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 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.
Claims 1-3, 7, and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasegawa et al. (US PGPub 2012/0217795 A1) in view of Keckeisen (DE 102019212386 A1).
As to claim 1, Hasegawa et al. teaches a method for determining a semiconductor temperature Tj of a semiconductor element of a semiconductor module (paragraphs [0016]-[0017]), wherein the semiconductor module comprises the semiconductor element and a cooler unit thermally coupled via a thermal path with the semiconductor element (claim 5), the method comprising:
ascertaining, with a microcontroller (10), an estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Tj for a point in time using an optimizable model of a thermal behavior of the semiconductor module (figure 3 and paragraphs [0032] and [0006]);
reading, with a microcontroller (10), a measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time via an interface in response to the measured value being available for the point in time, wherein the measured value represents a value detected directly or indirectly using a sensor unit (figures 1-3 and paragraph [0032]);
optimizing, with a microcontroller (10), the optimizable model using the measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time in response to the measured value being available for the point in time (paragraphs [0032], [0004, [0036] where detected temperatures are used as a base for the IGBT model and the model is updated by inputting the losses);
providing, with a microcontroller (10), a value representing the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time using the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Tj, in response to the measured value not being available for the point in time, and using the measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj, in response to the measured value being available for the point in time (paragraph [0032], where calculated temperatures are used when the temperatures of elements have not yet been detected); and
repeating the method for further points in time following the point in time (paragraph [0069]).
Hasegawa et al. does not explicitly teach throttling, with the microcomputer, a drive power of an electronic machine when the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Ti indicates overheating.
Keckeisen teaches throttling, with the microcomputer, a drive power of an electronic machine when the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Ti indicates overheating (the paragraph bridging pages 3 and 4 to the third paragraph on page 4).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hasegawa et al. to have throttling, with the microcomputer, a drive power of an electronic machine when the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Ti indicates overheating as taught by Keckeisen because it allows the prevention of impending overheating (third paragraph on page 4).
As to claim 2, Hasegawa et al. as modified (citations to Hasegawa et al. unless otherwise indicated) teaches detecting the measured value or at least one sensor value to derive the measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time using the sensor unit in response to the detecting being able to be carried out using the sensor unit at the point in time (paragraph [0032]).
As to claim 3, Hasegawa et al. as modified (citations to Hasegawa et al. unless otherwise indicated) teaches wherein optimizing the optimizable model comprises:
comparing the estimated value and the measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj; and
optimizing the optimizable model using a result of the comparison (paragraphs [0032] and [0047]-[0051]).
As to claim 7, Hasegawa et al. as modified (citations to Hasegawa et al. unless otherwise indicated) teaches reading a power loss value which represents a power loss of the semiconductor element for the point in time; and using the power loss value as an input variable for the optimizable model when ascertaining the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Tj (paragraph [0032]).
As to claim 13, Hasegawa et al. teaches a device for determining a semiconductor temperature Tj of a semiconductor element of a semiconductor module (paragraphs [0016]-[0017]), wherein the semiconductor module comprises the semiconductor element and a cooler unit thermally coupled with the semiconductor element via a thermal path (claim 5), wherein the device is configured to:
ascertain an estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Tj for a point in time using an optimizable model of a thermal behavior of the semiconductor module (figure 3 and paragraphs [0032] and [0006]);
read a measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time via an interface in response to the measured value being available for the point in time, wherein the measured value represents a value detected directly or indirectly using a sensor unit (figures 1-3 and paragraph [0032]);
optimize the optimizable model using the measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time in response to the measured value being available for the point in time (paragraphs [0032], [0004, [0036] where detected temperatures are used as a base for the IGBT model and the model is updated by inputting the losses);
provide a value representing the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time using the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Tj, in response to the measured value not being available for the point in time, and using the measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj, in response to the measured value being available for the point in time (paragraph [0032], where calculated temperatures are used when the temperatures of elements have not yet been detected); and
repeat the process for further points in time following the point in time (paragraph [0069]).
Hasegawa et al. does not explicitly teach throttling, with the microcomputer, a drive power of an electronic machine when the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Ti indicates overheating.
Keckeisen teaches throttling, with the microcomputer, a drive power of an electronic machine when the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Ti indicates overheating (the paragraph bridging pages 3 and 4 to the third paragraph on page 4).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hasegawa et al. to have throttling, with the microcomputer, a drive power of an electronic machine when the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Ti indicates overheating as taught by Keckeisen because it allows the prevention of impending overheating (third paragraph on page 4).
As to claim 14, Hasegawa et al. as modified (citations to Hasegawa et al. unless otherwise indicated) teaches an inverter comprising the device according to claim 13 (as noted above in detail for claim 13) and the semiconductor module (figures 1 and 3 ).
As to claim 15, Hasegawa et al. as modified (citations to Hasegawa et al. unless otherwise indicated) teaches an electric axle drive for a motor vehicle (paragraphs [0002]-[0004] and [0019]) comprising:
at least one electric machine (5);
a transmission unit (paragraphs [0019], where cars and electric vehicles conventionally include transmission units); and
the inverter according to claim 14 (as noted above in detail for claim 14).
As to claim 17, Hasegawa et al. teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium (the portion of 10 responsible for storing the calculations and control procedures, paragraph [0025]) having stored thereon a computer program that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform a method (paragraph [0027]) comprising:
ascertaining an estimated value of a semiconductor temperature Tj for a point in time using an optimizable model of a thermal behavior of a semiconductor module (figure 3 and paragraphs [0032] and [0006]);
reading a measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time via an interface in response to the measured value being available for the point in time, wherein the measured value represents a value detected directly or indirectly using a sensor unit (figures 1-3 and paragraph [0032]);
optimizing the optimizable model using the measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time in response to the measured value being available for the point in time (paragraphs [0032], [0004, [0036] where detected temperatures are used as a base for the IGBT model and the model is updated by inputting the losses);
providing a value representing the semiconductor temperature Tj for the point in time using the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Tj, in response to the measured value not being available for the point in time, and using the measured value of the semiconductor temperature Tj, in response to the measured value being available for the point in time (paragraph [0032], where calculated temperatures are used when the temperatures of elements have not yet been detected); and
repeating the method for further points in time following the point in time (paragraph [0069]).
Hasegawa et al. does not explicitly teach throttling, with the microcomputer, a drive power of an electronic machine when the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Ti indicates overheating.
Keckeisen teaches throttling, with the microcomputer, a drive power of an electronic machine when the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Ti indicates overheating (the paragraph bridging pages 3 and 4 to the third paragraph on page 4).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hasegawa et al. to have throttling, with the microcomputer, a drive power of an electronic machine when the estimated value of the semiconductor temperature Ti indicates overheating as taught by Keckeisen because it allows the prevention of impending overheating (third paragraph on page 4).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasegawa et al. (US PGPub 2012/0217795 A1) and Keckeisen (DE 102019212386 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of He et al. (US PGPub 2020/0240850 A1).
As to claim 9, Hasegawa et al. as modified teaches all of the limitations of the claimed invention, as noted above for claim 1, except wherein the optimizable model is based on a Foster model of the thermal path transferred into a state space representation.
He et al. teaches wherein an optimizable model is based on a Foster model of the thermal path transferred into a state space representation (paragraphs [0024]-[0026]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hasegawa et al. as modified to have wherein an optimizable model is based on a Foster model of the thermal path transferred into a state space representation as taught by He et al. because it is a well known system for modeling the IGBT power modules (paragraph [0024]) with predictable results.
As to claim 10, Hasegawa et al. as modified teaches all of the limitations of the claimed invention as noted above for claim 1, except wherein the optimizable model comprises a Kalman filter.
He et al. teaches wherein the optimizable model comprises a Kalman filter (paragraphs [0002] and [0012]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hasegawa et al. as modified to have wherein the optimizable model comprises a Kalman filter as taught by He et al. because it allows an optimal estimation value of the junction temperature (paragraph [0002]) with predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art applied to claims 1, 13, and 17 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.
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 JENNIFER E S BAHLS whose telephone number is (571)270-7807. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 am-3:30 pm.
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/JENNIFER BAHLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853