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 Objections
Claims 2-14 objected to because of the following informalities: “A control system of claim ...” should be “[[A]] The control system of claim” since it’s referring to the previously recited control system. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 9, 12, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: “the component(s)...” should be “the one or more components” for clarity and consistency of claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: “the conditioning component(s)...” should be “the one or more conditioning components” for clarity and consistency of claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the conditioning roller(s)...” should be “the one or more conditioning rollers” for clarity and consistency of claim language. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a feed rate of material ...” should be “ [[a]] the feed rate of material” since the limitation has been previously recited. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a level of tensioning ...” should be “ [[a]] the level of tensioning …” since the limitation has been previously recited. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: “an operational parameter of one or more ...” should be “ [[an]] the operational parameter of one or more …” since the limitation has been previously recited. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a measured real-time displacement ...” should be “ [[a]] the measured real-time displacement ...” since the limitation has been previously recited. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a minimum displacement ...” should be “ [[a]] the minimum displacement ...” since the limitation has been previously recited. Appropriate correction is required.
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: “control system” and “controllers” in claim 1.
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. See at least [0009], [0055] and [0056] of the as-filed specification (e.g. processor).
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
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-12, 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steidinger (US20210360857A1) in view of Ehrhart (US 7730701 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Steidinger discloses a control system for adjusting a level of conditioning applied by a conditioning system of or otherwise associated with an agricultural machine (See at least abstract), the control system comprising one or more controllers (See at least abstract, Fig. 1 & 2, [0008-0012], [0036-0042]), and being configured to: receive sensor data indicative of a real-time displacement associated with one or more conditioning components of the conditioning system (See at least abstract, [0036-0041] Each position sensor 162 may sense the position of its respective roll-gap actuator 152. Each potentiometer 163 may measure the rotational movement of the rigid arm 142, and thereby the translational movement of the upper conditioning roll 126. Upon receiving the signals from the potentiometers 163, the controller 170 may calculate the distance, i.e., roll gap RG, between the conditioning rolls 124, 126 based upon the measured rotation of the rigid arms 142. The controller 170 may monitor the roll gap size, via one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163, and calculate at least one roll-gap operational characteristic); determine a measured displacement in dependence on the received data (See at least abstract, [0036-0041], [0043-0045] Upon receiving the signals from the potentiometers 163, the controller 170 may calculate the distance, i.e., roll gap RG, between the conditioning rolls 124, 126 based upon the measured rotation of the rigid arms 142); compare the measured displacement with a minimum displacement for the conditioning component(s) (See at least abstract, Fig. 6, [0043-0045] This calibration strategy may take place prior to and/or during operation of the crop conditioning device 120 in order to set the roll gap RG. This action may accordingly allow the upper conditioning roll 126 to lower and rest on the lower conditioning roll 124, creating a zero roll gap size. Examiner notes the zero roll gap size is the minimum displacement. The controller 170 may then record the maximum tension force and the position of the tension member 141 at this fully rotated, maximum tension position, i.e., the fully retracted position of the tension cylinder 144. Additionally therewith, the controller 170 will record the positions of the position sensors 163 as a zero roll gap position. The controller 170 may calculate at least one roll-gap operational characteristic (at block 614). For example, the controller 170 may calculate an average deviation and/or a standard deviation of the change in roll gap size as the upper conditioning roll 126 fluctuates up and down); and generate and output one or more control signals for controlling an operational parameter of one or more components associated with the conditioning system in dependence on the comparison (See at least abstract, Fig. 6, [0040-0045] The controller 170 may automatically adjust the tension actuator 144 to set the tension force and the roll-gap actuators 152 to set the roll gap RG upon receiving a further input command from the operator and/or a signal from one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163. For example, during operation of the crop conditioning device 120, the controller 170 may optimize the conditioning performance by monitoring the operational roll gap and subsequently adjusting the tension force to maintain the desired operational roll gap. For example, the controller 170 may calculate an average deviation and/or a standard deviation of the change in roll gap size as the upper conditioning roll 126 fluctuates up and down during normal operation due to variations in the crop mat. Thereafter, the controller 170 may automatically adjust the size of the roll gap and/or the tension force depending upon the sensed roll gap, the sensed tension force, and/or the at least one roll-gap operational characteristic (at block 616). The method may also include a step of calibrating the tension mechanism 140 and the roll-gap mechanism 150 (at block 618));
Steidinger does not explicitly disclose to wherein the operational parameter comprises an operational speed of the component(s); and controlling the operational speed of the component(s) associated with the conditioning system includes controlling an operational speed of the one or more conditioning components. However, Ehrhart teaches wherein the operational parameter comprises an operational speed of the component(s) (See at least abstract, [Page 5, col 2, lines 30-40], [Page 6, col 4 , lines 10-15] Providing a hydraulic driver for powering the conditioner mechanism on an agricultural mower-conditioner, … which includes controls for varying the speed and/or direction of rotation of the conditioner mechanism independent from the speed of the cutting mechanism. The speed relationship between the disc cutter members 13 and the conditioner rolls 18 is established and managed using the conditioner gearbox 61 ratio and the hydraulic driver displacements.); and controlling the operational speed of the component(s) associated with the conditioning system includes controlling an operational speed of the one or more conditioning components ([Page 6, col 4, lines 45-60] By incorporating this element into the hydraulic circuit, the relative speed between the cutterbar drivers 22, 23 and the conditioner driver 32 may be adjusted thereby enabling an optimum conditioner speed for the crop conditions to be easily obtained. Similar conditioner mechanism speed adjustment may be obtained by selecting a variable displacement hydraulic motor for use as conditioner driver 32.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Steidinger to incorporate the teachings of Ehrhart which teaches wherein the operational parameter comprises an operational speed of the component(s); and controlling the operational speed of the component(s) associated with the conditioning system includes controlling an operational speed of the one or more conditioning components since they are all directed to conditioning systems and incorporation of Ehrhart would improve speed adjustment and optimize conditioning performance in conditioning systems.
Regarding claim 2, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses wherein the one or more conditioning components comprise one or more conditioning rollers (See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 3, [0026-0028] The at least two conditioning rolls 124, 126 may rotate in opposite directions for guiding a mat of crop material through the roll gap RG, as most clearly shown in FIG. 5).
Regarding claim 3, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses wherein the one or more conditioning components comprise a pair of conditioning rollers (See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 3, [0005-0008], [0026-0028] The conditioning rolls are located adjacent to one another such that a gap forms therebetween. The at least two conditioning rolls 124, 126 may rotate in opposite directions for guiding a mat of crop material through the roll gap RG, as most clearly shown in FIG. 5.).
Regarding claim 4, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses wherein the measured displacement comprises a roller gap (See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 6, [0026-0030], [0043-0045] The lateral distance in between the surfaces of the lower and upper conditioning rolls 124, 126 defines the size of the roll gap RG. The controller 170 may calculate at least one roll-gap operational characteristic (at block 614)).
Regarding claim 5, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses wherein the sensor data is received from one or more sensors mounted or otherwise coupled in association with the conditioning system for monitoring one or more parameters associated with the operation of the conditioning system (See at least Steidinger abstract, [0036-0040] The one or more sensors 160, 161, 162, 163 may include … and at least one roll- gap sensor 162, 163 associated with each roll-gap actuator 152 (FIGS. 1-4). Also, for example, the at least one roll- gap sensor 162, 163 may include a position sensor 162 located within each roll-gap actuator 152 and/or a position sensor 163, e.g. potentiometer 163, operably connected to each rigid arm 142, via a link 165. Each position sensor 162 may sense the position of its respective roll-gap actuator 152.).
Regarding claim 6, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses wherein the one or more sensors include a rotary potentiometer providing a comparable sensor output in dependence on the position of the one or more conditioning components (See at least Steidinger abstract, [0036-0040] A position sensor 161, e.g. potentiometer 161, operably connected to the tension member 141 via a link 146 (FIG. 4). The position sensor 160 may sense the position of the tension actuator 144. The potentiometer 161 may measure the rotation of the tension member 141. Also, for example, the at least one roll- gap sensor 162, 163 may include a position sensor 162 located within each roll-gap actuator 152 and/or a position sensor 163, e.g. potentiometer 163, operably connected to each rigid arm 142, via a link 165. Each position sensor 162 may sense the position of its respective roll-gap actuator 152. Each potentiometer 163 may measure the rotational movement of the rigid arm 142, and thereby the translational movement of the upper conditioning roll 126. Upon receiving the signals from the potentiometers 163, the controller 170 may calculate the distance, i.e., roll gap RG, between the conditioning rolls 124, 126 based upon the measured rotation of the rigid arms 142. As can be appreciated, the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163 may be in the form of any desired sensors. It should be appreciated that the one or more sensors may only include the potentiometers 161, 163).
Regarding claim 7, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses wherein the minimum displacement is predefined, is determined in dependence on a crop type to be processed by the conditioning system, and/or is determined in dependence on a user input (See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 3 & 6, [0039-0047] The controller 170 may retrieve stored data within the memory 172 that indicates relevant information concerning the crop material. For instance, the memory 172 may store the known and averaged stem diameter of a particular type of crop material, and the controller 170 may retrieve the corresponding stem diameter of the crop being harvested from the memory 172. The controller 170 may also retrieve preloaded operational settings from the memory 172 that are keyed to the type of crop material. For example, the memory 172 may store the archetypal roll gap RG and tension force settings for a particular type of crop material. The memory 172 may store the operator's preferred roll gap RG and tension force settings for a particular type of crop material. Hence, after determining the type of crop material and the relevant characteristics associated therewith, the controller 170 may set the static, initial roll gap size. The controller 170 may accordingly set the roll gap size and/or tension force depending upon the intended use of the crop material. The controller 170 may set the initial roll gap depending upon one or more crop material characteristics and/or operational settings (at block 608).).
Regarding claim 8, Steidinger discloses wherein the one or more conditioning components comprise one or more conditioning rollers (See at least abstract, Fig. 3, [0026-0028] The at least two conditioning rolls 124, 126 may rotate in opposite directions for guiding a mat of crop material through the roll gap RG, as most clearly shown in FIG. 5).
Steidinger does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control the operational speed of the conditioning roller(s) in dependence on the comparison. However, Ehrhart teaches wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control the operational speed of the conditioning roller(s) in dependence on the comparison (See at least abstract, Fig. 1, [Page 5, col 1, lines 40-43], [Page 5, col 2, lines 30-40], [Page 6, col 4, lines 45-60] Providing a hydraulic driver for powering the conditioner mechanism on an agricultural mower-conditioner, … which includes controls for varying the speed and/or direction of rotation of the conditioner mechanism independent from the speed of the cutting mechanism. The speed relationship between the disc cutter members 13 and the conditioner rolls 18 is established and managed using the conditioner gearbox 61 ratio and the hydraulic driver displacements. By incorporating this element into the hydraulic circuit, the relative speed between the cutterbar drivers 22, 23 and the conditioner driver 32 may be adjusted thereby enabling an optimum conditioner speed for the crop conditions to be easily obtained. Similar conditioner mechanism speed adjustment may be obtained by selecting a variable displacement hydraulic motor for use as conditioner driver 32.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Steidinger to incorporate the teachings of Ehrhart which teaches wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control the operational speed of the conditioning roller(s) in dependence on the comparison since they are all directed to conditioning systems and incorporation of Ehrhart would improve the optimization and operational flexibility of speed adjustments in conditioning systems.
Regarding claim 9, Steidinger does not explicitly disclose wherein controlling the operational speed of the component(s) associated with the conditioning system comprises controlling a feed rate of crop material to and/or through the conditioning system. However, Ehrhart teaches wherein controlling the operational speed of the component(s) associated with the conditioning system comprises controlling a feed rate of crop material to and/or through the conditioning system. (See at least abstract, Fig. 1, [Page 5, col 1, lines 40-50], [Page 6, col 3, lines 18-40], [Page 6, col 4, lines 50-58] Obtaining the most efficient crop conditioning performance requires proper matching of the conditioner mechanism speed to the specific crop conditions. Improper conditioner mechanism speed can have an adverse effect on the way in which crop is fed into the conditioner rolls, the configuration of the resultant windrows, fuel economy, and even the condition of the crop, wherein excessive conditioner roll speed tends to excessively damage the crop material. A conditioning mechanism 14 is mounted in the header 10 rearwardly of the cutterbar 12 to receive and condition crop material severed by the cutterbar. The conditioning mechanism 14 includes a pair of cooperable, generally vertically spaced apart transverse conditioner rolls 18 operable to condition severed crop material passing there between. The conditioner driver 32 may be adjusted thereby enabling an optimum conditioner speed for the crop conditions to be easily obtained. Similar conditioner mechanism speed adjustment may be obtained by selecting a variable displacement hydraulic motor for use as conditioner driver 32.Examiner notes that varying the conditioner roll speed affects the way crop is fed into and through the conditioner). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Steidinger to incorporate the teachings of Ehrhart which teaches wherein controlling the operational speed of the component(s) associated with the conditioning system comprises controlling a feed rate of crop material to and/or through the conditioning system since they are all directed to conditioning systems and incorporation of Ehrhart would improve crop management and speed variations in conditioning systems.
Regarding claim 11, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses wherein the operational parameter relates to a level of tensioning applied by a component positioning system for the conditioning component(s) (See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 3, [0008-0012], [0024-0027], [0043-0046] The crop conditioning device also includes a tension mechanism connected to the second conditioning roll. The tension mechanism is configured for applying a tension force on the second conditioning roll. The crop conditioning device 120 generally includes a subframe 122, at least two conditioning rolls 124, 126 connected to the subframe 122, a tension mechanism 140, and a roll-gap mechanism 150. The tension mechanism 140 sets and adjusts the tension force on the upper conditioning roll 126. The method may also include a step of calibrating the tension mechanism 140 and the roll-gap mechanism 150 (at block 618). For example, during operation of the crop conditioning device 120, the controller 170 may optimize the conditioning performance by monitoring the operational roll gap and subsequently adjusting the tension force to maintain the desired operational roll gap.).
Regarding claim 12, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses wherein the component positioning system comprises one or more actuators for controlling the displacement of the component(s) (See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 3, [0027-0028], [0030-0036], [0041-0045] The tension mechanism 140 generally includes a tension member 141, tension arms 142, 143, a tension actuator 144 operably connected to the tension member 141. The tension actuator 144 rotates tension member 141 in order to adjust the tension force applied by the tension member 141 onto the upper conditioning roll 126. The tension actuator 144 may dually adjust the tension force on the upper conditioning roll 126 and the roll gap RG. At least one tension sensor 160, 161 associated with the tension actuator 144 and at least one roll- gap sensor 162, 163 associated with each roll-gap actuator 152 (FIGS. 1-4). The controller 170 may automatically adjust the tension actuator 144 to set the tension force and the roll-gap actuators 152 to set the roll gap RG upon receiving a further input command from the operator and/or a signal from one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163.).
Regarding claim 17, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses an agricultural machine comprising or being controllable under operation of the control system of claim 1(See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 6, [0009-0010], [0020-0026], [0036-0038] A crop conditioning device for an agricultural harvesting machine. Referring now to the drawings, and more particularly to FIGS. 1-5, there is shown an agricultural harvester 100 which generally includes a chassis, a prime mover, wheels and/or tracts, a cab for housing the operator, an optional reel, and a header 110 removably connected to and supported by the chassis. The crop conditioning device 120 may also include one or more sensors 160, 161, 162, 163 which may measure the tension force on the conditioning roll 126 and the size of the roll gap RG in between the paired conditioning rolls 124, 126, and a controller 170 that can automatically set and/or adjust the tension force on the conditioning roll 126 and the roll gap RG. The controller 170 may be a standalone controller or incorporated into the existing hardware and/or software of the harvester 100.).
Regarding claim 18, Steidinger discloses a computer implemented method for adjusting a level of conditioning applied by a conditioning system of or otherwise associated with an agricultural machine (See at least abstract, Fig. 1 & 2, [0008-0012], [0036-0042], [0046-0048]), the method comprising: determining a measured real-time displacement associated with one or more components of the conditioning system (See at least abstract, [0036-0041], [0043-0045] Each position sensor 162 may sense the position of its respective roll-gap actuator 152. Each potentiometer 163 may measure the rotational movement of the rigid arm 142, and thereby the translational movement of the upper conditioning roll 126. Upon receiving the signals from the potentiometers 163, the controller 170 may calculate the distance, i.e., roll gap RG, between the conditioning rolls 124, 126 based upon the measured rotation of the rigid arms 142. The controller 170 may monitor the roll gap size, via one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163, and calculate at least one roll-gap operational characteristic. Upon receiving the signals from the potentiometers 163, the controller 170 may calculate the distance, i.e., roll gap RG, between the conditioning rolls 124, 126 based upon the measured rotation of the rigid arms 142); comparing the measured displacement with a minimum displacement for the component(s) (See at least abstract, Fig. 6, [0043-0045] This calibration strategy may take place prior to and/or during operation of the crop conditioning device 120 in order to set the roll gap RG. This action may accordingly allow the upper conditioning roll 126 to lower and rest on the lower conditioning roll 124, creating a zero roll gap size. Examiner notes the zero roll gap size is the minimum displacement. The controller 170 may then record the maximum tension force and the position of the tension member 141 at this fully rotated, maximum tension position, i.e., the fully retracted position of the tension cylinder 144. Additionally therewith, the controller 170 will record the positions of the position sensors 163 as a zero roll gap position. The controller 170 may calculate at least one roll-gap operational characteristic (at block 614). For example, the controller 170 may calculate an average deviation and/or a standard deviation of the change in roll gap size as the upper conditioning roll 126 fluctuates up and down); and controlling an operational parameter of one or more component(s) associated with the conditioning system in dependence on the comparison (See at least abstract, Fig. 6, [0040-0045] The controller 170 may automatically adjust the tension actuator 144 to set the tension force and the roll-gap actuators 152 to set the roll gap RG upon receiving a further input command from the operator and/or a signal from one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163. For example, during operation of the crop conditioning device 120, the controller 170 may optimize the conditioning performance by monitoring the operational roll gap and subsequently adjusting the tension force to maintain the desired operational roll gap. For example, the controller 170 may calculate an average deviation and/or a standard deviation of the change in roll gap size as the upper conditioning roll 126 fluctuates up and down during normal operation due to variations in the crop mat. Thereafter, the controller 170 may automatically adjust the size of the roll gap and/or the tension force depending upon the sensed roll gap, the sensed tension force, and/or the at least one roll-gap operational characteristic (at block 616). The method may also include a step of calibrating the tension mechanism 140 and the roll-gap mechanism 150 (at block 618)).
Steidinger does not explicitly disclose wherein the operational parameter comprises an operational speed of the component(s); and controlling the operational speed of the component(s) associated with the conditioning system includes controlling an operational speed of the one or more conditioning components. However, Ehrhart teaches wherein the operational parameter comprises an operational speed of the component(s) (See at least abstract, [Page 5, col 2, lines 30-40], [Page 6, col 4 , lines 10-15] Providing a hydraulic driver for powering the conditioner mechanism on an agricultural mower-conditioner, … which includes controls for varying the speed and/or direction of rotation of the conditioner mechanism independent from the speed of the cutting mechanism. The speed relationship between the disc cutter members 13 and the conditioner rolls 18 is established and managed using the conditioner gearbox 61 ratio and the hydraulic driver displacements); and controlling the operational speed of the component(s) associated with the conditioning system includes controlling an operational speed of the one or more conditioning components ([Page 6, col 4, lines 45-60] By incorporating this element into the hydraulic circuit, the relative speed between the cutterbar drivers 22, 23 and the conditioner driver 32 may be adjusted thereby enabling an optimum conditioner speed for the crop conditions to be easily obtained. Similar conditioner mechanism speed adjustment may be obtained by selecting a variable displacement hydraulic motor for use as conditioner driver 32.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Steidinger to incorporate the teachings of Ehrhart which teaches wherein the operational parameter comprises an operational speed of the component(s); and controlling the operational speed of the component(s) associated with the conditioning system includes controlling an operational speed of the one or more conditioning components since they are all directed to conditioning systems and incorporation of Ehrhart would improve speed adjustment and optimize conditioning performance in conditioning systems.
Claim(s) 10, 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steidinger (US 20210360857 A1) in view of Ehrhart (US 7730701 B1), and further in view of Smith (US 20170164558 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control an operational speed of a feed roller for controlling a feed rate of material to the conditioning system. However, Smith teaches wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control an operational speed of a feed roller for controlling a feed rate of material to the conditioning system (See at least abstract, Fig. 1, [0022], [0041], [0053-0058], [0060-0062] In some embodiments, the rotational speed of the feed roll is adjusted such that the ratio of the rotational speed of the PTO shaft to the rotational speed of the feed roll is maintained or approximately maintained. The term “feed roll” as used herein is defined as a roll which assist the movement of crop material into a crop feeding channel. In some embodiments, the feed roll is rotated by an attached hydraulic motor. In some embodiments, the feed roll is attached is a series of rotor blades. In some embodiments, the rotation of the feed roll is controlled by an attached hydraulic motor. In some embodiments, a hydraulic control valve controls the speed of the motor by adjusting the hydraulic fluid flow that the motor receives. In some embodiments, one or more electronic controllers are capable of adjusting the position of the control valve, and therefore adjusting the rotational speed of the feed roll. In this manner the tractor controller 404 can adjust the rotational speed of the feed roll. The tractor controller 404 is also in electronic communication with a speed sensor 405. The speed sensor 405 is located near or on a PTO shaft 406, and can determine the rotational speed of the PTO shaft 406. A harvester controller 407 is in electronic communication with a feed roll sensor 407. The hydraulic fluid flow through the motor 201 causes the rotational speed of the feed roll to change, such that the ratio of the rotational speed of the PTO shaft to the rotational speed of the feed roll is maintained or approximately maintained during the operation of the system. PTO shaft to the rotational speed of the feed roll equals or approximately equals the at least one preset ratio during the operation of the system). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart to incorporate the teachings of Smith which teaches wherein the one or more controllers are configured to control an operational speed of a feed roller for controlling a feed rate of material to the conditioning system since they are all directed to conditioning systems and incorporation of Smith would improve the accuracy and speed adjustment of conditioning systems.
Regarding claim 13, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart discloses wherein the one or more actuators form part of a fluid drive control system (See at least Steidinger abstract, [0035-0043] As can be appreciated, if the actuators 144, 152 are configured as hydraulic cylinders 144, 152, the crop conditioning device 120 may further include a hydraulic system 180 to independently control the extension and retraction of the hydraulic cylinders 144, 152 (FIG. 1). Hence, the hydraulic system 180 can be fluidly connected to the actuators 144, 152 of the tension and roll- gap mechanisms 140, 150. The hydraulic system 180 may also be operably connected to the controller 170. The controller 170 may open the corresponding hydraulic valves to allow the pressure in the tension and the roll-gap hydraulic cylinders 144, 152 to return to the fluid reservoir. Thereafter, the controller 170 may fully retract the tension cylinder 144, while the roll-gap cylinders 152 remain open to the fluid reservoir, to impart a maximum tension force on the upper conditioning roll 126 at the zero roll gap size. The controller 170 may automatically adjust the tension actuator 144 to set the tension force and the roll-gap actuators 152 to set the roll gap RG upon receiving a further input command from the operator and/or a signal from one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163).
Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart does not explicitly disclose the one or more controllers are configured to adjust a control pressure associated with the fluid drive control system of the component positioning system in dependence on the comparison of the measured displacement with the minimum displacement. However, Smith teaches the one or more controllers are configured to adjust a control pressure associated with the fluid drive control system of the component positioning system in dependence on the comparison of the measured displacement with the minimum displacement (See at least abstract, [0053-0055] In some embodiments, a hydraulic control valve controls the speed of the motor by adjusting the hydraulic fluid flow that the motor receives. In some embodiments, one or more electronic controllers are capable of adjusting the position of the control valve, and therefore adjusting the rotational speed of the feed roll. The controller is electronically connected to the control valve, a speed sensor capable of determining the rotational speed of a PTO shaft, and a control valve sensor capable of determining the position of and the rate of fluid flow through the control valve. In some embodiments, the controller is capable of adjusting the control valve based on the speed of the PTO shaft and the rate of fluid flow through the control valve such that the ratio of the rotational speed of the PTO shaft to the rotational speed of the feed roll is maintained or approximately maintained during the operation of the system). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart to incorporate the teachings of Smith which teaches the one or more controllers are configured to adjust a control pressure associated with the fluid drive control system of the component positioning system in dependence on the comparison of the measured displacement with the minimum displacement since they are all directed to conditioning systems and incorporation of Ehrhart would improve the accuracy and preciseness of the fluid drive control system of the component positioning system.
Regarding claim 14, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart and Smith discloses wherein the component positioning system is configured to control a level of tensioning applied to the one or more components; and wherein the one or more controllers are configured to adjust a level of tensioning applied by the component positioning system in dependence on the comparison of the measured displacement with the minimum displacement (See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 3 & 6, [0040-0045] After the initial roll gap size and/or tension force have been set, the controller 170 may use the initial roll gap size and tension force as a starting point for subsequent adjustments. This calibration strategy may take place prior to and/or during operation of the crop conditioning device 120 in order to set the roll gap RG. This action may accordingly allow the upper conditioning roll 126 to lower and rest on the lower conditioning roll 124, creating a zero roll gap size. Examiner notes the zero roll gap size is the minimum displacement. The controller 170 may then record the maximum tension force and the position of the tension member 141 at this fully rotated, maximum tension position, i.e., the fully retracted position of the tension cylinder 144. Additionally therewith, the controller 170 will record the positions of the position sensors 163 as a zero roll gap position. The controller 170 may calculate at least one roll-gap operational characteristic (at block 614). For example, the controller 170 may calculate an average deviation and/or a standard deviation of the change in roll gap size as the upper conditioning roll 126 fluctuates up and down). The controller 170 may monitor the roll gap size, via one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163, and calculate at least one roll-gap operational characteristic. For example, the controller 170 may calculate an average deviation and/or a standard deviation of the change in roll gap size as the upper conditioning roll 126 fluctuates up and down during normal operation due to variations in the crop mat. If the roll-gap standard deviation exceeds 50% of the stem diameter, the controller 170 may increase the tension force until the standard deviation falls below 50%. The controller 170 can vary the tension force on the upper conditioning roll 126 to maintain a maximum average roll gap and keep a roll-gap standard deviation below a maximum roll-gap standard deviation to achieve an optimized conditioning quality.).
Regarding claim 15, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart and Smith discloses a conditioning system for an agricultural machine, comprising: one or more moveable crop engaging components (See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 3 & 5, [0024-0026] The crop conditioning device 120 generally includes a subframe 122, at least two conditioning rolls 124, 126 connected to the subframe 122, a tension mechanism 140, and a roll-gap mechanism 150. The at least two conditioning rolls 124, 126 may rotate in opposite directions for guiding a mat of crop material through the roll gap RG, as most clearly shown in FIG. 5); and the control system of any preceding claim, operable in use for controlling an operational parameter of one or more components associated with the conditioning system to control a level of conditioning applied by the one or more moveable crop engaging components in dependence on a comparison of a measured real-time displacement of the crop engaging component(s) with a minimum displacement (See at least Steidinger abstract, Fig. 6, [0023-0026], [0040-0045] This calibration strategy may take place prior to and/or during operation of the crop conditioning device 120 in order to set the roll gap RG. This action may accordingly allow the upper conditioning roll 126 to lower and rest on the lower conditioning roll 124, creating a zero roll gap size. Examiner notes the zero roll gap size is the minimum displacement. The controller 170 may then record the maximum tension force and the position of the tension member 141 at this fully rotated, maximum tension position, i.e., the fully retracted position of the tension cylinder 144. Additionally therewith, the controller 170 will record the positions of the position sensors 163 as a zero roll gap position. The controller 170 may calculate at least one roll-gap operational characteristic (at block 614). For example, the controller 170 may calculate an average deviation and/or a standard deviation of the change in roll gap size as the upper conditioning roll 126 fluctuates up and down. The controller 170 may automatically adjust the tension actuator 144 to set the tension force and the roll-gap actuators 152 to set the roll gap RG upon receiving a further input command from the operator and/or a signal from one or more of the sensors 160, 161, 162, 163. For example, during operation of the crop conditioning device 120, the controller 170 may optimize the conditioning performance by monitoring the operational roll gap and subsequently adjusting the tension force to maintain the desired operational roll gap. For example, the controller 170 may calculate an average deviation and/or a standard deviation of the change in roll gap size as the upper conditioning roll 126 fluctuates up and down during normal operation due to variations in the crop mat. Thereafter, the controller 170 may automatically adjust the size of the roll gap and/or the tension force depending upon the sensed roll gap, the sensed tension force, and/or the at least one roll-gap operational characteristic (at block 616). The method may also include a step of calibrating the tension mechanism 140 and the roll-gap mechanism 150 (at block 618)).
Regarding claim 16, Steidinger as modified by Ehrhart and Smith discloses an agricultural machine comprising the conditioning system of claim 15 (See at least Steidinger abstract, [0009-0010], [0020-0024] A crop conditioning device for an agricultural harvesting machine. Referring now to the drawings, and more particularly to FIGS. 1-5, there is shown an agricultural harvester 100 which generally includes a chassis, a prime mover, wheels and/or tracts, a cab for housing the operator, an optional reel, and a header 110 removably connected to and supported by the chassis.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LABIBAH I. ALI whose telephone number is (571)272-6738. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Faris Almatrahi can be reached at (313) 446-4821. 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.
/LABIBAH ILMA ALI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/SAHAR MOTAZEDI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights