DETAILED ACTION
National Stage Application
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 Interpretation
MPEP § 2111.01 states that “… Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification - the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms …”. Thus under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification (e.g., see “… emission current from the filament to the anode target … generated voltage signal of the sensor. The generated voltage signal comprises a common ratio with the measured magnetic field such that the emission current can be determined with this generated voltage signal …” on pg. 1, lines 18+ and pg. 5, lines 5+) serves as a glossary for the claim term “emission current”.
The specification (e.g., see “… term “X-ray tube wire” shall be understood to describe a wire used for operating the X-ray tube, wherein the X-ray tube wire is configured for providing a connection to a power supply for the X-ray tube …” on pg. 2, lines 28+) serves as a glossary for the claim term “X-ray tube wire”.
The specification (e.g., see “… term “high voltage potential side” shall be understood to describe the voltage side of the X-ray tube, which has a different, e.g. a higher, potential than the earth potential side …… sensor may be arranged on the high voltage potential side of the X-ray tube either inside the X-ray tube or outside the X-ray tube, for example on the generator side, but still on the high-voltage potential side …” on pg. 2, lines 31+ and pg. 5, lines 19+) serves as a glossary for the claim term “arranged at a high voltage potential side of the X-ray tube”.
The specification (e.g., see “… term “resulting magnetic field” shall be understood to describe a magnetic field, which may be comprised of a superimposing of more than one magnetic field. For instance, the resulting magnetic field may be a main magnetic field, which comprises of or includes the superimposed first, second, third, and fourth magnetic field, or parts thereof. It may comprise a reduced magnetic field of the first and third magnetic field and a non-reduced second and fourth magnetic field …” on pg. 3, lines 5+) serves as a glossary for the claim term “a resulting magnetic field”.
The specification (e.g., see “… At the first Hall sensor, the first magnetic field and the second magnetic field may superimpose …” on pg. 7, lines 20+) serves as a glossary and indicates that the claim term “the superimposed magnetic fields” should be given its ordinary and customary meaning1 of “magnetic flux density”.
The specification (e.g., see “… In FIG. 2 at least two X-ray tube wires 111, 112 are arranged below the sensor 110 …” on pg. 13, lines 29+) serves as a glossary for the claim term “below”.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were effectively filed absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was effectively filed in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 of this title, 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, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blake (US 5,090,048) in view of Watanabe et al. (US 2014/0348289).
In regard to claim 1, Blake discloses a device for determining an emission current of an X-ray tube, the device comprising:
(a) a sensor (e.g., see “… a conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph) configured for determining the emission current (e.g., “… magnetic flux has a magnitude that is proportional to the level of the anode to cathode current I1 …” in the third column 4 paragraph) of the X-ray tube (e.g., see “… FIG. 1, an X-ray tube assembly, generally designated as 10 …” in Fig. 1 and the nineth column 2 paragraph); and
(b) a first X-ray tube wire (e.g., see wire “… connected to the negative terminal 57 of the anode high voltage supply 50 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph) and a second X-ray tube wire (e.g., see wire “… connected to the positive terminal 58 of the cathode high voltage supply 52 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph), which are configured to operate the X-ray tube (e.g., see “… conventional anode and cathode high voltage supplies 50 and 52, which combined form a bias supply for the X-ray vacuum tube …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph),
wherein the sensor is arranged at the first X-ray tube wire and at the second X-ray tube wire (e.g., see “… One end of the first winding 66 is connected to the negative terminal 57 of the anode high voltage supply 50 and its other end is connected to the positive terminal 58 of the cathode high voltage supply 52 … current sensing transformer 64 has a gap through its core 65 within which is mounted a conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph),
wherein the sensor is arranged at a high voltage potential side of the X-ray tube (e.g., see “… current sensing transformer 64 has a gap through its core 65 within which is mounted a conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph),
wherein the sensor is configured and arranged at the first X-ray tube wire and at the second X-ray tube wire in such a manner that a second magnetic field generated by the emission current of the X-ray tube in the first X-ray tube wire, and a fourth magnetic field generated by the emission current of the X-ray tube in the second X-ray tube wire are superimposed at the sensor (e.g., “… magnetic flux has a magnitude that is proportional to the level of the anode to cathode current I1 …” in the third column 4 paragraph),
wherein the sensor is configured to measure a resulting magnetic field, which results from the superimposed magnetic fields at the sensor (e.g., see “… a conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph), and
wherein the device is configured to determine the emission current of the X-ray tube based on the resulting magnetic field (e.g., “… magnetic flux has a magnitude that is proportional to the level of the anode to cathode current I1 …” in the third column 4 paragraph).
While Blake also discloses (nineth column 2 paragraph) that the “… cathode assembly 20 consists of a thermionic emissive cathode and a filament which heats the cathode to an operating temperature at which electron emission will occur. The cathode assembly 20 is coupled to a connector 22 to which the filament current and cathode bias potential are applied …”, the device of Blake lacks an explicit description of a first magnetic field generated by a heating current of the X-ray tube in the first X-ray tube wire and a third magnetic field generated by the heating current of the X-ray tube in the second X-ray tube wire. However, Watanabe et al. teach (paragraphs 36 and 37) “… tube voltage detector 153, which detects the tube voltage being applied; a filament current detector 154, which detects the filament current; a tube current detector 155, which detects the tube current between the cathode 161 and the anode 162; and an X-ray tube controller 157. The X-ray tube controller 157 controls the high voltage supply 151 in accordance with image-capturing conditions such that a predetermined tube voltage is applied. The X-ray tube controller 157 also controls the filament voltage supply 152 in such a way that the tube current detected by the tube current detector 155 is kept stable at the desired value specified for the tube current …”. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the “conventional magnetic flux sensor 70” of Blake as “a tube current detector 155, which detects the tube current between the cathode 161 and the anode 162” and “a filament current detector 154, which detects the filament current” using a first magnetic field generated by a heating current of the X-ray tube in the first X-ray tube wire and a third magnetic field generated by the heating current of the X-ray tube in the second X-ray tube wire, in order for “the tube current detected by the tube current detector 155 is kept stable at the desired value specified for the tube current”.
In regard to claim 3 which is dependent on claim 1, Blake also discloses that the sensor is further configured to generate a voltage signal based on the measured resulting magnetic field, wherein the device is configured to determine the emission current of the X-ray tube based on the generated voltage signal of the sensor (e.g., “… amplifier 72 responds to the signal from the magnetic flux sensor … amplifier current I2 produces a voltage e0 across the sensing resistor 76 that is proportional to the anode to cathode current according to the equation: e0 = I2R76 = I1(T1/T2)R76, where R76 is·the resistance of the current sensing resistor 76. Thus by measuring the voltage e0, this equation can be solved for the magnitude of the anode to cathode current I1 …” in the third column 4 paragraph).
In regard to claim 4 which is dependent on claim 1, Blake also discloses that the sensor is arranged at the first X-ray tube wire and at the second X-ray tube wire at a high voltage potential side of a generator driving the X-ray tube (e.g., see “… current sensing transformer 64 has a gap through its core 65 within which is mounted a conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph).
In regard to claim 6 which is dependent on claim 1, Blake also discloses that at least two X-ray tube wires are arranged below the sensor, wherein the at least two X-ray tube wires are the first X-ray tube wire and the second X-ray tube wire, which are arranged below the sensor (e.g., see “… One end of the first winding 66 is connected to the negative terminal 57 of the anode high voltage supply 50 and its other end is connected to the positive terminal 58 of the cathode high voltage supply 52 … current sensing transformer 64 has a gap through its core 65 within which is mounted a conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph). Alternatively it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the first and second X-ray tube wires are below the sensor in at least one orientation (e.g., see gantry 10 of Watanabe et al.) of the x-ray tube.
In regard to claim 7 which is dependent on claim 1, Blake also discloses a magnetic core, wherein the sensor is arranged inside a gap of the magnetic core, wherein the first X-ray tube wire and/or the second X-ray tube wire are extending through the magnetic core or are wound around the magnetic core (e.g., see “… current sensing transformer 64 has a gap through its core 65 within which is mounted a conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph).
In regard to claim 10 which is dependent on claim 1, Blake also discloses a communication unit configured for sending a data containing at least the determined emission current to at least one of an X-ray system, a generator of the X-ray tube, and an external analyzing unit (e.g., “… X-ray imaging system … Additional transformers and circuitry are incorporated to carry control signals in and out of the casing … monitoring the d.c. anode-cathode current …” in the second column 2 paragraph and the second column 4 paragraph). The device of Blake lacks an explicit description of details of the “… control signals …” such as the communication unit is further configured to receive at least one of a measurement time for measuring the emission current at a specific time, a reference value of the emission current, and a target value of the emission current. However, “… control signals …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “… tube voltage detector 153, which detects the tube voltage being applied; a filament current detector 154, which detects the filament current; a tube current detector 155, which detects the tube current between the cathode 161 and the anode 162; and an X-ray tube controller 157. The X-ray tube controller 157 controls the high voltage supply 151 in accordance with image-capturing conditions such that a predetermined tube voltage is applied. The X-ray tube controller 157 also controls the filament voltage supply 152 in such a way that the tube current detected by the tube current detector 155 is kept stable at the desired value specified for the tube current …” in the paragraphs 36 and 37 of Watanabe et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional control signal (e.g., comprising details such as “desired value specified for the tube current”, in order for “the tube current detected by the tube current detector 155 is kept stable at the desired value specified for the tube current”) for the unspecified “… control signals …” of Blake and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional control signal (e.g., comprising details such as the communication unit is further configured to receive at least one of a measurement time for measuring the emission current at a specific time, a reference value of the emission current, and a target value of the emission current) as the unspecified “… control signals …” of Blake.
In regard to claim 12, Blake discloses an X-ray tube comprising a device for measuring emission current on the X-ray tube (the cited prior art is applied as in claim 1 above), wherein the X-ray tube is operated (e.g., see “… conventional anode and cathode high voltage supplies 50 and 52, which combined form a bias supply for the X-ray vacuum tube …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph) via the first X-ray tube wire (e.g., see wire “… connected to the negative terminal 57 of the anode high voltage supply 50 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph) and the second X-ray tube wire (e.g., see wire “… connected to the positive terminal 58 of the cathode high voltage supply 52 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph) of the X-ray tube.
In regard to claim 13, Blake discloses an X-ray system, comprising:
(a) an X-ray tube (e.g., see “… FIG. 1, an X-ray tube assembly, generally designated as 10 …” in Fig. 1 and the nineth column 2 paragraph);
(b) a generator configured for driving the X-ray tube (e.g., see “… conventional anode and cathode high voltage supplies 50 and 52, which combined form a bias supply for the X-ray vacuum tube …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph); and
(c) a device for measuring emission current of the X-ray tube (the cited prior art is applied as in claim 1 above),
wherein the X-ray tube is operated by the generator (e.g., see “… conventional anode and cathode high voltage supplies 50 and 52, which combined form a bias supply for the X-ray vacuum tube …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph) via the first X-ray tube wire (e.g., see wire “… connected to the negative terminal 57 of the anode high voltage supply 50 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph) and the second X-ray tube wire of the X-ray tube (e.g., see wire “… connected to the positive terminal 58 of the cathode high voltage supply 52 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph), and
wherein the device is configured to communicate with the X-ray system using a communication unit of the device (e.g., “… X-ray imaging system … Additional transformers and circuitry are incorporated to carry control signals in and out of the casing … monitoring the d.c. anode-cathode current …” in the second column 2 paragraph and the second column 4 paragraph).
In regard to claim 14, Blake discloses a method for measuring an emission current of an X-ray tube, the method comprising:
(a) operating the X-ray tube (e.g., see “… conventional anode and cathode high voltage supplies 50 and 52, which combined form a bias supply for the X-ray vacuum tube …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph) using a first X-ray tube wire (e.g., see wire “… connected to the negative terminal 57 of the anode high voltage supply 50 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph) and a second X-ray tube wire (e.g., see wire “… connected to the positive terminal 58 of the cathode high voltage supply 52 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph),
(b) arranging a sensor at the first X-ray tube wire and at the second X-ray tube wire by positioning the sensor at the high voltage potential side of the X-ray tube (e.g., see “… One end of the first winding 66 is connected to the negative terminal 57 of the anode high voltage supply 50 and its other end is connected to the positive terminal 58 of the cathode high voltage supply 52 … current sensing transformer 64 has a gap through its core 65 within which is mounted a conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph),
(c) superimposing, due to a configuration and arrangement of the sensor, a second magnetic field generated by the emission current of the X-ray tube in the first X-ray tube wire, and a fourth magnetic field generated by the emission current of the X-ray tube in the second X-ray tube wire (e.g., “… magnetic flux has a magnitude that is proportional to the level of the anode to cathode current I1 …” in the third column 4 paragraph),
(d) measuring by the sensor a resulting magnetic field of the superimposed magnetic fields at the sensor (e.g., see “… a conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” in Fig. 1 and the second column 4 paragraph), and
(e) determining the emission current of the X-ray tube based on the resulting magnetic field of the superimposed magnetic fields at the sensor (e.g., “… magnetic flux has a magnitude that is proportional to the level of the anode to cathode current I1 …” in the third column 4 paragraph).
While Blake also discloses (nineth column 2 paragraph) that the “… cathode assembly 20 consists of a thermionic emissive cathode and a filament which heats the cathode to an operating temperature at which electron emission will occur. The cathode assembly 20 is coupled to a connector 22 to which the filament current and cathode bias potential are applied …”, the method of Blake lacks an explicit description of a first magnetic field generated by a heating current of the X-ray tube in the first X-ray tube wire and a third magnetic field generated by the heating current of the X-ray tube in the second X-ray tube wire. However, Watanabe et al. teach (paragraphs 36 and 37) “… tube voltage detector 153, which detects the tube voltage being applied; a filament current detector 154, which detects the filament current; a tube current detector 155, which detects the tube current between the cathode 161 and the anode 162; and an X-ray tube controller 157. The X-ray tube controller 157 controls the high voltage supply 151 in accordance with image-capturing conditions such that a predetermined tube voltage is applied. The X-ray tube controller 157 also controls the filament voltage supply 152 in such a way that the tube current detected by the tube current detector 155 is kept stable at the desired value specified for the tube current …”. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the “conventional magnetic flux sensor 70” of Blake as “a tube current detector 155, which detects the tube current between the cathode 161 and the anode 162” and “a filament current detector 154, which detects the filament current” using a first magnetic field generated by a heating current of the X-ray tube in the first X-ray tube wire and a third magnetic field generated by the heating current of the X-ray tube in the second X-ray tube wire, in order for “the tube current detected by the tube current detector 155 is kept stable at the desired value specified for the tube current”.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blake in view of Watanabe et al. as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Munger et al. (US 6,352,363).
In regard to claim 5 which is dependent on claim 1, while Blake also discloses a housing at least partially surrounding the first X-ray tube wire and the second X-ray tube wire (e.g., see “… shape and size of the enclosure 14 is designed to house the components of the X-ray tube assembly 10 and fit within an outer housing of an X-ray apparatus (not shown). The enclosure 14 is fabricated from an electrically conductive metal alloy containing lead so that when grounded, the external environment will be shielded from both X-rays and radio frequency signals generated within the enclosure …” in Fig. 1 and the last complete column 2 paragraph), the device of Blake lacks an explicit description that the housing surround the sensor and is configured for shielding the sensor from further magnetic fields. However, Munger et al. teach (sixth column 2 paragraph) “… a cast shield of an iron based material substantially enclosing and closely conforming to the x-ray tube to shield the x-ray tube imaging beam from interference from magnetic fields …”. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the “enclosure 14” and the “conventional magnetic flux sensor 70” of Blake with “a cast shield of an iron based material substantially enclosing and closely conforming”, in order “to shield” “from interference from magnetic fields”.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blake in view of Watanabe et al. as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Kiwaki et al. (US 4,768,215).
In regard to claim 8 which is dependent on claim 1, the device of Blake lacks an explicit description of details of the “… conventional magnetic flux sensor 70 …” such as comprising at least one Hall sensor for measuring magnetic fields. However, “… conventional magnetic flux sensor …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “Japanese Utility Model Unexamined Publication No. 60-175499 discloses that the current of an X-ray tube can be measured by using a magnetic sensor such as a hall element at the high-voltage cable of the X-ray device …” in the last complete column 1 paragraph of Kiwaki et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional magnetic flux sensor (e.g., comprising details such as “a hall element at the high-voltage cable of the X-ray device”, in order “that the current of an X-ray tube can be measured”) for the unspecified “… conventional magnetic flux sensor …” of Blake and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional magnetic flux sensor (e.g., comprising details such as the sensor comprises at least one Hall sensor for measuring magnetic fields) as the unspecified “… conventional magnetic flux sensor …” of Blake.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 2, 9, and 11 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the instant application is deemed to be directed to a nonobvious improvement over the invention disclosed in US 5,090,048. The improvement comprises in combination with other recited elements: (a) the sensor is arranged with respect to the first X-ray tube wire and the second X-ray tube wire, such that the heating current flowing through the first X-ray tube wire flows in an opposing current direction than the heating current flowing through the second X-ray tube wire as recited in claim 2; (b) the sensor comprises a first Hall sensor arranged at the first X-ray tube wire, and a second Hall sensor arranged at the second X-ray tube wire, wherein at the first Hall sensor the first magnetic field and the second magnetic field superimpose, wherein at the second Hall sensor the third magnetic field and the fourth magnetic field superimpose, wherein the first Hall sensor measures a first resulting magnetic field and the second Hall sensor measures a second resulting magnetic field, wherein the device is configured to determine the emission current of the X-ray tube based on the first and second resulting magnetic field as recited in claim 9; and (c) at least one filter for filtering a remaining heating current of the first X-ray tube wire and/or a remaining heating current of the second X-ray tube wire, wherein the filter is an analog filter and/or a digital filter, wherein the bandwidth of the filter is about 1 kHz as recited in claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 4,573,184 teaches an x-ray tube.
US 2015/0137795 teaches an x-ray tube.
US 2020/0008289 teaches an x-ray tube.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shun Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-2439. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at (571)272-3995. 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.
/SL/
Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
1 magnetic flux density defined as “(General Physics) a measure of the strength of a magnetic field at a given point, expressed by the force per unit length on a conductor carrying unit current at that point. Symbol: B”. Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014. Retrieved from www.thefreedictionary.com/magnetic+flux+density
Prosecution Insights