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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01 November 2023 was filed prior to the mailing date of this office correspondence. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9, the limitation “produced according to the method according to claim 1.” should read:
-- produced according to the method claim 1. --
Claim 10, the limitation “a rotor produced according to the method according to claim 1.” should read:-- a rotor produced according to the method claim 1. --
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-4, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philipp (DE 102019203291).
[AltContent: textbox (tie rod)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (breaches)]
PNG
media_image1.png
414
352
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 9, Philipp.
Regarding claim 1, Philipp teaches, a method for producing a rotor (rotor core 1, Figs. 1 to 9) for an electric machine (electric machine, para. [0003]), wherein the rotor comprises a shaft (a rotor for a synchronous machine…a shaft and such a laminated core, para. [0011]) and a sheet metal pack (laminated core 5, Fig. 1) arranged on the shaft, the method comprising:
stacking axially a plurality of individual metal sheets (see laminated core 5, Fig. 1) in succession to form the sheet metal pack (sheet metal stack, para. [0011]), wherein multiple poles are provided on the sheet metal pack (see the toothed laminated core 1, para. [0012]), and wherein multiple axially running breaches (first through hole 4.2 and the second through hole 7.2, Figs. 4 to 6, see annotated Fig. 9, para. [0021]) extend through the sheet metal pack (through holes 7.2 of the retaining ring plates 6 lie axially one above the other in different sheet layers, para. [0021]);
leading a respective tie rod (tie rod 8, Fig. 9) through each breach of the sheet metal pack (see Fig. 9);
axial tensioning the sheet metal pack via the tie rods (rod-like connecting elements 8 are guided to produce a radial positive fit between the rotor tooth plate packages 2 and the retaining ring plate package 5, para. [0021]); and
after the sheet metal pack is axially tensioned, winding wires around the poles to form individual windings (rotor tooth lamination packages can be inserted into corresponding recesses in the retaining ring lamination package via the tab-like projections and secured with the rodlike connecting elements that act as tie rods…a shaft and such a laminated core, which is mounted on the shaft and on which a copper winding is applied, which fills slots formed between the rotor toothed laminated cores of the laminated core, see Figs. 7, 8 and 9, para. [0010-0011]).
Though, Philipp does not explicitly teach, “after the sheet metal pack is axially tensioned, winding wires around the poles to form individual windings”, from the teaching of para. [0010-0011] and from Figs. 2 to 8, it is obvious that, the copper windings can be applied only after forming the toothed laminated core 2. In other words, Philipp teaches in Figs. 7 to 9 that, the laminated core 2 in Fig. 9 is formed after connecting the annular laminated core 5 in Fig. 7 and the toothed laminated core 2 in Fig. 8 and then applying the copper windings. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Philipp, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of producing a rotor of Philipp and winding the wires around the pole after axial tensioning the sheet metal pack so that it enables reducing the processing time and the waste product as Philipp disclosed in para. [0005].
Regarding claim 2, Philipp teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Philipp further teaches, the method according to claim 1, wherein the breaches are provided in at least part of the poles of the sheet metal pack (see the through holes 4.2, Figs. 3 and 4).
Regarding claim 3, Philipp teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 2. Philipp further teaches, the method according to claim 2, wherein a respective breach is provided in each pole (see Fig. 4) and the respective tie rod is led through each pole (two connecting channels for each rotor tooth lamination package 2, which is joined to the retaining ring lamination package 5, through which a rod-like connecting element 8 acting as a tie rod is guided, Fig. 9, para. [0029]).
Regarding claim 4, Philipp teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Philipp further teaches, the method according to claim 1, wherein the breaches are formed as boreholes in the sheet metal pack (see the first through holes 4.2 and second through hole 7.2).
Regarding claim 9, Philipp teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Philipp further teaches, a rotor, produced according to the method according to claim 1 (see Abstract).
Regarding claim 10, Philipp teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Philipp further teaches, an electric machine, comprising a rotor produced according to the method according to claim 1 (see Abstract).
Claim(s) 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philipp as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Perrot (US 20240072588).
PNG
media_image2.png
362
505
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2, Perrot.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Philipp does not teach, locking of the tie rods by nuts by a form-fitting connection; or a recess provided in an axial end face of the sheet metal pack. However, Perrot teaches, a method for producing a rotor (rotor 4, Fig. 1) for an electric machine (electric machine 1), including a sheet metal pack (magnetic sheets 12, Fig. 2) arranged on the shaft, stacking axially a plurality of individual metal sheets in succession to form the sheet metal pack, and multiple axially running breaches (through hole 15, Fig. 2) extend through the sheet metal pack; leading a respective tie rod (tie rods 13, Fig. 2) through each breach of the sheet metal pack; axial tensioning the sheet metal pack via the tie rods, in which,
5. The method according to claim 1, wherein axial tensioning of the sheet metal pack includes locking of the tie rods by nuts (conical nut 18, para. [0076]) screwed onto threaded sections at the end of the tie rods or by a form-fitting connection of the tie rod to the sheet metal pack produced by a forming process.
6. The method according to claim 5, wherein each nut or form-fitting connection is situated in a recess provided in an axial end face of the sheet metal pack (conical nut 18 comprises a blind threaded hole 18d replacing the through central tapered hole 18c, the blind threaded hole 18d cooperating with the thread 13a of the associated tie rod 13, para. [0076]).
Therefore, in view of the teachings of Perrot, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of producing a rotor of Philipp and to include nuts screwed to the tie rod as Perrot taught in Fig. 2 so that it enables reducing the deformation of the tie rod due to the higher acceleration of the nut while operating the high-speed rotating machine as Perrot disclosed in para. [0012].
Regarding claim 7, Philipp in view of Perrot teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 5. Philipp further teaches, the method according to claim 5, wherein prior to the locking of the tie rods, a respective star disc is placed axially on one of opposing ends of the sheet metal pack (laminated core is usually made from star disks and mounted on a shaft, para. [0005]). Perrot further teaches, each nut or form-fitting connection is situated in a recess (blind threaded hole 18d) provided in an axial end face of the star disc or placed on the axial end face of the star disc (para. [0076]).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philipp as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Stefan (DE 102015204872).
Regarding claim 8, Philipp does not teach, the tie rods are released and removed from the sheet metal pack. However, Stefan teaches, a method of producing a rotor, including axial tensioning the sheet metal pack via the tie rods, in which, after winding the wires around the poles, the tie rods are released and removed from the sheet metal pack (tie rods are exposed on this surface and can therefore be worked on from the outside…partially removed in order to subtractively balance the cage runner, para. [0019]). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Stefan, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of producing a rotor of Philipp and to remove the tie rods as Stefan taught in para. [0012] so that it enables balancing a rotor.
Conclusion
Prior art Leroy (US 20100090561) teaches, a method for producing a rotor for an electric machine, comprising a shaft and a sheet metal pack arranged on the shaft, stacking axially a plurality of individual metal sheets; multiple axially running breaches extend through the sheet metal pack; leading a respective tie rod through each breach of the sheet metal pack; axial tensioning the sheet metal pack via the tie rods.
Prior art Holzner (US 20130106211) teaches, a method for producing a rotor for an electric machine, including, stacking axially a plurality of individual metal sheets; multiple axially running breaches extend through the sheet metal pack; leading a respective tie rod through each breach of the sheet metal pack; axial tensioning the sheet metal pack via the tie rods.
Prior art Bockenhoff (US 20210328471) teaches, a method for producing a rotor for an electric machine, including, stacking axially a plurality of individual metal sheets; multiple axially running breaches extend through the sheet metal pack; and axial tensioning the sheet metal pack via the tie rods.
Prior art Semken (US 20150222151) teaches, a rotor for an electric machine, including, stacking axially a plurality of individual metal sheets; multiple axially running breaches extend through the sheet metal pack; and axial tensioning the sheet metal pack via the tie rods.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE K. ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1087. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 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, THOMAS J. HONG can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/JOSE K ABRAHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights