Appeal No. 1998-1078 Page 7
Application No. 08/442,532
desired output of the motor." (Examiner's Answer at 4.) He
then alleges, "it would have been obvious ... to have shifted
the frequency generating magnets of the admitted prior art to
obtain a desired torque ripple/output signal timing
relationship to optimize the motor characteristics for a
specific application." (Id.) The appellants argue, "there is
no recognition whatsoever in the prior art of a relationship
between a trigger point for rotation control and torque ripple
of the motor. Imai et al. are completely silent with respect
to torque ripple of the motor." (Appeal Br. at 6.)
Claims 1 and 3 specify in pertinent part the following
limitations: "relative positions of said stator core, said
driving magnet pole portion, said FG magnetized portion, and
said FG pattern in a circumferential direction are set so that
a minimum point of a torque ripple of said brushless motor
always occurs at a different time than a point of an output
signal from said FG pattern, said point of said output signal
functioning as a trigger for rotation control." Similarly,
claims 2 and 4 specify in pertinent part the following
limitations: "relative positions of said stator core, said
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007