Paper A 2018 Some explanation of our solution
A brief explanation of our choices
I will focus on the method claim shown below
The invention
I will focus on the method claim shown below
The invention
The client’s prime interest is already expressed in [02] “our new method to create protrusions on the surface of glass panes. These glass panes can be used in VIG glazing”.
[06] Our new method allows manufacturing the spacers directly on the glass panes. No separate spacers needed; spacers are manufactured from the glass pane itself: simple, less costly, improved quality. No reduction of transparency.
That seems great. How is that then done:
[07] Spacers are made by irradiating the glass panes with lasers. This gives convex protrusions at the surface of the glass pane. Should be done at several locations to obtain a glass pane with several protrusions distributed over the glass pane.
The client summarizes this ‘new’ method in [13]:
It turns out that, in particular, D1 discloses all of this.
So we need to find additional features which have an effect in order to narrow down.
[13] In order to achieve good optical properties, it is essential that the protrusions have a convex shape (hemisphere, may be flattened at its upper part). Convex shape improves transparency by 20-40%. Other shapes only 10%. 10% can also be achieved by gluing a glass hemisphere to the glass pane.
It turns out that indeed D2 shows this 10% improvement.
D2 also shows convex spacers but not monolithic, formed from a same type glass. D2 is used for VIG glass.
D1 shows monolithic but not convex: irregular shape [04].
Thus, a claim on producing a glass pane for VIG glass with monolithic, convex protrusions seems to be new and inventive.
How do we need to change the method of [13] to produce such convex protrusions?
[18] As mentioned above, the protrusions must have a convex shape in order to achieve good transparency of the glass pane. It is necessary that the solidification occurs while a stream of cooling air is provided over the surface of the glass pane. A convex form can only be achieved with such cooling.
Thus it seems necessary to include the cooling in our method. We are then new and inventive and have already one key essential feature.
Other essential features?
Lasers
[08] Our method employs photo-induced absorption of the glass, see D1.
So far, we have the use of a laser in the claim. Is that enough for photo-induced absorption?
D1 [01], [03] make clear that such absorption can be raised sufficiently by a UV- or IR-laser. Just laser beam seems to be too broad: UV and/or IR is needed. Both continuous wave and pulsed lasers can do the trick [03].
Client states in [09]: contrary to the explanation given in D1, we did not succeed in our first attempts to heat glass to the working temperature locally with a UV range continuous wave laser. We have also had a corresponding negative result with a conventional IR range continuous wave laser. We think sufficient heat can only be achieved through a long irradiation time. Such a method would however not be economical.
It is difficult to decide on this. Yes, a safe choice is to immediately go down to a pulsed laser. It seems that at least a continuous IR laser technically works. A competitor may choose that option in order not to infringe. The client only did a first attempt. It is not clear that the UV continuous laser cannot work. So we decided not to put the pulsing in as a limitation. To avoid covering non-working embodiments we added, based on [09]: “heat glass to the working temperature”. We think that the skilled person can easily figure out what laser to use and for how long, since D1 describes the options.
Perpendicular laser
[12] If the glass pane is oriented perpendicular to the plane of the laser, the result is a protrusion which forms a monolithic structure with the glass pane with a circular base.
Should that be in the claim? We decided not to based on the last sentence of [12]: Such arrangements for irradiating surfaces with lasers are furthermore known to persons skilled in the art. So, he seems to be able to figure that out.
Height
Then we also see in [18]: It is known from conventional spacers in insulating glazing that the protrusions should have a height H of 100 micrometers or more for satisfactory insulation.
Should this height be in the claim? Not so clear. If the claim makes clear that it is for VIG glazing it seems not needed; it is known what height you need. If you do not have a link to VIG glazing it seems wise to add it.
[06] Our new method allows manufacturing the spacers directly on the glass panes. No separate spacers needed; spacers are manufactured from the glass pane itself: simple, less costly, improved quality. No reduction of transparency.
That seems great. How is that then done:
[07] Spacers are made by irradiating the glass panes with lasers. This gives convex protrusions at the surface of the glass pane. Should be done at several locations to obtain a glass pane with several protrusions distributed over the glass pane.
The client summarizes this ‘new’ method in [13]:
- irradiating a glass pane with a laser beam to create a protrusion at a first location on the surface of the glass pane facing the laser,
- solidifying the protrusion by terminating the irradiation, and
- repeating the irradiation and solidification at at least one location, different from the first location, on the surface of the glass pane facing the laser.
It turns out that, in particular, D1 discloses all of this.
So we need to find additional features which have an effect in order to narrow down.
[13] In order to achieve good optical properties, it is essential that the protrusions have a convex shape (hemisphere, may be flattened at its upper part). Convex shape improves transparency by 20-40%. Other shapes only 10%. 10% can also be achieved by gluing a glass hemisphere to the glass pane.
It turns out that indeed D2 shows this 10% improvement.
D2 also shows convex spacers but not monolithic, formed from a same type glass. D2 is used for VIG glass.
D1 shows monolithic but not convex: irregular shape [04].
Thus, a claim on producing a glass pane for VIG glass with monolithic, convex protrusions seems to be new and inventive.
How do we need to change the method of [13] to produce such convex protrusions?
[18] As mentioned above, the protrusions must have a convex shape in order to achieve good transparency of the glass pane. It is necessary that the solidification occurs while a stream of cooling air is provided over the surface of the glass pane. A convex form can only be achieved with such cooling.
Thus it seems necessary to include the cooling in our method. We are then new and inventive and have already one key essential feature.
Other essential features?
Lasers
[08] Our method employs photo-induced absorption of the glass, see D1.
So far, we have the use of a laser in the claim. Is that enough for photo-induced absorption?
D1 [01], [03] make clear that such absorption can be raised sufficiently by a UV- or IR-laser. Just laser beam seems to be too broad: UV and/or IR is needed. Both continuous wave and pulsed lasers can do the trick [03].
Client states in [09]: contrary to the explanation given in D1, we did not succeed in our first attempts to heat glass to the working temperature locally with a UV range continuous wave laser. We have also had a corresponding negative result with a conventional IR range continuous wave laser. We think sufficient heat can only be achieved through a long irradiation time. Such a method would however not be economical.
It is difficult to decide on this. Yes, a safe choice is to immediately go down to a pulsed laser. It seems that at least a continuous IR laser technically works. A competitor may choose that option in order not to infringe. The client only did a first attempt. It is not clear that the UV continuous laser cannot work. So we decided not to put the pulsing in as a limitation. To avoid covering non-working embodiments we added, based on [09]: “heat glass to the working temperature”. We think that the skilled person can easily figure out what laser to use and for how long, since D1 describes the options.
Perpendicular laser
[12] If the glass pane is oriented perpendicular to the plane of the laser, the result is a protrusion which forms a monolithic structure with the glass pane with a circular base.
Should that be in the claim? We decided not to based on the last sentence of [12]: Such arrangements for irradiating surfaces with lasers are furthermore known to persons skilled in the art. So, he seems to be able to figure that out.
Height
Then we also see in [18]: It is known from conventional spacers in insulating glazing that the protrusions should have a height H of 100 micrometers or more for satisfactory insulation.
Should this height be in the claim? Not so clear. If the claim makes clear that it is for VIG glazing it seems not needed; it is known what height you need. If you do not have a link to VIG glazing it seems wise to add it.
SHARE:
