Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This communication is responsive to Application No. 18/247,725 and the amendments filed on 2/23/2026.
3. Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-9 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 4/3/2023, 5/20/2024, and 9/18/2025 have been fully considered by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claim(s) 1, 3-4, and 6-9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because 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.
Regarding independent claim 1, the Examiner agrees that the combination of US 20150246406 A1 to Takayama, US 20180093380 A1 to Yoshida, WO 2019215998 A1 to Yamamoto, and US 20220062109 A1 to Kaintz fails to teach all of the amended limitations of the claim. However, in light of the amendments and the Applicant’s remarks, an updated search was conducted, and a new ground of rejection concerning claim 1 has been determined, in which will be described later.
Regarding dependent claims 3-4 and 6-7, as all of these claims depend from claim 1, are still rejected, in which will be described later.
Regarding independent claims 8 and 9, as these claims contain similar limitations as claim 1, are still rejected for similar reasons as claim 1 is, in which will be described later.
Claim Objections
6. Claims 1, 8, and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 1, 8, and 9, the term "the workpiece" in the final line of each of these claims lacks antecedent basis. The workpiece is interpreted to be a generic workpiece that the tool interacts with in some capacity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claim(s) 1, 7, 8, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takayama (US 20150246406 A1 hereinafter Takayama) in view of Halvorsen et al. (US 20210323163 A1 hereinafter Halvorsen) and Heideman et al. (US 6013997 A hereinafter Heideman).
Regarding Claim 1, Takayama teaches a robot tool deformation amount calculator ([0024] via “Hereinafter, a welding robot system according to an embodiment of the present invention will be described referring to FIGS. 1 to 15.”), ([0074] via “According to the present invention, not only the position of the welding wire but also the inclination of the welding torch are detected based on the image signals of the welding torch and the welding wire. As a result, even when the welding torch is deformed after instructing the robot, interference of the welding torch with the welding tool or the peripheral device can be prevented.”), comprising:
a processor ([0029] via “The robot controller 10 is configured by including an arithmetic processing device that includes a central processing unit (CPU), ...”) configured to:
acquire a first image ([0031] via “Accordingly, the camera 32 acquires two camera images 40 (first and second camera images).”) in which a first measurement target positioned at a tool attachment part of a tip of a robot is captured by a camera for capturing the robot ([0031] via “In FIG. 4, a tip 3c of the welding torch 3 (second extension part 3b) is located substantially at the center of the imaging region 40a, and the camera image 40 includes an overall image (welding wire image 41) of the welding wire 4 and an image (welding torch image 42) of the tip part of the welding torch 3.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the proximal side of the tip 3c (also indicated as item number 421 or generically P1 in other figures) as the first measurement target.) and a second image ([0031] via “Accordingly, the camera 32 acquires two camera images 40 (first and second camera images).”) in which a second measurement target positioned at a predetermined part more on a tip side of the tool than the tool attachment part is captured by the camera ([0033] via “The setting unit 142 sets a target point 43 corresponding to a target position (wire target position) of the welding wire 4 on each of the first and second welding wire images 41 recognized by the image recognition unit 141. The wire target position is a target position of a tip of the welding wire 4, and the target point 43 on the welding wire image 41 defines the wire target position.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the target point 43 as the second measurement target. See Figures 4-7 of Takayama where the target point 43 is positioned more so on the tip side of the tool as compared to tip 3c.),
calculate a position of the first measurement target based on the first image ([0034] via “Therefore, the setting unit 142 sets an intersection point between a virtual line L2 away by a predetermined length .DELTA.L from a tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 along the center line L1 and the welding wire image 41 as the target point 43.”), ([0035] via “In FIG. 6, an intersection point between a circular arc having a predetermined radius R around the tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 and the welding wire image 41 is set as the target point 43.”), (Note: See Figures 5 and 6 of Takayama as well.),
calculate a position of the second measurement target based on the second image ([0036] via “The position detection unit 143 detects, based on the first and second welding wire images 41 recognized by the image recognition unit 141, a position of the target point 43 in a three-dimensional space.”),
calculate a deformation amount of the tool ([0040] via “ Accordingly, the inclination of the welding torch 3 with respect to the arm tip part P1 can be detected, and presence or absence of deformation of the welding torch 3 and a degree of deformation of the welding torch 3, in other words, an amount of deviation of a shape of the welding torch from its original state, can be understood.”) in accordance with a posture of the robot based on the position of the first measurement target and the position of the second measurement target ([0039] via “The inclination detection unit 144 detects, based on the first and second welding torch images 42 recognized by the image recognition unit 141, inclination of the welding torch 3 in a three-dimensional space with respect to the arm tip part P1. In this case, the inclination detection unit 144 first calculates an inclination angle .theta. of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 on the two-dimensional image based on the first welding torch image 42. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 4, the inclination detection unit 144 calculates, as the inclination angle .theta., an angle of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 with respect to a virtual line L3 parallel to a predetermined coordinate axis (e.g., .gamma. axis) of the user definition coordinate system. Similarly, the inclination detection unit 144 calculates an inclination angle of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 on the two-dimensional image based on the second welding torch image 42. The inclination detection unit 144 determines an inclination angle in the three-dimensional space by using these two inclination angles on the two-dimensional image.”), (Note: See Figures 4-7 of Takayama as well where centerline L1 passes through the first measurement targets 3C/421/P1 of Takayama. The Examiner interprets the inclination as the deformation, as stated above by Takayama in paragraph [0040].), and
calculate the position of the first measurement target based on the first image ([0034] via “Therefore, the setting unit 142 sets an intersection point between a virtual line L2 away by a predetermined length .DELTA.L from a tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 along the center line L1 and the welding wire image 41 as the target point 43.”), ([0035] via “In FIG. 6, an intersection point between a circular arc having a predetermined radius R around the tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 and the welding wire image 41 is set as the target point 43.”), (Note: See Figures 5 and 6 of Takayama as well.).
Takayama is silent on to calculate the position of the first measurement target based on the first image to calculate a position of a coordinate system of the camera which captures the first image and the second image, relative to a coordinate system of the robot, calculate the position of the predetermined part of the tool based on the deformation amount of the tool, and align the predetermined part of the tool with the workpiece.
However, Halvorsen teaches to calculate the position of the first measurement target based on the first image to calculate a position of a coordinate system of the camera which captures the first image and the second image, relative to a coordinate system of the robot ([0035] via “And, the calibration processor 23 instructs the optical tracker 22 to measure the position a2 of the optical marker 21 in the second posture P2. The optical tracker 22 submits the measured position a2 to the calibration processor 23. The calibration processor 23
evaluates a rotation of the robotic coordinate system C1 with respect to the optical tracker's coordinate system C2. The rotation can be determined based on the movement vector Vm as measured by the RCU 18, the movement vector Vm as measured by the optical tracker 22 and the shift vector Vs.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the optical marker 21 of Halvorsen as equivalent to the first measurement target.).
Further, Heideman teaches to calculate the position of the predetermined part of the tool based on the deformation amount of the tool (Col. 9 lines 1-23, where “As is shown in FIG. 4, the distance from plate center point 50 to the point P is the known distance from center point 50 of plate 46 to point P in contact with effector 66 when probe 16 is in a neutral position, i.e., the position when distal tip 54 is at A. The distance from center pivot point 72 to center point 50, as well as, the distance from center pivot point 72 to the distal most aspect of distal tip 54 in contact with the workpiece surface are also known. When a deflection occurs, the effector, such as effector 66 moves. … Thus, the degree of tilting, i.e., depression of effector 66 over distance .DELTA.z, is also known. Since these distances are known, and that the deflection measured in the device X' direction is equivalent to a rotation about the device Y' axis, then solving for .gamma., the degree of rotation, involves solving for coordinates of distal tip 54 as deflected from point A to point B as a complex trigonometric function. The simultaneous solution of the deflection in the device X' and Y' axis solves for the translational deflection of distal tip 54 resulting in a tilt vector, with the entire tilt measuring mechanism providing for a vectored answer for both degree and direction of the deflection.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the distal tip 54 of Heideman as the tool. Also, see Figures 3-4 of Heideman.), and
align the predetermined part of the tool with the workpiece (Col. 4 lines 58-67, where “Then any measured deflection of the distal tip, in the device X', Y', and Z' axes, caused by movement of the device by the robotic arm across the workpiece surface, results in commands from the transformation and control subsystem to the robotic arm. These commands change articulations of the robotic arm and counter the deflections of the distal tip, thus maintaining the position and optimal orientation, in the local X, Y, and Z axes, of the device over that point of the surface of the workpiece in contact with the distal tip during movement of the device.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Halvorsen wherein to calculate the position of the first measurement target based on the first image to calculate a position of a coordinate system of the camera which captures the first image and the second image, relative to a coordinate system of the robot. Doing so accurately determines the position of the robot relative to the position of the camera in the environment, as stated by Halvorsen ([0036] via “The second posture P2 may be a single predefined posture. However, preferably the calibration processor 23 determines the second posture P2 based on accuracy of a calibration result.”).
In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Heideman wherein to calculate the position of the predetermined part of the tool based on the deformation amount of the tool, and align the predetermined part of the tool with the workpiece. Doing so incorporates the known geometry of the tool to use mathematical calculations to calculate the updated position of the tool, as stated above by Heideman in Col. 9 lines 1-23.
Regarding Claim 7, modified reference Takayama teaches the robot tool deformation amount calculator according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined part is a tip of the tool ([0033] via “The wire target position is a target position of a tip of the welding wire 4, and the target point 43 on the welding wire image 41 defines the wire target position. During welding work, a position of the welding wire 4 is controlled so that the target point 43 (tool tip point) can coincide with the wire target position.”).
Regarding Claim 8, Takayama teaches a robot tool deformation amount calculation system ([0024] via “Hereinafter, a welding robot system according to an embodiment of the present invention will be described referring to FIGS. 1 to 15.”), ([0074] via “According to the present invention, not only the position of the welding wire but also the inclination of the welding torch are detected based on the image signals of the welding torch and the welding wire. As a result, even when the welding torch is deformed after instructing the robot, interference of the welding torch with the welding tool or the peripheral device can be prevented.”), comprising:
a first measurement target which is positioned at a tool attachment part of a tip of a robot ([0031] via “In FIG. 4, a tip 3c of the welding torch 3 (second extension part 3b) is located substantially at the center of the imaging region 40a, and the camera image 40 includes an overall image (welding wire image 41) of the welding wire 4 and an image (welding torch image 42) of the tip part of the welding torch 3.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the proximal side of the tip 3c (also indicated as item number 421 or generically P1 in other figures) as the first measurement target.),
a second measurement target which is positioned more on a tip side of the tool than the tool attachment part ([0033] via “The setting unit 142 sets a target point 43 corresponding to a target position (wire target position) of the welding wire 4 on each of the first and second welding wire images 41 recognized by the image recognition unit 141. The wire target position is a target position of a tip of the welding wire 4, and the target point 43 on the welding wire image 41 defines the wire target position.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the target point 43 as the second measurement target. See Figures 4-7 of Takayama where the target point 43 is positioned more so on the tip side of the tool as compared to tip 3c.),
a camera which is installed around the robot ([0027] via “The imaging device 30 includes … a camera 32 installed in the interior of the dustproof cover 31, ….”), (Note: See Figure 1 of Takayama where camera 32 is installed around the robot.) and which generates a first image in which the first measurement target is captured ([0031] via “In FIG. 4, a tip 3c of the welding torch 3 (second extension part 3b) is located substantially at the center of the imaging region 40a, and the camera image 40 includes an overall image (welding wire image 41) of the welding wire 4 and an image (welding torch image 42) of the tip part of the welding torch 3.”) and a second image in which the second measurement target is captured ([0033] via “The setting unit 142 sets a target point 43 corresponding to a target position (wire target position) of the welding wire 4 on each of the first and second welding wire images 41 recognized by the image recognition unit 141. The wire target position is a target position of a tip of the welding wire 4, and the target point 43 on the welding wire image 41 defines the wire target position.”), and
a tool deformation amount calculator which calculates a deformation amount of the tool ([0039] via “The inclination detection unit 144 detects, based on the first and second welding torch images 42 recognized by the image recognition unit 141, inclination of the welding torch 3 in a three-dimensional space with respect to the arm tip part P1. In this case, the inclination detection unit 144 first calculates an inclination angle .theta. of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 on the two-dimensional image based on the first welding torch image 42.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the inclination detection unit 144 as the tool deformation amount calculator.), wherein the tool deformation amount calculator comprises:
a processor ([0029] via “The robot controller 10 is configured by including an arithmetic processing device that includes a central processing unit (CPU), ...”) configured to:
acquire the first image and the second image by the camera for capturing the robot ([0031] via “Accordingly, the camera 32 acquires two camera images 40 (first and second camera images).”),
calculate a position of the first measurement target based on the first image ([0034] via “Therefore, the setting unit 142 sets an intersection point between a virtual line L2 away by a predetermined length .DELTA.L from a tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 along the center line L1 and the welding wire image 41 as the target point 43.”), ([0035] via “In FIG. 6, an intersection point between a circular arc having a predetermined radius R around the tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 and the welding wire image 41 is set as the target point 43.”), (Note: See Figures 5 and 6 of Takayama as well.),
calculate a position of the second measurement target based on the second image ([0036] via “The position detection unit 143 detects, based on the first and second welding wire images 41 recognized by the image recognition unit 141, a position of the target point 43 in a three-dimensional space.”),
calculate a deformation amount of the tool ([0040] via “ Accordingly, the inclination of the welding torch 3 with respect to the arm tip part P1 can be detected, and presence or absence of deformation of the welding torch 3 and a degree of deformation of the welding torch 3, in other words, an amount of deviation of a shape of the welding torch from its original state, can be understood.”) in accordance with a posture of the robot based on the position of the first measurement target and the position of the second measurement target ([0039] via “The inclination detection unit 144 detects, based on the first and second welding torch images 42 recognized by the image recognition unit 141, inclination of the welding torch 3 in a three-dimensional space with respect to the arm tip part P1. In this case, the inclination detection unit 144 first calculates an inclination angle .theta. of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 on the two-dimensional image based on the first welding torch image 42. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 4, the inclination detection unit 144 calculates, as the inclination angle .theta., an angle of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 with respect to a virtual line L3 parallel to a predetermined coordinate axis (e.g., .gamma. axis) of the user definition coordinate system. Similarly, the inclination detection unit 144 calculates an inclination angle of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 on the two-dimensional image based on the second welding torch image 42. The inclination detection unit 144 determines an inclination angle in the three-dimensional space by using these two inclination angles on the two-dimensional image.”), (Note: See Figures 4-7 of Takayama as well where centerline L1 passes through the first measurement targets 3C/421/P1 of Takayama. The Examiner interprets the inclination as the deformation, as stated above by Takayama in paragraph [0040].), and
calculate the position of the first measurement target based on the first image ([0034] via “Therefore, the setting unit 142 sets an intersection point between a virtual line L2 away by a predetermined length .DELTA.L from a tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 along the center line L1 and the welding wire image 41 as the target point 43.”), ([0035] via “In FIG. 6, an intersection point between a circular arc having a predetermined radius R around the tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 and the welding wire image 41 is set as the target point 43.”), (Note: See Figures 5 and 6 of Takayama as well.).
Takayama is silent on to calculate the position of the first measurement target based on the first image to calculate a position of a coordinate system of the camera which captures the first image and the second image, relative to a coordinate system of the robot, calculate the position of the predetermined part of the tool based on the deformation amount of the tool, and align the predetermined part of the tool with the workpiece.
However, Halvorsen teaches to calculate the position of the first measurement target based on the first image to calculate a position of a coordinate system of the camera which captures the first image and the second image, relative to a coordinate system of the robot ([0035] via “And, the calibration processor 23 instructs the optical tracker 22 to measure the position a2 of the optical marker 21 in the second posture P2. The optical tracker 22 submits the measured position a2 to the calibration processor 23. The calibration processor 23
evaluates a rotation of the robotic coordinate system C1 with respect to the optical tracker's coordinate system C2. The rotation can be determined based on the movement vector Vm as measured by the RCU 18, the movement vector Vm as measured by the optical tracker 22 and the shift vector Vs.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the optical marker 21 of Halvorsen as equivalent to the first measurement target.).
Further, Heideman teaches to calculate the position of the predetermined part of the tool based on the deformation amount of the tool (Col. 9 lines 1-23, where “As is shown in FIG. 4, the distance from plate center point 50 to the point P is the known distance from center point 50 of plate 46 to point P in contact with effector 66 when probe 16 is in a neutral position, i.e., the position when distal tip 54 is at A. The distance from center pivot point 72 to center point 50, as well as, the distance from center pivot point 72 to the distal most aspect of distal tip 54 in contact with the workpiece surface are also known. When a deflection occurs, the effector, such as effector 66 moves. … Thus, the degree of tilting, i.e., depression of effector 66 over distance .DELTA.z, is also known. Since these distances are known, and that the deflection measured in the device X' direction is equivalent to a rotation about the device Y' axis, then solving for .gamma., the degree of rotation, involves solving for coordinates of distal tip 54 as deflected from point A to point B as a complex trigonometric function. The simultaneous solution of the deflection in the device X' and Y' axis solves for the translational deflection of distal tip 54 resulting in a tilt vector, with the entire tilt measuring mechanism providing for a vectored answer for both degree and direction of the deflection.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the distal tip 54 of Heideman as the tool. Also, see Figures 3-4 of Heideman.), and
align the predetermined part of the tool with the workpiece (Col. 4 lines 58-67, where “Then any measured deflection of the distal tip, in the device X', Y', and Z' axes, caused by movement of the device by the robotic arm across the workpiece surface, results in commands from the transformation and control subsystem to the robotic arm. These commands change articulations of the robotic arm and counter the deflections of the distal tip, thus maintaining the position and optimal orientation, in the local X, Y, and Z axes, of the device over that point of the surface of the workpiece in contact with the distal tip during movement of the device.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Halvorsen wherein to calculate the position of the first measurement target based on the first image to calculate a position of a coordinate system of the camera which captures the first image and the second image, relative to a coordinate system of the robot. Doing so accurately determines the position of the robot relative to the position of the camera in the environment, as stated by Halvorsen ([0036] via “The second posture P2 may be a single predefined posture. However, preferably the calibration processor 23 determines the second posture P2 based on accuracy of a calibration result.”).
In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Heideman wherein to calculate the position of the predetermined part of the tool based on the deformation amount of the tool, and align the predetermined part of the tool with the workpiece. Doing so incorporates the known geometry of the tool to use mathematical calculations to calculate the updated position of the tool, as stated above by Heideman in Col. 9 lines 1-23.
Regarding Claim 9, Takayama teaches a robot tool deformation amount calculation method ([0024] via “Hereinafter, a welding robot system according to an embodiment of the present invention will be described referring to FIGS. 1 to 15.”), ([0074] via “According to the present invention, not only the position of the welding wire but also the inclination of the welding torch are detected based on the image signals of the welding torch and the welding wire. As a result, even when the welding torch is deformed after instructing the robot, interference of the welding torch with the welding tool or the peripheral device can be prevented.”), comprising the steps of:
acquiring a first image ([0031] via “Accordingly, the camera 32 acquires two camera images 40 (first and second camera images).”) in which a first measurement target positioned on a tool attachment part on a tip of a robot is captured by a camera for capturing the robot ([0031] via “In FIG. 4, a tip 3c of the welding torch 3 (second extension part 3b) is located substantially at the center of the imaging region 40a, and the camera image 40 includes an overall image (welding wire image 41) of the welding wire 4 and an image (welding torch image 42) of the tip part of the welding torch 3.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the proximal side of the tip 3c (also indicated as item number 421 or generically P1 in other figures) as the first measurement target.) and a second image ([0031] via “Accordingly, the camera 32 acquires two camera images 40 (first and second camera images).”) in which a second measurement target positioned more on the tip side of the tool than the tool attachment part is captured by the camera ([0033] via “The setting unit 142 sets a target point 43 corresponding to a target position (wire target position) of the welding wire 4 on each of the first and second welding wire images 41 recognized by the image recognition unit 141. The wire target position is a target position of a tip of the welding wire 4, and the target point 43 on the welding wire image 41 defines the wire target position.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the target point 43 as the second measurement target. See Figures 4-7 of Takayama where the target point 43 is positioned more so on the tip side of the tool as compared to tip 3c.),
calculating a position of the first measurement target based on the first image ([0034] via “Therefore, the setting unit 142 sets an intersection point between a virtual line L2 away by a predetermined length .DELTA.L from a tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 along the center line L1 and the welding wire image 41 as the target point 43.”), ([0035] via “In FIG. 6, an intersection point between a circular arc having a predetermined radius R around the tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 and the welding wire image 41 is set as the target point 43.”), (Note: See Figures 5 and 6 of Takayama as well.),
calculating a position of the second measurement target based on the second image ([0036] via “The position detection unit 143 detects, based on the first and second welding wire images 41 recognized by the image recognition unit 141, a position of the target point 43 in a three-dimensional space.”),
calculating a deformation amount of the tool ([0040] via “ Accordingly, the inclination of the welding torch 3 with respect to the arm tip part P1 can be detected, and presence or absence of deformation of the welding torch 3 and a degree of deformation of the welding torch 3, in other words, an amount of deviation of a shape of the welding torch from its original state, can be understood.”) in accordance with a posture of the robot based on the position of the first measurement target and the position of the second measurement target ([0039] via “The inclination detection unit 144 detects, based on the first and second welding torch images 42 recognized by the image recognition unit 141, inclination of the welding torch 3 in a three-dimensional space with respect to the arm tip part P1. In this case, the inclination detection unit 144 first calculates an inclination angle .theta. of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 on the two-dimensional image based on the first welding torch image 42. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 4, the inclination detection unit 144 calculates, as the inclination angle .theta., an angle of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 with respect to a virtual line L3 parallel to a predetermined coordinate axis (e.g., .gamma. axis) of the user definition coordinate system. Similarly, the inclination detection unit 144 calculates an inclination angle of the center line L1 of the welding torch 3 on the two-dimensional image based on the second welding torch image 42. The inclination detection unit 144 determines an inclination angle in the three-dimensional space by using these two inclination angles on the two-dimensional image.”), (Note: See Figures 4-7 of Takayama as well where centerline L1 passes through the first measurement targets 3C/421/P1 of Takayama. The Examiner interprets the inclination as the deformation, as stated above by Takayama in paragraph [0040].), and
calculating the position of the first measurement target based on the first image ([0034] via “Therefore, the setting unit 142 sets an intersection point between a virtual line L2 away by a predetermined length .DELTA.L from a tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 along the center line L1 and the welding wire image 41 as the target point 43.”), ([0035] via “In FIG. 6, an intersection point between a circular arc having a predetermined radius R around the tip 421 of the welding torch image 42 and the welding wire image 41 is set as the target point 43.”), (Note: See Figures 5 and 6 of Takayama as well.).
Takayama is silent on calculating the position of the first measurement target based on the first image to calculate a position of a coordinate system of the camera which captures the first image and the second image, relative to a coordinate system of the robot, calculating the position of the predetermined part of the tool based on the deformation amount of the tool, and aligning the predetermined part of the tool with the workpiece.
However, Halvorsen teaches calculating the position of the first measurement target based on the first image to calculate a position of a coordinate system of the camera which captures the first image and the second image, relative to a coordinate system of the robot ([0035] via “And, the calibration processor 23 instructs the optical tracker 22 to measure the position a2 of the optical marker 21 in the second posture P2. The optical tracker 22 submits the measured position a2 to the calibration processor 23. The calibration processor 23
evaluates a rotation of the robotic coordinate system C1 with respect to the optical tracker's coordinate system C2. The rotation can be determined based on the movement vector Vm as measured by the RCU 18, the movement vector Vm as measured by the optical tracker 22 and the shift vector Vs.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the optical marker 21 of Halvorsen as equivalent to the first measurement target.).
Further, Heideman teaches calculating the position of the predetermined part of the tool based on the deformation amount of the tool (Col. 9 lines 1-23, where “As is shown in FIG. 4, the distance from plate center point 50 to the point P is the known distance from center point 50 of plate 46 to point P in contact with effector 66 when probe 16 is in a neutral position, i.e., the position when distal tip 54 is at A. The distance from center pivot point 72 to center point 50, as well as, the distance from center pivot point 72 to the distal most aspect of distal tip 54 in contact with the workpiece surface are also known. When a deflection occurs, the effector, such as effector 66 moves. … Thus, the degree of tilting, i.e., depression of effector 66 over distance .DELTA.z, is also known. Since these distances are known, and that the deflection measured in the device X' direction is equivalent to a rotation about the device Y' axis, then solving for .gamma., the degree of rotation, involves solving for coordinates of distal tip 54 as deflected from point A to point B as a complex trigonometric function. The simultaneous solution of the deflection in the device X' and Y' axis solves for the translational deflection of distal tip 54 resulting in a tilt vector, with the entire tilt measuring mechanism providing for a vectored answer for both degree and direction of the deflection.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the distal tip 54 of Heideman as the tool. Also, see Figures 3-4 of Heideman.), and
aligning the predetermined part of the tool with the workpiece (Col. 4 lines 58-67, where “Then any measured deflection of the distal tip, in the device X', Y', and Z' axes, caused by movement of the device by the robotic arm across the workpiece surface, results in commands from the transformation and control subsystem to the robotic arm. These commands change articulations of the robotic arm and counter the deflections of the distal tip, thus maintaining the position and optimal orientation, in the local X, Y, and Z axes, of the device over that point of the surface of the workpiece in contact with the distal tip during movement of the device.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Halvorsen wherein the method comprises: calculating the position of the first measurement target based on the first image to calculate a position of a coordinate system of the camera which captures the first image and the second image, relative to a coordinate system of the robot. Doing so accurately determines the position of the robot relative to the position of the camera in the environment, as stated by Halvorsen ([0036] via “The second posture P2 may be a single predefined posture. However, preferably the calibration processor 23 determines the second posture P2 based on accuracy of a calibration result.”).
In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Heideman wherein the method comprises: calculating the position of the predetermined part of the tool based on the deformation amount of the tool, and aligning the predetermined part of the tool with the workpiece. Doing so incorporates the known geometry of the tool to use mathematical calculations to calculate the updated position of the tool, as stated above by Heideman in Col. 9 lines 1-23.
10. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takayama (US 20150246406 A1 hereinafter Takayama) in view of Halvorsen et al. (US 20210323163 A1 hereinafter Halvorsen) and Heideman et al. (US 6013997 A hereinafter Heideman), and further in view of Sirkett et al. (US 20180354137 A1 hereinafter Sirkett) and Crawford et al. (US 20190000569 A1 hereinafter Crawford).
Regarding Claim 3, modified reference Takayama teaches the robot tool deformation amount calculator according to claim 1, but is silent on wherein the processor is configured to calculate the position of the second measurement target relative to a coordinate system of the robot from the position of the second measurement target relative to the coordinate system of the camera calculated based on the second image and a position of the coordinate system of the camera relative to the coordinate system of the robot, calculate a position and posture of the tool attachment part relative to the coordinate system of the robot based on angles of joints of the robot, and calculate the position of the second measurement target relative to the tool attachment part based on the position of the second measurement target relative to the coordinate system of the robot and the position and posture of the tool attachment part relative to the coordinate system of the robot.
However, Sirkett teaches to calculate the position of the second measurement target relative to a coordinate system of the robot ([0030] via “Assuming that the robot gripper 30
has on it a detection mark 160 (see FIG. 3) whose position in the manipulator coordinate frame 70 is known, ….”) from the position of the second measurement target relative to the coordinate system of the camera calculated based on the second image ([0031] via “… determining a respective second detection mark position in the vision system coordinate frame 150 with the help of the vision system 40; ….”) and a position of the coordinate system of the camera relative to the coordinate system of the robot ([0031] via “… and calculating a correlation between the vision system coordinate frame 150 and the manipulator coordinate frame 70 on the basis of the first, second and third detection mark positions.”).
Further, Crawford teaches to calculate a position and posture of the tool attachment part relative to the coordinate system of the robot based on angles of joints of the robot ([0120] via “The robot's joint positions relative to these vectors k′, j′, i′ are known and fixed when all joints are at zero, and therefore rigid body calculations can be used to determine the location of any section of the robot relative to these vectors k′, j′, i′ when the robot is at a home position. During robot movement, if the positions of the tool markers 804 (while the tool 608 is in the guide tube 1014) and the position of the single marker 1018 are detected from the tracking system, and angles/linear positions of each joint are known from encoders, then position and orientation of any section of the robot can be determined.”), and
calculate the position of the second measurement target relative to the tool attachment part based on the position of the second measurement target relative to the coordinate system of the robot ([0123] via “Thus, it is possible to determine Tcr by inserting any tool 608 with a
tracking array 612 into the guide tube 1014 and reading the tool's array 612 plus the single marker 1018 of the guide tube 1014 while at the same time determining from the encoders on each axis the current location of the guide tube 1014 in the robot's coordinate system.”) and the position and posture of the tool attachment part relative to the coordinate system of the robot ([0123] via “To obtain Tcr, a full tracking array on the robot is tracked while it is rigidly attached to the robot at a location that is known in the robot's coordinate system, then known rigid body methods are used to calculate the transformation of coordinates.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Sirkett wherein the processor is configured to calculate the position of the second measurement target relative to a coordinate system of the robot from the position of the second measurement target relative to the coordinate system of the camera calculated based on the second image and a position of the coordinate system of the camera relative to the coordinate system of the robot. Doing so incorporates an accurate and timely calibration method between the robot and camera coordinate systems, as stated by Sirkett ([0004] – [0005] via “One object of the invention is to provide an improved method for calibrating a robot system, which method is fast, simple and accurate, and does not require high skills from the operator carrying it out. These objects are achieved by the method and device according to the invention.”).
In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Crawford wherein the processor is configured to calculate a position and posture of the tool attachment part relative to the coordinate system of the robot based on angles of joints of the robot, and calculate the position of the second measurement target relative to the tool attachment part based on the position of the second measurement target relative to the coordinate system of the robot and the position and posture of the tool attachment part relative to the coordinate system of the robot. Doing so calculates the relationship between the robot and camera coordinate systems from multiple positions of the robotic tool, as stated above by Crawford in paragraph [0123].
11. Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takayama (US 20150246406 A1 hereinafter Takayama) in view of Halvorsen et al. (US 20210323163 A1 hereinafter Halvorsen) and Heideman et al. (US 6013997 A hereinafter Heideman), further in view of Sirkett et al. (US 20180354137 A1 hereinafter Sirkett) and Crawford et al. (US 20190000569 A1 hereinafter Crawford), and further in view of Xu et al. (CN 109176487 A hereinafter Xu).
Regarding Claim 4, modified reference Takayama teaches the robot tool deformation amount calculator according to claim 3, but is silent on wherein the processor is configured to: compare, in a plurality of postures of the robot, the calculated position of the second measurement target relative to the tool attachment part and the position of the second measurement target relative to the tool attachment part obtained from a model formula representing elastic deformation of the tool to determine elastic deformation parameters of the tool included in the model formula, and calculate a deformation amount of the tool in accordance with the posture of the robot based on the model formula.
However, Xu teaches to compare, in a plurality of postures of the robot, the calculated position of the second measurement target relative to the tool attachment part and the position of the second measurement target relative to the tool attachment part obtained from a model formula representing elastic deformation of the tool to determine elastic deformation parameters of the tool included in the model formula (Page 3 paragraphs 3-4 via “the other technical solution adopted by the invention is as follows: a linkage joint section calibration device of flexible robot, wherein, comprising: at least one processor … “), (Page 8 paragraph 11 via “The embodiments of the flexible linkage joint segment calibration method of the robot, by kinematic error parameter of flexible robot, namely, initial length of rope error Δl and the joint angle of the linkage angle error ε θ and kinematic model X=f (Θ), establishing flexible linkage joint section of robot kinematics error mode Δ X=f, ε θ ε (Δ l0). then can obtain the nominal end position and posture flexible robot linkage joint section of several configuration according to the kinematics model of flexible robot X=f (Θ), at the same time by a laser tracker and the target of linkage end of joint section, obtained by actual measurement of the actual end position and posture at rope driving linkage joint section a plurality of configuration. combining the nominal and the actual end position posture difference, a plurality of kinematic error parameters based on optimization algorithm of genetic, calibrating the flexible robot linkage joint section.”), (Note: The Examiner interprets the kinematics model of Xu as the model formula.), and
calculate a deformation amount of the tool in accordance with the posture of the robot based on the model formula (Page 4 paragraph 5 via “Specifically, using the pose difference between the kinematic error between the nominal position and the actual pose of relation can exists between kinematic error of the calibration linkage joint section. according to the flexible robot kinematics error parameter that is the initial length of the rope of the error (i.e., initial length error) Δl, the joint angle of the linkage error (i.e., linkage angle error) E θ and the kinematics model X=f (Θ) can establish a flexible linkage joint section of robot kinematics error mode Δ X=f, ε θ ε (Δ l0), i.e., linkage pose difference of the joint section Δ and the initial length error Δl, linkage angle error ε θ, according to the plurality of nominal pose and the plurality of actual pose calibration linkage joint section of the kinematic error parameter (i.e. the initial length error linkage angle error).”), (Page 7 paragraph 17 via “then according to the kinematic error model of flexible robot, using laser tracking method to acquire the actual pose of the linkage joint section, and obtaining the plurality of nominal position at a plurality of different configurations of the linkage joint section based on genetic algorithm, and according to the plurality of nominal pose and the plurality of actual pose error and linkage angle can be initial length error calibrating the linkage joint section.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Xu wherein the processor is configured to: compare, in a plurality of postures of the robot, the calculated position of the second measurement target relative to the tool attachment part and the position of the second measurement target relative to the tool attachment part obtained from a model formula representing elastic deformation of the tool to determine elastic deformation parameters of the tool included in the model formula, and calculate a deformation amount of the tool in accordance with the posture of the robot based on the model formula. Doing so calibrates the measured and model formulaic position results of the robotic tool, ensuring a more accurate and precise combined position of the robot tool, as stated by Xu (Page 4 paragraph 5 via “calibration step, according to the plurality of nominal pose and the plurality of actual posture calibration of the linkage joint section of the kinematic error parameters. solves the problem that the existing flexible robot due to kinematic error of the tip location precision is low, fine operation ability limitation and so on, realizing the calibration of the kinematic error parameter of the linkage joint section of flexible robot and improve the tip location precision and operation skill of the robot.”).
12. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takayama (US 20150246406 A1 hereinafter Takayama) in view of Halvorsen et al. (US 20210323163 A1 hereinafter Halvorsen) and Heideman et al. (US 6013997 A hereinafter Heideman), and further in view of Yamamoto et al. (WO 2019215998 A1 hereinafter Yamamoto).
Regarding Claim 6, modified reference Takayama teaches the robot tool deformation amount calculator according to claim 1, but is silent on wherein the processor is further configured to: calculate a deformation amount of the robot in accordance with elastic deformation of the robot, and calculate the position of the predetermined part based on the deformation amount of the robot and the deformation amount of the tool.
However, Yamamoto teaches to calculate a deformation amount of the robot in accordance with elastic deformation of the robot (Page 3 paragraph 5 via “The calculation unit 36 calculates the deflection amount of the robot arm 10 based on the gravitational torque. Specifically, for each of the first joint portion J1 to the sixth joint portion J6, a deflection angle due to elastic deformation of the speed reducer and the bearing is calculated, and based on the deflection angle of the first joint portion J1 to the sixth joint portion J6. Thus, the deflection amount of the entire robot arm 10 is calculated.”), and
calculate the position of the predetermined part based on the deformation amount of the robot and the deformation amount of the tool (Page 3 paragraphs 4-5 via “The control unit 35 includes a calculation unit 36, a comparison unit 37, and a program correction unit 38. The calculation unit 36 calculates the gravitational torque acting on the joint portion of the motor 21 based on the rotation speed of the rotor obtained from the time change of the position information of the motor 21 and the load information. The calculation unit 36 calculates the deflection amount of the robot arm 10 based on the gravitational torque. Specifically, for each of the first joint portion J1 to the sixth joint portion J6, a deflection angle due to elastic deformation of the speed reducer and the bearing is calculated, and based on the deflection angle of the first joint portion J1 to the sixth joint portion J6. Thus, the deflection amount of the entire robot arm 10 is calculated.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yamamoto wherein the processor is further configured to: calculate a deformation amount of the robot in accordance with elastic deformation of the robot, and calculate the position of the predetermined part based on the deformation amount of the robot and the deformation amount of the tool. Doing so calculates the necessary correction amount of the robot tool according to a target position, as stated by Yamamoto (Page 5 paragraph 2 via “This makes it possible to appropriately correct the deflection amount of the robot arm 10 and move the robot arm 10 along the target movement path.”).
Examiner’s Note
13. The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the
references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the
specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific
limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is
respectfully requested of the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references
in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the
context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. See MPEP
2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole,
including portions that would lead away from the claimed Invention. W.L. Gore & Associates,
Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851
(1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to BYRON X KASPER whose telephone number is (571)272-3895.
The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 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, 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.
/BYRON XAVIER KASPER/Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights