DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 08/24/2023. Applicant has filed a certified copy of the foreign priority application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: DIAGNOSTIC DEVICE FOR DIAGNOSING A CAUSE OF A MACHINING ERROR.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3, “an NC device” should be rewritten as “a numerical control (NC) device.” Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
The following terms lack antecedent basis: Claim 1, line 6, “the machining”;
Claim 1, line 9, “the causes”;
Claim 4, line 2, “the temporal transition”; and
Claim 4, lines 12-13, “the calculated feature quantities.”
Claim 5 recites the limitation, "the error transition information is categorized into at least one of a first to sixth error transition … the cause diagnosis unit identifies the causes based on the error transition information categorized into the first to sixth error transition or a combination thereof." The meaning of the limitation is not clear, as the first and second sentences seem to somewhat contradict one another i.e., the first sentence seems to indicate that the error transition information can be categorized into just one error transition, but the second sentence seems to indicate that the error transition information must be categorized into possibly six different error transitions, or perhaps at least two of the error transitions. It is also somewhat unclear what "a combination thereof" exactly refers to e.g., a combination of causes, a combination of two or more of the six different error transitions, etc. For the purpose of examination, Examiner interprets the above limitation as meaning that the error transition information is categorized into two or more of the group selected from the first error transition, the second error transition, the third transition, the fourth transition, the fifth transition and the sixth transition.
Claims 2-5 are rejected for incorporating the above errors from their respective parent claims.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamiguchi (US 2019/0369594) over Liu (US 2022/0009049).
Kamiguchi was cited in an IDS filed 08/14/2024.
Regarding claim 1, Kamiguchi teaches a diagnostic device for diagnosing a cause of a machining error that occurs at each machining operation on a plurality of workpieces having a same shape (Abstract, Fig. 1 teaches a diagnosis device), the diagnostic device comprising:
an error transition recording unit in which a plurality of types of error transition information with different temporal transitions of the machining error are recorded ([0035-0036, 0056-0060, 0071, 0062-0065, 0049], the system stores various types of data associated with a factor e.g., a cause of a defect, such as a tool factor, jig factor, human factor etc.; for example, [0036, 0049] describes a feature quantity i.e., a pattern or representative parameter deviation, associated with a factor for defective machining, which is compared against a feature quantity for current machine operations to determine if there is a match that indicates the corresponding type of factor/defect; [0071], this feature quantity reflects historical machining operations; the system stores the feature quantity for each factor e.g., for each of human, tool, jig, workpiece and machine factors; "error transition information" can also be interpreted to include any other related data in addition to a factor feature quantity e.g., the corresponding result of a corresponding analysis and comparison between the machining operation feature quantity and the factor feature quantity e.g., see Fig. 7, [0036-0037, 0066-0069];see also [0062-0066]; inherently, the device includes memory where such data is stored);
an error transition input unit that selects at least one of pieces of error transition information from the plurality of types of error transition information ([0035-0036], when performing the above comparison, the system selects a feature quantity in accordance with a factor; the factor may be separately input/selected by a user; inherently, the device includes a processor to perform such operations);
an error cause recording unit in which a plurality of types of the causes are each recorded in association with the error transition information ([0035-0036, 0071, 0062-0065, 0049], the system stores feature quantities in association with respective causes/factors e.g., human, tool, jig, workpiece and machine factors; see also Fig. 4, [0044], which describes an interface in which a user can select a factor and cause the application of a corresponding feature quantity; Fig. 5, [0046] refers to a database, and it would be obvious or inherent that such data would be stored in a database/data structure within the memory);
a cause diagnosis unit that refers to the error cause recording unit and identifies the causes based on the error transition information selected by the error transition input unit ([0035-0036, 0018, 0049], the determination unit compares a feature quantity of actual machining operations with a feature quantity for a factor to determine whether the factor is applicable i.e., the system effectively looks for a match between a pattern for the defect and the pattern indicated by actual machining operations); and
a display portion that displays the causes identified by the cause diagnosis unit (Fig. 7, 8, [0037, 0066], the system outputs the above determination for presentation to a user; for example, Fig. 7 illustrates a display screen for providing information regarding the applicability of various factors/causes to actual machining operations).
Kamiguchi does not expressly disclose the different temporal transitions caused by repeating the machining.
In the same field of endeavor, Liu teaches the different temporal transitions caused by repeating the machining (Liu [0054-0062], it is known, when generating a reference signal reflecting a condition of a system involved in machining a workpiece, to derive the reference signal from multiple, repetitive machining operations, possibly involving multiple workpieces of the same type).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the different temporal transitions caused by repeating the machining as suggested in Liu into Kamiguchi because Kamiguchi and Liu pertain to analogous fields of technology. Kamiguchi pertains to determining a pattern e.g., a feature quantity for a factor, which is representative of a condition pertaining to machining operations. (Kamiguchi further notes that a feature quantity can be derived by repeatedly sampling time series data and using an average of multiple results e.g., see Kamiguchi [0056-0060].) Liu also pertains to generating a pattern/signal representative of a particular condition in machining operations e.g., tool wear. In both references, the pattern is used as a reference baseline for a comparing operation to classify current machining operations. In Liu, the signal is derived from multiple, repetitive machining operations using the same type of workpiece. It would be desirable to incorporate this feature into the generation of factor feature quantities in Kamiguchi to make the feature quantities more representative and accurate e.g., see Liu [0054-0062].
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kamiguchi and Liu teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. The combination of Kamiguchi and Liu also teaches
a machined portion input unit used for inputting machined portion information that is information related to identifying the machining error in the workpiece; and
a cutting condition input unit used for inputting cutting condition information that
is information related to machining to the workpiece (Kamiguchi [0033, 0034], a collection unit and various interfaces obtain tool machine data and measurement data pertaining to a machined part; as noted in Kamiguchi [0058], the tool may be a cutting tool used for cutting operations), wherein
the cause is also associated with the machined portion information and the cutting
condition information, and
the cause diagnosis unit refers to the error cause recording unit and identifies the cause based on the error transition information selected by the error transition input unit, the machined portion information input by the machined portion input unit, and the cutting condition information input by the cutting condition input unit (Kamiguchi [0035-0037], the above tool and measurement data relating to a machined part is associated with a factor/cause and is used to determine the same, based on feature quantity associated with a selected factor).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kamiguchi and Liu teaches the invention as claimed in claim 2. The combination of Kamiguchi and Liu also teaches wherein
the diagnostic device is connected to an NC device (Kamiguchi Figs. 1-2, [0033, 0034, 0038, 0039], the diagnosis device is connected to a device/system including a networked machine tool and measuring instrument; the machine tool may be a computerized numerical control (CNC) tool) and
at least any one piece of the machined portion information and the cutting condition information can be selected and input from data recorded in the NC device (Kamiguchi [0033, 0034], a collection unit and various interfaces obtain tool machine data and measurement data pertaining to a machined part from the machine tool and measuring instrument; such data is naturally stored there).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kamiguchi and Liu teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. The combination of Kamiguchi and Liu also teaches wherein
an actually measured value of the temporal transition of the machining error is allowed to be input by the error transition input unit (Kamiguchi [0033, 0034, 0056-0060], the diagnosis device obtains measured, time series data resulting from measurement of a part machined by a tool, as well as data measured from a tool) and
based on the input actually measured value of the temporal transition, the error transition input unit calculates at least one of
the initial product machining error Δa which is the machining error from a target value in a first machined workpiece (Kamiguchi [0056-0060], the system determines a feature quantity by determining a deviation between a parameter relating to defective machining and a parameter relating to machining known to be normal; [0052-0053, 0058], the deviation may relate to a problem in a workpiece; Kamiguchi [0062], the system compares an extracted feature quantity to a threshold; the above determinations are based on the above measured, time series data),
an absolute value Δb of a displacement width of the machining error that has occurred between the first machined workpiece and a finally machined workpiece,
a maximum value Δc of a difference between the machining error in previous machining and the machining error in current machining,
an error Δd with a linear approximation value, and
an error Δe with a first-order lag equation approximation value,
as feature quantities related to selection of the error transition information (Kamiguchi [0035-0036], the above relate to feature quantities determined in accordance with a selected factor and associated feature quantity), and
selects the error transition information based on the calculated feature quantities (Kamiguchi Fig. 7, [0036-0037, 0066-0069], the system selects analysis results based comparison operations involving feature quantities of a machining operation and a factor).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cao (H. Cao et al., “Root Cause Identification of Machining Error Based on Statistical Process Control and Fault Diagnosis of Machine Tools,” machines, published Sept. 6, 2017) teaches techniques for determining a root cause of a fault in a machining process e.g., see Cao Abstract.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC YOON whose telephone number is (408)918-7581. The examiner can normally be reached on 9 am to 5 pm ET Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3644. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/ERIC J YOON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights