DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Applicant's arguments filed 10/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
3. Applicant argues the amended claim(s) 1, and 8 is/are allowable over Hua et al. (CN-111328558-A) in view of Holgersson (SE-1850785-A1). Applicant continues, in making the current rejections, the examiner relies upon the teachings of Hua to generally teach collision detection, but then admits that Hua does not teach or suggest “when the change rate of the current of the self-propelled electric motor increases to a first threshold and the change rate of the rotational speed of the self-propelled electric motor decreases to a second threshold, a value of a counter is increased, and, when the value of the counter is greater than a third threshold, it is determined that the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision.” To cure these admitted deficiencies, the examiner relies upon the teachings of Holgersson. It is, respectfully submitted, however, that Holgersson does not teach or suggest the specific detection parameters claimed, and thus, the applicants respectfully traverse the rejections based upon the current combination of references. More precisely, although Holgersson mentions an IMU, the described IMU purpose is to calculate “expected current,” which is part of its model comparison method. Holgersson does not teach, disclose, or suggest that IMIU acceleration data can be used for the entirely different purpose of “dynamically adjusting the judgment threshold.” Transforming acceleration information from a “model input” to a “threshold adjuster” requires a deep understanding of the technical challenges in this field and a creative shift in thinking, which there is no suggestion or motivation to perform.
4. However, as indicated by the previous Office Action, Hua, teaches detecting a collision by detecting the rotational speed and/or current changes [i.e., change rate of the current and the change rate of the rotational speed] of the driving unit (Hua, see at least [0039]). It appears Applicant is analyzing the cited references in isolation while ignoring the combination of the references. Furthermore, Applicant asserts, “The simple view and understanding of the physical principle that acceleration is related to speed does not translate to inventing the specific technical approach of using acceleration changes to dynamically adjust collision detection thresholds, which allow for the adaptation to varying road conditions. The present claims and method are a cross-domain, cross-functional application of complex understandings and are a true manifestation of creativity.” The examiner reminds Applicant, that Holgersson method is also a dynamic method. Holgersson teaches one conceivable method of detecting a collision between the robotic tool and another object is to obtain a measure of motor currents fed to electric motors driving the robotic tool and comparing those measures with expected motor currents as derived from inertia measurement unit, IMU, data, using a prediction algorithm. lt is noted that the robotic tool moves much less than expected with regard to the motor currents, when a collision with a foreign object is detected (Page 1, lines 13-19). As mentioned above, the distance is related to the current and as current changes, the distance changes too. As such, the distance must be adjusted based on the current changes during the operation of the mower, which means the method is a dynamic method and the thresholds must be adjusted dynamically. As such, the Holgersson method is not a simple comparison as Applicant assets. While Applicant concludes there is no is no suggestion or motivation, clear rationale and motivation to modify has been laid out in the previous Office Action, which remains equally applicable to the currently amended claims.
5. As such, this argument is unpersuasive.
6. Applicant argues dependent claim(s) is/are patentable by the virtue of their dependency on one of the independent claims and the additional features recited in the dependent claims.
7. This argument is unpersuasive as each independent claim and dependent claim has been fully rejected and for the reasons given above.
8. Additionally, the rejection has been edited solely to fix minor informalities, while addressing the newly amended limitations and it is believed the Applicant fully understood the rejection despite the informalities.
Claim Objections
9. Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
“initialized a counter” should read “initializing a counter”.
10. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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.
12. Claim(s) 1, 4, 7-8, 10-11 and 14-15
is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hua et al. (CN-111328558-A) in view of Holgersson (SE-1850785-A1).
In regards to claim 1
, Hua teaches a control module ([0004] The mowing equipment mainly includes a mowing unit, a control unit and a d self-propelled unit. The control unit is a control module.) for a self-propelled apparatus, the control module including programming to provide a collision detection method for the self-propelled apparatus ([0002] The invention relates to garden tools, and in particular to a lawn mowing device and a control method thereof. The lawn mowing device acts as the self-propelled apparatus. [0045] The control unit determines the direction and position of the collision according to the change of acceleration. That is, the mowing device detects collisions. The examiner notes, a control unit necessity includes programming.), wherein the self-propelled apparatus comprises a self-propelled electric motor for driving wheels to rotate ([0048] The lawn mowing equipment avoids obstacles by changing the speed of its self-propelled motor through a driving unit connected to its self-propelled motor, thereby generating a speed difference between the left and right running wheels to achieve the lawn mowing equipment turning around, bypassing obstacles, and turning. As mentioned above, a motor generates the driving force of wheels for the mowing equipment.), and the collision detection method comprises:
detecting a current of the self-propelled electric motor in real time and calculating a change rate of the current of the self-propelled electric motor; ([0039] The driving state detection mechanism is used to detect the rotational speed and/or current changes of the driving unit of the mowing equipment which encompasses detecting the current and calculating the change rate of the current.)
detecting a rotational speed of the self-propelled electric motor in real time and calculating a change rate of the rotational speed of the self-propelled electric motor; and ([0039] The driving state detection mechanism is used to detect the rotational speed and/or current changes of the driving unit of the mowing equipment which encompasses detecting the rotational speed and calculating the change rate of the rotational speed.)
determining, according to at least the change rate of the current and the change rate of the rotational speed, whether the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision, ([0039] Generate a contact sensing signal when the rotational speed and/or current changes, especially when the rotational speed and/or current suddenly changes due to an obstacle blocking the operation of the mowing equipment, and output the contact sensing signal to the control unit which is determining whether the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision. The rotational speed and/or current suddenly changes due to an obstacle is the change rate of the current and the change rate of the rotational speed. To determine the rotational speed and/or current suddenly has changed, the current and rotational speed changes must be necessarily compared to a threshold.)
Hua does not teach initialized a counter;
wherein, when the change rate of the current of the self-propelled electric motor increases to a first threshold and the change rate of the rotational speed of the self-propelled electric motor decreases to a second threshold, a value of a counter is increased, and, when the value of the counter is greater than a third threshold, it is determined that the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision;
detecting acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus and calculating a change value of the acceleration adjusting the first threshold and the second threshold dynamically according to the change value of the acceleration, and
resetting the counter if it is not determined that the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision and repeating the collision detection method.
However, Holgersson teaches a method for detecting a collision where IMU parameters are measured 25 and based on those parameters a predicted motor current is determined 27. This predicted current is compared 29 with the actual current. A collision detection procedure is carried out 31, and if the actual current is much higher than the predicted current, a collision is detected. (Page 5, lines 10-14, Fig 4). The predicted current acts as the first threshold. Furthermore, Holgersson teaches one conceivable method of detecting a collision between the robotic tool and another object is to obtain a measure of motor currents fed to electric motors driving the robotic tool and comparing those measures with expected motor currents as derived from inertia measurement unit, IMU, data, using a prediction algorithm. lt is noted that the robotic tool moves much less than expected with regard to the motor currents, when a collision with a foreign object is detected (Page 1, lines 13-19). When the robotic tool moves much less than expected, it means the speed of the robot tool is below the expected value for speed which acts as the second threshold. As such, the current and the moving speed on the mower are related to each other. Acceleration and the current speed of an object are also directly related. That is, when the acceleration increases, the speed on the object also increases with time. For a specific current, the mower is expected to move a specific distance based on the acceleration, and the speed of the object. At any given time, the current speed of the object is related to the acceleration, which means the thresholds must be adjusted based on the acceleration change. That is, the first threshold and the second threshold are adjusted dynamically as the distance, acceleration, and speed are related through the concepts of motion. As mentioned above, the current and the moving speed on the mower are related to each other. That means for a specific current, the mower is expected to move with a specific speed. As mentioned above, if the speed for a specific current is not as expected, it is determined a collision has occurred. ln the updating loop 35 it is tested 47 whether the error category counter 38 is higher than a positive threshold, in the illustrated case 12000. lf this is the case, a prediction algorithm setting is adjusted 49 in one direction. Typically, the current offset term iofrset may be increased 5 mA. lf on the other hand the category counter 38 is lower than a negative threshold, in the illustrated case more negative than -12000, the prediction algorithm setting is adjusted in the other direction, the offset term being decreased in the same way. ln any case, the error category counter 38 may subsequently be reset 55. This starts a new time window to base an update on (Page 7, lines 13-20, Figs. 1-5). That is, the value of the counter is compared with a threshold, which acts as the third threshold, to reduce the false positives. Examiner notes, resetting the timer is also initialization.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify mowing device of Hua, by incorporating the teachings of Holgersson, such that thresholds for the current and speed are set and when the robotic tool moves much less than expected with regard to the motor current by comparing the speed and the current to those thresholds, a counter is incremented and when the counter reaches a specific threshold, it is determined that a collision with a foreign object has occurred and thresholds for the current and speed are set and adjusted as the speed changes based on the acceleration rate changes and the error counter is reset when the apparatus does not experience a collision.
The motivation to modify is that, as acknowledged by Holgersson, to provide a more reliable collision detection method (Page 1, line 24-25) for a robotic lawn mower, such that if the lawn mower operates in thick, tough grass, the prediction algorithm is adapted to compensate for this factor, such that false detections of collisions are not made simply by driving on the grass (Page 1, lines 30-33 and page 2, line 1) which one of ordinary skill would have recognized allows the mower to complete its work more efficiently.
In regards to claim 4
, Hua, as modified by Holgersson, teaches the control module according to claim 1.
Further, Holgersson teaches one conceivable method of detecting a collision between the robotic tool and another object is to obtain a measure of motor currents fed to electric motors driving the robotic tool and comparing those measures with expected motor currents as derived from inertia measurement unit, IMU, data, using a prediction algorithm. lt is noted that the robotic tool moves much less than expected with regard to the motor currents, when a collision with a foreign object is detected (Page 1, lines 13-19). When the robotic tool moves much less than expected, it means the speed of the robot tool is below the expected value for speed which acts as the second threshold. As such, the current and the moving speed on the mower are related to each other. Acceleration and the current speed of an object are also directly related. That is, when the acceleration increases, the speed on the object also increases with time. For a specific current, the mower is expected to move a specific distance based on the acceleration, and the speed of the object. At any given time, the current speed of the object is related to the acceleration, which means the thresholds must be adjusted based on the acceleration change. That is, the first threshold and the second threshold are adjusted dynamically as the distance, acceleration, and speed are related through the concepts of motion. As such, the current speed of the object is related to the acceleration, which means when the acceleration increases, the speed also increases with time and the threshold for speed must be increased to reduce the false positives. Reducing the current threshold, means the collision is detected more accurately based on the rate of change of the displacement. That is, the first threshold is decreased and the second threshold is increased when the change value of the acceleration increases.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify mowing device of Hua, by incorporating the teachings of Holgersson, such that a threshold for the current is decreased and threshold for speed is increased when the acceleration increases.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Holgersson in regards to claim 1.
In regards to claim 7
, Hua, as modified by Holgersson, teaches the control module according to claim 1, further comprising:
detecting acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus; ([0042] The acceleration sensor detects the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device.)
calculating a change value of the acceleration when the change rate of the current of the self-propelled electric motor increases to a first threshold; and ([0042] The acceleration sensor detects the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device, generates the contact sensing signal when the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device reaches a preset value, and outputs the contact sensing signal to the control unit. The preset value acts as the first threshold.)
determining that the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision when the change value of the acceleration is greater than a fourth threshold. ([0042] The acceleration sensor detects the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device, generates the contact sensing signal when the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device reaches a preset value, and outputs the contact sensing signal to the control unit. Compared with the above sensors, the acceleration sensor uses a gyroscope to measure acceleration, and the acceleration data obtained contains the direction information of the speed change. Therefore, in this way, the control unit can further determine the direction and position of the collision according to the change of acceleration. As mentioned above, the control unit detects collision by using the change value of the acceleration. The preset value also acts as the forth threshold.)
Further, Holgersson teaches one conceivable method of detecting a collision between the robotic tool and another object is to obtain a measure of motor currents fed to electric motors driving the robotic tool and comparing those measures with expected motor currents as derived from inertia measurement unit, IMU, data, using a prediction algorithm. lf for instance it is noted that the robotic tool moves much less than expected with regard to the motor currents, a collision with a foreign object is detected (Page 1, lines 13-19). When the robotic tool moves much less than expected, it means the speed of the robot tool is below the expected value for speed. As such, the current and the moving speed on the mower are related to each other. That is for a specific current, the mower is expected to move with a specific speed. Since speed and acceleration are directly related, if the change rate of the rotational speed of the motor falls below a threshold, then collision has happened, which is the second threshold. Therefore, if the speed for a specific current is not as expected, it is determined a collision has occurred.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify mowing device of Hua, by incorporating the teachings of Holgersson, such that collision is detected based on the robotic tool moving less than expected which means the rotational speed of the motor falls below a threshold.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Holgersson in regards to claim 1.
In regards to claim 8
, Hua teaches A self-propelled apparatus ([0002] The invention relates to garden tools, and in particular to a lawn mowing device and a control method thereof. The lawn mowing device acts as the self-propelled apparatus.), comprising:
wheels configured to support the self-propelled apparatus and drive the self-propelled apparatus; ([0048] The lawn mowing equipment avoids obstacles by changing the speed of its self-propelled motor through a driving unit connected to its self-propelled motor, thereby generating a speed difference between the left and right running wheels to achieve the lawn mowing equipment turning around, bypassing obstacles, and turning. As mentioned above, wheels are utilized for driving the mowing equipment.)
a self-propelled electric motor configured to drive the wheels to rotate so as to implement a self-propelled function; ([0048] The lawn mowing equipment avoids obstacles by changing the speed of its self-propelled motor through a driving unit connected to its self-propelled motor, thereby generating a speed difference between the left and right running wheels to achieve the lawn mowing equipment turning around, bypassing obstacles, and turning. As mentioned above, a motor generates the driving force of wheels for the mowing equipment.)
a current detection device configured to measure and calculate a current of the self-propelled electric motor in real time; ([0039] The driving state detection mechanism is used to detect the rotational speed and/or current changes of the driving unit of the mowing equipment which encompasses detecting the current and calculating the change rate of the current.)
a speed measurement device configured to measure and calculate a rotational speed of the self-propelled electric motor in real time; and ([0039] The driving state detection mechanism is used to detect the rotational speed and/or current changes of the driving unit of the mowing equipment which encompasses detecting the rotational speed and calculating the change rate of the rotational speed.)
a control module configured to calculate a change rate of the current according to the current measured and calculated by the current detection device, calculate a change rate of the rotational speed according to the rotational speed measured and calculated by the speed measurement device, and determine, according to at least the change rate of the current and the change rate of the rotational speed, whether the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision, ([0039] Generate a contact sensing signal when the rotational speed and/or current changes, especially when the rotational speed and/or current suddenly changes due to an obstacle blocking the operation of the mowing equipment, and output the contact sensing signal to the control unit which is determining whether the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision. To determine the rotational speed and/or current suddenly has changed, the current and rotational speed changes must be necessarily compared to a threshold.)
Hua does not teach wherein the control module is further configured to:
initialize a counter and increase a value of the counter when the change rate of the current of the self-propelled electric motor increases to a first threshold and the change rate of the rotational speed of the self-propelled electric motor decreases to a second threshold;
determine that the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision when the value of the counter is greater than a third threshold; and
reset the counter if it is not determined that the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision and continue the self-propelled function.
However, Holgersson teaches a method for detecting a collision where IMU parameters are measured 25 and based on those parameters a predicted motor current is determined 27. This predicted current is compared 29 with the actual current. A collision detection procedure is carried out 31, and if the actual current is much higher than the predicted current, a collision is detected. (Page 5, lines 10-14, Fig 4). The predicted current acts as the first threshold. Furthermore, Holgersson teaches one conceivable method of detecting a collision between the robotic tool and another object is to obtain a measure of motor currents fed to electric motors driving the robotic tool and comparing those measures with expected motor currents as derived from inertia measurement unit, IMU, data, using a prediction algorithm. lt is noted that the robotic tool moves much less than expected with regard to the motor currents, when a collision with a foreign object is detected (Page 1, lines 13-19). When the robotic tool moves much less than expected, it means the speed of the robot tool is below the expected value for speed which acts as the second threshold. As such, the current and the moving speed on the mower are related to each other. Acceleration and the current speed of an object are also directly related. That is, when the acceleration increases, the speed on the object also increases with time. For a specific current, the mower is expected to move a specific distance based on the acceleration, and the speed of the object. At any given time, the current speed of the object is related to the acceleration, which means the thresholds must be adjusted based on the acceleration change. That is, the first threshold and the second threshold are adjusted dynamically as the distance, acceleration, and speed are related through the concepts of motion. As mentioned above, the current and the moving speed on the mower are related to each other. That means for a specific current, the mower is expected to move with a specific speed. As mentioned above, if the speed for a specific current is not as expected, it is determined a collision has occurred. ln the updating loop 35 it is tested 47 whether the error category counter 38 is higher than a positive threshold, in the illustrated case 12000. lf this is the case, a prediction algorithm setting is adjusted 49 in one direction. Typically, the current offset term iofrset may be increased 5 mA. lf on the other hand the category counter 38 is lower than a negative threshold, in the illustrated case more negative than -12000, the prediction algorithm setting is adjusted in the other direction, the offset term being decreased in the same way. ln any case, the error category counter 38 may subsequently be reset 55. This starts a new time window to base an update on (Page 7, lines 13-20, Figs. 1-5). That is, the value of the counter is compared with a threshold, which acts as the third threshold, to reduce the false positives. Examiner notes, resetting the timer is also initialization.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify mowing device of Hua, by incorporating the teachings of Holgersson, such that thresholds for the current and speed are set and when the robotic tool moves much less than expected with regard to the motor current by comparing the speed and the current to those thresholds, a counter is incremented and when the counter reaches a specific threshold, it is determined that a collision with a foreign object has occurred and thresholds for the current and speed are set and adjusted as the speed changes based on the acceleration rate changes and the error counter is reset when the apparatus does not experience a collision.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Holgersson in regards to claim 1.
In regards to claim 10
, Hua, as modified by Holgersson, teaches the self-propelled apparatus according to claim 8, further comprising an accelerometer configured to detect acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus. ([0042] The acceleration sensor detects the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device.)
In regards to claim 11
, Hua, as modified by Holgersson, teaches the self-propelled apparatus according to claim 10.
Claim 11 recites an apparatus having substantially the same features of claim 3 above, therefore claim 11 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 3.
In regards to claim 14
, Hua teaches the self-propelled apparatus according to claim 8.
Claim 14 recites an apparatus having substantially the same features of claim 7 above, therefore claim 14 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 7.
In regards to claim 15
, Hua teaches the self-propelled apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the self-propelled apparatus is an intelligent mower. ([0004]The mowing equipment mainly includes a mowing unit, a control unit and a self-propelled unit.)
13. Claim(s) 5, and 6
is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hua et al. (CN-111328558-A) in view of in view of Holgersson (SE-1850785-A1) and further in view of Liao et al. (US-20080109136-A1).
In regards to claim 5
, Hua, as modified by Holgersson, teaches the control module according to claim 1.
Hua, as modified by Holgersson, does not teach further comprising:
detecting first acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus in an x-axis direction and second acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus in a y-axis direction;
calculating a change value of the first acceleration and a change value of the second acceleration separately;
acquiring a combined acceleration change value according to the change value of the first acceleration and the change value of the second acceleration; and
determining that the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision when the combined acceleration change value is greater than a fourth threshold.
However, Liao teaches an adjustable crash trigger apparatus and a method thereof. The adjustable crash trigger apparatus 1 includes a power supply module 11, an electronic accelerometer module 12, and a microcontroller module 13 connected with the power supply module 11 and the electronic accelerometer module 12. The adjustable crash trigger apparatus 1 first uses the electronic accelerometer module 12 to measure the acceleration values in each axis (x-, y-, and z-axis) of a vehicle. Then the acceleration values of each axis are transmitted to the real-time processing unit 131 of the microcontroller module 13. The real-time processing unit 131 presets a threshold acceleration value and a minimum velocity variation. The threshold acceleration value is determined depending on the type of the vehicle. Besides, the threshold acceleration value is adjusted by adjusting the real-time processing unit 131 through a computer program. The adjustable crash trigger apparatus 1 judges in three axes, thereby the real-time processing unit 131 receives the acceleration values in each axis measured by the electronic accelerometer module 12. However, the acceleration values have to be synthesized first to be a resultant acceleration value. Then, the resultant acceleration value is compared with the threshold acceleration value. When the resultant acceleration value is greater than the threshold acceleration value, judge if the resultant velocity variation of the vehicle is greater than the minimum velocity variation or not, wherein the resultant velocity variation is synthesized by the velocity variations in the three axes. If the resultant velocity variation is greater than the minimum velocity variation, then activate the beacon-activated command unit 132 ([0018]-[0023], Figs. 1-2 and 3A-3B). As mentioned above, the acceleration values are measured for each axis. That is, detecting first acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus in an x-axis direction and second acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus in a y-axis direction. When the adjustable crash trigger apparatus falls and collides with the ground, each of the axes extracts acceleration values, and it is known that two major acceleration changes occurred, which includes the crash when the adjustable crash trigger apparatus first touches the ground, and the overturn crash after the apparatus touches the ground, respectively ([0050]) which suggest the change in accelerations are calculated and used for detecting a collision. The resultant acceleration value which is the synthesized acceleration values, acts as the combined acceleration change value and the threshold acceleration value acts as the fourth threshold.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify mowing device of Hua, as already modified by Holgersson, by incorporating the teachings of Liao, such that the acceleration and rate of change of acceleration along each axis, including x- and y- axes, are detected and then the acceleration values are syncretized to determine the resultant acceleration value and by comparing the resultant acceleration with the threshold acceleration value, it is determined whether a collision has occurred or not.
The motivation to modify is that, as acknowledged by Liao, to achieve high sensitivity, low false alarm rate, and low failure rate ([0004]) which one of ordinary skill would have recognized allows the mower become more reliable.
In regards to claim 6
, Hua, as modified by Holgersson and Liao, teaches the control module according to claim 5, further comprising:
determining a direction of the collision according to the first acceleration and the second acceleration after the self-propelled apparatus collides. ([0042] The acceleration sensor detects the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device, generates the contact sensing signal when the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device reaches a preset value, and outputs the contact sensing signal to the control unit. Compared with the above sensors, the acceleration sensor uses a gyroscope to measure acceleration, and the acceleration data obtained contains the direction information of the speed change. Therefore, in this way, the control unit further determines the direction and position of the collision according to the change of acceleration. As mentioned above, the direction and position of the collision is determined by utilizing the change of acceleration which is determining a direction of the collision according to the first acceleration and the second acceleration after the self-propelled apparatus collides.)
14. Claim(s) 12, and 13
is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hua et al. (CN-111328558-A) in view of Holgersson (SE-1850785-A1) and further in view of Liao et al. (US-20080109136-A1).
In regards to claim 12
, Hua, as modified by Holgersson, teaches the self-propelled apparatus according to claim 10.
Hua, as modified by Holgersson, does not teach wherein the control module is further configured to: acquire first acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus in an x-axis direction and second acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus in a y-axis direction from the accelerometer; calculate a change value of the first acceleration and a change value of the second acceleration separately; acquire a combined acceleration change value according to the change value of the first acceleration and the change value of the second acceleration; and determine that the self-propelled apparatus experienced a collision when the combined acceleration change value is greater than a fourth threshold.
However, Liao teaches an adjustable crash trigger apparatus and a method thereof. The adjustable crash trigger apparatus 1 includes a power supply module 11, an electronic accelerometer module 12, and a microcontroller module 13 connected with the power supply module 11 and the electronic accelerometer module 12. The adjustable crash trigger apparatus 1 first uses the electronic accelerometer module 12 to measure the acceleration values in each axis (x-, y-, and z-axis) of a vehicle. Then the acceleration values of each axis are transmitted to the real-time processing unit 131 of the microcontroller module 13. The real-time processing unit 131 presets a threshold acceleration value and a minimum velocity variation. The threshold acceleration value is determined depending on the type of the vehicle. Besides, the threshold acceleration value can be adjusted by adjusting the real-time processing unit 131 through a computer program. The adjustable crash trigger apparatus 1 according to the present invention can judge in three axes, thereby the real-time processing unit 131 receives the acceleration values in each axis measured by the electronic accelerometer module 12. However, the acceleration values have to be synthesized first to be a resultant acceleration value. Then, the resultant acceleration value is compared with the threshold acceleration value. When the resultant acceleration value is greater than the threshold acceleration value, judge if the resultant velocity variation of the vehicle is greater than the minimum velocity variation or not, wherein the resultant velocity variation is synthesized by the velocity variations in the three axes. If the resultant velocity variation is greater than the minimum velocity variation, then activate the beacon-activated command unit 132 ([0018]-[0023], Figs. 1-2 and 3A-3B). As mentioned above, the acceleration values are measured in each axis. That is, detecting first acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus in an x-axis direction and second acceleration of the self-propelled apparatus in a y-axis direction. When the adjustable crash trigger apparatus falls and collides with the ground, each of the axes extracts acceleration values, and it is known that two major acceleration changes occurred, which includes the crash when the adjustable crash trigger apparatus first touches the ground, and the overturn crash after the apparatus touches the ground, respectively ([0050]) which suggest the change in accelerations are calculated and used for detecting a collision. The resultant acceleration value which is the synthesized acceleration values, acts as the combined acceleration change value and the threshold acceleration value acts as the fourth threshold.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify mowing device of Hua, as already modified by Holgersson, by incorporating the teachings of Liao, such that the acceleration and rate of change of acceleration along each axis, including x- and y- axes, are detected and then the acceleration values are syncretized to determine the resultant acceleration value and by comparing the resultant acceleration with the threshold acceleration value, it is determined whether a collision has occurred or not.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Liao in regards to claim 5.
In regards to claim 13
, Hua, as modified by Holgersson and Liao, teaches the self-propelled apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the control module determines a direction of the collision according to the first acceleration and the second acceleration after determining that the collision occurs. ([0042] The acceleration sensor detects the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device, generates the contact sensing signal when the acceleration or the rate of change of the acceleration of the mowing device reaches a preset value, and outputs the contact sensing signal to the control unit. Compared with the above sensors, the acceleration sensor uses a gyroscope to measure acceleration, and the acceleration data obtained contains the direction information of the speed change. Therefore, in this way, the control unit further determines the direction and position of the collision according to the change of acceleration. As mentioned above, the direction and position of the collision is determined by utilizing the change of acceleration which is determining a direction of the collision according to the first acceleration and the second acceleration after the self-propelled apparatus collides.)
Conclusion
15. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Foster et al. (US-20220007570-A1) teaches Systems and techniques for detecting suboptimal mowing due to impacted vegetation and/or orientation changes using a rate of change of current.
Sakai (US-20180170298-A1) teaches a collision detection sensor for detecting acceleration in different directions.
WU (CN-112405523-A) teaches a robot collision detection.
16. 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).
17. 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.
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Preston J Miller whose telephone number is (703)756-1582. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7:30 AM - 4:30 PM EST.
19. 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.
20. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ramya P Burgess can be reached at (571) 272-6011. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
21. 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.
/P.J.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3661 /RAMYA P BURGESS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661