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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/09/2024 was filed before the first action on the merits of the application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 objected to because of the following informalities: “the metho of claim 17” should be “the method of claim 17”. Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Fig. 4 is an unlabeled flow chart of two blank rectangular boxes; details of conventional features should be in the form of a graphical drawing symbol or labeled representation. (labeled boxes comes from 37 C.F.R 1.83 section (a)) Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-19 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “exceeding” in claim 1 is used by the claim to mean “at or below a threshold,” (e.g. 5s “exceeds” a 10s threshold) while the accepted meaning is “at or above a threshold.” (e.g. 15s “exceeds” a 10s threshold) The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
In plain English “exceed”, when used in reference to a numerical type limit/threshold, connotes that the exceeding value is above/greater than the threshold not below it.
E.g. “the driver exceeded the speed limit” would mean that they are driving faster than the speed limit. Not that they are driving below the speed limit.
However when the applicant’s specification is reviewed “exceeding” the time period threshold means that the time period until the vehicle reaches the braking start point is at/below the threshold. (see [0046] of the application’s specification)
Claims 2-19 all depend on claim 1 directly or indirectly and thus inherit this 112(b) issue regarding the “exceeding”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because: Claim 18 is directed to a “computer program product”, as such it is software per-se and pure software does not fall within the statutory categories for patent eligible subject matter.
Claim 19 already recites a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions…; as such amending claim 18 to instead recite a non-transitory would result in claim 19 being objected to as substantially duplicate. Therefore it is recommended that if claim 18 is to be amended it instead by amended to a system claim (comprising a processor and non-transitory computer readable medium equivalent) which performs the method of claim 17.
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) 1-5, 8-11, 13-14, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230373479 A1, “ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL WITH LOAD”, Lewandowski et al and further in view of US 20190023151 A1. “Vehicle Having A Brake Device”, Glinka.
Regarding Claim 1, Lewandowski teaches “A vehicle auxiliary braking system, comprising a friction” brake arrangement, the friction” brake arrangement comprising a rotatable friction” brake disc operably connectable to at least one wheel of a vehicle and brake pads operable to engage with the rotatablefriction” brake disc,”( Lewandowski [0026] The brake system 120 is typically a conventional vehicle braking subsystem and resists the motion of the vehicle 100 to thereby slow and/or stop the vehicle 100. The brake system 120 may include friction brakes such as disc brakes, drum brakes, band brakes, etc.; regenerative brakes; any other suitable type of brakes; or a combination. The brake system 120 can include an electronic control unit (ECU) or the like that is in communication with and receives input from the computer 105 and/or a human operator. The human operator may control the brake system 120 via, e.g., a brake pedal.); “the vehicle auxiliary braking system further comprising a control unit comprising processing circuitry configured to: determine a time period for an upcoming vehicle braking operation to be initiated at a brake start position at future point in time; and control the brake pads to engage with the rotatable“friction” brake disc at the brake start position in response to the time period exceeding a predetermined threshold time period.”( [0034] The computer 105 can be programmed to operate the adaptive cruise control, i.e., to actuate the propulsion system 115 and the brake system 120 according to an adaptive-cruise-control algorithm stored on the computer 105. The computer 105 can be programmed to operate the adaptive cruise control according to the parameters of the adaptive cruise control. For example, the parameters can include a target speed and a following distance. The computer 105 can be programmed to, according to the adaptive cruise control, actuate the propulsion system 115 and/or the brake system 120 to maintain a speed of the vehicle 100 at the target speed and to accelerate up to the target speed.” Lewandowski teaches the computer operating the braking system as part of the ACC + [0040] which teaches that the operation is triggered/based on the vehicle reaching a certain time (exceeding a threshold time period) until encountering a change (in grade, speed limit, turn/direction, etc))
Lewandowski however does not specifically teach that the braking assembly/disc brake is a carbon disc.
Glinka teaches a vehicle braking system which includes using a carbon disc and braking pads to brake the vehicle. ([0006]-[0007] the brake disc materials includes/can be carbon fiber)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application to modify Lewandowski to implement the carbon disc brake of Glinka as the friction braking system called for generally in Lewandowski. One would be motivated to implement a carbon disc brake in particular in order to reduce the overall weight of the system and to increase the temperatures the brake disc can withstand without damaging. Glinka teaches these improvements in ([0005] For this purpose, a vehicle with a braking device is provided, which has at least one friction brake unit, an electrical brake unit, and a brake control device, wherein the friction brake unit has at least brake components made of a composite material and the brake control device comprises a monitoring device, which is provided for monitoring a braking operation performed by the electrical brake unit. As a result, an advantageous weight reduction can be achieved with an at least unchanged level of reliability of the braking device compared to conventional braking devices for vehicles. The invention is based on the consideration that with a targeted use of the electrical brake unit as a priority relative to the friction brake unit, an advantageous relief thereof can be achieved. ... The invention is based on the further consideration that a brake component made of a composite material is quite capable of being operated undamaged in a high temperature range—typically at temperatures above 800° C. Although these temperatures are well above the typical temperatures at which oxidation of conventional, commercially available composite materials and disadvantages associated therewith occur, such exceeding of these critical oxidation limit temperatures is less critical in these only rare applications of emergency braking without the participation of the electrical brake unit. The high reliability of the electrical brake unit means the friction brake unit can be relaxed to the extent that it does not exceed the appropriate oxidation limit temperature in most braking cases—also called “service braking operations”. Therefore, commercially available, lightweight composite materials designed for average operating temperatures below 550° C. can be used for the design of a reliable braking device.)
Regarding Claim 2, Lewandowski teaches “. The vehicle auxiliary braking system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine a brake end position at which the upcoming vehicle braking operation will end; and control the brake pads to engage with the rotatable carbon brake disc for the entire duration of the vehicle braking operation from the brake start position to the brake end position.”( Lewandowski [0034] “The computer 105 can be programmed to operate the adaptive cruise control, i.e., to actuate the propulsion system 115 and the brake system 120 according to an adaptive-cruise-control algorithm stored on the computer 105. The computer 105 can be programmed to operate the adaptive cruise control according to the parameters of the adaptive cruise control. For example, the parameters can include a target speed and a following distance. The computer 105 can be programmed to, according to the adaptive cruise control, actuate the propulsion system 115 and/or the brake system 120 to maintain a speed of the vehicle 100 at the target speed and to accelerate up to the target speed “ Here teaches controlling of the braking system as part of the ACC + [0036]” ... The parameters can be set by the operator when activating or using the adaptive cruise control, can be stored in memory, and/or can be determined based on data received by the computer 105 according to a formula stored in memory. The computer 105 can be programmed to operate the adaptive cruise control based on the expected path 210. For example, some of the parameters can control operation relative to a turn 220 or a change in the posted speed limit, as will be described below”. Here teaches that the ACC controls according to the expected path, i.e. the start and end positions for braking + [0040] “The parameters can include times to begin accelerating relative to a change in the expected path 210, e.g., a… target speed out of the turn 220, a time relative to a change in grade to start accelerating or decelerating the vehicle 100 from the target speed (e.g., decelerating via engine braking), etc. The time relative to the change can be an amount of time before or after the vehicle 100 encounters the change, e.g., ten seconds before the change, two seconds after the change, etc. The computer 105 can be programmed to, according to the adaptive cruise control, determine the time at which the vehicle 100 will encounter the change based on the speed and the expected path 210 and to actuate the propulsion system 115 and/or the brake system 120 to accelerate or decelerate the vehicle 100 starting at the time relative to the change. The computer 105 can store the times in memory.” Here teaches that the expected path includes/defined by time thresholds until change points and the controlling (activating/deactivating) of the brakes to achieve the needed operations.)
Regarding Claim 3, Lewandowski teaches “The vehicle auxiliary braking system of claim 2, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: control the brake pads to release from the rotatable brake disc at the brake end position.”( Lewandowski [0034] “The computer 105 can be programmed to operate the adaptive cruise control, i.e., to actuate the propulsion system 115 and the brake system 120 according to an adaptive-cruise-control algorithm stored on the computer 105. The computer 105 can be programmed to operate the adaptive cruise control according to the parameters of the adaptive cruise control. For example, the parameters can include a target speed and a following distance. The computer 105 can be programmed to, according to the adaptive cruise control, actuate the propulsion system 115 and/or the brake system 120 to maintain a speed of the vehicle 100 at the target speed and to accelerate up to the target speed” From the control of the braking system “maintain a speed” at a target speed implicitly teaches the releasing of the brakes once the target speed/point has been reached as if the brakes are still actuated then the speed would not be maintained but instead lowered further)
Regarding Claim 4, Lewandowski teaches “The vehicle auxiliary braking system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine a vehicle weight, wherein the predetermined threshold time period is adjusted in response to the vehicle weight.”( [0040] The parameters can include times to begin accelerating relative to a change in the expected path 210, e.g., a time relative to a change in the posted speed limit to start (positively or negatively) accelerating the vehicle 100 from an old target speed to a new target speed, a time relative to a turn 220 to start decelerating the vehicle 100 from the target speed into the turn 220 to the target turn speed, a time relative to the turn 220 to start positively accelerating the vehicle 100 from the target turn speed to the target speed out of the turn 220, a time relative to a change in grade to start accelerating or decelerating the vehicle 100 from the target speed (e.g., decelerating via engine braking), etc. The time relative to the change can be an amount of time before or after the vehicle 100 encounters the change, e.g., ten seconds before the change, two seconds after the change, etc. The computer 105 can be programmed to, according to the adaptive cruise control, determine the time at which the vehicle 100 will encounter the change based on the speed and the expected path 210 and to actuate the propulsion system 115 and/or the brake system 120 to accelerate or decelerate the vehicle 100 starting at the time relative to the change. The computer 105 can store the times in memory.” Here teaches that the expected parameters include time to begin relative to a point in an expected path, which includes time relative to a grade change (i.e. going down a hill, reaching a bottom of a hill, etc) + [0041] “The parameters can include baseline parameters and loaded parameters. The baseline parameters are the parameters governing the adaptive cruise control when the vehicle 100 is not carrying the load 200. The loaded parameters are the parameters governing the adaptive cruise control when the vehicle 100 is carrying the load 200. The baseline parameters can be at least partially different than the loaded parameters. The loaded parameters can depend on the amount of the load 200, and/or different sets of the loaded parameters can govern the adaptive cruise control based on the amount of the load 200. For example, the computer 105 can store sets of the loaded parameters with the sets sorted into the type of the load 200 (in-bed cargo or trailer) and ranges of the amount, e.g., weight, of the load 200, as in the example table. The loaded parameters can be stored as multipliers or differences from the corresponding baseline parameters, e.g., for a maximum weight trailer, the maximum lateral acceleration (used to determine the target turn speed, as described above) is 0.625 of the baseline maximum lateral acceleration, and for an 8000lb trailer, the deceleration into a turn 220 or decrease in posted speed limit occurs 3 seconds earlier than the baseline time to start decelerating.” Weight of the vehicle (load) affects the how early (time) the ACC starts compared to a baseline + see [0031] which teaches the onboard weight sensor for the vehicle + [0042] further teaches modifying of the start times prior to an expected path point (e.g. beginning of a turn)
Regarding Claim 5, Lewandowski teaches “The vehicle auxiliary braking system of claim 4, wherein the predetermined threshold time period is reduced in response to an increased vehicle weight compared to a nominal vehicle weight, and increased in response to a lower vehicle weight compared to the nominal vehicle weight.”( [0041] The parameters can include baseline parameters and loaded parameters. The baseline parameters are the parameters governing the adaptive cruise control when the vehicle 100 is not carrying the load 200. The loaded parameters are the parameters governing the adaptive cruise control when the vehicle 100 is carrying the load 200. The baseline parameters can be at least partially different than the loaded parameters. The loaded parameters can depend on the amount of the load 200, and/or different sets of the loaded parameters can govern the adaptive cruise control based on the amount of the load 200. For example, the computer 105 can store sets of the loaded parameters with the sets sorted into the type of the load 200 (in-bed cargo or trailer) and ranges of the amount, e.g., weight, of the load 200, as in the example table. The loaded parameters can be stored as multipliers or differences from the corresponding baseline parameters, e.g., for a maximum weight trailer, the maximum lateral acceleration (used to determine the target turn speed, as described above) is 0.625 of the baseline maximum lateral acceleration, and for an 8000lb trailer, the deceleration into a turn 220 or decrease in posted speed limit occurs 3 seconds earlier than the baseline time to start decelerating.” + see table 1 posted below the grade compensation time decreases as the nominal load increases as can be seen in the table)
PNG
media_image1.png
192
330
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8, modified Lewandowski teaches “The vehicle auxiliary braking system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the time period for the upcoming vehicle braking operation in response to sensor received data.”( Lewandowski [0032] The computer 105 can be programmed to determine an expected path 210 for the vehicle 100 to follow. For example, the computer 105 can determine the expected path 210 from map data and location data. The map data can be stored by the computer 105 or received via the transceiver 135. The location data can be received from a GPS sensor of the sensors 130. The computer 105 can determine that the vehicle 100 will follow a current road 205 at least until a next intersection. Alternatively or additionally, the computer 105 can determine or receive navigation data, e.g., a route determined by a navigation algorithm. The navigation data can indicate where the vehicle 100 will go at the next intersection. Alternatively or additionally, the computer 105 can store counts of which directions the vehicle 100 travels at specific intersections. The computer 105 can determine that, at a given intersection, the vehicle 100 will travel in the direction with the highest count.” The expected path is determined from data including a GPS location data, from [0040] the changes are based on the expected path, i.e. time period is based in part of the GPS)
Regarding Claim 9, modified Lewandowski teaches “The vehicle auxiliary braking system of claim 8, wherein the sensor received data is received from a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS).”( Lewandowski [0032] The computer 105 can be programmed to determine an expected path 210 for the vehicle 100 to follow. For example, the computer 105 can determine the expected path 210 from map data and location data. The map data can be stored by the computer 105 or received via the transceiver 135. The location data can be received from a GPS sensor of the sensors 130. The computer 105 can determine that the vehicle 100 will follow a current road 205 at least until a next intersection. Alternatively or additionally, the computer 105 can determine or receive navigation data, e.g., a route determined by a navigation algorithm. The navigation data can indicate where the vehicle 100 will go at the next intersection. Alternatively or additionally, the computer 105 can store counts of which directions the vehicle 100 travels at specific intersections. The computer 105 can determine that, at a given intersection, the vehicle 100 will travel in the direction with the highest count.” The expected path is determined from data including a GPS location data, from [0040] the changes are based on the expected path, i.e. time period is based in part of the GPS)
Regarding Claim 10, modified Lewandowski teaches “The vehicle auxiliary braking system of claim 9, wherein the GNSS is a Global Positioning System (GPS).”( Lewandowski [0032] The computer 105 can be programmed to determine an expected path 210 for the vehicle 100 to follow. For example, the computer 105 can determine the expected path 210 from map data and location data. The map data can be stored by the computer 105 or received via the transceiver 135. The location data can be received from a GPS sensor of the sensors 130. The computer 105 can determine that the vehicle 100 will follow a current road 205 at least until a next intersection. Alternatively or additionally, the computer 105 can determine or receive navigation data, e.g., a route determined by a navigation algorithm. The navigation data can indicate where the vehicle 100 will go at the next intersection. Alternatively or additionally, the computer 105 can store counts of which directions the vehicle 100 travels at specific intersections. The computer 105 can determine that, at a given intersection, the vehicle 100 will travel in the direction with the highest count.” The expected path is determined from data including a GPS location data, from [0040] the changes are based on the expected path, i.e. time period is based in part of the GPS)
Regarding Claim 11, modified Lewandowski teaches “The vehicle auxiliary braking system of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the time period for the upcoming vehicle braking operation by receiving data from a look-up table.”( [0041] The parameters can include baseline parameters and loaded parameters. The baseline parameters are the parameters governing the adaptive cruise control when the vehicle 100 is not carrying the load 200. The loaded parameters are the parameters governing the adaptive cruise control when the vehicle 100 is carrying the load 200. The baseline parameters can be at least partially different than the loaded parameters. The loaded parameters can depend on the amount of the load 200, and/or different sets of the loaded parameters can govern the adaptive cruise control based on the amount of the load 200. For example, the computer 105 can store sets of the loaded parameters with the sets sorted into the type of the load 200 (in-bed cargo or trailer) and ranges of the amount, e.g., weight, of the load 200, as in the example table. T” Start time compared to a baseline start time for operations is stored in a table)
Regarding Claim 13, modified Lewandowski teaches “A vehicle comprising the vehicle auxiliary braking system of claim 1.”(Lewandowski 0005] This disclosure relates to dynamically optimizing performance of an adaptive cruise control system of a vehicle for when the vehicle is carrying a load, e.g., towing a trailer. A computer onboard the vehicle can be programmed to, in response to an activation of the adaptive cruise control while the vehicle is carrying the load, operate the adaptive cruise control according to a set of parameters. The parameters can include, e.g., a following distance, a time before an upcoming change in the posted speed limit to begin accelerating or decelerating the vehicle, a time before a turn to begin decelerating the vehicle, a target speed through the turn, a time before the turn ends to begin accelerating the vehicle, etc. The parameters can be based on the load, e.g., at least some of the parameters can change based on the amount of the load. To dynamically change the performance of the adaptive cruise control, the computer can be programmed to, while the adaptive cruise control is inactive and the vehicle is carrying the load, determine an expected operation of the adaptive cruise control.” Lewandowski teaches a vehicle)
Regarding Claim 14, modified Lewandowski teaches “The vehicle of claim 13, further comprising an electric traction motor, the electric traction motor being configured to apply a traction force to at least one wheel of the vehicle during propulsion and to generate electric power during braking.”( [0026] The brake system 120 is typically a conventional vehicle braking subsystem and resists the motion of the vehicle 100 to thereby slow and/or stop the vehicle 100. The brake system 120 may include friction brakes such as disc brakes, drum brakes, band brakes, etc.; regenerative brakes; any other suitable type of brakes; or a combination.” The braking system, and subsequent control, of Lewandowski can include both a regenerative braking system (electric traction motor) and friction disc brakes)
Regarding Claim 17 it is a method (computer implemented) equivalent to the control unit and its configuration as recited in claim 1. As such it has the same grounds of rejection as claim 1.
Claims 18-19 are a computer program produce and non-transitory computer readable medium equivalents to claim 17, as such they have the same grounds of rejection as claim 17, which has the same grounds of rejection as claim 1.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Lewandowski as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of “Electromechanical Brake Realizing Emergency Braking Function Using Pneumatic Pressure”, Cheol et al, KR 102082378 B1.
Regarding Claim 12, neither Lewandowski nor Glint teach that the disc brake is connected to the propellor shaft.
Cheol et al teaches a vehicle brake which comprising a rotatable braking disc which is conntected to the propellor shaft of the vehicle ([0014] “The brake disc 11 can be connected to the drive shaft 12 of the vehicle. A pair of brake pads 13 may be installed on the calipers 14 so as to face both sides of the brake disc 11. The brake pad 13 is installed to be able to move linearly to be in close contact with the brake disc 11, and when the brake pad 13 is in close contact with the brake disc 11, braking is made and spaced apart from the brake disc 11 In this case, normal driving of the vehicle becomes possible.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application to modify Lewandowski to implement the rotating disc brake by coupling it to brake the propellor shaft (drive shaft) as taught by Cheol. One would be motivated to implemented the drive shaft coupled friction brake in order to reduce the amount of components (e.g. brake calipers and pads) needed to brake the vehicle compared to separate braking disc systems for each axle and/or wheel of the vehicle. Cheol teaches the benefit in ([0003] …The first method has the disadvantage of diluting the advantages of the break-by-wire technology due to the increase in weight and volume, installation problems, etc. by the addition of the existing hydraulic braking system. In the second method, since two braking devices must be provided, two calipers are required, and braking is impossible when the vehicle is powered off.” – [0005] “The problem to be solved by the present invention is to solve the above problems and to provide an electromechanical brake capable of ensuring emergency braking using pneumatic pressure when a failure of the electromechanical brake occurs.”)
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Lewandowski as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of US 20180334038 A1, “OPTIMIZING REGENERATIVE BRAKING EFFICIENCY IN A HYBRID VEHICLE”, Zhao et al.
Regarding Claim 15, while Lewandowski teaches a braking system which includes both friction and regenerative braking as cited in claim 14, it does not teach the specific operational amounts of braking each performs in conjunction.
Zhao et al teaches a hybrid vehicle braking system which includes both friction and regenerative braking; which includes determining amount of energy which can be recovered in an upcoming braking event, ([0041] FIGS. 4A and 4B illustrate an algorithm 200 for constructing a vehicle torque profile to be used during an autonomous braking event. The steps of the algorithm will be explained in conjunction with the plots of FIG. 5 and the motor efficiency map of FIG. 6. The algorithm 200 is initiated in response to an autonomous braking event of the vehicle being requested. At operation 202, the controller determines a desired deceleration 250 of the vehicle during the braking event, which in the illustrated embodiment is an autonomous or semi-autonomous vehicle automatically braking for a stop sign. Of course, other types of braking events are contemplated. At operation 204, the controller determines a desired braking torque profile at the wheels for the desired deceleration 250, and the controller calculates the average of the brake torque profile (brake torque.sub.des.sub._.sub.avg) shown as trace 252. As used herein, braking torque refers to torque at the wheels, i.e., in the wheel domain, whereas regenerative torque refers to torque at the M/G, i.e., the motor domain.
[0042] At operation 206, the controller estimates the PT limit 254, which is at the wheels. As explained above, the PT limit may be based on the state of charge of the battery 20, the regenerative torque limits of the M/G 18, the brake stability limit, and the transmission capacity.) and controls both the friction and regenerative braking during this event to maximize both the regenerative energy that is obtained and ensure safety. Which includes controlling both the regenerative and friction braking ([0032] Along with regenerative braking capabilities, the vehicle 10 is also provided with conventional friction brakes 53 at the wheels which, like the regenerative braking, can be activated autonomously or by depression of a brake pedal. These can be controlled by, for example, a hydraulic brake system. The friction brakes can selectively provide the braking force for the vehicle, depending on the availability of the regenerative braking system. The amount of friction braking can vary. For example, if the state of charge of the battery 20 is relatively high (e.g., above a high threshold), then regenerative braking may be disabled for at least a portion of the braking event in order to prevent overcharging of the battery. Instead, the friction brakes 53 can be activated to slow the vehicle. In certain braking situations, the friction braking can be used to supplement the regenerative braking, or vice versa, to provide an overall brake force necessary to brake the vehicle while also maximizing the amount of regenerative braking.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application to modify Lewandowski to use utilize the optimized regenerative braking control schema as taught by Zhao for controlling the ACC and braking subsystem. One would be motivated to implement Zhao’s brake control schema to optimize the amount of energy which can be obtained while ensuring satisfactory/safe braking of the vehicle overall. ([[0032]… In certain braking situations, the friction braking can be used to supplement the regenerative braking, or vice versa, to provide an overall brake force necessary to brake the vehicle while also maximizing the amount of regenerative braking.” Here teaches that the system optimizes energy capture while ensuring safety by supplementing (adding friction brake force to reach overall needed/target brake force) the regenerative braking from)
Regarding Claim 16, modified Lewandowski teaches “The vehicle of claim 15, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine a total brake power level required to maintain a desired vehicle speed during the upcoming vehicle braking operation;”(Zhao [0041] FIGS. 4A and 4B illustrate an algorithm 200 for constructing a vehicle torque profile to be used during an autonomous braking event. The steps of the algorithm will be explained in conjunction with the plots of FIG. 5 and the motor efficiency map of FIG. 6. The algorithm 200 is initiated in response to an autonomous braking event of the vehicle being requested. At operation 202, the controller determines a desired deceleration 250 of the vehicle during the braking event, which in the illustrated embodiment is an autonomous or semi-autonomous vehicle automatically braking for a stop sign.” In Zhao the vehicle calculates the profile needed for an upcoming deceleration (profile being speed overtime/position) to safely break for a given scenario from Zhao [0039] );” and determine a motor brake power level obtainable by the electric traction motor during the upcoming vehicle braking operation, ”( [0042] At operation 206, the controller estimates the PT limit 254, which is at the wheels. As explained above, the PT limit may be based on the state of charge of the battery 20, the regenerative torque limits of the M/G 18, the brake stability limit, and the transmission capacity.
[0043] At operation 208, the controller determines if the brake torque.sub.des.sub._.sub.avg 252 is greater than the PT limit 254. If yes, this control strategy is exited and another control strategy is used. If no, control passes to operation 210, and the controller converts the brake torque.sub.des.sub._.sub.avg 252 into a motor torque (motor torque.sub.des.sub._.sub.avg) 256. This may be done for each gear ratio of the transmission, or only for gear ratios expected to be used during the braking event. The controller may use equation 1 to convert brake torque to motor torque and vice versa. Said another way, equation 1 converts torque between the motor domain and the wheel domain” Here teaches calculating the PT (power train) limit (regenerative motor breaking force limit) PT as defined in [0036]);” and during the upcoming vehicle braking operation: control the electric traction motor to apply the motor brake power level; and control the brake pads to apply a force on the rotatable carbon brake disc to obtain a brake power of the carbon brake arrangement corresponding to a difference between the total brake power level and the motor brake power level.”( Zhao [0032] Along with regenerative braking capabilities, the vehicle 10 is also provided with conventional friction brakes 53 at the wheels which, like the regenerative braking, can be activated autonomously or by depression of a brake pedal. These can be controlled by, for example, a hydraulic brake system. The friction brakes can selectively provide the braking force for the vehicle, depending on the availability of the regenerative braking system. The amount of friction braking can vary. For example, if the state of charge of the battery 20 is relatively high (e.g., above a high threshold), then regenerative braking may be disabled for at least a portion of the braking event in order to prevent overcharging of the battery. Instead, the friction brakes 53 can be activated to slow the vehicle. In certain braking situations, the friction braking can be used to supplement the regenerative braking, or vice versa, to provide an overall brake force necessary to brake the vehicle while also maximizing the amount of regenerative braking.” Here teaches that the friction brake provides the force necessary to supplement the regenerative braking force to reach a overall breaking force. )
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 6-7, while rejected under U.S.C 112(b) as being indefinite, due to its dependency on claim 1, no prior art was found to teach or render obvious the adjusting of the predetermined time period threshold based on the vehicle speed at the brake start position.
In comparison to the prior art, Lewandowski is considered to be the closest piece of prior art to this feature, while it teaches determining a target speed (vehicle speed) a brake start position ([0040] The parameters can include times to begin accelerating relative to a change in the expected path 210, e.g., a time relative to a change in the posted speed limit to start (positively or negatively) accelerating the vehicle 100 from an old target speed to a new target speed, a time relative to a turn 220 to start decelerating the vehicle 100 from the target speed into the turn 220 to the target turn speed, a time relative to the turn 220 to start positively accelerating the vehicle 100 from the target turn speed to the target speed out of the turn 220, a time relative to a change in grade to start accelerating or decelerating the vehicle 100 from the target speed (e.g., decelerating via engine braking), etc.” Here teaches calculating a time until decelerating from a target speed at a relative point/position on the expected path (logically as the target speed exists then at some point it was determined)); it does not teach modifying of the time until threshold (predetermined time period) based on the speed at this point. As such while the time period threshold is modified based on load, the time threshold remains the same based on speed; (e.g. Lewandowski teaches a 10sec threshold, at higher speeds this would correspond to a larger distance (as D=V * T) however the time period threshold itself still remains the same).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20180086227 A1, US 20200039498 A1,
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH MICHAEL DUNNE whose telephone number is (571)270-7392. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:30-6:30.
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, Navid Z Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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.
/KENNETH M DUNNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669