Appeal No. 97-1070
Application 08/100,418
with a pressure sensor mounted on an engine’s rubber mount (Reply Brief, pages 8 to 11). The
examiner states that Ina measures torque, and that since torque is proportional to acceleration, Ina can
be said to indirectly measure acceleration (Answer, page 4; Supplemental Answer, page 3). In other
words, the examiner alleges that sensing torque at a rubber engine mount yields results equivalent to
measuring crankshaft acceleration directly. We cannot agree with the examiner, and instead agree with
appellants that Ina measures torque and not compression.
The examiner relies on Buck (column 9, lines 35+) to show that measuring crankshaft
acceleration is a means for testing compression (Answer, page 5). As discussed earlier, we find that
Buck’s compression test embodiment (column 9, line 35 to column 11, line 14) does not
actually measure crankshaft acceleration as required by claim 1 on appeal. We also find that Buck’s
power test embodiment (column 11, line 15 to column 14, line 16) fails to determine compression or
provide a compression pressure variable as required by claim 1 on appeal.
The primary purpose of appellants’ disclosed invention is to measure crankshaft acceleration
directly in order to eliminate inaccuracies associated with transient engine operation (specification, page
2) and to avoid failing to eliminate error due to non-combustion related torque influencing the
compression measurement which is a common problem in the prior art (specification, page 3).
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007