Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
Claims 1-20 are currently presented for Examination.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/04/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
4. The amendment filed on 03/04/2026 has been entered and considered by the examiner. By the amendment, claims 1, 8 and 15 are amended. In view of amendment made, the previous 101 rejection is withdrawn since the claim is directed towards a specific improvement in computer-based discretization and dynamic mesh handling for numerical simulation of periodic physical structures. Specifically, the claim invention enables: 1) application of geometry cuts to a global mesh without re-meshing; 2) creation of arbitrary, non-planar matching boundaries; 3) preservation of conformality at the mesh boundary, ensuring solver compatibility; and 4) maintenance of simulation accuracy without the mesh defects. The prior art rejection is still maintained in view of the amendments made. See office action.
Applicant argument 103 rejection
Applicant arguments
Claim limitation “displacing the floating portion according to the matching boundaries of the first boundary and the second boundary; and assembling the static portion and the displaced floating portion to generate an assembled mesh bounded by the third boundary and the fourth boundary corresponding to the arbitrary matching boundary, wherein the static portion includes a conformal interface defined by the matching boundaries of the first boundary and the second boundary. The Office Action contends that paragraphs 22, 51, and 59; and Fig. 1c,1c, 15 of Masayuki discloses these features. (Office Action, p. 15-16).
It is respectfully submitted that Tani and Masayuki do not disclose the above emphasized claim limitations.
Examiner response
Applicant arguments are based on misinterpretations of the cited reference and fails to rebut the prime facie case of obviousness. The above claim limitation is rejected under Tani see previous action page 15-16. Masayuki is cited only for teaching a master region bounded between first and second matching boundaries. Tani explicitly teaches two corresponding mesh boundaries -the stator-side mesh surface and the rotor-side mesh surface-each equally divided and composed of elements of mutually equal size. (See Tani para 1, 22 and fig 1(a)-1(e)). Masayuki cited specially for its explicit disclosure of matching boundaries-not for conformal assembly. Applicant’s attempt to fail Masayuki for not teaching conformal assembly misrepresents the structure of the combination rejection. See office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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 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.
6. 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.
7. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
8. Claims 1-5, 7-12, 14-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Tani et al. (PUB NO: US20050055183A1) in view of Masayuki et al. (JP2005258839A)
Regarding claim 1, 8 and 17
Claim 1 – Tani teaches a non-transitory machine-readable medium storing executable program instructions which when executed by a data processing system cause the data processing system to perform a method, (see para 46-47 and fig 2- FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing a three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus according to the present invention. In the figure, 1 represents a three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus of the present invention implemented using a computer, which comprises: a CPU 11 for performing operations; a RAM 12; an external memory device 13 such as a CD-ROM drive; and an internal memory device 14 such as a hard disk, reads a computer program 20 of the present invention from a memory product 2 such as a CD-ROM of the present invention by the external memory device 13, stores the read computer program 20 into the internal memory device 14, and loads the computer program 20 into the RAM 12, and the CPU 11 executes processes necessary for the three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus 1, based on the computer program 20. The three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus 1 comprises an input device 15 such as a keyboard or a mouse, and an output device 16 such as a liquid crystal display or a CRT display, and receives operations, such as input of data, from an operator.) comprising;
generating a mesh of a master region in a geometry representing a physical structure for a simulation of the physical structure; (see para 11- A three-dimensional mesh generating method according to the first invention is a method for generating a three-dimensional mesh representing a rotating machine with a stator or a rotor having a twisted structure in a direction of a rotation axis of the rotor, including a spatial area between the stator and the rotor, by a combination of a plurality of polyhedrons. see para 22-In the first invention, a ring-shaped gap G1 is provided between the rotor and the stator on a two-dimensional plane perpendicular to the rotation axis as shown in FIG. 1(a), and both sides of the ring-shaped gap G1 are equally divided to generate a two-dimensional mesh of the stator side and the rotor side as shown in FIG. 1(b). In the third invention, each of the surface elements constituting the stator-side mesh surface ST and the rotor-side mesh surface RT is associated with surface elements constituting the boundary surface SL, and the space between corresponding surface elements is filled with one quadrangular pyramid and four tetrahedrons. Consequently, the three-dimensional mesh is made periodic in the rotation direction without requiring an additional process.)
wherein features of the geometry in the master region representing a periodic pattern of the geometry; (see para 10- Another object of the present invention is to provide a three-dimensional mesh generating method capable of giving a three-dimensional mesh periodicity in the rotation direction. (See also para 24- Consequently, the three-dimensional mesh is made periodic in the rotation direction without requiring an additional process.)
splitting the mesh of the master region along mesh edges between the first boundary and the second boundary, the mesh split into a static portion and a floating portion along an arbitrary matching boundary according to the mesh edges; (see para 005- At this time, portions of the two-dimensional meshes on the stator side and the rotor side, which come into contact with the boundary surface, are equally divided in the rotation direction. See para 22-FIG. 1 is an explanatory view showing the procedure of a three-dimensional mesh generating method of the first invention. Next, as shown in FIG. 1(d), a boundary surface SL is formed by projecting, into the cylindrical gap, any one of a stator-side mesh surface ST and a rotor-side mesh surface RT which face each other with a cylindrical gap G2 therebetween. Next, a three-dimensional mesh is generated as shown in FIG. 1(e) by filing the cylindrical gap G2 with a plurality of polyhedrons including polyhedrons comprising each of surface elements constituting the boundary surface SL, the stator-side mesh surface ST and the rotor-side mesh surface RT as one face. Since portions of the stator side and the rotor side of the three-dimensional mesh which come into contact with each other at the boundary surface are composed of elements having mutually equal size in the rotation direction, it is possible to rotate the rotor side of a three-dimensional mesh representing a rotating machine having skew by shifting the elements from the boundary surface. See fig 7 and para 52-53-First, the three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus 1 receives input of the initial three-dimensional mesh representing the structure of the rotating machine entered by the operation of the operator (S1). Next, the three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus 1 generates a boundary surface in the cylindrical gap G2 (S2))
Examiner note: Examiner consider the "stator-portion" and "rotor-portion" correspond to static and rotating (floating) portions, respectively. The boundary surface SL is created in the cylindrical gap between the rotor and stator. This SL acts as the arbitrary matching boundary along which the mesh is separated. First boundary is the first periodic side of the sector as shown in fig 1. Second boundary is the opposite periodic side of the sector as shown in fig 1.
the static portion being bounded by the first boundary and a third boundary, (see para 53-stator-side mesh surface ST or the rotor-side mesh surface RT onto the set boundary surface SL. See para 59- FIG. 13 is a perspective view showing the three-dimensional mesh between the stator-side mesh surface ST and the boundary surface SL, wherein FIG. 13(a) shows the three-dimensional mesh from the boundary surface SL side, and FIG. 13(b) shows the three-dimensional mesh from the stator-side mesh surface ST side.)
Examiner note: Third boundary corresponds to the stator-side interface boundary.
the floating portion being bounded by a fourth boundary and the second boundary, (see para 53-stator-side mesh surface ST or the rotor-side mesh surface RT onto the set boundary surface SL. See para 59- FIG. 14 is a perspective view showing the three-dimensional mesh between the rotor-side mesh surface RT and the boundary surface SL, wherein FIG. 14(a) shows the three-dimensional mesh from the rotor-side mesh surface RT side, and FIG. 14(b) shows the three-dimensional mesh from the boundary surface SL side)
Examiner note: Fourth boundary corresponds to the rotor-side interface boundary.
the third boundary and the fourth boundary corresponding to the arbitrary matching boundary according to the mesh edges; (see para 53-stator-side mesh surface ST or the rotor-side mesh surface RT onto the set boundary surface SL. see para 59- All the portions including the cylindrical gap G2 are represented by combinations of a plurality of polyhedrons, and the stator-side three-dimensional mesh and the rotor-side three-dimensional mesh match each other at the boundary surface SL.)
displacing the floating portion according to the matching boundaries of the first boundary and the second boundary;(see para 15- rotating a rotor side of the three-dimensional mesh by shifting the elements from the boundary surface. See para 67- The rotor side is shifted from the boundary surface SL in the rotation direction by one element with respect to the stator side from the initial state shown in FIG. 18(a), and thus the rotor side is rotated by one step as shown in FIG. 18(b). In the case where the rotor side is further rotated, the rotor side is further shifted by one element and thus rotated by one step as shown in FIG. 18(c).)
assembling the static portion and the displaced floating portion according to generate an assembled mesh bounded by the third boundary and the fourth boundary corresponding to the arbitrary matching boundary, (See para 22-Next, as shown in FIG. 1(c), an initial three-dimensional mesh having skew is generated by joining together the two-dimensional meshes with the stator side and the rotor side relatively rotated according to the skew structure, in the direction of the rotation axis. ee para 59-FIG. 15 is a perspective view showing a part of the completed three-dimensional mesh. By performing the filling periodically in the rotation direction, the spaces between the stator-side mesh surface ST and rotor-side mesh surface RT and the boundary surface SL are represented by combinations of a plurality of polyhedrons, and a three-dimensional mesh representing the rotating machine including the cylindrical gap G2 by combinations of a plurality of polyhedrons is completed. All the portions including the cylindrical gap G2 are represented by combinations of a plurality of polyhedrons, and the stator-side three-dimensional mesh and the rotor-side three-dimensional mesh match each other at the boundary surface SL. See also para 67- The magnetic field analyzing apparatus 4 for a rotating machine generates a three-dimensional mesh representing a rotating machine to be analyzed by using the above-mentioned three-dimensional mesh generating method (S100), and rotates the rotor side of the generated three-dimensional mesh from the boundary surface SL by one step by shifting the rotor side with respect to the stator side by one element (S200). Next, the magnetic field analyzing apparatus 4 connects the rotor side and the stator side at the boundary surface SL (S300), and analyzes the magnetic field of the rotating machine by using a finite element method (S400).)
wherein the static portion includes a conformal interface defined by the matching boundaries of the first boundary and the second boundary. (See para 005- At this time, portions of the two-dimensional meshes on the stator side and the rotor side, which come into contact with the boundary surface, are equally divided in the rotation direction and arranged to match each other at the boundary surface. See para 59- All the portions including the cylindrical gap G2 are represented by combinations of a plurality of polyhedrons, and the stator-side three-dimensional mesh and the rotor-side three-dimensional mesh match each other at the boundary surface SL)
Tani does not teach wherein the master region is bounded between a first boundary and a second boundary as matching boundaries of the mesh.
In the related field of invention, Masayuki teaches wherein the master region is bounded between a first boundary and a second boundary as matching boundaries of the mesh. (See para 58-59-In the analysis model 220 shown in FIG. 22, the surface 221, the surface 222 that is the back surface of the surface 221, the surface 223, the surface 224 that is the back surface of the surface 223, and the like are searched. Regarding the surface 221, line segments 225 and 227 are axial line segments, and line segments 226 and 228 are circumferential line segments. Find the first line segment closest to the axis of rotation among the line segments in the axial direction. The obtained first line segment is projected onto the rotation axis to create a second line segment. A surface having these two first and second line segments as a boundary line is created. In FIG. 22, the first line segment is a line segment 225, and the second line segment is a line segment 238. A surface 230 is created from these line segments 225, 238.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of mesh generation as disclosed by Tani to include wherein the master region is bounded between a first boundary and a second boundary as matching boundaries of the mesh as taught by Masayuki in the system of Tani in order to generate a mesh for an analysis model composed of an arbitrary rotating body that optimizes and rationalizes design work, and more particularly to an analysis mesh generation apparatus used in CAE. (see para 001 and 008, Masayuki)
Regarding claim 8
Tani teaches a computer implemented method, (see para 46-47 and fig 2- FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing a three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus according to the present invention)
The rest of claim 8 is rejected for the same reasons as Claim 1, as they share the same elements.
Regarding claim 15
Tani teaches a system, comprising: a memory to store a geometry representing a physical structure for a simulation of the physical structure; and one or more processors to: (see para 46-48 and fig 2- FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing a three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus according to the present invention. In the figure, 1 represents a three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus of the present invention implemented using a computer, which comprises: a CPU 11 for performing operations; a RAM 12; an external memory device 13 such as a CD-ROM drive; and an internal memory device 14 such as a hard disk, reads a computer program 20 of the present invention from a memory product 2 such as a CD-ROM of the present invention by the external memory device 13, stores the read computer program 20 into the internal memory device 14, and loads the computer program 20 into the RAM 12, and the CPU 11 executes processes necessary for the three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus 1, based on the computer program 20. The three-dimensional mesh generating apparatus 1 comprises an input device 15 such as a keyboard or a mouse, and an output device 16 such as a liquid crystal display or a CRT display, and receives operations, such as input of data, from an operator. FIG. 3 is a partially cut perspective view showing an example of the structure of a rotating machine having skew.)
The rest of claim 15 is rejected for the same reasons as Claim 1, as they share the same elements.
Regarding claim 2
Tani, in view of Masayuki as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tani does not teach wherein the assembled mesh is between a first arbitrary boundary and a second arbitrary boundary, and wherein the first arbitrary boundary and the second arbitrary boundary have a same shape of the arbitrary matching boundary.
However, Masayuki further teaches wherein the assembled mesh is between a first arbitrary boundary and a second arbitrary boundary, and wherein the first arbitrary boundary and the second arbitrary boundary have a same shape of the arbitrary matching boundary. (See para 39-49-(E) Next, a mesh is generated for the reference partial model 134p of group 2. At this time, mesh patterns are matched at the group boundary surfaces of group 1 and group 2 to ensure continuity of the mesh. The specific method is as follows. (F) The degree of coincidence of the faces and lines of the group 1 reference partial model 131p and the group 2 reference partial model 134p is examined. FIG. 17A shows the reference partial model 131p rotated and moved to the position of the reference partial model 134p. For comparison, a reference partial model 134p is shown in FIG. The line segments 171a to 171t have the same subscripts as the line segments 172a to 172t, and the surfaces 173a to 173k have the same subscripts as the surfaces 174a to 174k. It is the face of. (G) For the line segments 172a to 172t that match between the reference partial model 131p and the reference partial model 134p in step (f), when generating a mesh model with hexahedral mesh elements, the number of divisions is set to both models 131p. , 134p are the same. The system determines the line segment of the reference partial model 134p that does not match between the two reference partial models 131p and 134p, for example, the line segment 175. As a result, mesh elements are continuously formed even at the boundary portion (H) When generating a mesh model with tetrahedral mesh elements, the division of the faces 173a to 173k that coincide with each other in the reference partial models 131p and 134p is copied. For the surface of the reference partial model 134p that does not match between the two reference partial models 131p and 134p, for example, the surface 176, a mesh model is generated so as to maintain continuity at the copied mesh and the boundary. As a result, the entire mesh model is completed. An example of the mesh model 190 generated using the hexahedral mesh element 191 is shown in FIG.19)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of mesh generation as disclosed by Tani to include wherein the assembled mesh is between a first arbitrary boundary and a second arbitrary boundary, and wherein the first arbitrary boundary and the second arbitrary boundary have a same shape of the arbitrary matching boundary as taught by Masayuki in the system of Tani in order to generate a mesh for an analysis model composed of an arbitrary rotating body that optimizes and rationalizes design work, and more particularly to an analysis mesh generation apparatus used in CAE. (see para 001 and 008, Masayuki)
Regarding claim 9 and 16
Claims 9 and 16 are rejected for the same reasons as Claim 2, as they share the same elements.
Regarding claim 3
Tani, in view of Masayuki as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tani further teaches dividing the mesh of the master region into the static portion and the floating portion along the arbitrary boundary. (See para 22-FIG. 1 is an explanatory view showing the procedure of a three-dimensional mesh generating method of the first invention. In the first invention, a ring-shaped gap G1 is provided between the rotor and the stator on a two-dimensional plane perpendicular to the rotation axis as shown in FIG. 1(a), and both sides of the ring-shaped gap G1 are equally divided to generate a two-dimensional mesh of the stator side and the rotor side as shown in FIG. 1(b). Also see fig 5-6 and para 51- FIG. 5 is a schematic view for explaining the processes of generating the initial three-dimensional mesh. First, one layer of two-dimensional mesh as shown in FIG. 5(a) is stacked in the direction of the rotation axis, and the rotor side of the two-dimensional mesh is rotated according to the structure of the skew. In the figure, M1 represents the first two-dimensional mesh, and M2 represents the stacked two-dimensional mesh. Next, corresponding nodes in the two-dimensional meshes are connected by a straight line between the stacked two-dimensional meshes to generate one layer of initial three-dimensional mesh. Further, as shown in FIG. 5(c), the next two-dimensional mesh M3 is stacked and the rotor side is rotated, and the same operation is repeated until the initial three-dimensional mesh representing the structure of the rotating machine is completed. FIG. 6 is a perspective view showing a part of the initial three-dimensional mesh. On the stator side, the initial three-dimensional mesh is generated by stacking two-dimensional meshes parallel to the rotation axis, while, on the rotor side, the initial three-dimensional mesh having a twisted structure according to the structure of the skew is generated. A cylindrical gap G2 is generated between the stator side and the rotor side by a stack of the ring-shaped gaps G1.)
Regarding claim 10 and 17
Claims 10 and 17 are rejected for the same reasons as Claim 3, as they share the same elements.
Regarding claim 4
Tani, in view of Masayuki as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tani further teaches wherein splitting the mesh includes generating a first mesh of a first interior region of the master region, and further comprising partitioning the generated first mesh of the first interior region of the master region into the static portion and the floating portion. (See para 22-FIG. 1 is an explanatory view showing the procedure of a three-dimensional mesh generating method of the first invention. In the first invention, a ring-shaped gap G1 is provided between the rotor and the stator on a two-dimensional plane perpendicular to the rotation axis as shown in FIG. 1(a), and both sides of the ring-shaped gap G1 are equally divided to generate a two-dimensional mesh of the stator side and the rotor side as shown in FIG. 1(b). Next, as shown in FIG. 1(d), a boundary surface SL is formed by projecting, into the cylindrical gap, any one of a stator-side mesh surface ST and a rotor-side mesh surface RT which face each other with a cylindrical gap G2 therebetween. Next, a three-dimensional mesh is generated as shown in FIG. 1(e) by filing the cylindrical gap G2 with a plurality of polyhedrons including polyhedrons comprising each of surface elements constituting the boundary surface SL, the stator-side mesh surface ST and the rotor-side mesh surface RT as one face. Since portions of the stator side and the rotor side of the three-dimensional mesh which come into contact with each other at the boundary surface are composed of elements having mutually equal size in the rotation direction, it is possible to rotate the rotor side of a three-dimensional mesh representing a rotating machine having skew by shifting the elements from the boundary surface. Also see fig 5-6 and para 51- FIG. 5 is a schematic view for explaining the processes of generating the initial three-dimensional mesh. First, one layer of two-dimensional mesh as shown in FIG. 5(a) is stacked in the direction of the rotation axis, and the rotor side of the two-dimensional mesh is rotated according to the structure of the skew. In the figure, M1 represents the first two-dimensional mesh, and M2 represents the stacked two-dimensional mesh. Next, corresponding nodes in the two-dimensional meshes are connected by a straight line between the stacked two-dimensional meshes to generate one layer of initial three-dimensional mesh. Further, as shown in FIG. 5(c), the next two-dimensional mesh M3 is stacked and the rotor side is rotated, and the same operation is repeated until the initial three-dimensional mesh representing the structure of the rotating machine is completed. FIG. 6 is a perspective view showing a part of the initial three-dimensional mesh. On the stator side, the initial three-dimensional mesh is generated by stacking two-dimensional meshes parallel to the rotation axis, while, on the rotor side, the initial three-dimensional mesh having a twisted structure according to the structure of the skew is generated. A cylindrical gap G2 is generated between the stator side and the rotor side by a stack of the ring-shaped gaps G1.)
Regarding claim 11 and 18
Claims 11 and 18 are rejected for the same reasons as Claim 4, as they share the same elements.
Regarding claim 5
Tani, in view of Masayuki as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tani further teaches identifying a second interior region of an assembled region; and generating a second mesh of the second interior region. (See para 22-FIG. 1 is an explanatory view showing the procedure of a three-dimensional mesh generating method of the first invention. In the first invention, a ring-shaped gap G1 is provided between the rotor and the stator on a two-dimensional plane perpendicular to the rotation axis as shown in FIG. 1(a), and both sides of the ring-shaped gap G1 are equally divided to generate a two-dimensional mesh of the stator side and the rotor side as shown in FIG. 1(b). Next, as shown in FIG. 1(d), a boundary surface SL is formed by projecting, into the cylindrical gap, any one of a stator-side mesh surface ST and a rotor-side mesh surface RT which face each other with a cylindrical gap G2 therebetween. Next, a three-dimensional mesh is generated as shown in FIG. 1(e) by filing the cylindrical gap G2 with a plurality of polyhedrons including polyhedrons comprising each of surface elements constituting the boundary surface SL, the stator-side mesh surface ST and the rotor-side mesh surface RT as one face. Since portions of the stator side and the rotor side of the three-dimensional mesh which come into contact with each other at the boundary surface are composed of elements having mutually equal size in the rotation direction, it is possible to rotate the rotor side of a three-dimensional mesh representing a rotating machine having skew by shifting the elements from the boundary surface. Also see fig 5-6 and para 51- FIG. 5 is a schematic view for explaining the processes of generating the initial three-dimensional mesh. First, one layer of two-dimensional mesh as shown in FIG. 5(a) is stacked in the direction of the rotation axis, and the rotor side of the two-dimensional mesh is rotated according to the structure of the skew. In the figure, M1 represents the first two-dimensional mesh, and M2 represents the stacked two-dimensional mesh. Next, corresponding nodes in the two-dimensional meshes are connected by a straight line between the stacked two-dimensional meshes to generate one layer of initial three-dimensional mesh. Further, as shown in FIG. 5(c), the next two-dimensional mesh M3 is stacked and the rotor side is rotated, and the same operation is repeated until the initial three-dimensional mesh representing the structure of the rotating machine is completed. FIG. 6 is a perspective view showing a part of the initial three-dimensional mesh. On the stator side, the initial three-dimensional mesh is generated by stacking two-dimensional meshes parallel to the rotation axis, while, on the rotor side, the initial three-dimensional mesh having a twisted structure according to the structure of the skew is generated. A cylindrical gap G2 is generated between the stator side and the rotor side by a stack of the ring-shaped gaps G1.)
Regarding claim 12
Claims 12 are rejected for the same reasons as Claim 5, as they share the same elements.
Regarding claim 7
Tani, in view of Masayuki as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tani further teaches wherein the arbitrary matching boundary is at an interface of the static portion and the floating portion. (See para 59-FIG. 15 is a perspective view showing a part of the completed three-dimensional mesh. All the portions including the cylindrical gap G2 are represented by combinations of a plurality of polyhedrons, and the stator-side three-dimensional mesh and the rotor-side three-dimensional mesh match each other at the boundary surface SL.)
Regarding claim 14 and 20
Claims 14 and 20 are rejected for the same reasons as Claim 7, as they share the same elements.
9. Claims 6, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Tani et al. (PUB NO: US20050055183A1) in view of Masayuki et al. (JP2005258839A) and further in view of Shen, Jie. ("Feature-Based Optimization of Beam Structures Represented by Polygonal Meshes." Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering 3.3 (2003): 243-249.)
Regarding claim 6
Tani, in view of Masayuki as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Tani does not teach wherein generating the mesh of the master region comprises: identifying a plurality of cuts through a default master region determining a minimum geometry intersection of the plurality of cuts through the default master region.
However, Masayuki further teaches wherein generating the mesh of the master region comprises: identifying a plurality of cuts through a default master region; (See para 35-In the process of creating the partial models 131p to 136q, when the “partition plane creation” button 121 is clicked, the division planes 131a to 136a or 131c to 136c are created according to the above method. The system user changes the division position by clicking the “change position” button 122 as necessary. In addition, if the “change surface shape” button 123 is clicked, the shape of the divided surface itself can be changed to a curved surface or the like. If the “use symmetry” button 124 is clicked, the shape division based on the symmetry shown in FIGS. 13C and 13D can be performed. When the system user clicks the “divide execution” button 125, the analysis model 20 of the analysis model 20 is based on the rotation angle θ and the rotation speed n obtained from the equation (1) using the division plane displayed on the screen. )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of mesh generation as disclosed by Tani to include wherein generating the mesh of the master region comprises: identifying a plurality of cuts through a default master region as taught by Masayuki in the system of Tani in order to generate a mesh for an analysis model composed of an arbitrary rotating body that optimizes and rationalizes design work, and more particularly to an analysis mesh generation apparatus used in CAE. (see para 001 and 008, Masayuki)
The combination of Tani and Masayuki does not teach determining a minimum geometry intersection of the plurality of cuts through the default master region.
In the related field of invention, Shen teaches determining a minimum geometry intersection of the plurality of cuts through the default master region. (See section 3.1- 3.2- Determine all the cutting planes. Totally eight cutting planes are created with an equal angular interval. The reason for us to use only eight cutting planes is mainly due to the consideration of computational efficiency. Figure 2b! shows an example of 6 cutting planes that share the rotation axis. Loop over all the cutting planes find a cutting plane that has a minimum perimeter of the cross section caused by the intersection between this cutting plane and the beam component. Figure 3 shows an example of a cross section and its perimeter associated with a cutting plane. Return the minimum cutting plane as the minimum intersection plane. After the minimum intersection plane is known, the minimum intersection element set can be easily determined. It is basically a set of surface elements that intersect with the minimum intersection plane.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of mesh generation as disclosed by Tani to determining a minimum geometry intersection of the plurality of cuts through the default master region as taught by Shen in the system of Tani and Masayuki in order to provide a new shape optimization approach, feature-based optimization of beam structures for an efficient optimization solution of beam components in complex mechanical structures represented by polygonal meshes. an objective function is to minimize the compliance of structures represented by finite clement meshes using gradient-based optimization. (See Abstract, Shen)
Regarding claim 13 and 19
Claims 13 and 19 are rejected for the same reasons as Claim 6, as they share the same elements.
Conclusion
9. Claims 1-20 are rejected.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US6434491B1 Miyata et al.
Discussing a method of analyzing electromagnetic fields created in a rotary machine and an analyzer. The method and analyzer provide for an electromagnetic field in a total analysis space of a rotary machine including a stator space containing a stator and a rotor space containing a rotor to be analyzed to determine a boundary field between the stator space and the rotor space.
SCHIMIDT et al. US20130314415A1.
Discussing a system of receiving a first mesh boundary and a second mesh boundary, removing a first surface associated with the first mesh boundary, and removing a second surface associated with the second mesh boundary. The technique further involves joining a first vertex associated with the first mesh boundary to a first plurality of vertices associated with the second mesh boundary to form a joined surface. Finally, the technique involves performing one or more mesh refinement passes on the joined surface to generate a refined mesh surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PURSOTTAM GIRI whose telephone number is (469)295-9101. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:30 PM, Monday to Friday.
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, RENEE CHAVEZ can be reached at 5712701104. 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.
/PURSOTTAM GIRI/Examiner, Art Unit 2186
/RENEE D CHAVEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2186
Prosecution Insights