Appeal No. 2004-0278 Page 2
Application No. 09/626,362
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention generally relates to automatic calibration of a robot in a
processing system (specification, p. 1). A copy of the dependent claims under appeal is
set forth in the appendix to the appellant's brief.1 Claims 6 and 10, the independent
claims under appeal, read as follows:
6. A method for calibrating a robot in a processing chamber, comprising:
a) determining a useable free-space in the processing chamber;
b) positioning an emitter at a target point;
c) positioning a receiver at a point on an end effector of the robot;
d) determining a distance between the point on the end effector of the
robot and the target point using signals from the emitter and the receiver; and
e) determining a path from the point on the end effector of the robot and
the target point, using a path planning algorithm that minimizes a distance
function between the point on the end effector of the robot and the target point
within the useable free space.
10. An apparatus for calibrating a robot in a processing system, comprising:
a) a sensor disposed at a location to be taught;
b) a receiver disposed on a robot end effector; and
c) a microprocessor connected to receive signals from the sensor and the
receiver to determine a distance between the sensor and the receiver, wherein
the microprocessor generates a path using incremental movements that
minimizes the distance between the sensor and the receiver.
1 Claim 18 reads as follows: The method of claim 10, the path generated is within an useable
free-space of the processing system. However, parent claim 10 is not a method claim but an apparatus
claim. The appellant may wish to amend claim 18 to read as follows: The apparatus of claim 10 wherein
the path generated is within an useable free-space of the processing system.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007