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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 31 line 2, “in in an operating mode” should be corrected to “in an operating mode”.
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.
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:
Finishing tool in claim 17.
Measuring tool in claims 17 and 29.
Workpiece holding device in claims 19, 29.
Operator control device in claims 28, 31.
Control device in claim 29.
Evaluation device in claim 29.
Transport device in claim 32.
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.
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
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.
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) 17-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rauscher (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2011/0223833) in view of “Research of the On-Line Evaluating the Cylindricity Error Technology Based on the New Generation of GPS” by Zheng et al., hereinafter “Zheng”.
As per claim 17, Rauscher (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2011/0223833) discloses a finishing method for material-removing finishing of a bore (161; figure 1) in a workpiece (160) on a finishing machine (100), wherein a finishing tool removes material from the inner surface of the bore in a finishing operation (via sensors 153) and a shape measurement of the inner surface of the bore is performed on the finishing machine before, during and/or after the finishing operation (measurement for determining the macro-shape; paragraph [0003]), the method comprising introducing a measuring tool into the bore (as shown; figure 1) and generating a relative movement between the measuring tool and the workpiece (the workpiece and radar sensor are moved relative to one another; paragraph [0030]), detecting geometry-relevant measurement values by the measuring tool (measuring the workpiece surface; paragraph [0015]), and evaluating the measurement values in an evaluation operation to ascertain at least one shape measurement value describes the macro shape of the bore inner surface (paragraphs [0029], [0030]), wherein the evaluation operation comprises: ascertaining the shape measurement value using at least one geometric property of the fitting element (surface actual value that represent the macro shape of the workpiece surface is determined; paragraph [0039]); and further processing the shape measurement value to operate the finishing machine (controlling the fine machining tool; paragraph [0039]).
Rauscher does not explicitly teach filtering the measurement values generated by the measuring tool using a filter criterion and at least one filter parameter to ascertain filtered measurement values; performing a curve fitting on the filtered measurement values to ascertain at least one fitting element adapted to the filtered measurement values in a reference element selected from the group consisting of reference circle, reference line, reference cylinder, reference cone, reference sphere and a combination of rotationally symmetrical portions of at least two of the reference elements.
Zheng is a related prior art in that it deals with a method of evaluating cylindricity error. Zheng teaches filtering the measurement values generated by the measuring tool using a filter criterion and at least one filter parameter to ascertain filtered measurement values (filter to preprocess the sampling data to eliminate the noise; page 405); performing a curve fitting on the filtered measurement values to ascertain at least one fitting element adapted to the filtered measurement values (after filtering operation, then the data fitting and the evaluation of the cylindricity error are carried out; page 404, second paragraph) in a reference element selected from the group consisting of reference circle, reference line, reference cylinder, reference cone, reference sphere and a combination of rotationally symmetrical portions of at least two of the reference elements (the fitting process of the cylindricity error is to compare the actual profile of the measured workpiece with the ideal cylinder using four fitting methods; page 406, first and second paragraphs).
Rauscher teaches eliminating the measurement errors would increase the quality and reliability of the measurement results (paragraph [0032]) and Zheng teaches that filtering and fittings are the keys of the error evaluation (page 403, 4th paragraph) and cylindricity error due to grinding process and vibration can be reduced by filtering the data (page 405, bottom paragraph) and the curve fitting process allows to compare the actual profile of the measured workpiece with the ideal cylinder (page 406, first paragraph). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Rauscher’s evaluation operation to incorporate Zheng’s filtering the curve fitting as it allows to assess the geometry characteristics accurately (page 405, bottom paragraph) and allows to compare the actual profile of the measured workpiece with the ideal cylinder (page 406, first paragraph).
As per claim 18, Rauscher discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. While Rauscher does not explicitly teach the features of claim 18, Zheng teaches wherein a cutoff wavelength or the curvature of an interpolation curve is used as filter criterion (Gaussian filter using the appropriate cut-off frequency; page 405, bottom paragraph). Therefore, by the combination of claim 17 above, the modified method would have all claimed features of claim 18.
As per claim 19, Rauscher discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. Rauscher also discloses wherein at least one of the workpiece is clamped in a workpiece holding device of the finishing machine for the measurement, and the workpiece is still during the measurement and the measuring tool is moved (workpiece 160 is clamped into a clamping device 126; paragraph [0052]).
As per claim 20, Rauscher discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. Rauscher also discloses wherein a transport between a machining station and a measuring station of the finishing machine separate therefrom takes place between the finishing and the measuring (the measuring system is separate from a machining center; paragraph [0077]), and the workpiece remains clamped in the workpiece holding device (workpiece 160 is clamped into clamping device 126; paragraph [0052]).
As per claim 21, Rauscher discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. Rauscher also discloses wherein the further processing comprises at least one of: displaying an ascertained shape measurement value visibly to an operator; digitally storing the ascertained shape measurement value together with other workpiece-specific data in a memory unit; modifying parameters of the control of the finishing operation on the basis of the shape measurement value (measurement results are used for process feedback control; paragraph [0039]); and classifying the measured workpiece, wherein, in classification as a bad part, the workpiece is automatically ejected from a production process (distinguishing acceptable parts and non-acceptable parts; paragraph [0007]).
As per claim 22, Rauscher discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. Rauscher also discloses wherein a roundness measurement (measuring roundness; paragraph [0027]) to ascertain measurement values along a circumferential direction in at least one measurement plane and ascertaining a roundness value from the measurement values, and/or the roundness measurement comprises a rotation of the measuring tool about a measuring tool rotation axis during the measuring operation (scanning while the spindle is revolving; paragraph [0062]).
As per claim 23, Rauscher, in view of Zheng, discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 22. While Rauscher does not explicitly teach the features of claim 23, Zheng teaches wherein the ascertaining of the roundness value a fitting circle is calculated by the filtered measurement values (FMW) and a smallest radius and a largest radius relative to the center (ZAK) of the fitting circle are determined, and/or the roundness value (RUND) is a difference between the largest and the smallest radius (the mathematical model of MIC uses radius of the measure workpiece (filtered measurement value), minimum cylinder radius and the maximum cylinder radius; page 406, bottom paragraph). Therefore, by the combination of claim 17 above, the modified method would have all claimed features of claim 23.
As per claim 24, Rauscher in view of Zheng, discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. Rauscher further discloses wherein a straightness measurement comprises an axial movement of the measuring tool parallel to a measuring axis during the measuring operation to ascertain measurement values along an axis-parallel generatrix and an ascertaining of a straightness value from the measurement values (surface measurement value contain information about the cylindricity, i.e., inherently a roundness and straightness of a cylinder; profiling in an axial direction; paragraph [0027]).
As per claim 25, Rauscher in view of Zheng, discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. Rauscher further discloses wherein at least one of: cylindricity measurement ascertains a cylindricity value; parallelism measurement ascertains a parallelism value from straightness measurements at two diametrically opposed generatrices of the bore; and cone measurement ascertains a cone value or a cone angle of the bore or in a conical portion of the bore (surface measurement containing information about cylindricity and conicity; paragraph [0027]).
As per claim 26, Rauscher in view of Zheng, discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. Rauscher further discloses wherein a diameter measuring tool with at least one pair of diametrically opposed measuring probes is used as the measuring tool, or as a pneumatic measuring tool (two diametrically opposite radar sensors 152, 153; paragraph [0066]).
As per claim 27, Rauscher in view of Zheng, discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. Rauscher further discloses wherein the ascertaining of a temporal development of at least one shape measurement value by offsetting at least two similar measuring operations is performed at different times (acquiring the temporal development of the shape of the machined bore; paragraph [0063]).
As per claim 28, Rauscher, in view of Zheng, discloses the finishing method as claimed in claim 17. While Rauscher does not explicitly teach the features of claim 23, Zheng teaches wherein, in an operating mode associated with the shape measurement, an operator query for entering at least one item of information suitable to set up the shape measurement is generated at an operator control device of the finishing machine (see figure 6; page 408), and wherein one or more queries are generated: a desired measuring mode is selected from the following group: cylindricity measurement (test item: cylindricity; see figure 6), roundness measurement, parallelism measurement, straightness measurement, conicity measurement, bellmouth or constriction measurement; and a filter criterion including Gaussian filter or spline filter, and a matching filter parameter (filter type: gaussian filter; figure 6). Therefore, by the combination of claim 17 above, the modified method would have all claimed features of claim 28.
As per claim 29, Rauscher discloses a finishing machine that finishes a bore in a workpiece comprising: at least one work station (100; figure 1) having a tool carrier (110) that carries a tool (140) and a workpiece holding device (126) that holds the workpiece in a working position of the work station (as shown; figure 1); a control device that controls working movements of the tool carrier and/or the workpiece holding device (control unit 125 controlling spindle drive 122; paragraph [0051]); a measuring system (150) that performs a shape measurement of the bore inner surface (surface measurement of bore inner surface; paragraph [0053]), wherein the measuring system has a measuring tool that can be inserted into the bore (as shown; figure 1) for detecting geometry-relevant measurement values (paragraph [0053]), and the measuring tool is coupled or can be coupled to the tool carrier and can be moved relative to the workpiece by generating a relative movement between the measuring tool and the workpiece carrier (as shown; figure 1); and an evaluation device that evaluates the measurement values detected by the measuring tool in an evaluation operation (control unit 125 comprises an evaluation device; paragraph [0055]) to ascertain at least one shape measurement value describing the macro shape of the bore inner surface (surface actual value that represent the macro shape of the workpiece surface is determined; paragraph [0039]); wherein the evaluation device is configured in at least one evaluation mode to perform steps in an evaluation operation: ascertaining the shape measurement value using at least one geometric property of the fitting element (surface actual value that represent the macro shape of the workpiece surface is determined; paragraph [0039]); and processing the shape measurement value to operate the finishing machine (controlling the fine machining tool; paragraph [0039]).
Rauscher does not explicitly teach filtering the measurement values generated by the measuring tool using a filter criterion and at least one filter parameter to ascertain filtered measurement values; performing a curve fitting on the filtered measurement values to ascertain at least one fitting element adapted to the filtered measurement values in a reference element selected from the group consisting of reference circle, reference line, reference cylinder, reference cone, reference sphere and a combination of rotationally symmetrical portions of at least two of the reference elements.
Zheng is a related prior art in that it deals with a method of evaluating cylindricity error. Zheng teaches filtering the measurement values generated by the measuring tool using a filter criterion and at least one filter parameter to ascertain filtered measurement values (filter to preprocess the sampling data to eliminate the noise; page 405); performing a curve fitting on the filtered measurement values to ascertain at least one fitting element adapted to the filtered measurement values (after filtering operation, then the data fitting and the evaluation of the cylindricity error are carried out; page 404, second paragraph) in a reference element selected from the group consisting of reference circle, reference line, reference cylinder, reference cone, reference sphere and a combination of rotationally symmetrical portions of at least two of the reference elements (the fitting process of the cylindricity error is to compare the actual profile of the measured workpiece with the ideal cylinder using four fitting methods; page 406, first and second paragraphs).
Rauscher teaches eliminating the measurement errors would increase the quality and reliability of the measurement results (paragraph [0032]) and Zheng teaches that filtering and fittings are the keys of the error evaluation (page 403, 4th paragraph) and cylindricity error due to grinding process and vibration can be reduced by filtering the data (page 405, bottom paragraph) and the curve fitting process allows to compare the actual profile of the measured workpiece with the ideal cylinder (page 406, first paragraph). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Rauscher’s evaluation operation to incorporate Zheng’s filtering the curve fitting as it allows to assess the geometry characteristics accurately (page 405, bottom paragraph) and allows to compare the actual profile of the measured workpiece with the ideal cylinder (page 406, first paragraph).
As per claim 30, Rauscher, in view of Zheng, discloses the finishing machine as claimed in claim 29. Rauscher further discloses wherein the work station has as tool carrier a movably mounted work spindle that can be rotated about a spindle axis by a rotary drive and moved parallel to the spindle axis by a linear drive (by means of spindle drive, it can be rotated with an axially oscillating motion; paragraph [0051]).
As per claim 31, Rauscher, in view of Zheng, discloses the finishing machine as claimed in claim 29. While Rauscher does not explicitly teach the features of claim 31, Zheng teaches wherein an operator control device that operates the finishing machine, in in an operating mode belonging to the shape measurement an operator query that enters at least one item of information suitable for setting up the shape measurement can be generated, and one or more queries can be generated (see parameter settings of cylindricity evaluation; figure 6); a desired measurement mode selected from the group consisting of: roundness measurement, straightness measurement, cylindricity measurement, parallelism measurement, conicity measurement, eccentricity measurement, and bellmouth/constriction measurement or linear combinations thereof (cylindricity measurement; figure 6); at least one filter criterion including a Gaussian filter or spline filter, and a matching filter parameter, and/or at least one cutoff wavelength (filter type can be chosen to be Gaussian filter; figure 6). Therefore, by the combination of claim 29 above, the modified method would have all claimed features of claim 31.
Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raucher in view of Zheng and Rompp (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2017/0182630).
As per claim 32, Rauscher in view of Zheng, discloses the finishing machine as claimed in claim 29. Rauscher further discloses wherein the finishing machine has at least one of a machining station or a honing station, and a measuring station separate therefrom (measuring station that is separate from a machining center; paragraph [0077]). Rauscher does not explicitly teach wherein a transport device is provided for the automated transport of the workpiece between the machining station and the measuring station.
Rompp (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2017/0182630) is a related prior art in that it deals with a system for precision finishing and measuring of a bore. Rompp teaches a transport device provided for the automated transport of the workpiece between the machining station and the measuring station (transport between individual stations is fully automated via appropriate handling systems or robot arms; paragraph [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Rauscher’s device to incorporate Rompp’s automated transport system for transporting between Rauscher’s measuring and machining station as it allows for fully automated transportation (Rompp, paragraph [0037]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mayer (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2012/0184182) teaches a honing machine having a measuring sensor.
Stamenkovic (U.S. Patent No. 8,770,051) teaches an apparatus and method for measuring cylindricity of a bore by measuring the straightness of the bore.
Merkert (U.S. Patent No. 11,573,081) teaches a method of measuring a workpiece by performing a curve fitting.
Ould (U.S. Patent No. 12,510,346) teaches a method of measuring cylindricity by performing curve fitting.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at (571)270-3508. 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.
/SANG K KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745