Appeal No. 97-1840 Page 12
Application No. 08/316,685
radial distances from the axis x-x. In view of these facts,
we conclude that Andrä's hub ring 1 and inertial ring 2 are
axially spaced in the same manner that the appellant's rings
10, 11, 12 are axially spaced.
Second, the appellant argues that Andrä's device is not a
concentric ring rotor as known in the art. We do not agree.
As clearly shown in Figure 2 of Andrä, the hub ring 1 and
inertial ring 2 define concentric rings and since Andrä's
torsional vibration damper is a rotating part of a mechanical
device it constitutes a rotor.
Third, the appellant argues that there is no teaching in
Andrä of at least one expandable separator which functions as
a torque converter as defined in claim 1. We do not agree.
In our view, the claimed expandable separator/torque coupler
"reads on" Andrä's damping element (i.e., outer ring 3, flange
ring 5 and inner ring 4) arranged in the radial space between
the hub ring 1 and the inertial ring 2. In that regard, the
damping element (1) transmits torque between the hub ring 1
and the inertial ring 2, (2) separates the hub ring 1 and the
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007