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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/11/25 and 3/10/25 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1,2, 4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuzaki, Japanese Patent Publication JP 2019143474 (hereinafter “Matsuzaki”) in view of Metzner, German Patent Publication DE3713799 (hereinafter “Metzner”).
in Reference to Claim 1:
Matzusaki discloses a control system of a work machine (Figure 1), the control system comprising: a hydraulic pump (14L and 14R) that is rotationally driven by a prime mover(11) and supplies hydraulic operating oil to a hydraulic actuator (2L; 2R; 7-9); a displacement control unit (14a) that controls displacement of the hydraulic pump according to a control input (via controller 30);; and a controller (30) that acquires a displacement target value of the hydraulic pump and outputs the control input according to the displacement target value to the displacement control unit (14a), wherein the controller stores therein a mathematical model (Page 9) for predicting the displacement of the hydraulic pump (14L and 14R), and the controller is configured to compute a displacement predicted value (via 34) of the hydraulic pump by using the mathematical model, compute the control input that is optimum, on a basis of the displacement predicted value and a constraint on the control input, compute an evaluation value on a basis of the displacement target value and the displacement actual measured value (not calculated with a displacement sensor but utilizing alternative sensors Pressure sensors s1 and s3), and change the constraint (Tp – absorption torque) on the control input depending on the evaluation value.
Matzusaki fails to disclose a displacement sensor that senses a displacement actual measured value of the hydraulic pump, instead relying on a plurality of pressure sensors to calculate an actual measured value.
However, in the same field of endeavor, hydraulic circuits with variable displacement pump control, Metzner discloses a variable displacement pump with a regulator, wherein a displacement sensor 14 calculated the actual displacement value of the pump.
Examiner notes it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Matzusaki to include a displacement sensor attached to the regulator as taught by Metzner to determine an actual displacement amount of the pump because such a modification would allow for a reduction in cost and maintenance by eliminating the plurality of sensors used in Matzusaki to accomplish the same feat.
In Reference to Claim 2:
The control system of a work machine according to claim 1, wherein a threshold for the evaluation value is stored in the controller, and the controller is configured to set a value of the constraint on the control input depending on a magnitude relation between the evaluation value and the threshold. See, Matzusaki: “On the other hand, when the model predictive control is adopted, the pump absorption torque Tp is maintained at the target pump absorption torque Tt without significantly exceeding the target pump absorption torque Tt, unlike the case where the control system of FIG. 5 is not adopted. It remains unchanged. This is because the displacement control command value is changed before the pump absorption torque Tp deviates from the target pump absorption torque Tt by the model predictive control, and the deviation of the pump absorption torque Tp is proactively suppressed... the controller 30 then pushes the displacement volume that minimizes the difference between the displacement volume command value derived by the model state resetting unit 35 based on the predicted value of the pump discharge pressure after a predetermined time and the predicted displacement value after the predetermined time. The command value is derived. Then, the pump flow rate of the hydraulic pump 14 is controlled using the displacement command value so that the pump absorption torque Tp is maintained at the target pump absorption torque Tt.”
In Reference to Claim 4:
Matsuzaki as modified further discloses wherein the controller is configured to use a deviation between the displacement target value and the displacement actual measured value as the evaluation value. See, Metzner Figure 1 or 4 which shows the feedback loop and wherein the actual displacement from sensor 14 is compared with the target value.
In Reference to Claim 7:
Matsuki as modified further discloses wherein the controller is configured to update the mathematical model by using the displacement actual measured value and the control input. See, Metzner Figure 1 and 4 which shows the displacement is consistently placed in feedback loop into a controller and therefore updated.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 and 5-6 is 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 prior art fails to disclose wherein a constraint table that defines a characteristic of the constraint on the control input that continuously changes with respect to the evaluation value is stored in the controller, and the controller is configured to refer to the constraint table and set the value of the constraint on the control input on a basis of the evaluation value as recited in claim 3.
The prior art fails to disclose wherein the controller is configured to compute the control input such that an evaluation function including a sum of squares of a deviation between the displacement target value and the displacement predicted value in a prediction horizon with a predetermined time width becomes minimum, anduse a value of the evaluation function as the evaluation value as recited in claim 5. utilizing a different calculation to achieve similar results
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL S. COLLINS whose telephone number is (313)446-6535. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00-5:30.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-4648. 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.
/DANIEL S COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745