DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and remarks filed (1 – 23 – 2026) have been fully considered but they are not persuasiveApplicant argues…
Burke et al. (US 20060120874 A1, hereinafter Burke) does not teach the newly amended feature of compressing the first preform and the inserted second preform by applying a compression load along the stacking direction; and infiltrating a matrix material comprising a ceramic into the first preform to form the ceramic matrix composite.
Applicant further argues that none of the other applied references make up for the deficiency of Burke / Burke as modified.
This is not found to be persuasive because…
Burke discloses on ([0014]) that the lamellae 12 can be held together by one or more fasteners 28, such as the combination of rod 30 and nuts 32 shown in (Fig. 2). The rod 30 passes through respective radially aligned openings 38 formed in each respective lamella 12. A compliant member such as a Bellville or conical washer 34 may be used with or without a load-spreading member 36 to accommodate thermal expansion while maintaining a compressive pre-load on the assembly 10. ([0015]) adds that As such, the rod 30 is not a shear force bearing structure but rather is only a tensile load bearing member. As such, the fastener 28 which comprises rod 30 with nuts 32, washers 34 and optional load-spreading member 36 is understood to provide for a compressive pre-load on the assembly 10 after assembly. Additionally, ([0020]) teaches that a shear pin 62 may also comprise clamp 78, which may be formed of a CMC material that is laid up to include a central web portion 80 and opposed flange portions 82 that overlap onto a topmost and bottommost lamellae in a clamped subset of the lamellae 64. The reinforcing material in the central tubular portion 80 of the CMC clamp 78 may be oriented orthogonally to the reinforcing material in the lamellae 64. Sintering shrinkage of the clamp 78 during firing would provide a compressive preload to the grouped subset of lamellae that are captured by the opposed flange portions 82. Highlighting, that the subset of lamellae depicted in (Fig. 4) is shown to comprise at least one first reform and the inserted second preform between the at least one first preform. As such, the CMC clamp 78 are understood to also provide for a compressive load to the grouped subset of lamellae that are captured by the opposed flange portions 82.
This is unpersuasive because as explained above there was not found to be deficiency in Burke / Burke as modified.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
A.) Claim(s) 1 – 8, 10, 12 & 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burke et al. (US 20060120874 A1, hereinafter Burke) in view of Jean-Pierre Maumus (US 6231709 B1, hereinafter Maumus)Regarding claim 1,
A method of making a ceramic matrix composite, comprising:
forming a first preform comprising stacked layups of fibers stacked in a stacking direction;
inserting a second preform into the first preform along the stacking direction,
the second preform including a helical surface portion having a leading tip,
by rotating the second preform so that the leading tip enters into the first preform and
passes through at least one of the stacked layups of the first preform;
compressing the first preform and the inserted second preform by applying a compression load along the stacking direction; and
infiltrating a matrix material comprising a ceramic into the first preform to form the ceramic matrix composite.
Burke teaches the following:
([0014]) teaches that partially densified individual lamella are formed, stacked, and then fully densified and/or fired as an assembly, thus forming a continuous matrix material phase in and between the lamellae. ([0015]) adding that in-plane directions strength for a given lamella 12 is a result of the strength of the CMC reinforcing fibers 40. Where the stacked fiber lamella forms the first preform.
, c.), d.) & e.) ([0019]) teaches a shear pin 62 is inserted into the aligned holes 66 as the assembly 60 is laid up. The pins may be a solid monolithic ceramic material 68, a hollow ceramic tube 70, a fiber bundle 72, a CMC material 74 or other compatible material or combination thereof. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Fig. 4) the fiber / CMC shear pins comprise a leading tip, where the leading is understood to be pushed / inserted into the assembly 60 and the shear pin 62 extend across the interface between at least two lamellae 64, ([0019]). ([0020]) teaches that a further embodiment of a shear pin 62 is clamp 78. The clamp 78 is a CMC braided ceramic fiber rope. ([0023]) teaches a sealing member may be ceramic or metal, for example a rope seal 112 made of a ceramic fiber braid or ceramic/metal hybrid material. As such, the shear pins are understood to comprise both. ([0023]) adding that other shapes of grooves and sealing members may be used, such as rectangular or square, and the shape and size of the sealing member may affect it performance as a seal and as a shear force bearing structure. ([0016]) noting that the shear force bearing structures may take any of several forms and they may serve an additional function such as providing a flow path for cooling air.Accordingly, while the shape of the fiber / CMC shear pins are not disclosed to comprise a helical shape. The shape is understood to impact and affect the performance as a seal and as a shear force bearing structure. Consequently, the case law for result effective variable may be recited. Where, a particular parameter, (specifically the shape of the shear force bearing structures) must first be recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e., a variable which achieves a recognized result, before the determination of the optimum or workable ranges of said variable might be characterized as routine experimentation. Additionally, the case law for the change of shape may be recited. Where, it has been held that a mere change in shape without affecting the functioning of the part would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47; Eskimo Pie Corp. v, Levous et aI., 3 USPQ 23. Noting, while the performance as a seal and as a shear force bearing structure may be altered due to the shape as detailed above, the function of the article, i.e. a sealing shear force bearing structure, still remains.
([0014]) teaches that the lamellae 12 can be held together by one or more fasteners 28, such as the combination of rod 30 and nuts 32 shown in (Fig. 2). The rod 30 passes through respective radially aligned openings 38 formed in each respective lamella 12. A compliant member such as a Bellville or conical washer 34 may be used with or without a load-spreading member 36 to accommodate thermal expansion while maintaining a compressive pre-load on the assembly 10. ([0015]) adds that As such, the rod 30 is not a shear force bearing structure but rather is only a tensile load bearing member. As such, the fastener 28 which comprises rod 30 with nuts 32, washers 34 and optional load-spreading member 36 is understood to provide for a compressive pre-load on the assembly 10 after assembly. Additionally, ([0020]) teaches that a shear pin 62 may also comprise clamp 78, which may be formed of a CMC material that is laid up to include a central web portion 80 and opposed flange portions 82 that overlap onto a topmost and bottommost lamellae in a clamped subset of the lamellae 64. The reinforcing material in the central tubular portion 80 of the CMC clamp 78 may be oriented orthogonally to the reinforcing material in the lamellae 64. Sintering shrinkage of the clamp 78 during firing would provide a compressive preload to the grouped subset of lamellae that are captured by the opposed flange portions 82. Highlighting, that the subset of lamellae depicted in (Fig. 4) is shown to comprise at least one first reform and the inserted second preform between the at least one first preform. As such, the CMC clamp 78 are understood to also provide for a compressive load to the grouped subset of lamellae that are captured by the opposed flange portions 82.
([0019]) teaches that the shear pin 62 may be installed in a green or partially fired state. ([0019]) adding that the shear pin 62 are inserted into the aligned holes 66 as the assembly 60 is laid up. ([0014]) teaches that the lamellae 12 can be joined together through co-processing of partially processed individual laminates using methods such as chemical vapor infiltration, slurry or sol-gel impregnation, polymer precursor infiltration and pyrolysis, melt infiltration, etc. As such, the shear pins are understood to first be installed followed by impregnation / melt infiltration.
Regarding Claim 1, Burke is silent on the performing comprising a helical shape and inserting the performing providing rotation by a leading tip. In analogous art for a preform that is made from a fiber composite material, the fiber composite preform comprising gaps such that a spacer can be rotationally inserted into the fiber composite preform, Maumus suggest details regarding while inserting the perform providing rotation movement, and in this regard Maumus teaches the following:
— d.) (Col. 5, lines 65-End) teaches that a helical spacer 47 is inserted into the helical gap 45 by “screwing” the spacer and the preform 41 together by a leading tip, as shown in (Fig. 4C). As illustrated in (Figs. 4), the helical spacer 47 has a leading tip that enters through the first preform.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stacked ceramic matrix composite lamellate assembly (10) including shear force bearing structures (48) for resisting relative sliding movement between adjacent lamellae of Burke. By modifying the second preform with helical surface to comprise a spring shaped portion and screw the spacer and the preform 41 together, as taught by Maumus. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement a rotational insertion / screw a second preform with a helical surface that comprises a spring shaped portion as it provides a means for the preform to be held in shape by means of a spiral spacer, (Col. 6, lines 44 – 45). Additionally, the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results, allows for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known option within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." KSR int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 2 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the first preform comprises a three-dimensional woven fiber preform or a stacked fiber layup.
Burke teaches the following:
(Abstract) teaches that a stacked ceramic matrix composite lamellate assembly (10) including shear force bearing structures (48) for resisting relative sliding movement between adjacent lamellae. As illustrated in (Fig. 4) the preform comprises a stacked fiber layup. Highlighting, that (Fig. 3) also provides for a stitched / woven fiber preform.
Regarding claim 3 as applied to claim 2,
Wherein the first preform comprises a stacked layup of fibers including a Z-axis perpendicular to layers in the stacked layup, and
the second preform is inserted with a helical axis of said helical surface portion arranged parallel to the Z-axis.
Burke teaches the following:
(Abstract) teaches that a stacked ceramic matrix composite lamellate assembly (10) including shear force bearing structures (48) for resisting relative sliding movement between adjacent lamellae. As illustrated in (Fig. 4) the preform comprises a stacked fiber layup including a Z-axis perpendicular to layers in the stacked layup.
([0019]) adding that the shear pin 62 are inserted into the aligned holes 66 as the assembly 60 is laid up. As such, the pins are understood to be inserted and arranged parallel to the Z-axis of the stacked fiber layup.
Regarding claim 4 – 5 as applied to claim 1 and claim 4 respectively,
Wherein the second preform rotates about an axis of the helical surface portion as it is rotatably inserted into the first preform.
Wherein axial movement of the second preform within the first preform is equal to an axial distance traveled by the helical surface portion in response to the rotatable insertion of the second preform into the first preform
Burke teaches the following:
& 5a.) ([0019]) teaches a shear pin 62 is inserted into the aligned holes 66 as the assembly 60 is laid up. The pins may be a solid monolithic ceramic material 68, a hollow ceramic tube 70, a fiber bundle 72, a CMC material 74 or other compatible material or combination thereof. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Fig. 4) the fiber / CMC shear pins comprise a leading tip, where the leading is understood to be pushed / inserted into the assembly 60 and the shear pin 62 extend across the interface between at least two lamellae 64, ([0019]). Highlighting, as illustrated in (Fig. 4) the inserted shear pins / movement of the shear pins due to the insertion, provides for a shear pins that are found to be fully immersed into the stacked fiber preform.
Regarding Claim(s) 4 – 5, Burke is silent on while inserting the performing providing rotation such that the second preform rotates about an axis of the helical surface portion as it is rotatably inserted into the first preform and axial movement of the second preform within the first preform is equal to an axial distance traveled by the helical surface portion in response to the rotatable insertion of the second preform into the first preform. In analogous art as applied above, Maumus suggest details regarding inserting the perform by providing rotational movement such that while inserting the performing providing rotation such that the second preform rotates about an axis of the helical surface portion as it is rotatably inserted into the first preform and axial movement of the second preform within the first preform is equal to an axial distance traveled by the helical surface portion in response to the rotatable insertion of the second preform into the first preform, and in this regard Maumus teaches the following:
& 5a.) (Col. 5, lines 65-End) teaches that a helical spacer 47 is inserted into the helical gap 45 by “screwing” the spacer and the preform 41 together by a leading tip, as shown in (Fig. 4C). As illustrated in (Figs. 4), the helical spacer 47 has a leading tip enters through the first preform, as the helical spacer 47 is rotated into the preform 41 the movement of the twisting is showing to provide for rotation such that the second preform rotates about an axis of the helical surface portion as it is rotatably inserted into the first preform and axial movement of the second preform within the first preform is equal to an axial distance traveled by the helical surface portion in response to the rotatable insertion of the second preform into the first preform.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim(s) 6 – 7 as applied to claim 1 respectively,
Wherein the helical surface portion includes a portion arranged as a screw.
Wherein the helical surface portion includes a helical portion arranged as a spring.
Burke teaches the following:
– 7a.) As noted above, while the shape of the fiber / CMC shear pins are not disclosed to comprise a helical shape. The case law for the change of shape may be recited. Where, it has been held that a mere change in shape without affecting the functioning of the part would have been within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47; Eskimo Pie Corp. v, Levous et aI., 3 USPQ 23.
Regarding Claim(s) 6 – 7, Burke is silent on the helical surface portion includes a portion arranged as a screw and the helical surface portion includes a helical portion arranged as a spring. In analogous art as applied above, Maumus suggest details regarding inserting the perform comprising a the helical surface portion includes a portion arranged as a screw and the helical surface portion includes a helical portion arranged as a spring, and in this regard Maumus teaches the following:
& 7a.) (Col. 5, lines 60 – End) teaches the block 41 is stretched in its longitudinal direction to form a helical spring preform 44 with a gap 45 between its turns. Next, a helical spacer 47 is inserted into the helical gap 45 by “screwing” the spacer and the preform 41 together by a leading tip, as shown in (Fig. 4C). Thus, the leading tip provides for a portion arranged as a screw, noting that the entire helical spacer 47 provides for a cylinder with a helical groove spiraling around it, i.e., the shape of a screw. As illustrated in (Figs. 4), the helical spacer 47 has the same shape as the helical spring preform 44, thus the ), the helical spacer 47 is also understood to comprise a the helical spring shape.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 8 as applied to claim 7,
Wherein the second preform is inserted into the first preform with the helical portion arranged as a spring being under tension, or under compression, or under neutral compression/tension.
Burke teaches the following:
([0019]) the holes 66 may be sized to provide a tight fit around the pins 62 to encourage a sintering joint there between. ([0019]) adding that the shear pin 62 may be installed in a green or partially fired state so that sintering shrinkage of the pin during final curing imposes an interlaminar compressive stress on the assembly 60. ([0020]) teaches that sintering shrinkage of the clamp 78 during firing would provide a compressive preload to the grouped subset of lamellae that are captured by the opposed flange portions 82.
Regarding claim 10 as applied to claim 7,
Wherein compression of the inserted second preform includes a helical compression of the helical portion of the second preform arranged as the spring.
Burke teaches the following:
([0019]) teaches that the shear pin 62 may be installed in a green or partially fired state so that sintering shrinkage of the pin during final curing imposes an interlaminar compressive stress on the assembly 60. Alternatively, the shear pins 62 may be co-cured with the lamellae 64, with or without adhesive material 76. As such, the compression is understood to transpire after the shear pin 62 has been place within the preform, resulting in both the shear pin 62 and preform expressing compression during shrinkage.
Regarding claim 12 as applied to claim 1,
Further comprising compressing the first preform before infiltrating the matrix material.
Burke teaches the following:
([0020]) teaches that by using a plurality of clamps 78 capturing an overlapping plurality of subsets of the lamellae, a compressive pre-load may be applied to the entire lamellate assembly 60 that is in place of and/or in addition to the compressive stress that is applied by a fastener. ([0014]) notes that the partially densified individual lamella are formed, stacked (including the position of pins and clamps, as detailed in ([0019] –[0020]), and then fully densified (infiltrated) and/or fired as an assembly. As such, compressing the first preform before infiltrating the matrix is understood to be disclosed.
Regarding claim 15 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein infiltrating comprises chemical vapor infiltration, atomic layer deposition, polymer infiltration and pyrolysis, and/or melt infiltration. Page 3 of 9
Burke teaches the following:
([0014]) teaches that the lamellae 12 can be joined together through a co-processing of partially processed individual laminates using methods such as chemical vapor infiltration, slurry or sol-gel impregnation, polymer precursor infiltration and pyrolysis (PIP), amongst others.
B.) Claim(s) 11 & 13 – 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burke in view of Maumus and in further view of Cox et al. (US 6418973 B1, hereinafter Cox)Regarding claim 11 as applied to claim 7,
Wherein the second preform comprises ceramic fibers and
an organic polymer resin, and
the method includes pyrolyzing the organic polymer resin after compression and before infiltrating the matrix material.
Burke teaches the following:
& b.) ([0019]) teaches that the shear pins can comprise a fiber bundle 72, a CMC material 74 or other compatible material or combination thereof. ([0023]) teaches a sealing member may be ceramic or metal, for example a rope seal 112 made of a ceramic fiber braid or ceramic/metal hybrid material. As such, the shear pins are understood to comprise both ceramic fibers and polymer resin.
([0014]) teaches that the lamellae 12 can be joined together through a co-processing of partially processed individual laminates using methods such as chemical vapor infiltration, slurry or sol-gel impregnation, polymer precursor infiltration and pyrolysis (PIP), amongst others.
Regarding Claim 11, Burke as modified by Maumus is silent on pyrolyzing the organic polymer resin before infiltrating the matrix material. In analogous art for a ceramic matrix composite that comprises a plurality of layers of woven yarns of fibrous material, (Abstract) that is infiltration, and pyrolyzing, Cox suggests details regarding on pyrolyzing the organic polymer resin after compression and before infiltrating the matrix material, and in this regard, Cox teaches the following:
(Col. 9, lines 14-20) teaches that After infiltration, the part is heated to a temperature in the range 100 to 400° C. to cure the polymer. It is then heated to a temperature of approximately 1000 C. to pyrolyze the polymer and leave a matrix of SiC with Some porosity. The infiltration and pyrolysis cycle is repeated up to about ten times, with each cycle reducing the fraction of residual porosity in the matrix. As such, after the first pyrolysis a secondary infiltration takes place, that provides for pyrolyzing the resin before infiltrating the matrix material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stacked ceramic matrix composite lamellate assembly (10) including shear force bearing structures (48) for resisting relative sliding movement between adjacent lamellae of Burke as modified by Maumus. By further augmenting the process to include a repetition of the infiltration and pyrolysis (PIP), such that it provides for pyrolyzing the resin before infiltrating the matrix material, as taught by Cox. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement a repetition of the infiltration and pyrolysis (PIP), such that it provides for pyrolyzing the resin before infiltrating the matrix material as it allows for reducing the fraction of residual porosity in the matrix. (Col. 9, lines 14-20).
Regarding claim 13 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the second preform comprises ceramic fibers and
an organic polymer resin, and
the method includes pyrolyzing the organic polymer resin before infiltrating the matrix material.
Burke teaches the following:
& b.) ([0019]) teaches that the shear pins can comprise a fiber bundle 72, a CMC material 74 or other compatible material or combination thereof. ([0023]) teaches a sealing member may be ceramic or metal, for example a rope seal 112 made of a ceramic fiber braid or ceramic/metal hybrid material. As such, the shear pins are understood to comprise both ceramic fibers and polymer resin.
([0014]) teaches that the lamellae 12 can be joined together through a co-processing of partially processed individual laminates using methods such as chemical vapor infiltration, slurry or sol-gel impregnation, polymer precursor infiltration and pyrolysis (PIP), amongst others.
Regarding Claim 13, Burke as modified by Maumus is silent on pyrolyzing the organic polymer resin before infiltrating the matrix material. In analogous art as applied above in claim 11, Cox suggests details regarding on pyrolyzing the organic polymer resin after compression and before infiltrating the matrix material, and in this regard, Cox teaches the following:
(Col. 9, lines 14-20) teaches that After infiltration, the part is heated to a temperature in the range 100 to 400° C. to cure the polymer. It is then heated to a temperature of approximately 1000 C. to pyrolyze the polymer and leave a matrix of SiC with Some porosity. The infiltration and pyrolysis cycle is repeated up to about ten times, with each cycle reducing the fraction of residual porosity in the matrix. As such, after the first pyrolysis a secondary infiltration takes place, that provides for pyrolyzing the resin before infiltrating the matrix material.
The same rejection rationale, and analysis that was used previously for claim 11, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim 1,
Further including
applying an interface coating to the first preform, or
to the second preform, or
to the first preform and the second preform before infiltrating the matrix material.
Regarding Claim 14. Burke as modified by Maumus teaches the above detailed. Burke as modified by Maumus is silent on applying an interface coating to the either the first or second preform before infiltrating the matrix material. In analogous art as applied above in claim 11, Cox suggests details regarding applying an interface coating to the either the first or second preform before infiltrating the matrix material, and in this regard, Cox teaches the following:
(Col. 8, lines 65-End & Col. 9, lines 1-5) teaches that before infiltrating the fiber structure with the SiC matrix, it is also preferable to coat all of the fiber surfaces with a thin layer (approximately 0.2 μm) of pyrocarbon to provide good mechanical properties in the final ceramic composite. This is easily accomplished by chemical vapor infiltration. The fiber preform is held in the desired shape by carbon or refractory metal mandrels during the CVI processing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stacked ceramic matrix composite lamellate assembly (10) including shear force bearing structures (48) for resisting relative sliding movement between adjacent lamellae of Burke as modified by Maumus. By further augmenting the process to include a coating all of the fiber surfaces with a thin layer, as taught by Cox. Highlighting, one would be motivated to include a coating all of the fiber surfaces with a thin layer as it provides good mechanical properties in the final ceramic composite, (Col. 8, lines 65-End & Col. 9, lines 1-5).
C.) Claim(s) 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burke in view of Maumus and in further view of Subramanian et al. (US 20060141257 A1, hereinafter Subramanian)Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim ,
Further including
applying an interface coating to the first preform, or
to the second preform, or
to the first preform and the second preform before infiltrating the matrix material.
Regarding Claim 14. Burke as modified by Maumus is silent on applying an interface coating to the either the first or second preform before infiltrating the matrix material. In analogous art for a ceramic matrix composite that comprises tows of fibers that are woven into a cloth, ([0030]) and are densified, ([0033]) and infiltrated, ([0034]), Subramanian suggests details regarding applying an interface coating to the either the first or second preform before infiltrating the matrix material, and in this regard, Subramanian teaches the following:
([0027]) teaches a multilayer coating the BN including layer 50 is the base layer of the coating, the SiC fiber tows are still able to adequately debond from the matrix under stress. While the top carbon-including layer 80 is wettable with silicon, so that upon infiltration with at least silicon, the carbon-including layer will react to form SiC, which creates a good bond between the coated fiber tows 2 and the matrix material 4. As such, the coatings, including the top layer are understood to be applied prior to infiltration with silicon due to requiring the top carbon-including layer to react with the silicon infiltrant to form SiC.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stacked ceramic matrix composite lamellate assembly (10) including shear force bearing structures (48) for resisting relative sliding movement between adjacent lamellae of Burke as modified by Maumus. By further augmenting the preforms to include an interfacial coating before infiltrating the matrix material, as taught by Subramanian. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement an interfacial coating before infiltrating the matrix material as it provides for forming a reactionary product between the coating and the infiltrant, ([0027]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Donald Corsmeier (US 20180290391 A1) – teaches in the (Abstract) Various methods and assemblies are provided for producing composite components having formed in features. For example, a method may comprise depositing a composite material on a base tool; aligning an aperture forming tool with a tooling aperture in the base tool; inserting the aperture forming tool through the composite material to form an aperture in the composite material; deploying a feature forming tool to press the composite material into one or more recesses;
David C. Jarmon (US 20150321382 A1) – teaches in the (Abstract) A method of forming an integral fastener for a ceramic matrix composite component comprises the steps of forming a fiber preform with an opening, forming a fiber fastener, inserting the fiber fastener into the opening, and infiltrating a matrix material into the fiber preform and fiber fastener to form a ceramic matrix composite component with an integral fastener. A gas turbine engine is also disclosed.
Nakagawa et al. (US 5503783 A) – teaches in the (Abstract) a spring member made of a carbon fibers/carbon composite material in which carbon fibers are dispersed in a matrix of graphite.
Nakagawa et al. (US 5678809 A) – teaches in the (Abstract) A spring member made of a carbon fibers/carbon composite material in which carbon fibers are dispersed in a matrix of graphite, The spring member has a spring constant in a range of 0.1 to 25 kg/mm and a density of about 1.5 to 3.0 g/cm3. For use in high temperature severe conditions a ceramic material is incorporated into the surface of the spring member.
Bernard Buttazzoni (US 4544599 A) – teaches in the (Abstract) The present invention relates to a method for producing elastically deformable articles constituted of a textile substrate of carbon fibers which are elastically deformable with respect to an at rest shape, wherein a flexible structure of carbon fibers is used, a predetermined form being set for this textile.
Kracum et al. (US 20210190318 A1) – teaches in the (Abstract) A method of making an ceramic article according to an exemplary embodiment of this disclosure, among other possible things includes arranging fiber plies into a preform, inserting one or more sacrificial springs to the preform, infiltrating the preform with a matrix material to form an article, and thermally degrading the one or more sacrificial springs to form cooling holes. A ceramic article and a gas turbine engine component are also disclosed.
Kracum et al. (US 20220316706 A1) – teaches in the (Abstract) A method of making a ceramic article according to an exemplary embodiment of this disclosure, among other possible things includes arranging fiber plies into a preform, inserting one or more sacrificial springs to the preform, infiltrating the preform with a matrix material to form an article, and thermally degrading the one or more sacrificial springs to form cooling holes. A ceramic article and a gas turbine engine component are also disclosed.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrés E. Behrens Jr. whose telephone number is (571)-272-9096. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7:30 AM-5:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on (571)-270-7001. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Andrés E. Behrens Jr./Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/JaMel M Nelson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights