5.4.2.4 Example 4 

Claim 1:

A computer-implemented method of determining areas in which there is an increased risk of condensation for a surface in a building comprising the steps of:

(a)controlling an infrared (IR) camera to capture an image of the temperature distribution of the surface; 

(b)receiving mean values for the air temperature and the relative air humidity measured inside the building over the last 24 hours; 

(c)calculating, based on said mean air temperature and mean relative air humidity, a condensation temperature at which there is a risk of condensation on the surface; 

(d)comparing the temperature at each point on the image to said calculated condensation temperature; 

(e)identifying the image points having a temperature lower than the calculated condensation temperature as areas at increased risk of condensation on the surface; and 

(f)modifying the image by colouring the image points identified in step (e) in a particular colour to indicate the areas at increased risk of condensation to a user. 

Application of the steps of the problem-solution approach according to G‑VII, 5.4:

Step (i): The control of an IR camera in step (a) clearly makes a technical contribution. The question is whether steps (b) to (f) also contribute to the technical character of the claimed subject-matter.

Considered in isolation, steps (b) to (e) relate to algorithmic/mathematical steps and step (f) defines a presentation of information. However, the claim is not directed to a mental act, a mathematical method or presentation of information as such (which would be excluded from patentability under Art. 52(2)(a), (c), (d) and Art. 52(3)) because the claimed subject-matter involves technical means such as a computer.

Therefore, it has to be assessed whether the algorithmic and mathematical steps as well as the step related to presentation of information do, in the context of the invention, contribute to producing a technical effect, thereby contributing to the technical character of the invention.

Since the above-mentioned algorithmic and mathematical steps (b) to (e) are used to predict the physical state (condensation) of an existing real object (surface) from measurements of physical properties (IR image, measured air temperature and relative air humidity over time), they contribute to a technical effect serving a technical purpose. This applies regardless of what use is made of the output information about the risk of condensation on the surface (see G‑II, 3.3, in particular subsection "Technical applications"). Thus, steps (b) to (e) contribute also to the technical character of the invention.

A decision on whether step (f) makes a technical contribution is deferred to step (iii) below.

Step (ii): Document D1 discloses a method for monitoring a surface to determine the risk of condensation forming on it. The risk of condensation is determined based on the difference of the temperature reading obtained via an IR pyrometer for a single point on the surface and the condensation temperature calculated based on the actual ambient air temperature and the relative air humidity. The numerical value of the difference is then shown to a user as an indication of the likelihood of condensation at said point. This document is taken as the closest prior art.

Step (iii): The differences between the subject-matter of claim 1 and D1 are:

(1) an IR camera is used (instead of the IR pyrometer of D1, which only captures the temperature at a single point of the surface);

(2) mean values for air temperature and relative air humidity measured inside the building over the last 24 hours are received;

(3) the condensation temperature is calculated on the basis of the mean air temperature and mean relative air humidity and compared to the temperature at each point on the IR image of the surface;

(4) image points having a temperature lower than the calculated condensation temperature are identified as areas at increased risk of condensation on the surface;

(5) colours are used to indicate areas at increased risk of condensation.

As mentioned above, distinguishing features (1)-(4) contribute to the technical character of the claimed subject-matter and must be taken into consideration for the formulation of the technical problem. These features produce the technical effect of a more precise and reliable prediction of the risk of condensation as a result of considering all surface areas (as opposed to a single point) and accounting for temperature variations during a day.

Distinguishing feature (5) defines a particular manner of presenting information to a user (Art. 52(2)(d)) which does not produce a technical effect since any effect of the choice of displaying data using colours rather than numerical values depends on subjective preferences of the user: some users may prefer the former and other the latter (see G‑II, 3.7). This feature thus does not make a technical contribution. It cannot support the presence of an inventive step and is not discussed further in the analysis since it has no bearing on the other distinguishing features.

Step (iii)(c): The objective technical problem is therefore formulated as how to determine the risk of condensation on a surface in a more precise and reliable manner.

Obviousness: The use of an IR camera for obtaining temperature readings on a surface can be considered a normal technical development in the field of thermography without exercising any inventive activity: IR cameras were well known at the effective date of the application. Using an IR camera is a straightforward alternative to measuring the temperature at several points on the monitored surface using an IR pyrometer for the skilled person to arrive at a temperature distribution of the surface.

However, D1 does not suggest considering a temperature distribution on a surface (as opposed to at a single point) and calculating mean values for air temperature and taking relative air humidity measured inside the building over the last 24 hours into consideration. Neither does it suggest taking into account different conditions which may realistically occur inside the building over time for predicting the risk of condensation.

Assuming that no other prior art suggests the technical solution of the objective technical problem defined by distinguishing features (1)-(4), the subject-matter of claim 1 involves an inventive step.

Remarks: This example illustrates the situation addressed in G‑VII, 5.4, second paragraph: features which, when taken in isolation, are non-technical but do, in the context of the claimed invention, contribute to producing a technical effect serving a technical purpose (features (b) to (e), which are algorithmic/mathematical steps). Since said features contribute to the technical character of the invention, they may support the presence of an inventive step.