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 .
Response to Arguments
This office action is in response to amendments filed 08/01/2025. Claims 7-24 are pending.
Applicant’s arguments and amendments to the claims with respect to prior art rejections of Claims 7-24 under 35 USC 102/103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of Claims 7-24 under 35 USC 102/103 have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new rejection is made in view of Nakayama et al (US 20200070357, hereinafter Nakayama)
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are: estimator, corrector in claim(s) 7 (first instance).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The estimator and corrector will be interpreted as functional software modules stored on and executed by a control device as described in par. 0022-0023 and Fig. 2 of applicant’s specification as filed, or equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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) 7-9, 12-18, 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naitou et al (US 20150367510, hereinafter Naitou) in view of Nakayama et al ( US 20200070357, hereinafter Nakayama).
Regarding Claim 7, Naitou teaches:
a force detection device for detecting a force acting on a robot (see at least "In this case, sensor 30 further has a force detecting part 40 which detects a force applied to sensor 30, in addition to torque detecting part 32 as shown in FIG. 2." in par. 0027) ,
the robot comprising a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least "FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention." in par. 0020) ,
the force detection device comprising:
a measuring member measuring a force acting on the articulated axis using a force sensor (see at least "In this case, sensor 30 further has a force detecting part 40 which detects a force applied to sensor 30" in par. 0027) ;
an estimator estimating the force acting on the articulated axis based on a state quantity indicative of a driving state of the actuator (see at least "Then, external force estimating part 38 estimates the external force applied to robot 10, by calculating the force applied to sensor 30 generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 and subtracting the calculated force from the force detected by sensor 30 (or force detecting part 40). In this regard, the force generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 may be calculated based on the dimension and mass of each portion of robot 10, and the velocity and acceleration of each axis, etc. Such an external force estimating means may be conventional, and thus a detailed explanation thereof is omitted." in par. 0028) ; and
a corrector correcting an estimated value obtained through the estimation performed by the estimator (see at least "Then, external force estimating part 38 estimates the external force applied to robot 10, by calculating the force applied to sensor 30 generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 and subtracting the calculated force from the force detected by sensor 30 (or force detecting part 40). In this regard, the force generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 may be calculated based on the dimension and mass of each portion of robot 10, and the velocity and acceleration of each axis, etc. Such an external force estimating means may be conventional, and thus a detailed explanation thereof is omitted." in par. 0028) ,
wherein for a first articulated axis provided with the force sensor among the plurality of articulated axes, a measured value obtained through the measurement performed by the measuring member is determined as the detection result of the force (see at least "Then, external force estimating part 38 estimates the external force applied to robot 10, by calculating the force applied to sensor 30 generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 and subtracting the calculated force from the force detected by sensor 30 (or force detecting part 40). In this regard, the force generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 may be calculated based on the dimension and mass of each portion of robot 10, and the velocity and acceleration of each axis, etc. Such an external force estimating means may be conventional, and thus a detailed explanation thereof is omitted." in par. 0028), and
wherein for a second articulated axis not provided with the force sensor among the plurality of articulated axes, an estimated value corrected by the corrector is determined as a detection result of the force (see at least "According to the present invention, the torque of each axis can be detected more correctly than when the motor current is used, further, the repositioning motion of the plurality of axes can be performed by means of substantially one sensor (or a sensor positioned at one site of the robot). Therefore, it is not necessary to position a torque sensor at each of the plurality of axes, whereby a cost of the robot may be reduced." in par. 0038) .
Naitou does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Nakayama does teach:
wherein the state quantity is an actually measured value (see at least "In addition, in the present embodiment, encoders are exemplarily described as angle information detection units, and the rotation angles about the shafts J1 to J6 are exemplarily described as information related to angles, but the present invention is not limited thereto. Angle speed or angle acceleration may be detected." in par. 0034 and “The change amount estimation unit 13 may store physical parameters (for example, sizes and weights) of the robot constitution components (such as the first arm 3 and the like) coupling the shafts J1 to J6, and estimate the correction torque Tf based on the physical parameters and the rotation angles. In this case, the change amount estimation unit 13 can more accurately calculate the correction torque Tf by using inertia moment caused by an arm weight or the like and applied in a direction other than the direction about the shaft J1, and tensile force or compressive force applied in the direction along the shaft J1.” In par. 0035)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Naitou to incorporate the teachings of Nakayama wherein the joint rotation angle information used to correct force sensor data is actually measured by encoders. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Nakayama would be to more accurately represent the external force on a joint (see par. 0035)
Regarding Claim 8, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
the force detection device according to claim 7,
wherein the corrector corrects the estimated value in the second articulated axis using a difference amount between the measured value and the estimated value in the first articulated axis (see at least "Then, external force estimating part 38 estimates the external force applied to robot 10, by calculating the force applied to sensor 30 generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 and subtracting the calculated force from the force detected by sensor 30 (or force detecting part 40). In this regard, the force generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 may be calculated based on the dimension and mass of each portion of robot 10, and the velocity and acceleration of each axis, etc. Such an external force estimating means may be conventional, and thus a detailed explanation thereof is omitted." in par. 0028 and "According to the present invention, the torque of each axis can be detected more correctly than when the motor current is used, further, the repositioning motion of the plurality of axes can be performed by means of substantially one sensor (or a sensor positioned at one site of the robot). Therefore, it is not necessary to position a torque sensor at each of the plurality of axes, whereby a cost of the robot may be reduced." in par. 0038).
Regarding Claim 9, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
the force detection device according to claim 8,
wherein the estimator estimates respective forces acting on the first articulated axis and the second articulated axis in accordance with a common estimation model (see at least " As in controller 26′ of FIG. 3, when both the torque value of each axis and the external force applied to the robot are used for judging as to whether or not the repositioning motion of each axis of robot 10 can be performed, it may be advantageous that the criteria for the judgment include the position of the portion of robot 10 pushed by the operator (concretely, the distance between the portion pushed by the operator and sensor 30). " in par. 0031) .
Regarding Claim 12, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
the force detection device according to claim 8,
wherein, when the plurality of articulated axes are connected in series, the corrector corrects the estimated value in the second articulated axis using the difference amount in a first articulated axis located upstream or downstream of and closest to the second articulated axis (see at least "FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 1, robot mechanical unit 10 has a (one) sensor 30 attached to a lower part of J1 base 12, and sensor 30 has a torque detecting part 32 which detects a first torque about J1 axis 14 and a second torque about J2 axis 18 (FIG. 2). Torque detecting part 32 can detect torques of at least two axes intersecting with each other at right angles. For example, torque detecting part 32 is a torque sensor capable of detecting torques about X-, Y- and Z-axes intersecting with each other at right angles." in par. 0021 and “hen, external force estimating part 38 estimates the external force applied to robot 10, by calculating the force applied to sensor 30 generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 and subtracting the calculated force from the force detected by sensor 30 (or force detecting part 40). In this regard, the force generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 may be calculated based on the dimension and mass of each portion of robot 10, and the velocity and acceleration of each axis, etc.” in par. 0028) .
Regarding Claim 13, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
the force detection device according to claim 9,
wherein, when the plurality of articulated axes are connected in series, the corrector corrects the estimated value in the second articulated axis using the difference amount in a first articulated axis located upstream or downstream of and closest to the second articulated axis (see at least "FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 1, robot mechanical unit 10 has a (one) sensor 30 attached to a lower part of J1 base 12, and sensor 30 has a torque detecting part 32 which detects a first torque about J1 axis 14 and a second torque about J2 axis 18 (FIG. 2). Torque detecting part 32 can detect torques of at least two axes intersecting with each other at right angles. For example, torque detecting part 32 is a torque sensor capable of detecting torques about X-, Y- and Z-axes intersecting with each other at right angles." in par. 0021 and “hen, external force estimating part 38 estimates the external force applied to robot 10, by calculating the force applied to sensor 30 generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 and subtracting the calculated force from the force detected by sensor 30 (or force detecting part 40). In this regard, the force generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 may be calculated based on the dimension and mass of each portion of robot 10, and the velocity and acceleration of each axis, etc.” in par. 0028).
Regarding Claim 14, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
the force detection device according to claim 10,
wherein, when the plurality of articulated axes are connected in series, the corrector corrects the estimated value in the second articulated axis using the difference amount in a first articulated axis located upstream or downstream of and closest to the second articulated axis (see at least "FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 1, robot mechanical unit 10 has a (one) sensor 30 attached to a lower part of J1 base 12, and sensor 30 has a torque detecting part 32 which detects a first torque about J1 axis 14 and a second torque about J2 axis 18 (FIG. 2). Torque detecting part 32 can detect torques of at least two axes intersecting with each other at right angles. For example, torque detecting part 32 is a torque sensor capable of detecting torques about X-, Y- and Z-axes intersecting with each other at right angles." in par. 0021 and “hen, external force estimating part 38 estimates the external force applied to robot 10, by calculating the force applied to sensor 30 generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 and subtracting the calculated force from the force detected by sensor 30 (or force detecting part 40). In this regard, the force generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 may be calculated based on the dimension and mass of each portion of robot 10, and the velocity and acceleration of each axis, etc.” in par. 0028).
Regarding Claim 15, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
the force detection device according to claim 11,
wherein, when the plurality of articulated axes are connected in series, the corrector corrects the estimated value in the second articulated axis using the difference amount in a first articulated axis located upstream or downstream of and closest to the second articulated axis (see at least "FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 1, robot mechanical unit 10 has a (one) sensor 30 attached to a lower part of J1 base 12, and sensor 30 has a torque detecting part 32 which detects a first torque about J1 axis 14 and a second torque about J2 axis 18 (FIG. 2). Torque detecting part 32 can detect torques of at least two axes intersecting with each other at right angles. For example, torque detecting part 32 is a torque sensor capable of detecting torques about X-, Y- and Z-axes intersecting with each other at right angles." in par. 0021 and “hen, external force estimating part 38 estimates the external force applied to robot 10, by calculating the force applied to sensor 30 generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 and subtracting the calculated force from the force detected by sensor 30 (or force detecting part 40). In this regard, the force generated by the mass and the motion of robot 10 may be calculated based on the dimension and mass of each portion of robot 10, and the velocity and acceleration of each axis, etc.” in par. 0028).
Regarding Claim 16, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
a robot system (see at least " FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1." in par. 0021) comprising:
a robot including a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least " FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention. Robot 10 has a base (J1 base) 12, a rotating body (J2 base) 16 arranged on base 12 and rotatable about a first axis (J1 axis) 14, and an upper arm (J2 arm) 20 arranged on rotating body 16 and rotatable about a second axis (J2 axis) 18. J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 are configured so that an inner product of a first vector of J1 axis 14 and a second vector of J2 axis 18 is always equal to zero without depending on the posture of robot 10. In other words, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may intersect with each other at right angles, or, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may be skew lines so that the first and second vectors are at 90 degrees to each other. In addition, as shown in FIG. 1, robot 10 may further have a forearm (J3 arm) 24 arranged at a front end of upper arm 20 and rotatable about a third axis (J3 axis) 22, and forearm 24 is not essential." in par. 0020) ; and
the force detection device according to claim 7 (see Claim 7 analysis).
Regarding Claim 17, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
A robot system (see at least " FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1." in par. 0021) comprising:
a robot including a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least " FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention. Robot 10 has a base (J1 base) 12, a rotating body (J2 base) 16 arranged on base 12 and rotatable about a first axis (J1 axis) 14, and an upper arm (J2 arm) 20 arranged on rotating body 16 and rotatable about a second axis (J2 axis) 18. J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 are configured so that an inner product of a first vector of J1 axis 14 and a second vector of J2 axis 18 is always equal to zero without depending on the posture of robot 10. In other words, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may intersect with each other at right angles, or, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may be skew lines so that the first and second vectors are at 90 degrees to each other. In addition, as shown in FIG. 1, robot 10 may further have a forearm (J3 arm) 24 arranged at a front end of upper arm 20 and rotatable about a third axis (J3 axis) 22, and forearm 24 is not essential." in par. 0020); and
the force detection device according to claim 8 (see Claim 8 analysis).
Regarding Claim 18, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
A robot system (see at least " FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1." in par. 0021) comprising:
a robot including a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least " FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention. Robot 10 has a base (J1 base) 12, a rotating body (J2 base) 16 arranged on base 12 and rotatable about a first axis (J1 axis) 14, and an upper arm (J2 arm) 20 arranged on rotating body 16 and rotatable about a second axis (J2 axis) 18. J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 are configured so that an inner product of a first vector of J1 axis 14 and a second vector of J2 axis 18 is always equal to zero without depending on the posture of robot 10. In other words, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may intersect with each other at right angles, or, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may be skew lines so that the first and second vectors are at 90 degrees to each other. In addition, as shown in FIG. 1, robot 10 may further have a forearm (J3 arm) 24 arranged at a front end of upper arm 20 and rotatable about a third axis (J3 axis) 22, and forearm 24 is not essential." in par. 0020) ; and
the force detection device according to claim 9 (see Claim 9 analysis).
Regarding Claim 21, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
A robot system (see at least " FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1." in par. 0021) comprising:
a robot including a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least " FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention. Robot 10 has a base (J1 base) 12, a rotating body (J2 base) 16 arranged on base 12 and rotatable about a first axis (J1 axis) 14, and an upper arm (J2 arm) 20 arranged on rotating body 16 and rotatable about a second axis (J2 axis) 18. J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 are configured so that an inner product of a first vector of J1 axis 14 and a second vector of J2 axis 18 is always equal to zero without depending on the posture of robot 10. In other words, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may intersect with each other at right angles, or, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may be skew lines so that the first and second vectors are at 90 degrees to each other. In addition, as shown in FIG. 1, robot 10 may further have a forearm (J3 arm) 24 arranged at a front end of upper arm 20 and rotatable about a third axis (J3 axis) 22, and forearm 24 is not essential." in par. 0020); and
the force detection device according to claim 12 (see Claim 12 analysis).
Regarding Claim 22, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
A robot system (see at least " FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1." in par. 0021) comprising:
a robot including a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least " FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention. Robot 10 has a base (J1 base) 12, a rotating body (J2 base) 16 arranged on base 12 and rotatable about a first axis (J1 axis) 14, and an upper arm (J2 arm) 20 arranged on rotating body 16 and rotatable about a second axis (J2 axis) 18. J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 are configured so that an inner product of a first vector of J1 axis 14 and a second vector of J2 axis 18 is always equal to zero without depending on the posture of robot 10. In other words, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may intersect with each other at right angles, or, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may be skew lines so that the first and second vectors are at 90 degrees to each other. In addition, as shown in FIG. 1, robot 10 may further have a forearm (J3 arm) 24 arranged at a front end of upper arm 20 and rotatable about a third axis (J3 axis) 22, and forearm 24 is not essential." in par. 0020); and
the force detection device according to claim 13 (see Claim 13 analysis).
Regarding Claim 23, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
A robot system (see at least " FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1." in par. 0021) comprising:
a robot including a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least " FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention. Robot 10 has a base (J1 base) 12, a rotating body (J2 base) 16 arranged on base 12 and rotatable about a first axis (J1 axis) 14, and an upper arm (J2 arm) 20 arranged on rotating body 16 and rotatable about a second axis (J2 axis) 18. J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 are configured so that an inner product of a first vector of J1 axis 14 and a second vector of J2 axis 18 is always equal to zero without depending on the posture of robot 10. In other words, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may intersect with each other at right angles, or, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may be skew lines so that the first and second vectors are at 90 degrees to each other. In addition, as shown in FIG. 1, robot 10 may further have a forearm (J3 arm) 24 arranged at a front end of upper arm 20 and rotatable about a third axis (J3 axis) 22, and forearm 24 is not essential." in par. 0020); and
the force detection device according to claim 14 (see Claim 14 analysis).
Regarding Claim 24, Naitou as modified by Nakayama (references to Naitou) teaches:
A robot system (see at least " FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1." in par. 0021) comprising:
a robot including a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least " FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention. Robot 10 has a base (J1 base) 12, a rotating body (J2 base) 16 arranged on base 12 and rotatable about a first axis (J1 axis) 14, and an upper arm (J2 arm) 20 arranged on rotating body 16 and rotatable about a second axis (J2 axis) 18. J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 are configured so that an inner product of a first vector of J1 axis 14 and a second vector of J2 axis 18 is always equal to zero without depending on the posture of robot 10. In other words, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may intersect with each other at right angles, or, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may be skew lines so that the first and second vectors are at 90 degrees to each other. In addition, as shown in FIG. 1, robot 10 may further have a forearm (J3 arm) 24 arranged at a front end of upper arm 20 and rotatable about a third axis (J3 axis) 22, and forearm 24 is not essential." in par. 0020); and
the force detection device according to claim 15 (see Claim 15 analysis).
Claim(s) 10-11, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naitou et al (US 20150367510, hereinafter Naitou) in view of Nakayama et al ( US 20200070357, hereinafter Nakayama) and Wang et al (US 20210060793, hereinafter Wang).
Regarding Claim 10, Naitou teaches:
The force detection device according to claim 8,
Naitou and Nakayama do not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Wang does teach
wherein the difference amount is calculated by a statistical process regarding a set of difference amounts corresponding to two or more first articulated axes (see at least "Referring to FIG. 1, in some embodiments, each of the joints 121-127 of the robot 100 may be equipped with a multi-DOF force and/or torque sensor, which in some aspect may be a six DOF force and torque sensor. In such embodiments, additional redundant sensors in the arm can be fused together to improve the sensing accuracy. For example, averaging the sensors' output on the same force direction from multiple joints of a stationary robotic arm can reduce the overall sensing error in that direction. If a sensor has noise or error standard deviation of σ in one sensing direction, then with a seven DOF arm and a six DOF sensor in each joint, the error standard deviation may become σ/√{square root over (7)}. The force and torque sensors in the joints can be used to accurately estimate external contact force position, orientation and magnitude on each of the robot links 131-137, which is useful information for more advanced human-robot interactions and interfaces." in par. 0053) .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Naitou as modified by Nakayama to incorporate the teachings of Wang wherein the force measured at each joint is averaged to reduce sensor noise, in order to arrive at taking the average of the difference between measured and estimated sensor data. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Wang would be to improve sensing accuracy by fusing together data from multiple sensors (see par. 0053)
Regarding Claim 11, Naitou teaches:
the force detection device according to claim 9,
Naitou and Nakayama do not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Wang does teach:
wherein the difference amount is calculated by a statistical process regarding a set of difference amounts corresponding to two or more first articulated axes (see at least "Referring to FIG. 1, in some embodiments, each of the joints 121-127 of the robot 100 may be equipped with a multi-DOF force and/or torque sensor, which in some aspect may be a six DOF force and torque sensor. In such embodiments, additional redundant sensors in the arm can be fused together to improve the sensing accuracy. For example, averaging the sensors' output on the same force direction from multiple joints of a stationary robotic arm can reduce the overall sensing error in that direction. If a sensor has noise or error standard deviation of σ in one sensing direction, then with a seven DOF arm and a six DOF sensor in each joint, the error standard deviation may become σ/√{square root over (7)}. The force and torque sensors in the joints can be used to accurately estimate external contact force position, orientation and magnitude on each of the robot links 131-137, which is useful information for more advanced human-robot interactions and interfaces." in par. 0053) .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Naitou as modified by Nakayama to incorporate the teachings of Wang wherein the force measured at each joint is averaged to reduce sensor noise, in order to arrive at taking the average of the difference between measured and estimated sensor data. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Wang would be to improve sensing accuracy by fusing together data from multiple sensors (see par. 0053)
Regarding Claim 19, Naitou as modified by Nakayama and Wang also teaches (references to Naitou):
A robot system (see at least " FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1." in par. 0021) comprising:
a robot including a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least " FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention. Robot 10 has a base (J1 base) 12, a rotating body (J2 base) 16 arranged on base 12 and rotatable about a first axis (J1 axis) 14, and an upper arm (J2 arm) 20 arranged on rotating body 16 and rotatable about a second axis (J2 axis) 18. J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 are configured so that an inner product of a first vector of J1 axis 14 and a second vector of J2 axis 18 is always equal to zero without depending on the posture of robot 10. In other words, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may intersect with each other at right angles, or, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may be skew lines so that the first and second vectors are at 90 degrees to each other. In addition, as shown in FIG. 1, robot 10 may further have a forearm (J3 arm) 24 arranged at a front end of upper arm 20 and rotatable about a third axis (J3 axis) 22, and forearm 24 is not essential." in par. 0020); and
the force detection device according to claim 10 (see Claim 10 analysis).
Regarding Claim 20, Naitou as modified by Nakayama and Wang also teaches (references to Naitou):
A robot system (see at least " FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram showing a configuration example of a controller 26 for controlling robot mechanical unit 10 of FIG. 1." in par. 0021) comprising:
a robot including a plurality of articulated axes and a plurality of actuators connected to the respective articulated axes (see at least " FIG. 1 shows an example of a schematic configuration of a multi-joint robot (mechanical unit) 10 according to the present invention. Robot 10 has a base (J1 base) 12, a rotating body (J2 base) 16 arranged on base 12 and rotatable about a first axis (J1 axis) 14, and an upper arm (J2 arm) 20 arranged on rotating body 16 and rotatable about a second axis (J2 axis) 18. J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 are configured so that an inner product of a first vector of J1 axis 14 and a second vector of J2 axis 18 is always equal to zero without depending on the posture of robot 10. In other words, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may intersect with each other at right angles, or, J1 axis 14 and J2 axis 18 may be skew lines so that the first and second vectors are at 90 degrees to each other. In addition, as shown in FIG. 1, robot 10 may further have a forearm (J3 arm) 24 arranged at a front end of upper arm 20 and rotatable about a third axis (J3 axis) 22, and forearm 24 is not essential." in par. 0020); and
the force detection device according to claim 11 (see Claim 11 analysis).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DYLAN M KATZ whose telephone number is (571)272-2776. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs. 8:00-6:00.
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, Abby Lin can be reached on (571) 270-3976. 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.
/DYLAN M KATZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3657