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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/23/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8, and 15 have been considered but are moot because Applicant’s amendment changed the scope of the claims and the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 1-3, 5, 8-9, and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai et al. (US 20220339783 A1, hereinafter Kawai) in view of Talebi et al. (US 20220305678 A1, hereinafter Talebi).
Regarding claim 1, Kawai discloses:
A robotic system (Fig. 1, robot system 1) comprising:
a robotic arm (at least as in paragraph 0023, “The robot 2 includes a base 21, a robot arm 22”) comprising:
a flange (at least as in paragraph 0031, “a lower surface 520 of the second enclosure member 52 functions as an arm attachment surface, to which the robot arm 22 is attached”; at least as in paragraph 0026, “The end effector 23 is fitted to the front end of the robot arm 22, that is, the arm 226 via a mechanical interface”); and
an end effector configured to move a plurality of articles from a first location to a second location (at least as in paragraph 0022, “A robot system 1 shown in FIG. 1 can, for example, supply, remove, transport, assemble, and otherwise handle target objects, such as a precision instrument and parts that form the precision instrument”; at least as in paragraph 0023, “The robot 2 includes a base 21, a robot arm 22 pivotably linked to the base 21, and an end effector 23”);
a first sensor attached to a center of an engagement surface of the end effector (at least as in paragraph 0027, “The force detection apparatus 3 is interposed between the robot arm 22 and the end effector 23. That is, the end effector 23 is fitted to the tip of the robot arm 22 via the force detection apparatus 3”; at least as in paragraph 0031, “an upper surface 510 of the first enclosure member 51 functions as an end effector attachment surface, to which the end effector 23 is attached”; at least as in paragraph 0032, “The first enclosure member 51 includes a top plate 511 and four pressure applicators 512 provided at the lower surface of the top plate 511 and arranged at equal intervals (angular intervals of 90°) around the center axis A1”);
a second sensor attached to the end effector, wherein each of the first sensor and the second sensor is between the flange and a distal end of the end effector (at least as in paragraph 0027, “The force detection apparatus 3 is interposed between the robot arm 22 and the end effector 23. That is, the end effector 23 is fitted to the tip of the robot arm 22 via the force detection apparatus 3”; at least as in paragraph 0049, wherein force detection apparatus includes acceleration sensors); and
a processor communicably coupled to the first sensor, the second sensor, and the robotic arm, (at least as in paragraph 0025, “The robot control apparatus 20 is formed, for example, of a computer and includes a processor (CPU) that processes information, a memory communicably coupled to the processor, and an external interface via which the robot control apparatus 20 communicates with an external apparatus”) …
But Kawai does not explicitly teach:
wherein the processor is configured to:
actuate the end effector to lift an article from the plurality of articles from the first location;
receive a first input from the first sensor in response to the end effector lifting the article from the first location, wherein the first input corresponds to a value of force required to lift the article from the first location;
receive a second input from the second sensor in response to movement of the end effector engaged with the article, wherein the second input corresponds to a value of acceleration of the end effector engaged with the article and moving from the first location;
calculate a mass of the article based at least on the first input and the second input; and
control the acceleration and a speed of movement of the robotic arm towards the second location, based on the calculated mass of the article.
However, Talebi, in the same field of endeavor of a robot system estimating the one or more mass characteristics of the payload based on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench while in motion, specifically teaches:
wherein the processor is configured to:
actuate the end effector to lift an article from the plurality of articles from the first location (at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “a robot (e.g., an integrated mobile manipulator robot) moves the payload (e.g., through an excitation routine)”; at least as in paragraph 0064, wherein “a mass estimation algorithm may be executed after initial contact with a payload (e.g., after an end effector first grasps the payload)”; at least as in paragraph 0065, wherein “At act 702, a trajectory of the object (e.g., a payload grasped by an end effector of a robotic arm of the robot) may be planned. At act 704, the object may be moved along the planned trajectory by the robot”);
receive a first input from the first sensor in response to the end effector lifting the article from the first location, wherein the first input corresponds to a value of force required to lift the article from the first location (at least as in paragraph 0043, wherein “a force/torque sensor may measure forces and/or torques (e.g., wrenches) applied to the end effector”; at least as in paragraph 0047, wherein “a signal from a force sensor associated with the end effector may be indicative of the force exerted on the end effector by the payload. If the payload is held stationary (or moved at a constant velocity), the only force exerted on the end effector by the payload may be the weight of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0054, wherein “a robotic arm may include various sensors that produce signals from which forces and/or torques acting on the payload may be determined. For example, a 6-axis force/torque sensor associated with a wrist of a robotic arm may be used to determine the forces and torques (e.g., the wrenches) acting on the wrist due to the end effector and the payload grasped by the end effector”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “While the payload is in motion, the accelerations (e.g., linear and angular accelerations associated with different axes) of the payload may be determined, as at act 604, and the wrench applied to the payload may be sensed (e.g., using one or more sensors of the robot), as at act 606”);
receive a second input from the second sensor in response to movement of the end effector engaged with the article, wherein the second input corresponds to a value of acceleration of the end effector engaged with the article and moving from the first location (at least as in paragraph 0057, wherein “An excitation routine may be used to generate enough data (e.g., sensor data relating to forces, torques, and/or accelerations) to enable robust estimation of different mass properties”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “While the payload is in motion, the accelerations (e.g., linear and angular accelerations associated with different axes) of the payload may be determined, as at act 604”);
calculate a mass of the article based at least on the first input and the second input (at least as in paragraph 0053, wherein “With knowledge of the forces 520 (F) and/or torques 521 (τ) acting on the payload, as well as the linear accelerations ({umlaut over (r)}.sub.com) and/or angular accelerations ({dot over (ω)}) of the payload, certain mass properties of the payload may be ascertained according to equation (4), as shown diagrammatically in FIG. 4B. Mass properties of the payload that may be estimated include the mass of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0056, wherein “mass properties of a payload may be estimated based, at least in part, on the wrench applied to the payload and the accelerations of the payload. Mass properties may include a mass of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “At act 608, the mass properties of the payload may be estimated based, at least in part, on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench”; at least as in paragraph 0063, wherein “At act 702, payload mass properties may be estimated (according to one or more mass estimation methods described herein, such as the mass estimation method described above in relation to FIG. 5). At act 704, inverse dynamics of the payload may be computed based on the estimated mass properties”); and
control the acceleration and a speed of movement of the robotic arm towards the second location, based on the calculated mass of the article (at least as in paragraph 0063, wherein “At act 706, a trajectory may be planned based on the computed inverse dynamics. In some embodiments, computing inverse dynamics may include computing torques to be applied at the joints of a robotic arm. In some embodiments, planning a trajectory may include planning an optimized trajectory. Planning an optimized trajectory may include optimizing the speed and/or acceleration of a payload”; at least as in paragraph 0065, wherein “At act [8]04, the object may be moved along the planned trajectory by the robot”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Kawai to include Talebi’s teaching of a robot system estimating payload characteristics and adjusting control, since Talebi teaches wherein the system may estimate mass more accurately thus trajectories may be optimized such that the payload may be moved as fast as possible within a safety factor without separating from the end effector.
Regarding claim 2, in view of the above combination of Kawai and Talebi, Kawai further discloses:
The robotic system of claim 1, wherein the first sensor is a force sensor (at least as in paragraph 0027, “The force detection apparatus 3 is interposed between the robot arm 22 and the end effector 23. That is, the end effector 23 is fitted to the tip of the robot arm 22 via the force detection apparatus 3”; at least as in paragraph 0031, “an upper surface 510 of the first enclosure member 51 functions as an end effector attachment surface, to which the end effector 23 is attached”; at least as in paragraph 0032, “The first enclosure member 51 includes a top plate 511 and four pressure applicators 512 provided at the lower surface of the top plate 511 and arranged at equal intervals (angular intervals of 90°) around the center axis A1”).
Regarding claim 3, in view of the above combination of Kawai and Talebi, Kawai further discloses:
The robotic system of claim 1, wherein the engagement surface is configured to abut at least one surface of the article (at least as in paragraph 0026, wherein “The end effector 23 is fitted to the front end of the robot arm 22, that is, the arm 226 via a mechanical interface. The end effector 23 is not limited to a specific component, and any component can be selected as appropriate in accordance with a task to be performed. The illustrated configuration includes a pair of jaws 231 and 232, which are opened and closed to grasp a workpiece that is not illustrated”).
Regarding claim 5, in view of the above combination of Kawai and Talebi, Kawai further discloses:
The robotic system of claim 1, wherein the processor is operably coupled to the robotic arm (at least as in paragraph 0066, wherein “an integrated mobile manipulator robot may include a controller or other computing device configured to execute the dynamic mass estimation methods”; at least as in paragraph 0036, wherein “To pick some boxes within a constrained environment, the robot may need to carefully adjust the orientation of its arm to avoid contacting other boxes or the surrounding shelving”).
But Kawai does not explicitly teach:
configured to align the end effector of the robotic arm with respect to the article.
However, Talebi, in the same field of endeavor of a robot system estimating the one or more mass characteristics of the payload based on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench while in motion, specifically teaches:
configured to align the end effector of the robotic arm with respect to the article (at least as in paragraph 0066, wherein “an integrated mobile manipulator robot may include a controller or other computing device configured to execute the dynamic mass estimation methods”; at least as in paragraph 0036, wherein “To pick some boxes within a constrained environment, the robot may need to carefully adjust the orientation of its arm to avoid contacting other boxes or the surrounding shelving”; at least as in paragraph 0035, “Certain box positions and orientations relative to the shelving may suggest different box picking strategies. For example, a box located on a low shelf may simply be picked by the robot by grasping a top surface of the box with the end effector of the robotic arm (thereby executing a “top pick”). However, if the box to be picked is on top of a stack of boxes, and there is limited clearance between the top of the box and the bottom of a horizontal divider of the shelving, the robot may opt to pick the box by grasping a side surface (thereby executing a “face pick”)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Kawai to include Talebi’s teaching of a robot system estimating payload characteristics and adjusting control, since Talebi teaches wherein the system may estimate mass more accurately thus trajectories may be optimized such that the payload may be moved as fast as possible within a safety factor without separating from the end effector.
Regarding claim 8, Kawai discloses:
A method of controlling a robotic system, the method comprising:
actuating, by a processor, an end effector of a robotic arm of the robotic system to lift an article from a first location, wherein the end effector is configured to move a plurality of articles from the first location to a second location (at least as in paragraph 0022, “robot system 1 shown in FIG. 1 can, for example, supply, remove, transport, assemble, and otherwise handle target objects, such as a precision instrument and parts that form the precision instrument. The robot system 1 includes a robot 2, which is a single-armed six-axis vertically articulated robot, a robot control apparatus 20, which controls the operation of driving the robot 2, and a force detection apparatus 3 fitted to the robot 2”);
receiving, by the processor, a first input from a first sensor (at least as in paragraph 0027, “The force detection apparatus 3 is interposed between the robot arm 22 and the end effector 23. That is, the end effector 23 is fitted to the tip of the robot arm 22 via the force detection apparatus 3”; at least as in paragraph 0031, “an upper surface 510 of the first enclosure member 51 functions as an end effector attachment surface, to which the end effector 23 is attached”; at least as in paragraph 0032, “The first enclosure member 51 includes a top plate 511 and four pressure applicators 512 provided at the lower surface of the top plate 511 and arranged at equal intervals (angular intervals of 90°) around the center axis A1”);
receiving, by the processor, a second input from a second sensor (at least as in paragraph 0027, “The force detection apparatus 3 is interposed between the robot arm 22 and the end effector 23. That is, the end effector 23 is fitted to the tip of the robot arm 22 via the force detection apparatus 3”; at least as in paragraph 0049, wherein force detection apparatus includes acceleration sensors)…
But Kawai does not explicitly teach:
in response to the end effector lifting the article from the plurality of articles from the first location, wherein the first input corresponds to a value of force required to lift the article from the first location…
in response to movement of the end effector engaged with the article, wherein the second input corresponds to a value of acceleration of the end effector engaged with the article and moving from the first location…
calculating, by the processor, a mass of the article based at least on the first input and the second input; and
controlling, by the processor, the acceleration and a speed of movement of the robotic arm towards the second location, based on the calculated mass of the article.
However, Talebi, in the same field of endeavor of a robot system estimating the one or more mass characteristics of the payload based on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench while in motion, specifically teaches:
in response to the end effector lifting the article from the plurality of articles from the first location, wherein the first input corresponds to a value of force required to lift the article from the first location (at least as in paragraph 0043, wherein “a force/torque sensor may measure forces and/or torques (e.g., wrenches) applied to the end effector”; at least as in paragraph 0047, wherein “a signal from a force sensor associated with the end effector may be indicative of the force exerted on the end effector by the payload. If the payload is held stationary (or moved at a constant velocity), the only force exerted on the end effector by the payload may be the weight of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0054, wherein “a robotic arm may include various sensors that produce signals from which forces and/or torques acting on the payload may be determined. For example, a 6-axis force/torque sensor associated with a wrist of a robotic arm may be used to determine the forces and torques (e.g., the wrenches) acting on the wrist due to the end effector and the payload grasped by the end effector”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “While the payload is in motion, the accelerations (e.g., linear and angular accelerations associated with different axes) of the payload may be determined, as at act 604, and the wrench applied to the payload may be sensed (e.g., using one or more sensors of the robot), as at act 606”);
in response to movement of the end effector engaged with the article, wherein the second input corresponds to a value of acceleration of the end effector engaged with the article and moving from the first location (at least as in paragraph 0043, wherein “an end effector may be associated with one or more sensors”; at least as in paragraph 0055, wherein “The accelerations of the payload may be determined using one or more sensors… accelerations of the payload may be determined using one or more accelerometers (or other appropriate sensors) disposed on an end effector of a robotic arm”; at least as in paragraph 0057, wherein “An excitation routine may be used to generate enough data (e.g., sensor data relating to forces, torques, and/or accelerations) to enable robust estimation of different mass properties”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “While the payload is in motion, the accelerations (e.g., linear and angular accelerations associated with different axes) of the payload may be determined, as at act 604”);
calculating, by the processor, a mass of the article based at least on the first input and the second input (at least as in paragraph 0053, wherein “With knowledge of the forces 520 (F) and/or torques 521 (τ) acting on the payload, as well as the linear accelerations ({umlaut over (r)}.sub.com) and/or angular accelerations ({dot over (ω)}) of the payload, certain mass properties of the payload may be ascertained according to equation (4), as shown diagrammatically in FIG. 4B. Mass properties of the payload that may be estimated include the mass of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0056, wherein “mass properties of a payload may be estimated based, at least in part, on the wrench applied to the payload and the accelerations of the payload. Mass properties may include a mass of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “At act 608, the mass properties of the payload may be estimated based, at least in part, on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench”; at least as in paragraph 0063, wherein “At act 702, payload mass properties may be estimated (according to one or more mass estimation methods described herein, such as the mass estimation method described above in relation to FIG. 5). At act 704, inverse dynamics of the payload may be computed based on the estimated mass properties”); and
controlling, by the processor, the acceleration and a speed of movement of the robotic arm towards the second location, based on the calculated mass of the article (at least as in paragraph 0063, wherein “After one or more payload mass properties have been estimated, the estimated mass properties may be used to plan a trajectory of the payload… At act 706, a trajectory may be planned based on the computed inverse dynamics… planning a trajectory may include planning an optimized trajectory. Planning an optimized trajectory may include optimizing the speed and/or acceleration of a payload”; at least as in paragraph 0065, wherein “At act [8]04, the object may be moved along the planned trajectory by the robot”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Kawai to include Talebi’s teaching of a robot system estimating payload characteristics and adjusting control, since Talebi teaches wherein the system may estimate mass more accurately thus trajectories may be optimized such that the payload may be moved as fast as possible within a safety factor without separating from the end effector.
Regarding claim 9, in view of the above combination of Kawai and Talebi, Kawai further discloses:
The method of claim 8, wherein the engagement surface is configured to abut at least one surface of the article (at least as in paragraph 0026, wherein “The end effector 23 is fitted to the front end of the robot arm 22, that is, the arm 226 via a mechanical interface. The end effector 23 is not limited to a specific component, and any component can be selected as appropriate in accordance with a task to be performed. The illustrated configuration includes a pair of jaws 231 and 232, which are opened and closed to grasp a workpiece that is not illustrated”).
Regarding claim 11, in view of the above combination of Kawai and Talebi, Kawai further discloses:
The method of claim 8, wherein the first sensor is a force sensor (at least as in paragraph 0027, “The force detection apparatus 3 is interposed between the robot arm 22 and the end effector 23. That is, the end effector 23 is fitted to the tip of the robot arm 22 via the force detection apparatus 3”; at least as in paragraph 0031, “an upper surface 510 of the first enclosure member 51 functions as an end effector attachment surface, to which the end effector 23 is attached”; at least as in paragraph 0032, “The first enclosure member 51 includes a top plate 511 and four pressure applicators 512 provided at the lower surface of the top plate 511 and arranged at equal intervals (angular intervals of 90°) around the center axis A1”).
Regarding claim 12, in view of the above combination of Kawai and Talebi, Kawai further discloses:
The method of claim 8 further comprising aligning, by the processor, the end effector of the robotic arm (at least as in paragraph 0066, wherein “an integrated mobile manipulator robot may include a controller or other computing device configured to execute the dynamic mass estimation methods”; at least as in paragraph 0036, wherein “To pick some boxes within a constrained environment, the robot may need to carefully adjust the orientation of its arm to avoid contacting other boxes or the surrounding shelving”).
But Kawai does not explicitly teach:
with respect to the article.
However, Talebi, in the same field of endeavor of a robot system estimating the one or more mass characteristics of the payload based on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench while in motion, specifically teaches:
with respect to the article (at least as in paragraph 0066, wherein “an integrated mobile manipulator robot may include a controller or other computing device configured to execute the dynamic mass estimation methods”; at least as in paragraph 0036, wherein “To pick some boxes within a constrained environment, the robot may need to carefully adjust the orientation of its arm to avoid contacting other boxes or the surrounding shelving”; at least as in paragraph 0035, “Certain box positions and orientations relative to the shelving may suggest different box picking strategies. For example, a box located on a low shelf may simply be picked by the robot by grasping a top surface of the box with the end effector of the robotic arm (thereby executing a “top pick”). However, if the box to be picked is on top of a stack of boxes, and there is limited clearance between the top of the box and the bottom of a horizontal divider of the shelving, the robot may opt to pick the box by grasping a side surface (thereby executing a “face pick”)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Kawai to include Talebi’s teaching of a robot system estimating payload characteristics and adjusting control, since Talebi teaches wherein the system may estimate mass more accurately thus trajectories may be optimized such that the payload may be moved as fast as possible within a safety factor without separating from the end effector.
Claim(s) 15, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai et al. (US 20220339783 A1, hereinafter Kawai) in view of Talebi et al. (US 20220305678 A1, hereinafter Talebi) and Nakatani et al. (US 20140230581 A1, hereinafter Nakatani).
Regarding claim 15, Kawai discloses:
A method of controlling a robotic system, the method comprising:
actuating, by a processor, an end effector of a robotic arm of the robotic system to lift an article from a first location, wherein the end effector is configured to move a plurality of articles from the first location to a second location (at least as in paragraph 0022, “robot system 1 shown in FIG. 1 can, for example, supply, remove, transport, assemble, and otherwise handle target objects, such as a precision instrument and parts that form the precision instrument. The robot system 1 includes a robot 2, which is a single-armed six-axis vertically articulated robot, a robot control apparatus 20, which controls the operation of driving the robot 2, and a force detection apparatus 3 fitted to the robot 2”);
receiving, by the processor, during a first time interval, a first set of inputs from a first sensor (at least as in paragraph 0027, “The force detection apparatus 3 is interposed between the robot arm 22 and the end effector 23. That is, the end effector 23 is fitted to the tip of the robot arm 22 via the force detection apparatus 3”; at least as in paragraph 0031, “an upper surface 510 of the first enclosure member 51 functions as an end effector attachment surface, to which the end effector 23 is attached”; at least as in paragraph 0032, “The first enclosure member 51 includes a top plate 511 and four pressure applicators 512 provided at the lower surface of the top plate 511 and arranged at equal intervals (angular intervals of 90°) around the center axis A1”);
receiving, by the processor, during the first time interval, a second set of inputs from a second sensor (at least as in paragraph 0027, “The force detection apparatus 3 is interposed between the robot arm 22 and the end effector 23. That is, the end effector 23 is fitted to the tip of the robot arm 22 via the force detection apparatus 3”; at least as in paragraph 0049, wherein force detection apparatus includes acceleration sensors)…
But Kawai does not explicitly teach:
in response to the end effector lifting the article from the plurality of articles from the first location, wherein the first input corresponds to a value of force required to lift the article from the first location…
in response to movement of the end effector engaged with the article, wherein the second input corresponds to a value of acceleration of the end effector engaged with the article and moving from the first location…
filtering, by the processor, the first set of inputs and the second set of inputs to obtain a filtered set of first inputs and a filtered set of second inputs free from noise;
calculating, by the processor, a mass of the article based at least on the filtered set of first inputs and the filtered set of second inputs; and
controlling, by the processor, a speed of movement of the robotic arm towards the second location, based on the calculated mass of the article.
However, Talebi, in the same field of endeavor of a robot system estimating the one or more mass characteristics of the payload based on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench while in motion, specifically teaches:
in response to the end effector lifting the article from the plurality of articles from the first location, wherein the first input corresponds to a value of force required to lift the article from the first location (at least as in paragraph 0047, wherein “a signal from a force sensor associated with the end effector may be indicative of the force exerted on the end effector by the payload. If the payload is held stationary (or moved at a constant velocity), the only force exerted on the end effector by the payload may be the weight of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0048, wherein “to ensure that the mass estimates are accurate, such conventional mass estimation methods require that the payload be held stationary (or moved at a constant velocity) for a period of time”; at least as in paragraph 0043, wherein “a force/torque sensor may measure forces and/or torques (e.g., wrenches) applied to the end effector”; at least as in paragraph 0054, wherein “a robotic arm may include various sensors that produce signals from which forces and/or torques acting on the payload may be determined”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “While the payload is in motion, the accelerations (e.g., linear and angular accelerations associated with different axes) of the payload may be determined, as at act 604, and the wrench applied to the payload may be sensed (e.g., using one or more sensors of the robot), as at act 606”; at least as in paragraph 0061, wherein “a mass estimation method may converge within a predetermined time period”; at least as in paragraph 0064, wherein “a mass estimation algorithm may be executed after initial contact with a payload (e.g., after an end effector first grasps the payload)”)…
in response to movement of the end effector engaged with the article, wherein the second input corresponds to a value of acceleration of the end effector engaged with the article and moving from the first location (at least as in paragraph 0043, wherein “an end effector may be associated with one or more sensors”; at least as in paragraph 0043, wherein “a force/torque sensor may measure forces and/or torques (e.g., wrenches) applied to the end effector”; at least as in paragraph 0054, wherein “a robotic arm may include various sensors that produce signals from which forces and/or torques acting on the payload may be determined”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “While the payload is in motion, the accelerations (e.g., linear and angular accelerations associated with different axes) of the payload may be determined, as at act 604, and the wrench applied to the payload may be sensed (e.g., using one or more sensors of the robot), as at act 606”; at least as in paragraph 0055, wherein “The accelerations of the payload may be determined using one or more sensors… accelerations of the payload may be determined using one or more accelerometers (or other appropriate sensors) disposed on an end effector of a robotic arm”; at least as in paragraph 0057, wherein “An excitation routine may be used to generate enough data (e.g., sensor data relating to forces, torques, and/or accelerations) to enable robust estimation of different mass properties”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “While the payload is in motion, the accelerations (e.g., linear and angular accelerations associated with different axes) of the payload may be determined, as at act 604”; at least as in paragraph 0060, wherein “accelerations of the payload may be determined using one or more sensors associated with an end effector of the robotic arm”)…
calculating, by the processor, a mass of the article based at least on the first input and the second input (at least as in paragraph 0056, wherein “mass properties of a payload may be estimated based, at least in part, on the wrench applied to the payload and the accelerations of the payload. Mass properties may include a mass of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “At act 608, the mass properties of the payload may be estimated based, at least in part, on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench”; at least as in paragraph 0063, wherein “At act 702, payload mass properties may be estimated (according to one or more mass estimation methods described herein, such as the mass estimation method described above in relation to FIG. 5). At act 704, inverse dynamics of the payload may be computed based on the estimated mass properties”); and
controlling, by the processor, the acceleration and a speed of movement of the robotic arm towards the second location, based on the calculated mass of the article (at least as in paragraph 0063, wherein “After one or more payload mass properties have been estimated, the estimated mass properties may be used to plan a trajectory of the payload… At act 706, a trajectory may be planned based on the computed inverse dynamics… planning a trajectory may include planning an optimized trajectory. Planning an optimized trajectory may include optimizing the speed and/or acceleration of a payload”; at least as in paragraph 0065, wherein “At act [8]04, the object may be moved along the planned trajectory by the robot”).
Furthermore, Nakatani, in the same field of endeavor of a mass measurement device for measuring a mass of an article being moved by a manipulator using a force sensor and an acceleration sensor, specifically teaches:
filtering, by the processor, the first set of inputs and the second set of inputs to obtain a filtered set of first inputs and a filtered set of second inputs free from noise (at least as in paragraph 0133, wherein “amplifiers 31a, 31b are connected to the force sensor 21 and the acceleration sensor 22… A/D converters 33a, 33b are connected to the amplifiers 31a, 31b”; at least as in paragraph 0134, wherein “Low-pass filters 37a, 37b are connected to the A/D converters 33a, 33b, respectively. The low-pass filters 37a, 37b remove noise components having a constant frequency or greater from the inputted detection signals”; at least as in paragraph 0135, wherein “the control unit 40 removes noise frequency components included in the detection signals of the force sensor 21 and the acceleration sensor 22 with the aid of the low-pass filters 37a, 37b”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Kawai to include Talebi’s teaching of a robot system estimating payload characteristics and adjusting control and Nakatani's teaching of low-pass filters removing noise from sensor outputs, since Talebi teaches wherein the system may estimate mass more accurately thus trajectories may be optimized such that the payload may be moved as fast as possible within a safety factor without separating from the end effector and Nakatani teaches wherein filtering noise improves the precision of the calculation of mass by a commensurate amount
Regarding claim 16, in view of the above combination of Kawai, Talebi, and Nakatani, Kawai discloses the method of claim 15, but Kawai does not explicitly teach wherein controlling the speed of movement of the robotic arm towards the second location comprises:
calculating, by the processor, during the first time interval, a first value of acceleration of the end effector based on the filtered set of second inputs, wherein the end effector is engaged with the article moving from the first location to the second location; and
calculating, by the processor, the mass of the article based at least on the
However, Talebi, in the same field of endeavor of a robot system estimating the one or more mass characteristics of the payload based on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench while in motion, specifically teaches wherein controlling the speed of movement of the robotic arm towards the second location comprises:
calculating, by the processor, during the first time interval, a first value of acceleration of the end effector based on the filtered set of second inputs, wherein the end effector is engaged with the article moving from the first location to the second location (at least as in paragraph 0043, wherein “an end effector may be associated with one or more sensors”; at least as in paragraph 0055, wherein “The accelerations of the payload may be determined using one or more sensors… the payload may be accelerated if the mobile base is moving and the robotic arm is stationary (relative to the mobile base), if the robotic arm is moving and the base is stationary, or if the mobile base is moving and the robotic arm is moving (relative to the mobile base)… accelerations of the payload may be determined using one or more accelerometers (or other appropriate sensors) disposed on an end effector of a robotic arm”; at least as in paragraph 0057, wherein “An excitation routine may be used to generate enough data (e.g., sensor data relating to forces, torques, and/or accelerations) to enable robust estimation of different mass properties”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “While the payload is in motion, the accelerations (e.g., linear and angular accelerations associated with different axes) of the payload may be determined, as at act 604”; at least as in paragraph 0060, wherein “accelerations of the payload may be determined using one or more sensors associated with an end effector of the robotic arm”); and
calculating, by the processor, the mass of the article based at least on the filtered set of first inputs and the calculated first value of acceleration (at least as in paragraph 0053, wherein “With knowledge of the forces 520 (F) and/or torques 521 (τ) acting on the payload, as well as the linear accelerations ({umlaut over (r)}.sub.com) and/or angular accelerations ({dot over (ω)}) of the payload, certain mass properties of the payload may be ascertained according to equation (4), as shown diagrammatically in FIG. 4B. Mass properties of the payload that may be estimated include the mass of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0056, wherein “mass properties of a payload may be estimated based, at least in part, on the wrench applied to the payload and the accelerations of the payload. Mass properties may include a mass of the payload”; at least as in paragraph 0058, wherein “At act 608, the mass properties of the payload may be estimated based, at least in part, on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench”).
Nakatani discloses a mass measurement device for measuring a mass of an article being moved by a manipulator using a force sensor and an acceleration sensor. Nakatani specifically teaches “filtered” (at least as in paragraph 0133, wherein “amplifiers 31a, 31b are connected to the force sensor 21 and the acceleration sensor 22… A/D converters 33a, 33b are connected to the amplifiers 31a, 31b”; at least as in paragraph 0134, wherein “Low-pass filters 37a, 37b are connected to the A/D converters 33a, 33b, respectively. The low-pass filters 37a, 37b remove noise components having a constant frequency or greater from the inputted detection signals”; at least as in paragraph 0135, wherein “the control unit 40 removes noise frequency components included in the detection signals of the force sensor 21 and the acceleration sensor 22 with the aid of the low-pass filters 37a, 37b”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Kawai to include Talebi’s teaching of a robot system estimating payload characteristics and adjusting control and Nakatani's teaching of low-pass filters removing noise from sensor outputs, since Talebi teaches wherein the system may estimate mass more accurately thus trajectories may be optimized such that the payload may be moved as fast as possible within a safety factor without separating from the end effector and Nakatani teaches wherein filtering noise improves the precision of the calculation of mass by a commensurate amount
Regarding claim 20, in view of the above combination of Kawai, Talebi, and Nakatani, Kawai further discloses:
The method of claim 15, wherein the engagement surface is configured to abut at least one surface of the article (at least as in paragraph 0026, wherein “The end effector 23 is fitted to the front end of the robot arm 22, that is, the arm 226 via a mechanical interface. The end effector 23 is not limited to a specific component, and any component can be selected as appropriate in accordance with a task to be performed. The illustrated configuration includes a pair of jaws 231 and 232, which are opened and closed to grasp a workpiece that is not illustrated”).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai et al. (US 20220339783 A1, hereinafter Kawai) in view of Talebi et al. (US 20220305678 A1, hereinafter Talebi) and Nakatani et al. (US 20140230581 A1, hereinafter Nakatani), and further in view of Oaki et al. (US 20210323147 A1, hereinafter Oaki).
Regarding claim 17, the above combination of Kawai, Talebi, and Nakatani discloses:
The method of claim 16 but does not explicitly teach further comprising:
moving, by the processor, the end effector of the robotic arm at a second value of acceleration during a second time interval towards the second location, wherein movement of the end effector is continuous from the first location to the second location, and wherein the second value of acceleration is less than the first value of acceleration.
However, Talebi, in the same field of endeavor of a robot system estimating the one or more mass characteristics of the payload based on the determined accelerations and the sensed wrench while in motion, specifically teaches further comprising:
moving, by the processor, the end effector of the robotic arm at a second value of acceleration during a second time interval towards the second location, wherein movement of the end effector is continuous from the first location to the second location, (at least as in paragraph 0057, wherein “An excitation routine may be used to generate enough data (e.g., sensor data relating to forces, torques, and/or accelerations) to enable robust estimation of different mass properties… if a payload is moved in a trajectory associated with forces along different axes and torques about different axes, richer sensor data may be collected that may enable estimation of additional mass properties (and with greater accuracy)”; at least as in paragraph 0064, wherein “a mass estimation algorithm may be executed at any time… the mass estimation algorithm may be executed a second time according to a second set of parameters. For example, more sensor data may be provided or a longer convergence time may be allotted during the second execution of the mass estimation algorithm”).
However, Kawai does not explicitly teach “wherein the second value of acceleration is less than the first value of acceleration.”
Oaki discloses a mass measurement device for measuring a mass of an article being moved by a manipulator using a force sensor and an acceleration sensor. Oaki specifically teaches “wherein the second value of acceleration is less than the first value of acceleration” (at least as in paragraph 0055, wherein “the estimation apparatus causes the arm part 110 of the picking robot 100 to perform a high acceleration/deceleration operation (Step S207)”; at least as in Fig. 9 & 10 and paragraphs 0055-0057, wherein the acceleration values in the X.sub.E direction of a position of a center of gravity when the first joint 111 to the third joint 113 are reciprocated is high and the acceleration values in the Z.sub.E direction is low).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Kawai, to include Talebi’s teaching of a robot system estimating payload characteristics and adjusting control and Oaki’s teaching of performing a high acceleration/deceleration operation, since Talebi teaches wherein the system may estimate mass more accurately thus trajectories may be optimized such that the payload may be moved as fast as possible within a safety factor without separating from the end effector and Oaki teaches wherein the operation allows for the estimation of inertial force compensation parameters therefore improving object mass and collision detection accuracy.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai et al. (US 20220339783 A1, hereinafter Kawai) in view of Talebi et al. (US 20220305678 A1, hereinafter Talebi) and Nakatani et al. (US 20140230581 A1, hereinafter Nakatani), and further in view of Colbrunn et al. (US 20210229279 A1, hereinafter Colbrunn).
Regarding claim 19, the above combination of Kawai, Talebi, and Nakatani discloses:
The method of claim 15, but does not explicitly teach wherein each input of the first set of inputs is received at a predefined frequency.
However, Colbrunn, disclosing a system for correcting trajectories of a robotic system carrying an object based on a hybrid force and position control, specifically teaches “each input of the first set of inputs is received at a predefined frequency” (at least as in paragraph 0051, wherein “When the object 92 is at a point on the trajectory the controller 96 can sample the primary sensor 104 to receive position and orientation data of the primary sensor in a coordinate system at a time and sample the at least one ancillary sensor 106 to receive position and orientation data of the at least one ancillary sensor in the coordinate system at the time. The sampling can be done automatically at a sampling frequency”; see also paragraph 0110 and 0116).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teachings of Kawai, to include Colbrunn’s teaching of sampling data at a sampling frequency, since Colbrunn teaches wherein the sampling improves robotic system control and movement by providing deviation data for trajectory correction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICARDO ICHIKAWA VISCARRA whose telephone number is (571)270-0154. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-12 & 2-4 PST.
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, Adam Mott can be reached on (571) 270-5376. 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.
/RICARDO I VISCARRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657