DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is a response to communication submitted on 06/17/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
3. Claims 11-21 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 11-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being anticipated/unpatentable by BIRRER et al. (US 20200109026 A1, Foreign date 6/2/2014; PCT date 10/2/2019) in view of INOUE et al. (JP 2014156350 A).
In regards to claim 11, BIRRER shows (Figs. 1-5) and discloses a floor position detection device (26) of an elevator system (10) for determining a position of an elevator car (14) relative to a floor (i.e. 12) the floor position detection device comprising:
a sensor unit (i.e. 35) having at least two sensors each producing a sensor signal (i.e. 56) representing a floor position characteristic value associated with a position of the sensor relative to the floor (12, see Figs. 1-2);
an evaluation device (i.e. 36) receiving the sensor signals from the at least two sensors and producing a floor signal having at least two states (i.e. evaluation unit 136 determines a floor signal from the sensor signals of the two Hall effect sensors 128, 130. Progressions of the floor position characteristic values and the floor signal are represented see Fig. 5);
wherein when the floor position detection device (26) is arranged on the elevator car, one of the states of the floor signal is an "outside the range of the floor" state when the elevator car (14) is outside a range of the floor and another of the states of the floor signal is a "within the range of the floor" state when the elevator car is within an overall range of the floor (i.e. see curve 56/156, zero and 1, see Figs. 3/5, pars. 56-66);
wherein the evaluation device produces the floor signal based on a comparison between at least two of the floor position characteristic values (i.e. 48, 50, 52, 54) of the received sensor signals (see abstract and pars.4-5, 14, 16 and claim 14 and 28); and
BIRRER does not explicitly disclose (emphasis added) wherein the evaluation device produces the floor signal with at least two, mutually distinguishable states when the elevator car is within the overall range of the floor, each of the mutually distinguishable states corresponding to a partial range of the range of the floor, wherein the partial ranges fully cover the range of the floor.
However, INOUE further discloses and shows (Figs. 1-35) wherein the evaluation device produces the floor signal with at least two, mutually distinguishable states when the elevator car (8) is within the overall range of the floor, each of the mutually distinguishable states corresponding to a partial range of the range of the floor (i.e. inherent in multi-zone position detection), wherein the partial ranges fully cover the range of the floor (see Description, Figs. 1-5, in the landing control of the car 40 on a certain floor, it is desirable to consider the door zone and the relevel zone. That is, it is desirable to identify whether the sensor 30 is in the door zone, relevel zone, or outside both zones… The car position detecting arrangement 102/103 … When the sensor 130 moves in a direction (X direction) toward the recognition plate 120 from outside the range of the recognition plate 120, the output V3 of the phase difference detection circuit 134 and the output V2 of the amplitude value detection circuit 135 change as shown in Fig. 18. At this time, in the comparator 137 having two threshold values T3 and T4, the voltage V5 which is divided into three output values by the two threshold values T3 and T4 is output with respect to the output V3 of the phase difference detection circuit 134. That is, signals V5 corresponding to High (2), High (l), Low (0) within the door region, within the refloor region, or outside of these regions are output from the sensor 130. At this time, signals V4 of High (l) and Low (0) corresponding to within or outside the zone are also output from the sensor 130. As explained above, depending on the car position detecting arrangement 103, it is possible to use only the output of the phase difference detection circuit 134 to detect whether the position of the car 40 is located within the door zone, within or outside both zones).
Hence, given the teaching of INOUE it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the circuit/system of BIRRER to first divide a plurality of sub-areas within a floor area, distinguish different sub-areas by different characteristic such the voltages, wherein these sub-areas fully cover the floor area, and identify the direction and position in which the car drives into the floor, consequently improving the system accuracy and reliability.
In regards to claims 12-13, BIRRER shows (Figs. 1-5) and discloses wherein the at least two sensors of the sensor unit measure a field; wherein the at least two sensors are Hall effect sensors. (pars. 5, 47-50, 55).
In regards to claim 14, BIRRER shows (Figs. 1-5) and discloses wherein the floor signal is unique for each of the states based upon the floor position characteristic values at each position of the elevator car (implicit as the numbering used for the Hall effect sensors and therefore for the floor position characteristic values applies from top to bottom when passing the magnetic means as described above. When passing from bottom to top, the numbering is reversed, pars. 59-66).
In regards to claim 15, BIRRER shows (Figs. 1-5) and discloses wherein sensor unit detects an entry direction of the elevator car into the range of the floor (implicit as They reach their maximum when the Hall effect sensor 128, 130 in question is accurately at the height of the magnetic means 22, to sink back to the quiescent level when moving away from the magnetic means 22. From the size of the associated floor position characteristic value 148, 150, therefore, the distance of the corresponding Hall effect sensor 128, 130 from the magnetic means 22 in travel direction 13 can be inferred., pars. 59-66).
In regards to claim 16, BIRRER shows (Figs. 1-5) and discloses wherein the detection of the entry direction is based upon a progression of the floor position characteristic values of the sensor signals (see Figs. 3/5, pars. 51, 54, 63).
In regards to claims 17, BIRRER shows (Figs. 1-5) and discloses wherein the overall range of the floor is subdivided into an upper partial range and a lower partial range, and the floor signal adopts a "within the upper partial range of the range of the floor" state when the elevator car is in the upper partial range and adopts a "within the lower partial range of the range of the floor" state when the elevator car is in the lower partial range (i.e. implicitly as he progressions of floor position characteristic values, as well as of a floor signal when passing the magnetic means 22 of the elevator car 14 and therefore of the floor position detection device 26 are from top to bottom. Curve 48 shows the first floor position characteristic value of the first Hall effect sensor 28, curve 50 shows the second floor position characteristic value of the second Hall effect sensor 30, curve 52 shows the third floor position characteristic value of the third Hall effect sensor 32 and curve 54 shows the fourth floor position characteristic value of the fourth Hall effect sensor 34. Curve 56 shows the progression of the floor signal. The floor signal 56 can assume the state “outside the range of the floor” and “in the range of the floor”, wherein in FIG. 3 the state “outside the range of the floor” is characterized with “0” and the state “in the range of the floor” with “1”, pars. 54. 59, 63).
While INOUE further discloses a multi zone/level position detection wherein the overall range of the floor is subdivided into an upper partial range and a lower partial range, and the floor signal adopts a "within the upper partial range of the range of the floor" state when the elevator car is in the upper partial range and adopts a "within the lower partial range of the range of the floor" state when the elevator car is in the lower partial range floor (see Description, Figs. 1-5, in the landing control of the car 40 on a certain floor, it is desirable to consider the door zone and the relevel zone. That is, it is desirable to identify whether the sensor 30 is in the door zone, relevel zone, or outside both zones… The car position detecting arrangement 102/103 … When the sensor 130 moves in a direction (X direction) toward the recognition plate 120 from outside the range of the recognition plate 120, the output V3 of the phase difference detection circuit 134 and the output V2 of the amplitude value detection circuit 135 change as shown in Fig. 18. At this time, in the comparator 137 having two threshold values T3 and T4, the voltage V5 which is divided into three output values by the two threshold values T3 and T4 is output with respect to the output V3 of the phase difference detection circuit 134. That is, signals V5 corresponding to High (2), High (l), Low (0) within the door region, within the refloor region, or outside of these regions are output from the sensor 130. At this time, signals V4 of High (l) and Low (0) corresponding to within or outside the zone are also output from the sensor 130. As explained above, depending on the car position detecting arrangement 103, it is possible to use only the output of the phase difference detection circuit 134 to detect whether the position of the car 40 is located within the door zone, within or outside both zones).
In regards to claims 18-19, INOUE further shows (Figs. 1-35) and discloses wherein the floor signal is mapped by a voltage at an output of the evaluation device or at an output of an output module connected to the evaluation device, and wherein each of the at least two states is characterized by at least a voltage or a voltage range, wherein the "within the range of the floor" state is characterized by a plurality of different voltages, each of the different voltages being associated with one of the partial ranges (see Figs. -5, 202, i.e. implicit as the output V3 of the phase difference detection circuit 134 and the output V2 of the amplitude value detection circuit 135 become output values corresponding to the occupancy rate of the hole of the conductor 122-2 at the portion opposite to the detection coil 131A and the excitation coil 131B. That is, the smaller the occupancy of the hole of the conductor 122-2, the larger the values of the output V3 and the output V2. By utilizing this characteristic, it is possible to detect the absolute position of the sensor 130-5 within the recognition plate 120-2 (from which it can be obtained that a plurality of subregions are arranged in sequence in the lifting direction, the different sub-regions necessarily being triggered in sequence with a fixed timing as the sensor moves with the car.
The person skilled in the art can directly and unambiguously determine whether the car is driving into the floor area from the top down or from the bottom up based on the sequential order in which the signals appear, as a result, the car position detection apparatus 101 can be provided at a low cost.
In regards to claims 20-21, BIRRER shows (Figs. 1-5) and discloses an elevator control system of an elevator system (10), the elevator control system comprising:
an elevator control controlling movement of an elevator car (14, claims 24-27); and the floor position detection device (26) according to Claim 11 arranged on the elevator car (14) and in communications connection with the elevator control, and
an elevator system (10) comprising:
an elevator car (14) movable relative to a floor (12); and
the elevator control system according to Claim 20 controlling the movement of the elevator car (12), (pars. 46-49).
Related Prior Arts
6. The following related prior arts made of record are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure to further show the general state of the art and may be applied alone or in combination for rejection of the claims.
HIKITA (JP 2010208772 A) discloses as an initial state, it is assumed that the car 8 is positioned below the top floor in the NL state, and the operation mode is the normal operation mode. In this state, when the operation mode switching device 19 sets the operation mode to the inspection operation mode in accordance with the operation by the operator, the operation mode switching device 19 outputs a notification signal to that effect to the speed command device 1 and the suspension torque calculation device 12 (step S21). ). At this time, both the ascending operation switch and the descending operation switch of the inspection operation operating device are in the off state. When the speed command device 1 receives the notification signal from the operation mode switching device 19 and the lift operation switch of the inspection operation controller is turned on by the operator's operation, the NL state car 8 is the highest in inspection speed. Command the speed to go to the floor.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE L CARRASQUILLO whose telephone number is (571)270-7879. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday (9am to 5pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached on (571) 272-2060. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JORGE L CARRASQUILLO/Primary Examiner Engineer, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights