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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant filed remarks and amendments on 06/05/2026. Claims 1, 14 and 19-20 were amended. Claims 1-20 are presently pending examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 06/05/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 14 and 19 under 35 USC § 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ienaga (US20150360693A1) and Ling Heping et al. (KR 20250012136 A).
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 1-2, 5, 9-10, 12, 14-15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (US20060025905A1) in view of Ienaga (US20150360693A1) hereinafter referred to as Zhao and Ienaga respectively.
Regarding claims 1, 14 and 19, Zhao discloses a method for controlling a vehicle torque (“an output current signal is then applied by the motor controller 68 to the motor 26 (step 106) to generate a desired associated output torque signal within the range of the AMDL effective to dampen unwanted oscillations in the driveline.” [0092]), comprising:
acquiring, by a vehicle controller, a wheel speed of a wheel corresponding to a drive shaft, (“The rotational speed of the motor 26 is sensed by the motor speed sensor 66, and the wheel speeds Wh1, Wh2 of each of the drive wheels 18, 20 are sensed by the wheel speed sensors 62, 64, respectively.” See at least [0069];
“a plurality of inputs are input into the motor controller 68 (step 126), wherein the inputs are selected from at least one of two wheel speeds Wh1(n), Wh2(n) sensed by wheel speed sensors 62, 64, respectively, at a time t(n), a motor speed MS(n) of the traction motor 26 sensed by the motor sensor 68 at a time t(n)” Zhao, para. [0099]
“The motor vehicle preferably has a driveline that has at least one driveshaft driven by an output of the electrical machine, the at least one driveshaft has a driven end driven by the electric machine and an end coupled to a differential in communication with at least one, but preferably two drive wheels.” [0018]);
acquiring, by the vehicle controller, an actual rotating speed of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft, (“The rotational speed of the motor 26 is sensed by the motor speed sensor 66, and the wheel speeds Wh1, Wh2 of each of the drive wheels 18, 20 are sensed by the wheel speed sensors 62, 64, respectively.” (Zhao, ¶[0069],
“a motor speed MS(n) of the traction motor 26 sensed by the motor sensor 68 at a time t(n)” Zhao, para. [0099];
“A speed error SE is calculated (step 92) to determine a difference between the AWS and the MSw.” (Zhao, ¶[0089]
“The motor vehicle preferably has a driveline that has at least one driveshaft driven by an output of the electrical machine, the at least one driveshaft has a driven end driven by the electric machine and an end coupled to a differential in communication with at least one, but preferably two drive wheels.” [0018]);
adjusting, by the vehicle controller, an output torque of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft based on the correction torque value (“the traction motor is controlled to provide a motor output torque signal which is based on the difference between average wheel speed and the traction motor speed at the wheels” Zhao, ¶[0023],
“The traction motor can apply torque corrections in accordance with a control method to suppress or cancel the torque oscillations occurring in the driveline due to motor inertia of the traction motor.” [0061]
“Transmission 40 drives the driveshaft 34 coupled to drive wheels 18,20 through a differential 44 of the vehicle” [0044]).
Zhao does not explicitly teach calculating an equivalent rotating speed of a motor based on the wheel speed of the wheel,
and calculating, based on the equivalent rotating speed of the motor and the actual rotating speed of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft, an equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft,
acquiring, by the vehicle controller, a correction torque value based on the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft.
However, Ienaga does teach calculating an equivalent rotating speed of a motor based on the wheel speed of the wheel, (“The tire rotation speed acquiring module 250 acquires a value Nt’ obtained by converting the tire rotation speed into the rotation speed of the drive shafts of the motors 300 and 302 on the basis of the rotation speed of the tires 106 and 108 detected by the wheel speed sensors 500 and 502.” Ienaga, [0026];
“The vehicle speed acquiring module 230 acquires a value Nv’ obtained by converting the vehicle speed into the rotation speed of the drive shafts of the motors 300 and 302.” Ienaga, [0026];
“These kinds of control are exerted on the basis of a value obtained by converting the wheel speed and vehicle speed into the rotation speed on the drive shafts of the motors 300 and 302 in the present implementation.” Ienaga, [0027]);
and calculating, based on the equivalent rotating speed of the motor and the actual rotating speed of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft, an equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft (“The reference rotation speed Nm’ calculated by the reference rotation speed calculating module 260 is obtained by adding the torsional amount of the drive shafts 400 and 402 to the vehicle speed Nv’ on the shafts of the motors 300 and 302.” Ienaga, [0029];
“The reference rotation speed Nm’ calculated in this way is compared with the motor rotation speed Nm, thereby determining whether or not the tires 106 and 108 undergo a slip in the present implementation.” Ienaga, [0029];
“The adder-subtractor 265 obtains a difference S (=Nm−Nm’) between the motor rotation speed Nm and the reference rotation speed Nm’” Ienaga, [0038];
“The slip determiner 266 compares the difference S between the motor rotation speed Nm and the reference rotation speed Nm’ with a predetermined slip determination threshold n1.” Ienaga, [0039]);
acquiring, by the vehicle controller, a correction torque value based on the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft (“If a slip is determined, the rotation speed control module 270 exerts feedback control over the rotation speed of the motors 300 and 302 on the basis of the target rotation speed Ntgt and outputs output torque for the feedback control.” Ienaga, [0045]).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the speed-error and correction-torque method of Zhao to also include calculating an equivalent rotating speed of a motor based on the wheel speed of the wheel, and calculating, based on the equivalent rotating speed of the motor and the actual rotating speed of the motor, an equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft, as taught by Ienaga, with a reasonable expectation of success. Forming Zhao’s existing speed error in the motor-speed domain, by converting wheel speed onto the motor shafts as Ienaga does, allows the controller to compare actual motor speed with a wheel-derived equivalent motor speed and generate the same damping / slip-correction torque from a difference already expressed in motor units. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Ienaga, 0026, 0027, 0029, 0039 and 0045).
Regarding claims 2 and 15, Zhao calculates a difference after the gear-ratio conversion (“If a proportional derivative (PD) controller is used to control torque, a speed error (SE) is then calculated (step 146) to determine the difference in the AWS(n) and the MSw(n).” Zhao, para. [0105]).
Zhao does not explicitly teach wherein the calculating, based on the equivalent rotating speed of the motor and the actual rotating speed of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft, an equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft comprises: calculating a difference between the equivalent rotating speed of the motor and the actual rotating speed of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft to obtain the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft.
However, Ienaga does teach wherein the calculating, based on the equivalent rotating speed of the motor and the actual rotating speed of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft, an equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft comprises: calculating a difference between the equivalent rotating speed of the motor and the actual rotating speed of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft to obtain the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft (“The adder-subtractor 265 obtains a difference S (=Nm−Nm’) between the motor rotation speed Nm and the reference rotation speed Nm’……The absolute value of the difference S between the motor rotation speed Nm and the reference rotation speed Nm’, which is obtained by the adder-subtractor 265, is input to the slip determiner 266.” [0038];
“The slip determiner 266 compares the difference S between the motor rotation speed Nm and the reference rotation speed Nm’ with a predetermined slip determination threshold n1.” Ienaga, [0039]).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the speed-error calculation of Zhao to also include calculating a difference between the equivalent rotating speed of the motor and the actual rotating speed of the motor to obtain the equivalent rotating speed difference, as taught by Ienaga, with a reasonable expectation of success. Subtracting actual motor speed from the wheel-derived equivalent motor speed writes Zhao’s existing comparison in motor units so that slip or oscillation is detected on the motor shaft. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Ienaga, 0038-0039).
Regarding claims 5 and 18, Zhao discloses wherein the adjusting an output torque of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft based on the correction torque value comprises: controlling the motor corresponding to the drive shaft to reduce the output torque based on the correction torque value (“If the speed difference between the wheels and the motor is used as the basis for motor damping torque, a proportional controller would calculate the motor torque output signal as a gain multiplied by a difference that is obtained by subtracting the motor angular speed at the wheels from the average of the driven wheel angular speeds.” [0070];
“A torque command is calculated from a commanded value TCV (step 148) based on the speed error … the proportional part of the TCV value is calculated step 148 by both multiplying the speed error by a predefined proportional gain, Pgain.” [0106-0107]).
Regarding claim 9, Zhao discloses wherein the calculating an equivalent rotating speed of a motor based on the wheel speed of the wheel comprises: acquiring a transmission ratio of the wheel to the motor corresponding to the drive shaft (“The gear sets 30, 32 provide for speed ratio changes between the motor 26 and the wheels 18, 20. The rotational motor speed is converted to speed at the wheels by dividing the motor speed by a predefined gear ratio.” [0069];
“A determination of the motor speed at the wheels (MSw(n)) at a time t(n) is determined (step 140) by dividing MS(n) by a predefined gear ratio K.” [0103]
“Transmission 40 drives the driveshaft 34 coupled to drive wheels 18,20 through a differential 44 of the vehicle” [0044]).
Zhao does not explicitly teach calculating the equivalent rotating speed of the motor based on the wheel speed of the wheel and the corresponding transmission ratio of the wheel.
However, Ienaga does teach calculating the equivalent rotating speed of the motor based on the wheel speed of the wheel and the corresponding transmission ratio of the wheel (“The tire rotation speed acquiring module 250 acquires a value Nt’ obtained by converting the tire rotation speed into the rotation speed of the drive shafts of the motors 300 and 302 on the basis of the rotation speed of the tires 106 and 108 detected by the wheel speed sensors 500 and 502.” [0026];
“These kinds of control are exerted on the basis of a value obtained by converting the wheel speed and vehicle speed into the rotation speed on the drive shafts of the motors 300 and 302 in the present implementation.” [0027]).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the gear-ratio conversion of Zhao to also include calculating the equivalent rotating speed of the motor based on the wheel speed of the wheel and the corresponding transmission ratio, as taught by Ienaga, with a reasonable expectation of success. Applying Zhao’s known ratio K to wheel speed, instead of only to motor speed, places both measured speeds in the motor domain so the difference can be formed on the motor shaft. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Ienaga, 0026-0027).
Regarding claim 10, Zhao discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the acquiring a correction torque value comprises: calculating the correction torque value based on a formula: ΔT_f1 = k1 * Δω_f1 + k2 * (Δω_f1 - D1), wherein k1 and k2 are a proportional coefficient and a differential coefficient respectively, D1 is an equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft at a previous sampling time, Δω_f1 is an equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft at a current time, and ΔT_f1 is the correction torque value (“If a proportional derivative (PD) controller is used to control torque, a speed error (SE) is then calculated (step 146) to determine the difference in the AWS(n) and the MSw(n).” [0105];
“A torque command is calculated from a commanded value TCV (step 148) based on the speed error … the proportional part of the TCV value is calculated step 148 by both multiplying the speed error by a predefined proportional gain, Pgain.” [0106-0107]). Zhao’s PD controller is ΔT = Pgain·SE + Dgain·ΔSE, which is the same structure as ΔT_fl = k1·Δω_fl + k2·(Δω_fl − D1).
Regarding claim 12, Zhao discloses wherein the adjusting an output torque of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft based on the correction torque value comprises: determining a torque value lower limit; and after a current output torque of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is reduced by the correction torque value, in response to that the reduced current output torque is less than or equal to the torque value lower limit, setting the output torque of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft to be the torque value lower limit (“an active motor damping limit (AMDL) may be selected from at least one of a positive or upper AMDL and a negative or lower AMDL … Then, at least one of the positive AMDL or negative AMDL may be optionally applied to the calculated torque to control or limit amplitude of the output torque signal.” (Zhao, ¶[0027]).
Regarding claim 20, Zhao discloses a vehicle, comprising a front motor, a rear motor, and a controller, the controller being configured to implement the method for controlling a vehicle torque according to claim 1 (“The motor controller 68 can receive input from various vehicle component sensors, including, but not limited to: at least one wheel speed sensor selected from at least one of the two driven wheel speed sensors 62, 64 (in a front-wheel or four-wheel drive configuration) or wheel speed sensors 218, 229 (in a rear-wheel or four wheel drive configuration), traction motor speed sensor 66 and ABS operation data.” Zhao, ¶[0058] and “The traction motor can apply torque corrections in accordance with a control method to suppress or cancel the torque oscillations occurring in the driveline due to motor inertia of the traction motor.” [0061]).
Claims 3, 6-8, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao in view of Ienaga and further in view of Ling Heping et al. (KR 20250012136 A), hereinafter referred to as Zhao, Ienaga and Ling respectively.
Regarding claims 3 and 16, Zhao in view of Ienaga teaches applying a threshold to the motor-domain difference before determining slip and outputting torque ( “The slip determiner 266 compares the difference S between the motor rotation speed Nm and the reference rotation speed Nm’ with a predetermined slip determination threshold n1. If the difference S between the motor rotation speed Nm and the reference rotation speed Nm’ is greater than or equal to the threshold n1, the slip determiner 266 then determines that a slip occurs.” Ienaga, [0039];
“If a slip is determined, the rotation speed control module 270 … outputs output torque for the feedback control.” Ienaga, [0045]).
Zhao in view Ienaga does not explicitly teach wherein the acquiring a correction torque value based on the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft comprises: in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than a first threshold, acquiring the correction torque value
However, Ling does teach wherein the acquiring a correction torque value based on the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft comprises: in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than a first threshold, acquiring the correction torque value (“The drive shaft torque adjustment value is determined when the absolute value of the equivalent axle speed difference is greater than the first equivalent axle speed difference threshold.” [0152]).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the correction-torque acquisition of Zhao in view of Ienaga to also include wherein the acquiring a correction torque value based on the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft comprises: in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than a first threshold, acquiring the correction torque value, as taught by Ling, with a reasonable expectation of success. Gating the torque correction on a first threshold prevents the controller from changing motor torque on every small speed-sensor difference and intervenes only when the motor-domain difference indicates slip or oscillation (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Ling, 0152]).
Regarding claim 6,
Zhao in view of Ienaga does not explicitly teach wherein the drive shaft comprises a front axle and a rear axle; and the controlling the motor corresponding to the drive shaft to reduce the output torque based on the correction torque value comprises: in response to that an equivalent rotating speed difference of a motor corresponding to the front axle is greater than a first threshold, controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to reduce a torque based on the correction torque value, or in response to that an equivalent rotating speed difference of a motor corresponding to the rear axle is greater than the first threshold, controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to reduce a torque based on the correction torque value, or in response to that an equivalent rotating speed differences of motors corresponding to the front axle and the rear axle are greater than the first threshold, controlling the motors corresponding to the front axle and the rear axle to reduce torques based on the correction torque value
However, Ling does teach wherein the drive shaft comprises a front axle and a rear axle; and the controlling the motor corresponding to the drive shaft to reduce the output torque based on the correction torque value comprises: in response to that an equivalent rotating speed difference of a motor corresponding to the front axle is greater than a first threshold, controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to reduce a torque based on the correction torque value, or in response to that an equivalent rotating speed difference of a motor corresponding to the rear axle is greater than the first threshold, controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to reduce a torque based on the correction torque value, or in response to that an equivalent rotating speed differences of motors corresponding to the front axle and the rear axle are greater than the first threshold, controlling the motors corresponding to the front axle and the rear axle to reduce torques based on the correction torque value (“The calculation module (302) is configured to determine an equivalent axle speed difference between the front axle and the rear axle of the vehicle based on the equivalent axle speed of the front axle and the equivalent axle speed of the rear axle, and determine a drive shaft torque adjustment value based on the equivalent axle speed difference” [0189],
“wherein the torque calculation sub-module is configured to determine a drive shaft torque adjustment value when the absolute value of the equivalent axle speed difference is greater than a first equivalent axle speed difference threshold.” [0200]).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the torque-reduction method of Zhao in view of Ienaga to also include a drive shaft comprising a front axle and a rear axle and selectively reducing front-axle torque, rear-axle torque, or both when the corresponding equivalent rotating speed difference exceeds a first threshold, as taught by Ling, with a reasonable expectation of success. Applying the equivalent-speed-difference correction separately to each axle derates only the slipping axle and leaves the gripping axle at requested torque. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Ling, [0189-0200]).
Regarding claim 7,
Zhao in view of Ienaga does not explicitly teach wherein in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the front axle is greater than the first threshold, the controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to reduce the torque based on the correction torque value, comprises: controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to reduce the torque by the correction torque value, and determining a rear axle torque incremental value for the motor corresponding to the rear axle and in response to that the rear axle torque incremental value is great than or equal to the correction torque value, controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to increase the torque by the correction torque value, or in response to that the rear axle torque incremental value is less than the correction torque value, controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to increase the torque based on the rear axle torque incremental value.
However, Ling does teach wherein in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the front axle is greater than the first threshold, the controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to reduce the torque based on the correction torque value, comprises: controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to reduce the torque by the correction torque value, and determining a rear axle torque incremental value for the motor corresponding to the rear axle and in response to that the rear axle torque incremental value is great than or equal to the correction torque value, controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to increase the torque by the correction torque value, or in response to that the rear axle torque incremental value is less than the correction torque value, controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to increase the torque based on the rear axle torque incremental value (“The calculation module (302) is configured to determine an equivalent axle speed difference between the front axle and the rear axle of the vehicle based on the equivalent axle speed of the front axle and the equivalent axle speed of the rear axle, and determine a drive shaft torque adjustment value based on the equivalent axle speed difference” [0189],
“wherein the torque calculation sub-module is configured to determine a drive shaft torque adjustment value when the absolute value of the equivalent axle speed difference is greater than a first equivalent axle speed difference threshold.” [0200]).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the torque-reduction method of Zhao in view of Ienaga to also include a drive shaft comprising a front axle and a rear axle and selectively reducing front-axle torque, rear-axle torque, or both when the corresponding equivalent rotating speed difference exceeds a first threshold, as taught by Ling, with a reasonable expectation of success. Shifting the cut torque onto the gripping axle keeps total driveline torque closer to driver demand while still correcting the slipping shaft (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Ling, [0189-0200]).
Regarding claim 8,
Zhao in view of Ienaga does not explicitly teach wherein in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the rear axle is greater than the first threshold, the controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to reduce the torque based on the correction torque value comprises: controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to reduce the torque by the correction torque value, and determining a front axle torque incremental value for the motor corresponding to the front axle and in response to that the front axle torque incremental value is great than or equal to the correction torque value, controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to increase the torque by the correction torque value, or in response to that the front axle torque incremental value is less than the correction torque value, controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to increase the torque based on the front axle torque incremental value.
However, Ling does teach wherein in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the rear axle is greater than the first threshold, the controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to reduce the torque based on the correction torque value comprises:
controlling the motor corresponding to the rear axle to reduce the torque by the correction torque value(“During torque adjustment, when the rear axle torque adjustment threshold is smaller than the drive shaft torque adjustment value, the rear axle torque value is increased based on the rear axle torque adjustment threshold until the front axle torque increment reaches the torque adjustment threshold, and then the increase of the rear axle torque is stopped. The torque value of the front axle is reduced based on the drive shaft torque adjustment value until there is no demand for torque reduction of the front axle. In the whole process, the requirements for the total torque of the two axles are lowered, so that the vehicle slip is prevented while the driving force of the vehicle is guaranteed, and thus the driving performance of the vehicle is guaranteed while the slip is suppressed.”[0174],
and determining a front axle torque incremental value for the motor corresponding to the front axle and in response to that the front axle torque incremental value is great than or equal to the correction torque value “The calculation module (302) is configured to determine an equivalent axle speed difference between the front axle and the rear axle of the vehicle based on the equivalent axle speed of the front axle and the equivalent axle speed of the rear axle, and determine a drive shaft torque adjustment value based on the equivalent axle speed difference” [0189],
controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to increase the torque by the correction torque value, or in response to that the front axle torque incremental value is less than the correction torque value(“During torque adjustment, when the rear axle torque adjustment threshold is smaller than the drive shaft torque adjustment value, the rear axle torque value is increased based on the rear axle torque adjustment threshold until the front axle torque increment reaches the torque adjustment threshold, and then the increase of the rear axle torque is stopped. The torque value of the front axle is reduced based on the drive shaft torque adjustment value until there is no demand for torque reduction of the front axle. In the whole process, the requirements for the total torque of the two axles are lowered, so that the vehicle slip is prevented while the driving force of the vehicle is guaranteed, and thus the driving performance of the vehicle is guaranteed while the slip is suppressed.”[0174],
controlling the motor corresponding to the front axle to increase the torque based on the front axle torque incremental value “wherein the torque calculation sub-module is configured to determine a drive shaft torque adjustment value when the absolute value of the equivalent axle speed difference is greater than a first equivalent axle speed difference threshold.” [0200]).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the torque-reduction method of Zhao in view of Ienaga to also include a drive shaft comprising a front axle and a rear axle and selectively reducing front-axle torque, rear-axle torque, or both when the corresponding equivalent rotating speed difference exceeds a first threshold, as taught by Ling, with a reasonable expectation of success. Shifting the cut torque onto the gripping axle keeps total driveline torque closer to driver demand while still correcting the slipping shaft (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Ling, [0189-0200]).
Regarding claim 13,
Zhao in view of Ienaga does not explicitly teach wherein the determining a torque value lower limit comprises: in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than a third threshold and less than a fourth threshold, determining that the torque value lower limit is 0, wherein the fourth threshold is greater than the third threshold; and in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than the fourth threshold, determining a torque limit value of motor reversal as the torque value lower limit.
However, Ling does teach wherein the determining a torque value lower limit comprises: in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than a third threshold and less than a fourth threshold, determining that the torque value lower limit is 0, wherein the fourth threshold is greater than the third threshold; and in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than the fourth threshold, determining a torque limit value of motor reversal as the torque value lower limit (“determining the lower rear axle torque limit may include: determining the lower rear axle torque limit as 0 when the absolute value of the equivalent axle speed difference is less than a third equivalent axle speed difference threshold, or determining the lower rear axle torque limit as a torque limit of the motor reverse when the absolute value of the equivalent axle speed difference is greater than a third equivalent axle speed difference threshold. The third equivalent axle speed difference threshold is greater than the first equivalent axle speed difference threshold.” [0181]).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the torque reduction of Zhao in view of Ienaga to also include determining a torque lower limit value and controlling the motor output torque to that lower limit after the correction, including a zero limit between a first and second equivalent-speed-difference threshold and a motor-reversal limit above the second threshold, as taught by Ling, with a reasonable expectation of success. Applying a more aggressive floor when the motor-domain difference is larger keeps the damping loop from commanding an unbounded torque cut while still allowing a stronger correction for a larger slip. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Ling [0181]).
Claims 4 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao in view of Ienaga and further in view of Ono et al. (US8706376B2) hereinafter referred to as Zhao, Ienaga and Ono respectively.
Regarding claims 4 and 17,
Zhao in view of Ienaga does not explicitly teach wherein the acquiring a correction torque value based on the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft comprises: acquiring a wheel acceleration change rate of the wheel and in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than the first threshold and the wheel acceleration change rate is greater than a second threshold, acquiring the correction torque value
However, Ono does teach wherein the acquiring a correction torque value based on the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft comprises: acquiring a wheel acceleration change rate of the wheel and in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than the first threshold and the wheel acceleration change rate is greater than a second threshold, acquiring the correction torque value (“The over-braking correction value is usually obtained from the wheel acceleration a, the differential a′ thereof, and the control cycle T_cycle. That is, it is calculated by correction value OBR_Factor =f (a, a′, T_cycle).” [Example 3 Col. 7 ln 59-61]
“it is adjusted such that wheel acceleration after pressure reduction becomes a predetermined target value. Basically, when the pressure reduction quantity is small, acceleration is also small, and when the pressure reduction quantity is large, acceleration also becomes large. Consequently, a new pressure reduction quantity can be calculated from the difference between the target value of wheel acceleration after pressure reduction and the measured value.” [Col.8 ln 8-28]).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the correction-torque acquisition of Zhao in view of Ienaga to also include wherein the acquiring a correction torque value based on the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft comprises: acquiring a wheel acceleration change rate of the wheel and in response to that the equivalent rotating speed difference of the motor corresponding to the drive shaft is greater than the first threshold and the wheel acceleration change rate is greater than a second threshold, acquiring the correction torque value, as taught by Ono, with a reasonable expectation of success. Requiring both a motor-domain speed difference and a rapid wheel-acceleration transient distinguishes an incipient slip from a steady speed offset before torque is cut. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Ono, Example 3]).
Claim 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao in view of Ienaga and further in view of Tang (US20100222953A1), hereinafter referred to as Zhao, Ienaga and Tang respectively.
Regarding claim 11,
Zhao in view of Ienaga does not explicitly teach wherein the acquiring a correction torque value comprises: acquiring a correction left wheel torque value corresponding to a left wheel connected to the drive shaft, and acquiring a correction right wheel torque value corresponding to a right wheel connected to the drive shaft; and determining a larger one of the correction left wheel torque value and the correction right wheel torque value as the correction torque value
However, Tang does teach wherein the acquiring a correction torque value comprises: acquiring a correction left wheel torque value corresponding to a left wheel connected to the drive shaft, and acquiring a correction right wheel torque value corresponding to a right wheel connected to the drive shaft; and determining a larger one of the correction left wheel torque value and the correction right wheel torque value as the correction torque value (“preferably the higher of the two wheel slip ratios is taken as the wheel slip ratio for that axle.” ¶[0076],
“one of the motors (e.g., motor 601) is designed to have a relatively flat torque curve over a wide range of speeds such that it may be used to augment the output of the second motor (e.g., motor 603) at high speeds, specifically in the range in which the torque of second motor 603 is dropping off. FIGS. 7 and 8 illustrate torque and power curves, respectively, of motors 601 and 603 in such a configuration. In particular, curves 701 and 801 represent the torque and power curves, respectively, of motor 601 in this configuration while curves 703 and 803 represent the torque and power curves, respectively, of motor 603. Curves 705 and 805 represent the torque and power curves, respectively, of the combination of motors 601 and 603.” ¶[0037] ).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the correction-torque acquisition of Zhao in view of Ienaga to also include acquiring a correction left wheel torque value and a correction right wheel torque value and determining the larger of those two values as the correction torque value, as taught by Tang, with a reasonable expectation of success. Taking the larger of the two wheel-level corrections makes the shaft command follow the worse of the two wheels and is a conservative traction-control choice. (With regard to this reasoning, see at least Tang [0076]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED ALKIRSH whose telephone number is (703) 756-4503. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am-5:00 pm EST.
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, FADEY JABR can be reached on (571) 272-1516. 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.
/A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights