motor (Fig. 6, 5); a processor (1b); and an inverter (3, ¶0026); wherein the processor (1b) comprises a position controller module (39), a velocity controller module (41, 17, 20) and a current controller module (22): and wherein the position controller module (39) is arranged to output velocity demands (40) to the velocity controller module (41, 17, 20, ¶0101), and the velocity controller module (41, 17, 20) is arranged to output current demands (21) to the current controller module (22, ¶0041-¶0042), and the current controller module (22) is arranged to output voltage demands (23) to the inverter (¶0043, via 26); and wherein the inverter (3) is arranged to output inverted voltage demands to the motor (5, ¶0043);
Furutani does not disclose:
A servo actuation system for actuating a moving part of a missile comprising at least one of a fin a wing, or a moving seeker gimbal of the missile, comprising:
and wherein the processor is arranged to determine a parameter downstream of the inverter, and to calculate a limiting value from the parameter and a defined supply power limit, and to apply the limiting value in the processor to ensure that the power drawn by the servo actuation system remains within the defined supply power limit.
However, Kobayashi teaches (Fig. 1):
and wherein the processor is arranged to determine a parameter downstream of the inverter (Fig. 1, Iu, Iv, Iw, ¶0040), and to calculate a limiting value (Glimit) from the parameter (Iu, Iv, Iw currents) and a defined supply power limit (¶0046, battery power, Lin), and to apply the limiting value in the processor to ensure that the power drawn by the servo actuation system remains within the defined supply power limit (limits voltage command, ¶0048, 0051).
Simarco teaches (Fig. 2):
A servo actuation system (Fig. 2, all elements) for actuating a moving part of a missile comprising at least one of a fin (Fig. 2, fin, 14, ¶0021), a wing, or a moving seeker gimbal of the missile ,comprising:
Regarding claim 14, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and utilize the voltage limit from Kobayashi to further limit the power by limiting the voltage command in order to not use more power than the power supply can allow as taught by Kobayashi (¶0051). This would improve efficiency for the system.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the servo motor controller from Furutani that is used to limit the power output in order to smoothly control a servo motor using a DC power supply (¶0026) and use this motor controller to control a missile fin with a servo motor as taught by Simarco (¶0021). This would improve reliability by making the motor not use excess power which would increase range for the missile.
Regarding claim 15,
Furutani discloses (Fig. 6):
further comprising a current sensor (4) arranged to measure current downstream of the inverter (3, ¶0042), wherein the parameter is the current downstream of the inverter (¶0042), and the limiting value is a limiting voltage (¶0045).
Regarding claim 16,
Furutani discloses (Fig. 6):
further comprising a voltage sensor upstream of the inverter (Not shown, detects voltage of power supply which is upstream inverter, ¶0026).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/11/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments pertaining to claims 13 and 17, applicant argues that Simarco uses a torsion spring to reduce power consumption which would teach away from Furutani and Kobayashi because Simarco reduces power requirements using the spring and there is no additional motivation to add additional components from Kobayashi and Furutani.
Examiner disagrees because the Simarco reference is merely used to teach applying a servo motor control to a missile fin, it is not used to actually teach how a missile fin limits power consumption, just the intended use of the combination in a missile, this is taught in ¶0021 from Simarco.
Regarding claims 4-6, Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
As such, examiner is maintaining the rejections of claims 1-12, and 14-16.
Conclusion
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 CHARLES S LAUGHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7244. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/C.S.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2837 /KAWING CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights