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 .
Response to Arguments
This office action is in response to amendments filed 06/23/2026 and RCE filed 07/15/2026. Claims 1-3, 5-12 are pending.
Applicant’s arguments and amendments to the claims with respect to prior art rejections of Claims 1-3, 5-12 under 35 USC 102/103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of Claims 1-3, 5-12 under 35 USC 102/103 have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new rejection is made in view of Bitterbolf et al (US 20150355647, hereinafter Bitterbolf)
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Monnich et al (US 20190054622 hereinafter Monnich) in view of Bitterbolf et al ( US 20150355647, hereinafter Bitterbolf)
Regarding Claim 1, Monnich teaches:
A method for estimating one or more process forces associated with a tool center point of a machine tool (see at least " With the method for absolute position determination of the end effector of a robotic device with a kinematic chain of movable components, at least one current torque or a value corresponding to the torque is measured on at least one movable component of the kinematic chain of the robotic device by a torque sensor arranged on the movable component. At least one torque calculated on the basis of model data of the robotic device for the movable component is provided. " in par. 0007) ,
wherein the machine tool is capable of performing an operation in accordance with a predefined path (see at least ’ However, the accuracy of the model values used is only applicable in cases when, and under the assumption that, the robot moves freely in the area and is not in contact with anything. If the robot is in contact with another object or if further errors occur in the model values, there can be a significant deterioration in the absolute accuracy during the positioning of an articulated arm robot and the end effector thereof.” In par. 0004 and " This enables the end effector 8 (this can be any tool, instrument or an instrument holder) arranged on the movable end of the robot 7 to be positioned flexibly as required.” In par. 0015) , the method comprising:
determining a first set of axis torques along the one or more axes of the machine tool based on a model associated with the machine tool (see at least " A calculator (e.g., control or other processor) is provided for the determination of calculated torques from model data, for calculating differences between measured and calculated torques, for comparing the differences with prespecified threshold values, and for the determination of the absolute position of the end effector from calculated and measured torques.” In par. 0010 and “In a second step 2, at least one torque calculated on the basis of a model or model data of the robotic device for the axis is provided. The model data is generally available in a memory and may be used at any time as required. The torque may be calculated from the model data (for example the exact weight of the robotic device and of the instruments attached thereto, values for production tolerances, values for temperature effects, values for dynamic effects etc.) by calculation for the corresponding axis using the model.” In par. 0017);
measuring a second set of axis torques along the one or more axes of the machine tool during the operation (see at least " In a first step 1, at least one current torque or a value corresponding to the torque is measured on at least one axis of the robot 7. For example, of the seven-axis articulated robot 7, a torque sensor 9 arranged on an axis measures the torque. In particular, the respective current torque or the value corresponding to the torque is measured by each of the torque sensors 9." in par. 0017) ; and
determining the one or more process forces associated with the tool center point of the machine tool based on subtracting the determined first set of axis torques from the measured second set of axis torques to obtain resultant axis torques (see at least "Then, in a third step 3, a difference between the respective measured torque and calculated torque is formed for each axis in question. This difference may also be called the “external torque.” The external torque may be induced either by errors in the model calculation or by an external influence, for example contact with an external object." in par. 0018).
adapting the TCP position estimate based on the estimated one or more process forces associated with the tool center point of the machine tool for compensating for a deviation caused by the estimated one or more process forces (see at least " However, it is possible to utilize the adaptation of the dynamic correction. Regardless of the cause of the deviation, the calculation in the absolutely correct model is only correct if this is calculated in the model, not, as previously, with the model values, but with the model values+/−external torque=measured actual torque. This enhances the accuracy in the case of contact or false model assumptions." in par. 0019)
controlling operation of the machine tool based on the determined one or more process forces. (see at least " The method may be used to detect deviations, which occur as the result of contact with external objects, appliances or people or as a result of errors in the model data. The deviations may then be replaced by enhanced values and thus are no longer able to falsify the determination of the absolute position. The method is able to achieve high absolute accuracy in the determination of the position of the end effector." in par. 0007 and “The robot 7 is actuated by a system controller 10, which controls and/or regulates, for example, the movement of the axes, the positioning of the end effector 8 and the torque sensors 9.” In par. 0016)
Monnich does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Bitterbolf does teach:
wherein the machine tool is capable of performing a machining operation in accordance with a predefined path (see at least "Advantageously, therefore, the movement of the system is continuously dynamically controlled. Therefore, during the movement, force vectors and corresponding compensating variables are continuously recalculated so that a predetermined movement path may be more accurately maintained." in par. 0018)
determining the one or more process forces at the tool center point using the resultant axis torques and a system of equations associated with the machine tool (see at least “A multi-element model 10 (MKM; optionally implemented as a torque calculating device) processes the force vectors and/or the force vector f. Based thereon and based on the joint coordinates, one respective motor torque and/or a corresponding equivalent current for the respective motor of each axis is calculated. Moreover, in the multi-element model 10 angular offsets Δθ are also calculated here. In these calculations the mass properties, the resilience, the damping and linear dependencies of the degrees of freedom of the respective axes and/or individual elements are considered. Preferably, the multi-element model 10 is based on the second-order linear differential equation system which has been proposed above.” In par. 0060)
adapting the predefined path based on the estimated one or more process forces associated with the tool center point of the machine tool for compensating for a deviation caused by the estimated one or more process forces (see at least "Advantageously, therefore, the movement of the system is continuously dynamically controlled. Therefore, during the movement, force vectors and corresponding compensating variables are continuously recalculated so that a predetermined movement path may be more accurately maintained. " in par. 0018 and “FIG. 2 shows the structure of a method and/or a corresponding apparatus for controlling and regulating for compensating for interfering forces. Reference coordinates for the TCP, namely X.sub.TCP, Y.sub.TCP and Z.sub.TCP and α.sub.TCP, β.sub.TCP, γ.sub.TCP, are predetermined by a master unit.” In par. 0059 and “The acceleration of one axis and the counter force produced thereby in the joint may optionally lead to parasitic movements at the TCP due to the flexibility of the structure. If, for example, an accelerated axis is supported on a second axis, the second axis alters its position or inclination due to its finite stiffness. Such and similar parasitic movements may be compensated by means of compensating movements of the remaining axes. In this case the calculated compensating movement is pilot-controlled as rotational speed and torque. Such a pilot control is shown for n axes A1, A2, . . . , Ai, . . . , An in FIG. 3. The control structure is based on that of FIG. 2.” In ar. 0065);
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Monnich to incorporate the teachings of Bitterbolf wherein a system of kinematic equations is solved to determine compensating joint torques at each joint motor to cancel out process forces at the TCP and maintain the predetermined machining path. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Bitterbolf would be to more accurately maintain the TCP along the predetermined movement path (see par. 0018)
Regarding Claim 3, Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf teaches:
The method as claimed in claim 1,
Monnich further teaches: wherein the machine tool includes a plurality of elements capable of cooperating kinematically with each other and a drive for moving the plurality of elements of the machine tool (see at least "An example of a robotic device for carrying out the method is shown FIG. 2 in the form of a seven-axis articulated robot 7 in a light-weight design. The seven-axis articulated robot 7 has seven axes I to VII about which the robot 7 may be moved by corresponding joints and hence has seven degrees of freedom. This enables the end effector 8 (this can be any tool, instrument or an instrument holder) arranged on the movable end of the robot 7 to be positioned flexibly as required." in par. 0015) .
Regarding Claim 5, Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf teaches:
the method as claimed in claim 1,
Monnich further teaches: wherein the method further comprises detecting a collision or contact of the robot based on the estimated one or more process forces (see at least "If, for example, it assumed that there are no errors in the model values, conclusions may be drawn from the difference regarding external influences, such as contact with external objects, appliances, or people." in par. 0009)
Claim(s) 2, 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Monnich et al (US 20190054622 hereinafter Monnich) in view of Sun et al ( US 20150336267, hereinafter Sun) and Bitterbolf et al ( US 20150355647, hereinafter Bitterbolf)
Regarding Claim 2, Monnich teaches:
A method for estimating one or more process forces associated with a tool center point of a machine tool, wherein the machine tool is capable of performing a machining operation in accordance with a predefined path (see at least " With the method for absolute position determination of the end effector of a robotic device with a kinematic chain of movable components, at least one current torque or a value corresponding to the torque is measured on at least one movable component of the kinematic chain of the robotic device by a torque sensor arranged on the movable component. At least one torque calculated on the basis of model data of the robotic device for the movable component is provided. " in par. 0007), the method comprising:
determining a first set of axis torques along the one or more axes of the machine tool (see at least " A calculator (e.g., control or other processor) is provided for the determination of calculated torques from model data, for calculating differences between measured and calculated torques, for comparing the differences with prespecified threshold values, and for the determination of the absolute position of the end effector from calculated and measured torques.” In par. 0010 and “In a second step 2, at least one torque calculated on the basis of a model or model data of the robotic device for the axis is provided. The model data is generally available in a memory and may be used at any time as required. The torque may be calculated from the model data (for example the exact weight of the robotic device and of the instruments attached thereto, values for production tolerances, values for temperature effects, values for dynamic effects etc.) by calculation for the corresponding axis using the model.” In par. 0017);
measuring a second set of axis torques along the one or more axes of the machine tool during a second machining run, wherein the machine tool is performing the machining operation on a work piece during the second machining run operation (see at least " In a first step 1, at least one current torque or a value corresponding to the torque is measured on at least one axis of the robot 7. For example, of the seven-axis articulated robot 7, a torque sensor 9 arranged on an axis measures the torque. In particular, the respective current torque or the value corresponding to the torque is measured by each of the torque sensors 9." in par. 0017); and
determining the one or more process forces associated with the tool center point of the machine tool based on subtracting the determined first set of axis torques from the measured second set of axis torques to obtain resultant axis torques (see at least " Then, in a third step 3, a difference between the respective measured torque and calculated torque is formed for each axis in question. This difference may also be called the “external torque.” The external torque may be induced either by errors in the model calculation or by an external influence, for example contact with an external object." in par. 0018) .
adapting the TCP position estimate based on the estimated one or more process forces associated with the tool center point of the machine tool for compensating for a deviation caused by the estimated one or more process forces (see at least " However, it is possible to utilize the adaptation of the dynamic correction. Regardless of the cause of the deviation, the calculation in the absolutely correct model is only correct if this is calculated in the model, not, as previously, with the model values, but with the model values+/−external torque=measured actual torque. This enhances the accuracy in the case of contact or false model assumptions." in par. 0019)
controlling operation of the machine tool based on the determined one or more process forces. (see at least " The method may be used to detect deviations, which occur as the result of contact with external objects, appliances or people or as a result of errors in the model data. The deviations may then be replaced by enhanced values and thus are no longer able to falsify the determination of the absolute position. The method is able to achieve high absolute accuracy in the determination of the position of the end effector." in par. 0007 and “The robot 7 is actuated by a system controller 10, which controls and/or regulates, for example, the movement of the axes, the positioning of the end effector 8 and the torque sensors 9.” In par. 0016)
Monnich does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Sun does teach:
determining a first set of axis data based on a first machining run of the
machine tool in accordance with the predefined path without performing the machining operation; (see at least " In particular, the programmable controller 62 executes a program to move the robotic tool 10 along the desired continuous path 200 to achieve the cut master shape. However, in step 112, the robotic tool 10 does not perform any operation upon an item of work 16. Instead, during step 112, an actual TCP path 202 of the cutting tool 14 is recorded from encoder data." in par. 0026)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Monnich to incorporate the teachings of Sun wherein the robot traces a machining path with the tool without machining the workpiece to calibrate the tool, in order to arrive at using the modeled and measured torques taught by Monnich to compensate for the positional deviation at the TCP that the measured torques cause. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Sun would be to improve the speed, accuracy, and repeatability of a cutting operation (see par. 0031)
Monnich as modified by Sun does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Bitterbolf does teach:
determining the one or more process forces at the tool center point using the resultant axis torques and a system of equations associated with the machine tool (see at least “A multi-element model 10 (MKM; optionally implemented as a torque calculating device) processes the force vectors and/or the force vector f. Based thereon and based on the joint coordinates, one respective motor torque and/or a corresponding equivalent current for the respective motor of each axis is calculated. Moreover, in the multi-element model 10 angular offsets Δθ are also calculated here. In these calculations the mass properties, the resilience, the damping and linear dependencies of the degrees of freedom of the respective axes and/or individual elements are considered. Preferably, the multi-element model 10 is based on the second-order linear differential equation system which has been proposed above.” In par. 0060)
adapting the predefined path based on the estimated one or more process forces associated with the tool center point of the machine tool for compensating for a deviation caused by the estimated one or more process forces controlling operation of the machine tool based on the determined one or more process forces. (see at least " Advantageously, therefore, the movement of the system is continuously dynamically controlled. Therefore, during the movement, force vectors and corresponding compensating variables are continuously recalculated so that a predetermined movement path may be more accurately maintained. " in par. 0018 and “FIG. 2 shows the structure of a method and/or a corresponding apparatus for controlling and regulating for compensating for interfering forces. Reference coordinates for the TCP, namely X.sub.TCP, Y.sub.TCP and Z.sub.TCP and α.sub.TCP, β.sub.TCP, γ.sub.TCP, are predetermined by a master unit.” In par. 0059 and “The acceleration of one axis and the counter force produced thereby in the joint may optionally lead to parasitic movements at the TCP due to the flexibility of the structure. If, for example, an accelerated axis is supported on a second axis, the second axis alters its position or inclination due to its finite stiffness. Such and similar parasitic movements may be compensated by means of compensating movements of the remaining axes. In this case the calculated compensating movement is pilot-controlled as rotational speed and torque. Such a pilot control is shown for n axes A1, A2, . . . , Ai, . . . , An in FIG. 3. The control structure is based on that of FIG. 2.” In ar. 0065)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Monnich as modified by Sun to incorporate the teachings of Bitterbolf wherein a system of kinematic equations is solved to determine compensating joint torques at each joint motor to cancel out process forces at the TCP and keep it traveling along the predetermined path. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Bitterbolf would be to more accurately maintain the TCP along the predetermined movement path (see par. 0018)
Regarding Claim 11, Monnich as modified by Sun and Bitterbolf (references to Monnich) also teaches:
A control device for estimating one or more process forces associated with a tool center point of a machine tool in an industrial facility, wherein the machine tool is capable of performing a machining operation in accordance with a predefined path (see at least "The robot 7 is actuated by a system controller 10, which controls and/or regulates, for example, the movement of the axes, the positioning of the end effector 8 and the torque sensors 9." in par. 0016) , the control device comprising:
a. a network interface for receiving and transmitting data to one or more devices in the industrial facility (see at least " The robot 7 is actuated by a system controller 10, which controls and/or regulates, for example, the movement of the axes, the positioning of the end effector 8 and the torque sensors 9. The robot 7 also includes a calculator 11, which may, for example, be arranged in or be formed by the system controller 10 or also externally. " in par. 0016) ;
b. one or more processors connected to a memory module, the one or more processors configured to (see at least " To this end, the calculator 11 is embodied as a processor to determine calculated torques from model data….The model data (for example, the exact weight of the robotic device and the instruments attached thereto, values for production tolerances, values for temperature effects, values for dynamic effects, etc.) is generally supplied at the factory or is available on the commissioning of the robot 7 and may, for example, be stored in a memory. It is then possible to calculate from the model data the corresponding torque for each axis for an adopted position. " in par. 0016) :
implement the method of Claim 2 (see Claim 2 analysis for rejection of the method)
Regarding Claim 12, Monnich as modified by Sun and Bitterbolf (references to Monnich) teaches:
A non-transitory storage medium for estimating one or more process forces associated with a tool center point of a machine tool in an industrial facility, wherein the machine tool is capable of performing a machining operation in accordance with a predefined path, the non-transitory storage medium comprising a plurality of instructions, which when executed on one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to (see at least " To this end, the calculator 11 is embodied as a processor to determine calculated torques from model data….The model data (for example, the exact weight of the robotic device and the instruments attached thereto, values for production tolerances, values for temperature effects, values for dynamic effects, etc.) is generally supplied at the factory or is available on the commissioning of the robot 7 and may, for example, be stored in a memory. It is then possible to calculate from the model data the corresponding torque for each axis for an adopted position. " in par. 0016) ::
implement the method of Claim 2 (see Claim 2 analysis for rejection of the method)
Claim(s) 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Monnich et al (US 20190054622 hereinafter Monnich) in view of Bitterbolf et al (US 20150355647, hereinafter Bitterbolf) and Takahei et al (US 20190054622, hereinafter Takahei).
Regarding Claim 6, Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf teaches:
The method as claimed in claim 1,
Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Takahei does teach:
wherein the method further comprises determining a value of a degradation parameter indicative of wear and tear of the machine tool, based on the estimated one or more process forces (see at least “For example, when wear or chipping of a tool occurs at a certain tooth edge of the tool, the radius of rotation of the tool tooth edge becomes shorter than that of the other tool tooth edge(s). Thus, a correction amount corresponding to the wear width or chipping width of the tool is added.” In par. 0064 and " As described above, the identification unit 17 calculates the cutting process parameters that determine the characteristics of the cutting process model and the dynamic characteristic parameters that determine the characteristics of the dynamics model of the machine tool 2, using the disturbance force output from the coordinate transformation unit 12, the predetermined equation models, and the cutting conditions. The above equation models define the relationships between the cutting process parameters, the dynamic characteristic parameters, and the disturbance force." in par. 0074) .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf to incorporate the teachings of Takahei wherein disturbance forces and torques are used to calculate the wear width of the tool and correct for tool wear. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Takahei would be to improve the lifespan of the tool while maintaining machining quality (see par. 0004)
Regarding Claim 7, Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf teaches:
The method as claimed in claim 1,
Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Takahei does teach:
wherein the model can imply acceleration forces of the one or more axes of the machine tool (see at least “Specifically, the disturbance estimation unit 14 estimates and outputs a disturbance force applied to the machine drive system 21 as a disturbance force acting on a feed drive system, using the encoder signal and the motor current signal output from the machine drive system 21, and the acceleration sensor signal output from the acceleration sensor 211." in par. 0044) .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf to incorporate the teachings of Takahei wherein disturbance forces and torques are determined using modeled acceleration forces. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Takahei would be to improve the accuracy of the machined workpiece (see par. 0004)
Regarding Claim 8, Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf teaches:
The method as claimed in claim 1,
Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Takahei does teach:
wherein the model can imply friction forces of the one or more axes of the machine tool (see at least "For example, the disturbance estimation unit 14 may calculate, as an estimated disturbance force, the result of formula (1) from which a viscous frictional force proportional to the speed of the machine drive system is subtracted." in par. 0045) .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf to incorporate the teachings of Takahei wherein viscous friction forces and torques are accounted for in the model. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Takahei would be to improve the accuracy of the final workpiece product (see par. 0004)
Regarding Claim 9, Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf teaches:
The method as claimed in claim 1,
Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Takahei does teach:
wherein the first set of axis forces are determined in each interpolation cycle of the controller and wherein the second set of axis forces are measured in each interpolation cycle of the controller (see at least “that is, it is determined whether a tooth edge contacts the workpiece 32 based on a position deviation at each rotation angle of the tool 33 or each time.” In par. 0059 and "Furthermore, the simulation unit 19 simulates the mechanical dynamics and the cutting process, so that the cutting process can be changed in real time." in par. 0138) .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf to incorporate the teachings of Takahei wherein modeled and measured data are compared in real time to determine disturbances forces and torques. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Takahei would be to improve the accuracy of the final workpiece product (see par. 0004)
Regarding Claim 10, Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf teaches:
The method as claimed in claim 1,
Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf does not appear to explicitly teach all of the following, but Takahei does teach:
wherein the first set of axis forces are measured in each interpolation cycle of the controller and wherein the second set of axis forces are measured in each other interpolation cycle of the controller (see at least “that is, it is determined whether a tooth edge contacts the workpiece 32 based on a position deviation at each rotation angle of the tool 33 or each time.” In par. 0059 and "Furthermore, the simulation unit 19 simulates the mechanical dynamics and the cutting process, so that the cutting process can be changed in real time." in par. 0138) . Note real time is interpreted to mean at every control cycle, which includes every other control cycle as well. (the claim does not require only every other interpolation cycle)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Monnich as modified by Bitterbolf to incorporate the teachings of Takahei wherein modeled and measured data are compared in real time to determine disturbances forces and torques. The motivation to incorporate the teachings of Takahei would be to improve the accuracy of the final workpiece product (see par. 0004).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DYLAN M KATZ whose telephone number is (571)272-2776. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs. 8:00-6:00.
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, Abby Lin can be reached on (571) 270-3976. 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.
/DYLAN M KATZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights