Appeal No. 94-2299
Application No. 07/623,324
processing pseudocompressibility equations for block
102 at node B (i.e., a boundary node for block 102),
node B is updated by the difference between its
value as a boundary node and its value as an
interior node 101i in block 101. In this way,
blocks 101 and 102 are coupled prior to equating the
pseudocompressibility solution according to a
central finite differencing method described in the
Appellant’s specification at page 11, line 22-26.
It is respectfully submitted that the Examiner’s
contention that “it would take countless man/hours
to develop the invention” as presently claimed is
unfounded. As pointed out above, the solving of
pseudocompressibility equations in an iterative
fashion has been known since 1967 (see page 2, line
17 to page 3, line 2). Since that time, grid models
of flow regions have been developed as discrete
mathematical pieces that introduce artificial
boundaries in the flow region. It is submitted that
the Appellant’s claimed method overcomes this
deficiency by coupling the adjoining blocks thereby
removing the artificial boundaries to allow the
solution to converge more quickly. Thus, known
iterative processing techniques for solving the
pseudocompressibility equations need only be updated
with the Appellant’s claimed method. Furthermore,
Appellant is neither claiming nor is limited by a
particular data processing system. Accordingly, any
high speed processor capable of handling the volume
of equations may be used.
We agree. The lack of enablement rejection is reversed
because the examiner has not made a convincing showing that
the “countless man/hours to develop the invention as presently
claimed” would amount to undue experimentation.
As indicated supra, the disclosed and claimed invention
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007