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.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3 should be amended to recite “[[the]] a longitudinal direction” since such limitation is not previously recited. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “controller” and “state acquisition device” in claim set 1-11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. See 35 USC 112(a) and 112(b) below.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The written
description merely just states “controller” in claims 1, 4 and 6-11 and “state acquisition device” in claims 4-6 without any direct example of the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is indefinite because of the recited limitation: Claim 1 recites “a bucket capable of holding a product”, then recites “holding a loading object” in the following limitation. It is unclear, to the examiner, whether “product” and “loading object” are meant to be the same thing?
Claims 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 are indefinite because of the recited limitation: “a state in the container”. It is unclear, to the examiner, if the applicant is referring to the same “state in the container” in claim 1 or not?
Claims 5 is indefinite because of the recited limitation: “a planar area”. It is unclear, to the examiner, if the applicant is referring to the same “planar area” in claim 1 or not?
Claims 2, 3, and 6 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim limitation “controller” and “state acquisition device” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification merely repeats the term controller without any direction between what specific devices are used for/as these systems and how they are capable of their functions. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) 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 as of the effective filing date of the later invention 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US 20220195690 A1) in view of Yamada (US 20180171582 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses a work machine comprising (See at least abstract, Fig. 1, [0036-0040] First, a shovel 100 as an excavator according to an embodiment of the present invention is described with reference to FIGS. 1A and 1B. FIG. 1A is a side view of the shovel 100. FIG. 1B is a top plan view of the shovel 100): a machine body (See at least abstract, Fig. 1, [0037-0040] According to this embodiment, a lower traveling structure 1 of the shovel 100 includes a crawler 1C. The crawler 1C is driven by a travel hydraulic motor 2M mounted on the lower traveling structure 1. An upper swing structure 3 is swingably mounted on the lower traveling structure 1 via a swing mechanism 2); an attachment attached to the machine body, the attachment including a bucket capable of holding a product (See at least abstract, [0034-0040], [0145-0150] A boom 4 is attached to the upper swing structure 3. An arm 5 is attached to the distal end of the boom 4. A bucket 6 serving as an end attachment is attached to the distal end of the arm 5. The boom 4, the arm 5, and the bucket 6 constitute an excavation attachment AT that is an example of an attachment. The bucket 6 into which an excavation object is scooped and which is positioned above the bed BD by a manual operation or autonomous control is illustrated as a bucket 6 a); and a controller that automatically makes the attachment alternately repeat a holding motion of holding a loading object in the bucket and a release motion of releasing the loading object held in the bucket into a container (See at least abstract, [0147-0160], [0164-0170], [0187-0190] The controller 30 causes part of the excavation object lifted by the bucket 6 to fall out of the bucket 6 by slightly opening and closing the bucket 6 one or more times, namely, by slightly extending and retracting the bucket cylinder 9 one or more times. Thereafter, a target trajectory TL is determined as a virtual line segment connecting the dumping start point Ps1 and the dumping end point Pe1. Then, the opening angle of the bucket 6 is so calculated as to correspond to the position of this target trajectory TL. The controller 30 causes the excavation attachment AT to autonomously operate such that the teeth tips of the bucket 6 serving as the control reference point move along the target trajectory TL1 thus calculated. Furthermore, the controller 30 executes the bucket opening control in accordance with the movement of the teeth tips of the bucket 6 along the target trajectory TL1. The controller 30 creates the target trajectory TL for the third and subsequent dumping operations in the same manner. Specifically, the controller 30 creates the target trajectory TL for the next dumping operation if the total weight of the weight of the excavation object currently scooped into the bucket 6 and the weight of the load LD already loaded onto the bed BD of the dump truck DT is less than or equal to the maximum loading capacity of the dump truck DT. If the total weight exceeds the maximum loading capacity of the dump truck DT, the controller 30 does not create the target trajectory TL for the next dumping operation. Furthermore, the controller 30 executes the bucket opening control in accordance with the movement of the teeth tips of the bucket 6 along the target trajectory TL2. Specifically, FIGS. 7C and 7D illustrate the shape of the load LD formed when the controller 30 executes the bucket opening control while moving the teeth tips of the bucket 6 along the target trajectory TL2.), wherein: the release motion is selected from among a plurality of candidate motions (See at least abstract, [0155-0162], [0187-0189] A target trajectory TL2 for the second dumping operation is an example of the target trajectory TL. The interval RS for the target trajectory TL2 may be a value different from the interval RS for the target trajectory TL1. The interval FS for the target trajectory TL2 may be a value different from the interval FS for the target trajectory TL1. Specifically, the controller 30 causes part of the excavation object lifted by the bucket 6 to fall out of the bucket 6 by slightly opening and closing the bucket 6 one or more times, namely, by slightly extending and retracting the bucket cylinder 9 one or more times.), which are different from each other in a planar area, which is an area in plan view, of the loading object to be loaded into the container by each candidate motion and spread in the container (See at least abstract, [0150-0155], [0158-0168], [0174], [0187-0190] The height H1 is calculated such that the volume of a cuboid expressed as the product of the length Lt (L1), the height Ht (H1), and the width Wt is equal to the volume of the excavation object scooped into the bucket 6 a. The width Wt is a value corresponding to the width of the bucket 6. The interval RS for the target trajectory TL2 may be a value different from the interval RS for the target trajectory TL1. The interval FS for the target trajectory TL2 may be a value different from the interval FS for the target trajectory TL1. The load LD1 has substantially the same shape as a cuboid of the length L1, the width Wt, and the height H1. In FIG. 7B, the shape of the load LD1 formed by the first dumping operation is indicated by a cross pattern. The load LD2 has substantially the same shape as a cuboid of the length L2, the width Wt, and the height H2. In FIGS. 7C and 7D, the shape of the load LD2 formed by the second dumping operation is indicated by a pattern of downward diagonal lines. The controller 30 creates the target trajectory TL for the third and subsequent dumping operations in the same manner. Specifically, the height H1 is calculated such that the volume of a cuboid expressed as the product of the length Lt (L1), the height Ht (H1), and the width Wt is equal to the volume of the excavation object scooped into the bucket 6 immediately before the performance of the first dumping operation. Examiner notes the differing length and width is the differing planar area. The controller 30 starts moving the teeth tips of the bucket 6 along the target trajectory TL3 upon having shaken the bucket 6 a predetermined number of times, irrespective of whether the space SP1 is filled with part of the excavation object lifted by the bucket 6. The controller 30, however, may continue shaking the bucket 6 until determining that the space SP1 is filled with part of the excavation object).
Wu does not explicitly disclose the controller is configured to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions in accordance with a state in the container. However, Yamada teaches the controller is configured to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions in accordance with a state in the container (See at least abstract, [0025-0030] The loading operation calculation unit 54 calculates the loading operation of the hydraulic excavator 1 based on the correlation calculated by the correlation calculation unit 53 and the target shape of the load 42 loaded on the carrier 41. Then, the loading operation instruction unit 55 transmits an operation signal for the loading operation calculated by the loading operation calculation unit 54 to the vehicle body controller 19. Two load shapes including the load shape before the loading operation and the load shape after the loading operation may be acquired by the shape acquiring unit 52 and the correlation may be obtained by the correlation calculation unit 53 based on the load shape before the loading operation and the load shape after the loading operation. The vehicle body controller 19 generates an instruction for the boom cylinder 16, the arm cylinder 17, and the bucket cylinder 18 based on the operation signal transmitted from the loading operation instruction unit 55. Accordingly, the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15 can be controlled at arbitrary rotation postures. Further, the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15 can perform arbitrary operations changing with time by sequentially changing the rotation postures of the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Wu to incorporate the teachings of Yamada which teaches the controller is configured to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions in accordance with a state in the container since they are directed to work machine dumping operations and incorporation of Yamada would improve the evenness of the load distribution within the container.
Regarding claim 2, Wu as modified by Yamada discloses wherein the plurality of candidate motions include a motion of releasing the loading object while fixing a relative position of a part of the bucket to the machine body in a longitudinal direction of the attachment (See at least Wu abstract, Fig. 1, [0185-0190], [0226-00237] Furthermore, when the teeth tips of the bucket 6 reach the dumping start point Ps3, the controller 30 executes bucket shaking control before moving the teeth tips of the bucket 6 along the target trajectory TL3. The controller 30 causes part of the excavation object lifted by the bucket 6 to fall out of the bucket 6 by slightly opening and closing the bucket 6 one or more times, namely, by slightly extending and retracting the bucket cylinder 9 one or more times. The controller 30 may also cause part of the excavation object lifted by the bucket 6 to fall out of the bucket 6 by shaking the bucket 6 by moving at least one of the boom 4, the arm 5, and the bucket 6 one or more times. The target trajectory TL is desirably set along the longitudinal direction of the dump truck DT. Furthermore, the target trajectory TL is set at a predetermined height along the bottom surface of the bed BD of the dump truck DT. According to this configuration, the controller 30 can efficiently dump the excavation object scooped into the bucket 6 onto the bed BD of the dump truck DT. Completing the dumping operation, the controller 30 next swings the upper swing structure 3 as indicated by the arrow to move the bucket 6 to a position directly above an excavation position as illustrated in (G) of FIG. 13.).
Regarding claim 3, Wu as modified by Yamada discloses wherein the plurality of candidate motions include a motion of releasing the loading object while moving the bucket in the longitudinal direction of the attachment with respect to the container (See at least Wu abstract, [0216-0220], [0227-0230], [0235-0238] The target trajectory TL is desirably set along the longitudinal direction of the dump truck DT. According to this configuration, the controller 30 can efficiently dump the excavation object scooped into the bucket 6 onto the bed BD of the dump truck DT. Thereafter, completing the boom raising and swing operation, the controller 30 next opens the arm 5 and the bucket 6 to discharge the earth in the bucket 6 onto the bed BD of the dump truck DT as illustrated in (F) of FIG. 13. In this earth discharging operation (dumping operation), the controller 30 may open only the bucket 6 to discharge the earth. Specifically, the controller 30 causes part of the excavation object lifted by the bucket 6 to fall out of the bucket 6 by slightly opening and closing the bucket 6 one or more times, namely, by slightly extending and retracting the bucket cylinder 9 one or more times. The controller 30 may also cause part of the excavation object lifted by the bucket 6 to fall out of the bucket 6 by shaking the bucket 6 by moving at least one of the boom 4, the arm 5, and the bucket 6 one or more times.).
Regarding claim 4, Wu does not explicitly disclose further comprising a state acquisition device that acquires information about a state in the container, wherein the controller is configured to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions based on the information acquired by the state acquisition device. However, Yamada teaches further comprising a state acquisition device that acquires information about a state in the container (See at least abstract, [0009-0012], [0022-0024] A shape acquiring unit 52 which acquires a shape of the load 42 loaded on the carrier 41 after the loading operation. A stereo camera 25 which acquires shapes of a loading object disposed in the upper turning body 11 and a load 42 loaded on the loading object, and a calculation device 26. The stereo camera 25 is a device which includes two or more cameras and measures a distance from a subject to the stereo camera 25 based on an image captured by the plurality of cameras. Instead of the stereo camera 25, one or more sensors exhibiting the same effect as the stereo camera 25 may be provided. For example, the stereo camera 25 may be replaced by a laser sensor or a time of flight (TOF) type distance image camera. The loading object is set as a carrier 41 of the dump truck 4 and the load 42 is set as an excavated substance loaded on the carrier 41. Additionally, the loading object is not limited to the carrier 41 of the dump truck 4 and may be, for example, a ground or the like. In addition, the calculation device 26 acquires a shape of the carrier 41 or the load 42 from the stereo camera 25. Then, the calculation device 26 performs a calculation for obtaining a correlation of the acquired rotation posture or shape, plans an excavated substance loading operation based on the correlation), wherein the controller is configured to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions based on the information acquired by the state acquisition device (See at least abstract, [0022-0030], [0036-0045] In addition, the calculation device 26 acquires a shape of the carrier 41 or the load 42 from the stereo camera 25. Then, the calculation device 26 performs a calculation for obtaining a correlation of the acquired rotation posture or shape, plans an excavated substance loading operation based on the correlation. The loading operation calculation unit 54 calculates the loading operation of the hydraulic excavator 1 based on the correlation calculated by the correlation calculation unit 53 and the target shape of the load 42 loaded on the carrier 41. Then, the loading operation instruction unit 55 transmits an operation signal for the loading operation calculated by the loading operation calculation unit 54 to the vehicle body controller 19. Two load shapes including the load shape before the loading operation and the load shape after the loading operation may be acquired by the shape acquiring unit 52 and the correlation may be obtained by the correlation calculation unit 53 based on the load shape before the loading operation and the load shape after the loading operation. The vehicle body controller 19 generates an instruction for the boom cylinder 16, the arm cylinder 17, and the bucket cylinder 18 based on the operation signal transmitted from the loading operation instruction unit 55. Accordingly, the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15 can be controlled at arbitrary rotation postures. Further, the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15 can perform arbitrary operations changing with time by sequentially changing the rotation postures of the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15. The operation recording unit 51 acquires the three-dimensional shape of the load 42 loaded on the carrier 41 before the loading operation from the stereo camera 25. Next, the outline (for example, 42 a) on the XZ plane of the load 42 is extracted from the acquired three-dimensional shape. The bucket rotation posture θk can be obtained by the input of the load shape Zk before the loading operation, the target load shape Zk+1, and the horizontal speed Vk of the bucket claw. That is, when the horizontal speed of the bucket claw is determined at the time of determining the load shape before the loading operation and the target shape, it is possible to obtain the bucket rotation posture having the target load shape. Additionally, when the initial position of the loading operation is given at the time of determining the horizontal speed of the bucket claw and the bucket rotation posture, the loading operations of the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15 are determined at the same time). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Wu to incorporate the teachings of Yamada which teaches further comprising a state acquisition device that acquires information about a state in the container, wherein the controller is configured to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions based on the information acquired by the state acquisition device since they are directed to work machine dumping operations and incorporation of Yamada would improve the accuracy and reliability when each loading operation is planned.
Regarding claim 6, Wu does not explicitly disclose wherein the state acquisition device acquires a shape of the loading object having been loaded into the container as the information about the state in the container, and the controller is configured to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions based on comparison of the shape of the loading object acquired by the state acquisition device with a preset target shape. However, Yamada teaches wherein the state acquisition device acquires a shape of the loading object having been loaded into the container as the information about the state in the container (See at least abstract, [0022-0030], [0032-0036] A stereo camera 25 which acquires shapes of a loading object disposed in the upper turning body 11 and a load 42 loaded on the loading object, and a calculation device 26. The shape acquiring unit 52 acquires a shape of the load 42 loaded on the carrier 41 after the loading operation. The operation system 100 includes an operation recording unit 51, a shape acquiring unit 52, a correlation calculation unit 53, and a loading operation calculation unit 54. Referring to FIG. 3, a process of the calculation device 26 in the case where the carrier 41 is a plane, that is, the load 42 is not loaded on the carrier 41 will be described. Since the loading operation of the hydraulic excavator 1 is performed a plurality of times for the same dump truck 4, there are a plurality of load shapes of the load 42. The outline (for example, 42 a) on the XZ plane of the load 42 is extracted from the acquired three-dimensional shape. Further, the three-dimensional shape of the load 42 is acquired by the stereo camera 25 similarly to the case before the loading operation), and the controller is configured to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions based on comparison of the shape of the loading object acquired by the state acquisition device with a preset target shape (See at least abstract, [0007-0010], [0026-0030], [0043-0046] An object of the invention is to highly accurately plan the load loading operation by the working machine so that the load after the load loading operation has the target shape. The loading operation calculation unit 54 calculates the loading operation of the hydraulic excavator 1 based on the correlation calculated by the correlation calculation unit 53 and the target shape of the load 42 loaded on the carrier 41. Based on the target shape in addition to the correlation calculated by the correlation calculation unit 53, the loading operation for the target shape can be calculated. Then, the loading operation instruction unit 55 transmits an operation signal for the loading operation calculated by the loading operation calculation unit 54 to the vehicle body controller 19. The vehicle body controller 19 generates an instruction for the boom cylinder 16, the arm cylinder 17, and the bucket cylinder 18 based on the operation signal transmitted from the loading operation instruction unit 55. Accordingly, the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15 can be controlled at arbitrary rotation postures. Further, the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15 can perform arbitrary operations changing with time by sequentially changing the rotation postures of the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15. The bucket rotation posture θk can be obtained by the input of the load shape Zk before the loading operation, the target load shape Zk+1, and the horizontal speed Vk of the bucket claw. That is, when the horizontal speed of the bucket claw is determined at the time of determining the load shape before the loading operation and the target shape, it is possible to obtain the bucket rotation posture having the target load shape. Additionally, when the initial position of the loading operation is given at the time of determining the horizontal speed of the bucket claw and the bucket rotation posture, the loading operations of the boom 13, the arm 14, and the bucket 15 are determined at the same time). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Wu to incorporate the teachings of Yamada which teaches wherein the state acquisition device acquires a shape of the loading object having been loaded into the container as the information about the state in the container, and the controller is configured to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions based on comparison of the shape of the loading object acquired by the state acquisition device with a preset target shape since they are directed to work machine dumping operations and incorporation of Yamada would improve the reliability and accuracy of a more optimal corresponding load operations.
Claim(s) 5, 7, 10, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US 20220195690 A1) in view of Yamada (US 20180171582 A1), and further in view of Dunbabin (US 20120191431 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Wu as modified by Yamada does not explicitly disclose wherein the state acquisition device acquires, as the information about the state in the container, a planar area of a space into which the loading object is to be loaded by the next release motion in the container. However, Dunbabin teaches wherein the state acquisition device (See at least abstract, [0055-0060] A laser scanning system 40 is mounted near the top of the boom 18 to collect data for a control and planning system. For instance, it should be noted that the invention is not limited to the use of laser scanners, but that any other suitable scanning range finder could be used; including radar, ultrasonic and stereo camera systems) acquires, as the information about the state in the container, a planar area of a space into which the loading object is to be loaded by the next release motion in the container (See at least abstract, [0055-0065], [0092-0097], [0106-0112], [0150-0160], [0166] A laser scanning system 40 is mounted near the top of the boom 18 to collect data for a control and planning system. The laser scanning system 40 comprises two range scanning sensors to scan the shovel's surrounds, including the dig face, as the machine swings. For instance, it should be noted that the invention is not limited to the use of laser scanners, but that any other suitable scanning range finder could be used; including radar, ultrasonic and stereo camera systems. The ‘3-dimensional’ methods for finding the truck tray extend the 2-dimensional method and allow the determination of the position and orientation of the tray, as well as segmentation of the ‘fillable’ area of the tray. These methods rely on the idea of height encoded occupancy grids and image processing techniques. Together with the scanning laser range finder, enables the construction of a point cloud representation of the environment. The height of the terrain at each cell and instead of encoding a probability of occupancy in each cell's value, we encode the terrain height. Also shown, FIG. 8( b), is a 3-D plot of the data. The occupancy grid can be treated as an image but it must be remembered that in its use here it is a Cartesian representation of the environment's structure. Identifying the ‘fillable’ region of the tray is required to constrain the search for optimal loading positions. Finding the coordinates of the fillable area in the tray involves a thresholding of the truck/tray image such that the fillable area of the tray is highlighted. The coordinates of the corners of the fillable part of the tray can then be found using the same process described in Step 3. The algorithm described here relies on knowledge of the fillable area coordinates, an empty tray needs to be the scanned prior to creation of the ‘ideally’ filled tray. The cone of material is ‘pushed’ into the tray by incrementally increasing the cone's height offset and combining this image with the image of the tray. Push the cone into the tray until such time as the difference between the current estimated tray volume and the estimated volume with the new pile of material is equal to the volume contained in a normal bucket load. If it isn't possible to get a complete bucket of material into the tray at this position, then continue to the next coordinate pair.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Wu as modified by Yamada to incorporate the teachings of Dunbabin which teaches wherein the state acquisition device acquires, as the information about the state in the container, a planar area of a space into which the loading object is to be loaded by the next release motion in the container since they are all directed to work machine dumping operations and incorporation of Dunbabin would improve reliability and accuracy of loading and dumping the loaded object.
Regarding claim 7, Wu as modified by Yamada does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container and to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions based on the estimated state in the container. However, Dunbabin teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container (See at least abstract, [0108-0110], [0131-0146], Some key features of the loading strategies include the ability to: Estimate multi-pass loading profiles. 6. Evaluate a cost function which considers loading profile, spillage, bucket volumes. 7. Re-evaluate loading profile and volume at each pass. It is generally of importance to estimate the volume of the tray and the volume remaining after each consecutive dumping. A procedure was developed to predict the load distribution from the number of passes (np) ahead of current pass. This can be updated at any time during the loading process. The function hovel_load_tray_estimate_fill_height calculates the anticipated material height in the tray after dumping a bucket of volume Vb centred around point xs with array index is. If Vdirt=Vb, then the procedure is stopped and the estimated load distribution (znew) is returned. If it is determined that there is spillage of material either over the front or rear of the tray before the bucket volume is reached, a spilledDirt flag is set and that dump location is is considered invalid. Once a bucket of dirt is determined validly dumped into the tray, the load distribution is evaluated by a cost function which determines the squared weighted difference between an assumed ‘ideal’ loading profile and the estimated profile) and to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions based on the estimated state in the container (See at least abstract, [0009-0015], [0144-0152] In multi-pass filling, the above sequence is repeated by firstly placing a bucket at a position is, and then keeping this distribution constant, another bucket is placed at various locations and a new distribution calculated. This can be repeated as many times as considered feasible. The load distribution is evaluated by a cost function which determines the squared weighted difference between an assumed ‘ideal’ loading profile and the estimated profile. The optimal solution is taken as the minimal Jqp for multiple dumping positions over the entire length of the tray. The two dump locations, xp and xq that minimise Jpq over the entire tray are taken as the dumping points to for the bucket, x1 and x2 respectively. The swing angles of the dump location are then determined. FIG. 12 shows the estimated optimized loading distribution after two full buckets have been dumped into the tray. It can be seen that the material is dumped without spillage from the rear of the tray, and there is minimal over cabin loading.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Wu as modified by Yamada to incorporate the teachings of Dunbabin which teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container and to select the release motion from the plurality of candidate motions based on the estimated state in the container since they are all directed to work machine dumping operations and incorporation of Dunbabin would improve the reliability and accuracy of the loading and releasing of the loaded object over successive passes.
Regarding claim 10, Wu as modified by Yamada does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on comparison of a volume of the loading object having been loaded in the container with a preset target volume. However, Dunbabin teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on comparison of a volume of the loading object having been loaded in the container with a preset target volume (See at least abstract, [0108-0110], [0130-0145] Once all the tray identification scans have been stashed in the variables x[50] and z[50], the minimum and maximum heights are determined, zmin and zmax respectively. It is generally of importance to estimate the volume of the tray and the volume remaining after each consecutive dumping. The empty volume (Ve) can be estimated as: Ve=[≃inb(zmax-zi)wt]/x where zi is the height at xi (bin i) and wt is the average of the tray width dr determined using the 2-dimensional method. This simplified volume estimation assumes that the loading is based on the inside volume of a line 120 at the maximum height of the tray as shown in FIG. 10. o predict the load distribution the procedure assumes: 1. The bucket is filled to its maximum capacity with volume Vb. The idea here is to ‘grow’ the triangle 130 from the bottom of the tray 132 until the volume enclosed by the loaded material and the original profile of the truck tray 134 equals the bucket volume. In order to effectively load a truck tray, a loading strategy is required that ensures a desired loading profile is maintained and that the truck is loaded as close to its capacity as possible. Some key features of the loading strategies include the ability to: 1. Maximize truck volume loading. 6. Evaluate a cost function which considers loading profile, spillage, bucket volumes.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Wu as modified by Yamada to incorporate the teachings of Dunbabin which teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on comparison of a volume of the loading object having been loaded in the container with a preset target volume since they are all directed to work machine dumping operations and incorporation of Dunbabin would improve the reliability and utilization of the container’s available capacity.
Regarding claim 11, Wu as modified by Yamada does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on a position at which the next release motion is performed in the container. However, Dunbabin teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on a position at which the next release motion is performed in the container (See at least abstract, [0108], [0138-0146], [0155-0160] In order to effectively load a truck tray, a loading strategy is required that ensures a desired loading profile is maintained and that the truck is loaded as close to its capacity as possible. Some key features of the loading strategies include the ability to: 1. Maximise truck volume loading. 5. Estimate multi-pass loading profiles. 6. Evaluate a cost function which considers loading profile, spillage, bucket volumes. 7. Re-evaluate loading profile and volume at each pass. the first step is repeated for two different loading points, then the cost function is evaluated. The function hovel_load_tray_estimate_fill_height calculates the anticipated material height in the tray after dumping a bucket of volume Vb centred around point xs with array index is. eferring to FIG. 11 the height at is is given as h=i s x tan ∥R and the total height hj from is towards the front of the tray at index j is given by h j =h−tan ∥R(x i −x iS) z +j =Z j −z min where z+j is the material height within the tray. then new total height of the material in the tray (znewj) is stored and the volume of the segment (dV+) is given. In multi-pass filling, the above sequence is repeated by firstly placing a bucket at a position is, and then keeping this distribution constant, another bucket is placed at various locations and a new distribution calculated. This can be repeated as many times as considered feasible. At each load position, the ‘cone’ of material is pushed into the tray until such time as the difference between the current tray volume and the estimated tray volume with the new pile of material is equal to the volume contained in a normal bucket load. If it is a multi-pass fill: (a) For each of the drop zone coordinates: (i.) Push the cone into the tray until such time as the difference between the current estimated tray volume and the estimated volume with the new pile of material is equal to the volume contained in a normal bucket load. If it isn't possible to get a complete bucket of material into the tray at this position, then continue to the next coordinate pair. ii. Calculate the ‘cost’ of the new tray, storing the position with the lowest cost. Cost is defined as being the volume difference between the currently estimated loaded tray and the ideal tray. The cost function also contains a term to drive the load position towards a centred position in the tray. Given an optimal loading position(s), use the same process to estimate the load at the selected position, again by pushing a cone into the tray). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Wu as modified by Yamada to incorporate the teachings of Dunbabin which teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on a position at which the next release motion is performed in the container since they are all directed to work machine dumping operations and incorporation of Dunbabin would improve the reliability and accuracy of the placement of each load.
Claim(s) 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US 20220195690 A1) in view of Yamada (US 20180171582 A1), further in view of Dunbabin (US 20120191431 A1), and further in view of Hoshino (US 20200041331 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Wu as modified by Yamada and Dunbabin does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on comparison of the number of times the holding motion and the release motion have been repeated and a preset target number of times. However, Hoshino teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on comparison of the number of times the holding motion and the release motion have been repeated and a preset target number of times (See at least abstract, [0035-0045], [0050-0055] a bucket shape setting section 21 for performing input setting of bucket shape information indicative of a shape of the bucket 7, and a loading time number setting section 61 for performing inputting of a set loading time number n indicative of a loading time number (a number of times of a loading work) required for the hydraulic excavator 1 before the weight of working objects to be loaded into the dump truck reaches the target loading weight P. Examiner notes n as the preset target number of times. k indicates a number of times of a loading work having been performed for the dump truck, and the remaining loading time number n is a value obtained by subtracting k from the set loading time number (an initial value of n) inputted by the loading time number setting section 61. Then, the loading weight calculation section 27 divides the remaining loading weight Pa by the remaining loading time number n to calculate the appropriate loading weight Wa that is an appropriate value of the weight of the working objects to be loaded into the dump truck by the next time loading work by the hydraulic excavator. Here, in the case where a bucket dumping action is detected, it is considered that soil discharging action to the dump truck is being performed, and the processing advances to step S114, at which the remaining loading time number is decremented by one. At step S115, it is decided whether or not the remaining loading time number reaches zero. Here, in the case where the remaining loading time number is not zero, the processing advances to step S116, at which the integrated loading weight ΣWk is calculated by the load calculation section 26. At step S118, k is incremented by 1, and at step S105, the appropriate loading weight Wa is calculated again. The set loading time number n inputted through the loading time number setting section 61 is displayed as a loading time number 43.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Wu as modified by Yamada and Dunbabin to incorporate the teachings of Hoshino which teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on comparison of the number of times the holding motion and the release motion have been repeated and a preset target number of times since they are all directed to work machine dumping operations and incorporation of Hoshino would improve the ability to fill the container to its intended load without overloading it.
Regarding claim 9, Wu as modified by Yamada and Dunbabin does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on comparison of a mass of the loading object having been loaded into the container with a preset target mass. However, Hoshino teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on comparison of a mass of the loading object having been loaded into the container with a preset target mass (See at least abstract, [0036-0045], [0050-0060] The inputting device 50 is, for example, ten keys, a touch panel, a keyboard and so forth and includes a target loading weight setting section 20 for performing input setting of a target loading weight P that is a target value of the total weight of working objects to be loaded into a dump track. From the point of view of maximization of the efficiency of the loading work, preferably the maximum loading weight of the dump truck to be used in the loading work is set to the target loading weight P. At step S102, a target loading weight P and a loading time number n of a dump truck of a transport destination set by the operator are inputted through the target loading weight setting section 20 and the loading time number setting section 61. At step S111, the load calculation section 26 calculates an actual loading weight Wk on the basis of signals inputted from the posture sensor 101 and the pressure sensor 102, and at step S112, the value of the actual loading weight Wk is displayed as an excavation amount 33 on the display device 19. The load calculation section 26 calculates, during action of the front work implement 4, an actual loading weight Wk that is the weight of working objects (earth and sand, ore or the like) in the bucket 7 during transportation on the basis of signals from the sensors of the posture sensor 101 and the pressure sensor 102, and outputs the calculated actual loading weight Wk to the display device 19 and the loading weight calculation section 27. The remaining loading weight Pa is a value obtained by subtracting an integrated value (ΣWk, where k, =1, 2, 3, . . . ) of the actual loading weight Wk that is the weight of working objects loaded already in the dump truck from the target loading weight P (Pa=P−ΣWk). Since this makes it possible to easily make the loading weight of a dump truck closer to the target loading weight P (for example, a maximum loading weight), the working efficiency can be improved. Since the appropriate loading weight Wa and the loading time number are corrected in response to the integrated value (ΣWk) of the actual loading weight Wk, even if the working objects of a weight different from the initial appropriate loading weight Wa are loaded in the middle of a loading work, the final loading weight of the dump truck can be made closer to the target loading weight P. Aappropriate amount illustrations 30 of buckets each corresponding to the respective ratios Wb that are ratios of the appropriate loading weight to a maximum weight (hereinafter referred to “bucket capacity” for the convenience of description) Wcap of working objects that can be loaded into the bucket are stored in advance in the storage device 40. ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have modified Wu as modified by Yamada and Dunbabin to incorporate the teachings of Hoshino which teaches wherein the controller is configured to estimate a state in the container based on comparison of a mass of the loading object having been loaded into the container with a preset target mass since they are all directed to work machine dumping operations and incorporation of Hoshino would improve reliability and accuracy with which the container is filled to its intended load.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LABIBAH I. ALI whose telephone number is (571)272-6738. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Faris Almatrahi can be reached at (313) 446-4821. 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.
/LABIBAH ILMA ALI/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/SAHAR MOTAZEDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667
Prosecution Insights