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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho Su Yeon et al. KR 20230050188 A in view of Oomura US publication no.: US 2009/0315492 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Cho Su yeon et al. teach, A method for operating an electric drive system with an induction machine, comprising: supplying a pulsed magnetic flux current command signal and a pulsed torque current command signal (current command generator unit 110, figures 3-4; see paragraph 36, which explains that the Id* and Iq* is supplied by the current command generator 110) to an electric machine controller (current PI controller 120, figures 3-4), where the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal has timing different from the pulsed torque current command signal (see control unit 130, figure 3 and paragraphs 56-57, in which it is explained that the Id* and iq* is adjusted for each sampling time).
Cho Su Yeon et al. is silent on specifically teaching: where the different timing includes different pulse starting times and different pulse ending times.
However, Oomura is in the same field of art and teach: where the different timing includes different pulse starting times and different pulse ending time (see figure 3 and paragraphs 42-43, where it is explained that the id and Iq have different start and end times in a control of the current).
In view of Oomura’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Cho Su Yeon to include; where the different timing includes different pulse starting times and different pulse ending time, for the purpose of improving switching control.
Regarding claim 2, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, the method of claim 1, where the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal begins earlier in time than the pulsed torque current command signal (see paragraphs 56-63).
Regarding claim 3, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, the method of claim 1, where an amplitude of the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is greater than an amplitude of the pulsed torque current command signal (see paragraph 60, where the magnitude of D-axis current is greater).
Regarding claim 4, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, the method of claim 1, further comprising operating an electric machine (motor 170, figure 3) via the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal and the pulsed torque current command signal.
Regarding claim 5, Oomura teaches, the method of claim 1, where the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal has timing different from the pulsed torque current command signal includes different pulse starting times and different pulse ending time (see figure 3 and paragraphs 42-43).
Regarding claim 6, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, the method of claim 1, where the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal and the pulsed torque current command signal are determined via look-up tables (see paragraph 36).
Regarding claim 7, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, the method of claim 1, further comprising adjusting the pulsed torque current command signal in response to a magnetic flux of an electric machine of the electric drive system (see paragraphs 51-60).
Regarding claim 8, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, The method of claim 7, where adjusting the pulsed torque current command signal includes increasing a duration of the pulsed torque current command signal in response to the magnetic flux being greater than zero (see paragraphs 57-62).
Regarding claim 9, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, A system, comprising: an electric drive system including an inverter (inverter 160, figure 3) and an induction electric machine (motor 170, figure 3) ; and one or more controllers including executable instructions stored in non-transitory memory that cause the one or more controllers (see paragraphs 126-127) to generate a pulsed magnetic flux current command signal and a pulsed torque current command signal (current command generator unit 110, figures 3-4; see paragraph 36, which explains that the Id* and Iq* is supplied by the current command generator 110), where a duration of the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is shorter than a duration of the pulsed torque current command signal (see paragraphs 57-61).
Regarding claim 10, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, The system of claim 9, where the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is zero during a portion of a period of the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal(see paragraphs 51-60 and figure 4).
Regarding claim 11, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, The system of claim 9, where the pulsed torque current command signal is zero during a portion of a period of the pulsed torque current command signal (see paragraphs 51-60 and figure 4).
Regarding claim 12, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, The system of claim 9, where an amplitude of the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is greater than an amplitude of the pulsed torque current command signal (see paragraph 60, where the magnitude of D-axis current is greater).
Regarding claim 13, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, The system of claim 12, further comprising additional instructions to generate a second pulsed torque current command signal during a period of the pulsed torque current command signal (see paragraph 51 for “second voltage” during which a second pulsed torque command is generated).
Regarding claim 14, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach in paragraphs 51-60 that the control unit 130 controls the d-axis and q-axis current based on the voltage value and can be customized based on the requirements but is silent on specifically teaching: The system of claim 13, where the second pulsed torque current command signal is delivered to or generated by the one or more controllers when the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is a value of zero.
However, Oomura is in the same field of art and teach: where the second pulsed torque current command signal is delivered to or generated by the one or more controllers when the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is a value of zero (see figure 3 and paragraphs 42-43, where it is explained that the id is brought to zero and iq current is generated).
In view of Oomura’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Cho Su Yeon to include; where the second pulsed torque current command signal is delivered to or generated by the one or more controllers when the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is a value of zero, for the purpose of improving switching control.
Regarding claim 15, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, The system of claim 9, further comprising supplying electric current to an induction machine (motor 170, figure 3) in response to the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal and the pulsed torque current command signal.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu Su Yeon et al. KR 20230050188 A in view of Gopalakrishnan et al. US publication no.: US 2020/0313586 A1 and further in view of Oomura US publication no.: US 2009/0315492 A1.
Regarding claim 16, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, A method for operating an electric drive system, comprising: supplying a pulsed magnetic flux current command signal and a pulsed torque current command signal to an electric machine controller (current command generator unit 110, figures 3-4; see paragraph 36, which explains that the Id* and Iq* is supplied by the current command generator 110), where the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal has timing different from the pulsed torque current command signal(see control unit 130, figure 3 and paragraphs 56-57, in which it is explained that the Id* and iq* is adjusted for each sampling time).
Cho Su Yeon et al. is silent on specifically teaching:
where the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is adjusted based on a total amount of magnetic flux.
Cho Su Yeon et al. is silent on specifically teaching: where the different timing includes different pulse starting times and different pulse ending times.
Gopalakrishnan et al. teach: where the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is adjusted based on a total amount of magnetic flux (see figures 8a and 8b, paragraph 45-46).
In view of Gopalakrishnan et al. teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Cho Su Yeon et al. to include; where the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal is adjusted based on a total amount of magnetic flux, for the purpose of improving the control of the motor drive system.
However, Oomura is in the same field of art and teach: where the different timing includes different pulse starting times and different pulse ending time (see figure 3 and paragraphs 42-43, where it is explained that the id and Iq have different start and end times in a control of the current).
In view of Oomura’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Cho Su Yeon to include; where the different timing includes different pulse starting times and different pulse ending time, for the purpose of improving switching control.
Regarding claim 17, Gopalakrishnan et al. teach, the method of claim 16, where the total amount of magnetic flux is a sum of an induced magnetic flux amount and a residual magnetic flux amount (see figures 8a-8b where the induced magnetic flux and a residual magnetic flux is the combined value of the magnetic flux).
Regarding claim 18, Gopalakrishnan et al. teach: figures 8a-8b and claim 1, where the d-axis current is corrected based on the magnetic flux but is silent on specially teaching: where the pulsed torque current command signal is adjusted from a non-zero value to a value of zero beginning from a time when the total amount of magnetic flux is non-zero.
However, it could’ve been easily configured by one with the ordinary skills in art with the teachings of Cho Su Yeon et al. as modified.
In view of Gopalakrishnan et al. teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Cho Su Yeon et al. to include; where the pulsed torque current command signal is adjusted from a non-zero value to a value of zero beginning from a time when the total amount of magnetic flux is non-zero, for the purpose of improving the control of the motor drive system.
Regarding claim 19, Gopalakrishnan et al. teach: figures 8a-8b and claim 1, where the d-axis current is corrected based on the magnetic flux but is silent on specially teaching, The method of claim 17, where the pulsed torque current command signal is adjusted to a value of zero at a same time the total amount of magnetic flux reaches a value of zero from a non-zero value.
However, it could’ve been easily configured by one with the ordinary skills in art with the teachings of Cho Su Yeon et al. as modified.
In view of Gopalakrishnan et al. teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Cho Su Yeon et al. to include; where the pulsed torque current command signal is adjusted to a value of zero at a same time the total amount of magnetic flux reaches a value of zero from a non-zero value, for the purpose of improving the control of the motor drive system.
Regarding claim 20, Cho Su Yeon et al. teach, the method of claim 16, where the pulsed torque current command signal includes two pulses during a period of the pulsed magnetic flux current command signal (see paragraphs 51-60 where the first pulse is during a “first voltage” and second pulse during a “second voltage”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 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
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ZOHEB S IMTIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4308. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-730pm.
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, Eduardo Colon Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/ZOHEB S IMTIAZ/Primary Examiner , Art Unit 2846
Prosecution Insights