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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claims 1, 4-17 and 18 invoke 35 U.S.C. §112(f), specifically, the following claim limitation invoke 35 U.S.C. §112(f):
Regarding claim 1,
An angle measurement unit:
The above limitation uses a generic placeholder “an angle measurement unit” coupled with functional language “ determining the angular position…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the recited function. Further, the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material or acts for performing the claimed function.
Although the term “an angle measurement unit” is not one of the recognized nonce term, such as “means” or “step”, the presumption of not invoking 35 U.S.C. §112(f) is overcome. Specifically, “an angle measurement unit” is not a term of art with structural connotation to one skilled in the art.
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing “an angle measurement unit” is in Fig. 1, [0015], with an angle measurement unit or an encoder ([0039], encoder 28) determining an angular position of the scanning unit relative to the sensor.
A device:
The above limitation uses a generic placeholder “a device” coupled with functional language “configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency……” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the recited function. Further, the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material or acts for performing the claimed function.
Although the term “a device” is not one of the recognized nonce term, such as “means” or “step”, the presumption of not invoking 35 U.S.C. §112(f) is overcome. Specifically, “a device” is not a term of art with structural connotation to one skilled in the art.
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing “a device” is in Fig. 1, [0041], the laser scanner 10 therefore has a device 32, for example an encoder, a light barrier , or an induction sensor that measures an angular speed of the scanning unit.
Regarding claim 1, 9-12 and 15,
Evaluation unit:
The above limitation uses a generic placeholder “Evaluation unit” coupled with functional language “configured to generate…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the recited function. Further, the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material or acts for performing the claimed function.
Although the term “Evaluation unit” is not one of the recognized nonce term, such as “means” or “step”, the presumption of not invoking 35 U.S.C. §112(f) is overcome. Specifically, “Evaluation unit” is not a term of art with structural connotation to one skilled in the art.
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing “Evaluation unit” is in Fig. 1, [0015], [0026]-[0029], [0040], [0043], [0045], [0050], the evaluation unit 34 determine the object distance. This has the same function as a controller/processor to determine the distance in LIDAR field. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize the evaluation unit here is referred to a controller/processor in the system.
Regarding claim 1, 4-8, 14-15 and 18,
Correction unit:
The above limitation uses a generic placeholder “correction unit” coupled with functional language “configured to determine a self-rotation…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the recited function. Further, the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material or acts for performing the claimed function.
Although the term “correction unit” is not one of the recognized nonce term, such as “means” or “step”, the presumption of not invoking 35 U.S.C. §112(f) is overcome. Specifically, “correction unit” is not a term of art with structural connotation to one skilled in the art.
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing “correction unit” is in Fig. 1, [0018], [0021], [0022]-[0025], [0041], [0043], [0045], the correction unit 34. Based on the disclosed in paragraph above, the correction unit is related to control unit which control the pulse rate of transmitted light beam [0022], calculate the angular position of the scanning unit…[0023], correct the association of the measured values…[0024], check the measured angular speed …[0025]. This has the same function as a controller/processor to determine “a self-rotation of the sensor…” in LIDAR field. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize the correction unit here is referred to a controller/processor in the system.
Regarding claims 13-14, and 17,
Safeguarding unit:
The above limitation uses a generic placeholder “safeguarding unit” coupled with functional language “configured to recognize…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the recited function. Further, the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material or acts for performing the claimed function.
Although the term “safeguarding unit” is not one of the recognized nonce term, such as “means” or “step”, the presumption of not invoking 35 U.S.C. §112(f) is overcome. Specifically, “safeguarding unit” is not a term of art with structural connotation to one skilled in the art.
The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing “safeguarding unit” is in Fig. 1, [0042]-[0043], [0049], the safeguarding unit 36. This has the same function as a controller/processor to determine “there’s an unauthorized presence in the area and therefore not emit” in LIDAR field. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize the safeguarding unit here is referred to a controller/processor in the system.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-11, 13, 15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jachman et al. (US 20150015868 A1, hereinafter “Jachman”), modified in view of Siraky et al. (US 20060290534 A1, hereinafter “Siraky”), in view of Kerr (US 20190310355 A1, hereinafter “Kerr”).
Regarding claim 1, Jachman teaches an optoelectronic sensor for the detection of objects in a monitored zone comprising a light transmitter for transmitting a transmitted light beam, a scanning unit rotatable about an axis of rotation for a periodic scanning of the monitored zone by the transmitted light beam, a light receiver for generating a received signal from light beams remitted by objects in the monitored zone (Jachman; Fig. 1, [0045], laser scanner 10. A light beam 14 comprising individual light pulses generated by a light transmitter 12, is deflected into a monitoring area 18 by light deflection units 16a-b to an object. The remitted light 20 arrives back at the laser scanner 10 and is detected there via the deflection unit 16b and by means of reception optics 22 in a light receiver 24; [0046], the light deflection unit 16b is generally designed as a rotational mirror which continuously rotates driven by a motor 26), an angle measurement unit for determining the angular position of the scanning unit relative to the optoelectronic sensor (Jachman; Fig. 1, [0046], the respective angular position of the light deflection unit 16b is detected by an encoder 28), and an evaluation unit that is configured to generate measured values that indicate whether and in which direction an object has been detected using the received signals (Jachman; Fig. 1, [0047], the evaluation unit 30 connects with the light transmitter 12, the receiver 24, the motor 26 and encoder 28. Thus, 2D polar coordinates of all objects in the monitoring area 18 are available via the angle and the distance. This data may already be the relevant measurement data which is provided at an output 32),
Jachman does not teach,
further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation; and a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values.
Siraky disclosed in paragraph [0002], rotary encoders serve to measure angle-dependent magnitudes, such as the angular position, angular speed, and angular acceleration of a rotating object, e.g., the shaft of a motor. To this end, the rotary encoder exhibits a shaft which is coupled in torque-prof fashion to the rotating object that is being measured, e.g., the motor shaft. Connected to the shaft at a true angle or rotation is a material measure, which is scanned by a suitable scanning device to generate angle-dependent signals.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is using a device to measure the angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation predictably to increase the measurement accuracy.
However, Jachman modified in view of Siraky still not teach,
and a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values.
Kerr disclosed in Fig. 6, [0039], the rotation/reflection compensator 610 adjusts (e.g., correct augments, supplements) sensor data from the LIDAR scanner 222 based on a rotational speed of the LIDAR scanner 222 and/or a determined scanning area based on reflections from the reflector 224. In particular, the rotation/reflection compensator 610 can adjust sensor data based on a known rotation rate speed of the LIDAR to compensate for movement of the vehicle (e.g., the UAV 200).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is using the rotation/reflection compensator 610 to adjust sensor data based on a known rotation rate speed of the LIDAR to compensate for movement of the vehicle (Kerr; [0039]).
Regarding claim 2, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 1, wherein the optoelectronic sensor is a laser scanner (Jachman; Fig. 1, [0045], laser scanner 10).
Regarding claim 3, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 1.
Jachman does not teach,
wherein the device is formed by the angle measurement unit.
Siraky disclosed in paragraph [0002], rotary encoders serve to measure angle-dependent magnitudes, such as the angular position, angular speed, and angular acceleration of a rotating object, e.g., the shaft of a motor. To this end, the rotary encoder exhibits a shaft which is coupled in torque-prof fashion to the rotating object that is being measured, e.g., the motor shaft. Connected to the shaft at a true angle or rotation is a material measure, which is scanned by a suitable scanning device to generate angle-dependent signals.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation; wherein the device is formed by the angle measurement unit taught by Siraky, include a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is using an encoder to measure the angular speed and angle position predictably to reduce the size of laser scanner.
Regarding claim 4, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 1.
Jachman does not teach,
wherein the correction unit is configured to accelerate or decelerate the rotational movement of the deflection unit and to a degree corresponding to the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor.
Kerr disclosed in Fig. 6, [0039], the rotation reflection compensator 610 adjusts (e.g., corrects, augments, supplements) sensor data from the LIDAR scanner 222 based on a rotational speed of the LIDAR scanner 222 and/or a determined scanning area based on reflections from the reflector 224. In particular, the rotation/reflection compensator 610 can adjust sensor data based on a known rotational rate speed of the LIDAR to compensate for movement of the vehicle (e.g., the UAV 200); [0040], the rotational controller 611 controls a rotational movement of the LIDAR scanner 222. The rotation controller 611 calculates an angular speed at which to rotate the LIDAR scanner 222 based on a desired amount of scanning of an area of interest. For example, increased scanning requirements will require faster rotation of the LIDAR scanner 222 (equivalent to accelerate the rotational movement of the deflection unit) and/or lower speed of travel of the vehicle. Additional or alternatively, the angular speed of rotation of the LIDAR scanner is based on a travel velocity or speed of the vehicle. The rotation controller 611 controls a direction of rotation of the LIDAR scanner 222 (e.g., a clockwise or counter-clockwise rotation of the LIDAR scanner 222).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values; wherein the correction unit is configured to accelerate or decelerate the rotational movement of the deflection unit and to a degree corresponding to the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor taught by Kerr with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is the rotation controller 611 calculates an angular speed at which to rotate the LIDAR scanner 222 based on a desired amount of scanning of an area of interest by increased scanning requirements for example to faster rotation of the LIDAR scanner 222 (Kerr; [0039], [0040]).
Regarding claim 9, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 1, wherein the evaluation unit is configured to determine the distance from a scanned object from the time of flight of light between the transmission of the transmitted light beam and the reception of the remitted light beam so that the measured values each comprise an object distance and a direction (Jachman; [0033], the object is also satisfied by a method for the detection and distance determination of objects in a monitoring area, wherein a transmission light beam having a plurality of consecutive individual light pulses is transmitted and periodically scans the monitoring area by means of a rotatable deflection unit whose respective angular position is measured, reception pulses are generated from transmission light remitted or reflected by objects in the monitoring area, a time histogram is accumulated from a plurality of reception pulses in at least one histogram memory, and a light time of flight to an object and therefrom an object distance is determined, wherein time histograms are accumulated in a plurality of histogram memories each associated with an angular position, time histograms are accumulated in the histogram memories across several periods of the rotational movement of the deflection unit from reception pulses which are each detected at the angular position associated with the respective histogram memory, and the object distance for an angular position is determined from the histogram of the associated histogram memory).
Regarding claim 10, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 1, wherein the transmitted light beam has a plurality of consecutive individual light pulses and the evaluation unit is configured in each case to collect a group of individual received pulses corresponding to the transmitted individual light pulses for a measured value in a time histogram and to determine the time of flight of light from the optoelectronic sensor to an object from the histogram and to determine the object distance therefrom (Jachman; [0033], the object is also satisfied by a method for the detection and distance determination of objects in a monitoring area, wherein a transmission light beam having a plurality of consecutive individual light pulses is transmitted and periodically scans the monitoring area by means of a rotatable deflection unit whose respective angular position is measured, reception pulses are generated from transmission light remitted or reflected by objects in the monitoring area, a time histogram is accumulated from a plurality of reception pulses in at least one histogram memory, and a light time of flight to an object and therefrom an object distance is determined, wherein time histograms are accumulated in a plurality of histogram memories each associated with an angular position, time histograms are accumulated in the histogram memories across several periods of the rotational movement of the deflection unit from reception pulses which are each detected at the angular position associated with the respective histogram memory, and the object distance for an angular position is determined from the histogram of the associated histogram memory).
Regarding claim 11, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 10, wherein the evaluation unit is configured to determine the direction of the measured value from the angular positions of the deflection unit on transmission of the individual light pulses and/or on reception of the individual received pulses of the group collected in the associated histogram (Jachman; [0025] The angular resolution can also be preserved by configuring the evaluation unit, in another alternative embodiment, to add a reception pulse to several histograms in histogram memories associated with adjacent angular positions. In this case, histograms are formed in an overlapping manner, and each reception pulse contributes to multiple histograms in an angular neighborhood within the overlap. There remain some redundancy in the measurement value basis and still an angle dependent averaging, but it can be achieved that a distance value is determined for each direction into which an individual pulse is transmitted after significantly fewer periods. [0026] The evaluation unit is preferably configured to divide the histogram memories into a plurality of groups and to evaluate the histograms accumulated in the histogram memories in a staggered manner over a corresponding number of periods of the rotational movement of the deflection unit by determining the light time of flight from histograms of histogram memories of one group in one period).
Regarding claim 13, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 1, that is configured as a safety laser scanner and has a safeguarding unit and a safe output, wherein the safeguarding unit is configured to recognize unauthorized object intrusions into protected zones within the monitored zone and to thereupon output a safeguarding signal over the safe output (Jachman; [0032], [0034], [0048], the evaluation unit is preferably configured to compare the object distances determined in dependence on angular position with predefined protection zones in order to detect an object intrusion into a protection zone and to then output a safety-related shutdown signal. A sensor which evaluates protection zones for potential safety-related shutdowns preferably is a safe sensor according to the standards cited in the introduction or similar relevant standards in its entirety. Then for example, a safe output (OSSD, output signal switching device) is provided where the shutdown signal is output).
Regarding claim 15, Jachman teaches Jachman; Fig. 1, [0045], laser scanner 10), the optoelectronic sensor comprising a light transmitter for transmitting a transmitted light beam, a scanning unit rotatable about an axis of rotation for a periodic scanning of the monitored zone by the transmitted light beam, a light receiver for generating a received signal from light beams remitted by objects in the monitored zone (Jachman; Fig. 1, [0045], laser scanner 10. A light beam 14 comprising individual light pulses generated by a light transmitter 12, is deflected into a monitoring area 18 by light deflection units 16a-b to an object. The remitted light 20 arrives back at the laser scanner 10 and is detected there via the deflection unit 16b and by means of reception optics 22 in a light receiver 24; [0046], the light deflection unit 16b is generally designed as a rotational mirror which continuously rotates driven by a motor 26), an angle measurement unit for determining the angular position of the scanning unit relative to the optoelectronic sensor (Jachman; Fig. 1, [0046], the respective angular position of the light deflection unit 16b is detected by an encoder 28), and an evaluation unit that is configured to generate measured values that indicate whether and in which direction an object has been detected using the received signals (Jachman; Fig. 1, [0047], the evaluation unit 30 connects with the light transmitter 12, the receiver 24, the motor 26 and encoder 28. Thus, 2D polar coordinates of all objects in the monitoring area 18 are available via the angle and the distance. This data may already be the relevant measurement data which is provided at an output 32),
Jachman does not teach,
a vehicle,
further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation; and a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values.
Siraky disclosed in paragraph [0002], rotary encoders serve to measure angle-dependent magnitudes, such as the angular position, angular speed, and angular acceleration of a rotating object, e.g., the shaft of a motor. To this end, the rotary encoder exhibits a shaft which is coupled in torque-prof fashion to the rotating object that is being measured, e.g., the motor shaft. Connected to the shaft at a true angle or rotation is a material measure, which is scanned by a suitable scanning device to generate angle-dependent signals.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is using a device to measure the angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation predictably to increase the measurement accuracy.
However, Jachman modified in view of Siraky still not teach,
A vehicle.
and a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values.
Kerr disclosed in Fig. 6, [0039], the rotation/reflection compensator 610 adjusts (e.g., correct augments, supplements) sensor data from the LIDAR scanner 222 based on a rotational speed of the LIDAR scanner 222 and/or a determined scanning area based on reflections from the reflector 224. In particular, the rotation/reflection compensator 610 can adjust sensor data based on a known rotation rate speed of the LIDAR to compensate for movement of the vehicle (e.g., the UAV 200).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a vehicle; a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is using the rotation/reflection compensator 610 to adjust sensor data based on a known rotation rate speed of the LIDAR to compensate for movement of the vehicle (Kerr; [0039]).
Claim 19 is the method claim possesses nearly identical limitation to those of claim 1 and is thus rejected for the same reasoning.
Claim(s) 5, 7-8, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jachman, modified in view of Siraky, in view of Kerr, in view of Moehrle (DE 102011053212 B3, hereinafter “Moehrle”).
Regarding claim 5, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 4.
Jachman does not teach, wherein the correction unit is configured to accelerate or decelerate the rotational movement of the deflection unit in the opposite direction to the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor.
Moehrle disclosed in paragraph [0014], the compensation can be calculated by determining the deviation between the angular resolution targeted by rotating the deflection unit and the actual angular resolution resulting from the superposition with the sensor’s own movement, and then assigning the measured values to these actual angles. At the same time or alternatively, the measurement itself can also be corrected by using a correction unit to compensate for the movement of the deflection unit; [0016], the correction unit is preferably designed to accelerate or decelerate the rotational movement of the deflection unit. This ensures that, despite the sensor’s own movement, the angular steps between two measurements remain below a required angular resolution or even unchanged. Specifically, the acceleration or deceleration can occur in the opposite direction to the changes in orientation and to a degree corresponding to the changes in orientation. This effectively superimposes the regular, cyclical movement of the deflection unit relative to the sensor with the negative intrinsic movement of the laser scanner.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr, include wherein the correction unit is configured to accelerate or decelerate the rotational movement of the deflection unit in the opposite direction to the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor taught by Moehrle with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is the correction unit is configured to accelerate or decelerate (in the opposite direction to the changes in orientation and to a degree corresponding to the changes in orientation) the rotational movement of the deflection unit ensures that, despite the sensor’s own movement, the angular steps between two measurements remain below a required angular resolution or even unchanged (Moehrle; [0014]-[0016]).
Regarding claim 7, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 1.
Jachman does not teach,
wherein the correction unit is configured to calculate the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the environment from the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the optoelectronic sensor and from the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor relative to the environment.
Moehrle disclosed in paragraph [0017], the correction unit is preferably designed to calculate the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the environment form the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the sensor and the orientation of the sensor relative to the environment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr, include wherein the correction unit is configured to calculate the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the environment from the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the optoelectronic sensor and from the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor relative to the environment taught by Moehrle with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is the rotational movement of the scanning unit is referenced to an absolute world coordinate system instead of the co-moving coordinate system in which the angle measuring unit operates. This allows for an assessment of the impact of the sensor’s own movement on the angular resolution. For example, this could lead to the decision that the current self-movement is not critical for the sensor function (Moehrle; [0017]).
Regarding claim 8, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 7.
Jachman does not teach,
wherein the correction unit is configured to correct the association of the measured values with a direction in that the direction is determined from the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the environment.
Moehrle disclosed in paragraph [0018], the correction unit is preferably designed to correct the assignment of the measured values to direction by determining the direction from the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the environment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr, include wherein the correction unit is configured to calculate the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the environment from the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the optoelectronic sensor and from the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor relative to the environment; wherein the correction unit is configured to correct the association of the measured values with a direction in that the direction is determined from the angular position of the deflection unit relative to the environment taught by Moehrle with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is the analysis no longer focuses solely on the influence of the object’s own movement, but rather assigns the measured values to the actual direction in relation to th environment into which the transmitted light beam was emitted. This corrects distortions in the measured values due to intrinsic movements. The angular steps originally chosen with respect to the sensor by the rotational movement are consistently change according to the sensor’s own movement, both during the actual measurement and during the evaluation (Moehrle; [0018]).
Regarding claim 12, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 10.
Jachman does not teach,
wherein the evaluation unit is configured to select the groups such that the individual light pulses belonging to each group are transmitted within an angular segment corresponding to a predefined angular resolution of the optoelectronic sensor, with the angular segment being determined relative to the environment.
Moehrle disclosed in paragraph [0022], the evaluation unit is preferably designed to select the groups such that the individual light pulses belonging to each group are emitted within an angular segment corresponding to a predetermined angular resolution of the sensor, wherein the angular segment is determined relative to the environment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr, include wherein the evaluation unit is configured to select the groups such that the individual light pulses belonging to each group are transmitted within an angular segment corresponding to a predefined angular resolution of the optoelectronic sensor, with the angular segment being determined relative to the environment taught by Moehrle with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is when the sensor’s own movement is superimposed, it is no longer guaranteed that the group of individual pulses will be emitted precisely within the intended angular segment. Then it is possible to vary the group size, so that group membership is determined not by a fixed number of individual pulses, but by the assignment to an angular segment. The statistical depth, i.e., the number of individual pulses that form a histogram, and thus the robustness against disturbances are varied. This means that such a sensor robustly delivers a measured value for each desired angular segment despite its own movements, so that the angular resolution becomes independent of the sensor’s own movements (Moehrle; [0022]).
Regarding claim 14, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 13.
Jachman does not teach,
wherein the correction unit or the safeguarding unit is configured to check whether the measured values have a sufficient angular resolution after compensation by the correction unit and to otherwise output a shutdown signal over the safe output.
Moehrle disclosed in paragraph [0007], a safety laser scanner mush detect when the object resolution is impaired due to such influences and issue a shutdown signal in a timely manner. Traditionally, the rotational movement of the deflection unit is directly monitored using an angle encoder. At higher rotational speeds, the angular resolution decreases, all other things being equal. If a pre-set reserve is exceeded, this leads to a shutdown.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr, include wherein the correction unit or the safeguarding unit is configured to check whether the measured values have a sufficient angular resolution after compensation by the correction unit and to otherwise output a shutdown signal over the safe output taught by Moehrle with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is the safety laser scanner must check to whether the rotational movement of the deflection unit is impaired to timely shutdown when the angular resolution is decreased predictably to improve the accuracy of the safety laser scanner.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jachman, modified in view of Siraky, in view of Kerr, in view of Weed et al. (US 20180284225 A1, hereinafter “Weed”).
Regarding claim 6, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 1, wherein the transmitted light beam has a plurality of consecutive individual light pulses (Jachman; [0033], a transmission light beam having a plurality of consecutive individual light pulses) and,
Jachman does not teach,
the correction unit is configured to increase or decrease a pulse rate of the individual light pulses.
Weed disclosed in paragraph [0030], the controller may provide control signals to the light source to increase the pulse rate as the angle defining the orientation increase. In some implementations, the controller may compare the orientation angle to a threshold orientation angle. Then the controller may provide a control signal to the light source to adjust the pulse rate when the orientation angle rises above (or falls below) a threshold orientation angle. When the vehicle is about to make a left turn, the controller may set a threshold orientation near the left side of the lidar system to increase the pulse rate near the left side of the vehicle to more clearly identify objects in an area that the vehicle is approaching.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr, include the correction unit is configured to increase or decrease a pulse rate of the individual light pulses taught by Weed with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is that the controller may provide a control signal to the light source to adjust the pulse rate when the orientation angle rises above (or falls below) a threshold orientation angle predictably to keep the same measuring resolution when the orientation angle increased or decreased during the vehicle operation.
Claim(s) 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jachman, modified in view of Siraky, in view of Kerr, in view of Sadamoto et al. (US 20200290603 A1, hereinafter “Sadamoto”).
Regarding claim 16, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 15.
Jachman does not teach, wherein the vehicle is a driverless transport system having an omnidirectional drive, having a navigation control which is configured to change the movement of the vehicle with reference to the measured values.
Sadamoto disclosed in Fig. 1A, [0041], a control system of the autonomous mobile body including the omnidirectional mobile body 1 includes two control systems (normal/safety control systems). The normal control system controls an operation of the omnidirectional mobile body using a value obtained by the safety laser scanner 31, map information and the movement plan; [0004], further, in recent years, a mobile body having three or more drive wheels and including an omnidirectional movement mechanism movable in all directions has been known. For example, a mecanum wheel may be used for the drive wheel to be used for the omnidirectional movement mechanism. The mobile body movable in all directions can instantly perform complex operations, such as forward movement, change of direction, movement to a sideway, and turning on the spot. Here, there is a mobile body that includes a safety control system for the purpose of protecting people. The safety control system reduces a velocity of the mobile body or stops the mobile body, for example, when an obstacle or the like in a monitoring area is detected by a sensor or the like.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a vehicle; a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr, include wherein the vehicle is a driverless transport system having an omnidirectional drive, having a navigation control which is configured to change the movement of the vehicle with reference to the measured values taught by Sadamoto with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is using an omnidirectional drive in a vehicle such that the vehicle movable in all directions can instantly perform complex operations, such as forward movement, change of direction, movement to a sideway, and turning on the spot. Here, there is a mobile body that includes a safety control system for the purpose of protecting people (Sadamoto; [0004], [0041]).
Regarding claim 17, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 16.
Jachman does not teach, wherein the navigation control is further configured to stop or slow down the vehicle on reception of a safeguarding signal from the optoelectronic sensor.
Sadamoto disclosed in [0004] Further, in recent years, a mobile body having three or more drive wheels and including an omnidirectional movement mechanism movable in all directions has been known. Here, there is a mobile body that includes a safety control system for the purpose of protecting people. The safety control system reduces a velocity of the mobile body or stops the mobile body, for example, when an obstacle or the like in a monitoring area is detected by a sensor or the like; [0054] FIG. 1B is a diagram showing a specific example of the control signal 40. In FIG. 1B, the control signal 40 shown in FIG 1A includes a deceleration (alarm) signal 41, an operation mode signal 42, and an emergency stop signal 43. The deceleration signal 41 is a signal that is output from the safety laser scanner 31 to the main controller 22 when an object in the warning area is detected by the safety laser scanner 31. When the deceleration signal 41 is input, the main controller 22 controls the motor control circuit 23 to reduce the velocity of the omnidirectional mobile body 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a vehicle; a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr, include wherein the vehicle is a driverless transport system having an omnidirectional drive, having a navigation control which is configured to change the movement of the vehicle with reference to the measured values; wherein the navigation control is further configured to stop or slow down the vehicle on reception of a safeguarding signal from the optoelectronic sensor taught by Sadamoto with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is stop or slow down the vehicle when an obstacle or the like in a monitoring area is detected by a sensor for safety issue (Sadamoto; [0004], [0041], [0054]).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jachman, modified in view of Siraky, in view of Kerr, in view of Sadamoto, in view of Moehrle.
Regarding claim 18, Jachman as modified above teaches the optoelectronic sensor as recited in claim 16.
Jachman does not teach,
wherein the navigation control is configured to decelerate or to stop movements of the vehicle to ensure that the correction unit compensates the measured values within a demanded angular resolution.
Moehrle disclosed in paragraph [0014], the compensation can be calculated by determining the deviation between the angular resolution targeted by rotating the deflection unit and the actual angular resolution resulting from the superposition with the sensor’s own movement, and then assigning the measured values to these actual angles. At the same time or alternatively, the measurement itself can also be corrected by using a correction unit to compensate for the movement of the deflection unit; [0016], the correction unit is preferably designed to accelerate or decelerate the rotational movement of the deflection unit. This ensures that, despite the sensor’s own movement, the angular steps between two measurements remain below a required angular resolution or even unchanged. Specifically, the acceleration or deceleration can occur in the opposite direction to the changes in orientation and to a degree corresponding to the changes in orientation. This effectively superimposes the regular, cyclical movement of the deflection unit relative to the sensor with the negative intrinsic movement of the laser scanner.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the sensor taught by Jachman to include further comprising a device that is configured to measure an angular speed or rotational frequency of the scanning unit about the axis of rotation taught by Siraky, include a vehicle; a correction unit that is configured to determine a self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor with respect to the axis of rotation of the scanning unit using the measured angular speed or the rotational frequency of the scanning unit and to compensate the influence of the self-rotation of the optoelectronic sensor on the measured values taught by Kerr, include wherein the vehicle is a driverless transport system having an omnidirectional drive, having a navigation control which is configured to change the movement of the vehicle with reference to the measured values taught by Sadamoto, include wherein the navigation control is configured to decelerate or to stop movements of the vehicle to ensure that the correction unit compensates the measured values within a demanded angular resolution taught by Moehrle with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is the correction unit is configured to accelerate or decelerate the rotational movement of the deflection unit ensures that, despite the sensor’s own movement, the angular steps between two measurements remain below a required angular resolution or even unchanged (Moehrle; [0014]-[0016]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Missbach et al. (US 20200355830 A1) disclosed in paragraph [0042], the safety laser scanner furthermore includes an inertial measuring unit 38 which determines the acceleration preferably in all three spatial direction, and the angular speed with respect to all three axes; [0041], [0045]-[0046], vehicle 50 includes at least one safety laser scanner 10 is mounted to safeguard the movement paths.
Albert et al. (US 20170371066 A1) disclosed in [0007] In order to obtain reliable data over the entire detection area, there are high requirements not only for the actual measurement of the distances to detected objects, but also for the accuracy of the angle measurement. Conventionally, an encoder disk with regular openings is used for this purpose. A fork light barrier transmits light through the openings of the rotating encoder disk, and a rotational speed or angular position, respectively, is calculated by determining the number of beam interruptions per time. In this case, a relatively large number of components including a rather complex mechanism for the encoder disk and the fork light barrier are used. Individual openings of the encoder disk may be closed during operation by interfering particles or dust, which leads to maintenance requirements or even measurement errors and failure. The forked light barrier is affected by ambient light; [0046], While a conventional front screen monitoring only has a few separate measurement channels, even contamination information with high angular resolution can be obtained by the rotating angle measuring unit 30, and with suitable arrangement from the relevant part of the front screen 46 which is also used for the transmission light beam 16 and the remitted light 22. In a simple contamination monitoring, there is only a binary decision whether the laser scanner 10 is still operable. The angle-resolved contamination information also allows for more differentiated considerations. For example, it is evaluated whether a contaminated region of the front screen 46 relates to an angular range with a protection field. While an impairment of the monitoring of a protected field immediately has to result in a safety-related stop, a contamination in angular regions without relevance for safety could be accepted and thus the availability of the laser scanner 10 be increased.
O’Keeffe (US 20180088214 A1), disclosed in Figs. 10A, 10B, [0082], Laser ranger finder 810 can further generate a guard set of lower intensity laser pulses in one or more guard regions. The guard regions can encompass at least some of the perimeter of the adaptive-intensity region, thereby providing that objects on one of several trajectories mush first pass through a guard region before entering the adaptive-intensity region. In the embodiment of Fig. 10A person 760 and their associated trajectory can be determined based on one or more sets of laser pulses in the guard regions. It can be determined that person 760 with trajectory 1020 moves towards the right and thereby avoids adaptive-intensity region; [0083], in Fig. 10B laser range finder 810 can determine the person 780 has a trajectory that will intersect the adaptive-intensity region. In the embodiment of Fig. 10B, laser range finder 810 can react by reducing the intensity of some or all of the laser pulses subsequently generated in the adaptive-intensity region.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIA-LING CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1047. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8-5 ET.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571)270-3630. 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.
/CHIA-LING CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
