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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/20/2025, and 08/27/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims recite “the sleeve” rather than “the retaining sleeve” as previously introduced in claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhou (US 20230208227 A1).
Claim 1
Zhou teaches: A rotor module (130) configured to be concentrically disposed on a drive shaft (200) for an ESP motor comprises: a plurality of laminations (see para. 3), each configured to be concentrically disposed on the drive shaft (200); a plurality of magnets (132); two end rings (134); and a retaining sleeve (133); wherein: the plurality of laminations (see para. 3) are axially stacked to form a carrier having a plurality of axially-extending grooves, each configured to receive one or more of the plurality of magnets (132); the plurality of magnets (132) are surface mounted on the carrier within the grooves; and the retaining sleeve (133) extends concentrically around the carrier and the plurality of magnets (132), and is configured to retain the end rings (134) onto both ends of the carrier without threading.
Please note that when reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation “for an ESP motor” is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
PNG
media_image1.png
458
338
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
524
634
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 7/1
Zhou teaches: The rotor module (130) of claim 1, wherein the retaining sleeve (133) comprises a non-magnetic steel (e.g. austenitic stainless steel), low magnetic permeability steel (e.g. Inconel), or carbon fiber (stainless steel, see para. 36).
Claims 2-3, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Hoyland (US 20220278584 A1).
Claim 2/1
Zhou teaches: The rotor module (130) of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein the retaining sleeve (133) is interference fit onto the carrier and the end rings (134).
Hoyland conversely teaches installing a rotor retaining sleeve by forcing the sleeve over a conical assembly tool and subsequently onto the rotor until the sleeve is fully installed with an interference fit (see para. 0092-0093). Hoyland further explains that the interference fit creates radial pre-tension which increases the radially inward force exerted by the sleeve on the permanent magnets and the rotor assembly, while protecting the rotor components and improving structural integrity during high-speed operation. Hoyland additionally teaches that the increased pre-stress allows the sleeve thickness to be reduced while maintaining mechanical strength, thereby reducing weight and improving machine performance (see para. 0094-0095).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the retaining sleeve of Zhou so that It is interference fit onto the carrier and end rings as taught by Hoyland. Such a modification merely employs a known attachment technique for retaining sleeves in permanent magnet rotor assemblies to achieve the predictable advantages of increasing radial clamping force, securely retaining the magnets and end rings during operation, improving structural integrity under centrifugal loading, minimizing relative movement between rotor components, and enhancing reliability of the rotor assembly.
Claim 3/2/1
Zhou as modified by Hoyland teaches: The rotor module (130) of claim 2, wherein the interference fit is configured to maintain interference throughout a motor temperature operating range (up to 160o, see para. 0077; Hoyland) of the ESP motor.
Claims 4-6, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Gao (CN 113364232 A).
Claim 4/1
Zhou teaches: The rotor module (130) of claim 1, wherein both ends of the retaining sleeve (133) extend axially beyond the carrier, and the ends of the retaining sleeve (133) are permanently deformed to retain each end ring on the corresponding end of the carrier.
Zhou however is silent to teaching the stacking of the plurality of laminations on a mandrel to form the carrier. Gao conversely teaches am automatic rotor lamination stacking method in which individual rotor laminations (4) are successfully placed onto a stacking mandrel (21) to form a laminated rotor core. Specifically, Gao teaches that a mechanical arm transfers each rotor lamination onto the stacking mandrel, and the rotor laminations are axially pressed onto the stacking mandrel. This process is repeated until the desired laminated rotor core is formed. Gao further teaches that the stacking mandrel ensures inner diameter concentricity of the laminated rotor, prevents relative displacement between laminations during stacking, and improves assembly precision by maintaining alignment throughout the stacking process.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to modify the assembly method of Zhou by stacking the rotor laminations on a mandrel as taught by Gao. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that employing a stacking mandrel during lamination assembly is a known manufacturing technique for maintaining concentricity of the rotor core, preventing lamination displacement during assembly, improving dimensional accuracy and facilitating subsequent assembly operations.
Claim 5/4/1
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The rotor module (130) of claim 4, wherein: an exterior surface of each end ring (134) comprises a profiled surface (inherently); and each permanently deformed end of the retaining sleeve (133) approximately matches the profiled surface of the corresponding end ring (134).
Claim 6/4/1
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The rotor module (130) of claim 4, wherein the permanent deformation of each end of the retaining sleeve (133) extends around a perimeter circumference of the sleeve to provide circumferential contact between the retaining sleeve (133) and an exterior surface of each end ring (134).
Claim 11
Zhou teaches: A method of assembling a rotor module (130), comprising: stacking a plurality of laminations (see para. 3) to form a carrier; disposing a plurality of magnets (132) within grooves of the carrier; disposing an end ring at each end of the carrier; externally compressing the carrier and end rings (134) axially; disposing a retaining sleeve (133) around the carrier and end rings (134); and permanently deforming one or more end of the retaining sleeve (133) to secure the end rings (134) to the carrier.
Zhou however is silent to teaching the stacking of the plurality of laminations on a mandrel to form the carrier. Gao conversely teaches am automatic rotor lamination stacking method in which individual rotor laminations (4) are successfully placed onto a stacking mandrel (21) to form a laminated rotor core. Specifically, Gao teaches that a mechanical arm transfers each rotor lamination onto the stacking mandrel, and the rotor laminations are axially pressed onto the stacking mandrel. This process is repeated until the desired laminated rotor core is formed. Gao further teaches that the stacking mandrel ensures inner diameter concentricity of the laminated rotor, prevents relative displacement between laminations during stacking, and improves assembly precision by maintaining alignment throughout the stacking process.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to modify the assembly method of Zhou by stacking the rotor laminations on a mandrel as taught by Gao. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that employing a stacking mandrel during lamination assembly is a known manufacturing technique for maintaining concentricity of the rotor core, preventing lamination displacement during assembly, improving dimensional accuracy and facilitating subsequent assembly operations.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Hoyland in view of Olson (IT 1178405 B).
Claim 9/4/1
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The rotor module (130) of claim 4, but is silent to: wherein: the carrier further comprises a plurality of channels, each extending axially into an active length of the rotor module (130), and each configured to retain one of a plurality of balance masses; the plurality of channels are configured to be disposed around the drive shaft (200); and each end ring has a plurality of openings configured to align with the channels.
Olson teaches a permanent magnet rotor including a carrier/support having a plurality of longitudinally extending holes (channels) extending through the rotor. The holes are configured to received rod elements that selectively function as balancing masses. Specifically, Olson teaches that rods of magnetic material are inserted into selected longitudinal holes and, when necessary, rods of non-magnetic material having substantially the same mass are inserted into corresponding holes so that the rotor remains dynamically balanced. The reference further teaches that the rods are positioned symmetrically around the rotor to maintain rotor balance and extend longitudinally through the active length of the rotor.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to modify the rotor carrier of Zhou by providing longitudinal channels configured to receive balancing masses as taught by Olson. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized that permanent magnet rotors are particularly sensitive to imbalance at operating speed and that incorporating longitudinal balancing channels provides a known and predictable means for correcting manufacturing tolerances, magnet weight variation, and assembly imbalance while improving rotor dynamic stability and reducing vibration. It would have been obvious to provide openings in the end rings aligned with the longitudinal channels to permit installation, removal, or adjustment of the balancing rods after assembly of the rotor.
Claims 8 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gao in view of Hoyland.
Claim 8/4/1
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The rotor module (130) of claim 4, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein the retaining sleeve (133) is press fitted around the carrier and end rings (134) to ensure that thermal expansion during operation will not impact contact area between the end rings (134), the carrier, and the sleeve.
Hoyland conversely teaches installing a rotor retaining sleeve by forcing the sleeve over a conical assembly tool and subsequently onto the rotor until the sleeve is fully installed with an interference fit (see para. 0092-0093). Such installation inherently constitutes a press-fitting operation in which the sleeve is elastically expanded and mechanically forced over the rotor to produce an interference fit. Hoyland further teaches that the resulting pre-tension increases the radially inward force applied by the sleeve to the rotor assembly, thereby improving the structural integrity of the rotor while allowing a thinner sleeve to be used without sacrificing strength (see para. 0092-0095).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to modify the retaining sleeve of Zhou by press fitting the sleeve around the carrier and end rings as taught by Hoyland. Doing so would have increased radial preload between the sleeve and the rotor components, thereby securely retaining the end rings and magnets, minimizing relative movement of the components during operation, and maintaining mechanical engagement despite dimensional changes resulting from operation temperatures. A person having ordinary skill would have recognized that maintaining sufficient interference between the sleeve and the rotor components accommodates thermal expansion while preserving contact pressure and structural integrity throughout operation.
Claim 12/11
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The method of claim 11, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein disposing the retaining sleeve (133) around the carrier and end rings (134) occurs during externally compressing the carrier and end rings (134) axially by compressing the carrier and end rings (134) axially into the retaining sleeve (133); and wherein externally compressing the carrier and end rings (134) axially comprises two-stage compression.
Hoyland conversely teaches installing a rotor retaining sleeve by forcing the sleeve over a conical assembly tool and subsequently onto the rotor until the sleeve is fully installed with an interference fit (see para. 0092-0093). Hoyland explains that this installation method applies radial pre-tension to the sleeve and increases the radially inward force exerted on the rotor assembly, thereby improving structural integrity and retention of the rotor components. A person having ordinary skill in the art during the time the invention was filed would have understood that such interference-fit installation is achieved by axially pressing the rotor assembly into the retaining sleeve while the rotor assembly is maintained under compressive loading.
Gao conversely teaches assembling a laminated rotor by stacking rotor laminations onto a stacking mandrel and applying axial compression to the lamination stack using an axial pressing mechanism to maintain concentricity, and prevent dimensional accuracy throughout the assembly.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to modify the assembly method of Zhou by employing the interference-fit sleeve installation technique taught by Hoyland while utilizing the controlled axial compression technique taught by Gao. Such a modification would have predictably improved retention of the end rings and magnets, maintained concentricity of the rotor stack during sleeve installation, reduced relative movement between rotor components during assembly, and improved dimensional accuracy and structural integrity of the completed rotor module.
Furthermore, the resulting assembly process inherently comprises two successive compression operations. A first compression stage is performed by axially compressing the carrier and end rings while press-fitting the retaining sleeve over the rotor assembly to establish the interference fit as taught by Hoyland. A second compression stage is performed by permanently deforming the end portions of the retaining sleeve, as taught by Zhou, to mechanically secure the end rings to the carrier. Performing these sequential compression operations would have represented no more than the predictable application of known rotor assembly techniques to obtain the expected benefits of secure component retention, improved mechanical stability, and reliable rotor performance.
Claim 13/12/11
Zhou as modified by Gao and Hoyland teaches: The method of claim 12, wherein a first stage of compression compresses the carrier and end rings (134) axially into the retaining sleeve (133), but does not compress the retaining sleeve (133), and the second stage of compression additionally compresses the one or more end of the retaining sleeve (133) to permanently deform the one or more end of the retaining sleeve (133).
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gao in view of Dehn (US 20230396106 A1).
Claim 14/11
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The method of claim 11, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein permanently deforming one or more end of the retaining sleeve (133) comprises bending the one or more end of the retaining sleeve (133) radially inward around a perimeter circumference of the sleeve to provide circumferential contact between the retaining sleeve (133) and an exterior surface of each end ring.
Dehn teaches a permanent magnet rotor (2) having a sleeve-shaped protective retaining cover (36) surrounding a rotor body (6). In particular, Dehn teaches that the protective cover includes a chamfer on an end face that functions as an insertion aid for the rotor body and further teaches bending the chamfer radially inwardly by means of a first punch before shaping a flange collar (see claim 4). Dehn further teaches plastically deforming, shaping, press-fitting, and crimping the flange collar to mechanically engage the rotor body and positively retain the rotor components (see para. 72-83).
PNG
media_image3.png
732
1016
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill kin the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the retaining sleeve of Zhou to include the bending operation taught by Dehn. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that plastically bending the end portion of the sleeve prior to final forming provides improved positioning of the sleeve relative to the rotor assembly, facilitates subsequent deformation of the sleeve, improves mechanical engagement between the sleeve and the rotor components, enhances retention of the end rings and permanent magnets, and increases the structural integrity of the rotor assembly during high-speed operation.
Claim 15/14/11
Zhou as modified by Gao and Dehn teaches: The method of claim 14, wherein the exterior surface of each end ring comprises a profiled surface, and the one or more bent end of the retaining sleeve (133) approximately matches the (rectangular)profile surface.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gao in view of Hoyland and Dehn.
Claim 16/11
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The method of claim 11, but does not explicitly disclose: further comprising releasing the external compression; wherein upon releasing the external compression, the rotor module (130) retains a compressed axial length.
Hoyland conversely teaches installing a retaining sleeve by forcing the sleeve onto a rotor to establish an interference fit, thereby generating radial pre-tension and securely retaining the rotor components.
Dehn teaches a permanent magnet rotor (2) having a sleeve-shaped protective retaining cover (36) surrounding a rotor body (6). In particular, Dehn teaches that the protective cover includes a chamfer on an end face that functions as an insertion aid for the rotor body and further teaches bending the chamfer radially inwardly by means of a first punch before shaping a flange collar (see claim 4).
Goa conversely teaches assembling a laminated carrier on a stacking mandrel while applying axial compression to maintain concentricity and prevent displacement of the laminations during assembly.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art during the time the claimed invention was filed that, once the reattaining sleeve has been interference fit onto the rotor assembly as taught by Hoyland and the sleeve ends have been permanently deformed to secure the end rings as taught by Dehn, the externally applied compression may be released while the rotor module remains in its compressed assembled condition. The interference fit between the retaining sleeve and the rotor assembly together with the permanently deformed sleeve ends retaining the end rings, mechanically maintains the axial preload applied during assembly and prevents the lamination stack and end rings from returning to their pre-compressed condition. Thus, the rotor module predictably retains its compressed axial length after removal of the external compressive force.
It would have been obvious to a person n having ordinary skill in the art to employ this known assembly technique because maintaining axial preload after removal of the assembly fixture improves structural rigidity of the rotor assembly, minimizes relative movement between laminations and end rings during operation, improves dimensional stability under centrifugal loading, and increases the long-term reliability of the rotor module.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gao in view of Olson
Claim 17/11
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The method of claim 11, further comprising balancing the rotor module (130); wherein balancing the rotor module (130) comprises inserting one or more balance rods axially into an active length of the rotor module (130).
Olson teaches a permanent magnet rotor including a carrier/support having a plurality of longitudinally extending holes (channels) extending through the rotor. The holes are configured to received rod elements that selectively function as balancing masses. Specifically, Olson teaches that rods of magnetic material are inserted into selected longitudinal holes and, when necessary, rods of non-magnetic material having substantially the same mass are inserted into corresponding holes so that the rotor remains dynamically balanced. The reference further teaches that the rods are positioned symmetrically around the rotor to maintain rotor balance and extend longitudinally through the active length of the rotor.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to modify the rotor carrier of Zhou by providing longitudinal channels configured to receive balancing masses as taught by Olson. A person of ordinary skill would have recognized that permanent magnet rotors are particularly sensitive to imbalance at operating speed and that incorporating longitudinal balancing channels provides a known and predictable means for correcting manufacturing tolerances, magnet weight variation, and assembly imbalance while improving rotor dynamic stability and reducing vibration. It would have been obvious to provide openings in the end rings aligned with the longitudinal channels to permit installation, removal, or adjustment of the balancing rods after assembly of the rotor.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gao in view of Dehn and Konstantin (WO 2021180383 A1).
Claim 18/11
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The method of claim 11, further comprising clinching the stacked plurality of laminations (see para. 3) prior to permanently deforming one or more end of each retaining sleeve (133), wherein clinching further comprises axially aligning the clinches on each lamination of the stack.
Dehn teaches a permanent magnet rotor (2) having a sleeve-shaped protective retaining cover (36) surrounding a rotor body (6). In particular, Dehn teaches that the protective cover includes a chamfer on an end face that functions as an insertion aid for the rotor body and further teaches bending the chamfer radially inwardly by means of a first punch before shaping a flange collar (see claim 4).
Konstantin teaches forming a laminated rotor package by clinching (also referred to as pressure joining, toxening, or clinching; see description of the figures, para. 3) the individual rotor laminations together. Specifically, Konstantin teaches forming hollow cylindrical clinching knobs in the rotor laminations by means of a punch and die, wherein the protruding clinching portions of one lamination are pressed into corresponding cup-shaped recesses of an adjacent lamination so that the laminations are stacked substantially flush while being mechanically joined in both a positive locking and force-locking manner. Konstantin further teaches that multiple clinching locations are distributed throughout the rotor laminations and aligned through the lamination stack to form a rigid laminated rotor package.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to modify the assembly method of Zhou by clinching the stacked laminations as taught by Konstantin prior to permanently deforming the retaining sleeve as taught by Dehn. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that clinching the laminations first produces a mechanically stable laminated rotor core before installation and final deformation of the retaining sleeve, thereby maintaining lamination alignment, preventing relative displacement of the laminations during subsequent sleeve installation and deformation, simplifying assembly, reducing manufacturing costs, and eliminating the need for separate fastening components. Furthermore, because the clinching process taught by Konstantin joins adjacent laminations by engaging protruding clinching portions with corresponding recesses of successive laminations, the clinching features are necessarily arranged in axial alignment throughout the lamination stack.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as modified by Gao in view of Xiang (CN 115313716 A)
Claim 19/11
Zhou as modified by Gao teaches: The method of claim 11, wherein stacking a plurality of laminations on a mandrel to form a carrier comprises stacking a portion of the plurality of laminations to form a plurality of carrier subsections, wherein each carrier subsection has an axial length approximately equal to that of the corresponding magnets; and stacking the plurality of carrier subsections onto the mandrel to form the carrier.
Gao conversely teaches am automatic rotor lamination stacking method in which individual rotor laminations (4) are successfully placed onto a stacking mandrel (21) to form a laminated rotor core. Specifically, Gao teaches that a mechanical arm transfers each rotor lamination onto the stacking mandrel, and the rotor laminations are axially pressed onto the stacking mandrel. This process is repeated until the desired laminated rotor core is formed. Gao further teaches that the stacking mandrel ensures inner diameter concentricity of the laminated rotor, prevents relative displacement between laminations during stacking, and improves assembly precision by maintaining alignment throughout the stacking process.
Xiang likewise discloses a mandrel (73) of the lamination group pressing mechanism (7) upon which silicon steel sheets (21) are stacked to form a rotor iron core section (2a) (see embodiment 3, steps S21-S24; Figs. 6-7, reference numerals 73, 72, 74, 75, and 76).
Xiang conversely teaches the feature of forming a plurality of carrier subsections, each having an axial length approximately equal to that of the corresponding permanent magnets, before assembling the subsections into the completed carrier. Specifically, Xiang discloses that the rotor iron core (2) comprises a plurality of rotor iron core sections (2a), each rotor iron core section being composed of a plurality of stacked silicon steel laminations (21) (see for example embodiment 1; Figs. 1-5; rotor iron core 2, rotor iron core sections 2a, silicon steel sheets 21).
Xiang further teaches that each rotor iron core section (2a) is provided with mounting holes (22) receiving permanent magnets (23) (Embodiment 1; Figs. 3-5, reference numerals 22 and 23).
Xiang expressly teaches determining the number of silicon steel laminations forming each rotor iron core section according to the length of the corresponding permanent magnet. In particular, Step S11 in Embodiment 3 for example, teaches processing the silicon steel sheets according to the length of each permanent magnet, and expressly states that “the length of each rotor iron core section is equal to the length of each section of permanent magnet +(0.2-0.5mm).” Thus,, Xiang teaches each laminated rotor iron core section having an axial length approximately equal to that of the corresponding permanent magnet.
Xiang further teaches individually manufacturing multiple rotor iron core sections. Specifically (in Embodiment 3):
Step S21 places the mandrel (73) on the lower pressing plate (72).
Step S22 sleeves the silicon steel laminations (21) onto the mandrel (73) using the mandrel and locating column (76) for positioning.
Step S23 compresses the laminations by operation of the first hydraulic machine through the push rod sleeve (75) to form an individual rotor iron core section (2a).
Step S24 laser welds the laminations together and removes the completed rotor iron core section (2a) from the mandrel.
Step S26 repeats Steps S21-S25 to manufacture multiple rotor iron core sections (2a).
Thereafter Xiang teaches assembling the plurality of rotor iron core sections into the completed rotor iron core. Specifically, Step S3 is entitled “assembling a plurality of rotor iron core sections into ring by first forming a plurality of laminated carrier subsections, each having an axial length approximately equal to the corresponding permanent magnets, and thereafter assembling the plurality of carrier subsections to form the complete carrier. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that manufacturing the rotor carrier in discrete laminated subsections improves manufacturability, simplifies handling of long rotor assemblies (especially if they relate to wells), facilitates accurate magnet installation into each subsection prior to final assembly, improves dimensional accuracy and concentricity during fabrication, and increases assembly efficiency.
Claims 20 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Xiang, and Ameen (US 20230109040 A1).
Claim 10/1
Zhou teaches: The rotor module (130) of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein: the plurality of laminations (see para. 3) are pre-formed into a plurality of carrier subsections each having an axial length approximately equal to a length of the corresponding magnets (132), wherein when axially stacked, the plurality of carrier subsections jointly form the carrier; the retaining sleeve (133) is disposed around the plurality of carrier subsections; the retaining sleeve (133) holds the magnets (132) corresponding to each carrier subsection onto the corresponding carrier subsection; and the retaining sleeve (133) holds the plurality of carrier subsections together axially.
Ameen expressly teaches constructing an ESP permanent magnet rotor from a plurality of rotor sections (51) mounted successively along a common shaft (50) (see para. 0027-0031; Figs. 2, 5, and 7). As shown in Fig. 2, rotor sections 51 are arranged in an axial series to collectively form the rotor. Paragraph 0028 explains that the number of rotor sections 51 form an elongate cylindrical rotor, each rotor section having a relatively short axial length to reduce vibration and improve high-speed operation.
Ameen further teaches that each rotor section comprises a tubular core (59) supporting a plurality of permanent magnets (55, 57) mounted about the outer surface of the core (see para. 0030; Fig. 4). Paragraph 0031 and Fig. 4 further disclose an outer sleeve (61) extending concentrically around the magnets 55, and 57, wherein the outer sleeve is shrunk fit over the magnets to radially compress and retain the magnets on the core. Paragraph 0039 additionally teaches end rings (85) positioned at opposite ends of each rotor section beneath the outer sleeve, while paragraph 0049 teaches heat-shrinking the outer sleeve 61 over the magnets and end rings after assembly of each rotor section.
Xiang further teaches manufacturing a rotor from a plurality of laminated rotor iron core sections (2a), wherein each rotor iron core section is composed of a plurality of stacked silicon steel sheets (21) (Embodiment 1; Figs. 1-5; rotor iron core 2, rotor iron core sections 2a, silicon steel sheets 21). Xiang further teaches individually manufacturing multiple rotor iron core sections (Embodiment 3, Steps S21-S26) and subsequently assembling the plurality of rotor iron core sections together to form the completed rotor iron core (Embodiment 3, Steps S31-S35). Xiang additionally teaches determining the axial length of each rotor iron core section according to the length of the corresponding permanent magnet (Embodiment 3, Step S11), thereby reinforcing the concept of modular rotor subsections corresponding to magnet sections.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to modify the rotor module of Zhou to be constructed from a plurality of modular rotor subsections as taught by Ameen and further evidenced by Xiang. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that dividing the rotor into multiple independently assembled rotor sections, each including its own laminated carrier, permanent magnets, and surrounding retaining sleeve, provides recognized advantages including improved manufacturability, improved handling of long ESP rotors, improved assembly precision, reduced vibration during high-speed operation, simplified installation of permanent magnets, improved concentricity of individual rotor sections prior to final assembly, and improved overall assembly efficiency. Ameen expressly identifies reducing vibration and improving high-speed rotor performance through the use of multiple rotor sections (see para. 0005-0007, and para. 0028), while Xiang teaches that segmented rotor core construction improves production efficiency, assembly precision, assembly reliability, and manufacturing efficiency (contents of the invention; Embodiment 3).
Claim 20
Zhou teaches: A rotor module (130) comprising: a plurality of laminations (see para. 3) axially stacked to form a carrier, a plurality of magnets (132), and an external sleeve (133), and a retaining mechanism (133); a plurality of axially-extending grooves, each configured to receive one or more of the plurality of magnets (132); the plurality of magnets (132) are surface mounted on the corresponding carrier subsection within the grooves;
Zhou does not expressly teach: a plurality of module subsections each comprising: the plurality of laminations axially stacked to form a carrier subsection; the external sleeve extends concentrically around the corresponding carrier subsection and the corresponding magnets; and the plurality of module subsections are joined together in an axial stack by the retaining mechanism.
Ameen expressly teaches constructing an ESP permanent magnet rotor from a plurality of rotor sections (51) mounted successively along a common shaft (50) (see para. 0027-0031; Figs. 2, 5, and 7). As shown in Fig. 2, rotor sections 51 are arranged in an axial series to collectively form the rotor. Paragraph 0028 explains that the number of rotor sections 51 form an elongate cylindrical rotor, each rotor section having a relatively short axial length to reduce vibration and improve high-speed operation.
Ameen further teaches that each rotor section comprises a tubular core (59) supporting a plurality of permanent magnets (55, 57) mounted about the outer surface of the core (see para. 0030; Fig. 4). Paragraph 0031 and Fig. 4 further disclose an outer sleeve (61) extending concentrically around the magnets 55, and 57, wherein the outer sleeve is shrunk fit over the magnets to radially compress and retain the magnets on the core. Paragraph 0039 additionally teaches end rings (85) positioned at opposite ends of each rotor section beneath the outer sleeve, while paragraph 0049 teaches heat-shrinking the outer sleeve 61 over the magnets and end rings after assembly of each rotor section.
Xiang further teaches manufacturing a rotor from a plurality of laminated rotor iron core sections (2a), wherein each rotor iron core section is composed of a plurality of stacked silicon steel sheets (21) (Embodiment 1; Figs. 1-5; rotor iron core 2, rotor iron core sections 2a, silicon steel sheets 21). Xiang further teaches individually manufacturing multiple rotor iron core sections (Embodiment 3, Steps S21-S26) and subsequently assembling the plurality of rotor iron core sections together to form the completed rotor iron core (Embodiment 3, Steps S31-S35). Xiang additionally teaches determining the axial length of each rotor iron core section according to the length of the corresponding permanent magnet (Embodiment 3, Step S11), thereby reinforcing the concept of modular rotor subsections corresponding to magnet sections.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to modify the rotor module of Zhou to be constructed from a plurality of modular rotor subsections as taught by Ameen and further evidenced by Xiang. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that dividing the rotor into multiple independently assembled rotor sections, each including its own laminated carrier, permanent magnets, and surrounding retaining sleeve, provides recognized advantages including improved manufacturability, improved handling of long ESP rotors, improved assembly precision, reduced vibration during high-speed operation, simplified installation of permanent magnets, improved concentricity of individual rotor sections prior to final assembly, and improved overall assembly efficiency. Ameen expressly identifies reducing vibration and improving high-speed rotor performance through the use of multiple rotor sections (see para. 0005-0007, and para. 0028), while Xiang teaches that segmented rotor core construction improves production efficiency, assembly precision, assembly reliability, and manufacturing efficiency (contents of the invention; Embodiment 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED F SECK whose telephone number is (571)272-4638. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 4:30 pm.
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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at (571) 272-3560. 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.
/AHMED F SECK/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights