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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 11 - 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hancock et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0263413 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hancock discloses a multi-motor vehicle (1, FIG. 1) comprising:
a first inverter-motor assembly comprising a first inverter (Inverter 8, FIG. 1) and a first motor (First Electric Machine 7, FIG. 1), wherein the first inverter is electrically coupled to the first motor (7 and 8 are shown to be coupled, FIG. 1);
a second inverter-motor assembly comprising a second inverter (11, FIG. 1) and a second motor (10 Rear Electric Machine, FIG. 1), wherein the second inverter is electrically coupled to the second motor (11 and 10 are shown to be coupled, FIG. 1);
a vehicle control module (VCM) communicatively coupled to the first inverter and the
second inverter (VSC, FIG. 1); and
a high voltage battery assembly communicatively coupled to the VCM and electrically
coupled to the first inverter and the second inverter (First and second inverters are connected to a traction battery (not shown) for supplying power to the first and second electric machines ¶ 89),
wherein the VCM is configured to determine a first torque split value for the first
motor and a second torque split value for the second motor based (DS1 and DS2 Torque demand, FIG. 1 and determined at torque split module 23 ¶ 106) on:
a total torque request value (torque split module is operative to control the proposed torque transmitted to the front and rear axles to meet the total requested torque TQ ¶ 106);
a first inverter-motor efficiency value of the first inverter-motor assembly (considering efficiencies of the first inverter derived by torque split module which generates proposed front and rear torque demand signals DS1 and DS2 based on total torque requests TQ1 and TQ2 and temperature signals of machines and inverters TS1 and TS2 ¶ 106); and
a second inverter-motor efficiency value of the second inverter-motor assembly (considering efficiencies of the second inverter ¶ 106),
wherein the high voltage battery assembly is configured to provide power to the
first inverter-motor assembly and the second inverter-motor assembly according to the first
torque split value and the second torque split value, respectively (traction battery provides power to both inverters and electric machines accordingly to torque split demand signals DS1 and DS2 ¶ 89).
Regarding claim 4, Hancock discloses the multi-motor vehicle, wherein the VCM is further configured to determine the first torque split value for the first motor and the second torque split value for the second motor based on a temperature associated with the first motor and a temperature associated with the second motor (Rear and front electric machine temperatures measure, FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Hancock discloses the multi-motor vehicle, wherein:
the VCM is further configured to determine the first torque split value and the second
torque split value based on an energy management mode of the multi-motor vehicle (Driving mode selected by driver changes traction torque ranges TR1 and TR2 which may conserve energy or waste energy ¶ 94 and propulsion units being operated with a torque split maybe operated more efficiently to reduce the total power consumption ¶ 117).
Regarding claim 12, Hancock discloses the multi-motor vehicle, further comprising a memory (¶ 90), wherein a power loss value at an operating point (Based on Speed and torque, a Maximum power loss can be determined, FIG. 6), the first torque split value, and the second torque split value are stored in the memory, and wherein the VCM is further configured to determine the first torque split value and the second torque split value based on the power loss value (Power Loss 1 and 2 added to Total power cost, See FIG. 4, which determines the TPC which calculates a prescribed torque split in a cyclic loop procedure ¶ 117).
Regarding claim 13, Hancock discloses a method for torque management in a multi-motor electric vehicle (FIG. 3), the method comprising:
receiving a total torque request value at a vehicle control module (VCM) (VSC, FIG. 1) of the multi-motor (7, 10; FIG. 1) electric vehicle (torque split module is operative to control the proposed torque transmitted to the front and rear axles to meet the total requested torque TQ ¶ 106);
determining, by the VCM, a first torque split value associated with a first motor of the
multi-motor electric vehicle (DS1 Torque Split value, FIG. 1) and a second torque split value associated with a second motor of the multi-motor electric vehicle (DS2 Torque split value, FIG 1 and ¶ 106); and
communicating, by the VCM, the first torque split value and the second torque split value, thereby causing the first motor and the second motor to operate at the first torque split value and the second torque split value, respectively (VSC communicating Torque Split DS1 and DS2 output to inverter and electric machine, FIGS. 1 and 2), wherein determining, by the VCM, the first torque split value and the second torque split value comprises determining whether an energy management mode of the multi-motor electric vehicle is in an energy conservation mode or an energy waste mode (Driving mode selected by driver changes traction torque ranges TR1 and TR2 which may conserve energy or waste energy ¶ 94 and propulsion units being operated with a torque split maybe operated more efficiently to reduce the total power consumption ¶ 117).
Regarding claim 14, Hancock discloses the method, wherein, when the energy management mode is determined to be the energy conservation mode, the first torque split value and the second torque split value are determined based on a minimum value for a power loss at an operating point (Power Loss 1 PL1, FIG. 4 and min power losses depicted at 0, FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 15, Hancock discloses the method, wherein, when the energy management mode is determined to be the energy waste mode, the first torque split value and the second torque split value are determined based on a maximum value for a power loss at an operating point (PL1, PL2, PP1, PP2. Total Power Cost, FIG. 4 and Max Power loss FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 16, Hancock discloses the method, wherein the multi-motor electric vehicle comprises a first inverter electrically coupled to the first motor (7, 8; FIG. 1) and a second inverter electrically coupled to the second motor (11, 10; FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Hancock discloses a method for torque management in a multi-motor electric vehicle, the method comprising:
receiving a total torque request value at a vehicle control module (VCM) (VSC, FIG. 1) of the multi-motor (7, 10; FIG. 1) electric vehicle (torque split module is operative to control the proposed torque transmitted to the front and rear axles to meet the total requested torque TQ ¶ 106);
determining, by the VCM, a first torque split value associated with a first motor of the
multi-motor electric vehicle (DS1 Torque Split value, FIG. 1) and a second torque split value associated with a second motor of the multi-motor electric vehicle (DS2 Torque split value, FIG 1 and ¶ 106); and
communicating, by the VCM, the first torque split value and the second torque split value, thereby causing the first motor and the second motor to operate at the first torque split value and the second torque split value, respectively (VSC communicating Torque Split DS1 and DS2 output to inverter and electric machine, FIGS. 1 and 2),
wherein the first torque split value and the second torque split value are determined based on a maximum value for a power loss (Based on Speed and torque, a Maximum power loss can be determined, FIG. 6) at an operating point (Power Loss 1 and 2 added to Total power cost, See FIG. 4, which determines the TPC which calculates a prescribed torque split in a cyclic loop procedure ¶ 117).
Regarding claim 18, Hancock discloses the method, wherein the power loss is determined based on a first efficiency of the first motor and a first inverter electrically coupled to the first motor and a second efficiency of the second motor and a second inverter electrically coupled to the second motor (considering efficiencies of the first and second inverter derived by torque split module which generates proposed front and rear torque demand signals DS1 and DS2 based on total torque requests TQ1 and TQ2 and temperature signals of machines and inverters TS1 and TS2 ¶ 106).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hancock et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0263413 A1) as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Islam et al. (Pub. No.: 2023/0114289 A1).
Regarding claim 19, Hancock teaches the method, wherein the operating point is determined using a speed of the first motor and a speed of the second motor (Speed 1 and 2 respective of first and second electric machines 7 and 10 ¶ 99), and the total torque request value (total requested torque ¶ 106).
Hancock is silent to wherein the operating point is determined using inputs of voltage. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Islam teaches an electric machine where the machine may be an inverter and the voltage input may be determined and utilized (¶¶ 25, 34, 36).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the operating points taught by Hancock to further include inputs of voltage as taught by Islam to improve machine energy efficiency (See Abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, 5 - 10 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYLER J LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-9727. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached at 571-272-9855. 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.
/TYLER J LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663