Appeal 2007-0939
Application 10/931,274
Claims 20 and 22
We consider next the Examiner’s rejection of dependent claims 20
and 22 as being anticipated by Kojima.
Appellants argue that the Examiner has not shown that Kojima’s
ARCTAN function provides an indication of motor impedance angle (Br. 5).
The Examiner disagrees. The Examiner asserts that Kojima discloses
in fig. 8 (and corresponding description) that the output of block 21b is the
rotational angle [i.e., corresponding to the phase angle, see Kojima, col. 10,
l. 67 through col. 11, l. 2] (Answer 6).
We note that the “θ1” output of “tan-1 COMPUTING UNIT 41” is
shown in Fig. 7 as the single output of “PHASE CORRECTION SETTING
CONTROL UNIT 21b” that feeds the rotational angle (i.e., phase correction
value) “θ1” (col. 11, ll. 2-3, col. 6, l. 30) into “TWO PHASE/THREE
PHASE CONVERTER 4” (i.e., corresponding to the recited “second
transmission block” of claim 1). (See Kojima, col. 10, l. 67 through col. 11,
l. 11).
In particular, we note that “La 36” represents the motor armature
winding self inductance (see Fig. 8, element 36, col. 2, ll. 24, 34-35). In
addition, “Ra 39” represents the motor armature winding resistance (see Fig.
8, element 39, col. 10, ll. 61-63). Because inductance (i.e., a positive
reactance) and resistance are components of impedance, we find that
Kojima’s phase correction value “θ1” is representative of the motor
impedance angle, i.e., where the ARCTAN of signal components (La/Ra) is
the phase angle (col. 10, l. 67 through col. 11, l. 2). Therefore, we agree
with the Examiner that the recited language (i.e., “wherein said ARCTAN
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013