DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
In claim 1, “the rotor” (line 11) lacks antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 4, 8, 13 & 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chu et al. (US 7,977,840).
Regarding claim 1, Chu teaches a casing (core) 10 having a substantially cylindrical inner surface and/or substantially cylindrical outer surface (Fig.2);
a ring-cylindrical ironless stator (i.e., stator winding 20) arranged adjacent to the substantially cylindrical inner surface of the casing,
the ring-cylindrical ironless stator including a “continuous hairpin winding” (i.e., winding 20 comprising coils 24 divided into a number of phase windings 27 with no electrical joints except at end/tappings 25) 1 having at least two layers (i.e., stator magnet wire 22 wound about a bracket to form a phase coil 24 deformed into flat double layer web 26; abstract; c.3:66-67; c.7:13-16; Figs.6-7);
(a) the continuous hairpin winding 20 comprising wires (magnet wires) 22 which are hairpin-shaped and provide straight wire segments which run in parallel to a cylinder axis of the continuous hairpin winding (i.e., parallel portions of phase windings 27 wound around bracket), the cylinder axis being coaxial with a rotational axis of the rotor (c.3:66-67; c.7:13-16; Figs.6-7), and
(b) next to a first straight segment on one or both ends of the first straight segment, the wire being folded and bent such that a subsequent second straight segment runs anti-parallel at a distance to the first straight segment (inherent to phase windings 27 wound about a bracket to form hollow coil 24 which is then deformed into flat double layer web 26; c.3:66-67; c.7:13-16; Figs.6-7);
the casing 10 functioning as a support structure for the ring-cylindrical ironless stator 20 (i.e., stator winding fixed inside stator core; c.4:20-21; Fig.2), the substantially cylindrical inner surface and/or the substantially cylindrical outer surface of the casing 10 extending along more than one third of the axial extension of the ring-cylindrical ironless stator 20 (Fig.2); and
the continuous hairpin winding configured such that a given wire changes position from a first layer to a second layer or vice versa when seen around the continuous stator winding such that a first straight segment is arranged in the first layer and then is folded and bent (at end turns) such that the second or subsequent or next straight segment is arranged in the second layer (inherent to phase windings 27 wound about a bracket to form a hollow coil 24 which is then deformed into flat double layer web 26; c.3:66-67; c.7:13-16; Figs.6-7); and
a rotor 14 arranged coaxially with the ironless stator (Fig.1).
PNG
media_image1.png
513
804
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, the continuous hairpin winding comprises a plurality of interlaced phase windings 27, each phase winding consisting of (a) one or more adjacent wires (core wires) 23 or (b) a single uninterrupted wire having multiple turns around the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator (i.e., a coil phase winding 27 wound about a bracket to form a hollow coil 24 which is then deformed into flat double layer web 26; c.3:66-67; c.7:13-16; Figs.6-7).
Regarding claim 8, an outer radius of a folding region (end turns), in particular a folded segment, of the wire does neither extend beyond an outer surface of the first layer nor beyond an outer surface of the second layer (Figs.2-4).
Regarding claim 13, the rotating electromechanical apparatus is a slotless electric motor, in particular a radial flux slotless motor (abstract; Figs.1-3).
Regarding claim 39, each phase winding 27 compris[es] two to five adjacent wires or one wire (Figs.6-7).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 3, 9 & 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu as applied to claim 1, further in view of Mawatari et al. (WO 2020/175334).
Chu substantially teaches the invention except for: the continuous hairpin winding consists of one or more substantially rectangular or flattened wires which are insulated, the wires having a ratio of width to height in a range of 1:1 - 5:1 (claim 3); the rotor 14 is ring-cylindrical such that the rotating electro-mechanical apparatus has an empty inner cylindrical region (claim 9); the continuous hairpin winding 20 is encapsulated and/or fixed to the casing by a curable potting material (claim 11); and the casing 10 comprises a strip of laminated magnetically permeable material wound helically to form a ring-cylindrical casing (claim 12).
But, regarding claim 3, with reference to the corresponding English language publication (US Pat.Pub. 2021/0384789), Mawatari teaches a rotating electromechanical apparatus 10 comprising a ring-cylindrical ironless (i.e., slot-less) stator with a continuous hairpin winding consisting of one or more substantially rectangular or flattened wires (conductors) 82 which are insulated (with insulating coating 82b), the wires having a ratio of width to height in a range of 1:1 - 5:1 (i.e., thickness Tc & width Wc corresponds to relation of Tc x 2 < Wc x 2) to decrease thickness of the core and enhance torque (¶[0218]-¶[0222]; Fig.10). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure Chu’s continuous hairpin winding with one or more substantially rectangular or flattened wires which are insulated, the wires having a ratio of width to height in a range of 1:1 - 5:1 since Mawatari teaches this would have decreased thickness of the core and enhanced torque.
Regarding claim 9, Mawatari teaches a rotating electromechanical apparatus 10 comprising a ring-cylindrical ironless (i.e., slot-less) stator with a continuous hairpin winding configured either with an inner rotor (¶[0380]-¶[0381]; Figs.35-40) or with an outer rotor 40 with the stator arranged radially inside the rotor in an empty inner cylindrical region (¶[0145]; Figs.1-5). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure Chu’s inner rotor motor as an outer-rotor motor with an empty inner cylindrical region since Mawatari teaches inner- and outer-rotor slotless motors are known equivalents.
Regarding claim 11, Mawatari teaches the continuous hairpin winding 521 is encapsulated and/or fixed to the casing (stator core) 522 as a single unit by a curable potting material (resin molding material) to thereby insulate the stator winding and form it as a single unit with the core (¶[0467]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to encapsulate and/or fix Chu’s continuous hairpin winding to the casing by a curable potting material since Mawatari teaches this would have insulated the winding and enabled formation with the core as a single unit.
Regarding claim 12, Mawatari teaches the casing (stator core) comprises either a stack of magnetic steel plates of soft magnetic material (¶[0162]) or a sheet wound helically and stacked in the axial direction to have a hollow shape (¶[0663]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to form Chu’s ring-cylindrical casing from a helically wound strip of laminated magnetically permeable material since Mawatari teaches this was a known equivalent means of providing a hollow cylindrical stator core.
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu as applied to claim 4.
Regarding claim 40, Chu teaches each phase winding 27 consist[s] of a single uninterrupted wire (i.e., with tapped out connections 25 at either end). While it is apparent from Figs.6-7 that each phase winding has multiple turns around the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator, Chu does not specifically teach “three turns or five turns”. But, choosing three or five turns for Chu’s phase windings would have been obvious before the effective filing date as a matter of design choice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed, discovery of optimum or workable ranges involves routine skill. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 1, 3-4, 8-9, 11-13, 38-40 & 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mawatari et al. (WO 2020/175334) in view of Wedman et al. (US 9,425,664).
Regarding claim 1, with reference to the corresponding English language publication (US Pat.Pub.2021/0384789), Mawatari teaches a rotating electromechanical apparatus 10 comprising:
a casing (housing/core) 30/52 having a substantially cylindrical inner surface and/or substantially cylindrical outer surface (Fig.38);
a ring-cylindrical ironless (i.e., slot-less) stator (i.e., stator winding 51) arranged adjacent to the cylindrical outer surface of the casing (¶[0198]; ¶[0463]; Fig.38),
the ring-cylindrical ironless stator including a “continuous hairpin” [sic] winding (stator winding) 51/521 (Figs.38&53; i.e., fourth configuration where winding is completed without welding the coil ends of all the conductors; ¶[0482] 2 having at least two layers (i.e., stator winding includes three-phase windings U/V/W, each made of two layers of conductor 523: an outer layer and an inner layer located radially inside the outer layer; ¶[0463]-¶[0464]; ¶[0467]-¶[0469]);
the continuous hairpin winding comprising wires which are “hairpin-shaped” [sic] (Figs.12&53-54b)…where next to a first straight segment, on one or both ends of the first straight segment (i.e., at coil ends 526), the wire is folded and bent such that a subsequent second straight segment runs anti-parallel (i.e., reverse direction) at a distance to the first straight segment (i.e., a direction in which current flows in the stator winding 521 is reversed between the outer and inner layers of the conductors 523; ¶[0471]):
the casing 30/52 functioning as a support structure for the ring-cylindrical ironless stator (stator winding 521 mounted on a radially outer circumference of the stator core 522; ¶[0464]; Fig.53);
the substantially cylindrical inner surface and/or the substantially cylindrical outer surface of the casing 30/52 extending along more than one third of the axial extension of the ring-cylindrical ironless stator (Fig.38);
and the continuous hairpin winding configured such that a given wire changes position from a first (inner) layer to a second (outer) layer or vice versa when seen around the continuous stator winding such that a first straight segment 523 is arranged in the first (inner) layer and then is folded and bent (at coil ends 526) such that the second or subsequent or next straight segment 523 is arranged in the second (outer) layer (conductors 523 of the inner layer and the conductors 523 of the outer layer are electrically connected together by the coil ends 526. In other words, each of the conductors 523 of the outer layer is turned in the axial direction and leads to a respective one of the conductors 523 of the inner layer through the coil end 526 ¶[0471]; Figs.54a&54b); and
a rotor 40 arranged coaxially with the ironless stator (Fig.38).
PNG
media_image2.png
754
339
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
641
435
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
375
436
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Mawatari’s Fig.54a-55 embodiment does not teach that the continuous hairpin winding’s straight wire segments “run in parallel to a cylinder axis of the continuous hairpin winding, the cylinder axis being coaxial with a rotational axis of the rotor.” Instead, Mawatari’s hairpin winding comprises conductors 523 that are skewed (¶[0472]).
But, Wedman teaches a rotating electromechanical apparatus including a cylindrical ironless stator coil comprising a continuous hairpin winding formed by straight wire segments (conductors) 110 in two layers (Fig.4) which run in parallel to a cylinder axis, the cylinder axis being coaxial with a rotational axis of the rotor, and next to a first straight segment, on one or both ends of the first straight segment, the wire being folded and bent such that a subsequent second straight segment runs anti-parallel at a distance to the first straight segment (Figs.6&9). Since the sections of conductor are parallel to the axis of rotation, they generate no magneto-electromotive forces parallel to the axis of rotation of relative motion of the rotor and stator (c.4:20-23).
PNG
media_image5.png
244
309
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to modify the straight wire segments of Mawatari’s continuous hairpin winding to “run in parallel to a cylinder axis of the continuous hairpin winding, the cylinder axis being coaxial with a rotational axis of the rotor” since Wedman teaches this would have prevented generation of magneto-electromotive forces parallel to the axis of rotation of relative motion of the rotor and stator.
Regarding claim 3, in Mawatari the continuous hairpin winding 521 consists of one or more substantially rectangular or flattened wires (conductors) 523 which are insulated (by resin molding; ¶[0467]), “preferably the wires having a ratio of width to height in a range of 1:1-5:1 (note cross section shown in Fig.10).
Regarding claim 4, in Mawatari the continuous hairpin winding comprises a plurality of interlaced phase windings (e.g., three-phase wave windings U/V/W), each phase winding consisting of (a) one or more adjacent wires (Figs.10,13&54-54(a)) or (b) a single uninterrupted wire having multiple turns around the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator (i.e., distributed windings; ¶[0463]-¶[0464]; ¶[0467]-¶[0469]; Figs.53&54a-54b).
Regarding claim 8, in Mawatari an outer radius of a folding region (coil end) 526, in particular a folded segment, of the wire does neither extend beyond an outer surface of the first layer nor beyond an outer surface of the second layer (Fig.53).
Regarding claim 9, in Mawatari the rotor 40 is ring-cylindrical such that the rotating electro-mechanical apparatus has an empty inner cylindrical region (Fig.38).
Regarding claim 11, in Mawatari the continuous hairpin winding 521 is encapsulated and/or fixed to the casing by a curable potting material (resin molding material; ¶[0467]).
Regarding claim 12, in Mawatari the casing comprises a strip of laminated magnetically permeable material, preferably an iron-alloy, wound helically to form a ring-cylindrical casing (i.e., annular stack of magnetic steel plates of soft magnetic material, which may be wound helically; ¶[0162]; ¶[0663]).
Regarding claim 13, in Mawatari the rotating electromechanical apparatus is an electric motor, in particular a radial flux motor (Fig.38); and/or an electric generator, in particular a radial flux generator (¶[0172]; (¶[0277]).
Regarding claim 38, in Mawatari the flattened rectangular wires (conductors) have a 2:1 width to height ratio, where “width” is in the circumferential direction and “height” is in the radial direction (¶[0216]; ¶[0227]; Fig.10).
Regarding claim 39, in Mawatari each U/V/W phase winding comprising two to five adjacent wires (conductors) or one wires (Figs.13-14, ¶[0223]) or comprising one wire (¶[0478]).
Regarding claim 40, in Mawatari each U/V/W phase winding consisting of a single uninterrupted wire (conductors) 523 having three turns or five turns around the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator (i.e., distributed windings; ¶[0469]).
Regarding claim 42, in Mawatari the stator windings 521 are not embedded in slots of a stator core (i.e., the stator is slot-less; ¶[0198]; ¶[0463]).
Claims 6 & 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu & Mawatari or Mawatari & Wedman as applied to claim 3, further in view of Ueda (US 7,337,525).
Regarding claim 6, neither Chu nor Mawatari or Mawatari & Wedman specifically teach the continuous hairpin winding “has two sets of phase windings, a first set of phase windings running along the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator in a first direction and a second set of phase windings running along the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator in a second direction counter to the first direction, both sets having input leads on a same end of the stator, when seen in an axial direction of the stator, and within an azimuthal angle range of less than 60 degrees.”
But, Ueda teaches a stator for an electric rotating machine and method for fabricating including a multi-phase, wave winding rolled in a cylinder comprising conductors 19 wound parallel to each other on a spool 21 (c.4:1-59; Figs.2,4&6), with a first set of phase windings (i.e., one of twelve continuous wire conductors 19; Figs.2, 4 & 6-7) running along the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator in a first direction and a second set of phase windings (another of twelve conductors 19) running along the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator in a second direction counter to the first direction, both sets having input leads (not numbered, formed by leading ends of ) on a same end of the stator, when seen in an axial direction of the stator, and within an azimuthal angle range of less than 60 degrees (note distance between conductors 19 forming input leads relative to circumference; c.4:1-59; Fig.2). Ueda thus provides efficient assembly of the stator (c.2:25-30; c.5:37-43).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to modify Chu & Mawatari or Mawatari & Wedman and configure the winding as having two sets of phase windings, a first set of phase windings running along the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator in a first direction and a second set of phase windings running along the ring-cylindrical shape of the stator in a second direction counter to the first direction, both sets having input leads on a same end of the stator, when seen in an axial direction of the stator, and within an azimuthal angle range of less than 60 degrees, since Ueda teaches this would have provided efficiently assembly.
Regarding claim 41, note distance between conductors 19 in Ueda forming input leads relative to circumference (Fig.2).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu, Mawatari and Ueda or Mawatari, Wedman & Ueda as applied to claim 6, further in view of Takeuchi (US Pat.Pub.2006/0279166).
The combinations, in particular Chu, Mawatari and Ueda, disclose various radial flux machines including an inner stator/outer rotor configuration (Mawatari, Fig.1) or an outer stator/inner rotor configuration (Chu Fig.3; Mawatari Fig.37), but not specifically one with “an additional stator inside the rotor, the additional stator having an additional continuous hairpin winding….”
But, Takeuchi teaches an ironless (i.e., no core made from magnetic material is provided; abstract) radial flux, insert rotor motor with a “double wall structure” including an additional stator (coil group) 20B/24B inside the rotor 30M, the additional stator having an additional winding (Figs.1A-1B & 13A-13B). This configuration provides an electric machine with a large torque because magnetic fluxes on both sides of the magnet group are effectively utilized (¶[0013]-¶[0014]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure the radial flux machine of Chu, Mawatari and Ueda or Mawatari, Wedman & Ueda with an additional stator inside the rotor, the additional stator having an additional continuous hairpin winding since Takeuchi teaches this would have provided the machine with a large torque.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because of the new grounds of rejection.
It is noted the alleged distinguishing feature of a continuous hairpin winding comprising straight wire segments which run in parallel to a cylinder axis of the continuous hairpin winding, the cylinder axis being coaxial with a rotational axis of the rotor is well known. In addition to the Wedman reference, note Hawes (US Pat.Pub.2009/0230809) who teaches parallel coils produce more back EMF to improve speed and decrease losses (¶[0016]), Seo (US 7,990,013) who teaches one skilled in the art readily understands that unit coil bodies 200 may be formed by winding the insulated conductors in various geometric forms, e.g., a circular shape or a rectangular shape, in addition to the trapezoidal shape and the hexagonal shape of FIGS. 2A & B (c.3:55-59) and Toyoshima (JP 2002-291187) who teaches a continuous hairpin winding comprising winding systems (Figs.29a-29c) including a hex-winding (Fig.29a) wherein a straight conductor (parallel part) in the cylinder axis direction contributing to torque generation is located at the center of the cylindrical winding. The hex-winding is considered to be the most efficient of three winding systems (English Machine Translation, p.2).
Regarding Takeuchi, to the extent it applies to the current rejection of claim 10, it is noted that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Takeuchi's configuration would have provided an electric machine with a large torque because magnetic fluxes on both sides of the magnet group are effectively utilized (¶[0013]-¶[0014]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BURTON S MULLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2029. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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, Tulsidas C Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/BURTON S MULLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
1 Corresponding to the description given by specification p.8:3-7.
2 Corresponding to the description given by specification p.8.3-7.
Prosecution Insights