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 .
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.
Response to Arguments
The amendment filed 8/25/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-9, 11-18, and 20-22 are pending in the application. Regarding the specification objection, Applicant states:
The amendment of February 28, 2024 included text that did not correspond to original specification for paragraph starting on page 1, line 7 and paragraph starting on page 3, line 16. Since the text did not correspond, no new text could be entered as the instructions were to amend and not enter replacement text. Applicant's representative cancels the previous request to correct the typographical error.
(Response filed 8/25/2025 [page 10 paragraph 5]).
Examiner accepts withdrawing the amendment to the specification filed 2/28/2024.
Regarding the new specification amendment filed 8/25/2025. This amendment is accepted.
Regarding the prior art rejections, Applicant argues:
Zhang is showing an entirely different technical effect by confirming damage with the preliminary distributions. Zhang is not using the preliminary distributions to calculate... a distribution of an internal load exerted on the member of interest upon an occurrence of damage on the element of interest detected by a damage sensor.
(Response filed 8/25/2025 [page 15 paragraph 3]).
Examiner disagrees. Applicant is essentially arguing that because the constituent equations are used to derive a solution, the intermediate solutions cannot be used to teach the claim limitations. However, by showing the derivation, the entire system is solved when the unknowns are solved. Essentially, the virtual distortions which do not represent the real world on the right hand side of eq. (10), need to be solved in order to get the values of the left-hand side of eq. (10), which do represent the real world. The end goal of Zhang may be to identify damage locations, but the purpose of the virtual distortion method is to solve the overall system, including the internal forces. Examiner performed an updated search, and found a textbook “Smart Technologies For Safety Engineering” (2008_Holnicki-Szulc) explaining the method and how it can be used for different purposes within the field of structural health monitoring.
Two figures are helpful when explaining the virtual distortion method:
PNG
media_image1.png
458
470
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
368
420
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(2008_Holnicki-Szulc [pages 15-16]).
The method is mainly taught in FIG. 2.1, but FIG. 2.2 is the “main idea” of the method. There is no external load on the structure shown in FIG. 2.2. Instead, the element labeled “5” is removed from the structure, and artificially given a strain of epsilon^0_5 = 1. This “virtual distortion” is used solely to generate an internal force in the structure, which can be calculated using the following well known equation:
p
i
=
E
i
A
i
ε
i
Here, p is the internal force; E is Young’s modulus, and A is the cross-sectional area of the element. Knowing this force equation is important to understand FIG. 2.2. If epsilon is set 1, then the force equals E*A, which is why you see element 5 being pulled in tension on both sides by E*A. After the force of the internal element is known. The element is placed back into the structure, so all of the internal forces can be calculated. When all of the forces are in equilibrium with the anchor supports on the left hand side, then stresses and strains on the elements can be calculated. The strain on the initial element (element “5” in FIG. 2.2), can then be related to the corresponding strains in every other element, and this information is stored in an “influence vector”. The same procedure is applied to every element, and the influence vectors are collected into an influence matrix, D^epsilon_ij. The matrix can be read as a unit of strain on j causes corresponding strains on each element i based on a linear elastic force balancing equation. This isn’t the only influence matrix that is calculated, but it is the easiest to understand. Everything that was just discussed is shown in the top half of FIG. 2.1. These steps can be considered a preliminary analysis.
The next step, is the bottom half of FIG. 2.1. The author’s recognized that any strain in a damaged structure under load can be decomposed into the strain caused by the external forces balanced with the strain caused by the internal forces. In the real world, the “cause” of the internal forces is not a change in a strain, but instead a change in cross sectional area A or a change in stiffness K. For the purposes of the equations, the strain and forces are known, as well as the original area A and stiffness, but the modified stiffness and area are not known. The “distorted” structure is set as equivalent to the “modified” structure because the internal forces of every node are equivalent. This is formalized by the eq. (16) of the Holnicki:
PNG
media_image3.png
54
390
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(2008_Holnicki-Szulc [pages 19]).
Essentially, the right hand side of equation (16) is the internal forces of every element _i, see eq. (13) of the structure as defined by virtual distortions, epsilon^0_i (see Holnicki [page 18]). The left-hand side of the equation is the internal forces of every node as defined by the actually damaged structure. On the left-hand side, either E_i or A_i are different for some elements due to damage. This is why the hat is shown over the Young’s modulus E on the left-hand side. Essentially, the virtual distortion side needs to be determine first, which corresponds to determining damage to the element. Once the damage location(s) are known (i.e., the actual elements that are damaged), the properties of that element can be updated through the fact that the internal forces are the same. This transfer from the known right-hand side of eq. (16) to the left hand side of eq. (16) is what teaches “calculate, ..., a distribution of an internal load exerted on the member of interest”. The force balance equation is necessary to perform all of the calculations in the virtual distortion method.
The same relationship is shown in eq. (10) of Zhang (Zhang [page 59]). Both the right-hand side of eq. (10) and the left-hand size of eq. (10) represent a force. Once the values on the right hand-side are calculated by “(3) minimizing the objective function Eq. (28)”, (see FIG. 1 of Zhang [page 63]), then the system is solved by the force balance equation.
The background knowledge of Holnicki is necessary to explain Zhang, but Zhang still teaches the system and method. There is no reason to include Holnicki in the rejection if Zhang is used. Alternatively, Holnicki can be used to teach the claimed invention, and be used to explain itself.
Updated rejections are provided below with Holnicki as the primary art reference. Zhang is still important. Additionally, 2018-Ginsburg is provided in the pertinent art section at the bottom of the action to describe how the art has evolved from trusses and beam structures to plate structures.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, the limitation “a processor configured to: coupled to a damage sensor, the damage sensor being configured to detect an occurrence of damage on an element of interest, the element of interest corresponding to at least one of a plurality of elements of the member of interest;” does not make grammatical sense. The claim language could be “a processor, coupled to a damage sensor, the damage sensor being configured to detect an occurrence of damage on an element of interest, the element of interest corresponding to at least one of a plurality of elements of the member of interest; wherein the processor is configured to:” OR “a processor configured to: couple to a damage sensor, the damage sensor being configured to detect an occurrence of damage on an element of interest, the element of interest corresponding to at least one of a plurality of elements of the member of interest;”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9, 14-18, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Smart Technologies For Safety Engineering” (2008_Holnicki-Szulc).
With respect to claim 1, Holnicki-Szulc teaches An internal-load calculation apparatus comprising (SHM hardware system, [page 3 paragraph 3 lines 6]; examples shown in FIG. 1.1 and 1.2, [pages 5-6], using numerical algorithm 3.2.5, [page 44]; which relies on the virtual distortion method as described in chapter 2, [pages 15-35): a memory (computer center, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 8], where computers inherently have memory) configured to store results of a preliminary analysis of an internal load exerted on a member of interest in a sound condition (step (3), "compute the influence matrices D^epsilon_ij, B^epsilon_Lj, D^f_iL, D^f_ML for n_w frequencies of excitation”, [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 3]; epsilon is the influence of virtual strain distortions, [page 15-16], and f is the influence of virtual force distortions, [pages 27-28]; The unit virtual distortion is practically imposed as a pair of self-equilibrated compensative forces of reverse signs (equivalent to a unit strain as in Figure 2.2) applied to the nodes of the strained element; the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), which is a force balance equation K_MN*u_N = F_M, [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 3-9]; note the identification algorithm is software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2], so collections of values such as matrices are stored in memory as variables); and a processor configured to (computer center, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 8], actual speeds benchmarked with 36 Hz Intel processor, [page 46 paragraph 1 line 6]): coupled to a damage sensor (sensors, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 7]; FIG. 1.2 shows sensors connected to computer system, [page 6]; the sensor for measuring damage is a piezotransducer that measures strain in time, [page 42 paragraph 2 lines 4-5]), the damage sensor being configured to detect an occurrence of damage on an element of interest (step (2), "Determine the measured response epsilon^M_k of the structure with introduced modification using k sensors in experiment", [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 2]; the sensors are configured to detect distortions when the measurements are used in step B(5) to solve for distortions, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 5]), the element of interest corresponding to at least one of a plurality of elements of the member of interest (configured to perform step (5) solve for epsilon^0_i, the _i refers to the element, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 5]); determine whether the damage sensor detects the occurrence of damage on the element of interest (using measurements from step A.(2) to perform step B.(5), Solve for distortions epsilon^0_i, the _i refers to the element,, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 5]); in response to determining that the damage sensor detects the occurrence of damage on the element of interest, calculate (after step (5), perform calculations of step (6), [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 6]), on a basis of a distribution of an internal load exerted on the member of interest upon an application of an external load to the element of interest (step (6) references eq. (28), [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 6]; the first term on the right hand side of eq. (28) is the linear elastic strain epsilon^L_i(t), [page 25]; let us apply an external force-type load P to the analyzed structure. It generates the deformation denoted by epsilon^L_i in the loaded, linearly elastic structure, [page 15 paragraph 4 lines 1-2]; this is the structure labeled “loaded” in FIG. 2.1, [page 15]; and can be calculated using force balance equation (1) to determine displacement, and then strain equation (2) to get epsilon, [pages 16-17]) and the results of the preliminary analysis stored in the memory (step (6) references eq. (28), [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 6]; the second term on the right hand side of eq. (28) has the influence matrix D_ij, [page 25]; "It describes strains in the truss member i caused by the unit virtual distortion epsilon^0_i = 1 (unit initial strain) applied to the member j, [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 2-3]; where "The external force vector f in Equation (1) corresponds to two compensative forces (axial forces in the case of truss structures) applied to a structural member, equivalent to application of a unit strain to the unconstrained member, [page 17 paragraph 2 lines 1-3]; this relationship is shown in eq. (13), [page 18]; this is the structure labeled “prestressed” in FIG. 2.1, [page 15]; note the identification algorithm is software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2], so collections of values such as matrices are stored in memory as variables), a distribution of an internal load exerted on the member of interest (in step (6), combining the two terms on the right-hand side of eq. (28) to get the left-hand side of eq. (28), [page 25]; this how the “static postulate of equivalence of internal forces and strains (cf. Equation (16) in Chapter 2) is utilized”, [page 40 paragraph 1 lines 2-3]; the distortion field and the internal force distribution are related by eq. (12), [page 18]; after convergence at step (8), the entire virtual distortion field is solved and force equivalence may be used to solve for properties of the modified structure as in Fig. 2.1, [page 15] using eq. (16), [page 19]), wherein the preliminary analysis includes at a plurality of distributions in the sound condition by applying an external load or a virtual load, the plurality of distributions comprising (The influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 5-9]; Thus to build the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij, m solutions of a linear elastic problem have to be found, [page 17 paragraph 3 lines 1-2]): a second distribution of an internal load exerted on the member of interest and a load supported at a node of the element of interest upon an application of a predetermined load to the member of interest in a condition where the element of interest is not damaged (see example 1 in section 2.4.4 and FIG. 2.4 showing a load supported at a node, [page 20], as well as eq. (24); The influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 5-9]; Thus to build the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij, m solutions of a linear elastic problem have to be found, [page 17 paragraph 3 lines 1-2]; which means for the five truss elements in order to solve for the influence matrix D, m=5 distributions need to be calculated using eq. (1)), and a third distribution of an internal load exerted on the member of interest and a load supported at the node of the element of interest upon an application of a predetermined load to the node in the condition where the element of interest is not damaged (see example 1 in section 2.4.4 and FIG. 2.4 showing a load supported at a node, [page 20], as well as eq. (24); The influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 5-9]; Thus to build the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij, m solutions of a linear elastic problem have to be found, [page 17 paragraph 3 lines 1-2]; which means for the five truss elements in order to solve for the influence matrix D, m=5 distributions need to be calculated using eq. (1)).
With respect to claim 2, Holnicki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches wherein the results of the preliminary analysis include the plurality of distributions comprising: the second distribution and the third distribution (see example 1 in section 2.4.4 and FIG. 2.4 showing a load supported at a node, [page 20], as well as eq. (24); The influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 5-9]; Thus to build the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij, m solutions of a linear elastic problem have to be found, [page 17 paragraph 3 lines 1-2]; which means for the five truss elements in order to solve for the influence matrix D, m=5 distributions need to be calculated using eq. (1) and wherein the external load includes a tensile load (see FIG. 2.4, [page 20], the load on 2 is a tensile load that pulls on the structure rather than a compressive load that pushes on the structure).
With respect to claim 3, Holnicki-Szulc teaches A method of calculating an internal load comprising (using numerical algorithm 3.2.5, [page 44]; note every equation in the numerical algorithm is based on the virtual distortion method, which is based on the principle that "the distorted structure should be identical in terms of final strains epsilon_i and internal forces A_i*sigma_i with a modified structure (with a modified cross sectional area in the left-hand element from A_1 to hat A_1).", [page 15 paragraph 3 lines 5-7]): obtaining a distribution of an internal load exerted on a member of interest upon an application of an external load to an element of interest (step (1), "Calculate the response epsilon^L_k of the intact structure subjected successively to n_w harmonic excitations of different frequencies, using a numerical model", [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 1]; explained in FIG. 2.1, this is the diagram labeled "loaded", [page 15]; "let us apply an external force-type load P to the analyzed structure. It generates the deformation denoted by epsilon^L_i in the loaded, linearly elastic structure, [page 15 paragraph 1 lines 1-2]) and results of a preliminary analysis of an internal load exerted on the member of interest in a sound condition (step (3), "compute the influence matrices D^epsilon_ij, B^epsilon_Lj, D^f_iL, D^f_ML for n_w frequencies of excitation”, [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 3]; explained in FIGS. 2.1 and 2.2, [page 15-16], The unit virtual distortion is practically imposed as a pair of self-equilibrated compensative forces of reverse signs (equivalent to a unit strain as in Figure 2.2) applied to the nodes of the strained element; the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), which is a force balance equation K_MN*u_N = F_M, [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 3-9]; note the identification algorithm is software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2], so collections of values such as matrices are stored in memory as variables), the element of interest corresponding to at least one of elements of the member of interest (in step (1), epsilon^L_k represents the linear response of an element _k, [page 44]); detecting an occurrence of damage on an element of interest, the element of interest corresponding to at least one of a plurality of elements of the member of interest (using measurements from step A.(2) to perform step B.(5), Solve for distortions epsilon^0_i, the _i refers to the element of interest of a plurality of elements, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 5]); determining whether there is the detecting of the occurrence of damage on the element of interest (to perform step B.(5), Solve for distortions epsilon^0_i, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 5]; there will only be distortions in the elements that are damaged, epsilon^0_i will be 0 for the elements that do not have distortions); and in response to the determining of the detecting of the occurrence of damage on the element of interest, calculating (after step (5), perform calculations of step (6), [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 6]), on a basis of the distribution of the internal load exerted on the member of interest upon the application of the external load to the element of interest (step (6) references eq. (28), [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 6]; the first term on the right hand side of eq. (28) is the linear elastic strain epsilon^L_i(t), [page 25]; let us apply an external force-type load P to the analyzed structure. It generates the deformation denoted by epsilon^L_i in the loaded, linearly elastic structure, [page 15 paragraph 4 lines 1-2]; this is the structure labeled “loaded” in FIG. 2.1, [page 15]; and can be calculated using force balance equation (1) to determine displacement, and then strain equation (2) to get epsilon, [pages 16-17]) and the results of the preliminary analysis of the internal load exerted on the member of interest in the sound condition (step (6) references eq. (28), [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 6]; the second term on the right hand side of eq. (28) has the influence matrix D_ij, [page 25]; "It describes strains in the truss member i caused by the unit virtual distortion epsilon^0_i = 1 (unit initial strain) applied to the member j, [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 2-3]; where "The external force vector f in Equation (1) corresponds to two compensative forces (axial forces in the case of truss structures) applied to a structural member, equivalent to application of a unit strain to the unconstrained member, [page 17 paragraph 2 lines 1-3]; this relationship is shown in eq. (13), [page 18]; this is the structure labeled “prestressed” in FIG. 2.1, [page 15]), a distribution of an internal load exerted on the member of interest upon an occurrence of damage on the element of interest (in step (6), combining the two terms on the right-hand side of eq. (28) to get the left-hand side of eq. (28), [page 25]; this how the “static postulate of equivalence of internal forces and strains (cf. Equation (16) in Chapter 2) is utilized”, [page 40 paragraph 1 lines 2-3]; the distortion field and the internal force distribution are related by eq. (12), [page 18]; after convergence at step (8), the entire virtual distortion field is solved and force equivalence may be used to solve for properties of the modified structure as in Fig. 2.1, [page 15] using eq. (16), [page 19]), wherein the preliminary analysis includes at a plurality of distributions in the sound condition by applying an external load or a virtual load, the plurality of distributions comprising (The influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 5-9]; Thus to build the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij, m solutions of a linear elastic problem have to be found, [page 17 paragraph 3 lines 1-2]): a second distribution of an internal load exerted on the member of interest and a load supported at a node of the element of interest upon an application of a predetermined load to the member of interest in a condition where the element of interest is not damaged (see example 1 in section 2.4.4 and FIG. 2.4 showing a load supported at a node, [page 20], as well as eq. (24); The influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 5-9]; Thus to build the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij, m solutions of a linear elastic problem have to be found, [page 17 paragraph 3 lines 1-2]; which means for the five truss elements in order to solve for the influence matrix D, m=5 distributions need to be calculated using eq. (1)), and a third distribution of an internal load exerted on the member of interest and a load supported at the node of the element of interest upon an application of a predetermined load to the node in the condition where the element of interest is not damaged (see example 1 in section 2.4.4 and FIG. 2.4 showing a load supported at a node, [page 20], as well as eq. (24); The influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 5-9]; Thus to build the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij, m solutions of a linear elastic problem have to be found, [page 17 paragraph 3 lines 1-2]; which means for the five truss elements in order to solve for the influence matrix D, m=5 distributions need to be calculated using eq. (1)).
With respect to claim 4, Holnicki teaches all of the limitations of claim 3, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches wherein the results of the preliminary analysis include the plurality of distributions comprising: the second distribution and the third distribution (see example 1 in section 2.4.4 and FIG. 2.4 showing a load supported at a node, [page 20], as well as eq. (24); The influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 5-9]; Thus to build the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij, m solutions of a linear elastic problem have to be found, [page 17 paragraph 3 lines 1-2]; which means for the five truss elements in order to solve for the influence matrix D, m=5 distributions need to be calculated using eq. (1)), wherein the external load includes a tensile load (see FIG. 2.4, [page 20], the load on 2 is a tensile load that pulls on the structure rather than a compressive load that pushes on the structure), and wherein the distribution of the internal load exerted on the member of interest is calculated, using the preliminary analysis, after the damage on the element of interest is detected by a damage sensor (in step (5), damage is calculated based on the existence of a virtual distortion epsilon^0_i, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 5] using values from the sensor measurements in step (2), [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 2]; then step (6) and convergence (8) is calculated, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullets 6 and 8]; these correspond to taking the postulate of equivalent forces and strains to calculate the modified structure, see [page 40 paragraph 1] and FIG. 2.1, going from “distorted” to “modified”, [page 15]; the actual calculations are eq. (28), which is the strain equivalence, [page 25], which corresponds to eq. (16) for the force equivalence, [page 19] and the strain equivalence can be turned to force equivalence by eq. (12), [page 18]).
With respect to claim 5, Holnicki teaches circuitry configured to calculate (computer center, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 8] has circuitry configured to calculate, using software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2]).
Regarding the rest of claim 5, incorporating the rejection of claim 1, claim 5 is rejected for substantially similar rationale.
With respect to claim 6, Holnicki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to (computer center, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 8], actual speeds benchmarked with 36 Hz Intel processor, [page 46 paragraph 1 line 6]): detect a damaged portion of at the least one of a plurality of elements of the member of interest (in step (5), damage is detected based on the existence of a virtual distortion epsilon^0_i not being 0, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 5]); retrieve results of the preliminary analysis from the memory (then step (6) uses eq. (28), [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 6]; eq. (28) requires the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij, [page 25]; which was calculated in step (3) of the “initial calculations”/preliminary analysis, [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 3]; note the identification algorithm is software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2], so collections of values such as matrices are stored and retrieved in memory as variables), wherein the processor configured to calculate the distribution of the internal load exerted on the member of interest after the damage on the element of interest is detected by the damage sensor (in step (5), damage is calculated based on the existence of a virtual distortion epsilon^0_i, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 5] using values from the sensor measurements in step (2), [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 2]; then step (6) and convergence (8) is calculated, [page 44 paragraph 5 bullets 6 and 8]; these correspond to taking the postulate of equivalent forces and strains to calculate the modified structure, see [page 40 paragraph 1] and FIG. 2.1, going from “distorted” to “modified”, [page 15]; the actual calculations are eq. (28), which is the strain equivalence, [page 25], which corresponds to eq. (16) for the force equivalence, [page 19] and the strain equivalence can be turned to force equivalence by eq. (12), [page 18]).
With respect to claim 7, Holnicki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to (computer center, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 8], actual speeds benchmarked with 36 Hz Intel processor, [page 46 paragraph 1 line 6]): extract a predetermined number of pieces of information from the data on the internal load exerted on each of the plurality of elements a surrounding the element of interest (step (3), "compute the influence matrices D^epsilon_ij, B^epsilon_Lj, D^f_iL, D^f_ML for n_w frequencies of excitation”, [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 3]; Dij describes the strains in element/member i caused by virtual distortions in member j, where the predetermined pieces of information refers to the size of the matrix; the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 3-9]; thus the rank is usually m x m (pieces of information), but the rank can be reduced if there are structural redundancies, [page 17 paragraph 4]).
With respect to claim 8, Holnicki teaches all of the limitations of claim 7, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches wherein the data on the internal load exerted on each of the plurality of elements surrounding the element of interest includes in the results of the preliminary analysis regarding the element of interest from the memory (step (3), "compute the influence matrices D^epsilon_ij, B^epsilon_Lj, D^f_iL, D^f_ML for n_w frequencies of excitation”, [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 3]; Dij describes the strains in element/member i caused by virtual distortions in member j, where the predetermined pieces of information refers to the size of the matrix; the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 3-9]; The response in strains is a standard for building an influence vector. However, storage of any other required response is also useful, i.e. displacements, stresses or forces, [page 17 paragraph 1 lines 4-6]; force distortions are discussed in section 2.4.5, [pages 27-28]; note the identification algorithm is software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2], so collections of values such as matrices are stored in memory as variables).
With respect to claim 9, Holnicki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to (computer center, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 8], actual speeds benchmarked with 36 Hz Intel processor, [page 46 paragraph 1 line 6]): extract a second predetermined number of pieces of information from the data on the internal load supported by the element of interest from the results of the preliminary analysis regarding the element of interest (step (3), "compute the influence matrices D^epsilon_ij, B^epsilon_Lj, D^f_iL, D^f_ML for n_w frequencies of excitation”, [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 3]; Dij describes the strains in element/member i caused by virtual distortions in member j, where the predetermined pieces of information refers to the size of the matrix; the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 3-9]; each influence vector can be considered “pieces of information”, so a single column of the D_ij matrix is one, and the next column is the second; the rank of D_ij is usually m x m (pieces of information), but the rank can be reduced if there are structural redundancies, [page 17 paragraph 4]).
With respect to claim 14, Holnicki teaches all of the limitations of claim 3, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer instructions executable by a processor (computer center, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 8], actual speeds benchmarked with 36 Hz Intel processor, [page 46 paragraph 1 line 6]; note the identification algorithm is software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2], so collections of values such as matrices are stored in memory as variables).
With respect to claim 15, incorporating the rejection of claim 3 and claim 6, claim 15 is rejected for substantially similar rationale.
With respect to claim 16, incorporating the rejection of claim 3 and claim 7, claim 16 is rejected for substantially similar rationale.
With respect to claim 17, incorporating the rejection of claim 16 and claim 8, claim 17 is rejected for substantially similar rationale.
With respect to claim 18, incorporating the rejection of claim 3 and claim 9, claim 18 is rejected for substantially similar rationale.
With respect to claim 20, incorporating the rejection of claim 5 and claim 4, claim 20 is rejected for substantially similar rationale.
With respect to claim 21, Holnicki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to (computer center, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 8], actual speeds benchmarked with 36 Hz Intel processor, [page 46 paragraph 1 line 6]; note the identification algorithm is software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2], so collections of values such as matrices are stored in memory as variables): perform an addition of a distribution of the internal load in the sound condition determined by the preliminary analysis and a product of the distribution of the internal load calculated by applying an external load and a coefficient, to calculate the distribution of the internal load exerted on the member of interest upon an occurrence of damage on the element of interest (this is eq. (28), [page 25]; in internal forces form by multiplying both sides of the equation by E*A, as shown by eq. (12), [page 18]; both forms are required for the static postulate of equivalence of internal forces and strains, [page 40 paragraph 1]; getting back to eq. (28), the first term on the right-hand site is E*A*epsilon^L, which is the “linear” term or “sound condition” term determined by preliminary analysis, at step A.(1), [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 1]; in eq. (28), the term “D” is the “coefficient”, and epsilon^0_j is the “distribution of the internal load calculated by applying an external load”, when multiplied by E*A; finally, the left-hand side of eq. (28), when multiplied by E*A is the “distribution of the internal load exerted on the member of interest upon an occurrence of damage on the element of interest”).
With respect to claim 22, incorporating the rejection of claim 3 and claim 21, claim 22 is rejected for substantially similar rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Smart Technologies For Safety Engineering” (2008_Holnicki-Szulc) in view of US 2006/0004499 A1 (Trego)
With respect to claim 11, Holnicki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches the member of interest (example structure, such as example 3.2.6.1 shown in FIG. 3.2, [page 45]); and the damage sensor detecting a physical quantity of the member of interest (sensors located in all elements of the structure shown in Fig. 3.2, [page 45 paragraph 4]) wherein the physical quantity to be detected by the damage sensor is given physical quantity that changes upon the occurrence of damage on the member of interest (sensors measure strain response, [page 45 paragraph 4]; results in damage identification shown in FIG. 3.3, [page 46]).
Holnicki does not teach of an aircraft while the aircraft is flying.
However, Trego teaches of an aircraft while the aircraft is flying (usage reasoner communicates with strain sensor to receive real time flight parameters, [0026] lines 15-20; see FIGS. 1, 2, and 3 for schematics of aircraft flying system).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to combine Holnicki with Trego because of a teaching, suggestion, and motivation. Holnicki teaches “while high-frequency methods are used in aerospace engineering for crack identification in aircraft components”, (Holnicki [page 38 paragraph 7 lines 4-5]). This is a suggestion the method can be applied to an aircraft, but the implementation while flying is not discussed. Trego teaches implementing the calculations in real-time during the flight of an aircraft, (Trego [0026] lines 1-20). One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the calculations of Holnicki with the computer components of Trego using known methods of programming using a general purpose programming language. One having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the algorithm of Holnicki to the flight of Trego would yield the predictable result of making the algorithm of Holnicki work for a specific structure such as the aircraft disclosed in Trego (see Trego FIG. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Holnicki with Trego to a person having ordinary skill in the art, and this claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
With respect to claim 12, Holnicki in view of Trego teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as noted above. Holnicki further teaches a preliminary analyzer comprising the processor configured to: (computer center, [page 3 paragraph 3 line 8], actual speeds benchmarked with 36 Hz Intel processor, [page 46 paragraph 1 line 6]) preliminarily analyze the member of interest to obtain the distribution of the internal load exerted on the member of interest in a sound condition (step (3), "compute the influence matrices D^epsilon_ij, B^epsilon_Lj, D^f_iL, D^f_ML for n_w frequencies of excitation”, [page 44 paragraph 3 bullet 3]; explained in FIGS. 2.1 and 2.2, [page 15-16], The unit virtual distortion is practically imposed as a pair of self-equilibrated compensative forces of reverse signs (equivalent to a unit strain as in Figure 2.2) applied to the nodes of the strained element; the influence matrix D^epsilon_ij collects m influence vectors, where m denotes the number of truss elements using eq. (1), which is a force balance equation K_MN*u_N = F_M, [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 3-9]); and accumulate the results of the analysis of the member of interest in the memory (note the identification algorithm is software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2], so collections of values such as matrices are stored in memory as variables), and wherein when calculating an internal load, the processor retrieves the results of the analysis of the member of interest preliminarily stored in the memory (step (6) references eq. (28), [page 44 paragraph 5 bullet 6]; the second term on the right hand side of eq. (28) has the influence matrix D_ij, [page 25]; "It describes strains in the truss member i caused by the unit virtual distortion epsilon^0_i = 1 (unit initial strain) applied to the member j, [page 16 paragraph 2 lines 2-3]; where "The external force vector f in Equation (1) corresponds to two compensative forces (axial forces in the case of truss structures) applied to a structural member, equivalent to application of a unit strain to the unconstrained member, [page 17 paragraph 2 lines 1-3]; this relationship is shown in eq. (13), [page 18]; this is the structure labeled “prestressed” in FIG. 2.1, [page 15]; note the identification algorithm is software, [page 39 paragraph 2 line 2], so collections of values such as matrices are stored in memory as variables; in step (6), combining the two terms on the right-hand side of eq. (28) to get the left-hand side of eq. (28), [page 25]; this how the “static postulate of equivalence of internal forces and strains (cf. Equation (16) in Chapter 2) is utilized”, [page 40 paragraph 1 lines 2-3]; the distortion field and the internal force distribution are related by eq. (12), [page 18]; after convergence at step (8), the entire virtual distortion field is solved and force equivalence may be used to solve for properties of the modified structure as in Fig. 2.1, [page 15] using eq. (16), [page 19]).
With respect to claim 13, Holnicki and Trego teaches all of the limitations of claim 11, as noted above. Holnicki does not teach An aircraft comprising.
However, Trego teaches An aircraft, comprising (see FIGS. 1, 2, and 3, where the aircraft is shown in FIG. 1, the hardware systems are shown in FIG. 2, and the software system is shown in FIG. 3).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to combine Holnicki with Trego because of a teaching, suggestion, and motivation. Holnicki teaches “while high-frequency methods are used in aerospace engineering for crack identification in aircraft components”, (Holnicki [page 38 paragraph 7 lines 4-5]). This is a suggestion the method can be applied to an aircraft, but the implementation while flying is not discussed. Trego teaches implementing the calculations in real-time during the flight of an aircraft, (Trego [0026] lines 1-20). One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the calculations of Holnicki with the computer components of Trego using known methods of programming using a general purpose programming language. One having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the algorithm of Holnicki to the flight of Trego would yield the predictable result of making the algorithm of Holnicki work for a specific structure such as the aircraft disclosed in Trego (see Trego FIG. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Holnicki with Trego to a person having ordinary skill in the art, and this claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
“Sparse Solution Approach to Simultaneous Identification of Structural Damage and Mechanical Loading” (2018-Ginsberg) - Load monitoring and damage identification are important tasks in the field of Structural Health Monitoring. They are necessary for assessing the structural integrity and predicting the remaining useful life time. Reconstructing unknown force inputs or system parameters usually involves the solution of an inverse problem. In many applications both, the external forces and the structural damage parameters are unknown and only the structural vibration response can be determined by means of measurement data. Methods which tackle the combined problem of load reconstruction and damage identification are rarely represented and usually require a large number of sensors. The use of prior knowledge of the unknown quantities is advisable for solving the combined inverse problem. In this contribution a sparsity-based reconstruction method is developed for identifying the structural force excitation and damage parameter simultaneously by using output-only acceleration data. Here damage is interpreted as additional load (virtual distortion). The properties of L1-minimization techniques allow are liable estimation of the external forces along with the virtual distortion. A proof of-concept experiment of a quadratic aluminum plate is presented. It shows that the proposed reconstruction method is able to identify the external force and damage parameter by using a significantly lower number of accelerometers, [Abstract].
“Sensitivity Analysis Of Truss Structures (Virtual Distortion Method Approach)” (1998-Kolakowski) - A new approach to structural sensitivity analysis based on the so-called virtual distortion method is presented. The proposed methodology enables the calculation of derivatives for elastic as well as elastoplastic structures on the basis of knowledge of current strains, permanent plastic deformations and influence matrix, describing interactions between a chosen member and the entire structure. The analytical basis as well as numerical verification of the concept is demonstrated. Advantages of the proposed approach, in the sense of numerical cost, are summarized in conclusions, [Abstract].
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL MILLER whose telephone number is (408) 918-7548. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 11am to 5pm (PT).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Emerson Puente, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-3652. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/D.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2187
/EMERSON C PUENTE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2187