DETAILED ACTION
Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is unclear. The abstract starts out to state the gist of the disclosure/invention “a method and a system for measuring torsion on a rotating shaft,” but then appears to end up with something else. Going forward with examination, the abstract is interpreted to be (Note that in applicant’s response, where a change is requested in the abstract, a separate page of the abstract containing the change will be needed):
--A system and method , using the obtained sensor data, computing torsion on the rotating shaft or output from the rotating shaft. The system comprises: a first magnetic tape of a predetermined pattern and a second magnetic tape of a predetermined pattern secured on the rotating shaft a predetermined distance apart, a first Hall effect sensor and a second Hall effect sensor placed proximate to the first magnetic tape and the second magnetic tape respectively, and a computing device for computing, by using obtained sensor data, torsion on the rotating shaft or power output from the rotating shaft.--
Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Specification
The disclosure (specification) is objected to because paragraph [0040] appears to contain editorial error(s). Going forward with examination, the paragraph is interpreted to be (Note that in applicant’s response, where a change is requested in the specification, an entire paragraph of the specification containing the change will be needed):
--[0040] Time Difference is the moving average time difference between the edge transitions between the sensors. This angle is then used to compute the torque T:
T = G*J*θ/I (2)--
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 9, 11 and 17 are objected to because they are unclear. Note that the claims start out to recite “a method/system for measuring torsion on a rotating shaft,” but then appear to end up with something else. Going forward with examination, the claims are interpreted to be:
--1. A method for measuring torsion on a shaft, the method comprising:
[[(a)]] obtaining a first tape and a second tape;
[[(b)]] securing the first tape and the second tape on the shaft, a predetermined distance apart;
[[(c)]] placing a first sensor proximate the first tape and placing a second sensor proximate the second tape;
[[(d)]] sensing a signal from each of the first tape and the second tape using the first sensor and the second sensor respectively to obtain corresponding sensor data; and
[[(e)]] computing, by using the obtained sensor data, at least one of torsion on the rotating shaft and power output from the rotating shaft.--
--9. The method of claim 8, wherein the torque T [[and]] or the power P [[are]] is computed over a predetermined number of revolutions of the shaft.--
--11. A system for measuring torsion on a rotating shaft, the system comprising:
[[(a)]] a first encoder tape secured on the rotating shaft;
[[(b)]] a second encoder tape secured on the rotating shaft at a predetermined distance away from the first encoder tape;
[[(c)]] a first optical sensor disposed proximate the first encoder tape;
[[(d)]] a second optical sensor disposed proximate the second encoder tape; and
[[(e)]] a computing device comprising a processor and a memory in electrical communication with the first optical sensor and the second optical sensor, the memory for storing instructions for computing at least one of twist angle, torque on the rotating shaft and power output from the rotating shaft
wherein the first encoder tape and the second encoder tape comprise a first pattern and a second pattern respectively and wherein the first optical sensor and the second optical sensor transmit sensor data to the computing device indicative of rotational speeds for the first encoder tape and the second encoder tape respectively and a moving average time difference between edge transitions between the sensors, and
wherein the computing device computes, by using the transmitted sensor data, at least one of the twist angle, torque on the rotating shaft and the power output from the rotating shaft.--
--17. A system for measuring torsion on a rotating shaft, the system comprising:
[[(a)]] a first magnetic tape secured on the rotating shaft;
[[(b)]] a second magnetic tape secured on the rotating shaft at a predetermined distance away from the first magnetic tape;
[[(c)]] a first Hall effect sensor disposed proximate the first magnetic tape;
[[(d)]] a second Hall effect sensor disposed proximate the second magnetic tape; and
[[(e)]] a computing device comprising a processor and memory in electrical communication with the first and second Hall effect sensors, the memory for storing instructions for computing at least one of twist angle, torque on the rotating shaft and power output from the rotating shaft
wherein the first and second Hall effect sensors transmit sensor data to the computing device indicative of rotational speeds for the first magnetic tape and the second magnetic tape respectively and a moving average time difference between edge transitions between the sensors, and
wherein the computing device computes, by using the transmitted sensor data, at least one of the twist angle, torque on the rotating shaft and the power output from the rotating shaft.--
--18. The system[[,]] of claim 17, wherein a distance between the first Hall effect sensor and the first magnetic tape ranges from about 0.5 mm to about 5.0 mm.--
--19. The system[[,]] of claim 17, wherein a distance between the second Hall effect sensor and the second magnetic tape ranges from about 0.5 mm to about 5.0 mm.--
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bechtel et al. (US 5,001,937; hereinafter “Bechtel”). Bechtel is a reference listed in an IDS filed on 2/28/2024.
Bechtel teaches:
1. A method for measuring torsion on a shaft (1), the method comprising (See fig. 1, reproduced below):
obtaining a first tape (2) and a second tape 3 (Abstract: “The band [2/3] may be applied as an adhesive tape; Col. 2, lines 41-68: “These bands [2 and 3]…may consist of an adhesive tape attached to the shaft [1];” Bechtel claim 2);
securing the first tape (2) and the second tape (3) on the shaft (1), a predetermined distance apart (as seen in fig. 1);
placing a first sensor (4) proximate the first tape (2) and placing a second sensor (5) proximate the second tape 3 (as seen in fig. 1);
sensing a signal from each of the first tape (2) and the second tape (3) using the first sensor (4) and the second sensor (5) respectively to obtain corresponding sensor data (Col. 2, lines 41-68); and
computing, by using the obtained sensor data, at least one of torsion on the rotating shaft and power output from the rotating shaft (Abstract; Col. 3, lines 1-12).
PNG
media_image1.png
510
774
media_image1.png
Greyscale
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the first tape (2) is a first encoder tape, the second tape (3) is a second encoder tape, the first sensor (4) is a first optical sensor, and the second sensor (5) is a second optical sensor (Abstract; Bechtel claim 1).
4. The method of claim 2, wherein the first encoder tape (2) and the second encoder tape (3) each comprise a predetermined pattern and wherein the predetermined pattern comprises alternating light and dark portions (as seen in fig. 1; Abstract; Bechtel claim 1).
11 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
A system for measuring torsion on a rotating shaft (1), the system comprising:
a first encoder tape (2) secured on the rotating shaft (1);
a second encoder tape (3) secured on the rotating shaft (1) at a predetermined distance away from the first encoder tape (3);
a first optical sensor (4) disposed proximate the first encoder tape (2);
a second optical sensor (5) disposed proximate the second encoder tape (3); and
a computing device (= microprocessor/microcontroller 6; Fig. 1) comprising a processor and a memory (an inherent structure for storing instructions for computing…) in electrical communication with the first optical sensor (4) and the second optical sensor 5 (as is evident from at least fig. 1), the memory for storing instructions for computing at least one of twist angle, torque on the rotating shaft and power output from the rotating shaft (Abstract; Col. 3, lines 1-12),
wherein the first encoder tape (2) and the second encoder tape (3) comprise a first pattern and a second pattern respectively (as seen at least in fig. 1) and wherein the first optical sensor (4) and the second optical sensor (5) transmit sensor data to the computing device (6) indicative of rotational speeds (= rotation rate; Col. 5, lines 22-27) for the first encoder tape (2) and second encoder tape (3) respectively and a moving average time difference between edge transitions between the sensors (the moving average time difference accounts for any up and down motion of the shaft; Col. 5, lines 41-56), and
wherein the computing device (16) computes, by using the transmitted sensor data, at least one of the twist angle, torque on the rotating shaft and the power output from the rotating shaft (Abstract; Col. 3, lines 1-12).
12. The system of claim 11, wherein the first encoder tape (2) comprises a first pattern , the second encoder tape (3) comprises a second pattern, the first pattern comprises alternating light and dark portions, and the second pattern comprises alternating light and dark portions (as seen at least in fig. 1).
13. The system of claim 11, wherein the first pattern and the second pattern are the same (as is apparent from at least fig. 1).
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 6-10 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bechtel.
6. Bechtel teaches the method of claim 1, wherein said computing said power comprises computing a twist angle ϕ of the rotating shaft as (See Bechtel col. 3, lines 1-12):
PNG
media_image2.png
168
404
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Bechtel is silent about:
“wherein said computing said power comprises computing a twist angle θ as:
θ = 2*π*(RPM)*(Time Difference)/60,000,000 rad
wherein RPM is revolutions per minute of the shaft and Time Difference is a moving average of time difference between corresponding edge transitions from the first sensor and the second sensor.”
The feature, however, appears to direct to natural phenomenon unpatentable. So does Bechtel above teaching. The twist angle of the rotating shaft (1) would always be the same regardless of any computation to come up with a value for the twist angle. The computation recited in the claim, or that taught by Bechtel, is merely means to express or convey in writing a natural phenomenon being the twist angle occurring naturally as a result of the recited method steps. The computation would at best be a human expression but not considered to be an invention (Neither would a computation E = mc2 be considered to be an invention, thus cannot be patented).
Furthermore, it has been held that optimization within prior art conditions or through routine experimentation is an obvious variation of a known structure, thus uninventive and unpatentable. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). As for the present case, it appears that one may perform routine experimentation to determine θ = 2*π*(RPM)*(Time Difference)/60,000,000 rad, based on parameters and/or operating condition of elements involved, for example, so as to best determine the twist angle θ.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to claim wherein said computing said power comprises computing a twist angle θ as: θ = 2*π*(RPM)*(Time Difference)/60,000,000 rad, wherein RPM is revolutions per minute of the shaft and Time Difference is a moving average of time difference between corresponding edge transitions from the first sensor and the second sensor (or any other computation), since the computation is merely means to express a natural phenomenon, thus doesn’t constitute a human invention. Furthermore, it appears that one may perform routine experimentation to determine θ = 2*π*(RPM)*(Time Difference)/60,000,000 rad, based on parameters and/or operating condition of elements involved, for example, so as to best determine the twist angle θ.
7. Bechtel as modified teaches the method of claim 6, wherein said computing said power may further comprise: computing a torque T as T = G*J*θ/I wherein the torque is measured in Nm, G = Modulus of Rigidity, J = polar area moment of inertia, θ = angle of twist in radians (rad) and I = said predetermined distance between the first tape and the second tape (The claim is directed to a natural phenomenon and/or routine experimentation. See discussion above).
8. The method of claim 7, further comprising computing the power P as: P=2*π*(RPM)*T/60 (The claim is directed to a natural phenomenon and/or routine experimentation. See discussion above).
9. Bechtel as modified teaches the method of claim 8, wherein the torque T or the power P is computed over a predetermined number of revolutions of the shaft (which may be one revolution/rotation; Bechtel col. 3, lines 36-39: “The torsion ϕ(t) can then be…computed several times during a single shaft rotation”).
10. Bechtel as modified teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the predetermined number of revolutions is 50 (or any other number of revolutions that is greater than 1, obviously because the torque T or the power P is computable over at least one revolution as discussed above in claim 9).
15. Bechtel as modified teaches the system of claim 11, wherein a distance between the first optical sensor and the first encoder tape ranges from about 0.8 mm to about 12 mm (based on routine experimentation. See discussion above in claim 6. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
16. Bechtel as modified teaches the system of claim 11, wherein a distance between the second optical sensor and the second encoder tape ranges from about 0.8 mm to about 12 mm (based on routine experimentation. See discussion above in claim 6. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bechtel in view of Witte (US 5,067,355).
5. Bechtel teaches the method of claim 4, but is silent about: wherein the predetermined pattern comprising the alternating light and dark portions is uniform.
Witte teaches a method for measuring torsion on a shaft (24), wherein a first encoder wheel (28) and a second encoder wheel (32) each comprise a predetermined pattern, and wherein the predetermined pattern may be uniform (as is apparent from at least fig. 2, reproduced below; Col. 3, line 65 – Col. 4, line 3: “While any number of teeth may be utilized on the speed sensor wheel 28, phase comparison may be simplified by providing a toothed or notched wheel 28 which has the same number of teeth or notches as the number of blades 36 in the at least one turbine disk 32 or at least an integral multiple of those number of blades”), so as to provide encoder data.
PNG
media_image3.png
776
784
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to apply Witte teaching to Bechtel method by having the predetermined pattern comprising the alternating light and dark portions be uniform, so as to provide encoder/sensor data.
14. Bechtel as modified teaches the system of claim 11, but is silent about: wherein the first pattern and the second pattern are different.
Witte teaches a method for measuring torsion on a shaft (24), wherein a first encoder wheel (28) and a second encoder wheel (32) each comprise a predetermined pattern, and wherein a first pattern (on the encoder wheel 28) and a second pattern (on the encoder wheel 32) may be different (Col. 3, line 65 – Col. 4, line 3: “While any number of teeth may be utilized on the speed sensor wheel 28, phase comparison may be simplified by providing a toothed or notched wheel 28 which has the same number of teeth or notches as the number of blades 36 in the at least one turbine disk 32 or at least an integral multiple of those number of blades”), so as to provide encoder data.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to apply Witte teaching to Bechtel method by having the first pattern and the second pattern are different, so as to still provide encoder/sensor data.
Claims 1, 3 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (CN 111043951 A; hereinafter “Xiao”) in view of Bechtel. This Office action provides a Machine Translation of Xiao.
1. Xiao teaches a method for measuring torsion on a shaft (20a), the method comprising (See figs. 4, 5, reproduced below):
(a) obtaining a first circular sheet (31a) and a second circular sheet 31a (Abstract; Xiao claim 5);
(b) securing the first circular sheet (31a) and the second circular sheet (31a) on the shaft (20a), a predetermined distance apart (as seen at least in fig. 5);
(c) placing a first sensor (32a) proximate the first tape (31a) and placing a second sensor (32a) proximate the second tape 31a (as is evident at least from fig. 4);
(d) sensing a signal from each of the first circular sheet (31a) and the second circular sheet (31a) using the first sensor (32a) and the second sensor (32a) respectively to obtain corresponding sensor data (Abstract; Translation pages 2 and 4-5); and
(e) computing, by using the obtained sensor data, at least one of torsion on the rotating shaft (20a) and power output from the rotating shaft (Abstract; Translation pages 2 and 4-5).
PNG
media_image4.png
1248
635
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
514
688
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Xiao is silent about: the first circular sheet (31a) and a second circular sheet (31a) are tapes.
Bechtel teaches a system for measuring torsion on a rotating shaft (1), the system comprising a first encoder tape (2) ad a second encoder tape (3) secured on the rotating shaft (See Bechtel fig. 1). The encoder tape tapes (2, 3) can be easily retrofitted onto existing equipment without substantial modification (Col. 1, lines 39-43).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to apply Bechtel teaching to Xiao method by having the first circular sheet (31a) and a second circular sheet (31a) be tapes, since such tapes would easily be retrofitted onto existing equipment (e.g., the shaft 20a) without substantial modification.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the first tape is a first magnetic tape (31a), the second tape is a second magnetic tape (31a), the first sensor is a first Hall effect sensor, and the second sensor is a second Hall effect sensor (Xiao Translation pages 3-4).
17 (essentially equivalent to claims 1 and 11).
Xiao as modified teaches a system for measuring torsion on a rotating shaft (20a), the system comprising:
a first magnetic tape (31a) secured on the rotating shaft (20a);
a second magnetic tape (31a) secured on the rotating shaft (20a) at a predetermined distance away from the first magnetic tape (31a);
a first Hall effect sensor (32a) disposed proximate the first magnetic tape (31a);
a second Hall effect sensor (32a) disposed proximate the second magnetic tape (31a); and
a computing device (16; Bechtel fig. 1) comprising a processor and memory in electrical communication with the first and second magnetic sensors, the memory for storing instructions for computing at least one of twist angle, torque on the rotating shaft and power output from the rotating shaft,
wherein the first and second Hall effect sensors transmit sensor data to the computing device indicative of rotational speeds for the first magnetic tape and second magnetic tape respectively and a moving average time difference between edge transitions between the sensors (per Bechtel teaching; See discussion above in claim 11), and
wherein the computing device computes, by using the transmitted sensor data, at least one of the twist angle, torque on the rotating shaft and the power output from the rotating shaft (See discussions above in claim 1).
18. Xiao as modified teaches the system of claim 17, wherein a distance between the first Hall effect sensor and the first magnetic tape ranges from about 0.5 mm to about 5.0 mm (based on routine experimentation. See discussion above in claim 6. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
19. Xiao as modified teaches the system of claim 17, wherein a distance between the second Hall effect sensor and the second magnetic tape ranges from about 0.5 mm to about 5.0 mm (based on routine experimentation. See discussion above in claim 6. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nguyen (Wyn) Q. Ha whose telephone number is (571) 272-2863, email: nguyenq.ha@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4:30 pm (Eastern Time).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Nguyen Q. Ha/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 February 10, 2026