Appeal No. 1998-1553
Application 08/595,965
Eaton discloses a fuel burner unit comprising a nozzle
composed of a fuel oil tube 36 and a surrounding atomizing air
tube 37, and tubular casings 13 and 65 disposed about the
nozzle for directing air around and into the discharged fuel
(see page 2, column 2, lines 33 through 70). The casings also
serve to
physically shield the nozzle from combustion heat and to
actively cool the nozzle via the air flowing therethrough (see
page 1, column 1, lines 34 through 52). Casing 65 includes
internally projecting fins 71 for holding it in spaced
relation to the nozzle.
In rejecting claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), the
examiner concludes that
[i]t would have been obvious to one skilled in
the art at the time of the invention to install a
frustro-conical vane [presumably as in Henderson]
onto the outer surface of the outer tubular member
of a burner [presumably Vatsky’s burner] in order to
set up a swirling or turbulent action of the
secondary air or to direct and properly focus the
secondary air to the burner outlet to improve the
mixing of air and fuel at the burner outlet, thus
enhancing the combustion process. It would have
also been obvious to substitute the fins (71) of
Eaton et al for the mounting means (26) of Henderson
et al to efficiently mount the conical vane to the
surface of the outer tubular member while reducing
the cost associated with the production of a
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007