DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant's remarks/arguments filed 25 August 2025 have been fully considered. The following responses are provided:
-“In pulse charging, it is necessary to maintain pulse separation from engine exhaust valve to at least the inner radius of a nozzle ring” - It is respectfully noted that there is no claim limitation directed towards, explicitly or implicitly, “pulse charging”, and that there is no implications for structure resulting from “pulse charging” in the context of the claimed invention being characterized as “A turbocharger turbine”;
-“Critically, the divider walls do not extend to the inner radius of the annular nozzle ring (guide apparatus 14)” - It is respectfully noted that this limitation is addressed by Hirth;
-“And the person of ordinary skill would know that the knife-blade thin dividers would vibrate and self-destruct extremely quickly, thus this is not a real-world turbocharger” - It is respectfully noted that that this is conjecture based merely on dimensions gleaned from figures that are not indicated as being drawn to scale;
-“Sauerstein Fig. 4 shows a robust divider extending close to the turbine wheel, but the divider wall is not continuous, it includes an opening to allow for blades to fully pivot between open and closed position” - It is respectfully noted that the Sauerstein Figure 4 is not relied upon in the prior art rejections;
-“In conclusion, Sauerstein -does not teach a divided volute with continuous pulse separation” - It is respectfully noted that Sauerstein Figure 3 shows a divided volute, that there is no claim limitation directed towards, explicitly or implicitly, “pulse separation” (emphasis added), and that there is no implications for structure resulting from “pulse separation” (emphasis added);
-“In conclusion, Sauerstein… -does not teach a VTG cartridge” - It is respectfully noted that Sauerstein is not relied upon in the prior art rejections for a “cartridge”, nor is such absence deemed to render the proposed modification improper;
-“In conclusion, Sauerstein… -is notable for assuming all “blades 15” must be same-length” - It is respectfully noted Sauerstein blades 15 are not relied upon for any proposed modification in the prior art rejections;
-“Prior to the present invention it had not been possible to combine (a) VTG cartridge technology with (b) pulse separation technology since the flow separating means would interfere with pivoting of the pivoting vanes (blades)” - It is respectfully noted that such interference will not necessarily arise (i.e., the relevant components can be sized and/or arranged to avoid such interference) and that Applicant’s disclosure does not provide any identification of and/or indication as to the particular problem (as implied by “it had not been possible to combine…”) that is solved to innovatively allow for both (a) and (b) above;
-“However, Hirth does not show blocking bodies between VTG pivoting blades. It is clearly not possible to incorporate the massive blocking bodies of Hirth into the VTG of Sauerstein, since such thick bodies in place of knife-thin blades would substantially impede the range of pivoting of the pivoting blades” - It is respectfully noted that the proposed modification over Hirth does not involve “incorporate[ing]… bodies of Hirth into the VTG of Sauerstein” - rather, the proposed modification is stated as “to make the separating blades extend to the inner radius of the nozzle ring”;
-“Sauerstein in fact evidences that it is conventional wisdom that all pivot [guide] vanes are equal length and arranged evenly spaced around the nozzle ring… Accordingly, Sauerstein cannot be combined with or modified using the teachings of Hirth” - It is respectfully noted that the characteristics of Sauerstein blades 15 are irrelevant to the proposed modification involving Hirst since the proposed modification relies on Sauerstein elements 16,17;
-“In Fukaya, the actual pivoting guide vanes are all identical. There is no suggestion for guide vanes with shorter leading or trailing edges” - It is respectfully noted that Fukaya vanes 12 are not identical to Fukaya vanes 7, and that claim 1 does not include any limitations directed towards “shorter leading or trailing edges”;
-“Applicants note that Fukaya teaches in col. 5 in association with Fig. 8 an embodiment in which a bill-like projection portion 4 is movably provided” - It is respectfully noted that the proposed modification over Fukaya does not rely on Figure 8;
-“While there may be some component structural similarities to the present invention, there is no teaching of how providing a bill to reduce turbulence downstream of a spacer can be used to solve the problem of how to incorporate flow dividers into a VTG cartridge… Fukaya in no suggests that the bill-shaped projection in the flow shadow of a spacer could in any way relates to maintaining pulse separation in the main flow path of a VTG turbocharger” - It is respectfully noted that the proposed modification over Fukaya does not rely on the “bill” embodiment(s) and does not purport to address the above stated “problem of how to incorporate flow dividers into a VTG cartridge” or “maintaining pulse separation in the main flow path” (insofar as “flow dividers” is referring to the claimed “first and second fixed separating blades”) - rather, the proposed modification is directed towards the claimed “plurality of guide vanes”;
-“The Examiner takes the position that the leading edge is unnecessary, that a VTG could operate with vanes having only tails (as designed to operate in the flow shadow, not the flow stream)” - It is respectfully noted that the proposed modification over Fukaya relies on vane 12 of Figure 12, which includes a leading edge;
-“Even if one could find some motivation to move the bill-like projection of Fukaya from the spacer-blocked downstream turbulence area, where it serves to reduce turbulence, into the main flow area of the flow space, where it is not designed to operate as a variable flow director able to substitute for the blades of Sauerstein, Fukaya would not do this, it would destroy the teaching of Fukaya. AAPA would not do this — would not move a turbulence reducing means from downstream of a spacer into the main flow stream, or amputate part of the vane of a VTG guide vane. Thus, the combination cannot be reached” - It is respectfully noted that the proposed modification over Fukaya does not rely on the “bill-like projection of Fukaya”, nor does it involve “move a turbulence reducing means from downstream of a spacer into the main flow stream” or “amputate part of the vane of a VTG guide vane” - rather, the proposed modification involves “to include at least one second guide vane, sized to be shorter than the at least one first guide vane, that are immediately downstream of the spacer elements (APA - 31)… for the purpose of preventing flow separation resulting from the spacer elements” (i.e., second guide vane is added) with reliance on the relationships between vanes 12, vanes 7, and spacers 8 of Fukaya Figure 12;
-“However, the technical problem of turbulence downstream of a spacer is not only a different technical problem from the present invention, it is a technical problem that has nothing to do with maintaining pulse separation in a VTG cartridge, thus cannot be combined with or modify AAPA to reach the present invention” - It is respectfully noted that the modification over Fukaya addresses a claimed limitation (i.e., “said plurality of guide vanes includes at least one first guide vane having a first vane length and at least one second guide vane having a second vane length, said second vane length being different from said first vane length” (emphasis added)) and, thus, is entirely relevant to the patentability of the claimed invention;
-“The combined teachings of the cited prior art do not suggest a turbocharger having a variable vane cartridge with a pulse energy driven turbocharger such that… - the cartridge, which is designed to be assembled outside the turbine housing and inserted into the turbine housing as an assembled unit, is fed pulse exhaust flow from a divided volute” - It is respectfully noted that there is no claim limitation directed towards “pulse energy driven” / “pulse exhaust flow” (nor any structure resulting therefrom), the claimed “cartridge” is modified by Sauerstein / Hirth / Fukaya to include all claimed structural elements (i.e., there is no structural distinction over the proposed combination provided by “assembled outside the turbine housing and inserted into the turbine housing as an assembled unit”), and that Sauerstein establishes the obviousness of including a “divided volute”;
-“The combined teachings of the cited prior art do not suggest a turbocharger having a variable vane cartridge with a pulse energy driven turbocharger such that… - flow separation is maintained all the way through the cartridge (to the inner radius of the nozzle ring) to the turbine wheel for optimal harnessing of pulse energy” - It is respectfully deemed that the disclosures of Sauerstein and Hirth render obvious the instant limitations - i.e., Sauerstein discloses flow separating means from a divided volute to a location radially proximal to “inner radius of the nozzle ring”, and Hirth discloses a flow separating means extending to an “inner radius of the nozzle ring”;
-“The combined teachings of the cited prior art do not suggest a turbocharger having a variable vane cartridge with a pulse energy driven turbocharger such that… - pivoting guide vanes are provided fully freely pivotable between a fully “open” position, in which the turbine is operated at its maximum flow rate and the velocity vector of the flow has a large centripetal component, and a “closed” position, in which the high circumferential components of the flow speed and a steep enthalpy gradient lead to a high turbine output and therefore to a high charging pressure… The person of ordinary skill would recognize that different physical parts ((1) continuous flow separator wall and (2) freely pivotable vanes) cannot occupy the same space at the same time. A pivoting vane when pivoting would bump into the fixed separator wall, thus the freedom to pivot would be limited to the extent that pivoting vanes cannot achieve the full range of movement required in operation” - It is respectfully noted that the proposed combination does not necessarily preclude such pivoting functionality - i.e., one having ordinary skill in the art could size and/or arrange the relevant structures in the proposed combination so as to preserve and/or achieve the desired pivoting of the guide vanes of AAPA;
-“Since APA has no mention of divided volute, the burden falls to the secondary references to teach how to integrate a VTG cartridge with pivotable vanes into a divided volute turbine housing. Neither Sauerstein nor Fukaya teach how to maintain pulse flow separation from divided volute to turbine wheel. The person of ordinary skill would not see how to combine the structures disclosed in Fukaya and Sauerstein to solve the technical problem addressed by the present inventors.” - It is respectfully noted that: (1) Sauerstein discloses (see par. [0003]) a divided volute (5,6) and corresponding flow separating means (16,17) among a plurality of pivotable guide vanes (15) (note: although Sauerstein is deficient with respect to the radially inner extent of the flow separating means (16,17), this deficiency is considered to be obvious in view of Hirth) - since both APA and Sauerstein involve radial flow turbines having guide vanes, one having ordinary skill in the art could easily envisage the resulting modification(s) over Sauerstein; (2) Fukaya discloses the use of relatively smaller guide vanes 12 located behind spacers 8 - since both APA and Fukaya involve radial flow turbines having guide vanes and spacers, one having ordinary skill in the art could easily envisage the resulting modification(s) over Fukaya;
-“Tries does not relate to the technology of pulse charging turbochargers” - It is respectfully noted that there is no claim limitation directed towards, explicitly or implicitly, “pulse charging”, and that there is no implications for structure resulting from “pulse charging” in the context of the claimed invention being characterized as “A turbocharger turbine”;
-“There [in Tries] are no flow dividing walls to maintain pulse separation from nozzle ring outer radius to nozzle ring inner radius. If one were to incorporate such flow dividers into the variable vane arrangement disclosed in Tries, the result would be vanes having almost no freedom of movement since the vanes and the flow separating walls could not occupy the same space. The divider walls would block movement of either the leading edge or the trailing edge of at least one pivoting vane” - It is respectfully noted that the obviousness of the proposed modification (pertaining to differently sized guide vanes) over Tries does not necessarily rely on the presence of “flow dividing walls”, and that one having ordinary skill in the art could size and/or arrange the relevant structures in the proposed combination so as to preserve and/or achieve the desired pivoting of the guide vanes of AAPA;
-“Tries in fact teaches that flow around spacers can impart forces on vanes, which can being about poor controllability and a high degree of wear. All vanes of Trise, though they may be of two different sizes, do appear to have leading and trailing edges designed for balanced flow, ease of pivotability, and reduced wear. This would be contrary to the present vanes, particularly vanes with stump leading edges or stump trailing edges” - It is respectfully noted that there are no claim limitation(s) directed towards “designed for balanced flow, ease of pivotability, and reduced wear” or “stump leading edges or stump trailing edges”.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 5, “as well as” (line 2) should be changed to --includes-- (to imbue proper antecedent basis practice) and lines 3-4 should be deleted (since they are duplicative of recitations in claim 1).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for failing the written description requirement.
In claim 6, the limitation recited as “said second vane leading edge length being different from said first vane leading edge length” was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that Applicant, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The originally filed disclosure: (1) is silent as to such a limitation, and/or (2), does not describe or depict the dimension (e.g., in the chordwise direction, or in the thickness direction) considered to correspond with “length”, and/or (3) does not describe or depict the intended “length” of a “leading edge” of “first guide vane” and/or “second guide vane”, thereby failing to establish a basis for comparison between “second vane leading edge length” and “first vane leading edge length”.
In claim 7, the limitation recited as “said second vane trailing edge length being different from said first vane trailing edge length” was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that Applicant, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The originally filed disclosure: (1) is silent as to such a limitation, and/or (2), does not describe or depict the dimension (e.g., in the chordwise direction, or in the thickness direction) considered to correspond with “length”, and/or (3) does not describe or depict the intended “length” of a “trailing edge” of “first guide vane” and/or “second guide vane”, thereby failing to establish a basis for comparison between “second vane trailing edge length” and “first vane trailing edge length”.
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 of this title, 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 1, 4, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (i.e., portions of Applicant’s disclosure - hereafter referred to as APA) in view of Sauerstein (US 2012/0159946; previously cited), Hirth et al. (US 9,121,345 - hereafter referred to as Hirth; previously cited), and Fukaya et al. (US 6,558,117 - hereafter referred to as Fukaya; previously cited).
In reference to claim 1
APA discloses:
A turbocharger turbine (see Figures 1 and 2, which are indicated as Prior Art) comprising:
a turbine housing (2) that houses a turbine wheel (see par. [0011]), said turbine wheel rotatable about an axis of rotation (R), said turbine housing including a volute (9); and
a variable turbine geometry cartridge mounted in said turbine housing and comprising:
- a plurality of guide vanes (7) arranged in said housing downstream of said divided volute, in angular separation around said axis of rotation in an axially extending vane space (i.e., the space occupied by vanes 7 - see Figure 1), each guide vane (7) having a leading edge (i.e., an upstream/leading end) having a length (notes: (1) the leading edge extends along a span and, thus, has a length aligned therewith; (2) any leading edge is a three-dimensional surface and, thus, has a length in the thickness direction and/or the chordal direction) and a trailing edge (i.e., a downstream/trailing end) having a length (notes: (1) the trailing edge extends along a span and, thus, has a length aligned therewith; (2) any trailing edge is a three-dimensional surface and, thus, has a length in the thickness direction and/or the chordal direction) and being pivotal about an associated pivot axis (i.e., the rotational axis of a respective shaft 8 - see par. [0012]), said guide vanes controlled in unison (i.e., via unison ring 5 - see par. [0012]) to pivot between a fully open position (i.e., the maximum achievable open position permitted by the pivoting of the vanes 7) and a fully closed position (i.e., the maximum achievable closed position permitted by the pivoting of the vanes 7) thereby forming nozzles of variable cross-section between adjacent vanes of the plurality of guide vanes;
- an annular nozzle ring (6) for supporting said guide vanes for pivoting about their respective said pivot axis, said nozzle ring having an outer radius (i.e., an outermost radius) and an inner radius (i.e., an innermost radius) and forming a first axial limitation (i.e., a right-side axial limitation as viewed in Figure 1) of said vane space;
- a disk (29) with a central opening (53), said disk connected to (via bolts 30) and spaced from (see Figure 1) said nozzle ring at a predetermined axial distance to form a second axial limitation (i.e., a left-side axial limitation as viewed in Figure 1) of said vane space;
wherein said plurality of guide vanes includes at least one first guide vane (7) having a first vane length.
APA does not disclose:
the volute is divided and adapted for receiving divided exhaust gas flows from an engine and maintaining separation of exhaust gas flows from different cylinders or cylinder groups of the engine;
- at least a first and a second fixed separating blade provided between said nozzle ring and said disk for continuing separation of exhaust gas flows from said divided volute to said turbine wheel, the first and the second fixed separating blade each extending from the outer radius of the annular nozzle ring to the inner radius of the annular nozzle ring;
said plurality of guide vanes includes at least one second guide vane having a second vane length, said second vane length being different from said first vane length.
Sauerstein discloses:
a turbocharger comprising a turbine housing having a divided volute having a first volute (5 - Figure 3) and a second volute (6 - Figure 3), a plurality of variable / guide vanes (15), and two separating vanes (16,17 - see paragraph [0030]) extending from an outer radius (see annotated Figure 3 below) of a nozzle ring for guiding flow (see Figure 3) from the divided volute to the turbine wheel; the divided volute provides separate paths to the turbine wheel that permits an increase in flow speed and, thus, power generation (see paragraph [0003]).
PNG
media_image1.png
230
436
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hirth discloses:
a turbocharger comprising a nozzle, a divided volute (see Figure 2) comprising spiral ducts (58), and stationary blades (i.e., tongues 68) for circumferentially separating the flow that is conveyed by the spiral ducts, wherein the stationary blades extend from an outer radius (see annotated Figure 2 below) of the nozzle to an inner radius (see annotated Figure 2 below) of the nozzle.
PNG
media_image2.png
207
409
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbine of APA to divide the volute and include separating blades that extend from the outer radius of the nozzle ring towards the turbine wheel, as disclosed by Sauerstein, for the purpose of promoting increased power generation. In performing this modification, it would have been further obvious to make the separating blades extend to the inner radius of the nozzle ring, as disclosed by Hirth, for the purpose of ensuring complete separation of the flows from the divided volute.
Fukaya discloses:
a turbocharger turbine (see Figure 12) comprising a guide vane space of an inlet including first / long pivotal guide vanes (2) and second / short pivotal guide vanes (12), wherein the short pivotal guide vanes are provided immediately downstream, in the direction of flow through the inlet guide channel, of a corresponding spacer element (3) within the inlet guide channel in order to prevent flow separation resulting therefrom (see col.7:ll.24-32).
PNG
media_image3.png
180
363
media_image3.png
Greyscale
APA further discloses spacer elements (31 - Figure 1) in the guide vane space that are, at the least, radially coincident (relative to axis R) with the guide vanes (7)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbocharger turbine of APA to include at least one second guide vane, sized to be shorter than the at least one first guide vane, that are immediately downstream of the spacer elements (APA - 31), as disclosed by Fukaya, for the purpose of preventing flow separation resulting from the spacer elements.
APA, as modified by Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya, therefore addresses:
the volute is divided (as in Sauerstein) and adapted for receiving divided exhaust gas flows from an engine and maintaining separation of exhaust gas flows from different cylinders or cylinder groups of the engine (note: the recitation maintaining separation of exhaust gas flows from different cylinders or cylinder groups of the engine (emphasis added) is regarded as a statement of intended use; a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art; the instant recitation specifies aspects of the engine in which the invention characterized as A turbocharger turbine is used, which merely places the invention in an environment of use);
- at least a first and a second fixed separating blade (Sauerstein - 16,17) provided between said nozzle ring (APA - 6) and said disk (APA - 29) for continuing separation of exhaust gas flows from said divided volute to said turbine wheel (APA), the first and the second fixed separating blade each extending from the outer radius (see Sauerstein Figure 3 and Hirth Figure 2) of the annular nozzle ring to the inner radius (see Hirth Figure 2) of the annular nozzle ring;
said plurality of guide vanes (APA - 7; Fukaya - 12) includes at least one second guide vane (Fukaya - 12) having a second vane length, said second vane length being different from said first vane length.
In reference to claim 4
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1, wherein the cartridge includes a unison ring (APA - 5) pivotable around said axis of rotation (APA - R) relative to said nozzle ring (APA - 6), said unison ring being operatively connected to (via APA shafts 8 - see APA Figure 2) said at least one first guide vane (APA - 7) in order to pivot said at least one first guide vane about their pivot axis when said unison ring is pivoted.
Fukaya further discloses:
the first / long pivotal guide vanes (2) and the second / short pivotal guide vanes (12) are rotated in unison by a common drive mechanism (see col.7:ll.11-14).
In performing the modification over Fukaya in the rejection of claim 1, it would have been additionally obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operatively connect the at least one second guide vane to be rotatable in unison with the at least one first guide vane, as further disclosed by Fukaya, for the purpose of promoting rotationally uniform flow to the turbine wheel inlet. Such a modification is envisaged as operatively connecting the at least second guide vane to APA unison ring 5 since it controls pivoting / rotation of the “at least one first guide vane”.
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya therefore also addresses:
said unison ring (APA - 5) being operatively connected to said at least one second guide vane (Fukaya - 12) in order to pivot said at least one second guide vane about their pivot axis when said unison ring is pivoted.
In reference to claim 6
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1, wherein said at least one first guide vane (7)( (APA - 7) has a first vane leading edge length and at least one second guide vane (14a, 14b)(Fukaya - 12) has a second vane leading edge length, said second vane leading edge length being different from said first vane leading edge length (note: the proposed modification over Fukaya results in at least one second guide vane being smaller than at least one first guide vane - accordingly, limits/boundaries, in at least one of a vane chordwise dimension and a vane thickness dimension, for the leading edge of second guide vane and the leading edge of first guide vane can be drawn such that the instant inequality is met).
In reference to claim 7
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1, wherein said at least one first guide vane (7)(APA - 7) has a first vane trailing edge length and at least one second guide vane (14a, 14b)(Fukaya - 12) has a second vane trailing edge length, said second vane trailing edge length being different from said first vane trailing edge length (note: the proposed modification over Fukaya results in at least one second guide vane being smaller than at least one first guide vane - accordingly, limits/boundaries, in at least one of a vane chordwise dimension and a vane thickness dimension, for the trailing edge of second guide vane and the trailing edge of first guide vane can be drawn such that the instant inequality is met).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Fukaya, and Meacher et al. (US 4,362,020 - hereafter referred to as Meacher; previously cited).
In reference to claim 2
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1, wherein said nozzle ring (APA - 6) and said disk (APA - 29) include flat surfaces (see APA Figures 1 and 2).
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya does not address:
said at least first and second separating blades are mounted flush on said flat surfaces, and include mounting pins for mounting the said at least first and second separating blades to the nozzle ring and the disk.
Meacher discloses:
a radial-flow turbine comprising stationary guide vanes (208) disposed within a guide vane space that is axially delimited by opposed walls (162,213), wherein the stationary guide vanes are flush (see Figure 3) with surfaces of the walls and are mounted to the walls via pins (i.e., mounting studs 210).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbocharger turbine of APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya to include mounting the vanes to the ring / disk via pins such that they are flush with the ring / disk, as disclosed by Meacher, for the purpose of permitting independent repair / replacement of the vanes (due to use of pins) while ensuring maximum guiding / turning of flow (due to the flushness).
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Fukaya, and Meacher therefore addresses:
said at least first and second separating blades (Sauerstein - 16,17) are mounted flush on said flat surfaces (APA), and include mounting pins (Meacher - 210) for mounting the said at least first and second separating blades to the nozzle ring (APA - 6) and the disk (APA - 29).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Fukaya, and Roberts et al. (US 2008/0038110 - hereafter referred to as Roberts; previously cited).
In reference to claim 3
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1.
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya does not address:
at least one of said nozzle ring and said disk are provided with grooves, and wherein said at least first and second separating blades are seated in said grooves.
Roberts discloses:
a turbocharger turbine comprising first and second separating blades (52) that are separate from and serve as flow-wise extensions of corresponding volute portions (46) and that are received within a corresponding recess / groove (49) of a disk (48) that delimits a guide vane space.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbocharger turbine of APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya to form the first and second separating blades as separate from the volute and to include grooves / recesses in the disk that receive the first and second separating blades, as disclosed by Roberts, for the purpose of permitting repair / replacement of the first and separating blades independent of the volute and/or disk and permitting repair / replacement of the disk independent of the first and second separating blades.
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Fukaya, and Roberts therefore addresses:
at least one of said nozzle ring (APA - 6) and said disk (APA - 29) are provided with grooves (Roberts - 49), and wherein said at least first and second separating blades (Sauerstein - 16,17) are seated in said grooves.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Fukaya, and Kindl et al. (US 2015/0013330 - hereafter referred to as Kindl; previously cited).
In reference to claim 5
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1.
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya does not address:
the at least first and second fixed separating blade as well as a third fixed separating blade are provided between said nozzle ring and said disk for continuing separation of exhaust gas flows from said divided volute to said turbine wheel.
Hirth further discloses:
three of the separating blades (68), each separating blade corresponding to an inlet.
Kindl discloses:
a turbocharger turbine comprising three-channels (see par. [0053]), the number of channels being chosen based at least on the number of upstream cylinders.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbine of APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Fukaya to include three separating blades, as further disclosed by Hirth, for the purpose of configuring it as a three-channel turbine in order to adapt for use with a particular engine architecture (i.e., number of upstream cylinders).
Claims 1, 4, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries et al. (US 8,328,503 - hereafter referred to as Tries; previously cited).
In reference to claim 1
APA discloses:
A turbocharger turbine (see Figures 1 and 2, which are indicated as Prior Art) comprising:
a turbine housing (2) that houses a turbine wheel (see par. [0011]), said turbine wheel rotatable about an axis of rotation (R), said turbine housing including a volute (9); and
a variable turbine geometry cartridge mounted in said turbine housing and comprising:
- a plurality of guide vanes (7) arranged in said housing downstream of said divided volute, in angular separation around said axis of rotation in an axially extending vane space (i.e., the space occupied by vanes 7 - see Figure 1), each guide vane (7) having a leading edge (i.e., an upstream/leading end) having a length (notes: (1) the leading edge extends along a span and, thus, has a length aligned therewith; (2) any leading edge is a three-dimensional surface and, thus, has a length in the thickness direction and/or the chordal direction) and a trailing edge (i.e., a downstream/trailing end) having a length (notes: (1) the trailing edge extends along a span and, thus, has a length aligned therewith; (2) any trailing edge is a three-dimensional surface and, thus, has a length in the thickness direction and/or the chordal direction) and being pivotal about an associated pivot axis (i.e., the rotational axis of a respective shaft 8 - see par. [0012]), said guide vanes controlled in unison (i.e., via unison ring 5 - see par. [0012]) to pivot between a fully open position (i.e., the maximum achievable open position permitted by the pivoting of the vanes 7) and a fully closed position (i.e., the maximum achievable closed position permitted by the pivoting of the vanes 7) thereby forming nozzles of variable cross-section between adjacent vanes of the plurality of guide vanes;
- an annular nozzle ring (6) for supporting said guide vanes for pivoting about their respective said pivot axis, said nozzle ring having an outer radius (i.e., an outermost radius) and an inner radius (i.e., an innermost radius) and forming a first axial limitation (i.e., a right-side axial limitation as viewed in Figure 1) of said vane space;
- a disk (29) with a central opening (53), said disk connected to (via bolts 30) and spaced from (see Figure 1) said nozzle ring at a predetermined axial distance to form a second axial limitation (i.e., a left-side axial limitation as viewed in Figure 1) of said vane space;
wherein said plurality of guide vanes includes at least one first guide vane (7) having a first vane length.
APA does not disclose:
the volute is divided and adapted for receiving divided exhaust gas flows from an engine and maintaining separation of exhaust gas flows from different cylinders or cylinder groups of the engine;
- at least a first and a second fixed separating blade provided between said nozzle ring and said disk for continuing separation of exhaust gas flows from said divided volute to said turbine wheel, the first and the second fixed separating blade each extending from the outer radius of the annular nozzle ring to the inner radius of the annular nozzle ring;
said plurality of guide vanes includes at least one second guide vane having a second vane length, said second vane length being different from said first vane length.
Sauerstein discloses:
a turbocharger comprising a turbine housing having a divided volute having a first volute (5 - Figure 3) and a second volute (6 - Figure 3), a plurality of variable / guide vanes (15), and two separating vanes (16,17 - see paragraph [0030]) extending from an outer radius (see annotated Figure 3 below) of a nozzle ring for guiding flow (see Figure 3) from the divided volute to the turbine wheel; the divided volute provides separate paths to the turbine wheel that permits an increase in flow speed and, thus, power generation (see paragraph [0003]).
PNG
media_image1.png
230
436
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hirth discloses:
a turbocharger comprising a nozzle, a divided volute (see Figure 2) comprising spiral ducts (58), and stationary blades (i.e., tongues 68) for circumferentially separating the flow that is conveyed by the spiral ducts, wherein the stationary blades extend from an outer radius (see annotated Figure 2 below) of the nozzle to an inner radius (see annotated Figure 2 below) of the nozzle.
PNG
media_image2.png
207
409
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbine of APA to divide the volute and include separating blades that extend from the outer radius of the nozzle ring towards the turbine wheel, as disclosed by Sauerstein, for the purpose of promoting increased power generation. In performing this modification, it would have been further obvious to make the separating blades extend to the inner radius of the nozzle ring, as disclosed by Hirth, for the purpose of ensuring complete separation of the flows from the divided volute.
Tries discloses:
a turbocharger turbine (see figure) comprising a guide vane space of an inlet including first / long pivotal guide vanes (4) and second / short pivotal guide vanes (3), wherein the presence of both long and short pivotal guide vanes is intended to compensate for different flow types caused by spacers (5) in order to maintain as uniform a flow as possible (see col.2:ln.57 through col.3:ln.11).
APA further discloses spacer elements (31 - Figure 1) in the guide vane space that are, at the least, radially coincident (relative to axis R) with the guide vanes (7)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbocharger turbine of APA to include at least one second guide vane (i.e., by modifying the APA vanes 7 that are in the vicinity of spacer elements 31, in accordance with the teachings of Tries), sized to be shorter than the at least one first guide vane, as disclosed by Tries, for the purpose of maintaining as uniform a flow as possible.
APA, as modified by Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries, therefore addresses:
the volute is divided (as in Sauerstein) and adapted for receiving divided exhaust gas flows from an engine and maintaining separation of exhaust gas flows from different cylinders or cylinder groups of the engine (note: the recitation maintaining separation of exhaust gas flows from different cylinders or cylinder groups of the engine (emphasis added) is regarded as a statement of intended use; a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art; the instant recitation specifies aspects of the engine in which the invention characterized as A turbocharger turbine is used, which merely places the invention in an environment of use);
- at least a first and a second fixed separating blade (Sauerstein - 16,17) provided between said nozzle ring (APA - 6) and said disk (APA - 29) for continuing separation of exhaust gas flows from said divided volute to said turbine wheel (APA), the first and the second fixed separating blade each extending from the outer radius (see Sauerstein Figure 3 and Hirth Figure 2) of the annular nozzle ring to the inner radius (see Hirth Figure 2) of the annular nozzle ring;
said plurality of guide vanes (APA - 7; Tries - 3,4) includes at least one second guide vane (Tries - 3) having a second vane length, said second vane length being different from said first vane length.
In reference to claim 4
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1, wherein the cartridge includes a unison ring (APA - 5) pivotable around said axis of rotation (APA - R) relative to said nozzle ring (APA - 6), said unison ring being operatively connected to (via APA shafts 8 - see APA Figure 2) said at least one first guide vane (APA - 7) in order to pivot said at least one first guide vane about their pivot axis when said unison ring is pivoted.
Tries further discloses:
the first / long pivotal guide vanes (4) and the second / short pivotal guide vanes (3) are rotated in unison by a common drive mechanism (see col.2:ll.47-57).
In performing the modification over Tries in the rejection of claim 1, it would have been additionally obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operatively connect the at least one second guide vane to be rotatable in unison with the at least one first guide vane, as further disclosed by Tries, for the purpose of promoting rotationally uniform flow to the turbine wheel inlet. Such a modification is envisaged as operatively connecting the at least second guide vane to APA unison ring 5 since it controls pivoting / rotation of the at least one first guide vane.
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries therefore also addresses:
said unison ring (APA - 5) being operatively connected to said at least one second guide vane (Tries - 3) in order to pivot said at least one second guide vane about their pivot axis when said unison ring is pivoted.
In reference to claim 6
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1, wherein said at least one first guide vane (7)( (APA - 7) has a first vane leading edge length and at least one second guide vane (14a, 14b)(Fukaya - 12) has a second vane leading edge length, said second vane leading edge length being different from said first vane leading edge length (note: the proposed modification over Fukaya results in at least one second guide vane being smaller than at least one first guide vane - accordingly, limits/boundaries, in at least one of a vane chordwise dimension and a vane thickness dimension, for the leading edge of second guide vane and the leading edge of first guide vane can be drawn such that the instant inequality is met).
In reference to claim 7
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1, wherein said at least one first guide vane (7)(APA - 7) has a first vane trailing edge length and at least one second guide vane (14a, 14b)(Fukaya - 12) has a second vane trailing edge length, said second vane trailing edge length being different from said first vane trailing edge length (note: the proposed modification over Fukaya results in at least one second guide vane being smaller than at least one first guide vane - accordingly, limits/boundaries, in at least one of a vane chordwise dimension and a vane thickness dimension, for the trailing edge of second guide vane and the trailing edge of first guide vane can be drawn such that the instant inequality is met).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Tries, and Meacher.
In reference to claim 2
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1, wherein said nozzle ring (APA - 6) and said disk (APA - 29) include flat surfaces (see APA Figures 1 and 2).
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries does not address:
said at least first and second separating blades are mounted flush on said flat surfaces, and include mounting pins for mounting the said at least first and second separating blades to the nozzle ring and the disk.
Meacher discloses:
a radial-flow turbine comprising stationary guide vanes (208) disposed within a guide vane space that is axially delimited by opposed walls (162,213), wherein the stationary guide vanes are flush (see Figure 3) with surfaces of the walls and are mounted to the walls via pins (i.e., mounting studs 210).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbocharger turbine of APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries to include mounting the vanes to the ring / disk via pins such that they are flush with the ring / disk, as disclosed by Meacher, for the purpose of permitting independent repair / replacement of the vanes (due to use of pins) while ensuring maximum guiding / turning of flow (due to the flushness).
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Tries, and Meacher therefore addresses:
said at least first and second separating blades (Sauerstein - 16,17) are mounted flush on said flat surfaces (APA), and include mounting pins (Meacher - 210) for mounting the said at least first and second separating blades to the nozzle ring (APA - 6) and the disk (APA - 29).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Tries, and Roberts.
In reference to claim 3
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1.
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries does not address:
at least one of said nozzle ring and said disk are provided with grooves, and wherein said at least first and second separating blades are seated in said grooves.
Roberts discloses:
a turbocharger turbine comprising first and second separating blades (52) that are separate from and serve as flow-wise extensions of corresponding volute portions (46) and that are received within a corresponding recess / groove (49) of a disk (48) that delimits a guide vane space.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the turbocharger turbine of APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries to form the first and second separating blades as separate from the volute and to include grooves / recesses in the disk that receive the first and second separating blades, as disclosed by Roberts, for the purpose of permitting repair / replacement of the first and separating blades independent of the volute and/or disk and permitting repair / replacement of the disk independent of the first and second separating blades.
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Tries, and Roberts therefore addresses:
at least one of said nozzle ring (APA - 6) and said disk (APA - 29) are provided with grooves (Roberts - 49), and wherein said at least first and second separating blades (Sauerstein - 16,17) are seated in said grooves.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, Tries, and Kindl.
In reference to claim 5
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries addresses:
The turbocharger turbine as in claim 1.
APA in view of Sauerstein, Hirth, and Tries does not address:
the at least first and second fixed separating blade as well as a third fixed separating blade are provided between said nozzle ring and said disk for continuing separation of exhaust gas flows from said divided volute to said turbine wheel.