DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 10, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallego (US Patent Application Publication 2012/0200064) in view of Sandrasekaran (WO 2021/098974 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Gallego discloses a control unit for a heavy road vehicle combination, configured to:
obtain readouts from one or more sensors (18, 19) configured to sense a state of an active suspension element (5) of a drawbar (4) coupling together a first vehicle unit (3) and a second vehicle unit (2) of the vehicle combination, wherein the state is indicative of a longitudinal force exerted by the first vehicle unit [0014; 0045, where braking exerts a longitudinal force on the second vehicle unit: “The electronic controller 8 is joined by data lines at least to the speed sensor 11. Furthermore, as further input quantities, data from another signal generator 18 and a force measuring element 14 arranged on the hitch 4 can be processed by the electronic controller 8”]; and
control the vehicle combination based on the readouts of the one or more sensors [0038, 0040-0041: “When the articulated train is moving fast on a straight stretch, no sharp curves are possible, so that the distance x between tractor vehicle 2 and trailer 3 and thus the gap 1 can be…shortened…Reducing of the distance x occurs by a telescoping of the hitch 4…The particular distance x that is set is detected by a distance sensor 19 arranged on the back side of the tractor vehicle 2 and used in adjusting the intended gap 1”] [0007-0008, 0011: “Accordingly, the controller receives a metered value of the currently driven speed as its input quantity and puts out a corresponding signal to the actuator as its output quantity. The actuator thereupon adjusts the gap between the tractor vehicle and the trailer in dependence on the speed of travel…Basically, a larger gap is advantageous in the low speed range…On the other hand…The curves to be negotiated at high speed are generally gentle, so that only slight relative movements occur between the tractor vehicle and the trailer, and there is no chance of the trailer knocking against the chassis of the tractor vehicle…According to another embodiment, the speed pickup can be formed from the Antilock-System (ABS) of the trailer. The ABS system constantly generates a speed signal, so that no further sensors need to [be] mounted and hooked up”];
detect an imminent jack-knifing situation based on the readouts of the one or more sensors [0051, as shown in Figure 4, a jack-knifing situation is imminent when the distance measured by the sensors 19 decreases so that the second vehicle unit is in danger of making contact with the first vehicle unit: “As further input quantities, the electronic controller 8 obtains data from another signal generator 18 in the form of two distance sensors 19 located on the front end 20 of the trailer 3. The distance sensors 19 are each pointed in the direction of travel of the trailer 3 and detect the shortest distance x (see FIG. 1) from the back side 21 of the tractor vehicle 2 on opposite sides of the hitch 4”];
command a compression or elongation of the active suspension element to cause or extend a delay of a force exerted on the second vehicle unit by the drawbar [0052: “As soon as one of the distance sensors 19 recognizes a drop below the predetermined minimum distance, the electronic controller 8 places the actuator 17 in motion (see FIGS. 2 and 3), which increases the length of the hitch 4 and thus the gap 1 by moving apart the first and second pipe segments 15, 16. To prevent trailer 3 and tractor vehicle 2 from bumping together, a telescoping of the hitch 4 should occur when the minimum distance is passed, regardless of the detected speed of travel of the articulated train”].
Gallego does not disclose the control unit configured to prepare the vehicle combination to avoid or at least alleviate the jack-knifing situation during the delay, wherein, to prepare the vehicle combination to avoid or at least alleviate the jack-knifing situation during the delay, the control unit is configured to cause at least one of braking of the vehicle combination, a slowing down of the vehicle combination, and a steering of a towing vehicle of the vehicle combination.
Sandrasekaran discloses a control unit for a heavy road vehicle combination comprising a first vehicle unit (220) and a second vehicle unit (210), the control unit configured to:
obtain readouts from one or more sensors configured to sense a state of an active suspension element [as shown in Figures 2-3 and 6, the sensors detect a vehicle state that includes an abnormal vehicle load distribution or cargo shift and vehicle braking where braking of the first vehicle unit generates a longitudinal force on the second vehicle unit; page 5, lines 16-19; page 6, lines 8-11; page 9, lines 18-25: “One or more load sensors are arranged on each vehicle and configured to monitor vehicle load distribution. A vehicle load distribution may, e.g., comprise a distribution of axle loads, a distribution of load over the different wheels of the vehicle, and/or a distribution of load on the left and right sides of the vehicle…A variety of different load sensors can be used to determine axle and/or wheel loads. For instance, bellow pressures or other compression force related values from the suspension system 340, 350, and suspension position data (from levelling sensors) from the vehicle suspension system can be used to infer vehicle load distribution…The VMM module 110 has access to various forms of sensor data 650 from which a vehicle state can be inferred…Sensor data may also comprise internal sensor data from, e.g., wheel speed sensors, steering angle sensors, brake and drive torque estimators, inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensors, and the like”]; and
control the vehicle combination based on the readouts of the one or more sensors [page 9, lines 11-17: “Figure 6 schematically shows a system for vehicle control comprising the control unit 110, here denoted as Vehicle Motion Management (VMM). A traffic situation management (TSM) module 610 plans a vehicle trajectory to be followed by the vehicle and, based on the planned trajectory, requests acceleration and curvature profiles 620 from the VMM 110. The VMM 110 responds back with current vehicle capabilities and vehicle status 630, whereby the TSM module can update and maintain the planned trajectory to, e.g., ensure vehicle safety while optimizing vehicle operation”];
wherein the control unit (110) is further configured to:
detect an imminent jack-knifing situation based on the readouts of the one or more sensors [page 10, lines 13-18; page 11, lines 1-14: “If the VMM detects a change in load distribution and determines this change in load distribution to be significant, it may quickly increase vehicle operation safety margins to account for the potential reduction in vehicle stability. For instance, the VMM may quickly report reduced acceleration and/or velocity capabilities back to the TSM 610, it may reduce the configured wheel slip limit .sub.LIM i, and it may be more restrictive when it comes to requesting brake torque from the WEMs…The VMM 110 may at least in part compensate for a shift in cargo and possible change in vehicle stability by adjusting brake torque requests, i.e., by being more careful when it comes to braking the vehicle, at least in some scenarios. Auxiliary braking, i.e., engine braking, may be inactivated if a significant cargo shift is detected, since this type of braking can be quite harsh and abrupt. Wheel slip limits imposed on the wheel brake controllers can also be reduced in order to increase safety margins. To summarize, the emergency procedure may comprise reducing any of; a maximum allowable service brake torque request value, a maximum allowable auxiliary brake torque request, and/or a brake controller wheel slip limit. For a combination vehicle, such as the semi-trailer vehicle 200, vehicle stability may be improved, and risk of roll-over can be reduced, by adjusting a pitch control parameter to increase dampening of a fifth wheel arrangement 211 of the vehicle. This may have an effect of counteracting undesired events such as jack-knifing and certain types of vehicle roll-over events”];
command the active suspension element to cause or extend a delay of a force exerted on the second vehicle unit [page 11, lines 10-14: “For a combination vehicle, such as the semi-trailer vehicle 200, vehicle stability may be improved, and risk of roll-over can be reduced, by adjusting a pitch control parameter to increase dampening of a fifth wheel arrangement 211 of the vehicle. This may have an effect of counteracting undesired events such as jack-knifing and certain types of vehicle roll-over events. A similar effect can be obtained by adjusting a dampening parameter of an active suspension system of the vehicle 100, 200”]; and
prepare the vehicle combination to avoid or at least alleviate the jack-knifing situation during the delay, wherein, to prepare the vehicle combination to avoid or at least alleviate the jack-knifing situation during the delay, the control unit is configured to cause at least one of braking of the vehicle combination, a slowing down of the vehicle combination, and a steering of a towing vehicle of the vehicle combination [as shown in Figure 7, the emergency procedure may include vehicle preparations such as stopping the vehicle or limiting its maximum velocity with the adjustment to the active suspension element; page 12, lines 8-21, lines 24-29; page 13, lines 4-6: “…the method comprises….executing S4 an emergency procedure in case the determined vehicle load distribution differs from the pre-determined vehicle load distribution by more than an allowable amount. The load distribution may be determined as a relative load distribution S21 , or as absolute weights or forces S22 acting on the different axles or wheels. According to aspects, the comparing comprises detecting S31 a shift in cargo when the vehicle 100, 200 is in motion by comparing the determined vehicle load distribution to one or more previously determined vehicle load distributions…According to aspects, executing the emergency procedure comprises executing S42 an emergency stop manoeuvre. According to aspects, executing the emergency procedure comprises reducing S43 a maximum allowable vehicle velocity associated with the vehicle 100, 200. According to aspects, executing the emergency procedure comprises adjusting S44 a planned vehicle trajectory to reduce a vehicle lateral acceleration…According to aspects, executing the emergency procedure comprises adjusting S47 a dampening parameter to of an active suspension system of the vehicle 100, 200”].
Sandrasekaran teaches that stopping or limiting the maximum velocity of the second vehicle unit increases stability and may prevent the vehicle combination from rolling over when cargo carried by the first vehicle unit shifts during a turn [page 9, lines 7-10: “However, if the cargo shifts at a bad time, the lateral acceleration forces may lead to vehicle roll-over. The risk of roll-over can be reduced by reducing the lateral forces acting on the vehicle. Thus, if the control unit 110 detects a shift in cargo, it may impose a limitation on vehicle velocity in order to maintain vehicle stability throughout the turn 510”’ page 10, lines 13-18: “If the VMM detects a change in load distribution and determines this change in load distribution to be significant, it may quickly increase vehicle operation safety margins to account for the potential reduction in vehicle stability. For instance, the VMM may quickly report reduced acceleration and/or velocity capabilities back to the TSM 610, it may reduce the configured wheel slip limit LIM i, and it may be more restrictive when it comes to requesting brake torque from the WEMs”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to prepare the vehicle combination by stopping or limiting maximum vehicle speed as disclosed by Sandrasekaran with the command to prevent an imminent jack-knifing situation disclosed by Gallego to prevent a roll over of the vehicle combination. Specifically, Gallego teaches that a jack-knifing situation may be imminent during braking of the second vehicle unit and Sandrasekaran teaches that a rollover may occur when, while turning the vehicle combination, a shift in carried cargo occurs. Since control to alleviate the jack-knifing situation can be performed concurrently with control to increase vehicle stability, as disclosed by Sandrasekaran, it would be obvious to temporarily stop the vehicle or further limit vehicle speed to prevent a rollover.
Regarding claim 10, Gallego further discloses wherein the control unit is further configured to, in response to determining that a current or predicted future speed of the vehicle combination exceeds a speed threshold, control the active suspension element to reduce an overall longitudinal length of the drawbar for thereby bringing the first and second vehicle units closer together [0007-0008, 0038].
Regarding claim 12, Gallego further discloses a drawbar arrangement for a heavy road vehicle combination, comprising:
the control unit (8) of claim 1;
the drawbar (4) for coupling of the first vehicle unit and the second vehicle unit of the vehicle combination; and
the one or more sensors (18, 19) configured to sense the state of the active suspension element of the drawbar.
Regarding claim 13, Gallego further discloses a heavy towing vehicle, wherein the vehicle is the second vehicle unit as discussed in reference to claim 1 above, but does not disclose the heavy towing vehicle comprising the control unit. Sandrasekaran discloses a heavy towing vehicle comprising a control unit and teaches that coupling the control unit to the second vehicle unit allows the operator of the second vehicle unit to directly obtain information relating to the current load distribution of the first vehicle unit [page 11, line 32-page 12, line 5].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control unit location disclosed by Gallego so that the control unit is coupled to the second vehicle unit to allow an operator to obtain information about the current cargo load of the first vehicle unit.
Regarding claim 14, Gallego further discloses a heavy vehicle combination, comprising:
the drawbar arrangement of claim 12 (as discussed in reference to claim 12 above);
the first vehicle unit (2); and
the second vehicle unit (3).
Claim(s) 2, 4 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallego (US Patent Application Publication 2012/0200064) in view of Sandrasekaran (WO 2021/098974 A1) and further in view of Queveau (US Patent Number 4,320,811).
Regarding claim 2, Gallego, as modified by Sandrasekaran, discloses the control unit of claim 1 as discussed above but does not disclose wherein, to detect the imminent jack-knifing situation, the control unit is further configured to detect that the indicated longitudinal force exerted by the first vehicle unit exceeds a force threshold value. Specifically, Gallego discloses measuring the longitudinal force exerted by the first vehicle unit and using the measured force to prevent a jack-knifing situation [see Gallego 0014] but does not explicitly disclose comparison to a force threshold value.
Queveau discloses detecting an imminent jack-knifing situation based on detecting a longitudinal force exerted by a first vehicle unit exceeds a force threshold value (Col. 4, lines 20-26, as shown in Figures 1, 2 or 3; Col. 14, lines 47-56).
Queveau teaches that by reducing the magnitude of the force, jackknifing can be avoided even while maintaining a substantially constant power level to the wheels of the vehicle combination (Col. 4, lines 30-36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the threshold disclosed by Queveau to detect the imminent jack-knifing situation disclosed by Gallego since the threshold can be used to avoid jackknifing while maintaining a substantially constant propulsion.
Regarding claim 4, Gallego, as modified by Sandrasekaran and Queveau, discloses the control unit of claim 2 as discussed above. In another embodiment Gallego further discloses wherein, to detect the imminent jack-knifing situation, the control unit is further configured to take into account also an articulation angle between the first and second vehicle units [0018, 0021-0023]. Gallego teaches that either the distance sensor or the angle measurement provide a distance between the first and second vehicle units and allow for a timely reaction that minimizes the risk of collision [0018, 0022].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the embodiment of Gallego that uses an angle measurement to determine the articulation angle to detect the imminent jack-knifing situation in the combination disclosed by Gallego, as modified by Sandrasekaran and Queveau, because the angle measurement provides a measurement of the distance between the vehicle units that can be used to minimize a risk of collision.
Regarding claims 7-9, Gallego, as modified by Sandrasekaran, discloses the control unit of claim 1 as discussed above but does not disclose wherein the control unit is further configured to, as part of controlling the vehicle combination, control at least one of braking and propulsion of the vehicle combination based on the readouts from the one or more sensors, wherein the control unit is further configured to obtain an indication of an articulation angle between the first and second vehicle units and, as part of controlling the vehicle combination, control the at least one of braking and propulsion of the vehicle combination based also on the articulation angle, wherein the control unit is further configured to estimate respective longitudinal and lateral force components of a force exerted by the drawbar on the second vehicle unit based on the articulation angle and readouts of the one or more sensors, and to control the at least one of braking and propulsion of the vehicle combination based on the force components in order for at least one vehicle unit of the vehicle combination to stay within one or more tire slip limitations.
Queveau discloses a control unit (39-42, 44-46, 48, 50-51) that is configured to, as part of controlling a vehicle combination, control at least one of braking and propulsion of the vehicle combination based on readouts from one or more sensors (87) configured to sense a state of a connection (60) coupling together a first vehicle unit (22) and a second vehicle unit (21), wherein the control unit is further configured to obtain an indication of an articulation angle (α) between the first and second vehicle units and, as part of controlling the vehicle combination, control the at least one of braking and propulsion of the vehicle combination based also on the articulation angle (Col. 10, lines 55-64; Col. 11, lines 20-32; Col. 11, lines 57-67);
wherein the control unit is further configured to estimate respective longitudinal (FCL) and lateral force (FCT) components of a force (FC) exerted by the connection on the second vehicle unit based on the articulation angle and readouts of the one or more sensors, and to control the at least one of braking and propulsion of the vehicle combination based on the force components in order for at least one vehicle unit of the vehicle combination to stay within one or more tire slip limitations (Col. 5, lines 14-24; Col. 10, line 65-Col. 11, line 32).
Queveau teaches that redistributing the propulsion force based on the longitudinal force derived from the one or more sensors and the articulation angle improves drive stability at relatively high articulation angles and under certain adverse road conditions at higher power levels (Col. 2, lines 10-20 & lines 30-33). Queveau also teaches that conditions exist where tire slippage occurs related to the force components and sensed operating conditions in which redistributing the propulsion force is also effective to prevent the slippage (Col. 5, lines 14-24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control the propulsion of the vehicle combination disclosed by Gallego using the sensor readout indicating longitudinal force and articulation angle as well as the force components disclosed by Queveau since these values are already available to the control unit disclosed by Gallego and can be used to improve vehicle stability when the articulation angle is high and/or under adverse road conditions while minimizing power reduction compared to the prior art in addition to preventing tire slippage.
Claim(s) 3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallego (US Patent Application Publication 2012/0200064) in view of Sandrasekaran (WO 2021/098974 A1) and further in view of Subramanian (WO 2022/139831 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Gallego, as modified by Sandrasekaran, discloses the control unit of claim 1 as discussed above but does not disclose wherein, to detect the imminent jack-knifing situation, the control unit is further configured to detect that a rate of change of the indicated longitudinal force exerted by the first vehicle unit exceeds a rate of change threshold value.
Subramanian discloses detecting an imminent jack-knifing situation based on detecting a rate of change of a longitudinal force exerted by a first vehicle unit on a second vehicle unit exceeds a rate of change threshold value [0015].
Subramanian teaches that the rate of change threshold value is a physical property that, when exceeded, leads to jack-knifing or a loss of stability and depends on speed of the vehicle combination and surface conditions [0015].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the threshold disclosed by Subramanian to detect the imminent jack-knifing situation disclosed by Gallego since the threshold can be used to identify the situation in different scenarios such as where the surface on which the vehicle combination travels varies.
Regarding claim 5, Gallego, as modified by Sandrasekaran and Subramanian, discloses the control unit of claim 3 as discussed above. In another embodiment Gallego further discloses wherein, to detect the imminent jack-knifing situation, the control unit is further configured to take into account also an articulation angle between the first and second vehicle units [0018, 0021-0023]. Gallego teaches that either the distance sensor or the angle measurement provide a distance between the first and second vehicle units and allow for a timely reaction that minimizes the risk of collision [0018, 0022].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the embodiment of Gallego that uses an angle measurement to determine the articulation angle to detect the imminent jack-knifing situation in the combination disclosed by Gallego, as modified by Sandrasekaran and Subramanian, because the angle measurement provides a measurement of the distance between the vehicle units that can be used to minimize a risk of collision.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gallego (US Patent Application Publication 2012/0200064) in view of Sandrasekaran (WO 2021/098974 A1) and further in view of Chiu (US Patent Application Publication 2015/0165850).
Regarding claim 11, Gallego, as modified by Sandrasekaran, discloses the control unit of claim 1 including wherein the control unit is further configured to determine or predict future jackknifing between the first and second vehicle units and to control the active suspension element to counteract the jackknifing as discussed in reference to claim 1 above. Gallego does not disclose predicting current or future longitudinal oscillatory relative movements between the first and second vehicle units.
Chiu discloses a control unit (220, 230, 240, 250, 260) configured to determine or predict current or future longitudinal oscillatory relative movements between first and second vehicle units, and to generate a control to counteract such oscillatory movements [0061-0062].
Chiu teaches that the oscillatory movements indicate a possibility of jackknifing when if the oscillations increase over time [0063].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include as a condition to control the active suspension to counteract jackknifing disclosed by Gallego, a condition to predict future longitudinal oscillatory relative movements between the first and second vehicle units as disclosed by Chiu, because when these oscillations steadily increase, they may cause jackknifing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to JOSHUA CAMPBELL whose telephone number is (571) 272-8215. The examiner
can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor,
Lindsay M. Low can be reached on (571) 272-1196. The fax phone number for the organization where
this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application
Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained
from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available
through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-
direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer
Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR
CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSHUA CAMPBELL/
Examiner, Art Unit 3747
/JACOB M AMICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747