DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communications filed 03/05/2026 in which claims 1, 10-11, 17, 19-20, and 23-24 have been amended, claim 25 has been cancelled. No new claims have been added. Claims 1-24 and 26 are presented for examination.
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 Amendment
Applicant has provided citations to the original specification for the amended matter presented in the claims to paragraph [0042].
The cited portion of the originally filed specification has been evaluated with regard to the amended claims. Examiner submits that the specification adequately supports the claim amendments. No new matter has been introduced by way of amendment.
Response to Arguments
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112
Applicant has amended the claims in response to the previously set forth rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
The amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the previously set forth rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b). Accordingly, the rejections to claims 10-18, 20, and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101
Applicant argues the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101, particularly suggesting that the consideration of the claim elements as a whole provide an inventive concept due to non-conventional arrangement of claim elements.
Applicants arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. The arrangement of the steps construed as mental process is irrelevant in the analysis to identify an inventive concept. The inventive concept cannot be provided by the judicial exception but rather must be furnished by an additional element or by an additional element in conjunction to the judicial exception. While the claim has been found to contain additional elements that cannot be construed as the recitation of a judicial exception, the relationship(s) of the additional element(s) to the judicial exception(s) is not demonstrated in the claims such that it would be readily apparent that a non-conventional arrangement of steps by which to apply the judicial exception is claimed.
Drilling at least one borehole with a drilling assembly and leaving a portion of the drilling assembly in the borehole do not demonstrate any sort of inventive concept alone and are not recited in such a way that they interact with the steps of the judicial exception. These elements appear to be linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and field of use without demonstrating the significance of the claimed elements or demonstrating how the additional elements interact with the recited exception.
Applying a set of operational loads to a numerical model, applying a set of material properties of a grout material to the numerical model, determining risk, iterating grout materials in response to evaluating risk, and generating a design in response to a risk are all steps which can be practically performed in the human mind, but for recitation of generic computing components to perform the judicial exception. Leveraging generic computing components as tools by which to execute the judicial exception is not enough to demonstrate an inventive concept nor amount to significantly more. Likewise, linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and field of use, such as in the claims, does not demonstrate an inventive concept or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
When taken as a whole, the claim appears to be using generic computing components recited at a high level of generality to execute a judicial exception that is generically linked to the field of use of anchoring pile system construction. It is not abundantly clear in the claims what the inventive concept, beyond those steps recited in the judicial exception, may be. The inventive concept appears to be rooted in those steps determined to fall within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas and is not furnished by the additional elements or the way by which the additional elements are related to or interact with the judicial exception.
For the reasons stated in this response, in conjunction with the updated rejection of this office action, the claims remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 103
Applicant has amended the claims in response to the previously set forth rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 103. The applicant argues that the newly amended claims include a feature (‘wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via a sleeve”) not taught or suggested by the prior art of record.
Applicant’s arguments, regarding the newly claimed feature, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. § 102/103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made with the prior art of record as presented in the last action but further in view of Chakrabarti to teach the newly-added feature in the independent claims.
Chakrabarti discloses key considerations in the design of offshore platforms to include the evaluation of jacket/tower structural members and the corresponding interactions of load distribution from the jacket (template) through welding via grout to the sleeve of the anchoring pile system. Chakrabarti further suggests performing finite element analysis on such design configurations to evaluate the load interactions of proposed designs. Accordingly, Chakrabarti cures the deficiencies of the other previously-cited references and the claims remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as presented herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the FEA process" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The introduction of the claim element occurs in the claim 13 which depends from claim 11.
Claims 12-18 incorporate the deficiency of claim 11 and are rejected under the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-9, 11-24 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The following section follows the 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance (PEG) for analyzing subject matter eligibility:
Step 1 - Statutory Category:
Step 1 of the PEG analysis entails considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101 (process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter).
Step 2A Prong 1 - Judicial exception:
In Step 2A Prong 1, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception (an abstract idea, law of nature, or a natural phenomenon).
Step 2a Prong 2 - Integration into a practical application:
If claims recite a judicial exception, the claim requires further analysis in Step 2A Prong 2. In Step 2A Prong 2, examiners evaluate whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application.
Step 2B - Significantly More:
If the additional elements identified in Step 2A Prong 2 do not integrate the exception into a practical application, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception and requires further analysis under Step 2B- Significantly More.
As noted in the MPEP 2106.05(II): The identification of the additional element(s) in the claim from Step 2A Prong 2, as well as the conclusions from Step 2A Prong 2 on the considerations discussed in MPEP 2106.05(a) -(c), (e), (f), and (h) are to be carried over. Claim limitations identified as Insignificant Extra-Solution Activities are further evaluated to determine if the elements are beyond what is well -understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) activity, as dictated by MPEP 2106.05(II).
Independent Claims:
Claim 1:
Step 1: Claim 1 and its dependent claims 2-10 are directed to a method which falls within one of the four statutory categories of a process.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 1 recites a judicial exception, noted in bold:
generating a numerical model of the anchoring pile system by a finite element analysis (FEA) process; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail executing a finite element analysis process to evaluate a discretized geometric representation of an anchoring pile system so as to derive a numeric model representation of the geometry. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
applying a set of operational loads to the numerical model; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating the numerical model with regard to imposed loads at points of the model, which are understood to be likewise represented by numeric values. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
applying a set of material properties of a grout material to the numerical model; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail imposing numeric properties which characterize the behavior of grout material onto the model. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
determining a risk of failure value for at least one grout location of the grout material on the anchoring pile system; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating the behavior of the grout material at at least one grout location in the system so as to derive a risk of failure for the material. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
iterating the grout material from a first grout material to a second grout material in response to the risk of failure value for the at least one grout location exceeding a risk threshold value; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail observing different material responses for grout material with regard to a determined risk of failure. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process. Further, the limitation recites the evaluation of a mathematical relationship between a risk of failure value and a risk threshold value which is the recitation of the mathematical concept of mathematical relationships. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas as a mathematical concept.
generating an anchoring pile design in response to the risk of failure value exceeding the risk threshold value, and wherein the anchoring pile design comprises a grout blend; and The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating a risk of failure with regard to a risk threshold and determining a design of an anchoring pile including the grout blend of the design. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Therefore, the claim recites a judicial exception.
Step 2A Prong 2: Additional elements were identified and are noted in italics.
drilling at least one borehole with a drilling assembly;- This limitation has been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h))
wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via a sleeve; This limitation has been identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) for using generic computing components as a tool to perform the exception (FEA process) and as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)) for generically limiting the use of the exception to the particular technological environment
leaving at least a portion of the drilling assembly in the borehole.- This limitation has been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h))
The courts have found that invoking the use of computers as tools to perform the exceptions (Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f))) and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h))) does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
When viewed independently and within the claim as a whole, the additional element does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: As discussed in Step 2A Prong 2, no additional elements were identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and so no further evaluation is required to determine elements beyond WURC activities. Additional elements identified otherwise and conclusions from Step 2A Prong 2 are carried over for evaluating if the claim, as a whole, amounts to an inventive concept that is significantly more than the judicial exception:
The additional elements were identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)) and Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)), as stated previously. The courts have found that generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment and invoking the use of generically recited computing components as tools does not qualify the limitations as “significantly more” than the recited judicial exception.
With the additional elements viewed independently and as part of the ordered combination, the claim as a whole does not appear to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception because the claim recites a process which can be practically performed in the human mind using pen and paper as assistive physical aids and includes additional elements that do not effectively demonstrate how the steps construed as mental process would be integrated so as to provide a solution in a practical application. The additional elements appear to merely link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and invoke the use of generically recited computing components. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
Conclusion: Based on this rationale, the claim has been deemed to be ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 11:
Step 1: Claim 11 and its dependent claims 12-18 are directed to a method which falls within one of the four statutory categories of a process.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 11 recites a judicial exception, noted in bold:
determining, by the model group, a numerical model of the anchoring pile system The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating a plurality of models so as to make a judgement of a particular numeric model representation of the anchoring pile system. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
determining, by the model group, a set of operational loads applied to the anchoring pile system at a load point; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating a plurality of models so as to make a judgement of a particular numeric model representation of the operational loads to be applied to the anchoring pile system. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
selecting [[..]] a grout material in response to a set of grout material properties exceeding an operational stress value;. The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail observing the excess of an operational stress value and making a judgement as to the appropriate grout material according to the observations. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
iterating, by the advisory process, a grout material from a first grout material to a second grout material in response to a threshold value exceeding at least one of the set of outputs from the model group; and. The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail observing and evaluating different outputs of the model group with regard to a threshold value. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process. Further, the limitation recites the evaluation of a mathematical relationship between an output and a risk threshold value which is the recitation of the mathematical concept of mathematical relationships. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas as a mathematical concept.
generating, by the advisory process, a job design in response to the set of outputs exceeding the threshold value The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail observing the set of outputs with regard to the threshold value so as to make a judgment of a job design. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Therefore, the claim recites a judicial exception.
reg
Step 2A Prong 2: Additional elements were identified and are noted in italics.
inputting,[[..]] a portion of an anchoring pile dataset comprising a plurality of customer inputs and a borehole path;- This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) of mere data gathering
wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via a sleeve; This limitation has been identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) for using generic computing components as a tool to perform the exception (FEA process) and as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)) for generically limiting the use of the exception to the particular technological environment
by a model group executing on a computer system- This limitation has been identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) for invoking the use of computers as a tool to perform the process
by an advisory process executing on the computer system- This limitation has been identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) for invoking the use of computers as a tool to execute the process
receiving, by the advisory process, a set of outputs from the model group, wherein the set of outputs comprises a stress state of the grout material, a stress limit of a grout interface, or combinations thereof;- This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) of mere data gathering. The limitation has further been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)) for generally linking the judicial exception to include a particular set of outputs relevant to the field of use.
The courts have found that merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f))); adding insignificant extra- solution activity to the judicial exception (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g))); and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h))) does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
When viewed independently and within the claim as a whole, the additional element does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: As discussed in Step 2A Prong 2, additional elements were identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) which must be further evaluated to determine if they are beyond WURC activities. Additional elements identified otherwise and conclusions from Step 2A Prong 2 are carried over for evaluating if the claim, as a whole, amounts to an inventive concept that is significantly more than the judicial exception:
inputting,[[..]] a portion of an anchoring pile dataset comprising a plurality of customer input and a borehole path;- Under broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation encompasses transmitting and receiving data over a network, which has been found by the courts to be a computer function that is considered well understood, routine, and conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner, such as in this claim.
receiving, by an advisory process, a set of outputs from the model group, wherein the set of outputs comprises a stress state of the grout material, a stress limit of a grout interface, or combinations thereof;- Under broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation encompasses transmitting and receiving data over a network, which has been found by the courts to be a computer function that is considered well understood, routine, and conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner, such as in this claim.
The courts have found that simply appending insignificant extra solution activities that are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities to the judicial exception does not qualify the limitations as “significantly more” than the recited judicial exception. The remaining additional elements were identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) and Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)), as stated previously. The courts have found that merely using a computer as a tool to perform a mental process and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment does not qualify the limitations as “significantly more” than the recited judicial exception.
With the additional elements viewed independently and as part of the ordered combination, the claim as a whole does not appear to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception because the claim is using generic computing components recited at a high level of generality and functioning in their normal capacity in conjunction with well-understood, routine, and conventional activity to enable the performance of a task that can practically be performed within the human mind or using pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
Conclusion: Based on this rationale, the claim has been deemed to be ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 19:
Step 1: Claim 19 and its dependent claims 20-22 are directed to a method which falls within one of the four statutory categories of a process.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 19 recites a judicial exception, noted in bold:
generating, by the design process, a borehole path comprising a trajectory, a set of formation properties, a description of a borehole environment, or combinations thereof; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail making a judgement during design as to a borehole patch with particular parameters. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
generating, by the design process, a model input for a model group; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail making a judgement as to pertinent data to incorporate as input for a model group. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
determining, by the model group [[..]]i) a stress value for an interface of a grout material to a sleeve, ii) a stress value for a grout material, and iii) a stress value for a grout material to a formation, wherein the determining comprises; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating behavior of models so as to make a judgement for different stress values. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
generating a numerical model of the anchoring pile system by a finite element analysis (FEA) process; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail executing a finite element analysis process to evaluate a discretized geometric representation of an anchoring pile system so as to derive a numeric model representation of the geometry. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
applying a set of operational loads to the numerical model The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating the numerical model with regard to imposed loads at points of the model, which are understood to be likewise represented by numeric values. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
applying a set of material properties of a grout material to the numerical model The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail imposing numeric properties which characterize the behavior of grout material onto the model. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
iterating, by the design process, the grout material from a first grout material to a second grout material in response to a grout stress state exceeding a failure property of at least one of i) the interface of the grout material to the sleeve, ii) the grout material, iii) the interface of the grout material to a formation, iv) or combinations thereof; and The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail observing multiple grout materials after evaluating one which demonstrated a stress state exceeding a failure property. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
generating, by the design process, an anchoring pile design, in response to a threshold of the grout stress state exceeding the failure properties The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating the response of a grout stress state so as to make a judgement of an anchoring pile design. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Therefore, the claim recites a judicial exception.
Step 2A Prong 2: Additional elements were identified and are noted in italics.
retrieving,[[…]] at least one periodic dataset indicative of drilling a borehole;- This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g))
by a design process executing on a first computer, - This limitation has been identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f))
by the model group executing on a second computer - This limitation has been identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f))
wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via the sleeve; and; This limitation has been identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) for using generic computing components as a tool to perform the exception (FEA process) and as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)) for generically limiting the use of the exception to the particular technological environment
The courts have found that merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f))); adding insignificant extra- solution activity to the judicial exception (Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g))); and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h))) does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
When viewed independently and within the claim as a whole, the additional element does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: As discussed in Step 2A Prong 2, additional elements were identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) which must be further evaluated to determine if they are beyond WURC activities. Additional elements identified otherwise and conclusions from Step 2A Prong 2 are carried over for evaluating if the claim, as a whole, amounts to an inventive concept that is significantly more than the judicial exception:
retrieving,[[…]] at least one periodic dataset indicative of drilling a borehole;- This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), as stated previously. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation encompasses storing and retrieving information in memory which has been recognized by the courts as a computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner such as in this claim.
The courts have found that simply appending insignificant extra solution activities that are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities to the judicial exception does not qualify the limitations as “significantly more” than the recited judicial exception. The remaining additional elements were identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) and Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)), as stated previously. The courts have found that merely using a computer as a tool to perform a mental process and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment does not qualify the limitations as “significantly more” than the recited judicial exception.
With the additional elements viewed independently and as part of the ordered combination, the claim as a whole does not appear to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception because the claim is using generic computing components recited at a high level of generality and functioning in their normal capacity in conjunction with well-understood, routine, and conventional activity to enable the performance of a task that can practically be performed within the human mind or using pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
Conclusion: Based on this rationale, the claim has been deemed to be ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 23:
Step 1: Claim 23 and its dependent claims 23-24 and 26 are directed to a method which falls within one of the four statutory categories of a process.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 19 recites a judicial exception, noted in bold:
generating, by a finite element analysis (FEA) process, a numerical model of the anchoring pile system; The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating a finite element representation of a model so as to make a judgement of a numeric model representation of an anchoring pile system. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
applying a set of operational loads to the numerical model The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating the numerical model with regard to imposed loads at points of the model, which are understood to be likewise represented by numeric values. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process
applying a set of material properties of a grout material to the numerical model The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail imposing numeric properties which characterize the behavior of grout material onto the model. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
determining a risk of failure value for at least one grout location of the grout material on the anchoring pile system; and The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating the behavior of the grout material at at least one grout location in the system so as to derive a risk of failure for the material. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process
generating an anchoring pile design in response to a risk of failure value exceeding a risk threshold value.The claim limitation can be reasonably read to entail evaluating a risk of failure with regard to a risk threshold value so as to make a judgment on an appropriate anchoring pile design. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process. Furthermore, because this claim recites the mathematical relationship between the risk of failure value and the risk threshold value, the claim further recites the judicial exception of abstract ideas as mathematical concepts.
Therefore, the claim recites a judicial exception.
Step 2A Prong 2: Additional elements were identified and are noted in italics.
wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via a sleeve; This limitation has been identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) for using generic computing components as a tool to perform the exception (FEA process) and as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)) for generically limiting the use of the exception to the particular technological environment
The courts have found that invoking the use of computers as tools to perform the exceptions (Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f))) and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h))) does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
When viewed independently and within the claim as a whole, the additional element does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: As discussed in Step 2A Prong 2, no additional elements were identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore no further evaluation is required to determine if beyond WURC activities. Additional elements identified otherwise and conclusions from Step 2A Prong 2 are carried over for evaluating if the claim, as a whole, amounts to an inventive concept that is significantly more than the judicial exception:
The additional elements were identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)) and Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) , as stated previously. The courts have found that generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment and invoking the use of generically recited computing components as tools does not qualify the limitations as “significantly more” than the recited judicial exception.
With the additional elements viewed independently and as part of the ordered combination, the claim as a whole does not appear to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception because the claim recites a process which can be practically performed in the human mind using pen and paper as assistive physical aids and includes additional elements that do not effectively demonstrate how the steps construed as mental process would be integrated so as to provide a solution in a practical application. The additional elements appear to merely link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and invoke the use of generically recited computing components. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
Conclusion: Based on this rationale, the claim has been deemed to be ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Dependent Claims:
Examiner notes limitations identified as judicial exceptions are indicated in italicized bold and limitations identified as additional elements are indicated using italics.
Claim 2
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 2, the judicial exception of independent claim 1 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 2 does not recite any additional judicial exceptions
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 2 additionally recites the limitation retrieving, by an advisory process, an anchor pile dataset from a database by an electronic communication method, wherein the anchor pile dataset comprises a plurality of customer input, a plurality of sensor data, a borehole path, a material inventory, or combinations thereof, and wherein the database is on a storage computer. This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The courts have ruled appending insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Because the additional element was identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), it requires further evaluation to determine if the limitation is beyond well understood, routine, and conventional activity. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, retrieving a dataset from a database stored on a storage computer encompasses storing and retrieving information in memory. This task has been recognized by the courts as well understood, routine and conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner such as in this claim. The courts have found that limitations that amount to computer-implemented processes are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 3
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 3, the judicial exception of independent claim 1 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 3 additionally recites the limitation the numerical model is generated, which can reasonably be read to entail defining a numerical representation of a system. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 3 additionally recites the limitation by an advisory process executing on a computer system, This limitation has been identified as Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Further, the claim recites the limitation in response to inputting a first set of model inputs into a finite element analysis (FEA) model. This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The courts have ruled using a computer as a tool to perform the mental process and appending insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Under broadest reasonable interpretation, inputting inputs into a model encompasses transmitting and receiving data over a network which has been found by the courts to be a computer function that is well understood, routine, and conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner. The courts have found that limitations that amount to using a computer as a tool to perform the mental process and adding well understood routine and conventional activity to the judicial exception are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 4
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 4, the judicial exception of independent claim 1 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 4 additionally recites the limitation the first set of model inputs is selected from an anchor pile dataset., which can reasonably be read to entail observing an anchor pile dataset and making a judgement as to the appropriate inputs. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2 & Step 2B: Claim 4 does not recite any additional elements that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 5
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 5, the judicial exception of independent claim 1 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 5 additionally recites the limitation the set of operational loads is generated, by an advisory process, which can reasonably be read to entail making a judgement as to an operational load quantity. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 5 additionally recites the limitation in response to inputting a second set of model inputs into a load point model. This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The courts have ruled appending insignificant extra solution activity does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Under broadest reasonable interpretation, inputting inputs into a model encompasses transmitting and receiving data over a network which has been found by the courts to be a computer function that is well understood, routine, and conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner. The courts have found that adding well understood routine and conventional activity to the judicial exception are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 6
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 6, the judicial exception of independent claim 1 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 6 additionally recites the limitation wherein the second set of model inputs is selected from an anchor pile dataset which can reasonably be read to entail observing the dataset to make a judgement as to the appropriate inputs. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2 & Step 2B: Claim 6 does not recite any additional elements that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 7
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 7, the judicial exception of independent claim 1 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 7 additionally recites the limitation the grout material is determined, by an advisory process, in response to a set of material properties of the grout material exceeding an operational stress state. which can reasonably be read to entail evaluating material properties with regard to an operational stress state and making a judgement as to the grout material due to the evaluation. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2 & Step 2B: Claim 7 does not recite any additional elements that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 8
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 8, the judicial exception of independent claim 1 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 8 additionally recites the limitation wherein the set of material properties is selected from an anchor pile dataset. which can reasonably be read to entail observing the anchor pile dataset to make a judgement as to the appropriate material properties. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2 & Step 2B: Claim 8 does not recite any additional elements that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 9
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 9, the judicial exception of independent claim 1 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 9 additionally recites the limitation the operational stress state of the grout material is determined by applying the set of operational loads to the numerical model. which can reasonably be read to entail evaluating the numerical model with regard for imparting operational load values so as to make a judgement on the operational stress state of the material. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2 & Step 2B: Claim 9 does not recite any additional elements that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 12
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 12, the judicial exception of independent claim 11 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 12 does not recite any additional judicial exceptions.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 12 additionally recites the limitation further comprising retrieving, by the advisory process, the anchoring pile dataset from a storage computer by an electronic communication method, This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The claim further recites wherein the anchor pile dataset comprises the plurality of customer inputs, a plurality of sensor data, the borehole path, a material inventory, or combinations thereof which has been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)). The courts have ruled appending insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception and generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and field of use does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional elements viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Under broadest reasonable interpretation, retrieving a dataset from a storage computer by an electronic communication method encompasses retrieving data from member which has been recognized by the courts as a computer function that is well understood, routine, and conventional when claimed in a merely generic manner. The courts have found that limitations that amount to adding well understood, routine, and conventional activities to the judicial exception and generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and field of use are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 13
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 13, the judicial exception of independent claim 11 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 13 additionally recites the limitation further comprising generating, by the model group, the numerical model, by a finite element analysis (FEA) process, from a first set of model inputs, which can reasonably be read to entail evaluating the model inputs to characterize the numerical model. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 13 additionally recites the limitation wherein the first set of model inputs comprises a portion of the anchoring pile dataset. This limitation has been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)). The courts have ruled generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: The courts have found that limitations that amount to generally linking the use of the judicial exception into a particular technological environment and field of use are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 14
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 14, the judicial exception of independent claim 11 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 14 additionally recites the limitation further comprising generating, by the model group, the set of operational loads by a load point model from a second set of model inputs, which can reasonably be read to entail evaluating the model inputs to characterize the operational loads. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 14 additionally recites the limitation wherein the second set of modeling inputs comprises a portion of the anchoring pile dataset. This limitation has been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)). The courts have ruled generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: The courts have found that limitations that amount to generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 15
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 15, the judicial exception of independent claim 11 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 15 additionally recites the limitation further comprising generating, by the model group, the stress limit of the grout interface by a geophysical model from a third set of model inputs, which can be reasonably read to entail evaluating the set of model inputs so as to characterize the stress limit of the grout. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 15 additionally recites the limitation wherein the grout interface is located between the grout material and a formation and wherein the third set of model inputs comprises a portion of the anchoring pile dataset. This limitation has been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)). The courts have ruled generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: The courts have found that limitations that amount to generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and field of use are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 16
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 16, the judicial exception of independent claim 11 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 16 does not recite any additional judicial exceptions
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 16 additionally recites the limitation herein the model group comprising a least one model selected from a group consisting of a pile FEA model, a stress model, a load point model, and a geophysical model. This limitation has been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)).The courts have ruled generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: The courts have found that limitations that amount to generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 17
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 17, the judicial exception of independent claim 11 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 17 does not recite any additional judicial exceptions.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 17 additionally recites the limitation wherein the set of outputs from the model group comprises a numerical model of the anchoring pile system, the stress state of a grout material, a stress state of a grout interface, a stress limit of an interface located between the grout material and a formation, a distribution of an operational load to the anchoring pile system, a probability value of a failure of the grout material or a portion of the grout material, or combinations thereof.. This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)).The courts have ruled appending insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception and linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and field of use does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Under broadest reasonable interpretation, outputting data encompasses transmitting data over a network which has been recognized by the courts as a computer function that is well understood, routine, and conventional when claimed in a merely generic manner. The courts have found that limitations that amount to adding well understood, routine, and conventional activities to the judicial exception and generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 18
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 18, the judicial exception of independent claim 11 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 18 recites the limitation wherein the threshold value comprises a probability value for achieving a job objective, a lifecycle value for a grout, a stress state of the anchor pile system, or combinations thereof. which can be reasonably read to entail defining the threshold value as a mathematical relationship of a probability for various objectives. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas as a mathematical concept.
Step 2A Prong 2 & Step 2B: Claim 18 does not recite any additional elements that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 20
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 20, the judicial exception of independent claim 19 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 20 does not recite any additional judicial exceptions.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 20 additionally recites the limitation the at least one periodic dataset comprises a dataset selected from a group consisting of fluid systems dataset, borehole path dataset, formation properties dataset, or combinations thereof; and and wherein the at least one periodic dataset is real-time dataset from a drilling operation. This limitation has been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)). The courts have ruled generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and field of use does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: The courts have found that limitations that amount to generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 21
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 21, the judicial exception of independent claim 19 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 21 additionally recites the limitation further comprising iterating, by the design process, the model input in response to a change in the borehole path or in response to [[…]], which can reasonably be read to entail iteratively observing model inputs due to observed changes. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 21 additionally recites the limitation receiving a
subsequent periodic dataset indicative of a drilling operation. This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The courts have ruled appending insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Under broadest reasonable interpretation, receiving data encompasses receiving data over a network, which is a computer function that the courts have found to be well understood, routine, and conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner. The courts have found that limitations that amount to adding well understood, routine, and conventional activities to the judicial exception are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 22
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 22, the judicial exception of independent claim 19 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 22 additionally recites the limitation further comprising modifying, by the design process, the anchoring pile design in response to a change in the borehole path., which can reasonably be read to entail observing changes in the borehole path to make a judgement as to how the anchoring pile design should be modified accordingly. This task can be performed within the human mind or using a pen and paper as an assistive physical aid. Therefore, this claim limitation includes the recitation of the judicial exception of abstract ideas of a mental process.
Step 2A Prong 2 & Step 2B: Claim 22 does not recite any additional elements that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 24
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 24, the judicial exception of independent claim 23 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 24 does not recite any additional judicial exceptions.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 24 additionally recites the limitation retrieving, by the FEA process, from a database, a plurality of customer inputs, a plurality of sensor data, a borehole path, a material inventory, or combinations thereof. This limitation has been identified as Insignificant Extra Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)). The courts have ruled appending insignificant extra solution activity to the judicial exception does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Under broadest reasonable interpretation, retrieving data from a database encompasses retrieving information from memory which has been found by the courts to be a computer function that is considered well understood, routine, and conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner. The courts have found that limitations that amount to adding activity that is well understood, routine and conventional activity to the judicial exception are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 26
Step 1: Regarding dependent claim 26, the judicial exception of independent claim 23 is further incorporated. The claim falls within the corresponding statutory category as stated previously.
Step 2A Prong 1: Claim 26 does not recite any additional judicial exceptions.
Step 2A Prong 2: Claim 26 additionally recites the limitations drilling a borehole with a drilling assembly; leaving at least a portion of the drilling assembly in the borehole; and coupling the drilling assembly to a load point. This limitation has been identified as Field of Use and Technological Environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)).The courts have ruled generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. With the additional element viewed in conjunction with the other limitations, the claim as a whole does not appear to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: The courts have found that limitations that amount to generally linking the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use are not enough to qualify the claim as significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not include additional elements, alone or in the ordered combination that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
This claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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.
Claims 1 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zuo et al (CN114117592A), hereinafter referred to as Zuo, in view of Chun (KR 101735261 B1), hereinafter referred to as Chun, and further in view of Chakrabarti (Chakrabarti, S., “Handbook of Offshore Engineering- Chapter 6: Fixed Offshore Platform Design”, Elsevier, 2005), hereinafter referred to as Chakrabarti.
Regarding claim 1, Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) A method of constructing an anchoring pile system with a drilling operation, comprising: A method analyzing grouting in a cast-in-place pile is disclosed, wherein a cast-in-place pile is understood to be part of an anchoring pile system ((Zuo, ¶6) "This invention provides a method for analyzing the water-cement ratio in grouting of large-diameter cast-in-place piles based on ANSYS numerical simulation, comprising:"). The method includes the construction of test piles ((Zuo, ¶43) "Step S2, On-site test piles: Before the full-scale construction of engineering piles, test piles are constructed."). The pile is referred to as a bored pile, where a bore is understood to be achieved via drilling ((Zuo, ¶74) "The reinforcement of bored piles with post-grouting mainly relies on the intrusion of grout into the surrounding soil and its combination with the soil at the pile tip to reinforce the soil and increase the pile tip resistance.")
[[drilling at least one borehole with a drilling assembly;]]
generating a numerical model of the anchoring pile system by a finite element analysis (FEA) process; A cast-in-place pile model is modeled using ANSYS modeling numerical simulation software, wherein one having skill in the art would recognize ANSYS software as FEA software ((Zuo, ¶11-12) "Step S1, ANSYS modeling and simulation analysis: In the ANSYS numerical simulation software, the large-diameter cast-in-place pile model is modeled according to a completely proportional scale, specifically in steps S11 to S15.”); ((, ¶37) "Contact surface elements are used to simulate the contact surface between the pile wall and the soil."). The simulation on the model is described as being a numerical simulation, thereby indicating that the model is a numerical model ((Zuo, ¶25) "Figure 4 is a parameter table of the numerical simulation model of the present invention;")
applying a set of operational loads to the numerical model, [[wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via a sleeve]]; Load is applied to the simulated pile as part of the simulation ((Zuo, ¶42) "Step Sl5: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7.");((Zuo, ¶44) " Step S3: Comparison of ANSYS simulation results and test pile results: By simulating the load conditions of the test pile using ANSYS, the settlement at the pile end under different load levels can be obtained, and stress cloud diagrams of the pile and soil under different load conditions can be obtained.")
applying a set of material properties of a grout material to the numerical model; The ratio of water and cement are changed in the model to evaluate the influence of the material ((Zuo, ¶65-66) " The influence of post-grouting at the pile end on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. After the completion of the post-grouting bored pile, the bearing capacity of the pile end is improved by the combined action of the post-grouting grout and the soil at the pile end. Changing the water-cement ratio of the grout injected after pile tip can affect the extent and intensity of grout penetration into the soil pores, thereby affecting the bearing capacity of a single pile. Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9."); ((Zuo, ¶74) " Under otherwise unchanged conditions, the influence of the amount of grouting cement on the bearing capacity of a single pile of a post-grouting bored cast-in-place pile is analyzed by changing the mechanical properties and range of action of the grouting material at the pile tip.")
determining a risk of failure value for at least one grout location of the grout material on the anchoring pile system; The bearing capacity value (wherein decreased/non-optimal bearing capacity is understood to be a failure) is determined for a single pile, based on the water-cement ratio of grout applied to the pile tip ((Zuo, ¶68) "Starting with a water-cement ratio of 0.35, the bearing capacity of a single pile gradually increases with the increase of the water-cement ratio. When it reaches a certain value, the bearing capacity of a single pile shows a decreasing trend."); ((Zuo, ¶74) " Under otherwise unchanged conditions, the influence of the amount of grouting cement on the bearing capacity of a single pile of a post-grouting bored cast-in-place pile is analyzed by changing the mechanical properties and range of action of the grouting material at the pile tip."). The optimal water-cement ratio ensures effective injection which insures construction safety, cost savings, quality and improved bearing capacity, wherein the opposite of these benefits may be considered a failure ((Zuo, ¶77) "After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water-cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss. By adopting a reasonable cement grout injection volume (2.St) under simulated geological conditions, cement consumption can be saved, and the problems of grout leakage and overflow caused by excessive cement injection can be solved. This ensures construction safety, effectively reduces construction costs, guarantees project quality, and improves the bearing capacity of single piles.")
iterating the grout material from a first grout material to a second grout material in response to the risk of failure value for the at least one grout location exceeding a risk threshold value; Different water-cement ratios are evaluated, as iterating at least two grout materials ((Zuo, ¶66) " Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9."). Grouting parameters are optimized, thereby indicating that the optimal grout material is achieved by adjusting different ratios within the model ((Zuo, ¶20) "Step S4: Adjust the ANSYS model to optimize grouting parameters: According to the columnar diffusion theory of grout, the grout is injected into the sandy soil from the grouting hole and diffuses in the soil layer in a columnar shape; according to Darcy's law, the grout flow rate, grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio, etc. are linked to the grouting model; by adjusting the size of the pile end grouting model, the purpose of adjusting the grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio is achieved."); Threshold value for reasonableness and to avoid large amount of loss, reduce cross hole phenomena, ensure construction safety, reduce costs, ensure quality, and increase bearing capacity (as a risk of failure when such objectives are not met) as a quantifiable failure metric that can be considered a threshold ((Zuo, ¶21) "The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the AN SYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water- cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles.”)).
generating an anchoring pile design in response to the risk of failure value exceeding the risk threshold value, and wherein the anchoring pile design comprises a grout blend; and Grouting parameters are optimized to obtain a reasonable ratio, wherein reasonableness is characterized by the avoidance of a large amount of grout loss or excessive waste that causes cross-hole phenomena. Based on the reasonable parameters, a water-cement ratio is determined. ((Zuo, ¶20-21) " Step S4: Adjust the ANSYS model to optimize grouting parameters: According to the columnar diffusion theory of grout, the grout is injected into the sandy soil from the grouting hole and diffuses in the soil layer in a columnar shape; according to Darcy's law, the grout flow rate, grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio, etc. are linked to the grouting model; by adjusting the size of the pile end grouting model, the purpose of adjusting the grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio is achieved. The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles."). A water-cement ratio of the grout is determined as part of the pile design ((Zuo, ¶64-65) " Determine the appropriate water-cement ratio: The influence of post-grouting at the pile end on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. After the completion of the post-grouting bored pile, the bearing capacity of the pile end is improved by the combined action of the post-grouting grout and the soil at the pile end. Changing the water-cement ratio of the grout injected after pile tip can affect the extent and intensity of grout penetration into the soil pores, thereby affecting the bearing capacity of a single pile. ")
[[leaving at least a portion of the drilling assembly in the borehole.]]
Zuo does not alone disclose, however, Chun discloses drilling at least one borehole with a drilling assembly Drilling equipment is used to drill injection holes for grouting applications ((Chun, ¶16) "To reinforce the ground by grouting, injection holes are drilled into the ground. The drilling equipment is the same as the existing drilling equipment, but a sensor module is applied to check the characteristics of the ground.") (See also Chun Figure 4)
leaving at least a portion of the drilling assembly in the borehole A sensor is used as part of the drilling equipment to monitor the injection of grout inside the injection hole and is left in place for a period of time ((Chun, ¶9) "The method for automated grouting based on an algorithm using simultaneous drilling and ground exploration according to the present invention is characterized by comprising: a first step of sensing a drilling speed, a drilling energy, and a drilling reaction force according to the depth of an injection hole while drilling an injection target ground using a drilling device, and confirming the injection target ground according to the depth by comparing the sensed sensing data with reference data of a pre-stored database, and determining grouting conditions including optimal injection conditions suitable for the confirmed ground condition; a second step of calculating a predicted injection amount in real time by an algorithm based on the optimal injection conditions of the grouting conditions determined in the first step, synchronizing the calculated predicted injection amount with the measured injection amount, and simultaneously sensing the current grouting state; and a third step of automatically controlling the stoppage of the injection based on the current grouting state sensed in real time through an automated grouting system while grouting the inside of the injection hole through the second step.")((Chun, ¶18) “In addition, although the sensing of the sensing module is performed by depth, a timer may be provided for cases where the sensing is performed by time cycle, and a clock may be provided for indicating the schedule (year/month/day, time)."); ((Chun, ¶20-21) " The ground is drilled using a drilling device of this configuration, and ground data is sensed through the sensing module during the drilling operation. Sensing by the sensing module can be performed in various ways, such as by depth (section) or by period. For example, according to depth-based sensing, data is sensed at a period of, for example, 30 cm (see Fig. 4).") (See also Chun Figure 4)
Zuo is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of optimizing grout material parameters for anchoring piles using simulation. Chun is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of automating and improving the grouting process of anchoring piles. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have combined the prior art references because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one having ordinary skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo describes the optimization of grout material to be used in bored cast-in-place piles but does not particularly describe the boring process beyond a very high level description. Chun explicitly discloses the utilization of a drilling assembly to create the borehole and further describes outfitting the assembly with sensors for use within the injection holes to monitor the injection process. Further, Chun describes deriving optimal injection conditions, including the mixing ration of the injection material ((Chun, ¶27) " The above optimal injection conditions include injection pressure, injection speed, injection amount, and injection material (powder content, mixing ratio, etc.). The injection amount is determined through the algorithm described below. ").Because Zuo suggests the boring of piles and Chun explicitly provides a mechanism by which to achieve the bored holes for the piles and further provides the explicit integration of consideration of optimal injection material ratios, it would have accordingly been obvious to combine the references such that the optimal injection material ratio process described in Zuo is implemented with the automated grouting methodology of Chun that optimizes grouting in real-time.
The proposed combination fails to disclose the details of the FEA process so as to include the distribution of forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets that transfer the distributed forces to the pile system via a sleeve. However, the proposed combination in view of the teachings of Chakrabarti discloses wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via a sleeve Details are provided for the detailed design of a fixed steel jacket tower type of an offshore platform to provide insights for subsequent computerized structural analyses ((Chakrabarti, Page 293, 3¶) " tower-type of an offshore platform (see fig. 6.11). Our initial efforts will concentrate on the problems surrounding the selection of the basic configuration and the major member sizes of a platform such that these will form a valid basis for the subsequent detailed engineering analyses and design activities. We will then spend some time on computerised structural analysis and code check. An analysis helps the designer answer questions about the adequacy or efficiency of his design. "). The jacket/tower design is characterized by a jacket (template) and skirt pile sleeves ((Chakrabarti, Page 296, ¶4) "Jacket/Tower– in addition to providing support for the deck, jacket (may also be called steel template or the tower) provides support for conductors and other substructures such as boat landings, barge bumpers, risers, sumps, j-tubes, walkways, mud-mats, etc. The major jacket structure components are:– Jacket legs– Braces (vertical, horizontal and diagonal),– Joints, which are the intersection points of legs and braces. Bracing stubs and cans may be provided to reduce stresses and improve the ductile behaviour of joints,– Launch runners and trusses, if the jacket will be transported and launched to sea from a launch barge using skid and tilting beams,– Skirt pile sleeves and braces (if skirt piles are needed),– Appurtenances (boat landings, barge bumpers, conductor bracing and guides, risers, clamps, grout and flooding lines, j-tubes, walkways, mud-mats, etc.)."). Connections are described as being achieved through grouting between the jacket and the sleeve, wherein the connections are characterized by the load transfer between such components ((Chakrabarti, Page 387, ¶5) "Grouted Pile to Sleeve Connections If the piles are driven through the skirt pile sleeves, the skirt pile to jacket connection could be achieved through grouting the piles inside the pile sleeves. In such connections, the jacket load is transferred to the pile by the sleeve across the grout. Tests on the strength of plain pile to sleeve grouted connections with no shear keys demonstrate high scatter and uncertainty because of the inadequate confinement due to flexibility of the large pile and sleeve diameters and difficulty of fully displacing the water in the annulus with surface pumped grout."). A 3D simulation and analysis of the jacket structure under actual loading conditions is performed according to design choices ((Chakrabarti, Page 333, ¶12-13) " Full three dimensional simulation and analysis of the jacket and deck structures under actual design loading conditions will result in a better determination of final member sizes (see next Section 6.2.4). Once estimates for the platform geometry and member sizes are available, these are input to a structural analysis computer program to perform a three-dimensional structural analysis. There are a number software programs available for offshore platform design and analysis [SACS, Sesam, StruCad]. A typical platform analysis program would compute the structural deflections, member loads, stresses, utilisation ratios and support reactions, given initial member sizes and platform loads. Generally, repeated structural computer analyses are performed to revise over or under-utilised member sizes and the platform loads and load combinations at each step (see the design spiral in Section 6.1.2). ")
Chakrabarti is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of anchoring pile design optimizations to included grouted configurations. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have modified the finite element analysis process disclosed by Zuo with the teachings of Chakrabarti because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one having skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses the implementation of a numerical simulation as part of an optimization methodology for determining the appropriate water-cement ratio in grouting of large diameter anchor piles but does not particularly disclose the implementation details of the ANSYS simulation to describe what occurs within. Chakrabarti, however, discloses important considerations in the design of anchor pile systems, particularly noting the relationship between the transfer of jacket loads to the foundation piles is a significant consideration ((Chakrabarti, page 387, ¶4) "Safe transfer of the jacket loads to the foundation piles is an important design consideration. If piles are to be driven through the jacket legs, the axial load transfer could be achieved through use of a welded connection between the jacket leg top and the pile (fig. 6.50)."). Chakrabarti further describes how the loads are applied in such a configuration and details that the configuration can be input to a structural analysis program to evaluate the fatigue reactions of the system to the imparted loads. ((Chakrabarti, Page 396, ¶2) "Fatigue is a major design concern for deepwater platforms that are subject to dynamically amplified stress ranges. The fatigue analysis procedures for deepwater platforms are same as those described in Section 6.3.1.1– Fatigue Strength of Simple Tubular Joints. Fatigue behaviour of deepwater platforms can be improved by: Development of accurate site specific database, wave parameters, spectral characteristics and associated wave scatter diagrams, Generating accurate stress range RAOs by performing time domain analyses and using realistic structural damping values, Using accurate SCF formulations or performing special finite element analyses for calculating the SCFs of critical joints, Paying attention to the quality of the tubular joint welding. Using appropriate fatigue life improvement techniques, including weld profiling, buttering, grinding and peening justifying use of higher fatigue S–N curves, Considering use of specially contoured cast steel joint nodes with low SCF values for fatigue sensitive platform joints. "). Accordingly, because discloses an implementation of a numerical analysis without providing explicit details and Chakrabarti explicitly discloses a key relationship at particular joints in a configuration with a jacket and sleeve component whereby loads are distributed from the load point through the jacket and sleeve to the anchoring pile system and further discloses modeling the configuration to account for the loads imparted on such a configuration so as to aide in the design of an anchoring pile system which may include grouted joints, the combination would have accordingly been obvious to one having skill in the art.
Regarding claim 26, Zuo discloses The method of claim 23, further comprising: as stated herein in the rejection of claim 23 under Zuo and Chakrabarti.
The combination does not disclose; however Chun discloses drilling a borehole with a drilling assembly; Drilling equipment is used to drill injection holes for grouting applications ((Chun, ¶16) "To reinforce the ground by grouting, injection holes are drilled into the ground. The drilling equipment is the same as the existing drilling equipment, but a sensor module is applied to check the characteristics of the ground.") (See also Chun Figure 4)
leaving at least a portion of the drilling assembly in the borehole; and borehole A sensor is used as part of the drilling equipment to monitor the injection of grout inside the injection hole and is left in place for a period of time ((Chun, ¶9) "The method for automated grouting based on an algorithm using simultaneous drilling and ground exploration according to the present invention is characterized by comprising: a first step of sensing a drilling speed, a drilling energy, and a drilling reaction force according to the depth of an injection hole while drilling an injection target ground using a drilling device, and confirming the injection target ground according to the depth by comparing the sensed sensing data with reference data of a pre-stored database, and determining grouting conditions including optimal injection conditions suitable for the confirmed ground condition; a second step of calculating a predicted injection amount in real time by an algorithm based on the optimal injection conditions of the grouting conditions determined in the first step, synchronizing the calculated predicted injection amount with the measured injection amount, and simultaneously sensing the current grouting state; and a third step of automatically controlling the stoppage of the injection based on the current grouting state sensed in real time through an automated grouting system while grouting the inside of the injection hole through the second step.")((Chun, ¶18) “In addition, although the sensing of the sensing module is performed by depth, a timer may be provided for cases where the sensing is performed by time cycle, and a clock may be provided for indicating the schedule (year/month/day, time)."); ((Chun, ¶20-21) " The ground is drilled using a drilling device of this configuration, and ground data is sensed through the sensing module during the drilling operation. Sensing by the sensing module can be performed in various ways, such as by depth (section) or by period. For example, according to depth-based sensing, data is sensed at a period of, for example, 30 cm (see Fig. 4).") (See also Chun Figure 4)
coupling the drilling assembly to a load point. Drilling is performed at an injection target ground for an injection hole ((Chun, ¶9) " The method for automated grouting based on an algorithm using simultaneous drilling and ground exploration according to the present invention is characterized by comprising: a first step of sensing a drilling speed, a drilling energy, and a drilling reaction force according to the depth of an injection hole while drilling an injection target ground using a drilling device,"). The injection hole is understood to be the point at which the grouting load is applied into voids, gaps, and cracks ((Chun, ¶3) " This type of grouting involves first drilling injection holes in vulnerable ground where voids, gaps or cracks have developed, inserting an injection pipe with multiple nozzles penetrating in four directions at regular intervals step by step, installing an injection packer in the injection pipe, and then injecting grout material into the cracked voids, gaps or cracks through the injection pipe to solidify the material.")
Chun is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to grouting methods for structural reinforcement in drilling applications. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have combined the prior art references to arrive at the claimed invention because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one having skill to do so. Zuo discloses an optimization strategy for determining optimal grout parameters in a grouting application and suggests that the optimized parameters be used in the actual construction of the cast-in-place piles but does not disclose in detail what the construction entails. Chun discloses more explicitly how the physical grouting process is performed. Accordingly, because of the suggestion of Zuo is more explicitly described by the disclosure of Chun, the combination would have been obvious to one having skill in the art.
Claims 2-9 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zuo et al (CN114117592A), hereinafter referred to as Zuo, in view of Chun (KR 101735261 B1), hereinafter referred to as Chun and Chakrabarti (Chakrabarti, S., “Handbook of Offshore Engineering- Chapter 6: Fixed Offshore Platform Design”, Elsevier, 2005), hereinafter referred to as Chakrabarti, and further in view of Abbassian et al (US 2014/0299377 A1), hereinafter referred to Abbassian.
Regarding claim 2, the proposed combination of Zuo, Chun, and Chakrabarti discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising: as stated previously.
The proposed combination does not disclose; however the proposed combination in view of Abbassian discloses retrieving, by an advisory process, an anchor pile dataset from a database by an electronic communication method, wherein the anchor pile dataset comprises a plurality of customer input, a plurality of sensor data, a borehole path, a material inventory, or combinations thereof, and wherein the database is on a storage computer. An advisory system uses a network interface to receive well cementing plans, geological models, and configuration files and wherein a storage devices is used to store the data as a collection of data (database) 3((Abbassian, ¶150-151) "In one exemplary embodiment, the network interface may comprise a wire-based interface (e.g., Ethernet), or a wireless interface (e.g., BlueTooth, wireless broadband, IEEE 802.11x WiFi, or the like), which provides network connectivity to the workstation and system to enable communications across local and/or wide area networks. For example, the workstation can receive portions of or entire well or cementing plans or geological models 117 from a variety of locations. The storage devices 110 may comprise both non-volatile storage devices (e.g., flash memory, hard disk drive, or the like) and volatile storage devices (e.g., RAM), or combinations thereof. The storage devices store the system software 115 which is executable by the processors or microprocessors to perform some or all of the functions describe below. The storage devices also may be used to store well plans, geological models 117, configuration files and other data. "). The well advisor software further comprises a database that includes sensor data and user input data, wherein the real-time well advisor is stored on the storage device of a computer ((Abbassian, ¶154) " FIG. 2 provides an example of the system software architecture. The system software comprises a database/server 150, a display or visualization module 152, one or more smart agents 154, one or more templates 156, and one or more "widgets" 160. The database/server 150 aggregates, distributes and manages real-time data being generated on the rig and received through the sensors. "); ((Abbassian, ¶160) " Users can export an agent configuration file for other users to import and use. ")(See also Figures 1 and 2)
Zuo is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of optimizing grouting parameters for pile anchor applications. Abbassian is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of automated advisory processes for cementing jobs in wellbore applications. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have combined the prior art references such that the modeling process of Zuo was integrated into the monitoring and advisory process of Abbassian because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation would have led one having skill in the art to make the combination in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Abbassian discloses the utilization of cementing plans to configure an actual system to execute and monitor the cementing job according to the plan and further suggests that the cementing plans may be received from various locations. Abbassian further describes making the cementing plans according to a knowledge base and sensor data. Zuo describes a method of optimizing aspects of grouting/cementing parameters for utilization in the construction process and suggests that model parameters are chosen based on an actual situation but does not particularly disclose the source of data indicative of the actual situation. Because Zuo discloses utilizing data indicative of an actual situation in a cementing job and Abbassian provides a mechanism by which to receive such data, the combination would have accordingly been obvious to one having skill in the art.
Regarding claim 3, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 1, wherein: as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) the numerical model is generated, [[by an advisory process executing on a computer system,]] in response to inputting a first set of model inputs into a finite element analysis (FEA) model. The cast-in-place pile model system made in Ansys numerical simulation software is modeled according to behavior parameters that are set (as an input) and adopted to the geometric model ((Zuo, ¶36-37) "In the ANSYS numerical simulation software, the large-diameter cast-in-place pile model is modeled at a completely proportional scale. The soil model adopts the MC elastoplastic model, while the cast-in-place piles and grouting materials are established using elastic models. During the modeling process, the soil is considered as an isotropic elastoplastic body. In the numerical simulation, the post-grouting only considers the seepage compaction effect and does not consider the splitting reinforcement effect. The pile end and pile side consolidation body are simplified into regular cylinders. Contact surface elements are used to simulate the contact surface between the pile wall and the soil. The pile top load is set as a uniformly distributed load when simulating the static load test."). Boundary conditions are added (inputting model inputs) to the meshed model such that the model is characterized by numeric values for calculated analysis ((Zuo, ¶38-40) "Step S11: Establish a meshed model: ANSYS software has powerful mesh modeling capabilities. A meshed model that meets the requirements can be established through command flow. The overall model obtained is shown in Figure 2, and the grouting body model obtained is shown in Figure 3. Step Sl2: Determine boundary conditions: Add certain displacement constraints to the bottom and around the model to limit the model's translation, vertical displacement and rotation. The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation. Step Sl3: Assign material property values to the model: Based on the design drawings, specifications, and geological survey data, select the most representative parameters to merge and simplify the soil. Based on past engineering experience and relevant test results, the minimum elastic modulus of the cement-soil consolidation body at the grouting end is 1770 MPa. Since the strength of the consolidation body formed by on-site grouting is lower than that of the laboratory model, the elastic modulus of the model consolidation body is usually selected as 1000 MPa. The calculation parameters are shown in Figure 4.")
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo does not disclose, however in view of Abbassian discloses modifying a well plan by an advisory process executing on a computer system ((Abbassian, ¶15) "In various embodiments, the present invention comprises a well advisor system for monitoring and managing well drilling and production operations. The system may be accessed through one or more workstations, or other computing devices. A workstation comprises one or more computers or computing devices, and may be located at a well site or remotely. The system can be implemented on a single computer system, multiple computers, a computer server, a handheld computing device, a tablet computing device, a smart phone, or any other type of computing device."); ((Abbassian, ¶18) "The system thus allows personnel at the well site to monitor the well site operation in real time, and respond to changes o uncertainties encountered during the operation. The response may include comparing the real time data to the current well plan, and modifying the well plan.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination such that the advisory process of Abbassian incorporates the numerical modeling discloses by Zuo because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the art would have led one having skill in the art to make the combination in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Abbassian discloses an advisory system that allows personnel at a well site to monitor well site operation in real time and respond to changes in real-time, wherein the response considers modifications to a well plan ((Abbassian, ¶18) " The system thus allows personnel at the well site to monitor the well site operation in real time, and respond to changes or uncertainties encountered during the operation. The response may include comparing the real time data to the current well plan, and modifying the well plan."). Abbassian further describes well operations as including cement jobs, wherein a cementing job can be configured by a user for execution and wherein the validity of the cement job is evaluated ((Abbassian, ¶195) "Once the user has configured all stages of the cementing job, the validate button is used to check all of the entries to ensure validity."). Zuo discloses optimizing grouting parameters for a cast-in-place anchoring system that is described as using cement for grouting purposes for the on numerical modeling simulation in Ansys ((Zuo, ¶21) "The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the AN SYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles."). Because Abbassian describes a real-time monitoring and advisory system that can incorporate cementing jobs based on valid cement job plans and Zuo provides a mechanism by which to acquire optimal cement ratios for cement job plans using FEA and numeric models, the combination would have been obvious to one having skill.
Regarding claim 4, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 3, wherein: as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) the first set of model inputs is selected [[from an anchor pile dataset.]] displacement constraints are added to the meshed model as inputs ((Zuo, ¶38-40) "Step S11: Establish a meshed model: ANSYS software has powerful mesh modeling capabilities. A meshed model that meets the requirements can be established through command flow. The overall model obtained is shown in Figure 2, and the grouting body model obtained is shown in Figure 3. Step Sl2: Determine boundary conditions: Add certain displacement constraints to the bottom and around the model to limit the model's translation, vertical displacement and rotation. The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation. Step Sl3: Assign material property values to the model: Based on the design drawings, specifications, and geological survey data, select the most representative parameters to merge and simplify the soil. Based on past engineering experience and relevant test results, the minimum elastic modulus of the cement-soil consolidation body at the grouting end is 1770 MPa. Since the strength of the consolidation body formed by on-site grouting is lower than that of the laboratory model, the elastic modulus of the model consolidation body is usually selected as 1000 MPa. The calculation parameters are shown in Figure 4.")
The proposed combination does not disclose; however, the proposed combination in further view of Abbassian discloses selecting data from an anchor pile dataset. A collection of data characterizing cement test wells, wherein cementing in well applications is understood to be associated with the foundational support such as with anchor piles is used to configure a cementing plan (See at least Abbassian Figures 32-37 depicting selecting user inputs characterizing a cement job plan); ((Abbassian, ¶186) "Clicking the "Create New Cement Plan" button 420 enables the user to create and configure the cement plan, and also configure the cementing smart agent. The cement plan is configured in the "cement component" section 422 of the configuration screen, as seen in FIG. 36. Components can be added or removed by clicking the appropriate buttons or icons (in one embodiment, a green"+" button is used to add components, and a red "X" button is used to delete components).").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination to incorporate the anchor pile dataset of Abbassian as the source of data for the model inputs of Zuo because some teaching, suggestion or motivation would have led one having ordinary skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses adding parameters to the numeric model but does not particularly disclose the source of the parameters, and merely indicates that the model information should be added according to the actual situation ((Zuo, ¶39) "The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation."). Abbassian discloses a collection of information by which to generate initial and updated cement job plans, which can be obtained as user input, from a knowledge base, sensor signals, or configuration files ((Abbassian, ¶135) "The present invention may be implemented into an expert computer hardware and software system, implemented and operating on multiple levels, to derive and apply specific tools at a drilling site from a common knowledge base, including, but not limited to, information from multiple drilling sites, production fields, drilling equipment, and drilling environments. At a highest level, a knowledge base is developed from attributes and measurements of prior and current wells, information regarding the subsurface of the production fields into which prior and current wells have been or are being drilled, lithology models for the subsurface at or near the drilling site, and the like."); ((Abbassian, ¶181) "FIG. 30 shows an example of a Cementing Console configuration screen, which is the main entry point for a cement job. Cement jobs can be configured and planned using this screen, although a stored configuration or plan file can be uploaded in some embodiments. The user can input or modify, validate, and save the various parameters 380 shown."); ((Abbassian, ¶203) “If the "sync with cement activity" option is selected, the widget will automatically start drawing real-time data when the cementing smart agent has detected that the cement job has started."). Because Zuo notes that model inputs can be obtained according to the actual situation and Abbassian discloses data sources including a sensed dataset from a cementing job reflecting of the actual situation, it would have been obvious to make the combination.
Regarding claim 5, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 1, wherein: as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) the set of operational loads is generated, [[by an advisory process,]] in response to inputting a second set of model inputs into a load point model. A stress field is created by applied model parameter settings ((Zuo, ¶41) "Step S14: Forming the initial stress field: After assigning material parameters to the model using the command flow, the stress field under the initial stress state is solved using the SOLVE solver to ensure that the stress on the model is in a convergent state. The maximum unbalanced force during the calculation is shown in Figure 5. The rationality of the model parameter settings is verified. After the calculation is completed, the stress cloud map in the Z direction of the initial stress field is obtained, as shown in Figure 6."). Static loads are applied to the model after the stress field is obtained per S14 ((Zuo, ¶42) "Step SlS: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7.")
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo does not disclose; however in further view of Abbassian discloses modifying a well plan by an advisory process, ((Abbassian, ¶15) "In various embodiments, the present invention comprises a well advisor system for monitoring and managing well drilling and production operations. The system may be accessed through one or more workstations, or other computing devices. A workstation comprises one or more computers or computing devices, and may be located at a well site or remotely. The system can be implemented on a single computer system, multiple computers, a computer server, a handheld computing device, a tablet computing device, a smart phone, or any other type of computing device."); ((Abbassian, ¶18) "The system thus allows personnel at the well site to monitor the well site operation in real time, and respond to changes o uncertainties encountered during the operation. The response may include comparing the real time data to the current well plan, and modifying the well plan.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination such that the advisory process of Abbassian incorporates the load modeling discloses by Zuo because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the art would have led one having skill in the art to make the combination in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Abbassian discloses an advisory system that allows personnel at a well site to monitor well site operation in real time and respond to changes in real-time, wherein the response considers modifications to a well plan ((Abbassian, ¶18) " The system thus allows personnel at the well site to monitor the well site operation in real time, and respond to changes or uncertainties encountered during the operation. The response may include comparing the real time data to the current well plan, and modifying the well plan."). Abbassian further describes well operations as including cement jobs, wherein a cementing job can be configured by a user for execution and wherein the validity of the cement job is evaluated ((Abbassian, ¶195) "Once the user has configured all stages of the cementing job, the validate button is used to check all of the entries to ensure validity."). Zuo discloses optimizing grouting parameters for a cast-in-place anchoring system that is described as using cement for grouting purposes for the numerical modeling simulation in Ansys, which accounts for simulated loads to determine the optimized grout parameters ((Zuo, ¶21) "The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles."); ((Zuo, ¶14) " Step S12: Determine boundary conditions: Add self-weight and pile top load to the model according to the actual situation.") . Because Abbassian describes a real-time monitoring and advisory system that can incorporate cementing jobs based on valid cement job plans and Zuo provides a mechanism by which to acquire optimal cement ratios for cement job plans by applying loads that are reflective of an actual situation, the combination would have been obvious to one having skill.
Regarding claim 6, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 5, wherein: as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) wherein the second set of model inputs is selected [[from an anchor pile dataset.]] The model’s pile top load is added according to an actual situation ((Zuo, ¶39) "The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation."); ((Zuo, ¶42) "Step SlS: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7.")
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo does not disclose; however the proposed combination in further view of Abbassian discloses [[from an anchor pile dataset.]] A collection of data characterizing cement test wells, wherein cementing in well applications is understood to be associated with the foundational support such as with anchor piles is used to configure a cementing plan (See at least Abbassian Figures 32-37 depicting selecting user inputs characterizing a cement job plan); ((Abbassian, ¶186) "Clicking the "Create New Cement Plan" button 420 enables the user to create and configure the cement plan, and also configure the cementing smart agent. The cement plan is configured in the "cement component" section 422 of the configuration screen, as seen in FIG. 36. Components can be added or removed by clicking the appropriate buttons or icons (in one embodiment, a green"+" button is used to add components, and a red "X" button is used to delete components).").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination to incorporate the anchor pile dataset of Abbassian as the source of data for the model inputs of Zuo because some teaching, suggestion or motivation would have led one having ordinary skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses characterizing the load model based on an actual situation or design requirements but does not particularly disclose the source of the parameters, and merely indicates that the model information should be added according to the actual situation ((Zuo, ¶39) "The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation."). Abbassian discloses a collection of information by which to generate initial and updated cement job plans, which can be obtained as user input, from a knowledge base, sensor signals, or configuration files ((Abbassian, ¶135) "The present invention may be implemented into an expert computer hardware and software system, implemented and operating on multiple levels, to derive and apply specific tools at a drilling site from a common knowledge base, including, but not limited to, information from multiple drilling sites, production fields, drilling equipment, and drilling environments. At a highest level, a knowledge base is developed from attributes and measurements of prior and current wells, information regarding the subsurface of the production fields into which prior and current wells have been or are being drilled, lithology models for the subsurface at or near the drilling site, and the like."); ((Abbassian, ¶181) "FIG. 30 shows an example of a Cementing Console configuration screen, which is the main entry point for a cement job. Cement jobs can be configured and planned using this screen, although a stored configuration or plan file can be uploaded in some embodiments. The user can input or modify, validate, and save the various parameters 380 shown."); ((Abbassian, ¶203) “If the "sync with cement activity" option is selected, the widget will automatically start drawing real-time data when the cementing smart agent has detected that the cement job has started."). Because Zuo notes that model inputs can be obtained according to the actual situation and Abbassian discloses data sources including a sensed dataset from a cementing job reflecting of the actual situation, it would have been obvious to make the combination.
Regarding claim 7, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 1, wherein: as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) the grout material is determined, [[by an advisory process,]] in response to a set of material properties of the grout material exceeding an operational stress state. The appropriate water-cement ratio is determined by evaluating different ratios ((Zuo, ¶66) "Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9."). The optimal ratio is determined when the bearing capacity of the single pile shows a decreasing trend, indicative of the grout material exceeding a threshold of undesirability ((Zuo, ¶68) "Starting with a water-cement ratio of 0.35, the bearing capacity of a single pile gradually increases with the increase of the water-cement ratio. When it reaches a certain value, the bearing capacity of a single pile shows a decreasing trend."); ((Zuo, ¶70) "When the water-cement ratio is low, the grout is relatively viscous. Although the grout strength is relatively high, its ability to penetrate and permeate the soil is relatively weak. When it reaches a certain level, the bearing capacity decreases.")
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo does not disclose; however in further view of Abbassian discloses by an advisory process, ((Abbassian, ¶15) "In various embodiments, the present invention comprises a well advisor system for monitoring and managing well drilling and production operations. The system may be accessed through one or more workstations, or other computing devices. A workstation comprises one or more computers or computing devices, and may be located at a well site or remotely. The system can be implemented on a single computer system, multiple computers, a computer server, a handheld computing device, a tablet computing device, a smart phone, or any other type of computing device."); ((Abbassian, ¶18) "The system thus allows personnel at the well site to monitor the well site operation in real time, and respond to changes o uncertainties encountered during the operation. The response may include comparing the real time data to the current well plan, and modifying the well plan.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination such that the advisory process of Abbassian incorporates the determined grout material Zuo because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the art would have led one having skill in the art to make the combination in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Abbassian discloses an advisory system that allows personnel at a well site to monitor well site operation in real time and respond to changes in real-time, wherein the response considers modifications to a well plan ((Abbassian, ¶18) " The system thus allows personnel at the well site to monitor the well site operation in real time, and respond to changes or uncertainties encountered during the operation. The response may include comparing the real time data to the current well plan, and modifying the well plan."). Abbassian further describes well operations as including cement jobs, wherein a cementing job can be configured by a user for execution and wherein the validity of the cement job is evaluated ((Abbassian, ¶195) "Once the user has configured all stages of the cementing job, the validate button is used to check all of the entries to ensure validity."). Zuo discloses optimizing grouting parameters for a cast-in-place anchoring system that is described as using cement for grouting purposes ((Zuo, ¶21) "The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles."); ((Zuo, ¶14) " Step S12: Determine boundary conditions: Add self-weight and pile top load to the model according to the actual situation.") . Because Abbassian describes a real-time monitoring and advisory system that can incorporate cementing jobs based on valid cement job plans and also has functionality to advise operators or changes to well plans and Zuo provides a mechanism by which to acquire optimal cement ratios for cement job, the combination would have been obvious to one having skill so as to be able to inform the operator of optimal grouting parameters for a cementing job.
Regarding claim 8, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 7, wherein: as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses wherein the set of material properties is selected from an anchor pile dataset. Material property values are assigned according to past engineering experience and relevant test results of grouting applications ((Zuo, ¶40) "Step S13: Assign material property values to the model: Based on the design drawings, specifications, and geological survey data, select the most representative parameters to merge and simplify the soil. Based on past engineering experience and relevant test results, the minimum elastic modulus of the cement-soil consolidation body at the grouting end is 1770 MPa. Since the strength of the consolidation body formed by on-site grouting is lower than that of the laboratory model, the elastic modulus of the model consolidation body is usually selected as 1000 MPa. ")
Regarding claim 9, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 7, wherein: as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses the operational stress state of the grout material is determined by applying the set of operational loads to the numerical model. The stress cloud map is determined for the model, a load is applied to the cast-in-place pile model and Figure 7 depicts the settlement state with consideration to the grout material applied to the pile. ((Zuo, ¶41-42) "Step S14: Forming the initial stress field: After assigning material parameters to the model using the command flow, the stress field under the initial stress state is solved using the SOLVE solver to ensure that the stress on the model is in a convergent state. The maximum unbalanced force during the calculation is shown in Figure 5. The rationality of the model parameter settings is verified. After the calculation is completed, the stress cloud map in the Z direction of the initial stress field is obtained, as shown in Figure 6. Step SlS: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7. ")
Regarding claim 19, Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) A method of designing an anchoring pile system with a dataset from a drilling operation, comprising: A method of determining optimal grouting parameters for single cast-in-place piles using past engineering experience and relevant test results pertinent to grouting (as a drilling operation) is disclosed ((Zuo, ¶20) "Step S4: Adjust the ANSYS model to optimize grouting parameters: According to the columnar diffusion theory of grout, the grout is injected into the sandy soil from the grouting hole and diffuses in the soil layer in a columnar shape; according to Darcy's law, the grout flow rate, grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio, etc. are linked to the grouting model; by adjusting the size of the pile end grouting model, the purpose of adjusting the grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio is achieved.");((Zuo, ¶40) "Based on past engineering experience and relevant test results, the minimum elastic modulus of the cement-soil consolidation body at the grouting end is 1770 MPa"); ((Zuo, ¶34) "The present invention provides a method for analyzing the water-cement ratio in grouting of large-diameter cast-in-place piles based on ANSYS numerical simulation, comprising:")
[[retrieving,]] by a design process executing on a first computer, [[at least one periodic dataset indicative of drilling a borehole;]] A process for optimizing grouting parameters for an anchor pile design using ANSYS simulation software, which is understood to execute on a computer, is described which takes into consideration design requirements as part of the process ((Zuo, ¶4) " To address the aforementioned technical problems, this invention provides a method for analyzing the water-cement ratio in grouting of large-diameter cast-in-place piles based on ANSYS numerical simulation."); ((Zuo, ¶40) " Step Sl3: Assign material property values to the model: Based on the design drawings, specifications, and geological survey data, select the most representative parameters to merge and simplify the soil."); ((Zuo, ¶42) " Step SlS: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7."); ((Zuo,43) "Step S2, On-site test piles: Before the full-scale construction of the engineering piles, construct two sets of test piles according to the design requirements and corresponding parameters, and carry out post-grouting construction on the test piles according to the drawings. Record the post-grouting construction process in detail. After the post-grouting construction is completed, perform low-strain testing and ultrasonic testing on the pile body to determine that the pile length and pile body integrity meet the design requirements. Then, carry out static load tests according to the design requirements and record the test process and corresponding data.")
generating, by the design process, a borehole path comprising a trajectory, a set of formation properties, a description of a borehole environment, or combinations thereof; Different geological conditions of the soil are evaluated with respect to a water-cement ratio for grouting in construction ((Zuo, ¶72) " For post-grouting bored piles, it is necessary to select an appropriate water-cement ratio for construction based on different geological conditions of the soil to ensure that the bearing capacity of the pile tip reaches the maximum."); ((Zuo, ¶37) " The soil model adopts the MC elastoplastic model, while the cast-in-place piles and grouting materials are established using elastic models."); ((Zuo, ¶40) " Step Sl3: Assign material property values to the model: Based on the design drawings, specifications, and geological survey data, select the most representative parameters to merge and simplify the soil.")
generating, by the design process, a model input for a model group; Parameters are assigned to the model ((Zuo, ¶16) "Step S14: Forming the initial stress field: After assigning material parameters to the model using the command flow, the stress field under the initial stress state is solved using the SOLVE solver.")
determining, by the model group [[executing on a second computer]], i) a stress value for an interface of a grout material to a sleeve, ii) a stress value for a grout material, and iii) a stress value for a grout material to a formation, wherein determining comprises: A stress cloud is generated and encompasses a modeled grouted body which depicts a sleeve (Figures 2/7), a pile cast-in-place with the grout material (Figure 7), and the settlement stress results of the cement-soil interaction (Figure 7).
generating a numerical model of the anchoring pile system by a finite element analysis process; A cast-in-place pile model is modeled using ANSYS modeling numerical simulation software, wherein one having skill in the art would recognize ANSYS software as FEA software ((Zuo, ¶11-12) "Step S1, ANSYS modeling and simulation analysis: In the ANSYS numerical simulation software, the large-diameter cast-in-place pile model is modeled according to a completely proportional scale, specifically in steps S11 to S15.”); ((, ¶37) "Contact surface elements are used to simulate the contact surface between the pile wall and the soil."). The simulation on the model is described as being a numerical simulation, thereby indicating that the model is a numerical model ((Zuo, ¶25) "Figure 4 is a parameter table of the numerical simulation model of the present invention;")
applying a set of operational loads to the numerical model, [[wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via the sleeve; and ]] Load is applied to the simulated pile as part of the simulation ((Zuo, ¶42) "Step Sl5: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7.");((Zuo, ¶44) " Step S3: Comparison of ANSYS simulation results and test pile results: By simulating the load conditions of the test pile using ANSYS, the settlement at the pile end under different load levels can be obtained, and stress cloud diagrams of the pile and soil under different load conditions can be obtained.")
applying a set of material properties of the grout material to the numerical model; The ratio of water and cement are changed in the model to evaluate the influence of the material ((Zuo, ¶65-66) " The influence of post-grouting at the pile end on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. After the completion of the post-grouting bored pile, the bearing capacity of the pile end is improved by the combined action of the post-grouting grout and the soil at the pile end. Changing the water-cement ratio of the grout injected after pile tip can affect the extent and intensity of grout penetration into the soil pores, thereby affecting the bearing capacity of a single pile. Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9."); ((Zuo, ¶74) " Under otherwise unchanged conditions, the influence of the amount of grouting cement on the bearing capacity of a single pile of a post-grouting bored cast-in-place pile is analyzed by changing the mechanical properties and range of action of the grouting material at the pile tip.")
iterating, by the design process, the grout material from a first grout material to a second grout material in response to a grout stress state exceeding a failure property of at least one of i) the interface of the grout material to the sleeve, ii) the grout material, iii) the interface of the grout material to a formation, iv) or combinations thereof; and Different water-cement ratios are evaluated, as iterating at least two grout materials ((Zuo, ¶66) " Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9."). Grouting parameters are optimized, thereby indicating that the optimal grout material is achieved by adjusting different ratios within the model ((Zuo, ¶20) "Step S4: Adjust the ANSYS model to optimize grouting parameters: According to the columnar diffusion theory of grout, the grout is injected into the sandy soil from the grouting hole and diffuses in the soil layer in a columnar shape; according to Darcy's law, the grout flow rate, grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio, etc. are linked to the grouting model; by adjusting the size of the pile end grouting model, the purpose of adjusting the grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio is achieved."); Threshold value for reasonableness and to avoid large amount of loss, reduce cross hole phenomena, ensure construction safety, reduce costs, ensure quality, and increase bearing capacity (as a risk of failure when such objectives are not met) as a quantifiable failure metric that can be considered a threshold ((Zuo, ¶21) "The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the AN SYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water- cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles.”)).
generating, by the design process, an anchoring pile design, in response to a threshold of the grout stress state exceeding the failure properties. The appropriate water-cement ratio is determined by evaluating different ratios ((Zuo, ¶66) "Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9."). The optimal ratio is determined when the bearing capacity of the single pile shows a decreasing trend, indicative of the grout material exceeding a threshold of undesirability ((Zuo, ¶68) "Starting with a water-cement ratio of 0.35, the bearing capacity of a single pile gradually increases with the increase of the water-cement ratio. When it reaches a certain value, the bearing capacity of a single pile shows a decreasing trend."); ((Zuo, ¶70) "When the water-cement ratio is low, the grout is relatively viscous. Although the grout strength is relatively high, its ability to penetrate and permeate the soil is relatively weak. When it reaches a certain level, the bearing capacity decreases.")
Zuo does not disclose; however Zuo in view of Chun discloses retrieving,…at least one periodic dataset indicative of drilling a borehole; Sensor data is used and characterizes the formation as characteristics (properties) of the ground during operations that track drilling speed ((Chun, ¶17) "The sensor module senses various data required for determining grouting conditions, preferably sensing drilling speed, drilling energy, and drilling reaction force, and is configured with a speedometer for sensing drilling speed, a drilling pressure gauge for sensing drilling energy, and a rotation pressure gauge for sensing drilling reaction force. Additionally, since there will be changes in the stratum at each depth, a depth gauge is constructed to check the characteristics of the ground at each depth. Since the present invention enables ground exploration while simultaneously drilling the ground, it is not limited to the sensors described above, and it is possible to use only some of the sensors described above under the premise of achieving the purpose, and it also includes the application of other sensors. "). Sensors are also included for a grout pump to measure pressure and flow (as part of a fluid system) ((Chun, ¶63) "The grouting automatic management system is composed of a grout material supply unit, a grout pump that receives grout material from the grout material supply unit and pumps it, a sensor (pressure gauge, flow meter) that detects the pressure and flow rate of the grout material pumped through the grout pump, a controller that controls the pressure and flow rate of the grout material pumped through the grout pump, and a computer that communicates with the controller to display and store injection pressure and injection amount in real time."). Sensing modules are described as being performed by period, thereby indicating periodic nature of the datasets ((Chun, ¶21) "Sensing by the sensing module can be performed in various ways, such as by depth (section) or by period. For example, according to depth-based sensing, data is sensed at a period of, for example, 30 cm (see Fig. 4)."); ((Chun, ¶20) "The ground is drilled using a drilling device of this configuration, and ground data is sensed through the sensing module during the drilling operation."); ((Chun, ¶89) "When the current injection status sensed in real time from the automated grouting system during grouting injection matches even one of the five preset injection stop conditions, an automatic notification window is displayed and the current status is notified to the site manager via text message, etc., and the final termination point is when the grouting is stopped when it matches the first priority")
Zuo is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of optimizing grouting parameters for pile anchor applications. Chun is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to grouting methods for structural reinforcement in drilling applications. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination in further view of Chun because combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Chun discloses an automated system for adjusting an injection process based on feedback received from sensors during an operation. Zuo discloses refining grout parameters in an offline simulation approach that does not consider real-time data. By incorporating the real-time system of Chun into the modeling system of Zuo, one having skill could reasonably expect to realize the benefits of real-time modifications to the operation which include higher accuracy due to reliance on actual sensed data instead over modeled or predicted data.
The proposed combination does not disclose; however the combination in view of Abbassian discloses executing on a second computer A multi-computer system is described for carrying out various functions in an operations advisory system ((Abbassian, ¶15) "In various embodiments, the present invention comprises a well advisor system for monitoring and managing well drilling and production operations. The system may be accessed through one or more workstations, or other computing devices. A workstation comprises one or more computers or computing devices, and may be located at a well site or remotely. The system can be implemented on a single computer system, multiple computers, a computer server, a handheld computing device, a tablet computing device, a smart phone, or any other type of computing device.")
Abbassian is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of automated advisory processes for cementing jobs in wellbore applications. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have utilized a multi-computer system as part of the claimed invention because combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Abbassian describes a methodology that can be executed on multiple computers or computing devices whereas Zuo and Chun describe methods being performed on a singular device. By employing multiple computing devices to perform different functions, one having skill in the art could reasonably expect the predictable results of having dedicated computing systems to perform distinct functions wherein the distributed computers can operate interconnectedly via network functionality.
The proposed combination fails to disclose the details of the FEA process so as to include the distribution of forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets that transfer the distributed forces to the pile system via a sleeve. However, the proposed combination in view of the teachings of Chakrabarti discloses wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via the sleeve; and Details are provided for the detailed design of a fixed steel jacket tower type of an offshore platform to provide insights for subsequent computerized structural analyses ((Chakrabarti, Page 293, 3¶) " tower-type of an offshore platform (see fig. 6.11). Our initial efforts will concentrate on the problems surrounding the selection of the basic configuration and the major member sizes of a platform such that these will form a valid basis for the subsequent detailed engineering analyses and design activities. We will then spend some time on computerised structural analysis and code check. An analysis helps the designer answer questions about the adequacy or efficiency of his design. "). The jacket/tower design is characterized by a jacket (template) and skirt pile sleeves ((Chakrabarti, Page 296, ¶4) "Jacket/Tower– in addition to providing support for the deck, jacket (may also be called steel template or the tower) provides support for conductors and other substructures such as boat landings, barge bumpers, risers, sumps, j-tubes, walkways, mud-mats, etc. The major jacket structure components are:– Jacket legs– Braces (vertical, horizontal and diagonal),– Joints, which are the intersection points of legs and braces. Bracing stubs and cans may be provided to reduce stresses and improve the ductile behaviour of joints,– Launch runners and trusses, if the jacket will be transported and launched to sea from a launch barge using skid and tilting beams,– Skirt pile sleeves and braces (if skirt piles are needed),– Appurtenances (boat landings, barge bumpers, conductor bracing and guides, risers, clamps, grout and flooding lines, j-tubes, walkways, mud-mats, etc.)."). Connections are described as being achieved through grouting between the jacket and the sleeve, wherein the connections are characterized by the load transfer between such components ((Chakrabarti, Page 387, ¶5) "Grouted Pile to Sleeve Connections If the piles are driven through the skirt pile sleeves, the skirt pile to jacket connection could be achieved through grouting the piles inside the pile sleeves. In such connections, the jacket load is transferred to the pile by the sleeve across the grout. Tests on the strength of plain pile to sleeve grouted connections with no shear keys demonstrate high scatter and uncertainty because of the inadequate confinement due to flexibility of the large pile and sleeve diameters and difficulty of fully displacing the water in the annulus with surface pumped grout."). A 3D simulation and analysis of the jacket structure under actual loading conditions is performed according to design choices ((Chakrabarti, Page 333, ¶12-13) " Full three dimensional simulation and analysis of the jacket and deck structures under actual design loading conditions will result in a better determination of final member sizes (see next Section 6.2.4). Once estimates for the platform geometry and member sizes are available, these are input to a structural analysis computer program to perform a three-dimensional structural analysis. There are a number software programs available for offshore platform design and analysis [SACS, Sesam, StruCad]. A typical platform analysis program would compute the structural deflections, member loads, stresses, utilisation ratios and support reactions, given initial member sizes and platform loads. Generally, repeated structural computer analyses are performed to revise over or under-utilised member sizes and the platform loads and load combinations at each step (see the design spiral in Section 6.1.2). ")
Chakrabarti is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of anchoring pile design optimizations to included grouted configurations. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have modified the finite element analysis process disclosed by Zuo with the teachings of Chakrabarti because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one having skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses the implementation of a numerical simulation as part of an optimization methodology for determining the appropriate water-cement ratio in grouting of large diameter anchor piles but does not particularly disclose the implementation details of the ANSYS simulation to describe what occurs within. Chakrabarti, however, discloses important considerations in the design of anchor pile systems, particularly noting the relationship between the transfer of jacket loads to the foundation piles is a significant consideration ((Chakrabarti, page 387, ¶4) "Safe transfer of the jacket loads to the foundation piles is an important design consideration. If piles are to be driven through the jacket legs, the axial load transfer could be achieved through use of a welded connection between the jacket leg top and the pile (fig. 6.50)."). Chakrabarti further describes how the loads are applied in such a configuration and details that the configuration can be input to a structural analysis program to evaluate the fatigue reactions of the system to the imparted loads. ((Chakrabarti, Page 396, ¶2) "Fatigue is a major design concern for deepwater platforms that are subject to dynamically amplified stress ranges. The fatigue analysis procedures for deepwater platforms are same as those described in Section 6.3.1.1– Fatigue Strength of Simple Tubular Joints. Fatigue behaviour of deepwater platforms can be improved by: Development of accurate site specific database, wave parameters, spectral characteristics and associated wave scatter diagrams, Generating accurate stress range RAOs by performing time domain analyses and using realistic structural damping values, Using accurate SCF formulations or performing special finite element analyses for calculating the SCFs of critical joints, Paying attention to the quality of the tubular joint welding. Using appropriate fatigue life improvement techniques, including weld profiling, buttering, grinding and peening justifying use of higher fatigue S–N curves, Considering use of specially contoured cast steel joint nodes with low SCF values for fatigue sensitive platform joints. "). Accordingly, because discloses an implementation of a numerical analysis without providing explicit details and Chakrabarti explicitly discloses a key relationship at particular joints in a configuration with a jacket and sleeve component whereby loads are distributed from the load point through the jacket and sleeve to the anchoring pile system and further discloses modeling the configuration to account for the loads imparted on such a configuration so as to aide in the design of an anchoring pile system which may include grouted joints, the combination would have accordingly been obvious to one having skill in the art.
Regarding claim 20, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 19, wherein: as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Chun discloses the at least one periodic dataset comprises a dataset selected from a group consisting of fluid systems dataset, borehole path dataset, formation properties dataset, or combinations thereof; and Sensor data is used and characterizes the formation as characteristics (properties) of the ground ((Chun, ¶17) "The sensor module senses various data required for determining grouting conditions, preferably sensing drilling speed, drilling energy, and drilling reaction force, and is configured with a speedometer for sensing drilling speed, a drilling pressure gauge for sensing drilling energy, and a rotation pressure gauge for sensing drilling reaction force. Additionally, since there will be changes in the stratum at each depth, a depth gauge is constructed to check the characteristics of the ground at each depth. Since the present invention enables ground exploration while simultaneously drilling the ground, it is not limited to the sensors described above, and it is possible to use only some of the sensors described above under the premise of achieving the purpose, and it also includes the application of other sensors. "). Sensors are also included for a grout pump to measure pressure and flow (as part of a fluid system) ((Chun, ¶63) "The grouting automatic management system is composed of a grout material supply unit, a grout pump that receives grout material from the grout material supply unit and pumps it, a sensor (pressure gauge, flow meter) that detects the pressure and flow rate of the grout material pumped through the grout pump, a controller that controls the pressure and flow rate of the grout material pumped through the grout pump, and a computer that communicates with the controller to display and store injection pressure and injection amount in real time."). Sensing modules are described as being performed by period, thereby indicating periodic nature of the datasets ((Chun, ¶21) "Sensing by the sensing module can be performed in various ways, such as by depth (section) or by period. For example, according to depth-based sensing, data is sensed at a period of, for example, 30 cm (see Fig. 4).")
wherein the at least one periodic dataset is real-time dataset from a drilling operation. ((Chun, ¶20) "The ground is drilled using a drilling device of this configuration, and ground data is sensed through the sensing module during the drilling operation."); ((Chun, ¶89) "When the current injection status sensed in real time from the automated grouting system during grouting injection matches even one of the five preset injection stop conditions, an automatic notification window is displayed and the current status is notified to the site manager via text message, etc., and the final termination point is when the grouting is stopped when it matches the first priority")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination in further view of Chun because combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Chun discloses an automated system for adjusting an injection process based on feedback received from sensors during an operation. Zuo discloses refining grout parameters in an offline simulation approach that does not consider real-time data. By incorporating the real-time system of Chun into the modeling system of Zuo, one having skill could reasonably expect to realize the benefits of real-time modifications to the operation which include higher accuracy due to reliance on actual sensed data instead over modeled or predicted data.
Regarding claim 21, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 19, as stated previously. The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) further comprising iterating, by the design process, the model input [[in response to a change in the borehole path or in response to receiving a subsequent periodic dataset indicative of a drilling operation.]]
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo does not disclose; however, the proposed combination in further view of Chun discloses modifying the optimal grout ratio as a grouting condition in response to a change in the borehole path or in response to receiving a subsequent periodic dataset indicative of a drilling operation. The optimal grouting condition is determined, which includes the mixing ratio of material ((Chun, ¶23-27) "Through the exploration process, sensing data on drilling speed, drilling energy, and drilling reaction force are acquired, and the grouting automatic management system compares the sensing data with reference data stored in the database to determine the ground for all injection holes and determine the grouting conditions suitable for the determined ground. As exploration progresses at different depths, ground determinations are also made at different depths. The grouting conditions for each ground are stored in the database, and exploration, ground determination, and grouting conditions are performed simultaneously. The above grouting conditions may be optimal injection conditions. The above optimal injection conditions include injection pressure, injection speed, injection amount, and injection material (powder content, mixing ratio, etc.). The injection amount is determined through the algorithm described below. "). The optimal grouting condition is first determined and subsequently real-time sensed data about the current grouting state is received (where sensor data is understood to be periodic and the sensor is outfitted on the drilling equipment and reflects behavior of the drilling operation ((Chun, ¶9) "…and determining grouting conditions including optimal injection conditions suitable for the confirmed ground condition; a second step of calculating a predicted injection amount in real time by an algorithm based on the optimal injection conditions of the grouting conditions determined in the first step, synchronizing the calculated predicted injection amount with the measured injection amount, and simultaneously sensing the current grouting state;…"); ((Chun, ¶18) "In addition, although the sensing of the sensing module is performed by depth, a timer may be provided for cases where the sensing is performed by time cycle, and a clock may be provided for indicating the schedule (year/month/day, time).")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination in further view of Chun because combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Chun discloses an automated system for adjusting an injection process based on feedback received from sensors during an operation. Zuo discloses refining grout parameters in an offline simulation approach that does not consider real-time data. By incorporating the real-time system of Chun into the modeling system of Zuo, one having skill could reasonably expect to realize the benefits of real-time modifications to the operation which include higher accuracy due to reliance on actual sensed data instead over modeled or predicted data.
Regarding claim 22, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 19, as stated previously.
The proposed combination does not disclose, however in further view of Abbassian discloses further comprising modifying, by the design process, the anchoring pile design in response to a change in the borehole path. Changes to the well plan can be made in response to changes encountered during the operation. ((Abbassian, ¶18) " The system thus allows personnel at the well site to monitor the well site operation in real time, and respond to changes or uncertainties encountered during the operation. The response may include comparing the real time data to the current well plan, and modifying the well plan. "). Wellbore geometry can be updated prior to a cementing job, wherein the cementing configuration accounts for the changes made to the wellbore geometry ((Abbassian, ¶184) "New cement jobs and plans should be created on open hole sections within the well bore. In one embodiment, if an open hole section is unavailable in the well bore geometry object, a new cement job or plan cannot be configured. Thus, the wellbore geometry object should be updated well in advance of the cement job, and ideally, right after the new wellbore section has been drilled. The wellbore geometry object can be updated through the WITSML WellboreGeometry editor, which can be initiated through the system's WITS ML tree in the side bar 410, as seen in FIG. 34. Once the\ wellbore geometry object has been updated, the system replicates the changes to the server and various widgets and editors in the system. In one embodiment, the cementing configuration screen must be manually refreshed to reflect any change made to the wellbore geometry object. The cementing configuration screen does not modify or change the wellbore geometry data itself, and only reads the data.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have incorporated the teachings of Abbassian into the proposed combination because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation would have led one having skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the same invention. Abbassian explicitly suggests that cementing plans need to be modified according to changes in the wellbore geometry and Zuo provides a mechanism by which to optimize the grouting parameters of an anchoring pile, which takes into consideration the geometry of the wellbore as part of the modeling process. Accordingly, the combination would have been obvious.
Claims 11-18 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zuo et al (CN114117592A), hereinafter referred to as Zuo, in view of Abbassian et al (US 2014/0299377 A1), hereinafter referred to Abbassian and further in view of Chakrabarti (Chakrabarti, S., “Handbook of Offshore Engineering- Chapter 6: Fixed Offshore Platform Design”, Elsevier, 2005), hereinafter referred to as Chakrabarti.
Regarding claim 11, Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) A method of designing an anchoring pile system, comprising: A method is disclosed for determining the optimal grouting parameters for a cast-in-place piling system to be used in on-site applications ((Zuo, ¶77) "After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post grouting adopts a reasonable water-cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss. ")
[[inputting,]] by a model group executing on a computer system, [[a portion of an anchoring pile dataset comprising a plurality of customer inputs and a borehole path;]] A set of models are used in Ansys simulation software (which is understood to execute on a computing system) to optimize grouting parameters ((Zuo, ¶38) "Step S11: Establish a meshed model: ANSYS software has powerful mesh modeling capabilities. A meshed model that meets the requirements can be established through command flow. The overall model obtained is shown in Figure 2, and the grouting body model obtained is shown in Figure 3.")
determining, by the model group, a numerical model of the anchoring pile system; ((Zuo, ¶12) "In the ANSYS numerical simulation software, the large-diameter cast-in-place pile model is modeled according to a completely proportional scale, specifically in steps S11 to S15.")
determining, by the model group, a set of operational loads applied to the anchoring pile system at a load point [[wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via a sleeve]]; ((Zuo, ¶39) "The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation. ")
selecting, [[by an advisory process executing on the computer system,]] a grout material in response to a set of grout material properties exceeding an operational stress value; The appropriate water-cement ratio is determined by evaluating different ratios ((Zuo, ¶66) "Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9."). The optimal ratio is determined when the bearing capacity of the single pile shows a decreasing trend, indicative of the grout material exceeding a threshold of undesirability ((Zuo, ¶68) "Starting with a water-cement ratio of 0.35, the bearing capacity of a single pile gradually increases with the increase of the water-cement ratio. When it reaches a certain value, the bearing capacity of a single pile shows a decreasing trend."); ((Zuo, ¶70) "When the water-cement ratio is low, the grout is relatively viscous. Although the grout strength is relatively high, its ability to penetrate and permeate the soil is relatively weak. When it reaches a certain level, the bearing capacity decreases.")
[[receiving, by the advisory process,]] a set of outputs from the model group, wherein the set of outputs comprises a stress state of the grout material, a stress limit of a grout interface, or combinations thereof; The stress cloud is given for a simulated model, wherein the model takes into consideration the grout material being distributed within the model and the cement-soil interface. ((Zuo, ¶42) " Step SlS: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7."); ((Zuo, ¶70-71) " When the water-cement ratio is low, the grout is relatively viscous. Although the grout strength is relatively high, its ability to penetrate and permeate the soil is relatively weak. When it reaches a certain level, the bearing capacity decreases. As the water-cement ratio increases, the fluidity of the cement grout increases, enhancing its ability to penetrate the soil. However, its strength weakens after bonding with the soil at the pile tip."); ((Zuo, ¶40) " Based on past engineering experience and relevant test results, the minimum elastic modulus of the cement-soil consolidation body at the grouting end is 1770 MPa. Since the strength of the consolidation body formed by on-site grouting is lower than that of the laboratory model, the elastic modulus of the model consolidation body is usually selected as 1000 MPa. The calculation parameters are shown in Figure 4.")
iterating,[[ by the advisory process,]] a grout material from a first grout material to a second grout material in response to a threshold value exceeding at least one of the set of outputs from the model group; and Different water-cement ratios are evaluated, as iterating at least two grout materials ((Zuo, ¶66) " Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9."). Grouting parameters are optimized, thereby indicating that the optimal grout material is achieved by adjusting different ratios within the model ((Zuo, ¶20) "Step S4: Adjust the ANSYS model to optimize grouting parameters: According to the columnar diffusion theory of grout, the grout is injected into the sandy soil from the grouting hole and diffuses in the soil layer in a columnar shape; according to Darcy's law, the grout flow rate, grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio, etc. are linked to the grouting model; by adjusting the size of the pile end grouting model, the purpose of adjusting the grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio is achieved."); Threshold value for reasonableness of bearing capacity is considered in determining the optimal ratio through the iterative optimization process ((Zuo, ¶21) "The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the AN SYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water- cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles.”)).
generating, [[by the advisory process,]] a job design in response to the set of outputs exceeding the threshold value. Grouting parameters are optimized to obtain a reasonable ratio, wherein reasonableness is characterized by the avoidance of a large amount of grout loss or excessive waste that causes cross-hole phenomena. Based on the reasonable parameters, a water-cement ratio is determined. ((Zuo, ¶20-21) " Step S4: Adjust the ANSYS model to optimize grouting parameters: According to the columnar diffusion theory of grout, the grout is injected into the sandy soil from the grouting hole and diffuses in the soil layer in a columnar shape; according to Darcy's law, the grout flow rate, grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio, etc. are linked to the grouting model; by adjusting the size of the pile end grouting model, the purpose of adjusting the grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio is achieved. The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles."). A water-cement ratio of the grout is determined as part of the pile design ((Zuo, ¶64-65) " Determine the appropriate water-cement ratio: The influence of post-grouting at the pile end on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. After the completion of the post-grouting bored pile, the bearing capacity of the pile end is improved by the combined action of the post-grouting grout and the soil at the pile end. Changing the water-cement ratio of the grout injected after pile tip can affect the extent and intensity of grout penetration into the soil pores, thereby affecting the bearing capacity of a single pile. ")
Zuo does not disclose; however Zuo in view of Abbassian discloses inputting, …a portion of an anchoring pile dataset comprising a plurality of customer input and a borehole path; Data is input by the user via GUIs to configure cementing plans ((Abbassian, ¶181) "FIG. 30 shows an example of a Cementing Console configuration screen, which is the main entry point for a cement job. Cement jobs can be configured and planned using this screen, although a stored configuration or plan file can be uploaded in some embodiments. The user can input or modify, validate, and save the various parameters 380 shown.") See also Figure 33 depicting a trajectory field.
by an advisory process executing on the computer system, (See Abbassian Figures 1 and 2) ((Abbassian, ¶15) "In various embodiments, the present invention comprises a well advisor system for monitoring and managing well drilling and production operations. The system may be accessed through one or more workstations, or other computing devices. A workstation comprises one or more computers or computing devices, and may be located at a well site or remotely. The system can be implemented on a single computer system, multiple computers, a computer server, a handheld computing device, a tablet computing device, a smart phone, or any other type of computing device")
receiving, by an advisory process, The system includes a real-time well advisor system that receives sensor data and well plans in order monitor and advise control to operators ((Abbassian, ¶141) "The software experts develop rules, heuristics, and calibrations applicable to the drilling site derived from the knowledge base that are transmitted via an agent to a drilling advisor application, located at the drilling site, that is coupled to receive signals from multiple sensors at the drilling site, and also to one or more servers that configure and service multiple software agents."); ((Abbassian, ¶151) "For example, the workstation can receive portions of or entire well or cementing plans or geological models 117 from a variety of locations.")
by the advisory process, (See Abbassian Figure 2); ((Abbassian, ¶15) "In various embodiments, the present invention comprises a well advisor system for monitoring and managing well drilling and production operations. The system may be accessed through one or more workstations, or other computing devices. A workstation comprises one or more computers or computing devices, and may be located at a well site or remotely. The system can be implemented on a single computer system, multiple computers, a computer server, a handheld computing device, a tablet computing device, a smart phone, or any other type of computing device")
by the advisory process(See Abbassian Figure 2); ((Abbassian, ¶15) "In various embodiments, the present invention comprises a well advisor system for monitoring and managing well drilling and production operations. The system may be accessed through one or more workstations, or other computing devices. A workstation comprises one or more computers or computing devices, and may be located at a well site or remotely. The system can be implemented on a single computer system, multiple computers, a computer server, a handheld computing device, a tablet computing device, a smart phone, or any other type of computing device")
Zuo is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of optimizing grouting parameters for pile anchor applications. Abbassian is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of automated advisory processes for cementing jobs in wellbore applications. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have combined the prior art references such that the modeling process of Zuo was integrated into the monitoring and advisory process of Abbassian because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation would have led one having skill in the art to make the combination in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Abbassian discloses the utilization of cementing plans to configure an actual system to execute and monitor the cementing job according to the plan and further suggests that the cementing plans may be received from various locations. Zuo describes a method of optimizing aspects of grouting/cementing parameters for utilization in the construction process. Because Abbassian suggests that cementing plans can be received from different sources and Zuo provides an optimal cement blend ratio based on modeling, it would have been obvious to combine the prior art references such that the automated system of Abbassian could leverage the optimal plans generated by Zuo and so that the automated system could carry out the functions performed by the models in the methodology as described by Zuo.
The proposed combination fails to disclose the details of the FEA process so as to include the distribution of forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets that transfer the distributed forces to the pile system via a sleeve. However, the proposed combination in view of the teachings of Chakrabarti discloses wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to the anchoring pile system via a sleeve .Details are provided for the detailed design of a fixed steel jacket tower type of an offshore platform to provide insights for subsequent computerized structural analyses ((Chakrabarti, Page 293, 3¶) " tower-type of an offshore platform (see fig. 6.11). Our initial efforts will concentrate on the problems surrounding the selection of the basic configuration and the major member sizes of a platform such that these will form a valid basis for the subsequent detailed engineering analyses and design activities. We will then spend some time on computerised structural analysis and code check. An analysis helps the designer answer questions about the adequacy or efficiency of his design. "). The jacket/tower design is characterized by a jacket (template) and skirt pile sleeves ((Chakrabarti, Page 296, ¶4) "Jacket/Tower– in addition to providing support for the deck, jacket (may also be called steel template or the tower) provides support for conductors and other substructures such as boat landings, barge bumpers, risers, sumps, j-tubes, walkways, mud-mats, etc. The major jacket structure components are:– Jacket legs– Braces (vertical, horizontal and diagonal),– Joints, which are the intersection points of legs and braces. Bracing stubs and cans may be provided to reduce stresses and improve the ductile behaviour of joints,– Launch runners and trusses, if the jacket will be transported and launched to sea from a launch barge using skid and tilting beams,– Skirt pile sleeves and braces (if skirt piles are needed),– Appurtenances (boat landings, barge bumpers, conductor bracing and guides, risers, clamps, grout and flooding lines, j-tubes, walkways, mud-mats, etc.)."). Connections are described as being achieved through grouting between the jacket and the sleeve, wherein the connections are characterized by the load transfer between such components ((Chakrabarti, Page 387, ¶5) "Grouted Pile to Sleeve Connections If the piles are driven through the skirt pile sleeves, the skirt pile to jacket connection could be achieved through grouting the piles inside the pile sleeves. In such connections, the jacket load is transferred to the pile by the sleeve across the grout. Tests on the strength of plain pile to sleeve grouted connections with no shear keys demonstrate high scatter and uncertainty because of the inadequate confinement due to flexibility of the large pile and sleeve diameters and difficulty of fully displacing the water in the annulus with surface pumped grout."). A 3D simulation and analysis of the jacket structure under actual loading conditions is performed according to design choices ((Chakrabarti, Page 333, ¶12-13) " Full three dimensional simulation and analysis of the jacket and deck structures under actual design loading conditions will result in a better determination of final member sizes (see next Section 6.2.4). Once estimates for the platform geometry and member sizes are available, these are input to a structural analysis computer program to perform a three-dimensional structural analysis. There are a number software programs available for offshore platform design and analysis [SACS, Sesam, StruCad]. A typical platform analysis program would compute the structural deflections, member loads, stresses, utilisation ratios and support reactions, given initial member sizes and platform loads. Generally, repeated structural computer analyses are performed to revise over or under-utilised member sizes and the platform loads and load combinations at each step (see the design spiral in Section 6.1.2). ")
Chakrabarti is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of anchoring pile design optimizations to included grouted configurations. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have modified the finite element analysis process disclosed by Zuo with the teachings of Chakrabarti because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one having skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses the implementation of a numerical simulation as part of an optimization methodology for determining the appropriate water-cement ratio in grouting of large diameter anchor piles but does not particularly disclose the implementation details of the ANSYS simulation to describe what occurs within. Chakrabarti, however, discloses important considerations in the design of anchor pile systems, particularly noting the relationship between the transfer of jacket loads to the foundation piles is a significant consideration ((Chakrabarti, page 387, ¶4) "Safe transfer of the jacket loads to the foundation piles is an important design consideration. If piles are to be driven through the jacket legs, the axial load transfer could be achieved through use of a welded connection between the jacket leg top and the pile (fig. 6.50)."). Chakrabarti further describes how the loads are applied in such a configuration and details that the configuration can be input to a structural analysis program to evaluate the fatigue reactions of the system to the imparted loads. ((Chakrabarti, Page 396, ¶2) "Fatigue is a major design concern for deepwater platforms that are subject to dynamically amplified stress ranges. The fatigue analysis procedures for deepwater platforms are same as those described in Section 6.3.1.1– Fatigue Strength of Simple Tubular Joints. Fatigue behaviour of deepwater platforms can be improved by: Development of accurate site specific database, wave parameters, spectral characteristics and associated wave scatter diagrams, Generating accurate stress range RAOs by performing time domain analyses and using realistic structural damping values, Using accurate SCF formulations or performing special finite element analyses for calculating the SCFs of critical joints, Paying attention to the quality of the tubular joint welding. Using appropriate fatigue life improvement techniques, including weld profiling, buttering, grinding and peening justifying use of higher fatigue S–N curves, Considering use of specially contoured cast steel joint nodes with low SCF values for fatigue sensitive platform joints. "). Accordingly, because discloses an implementation of a numerical analysis without providing explicit details and Chakrabarti explicitly discloses a key relationship at particular joints in a configuration with a jacket and sleeve component whereby loads are distributed from the load point through the jacket and sleeve to the anchoring pile system and further discloses modeling the configuration to account for the loads imparted on such a configuration so as to aide in the design of an anchoring pile system which may include grouted joints, the combination would have accordingly been obvious to one having skill in the art.
Regarding claim 12, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 11, as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Abbassian discloses further comprising retrieving, by the advisory process, the anchoring pile dataset from a storage computer by an electronic communication method, wherein the anchor pile dataset comprises the plurality of customer inputs, a plurality of sensor data, the borehole path, a material inventory, or combinations thereof. Electronic communications are used to receive cementing plans and geological models ((Abbassian, ¶150-151) "In one exemplary embodiment, the network interface may comprise a wire-based interface ( e.g., Ethernet), or a wireless interface (e.g., BlueTooth, wireless broadband, IEEE 802.1 lx WiFi, or the like), which provides network connectivity to the workstation and system to enable communications across local and/or wide area networks. For example, the workstation can receive portions of or entire well or cementing plans or geological models 117 from a variety of locations. The storage devices 110 may comprise both nonvolatile storage devices ( e.g., flash memory, hard disk drive, or the like) and volatile storage devices ( e.g., RAM), or combinations thereof. The storage devices store the system software 115 which is executable by the processors or microprocessors to perform some or all of the functions describe below. The storage devices also may be used to store well plans, geological models 117, configuration files and other data."); The data used by the system includes sensor data and data from users ((Abbassian, ¶145) "The system is in communication with and receives input from various sensors 120, 130. In general, the system collects real-time sensor data sampled during operations at the well site, which may include drilling operations, running casing or tubular goods, completion operations, or the like."); ((Abbassian, ¶160) "Users can export an agent configuration file for other users to import and use"); (See also Abbassian Figure 33 with a trajectory)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination in further view of Abbassian because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation would have led one having ordinary skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses characterizing models based on an actual situation or design requirements but does not particularly disclose the source of the parameters, and merely indicates that the model information should be added according to the actual situation ((Zuo, ¶39) "The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation."). Abbassian discloses a collection of information by which to generate initial and updated cement job plans, which can be obtained as user input, from a knowledge base, sensor signals, or configuration files ((Abbassian, ¶135) "The present invention may be implemented into an expert computer hardware and software system, implemented and operating on multiple levels, to derive and apply specific tools at a drilling site from a common knowledge base, including, but not limited to, information from multiple drilling sites, production fields, drilling equipment, and drilling environments. At a highest level, a knowledge base is developed from attributes and measurements of prior and current wells, information regarding the subsurface of the production fields into which prior and current wells have been or are being drilled, lithology models for the subsurface at or near the drilling site, and the like."); ((Abbassian, ¶181) "FIG. 30 shows an example of a Cementing Console configuration screen, which is the main entry point for a cement job. Cement jobs can be configured and planned using this screen, although a stored configuration or plan file can be uploaded in some embodiments. The user can input or modify, validate, and save the various parameters 380 shown."); ((Abbassian, ¶203) “If the "sync with cement activity" option is selected, the widget will automatically start drawing real-time data when the cementing smart agent has detected that the cement job has started."). Because Zuo notes that model inputs can be obtained according to the actual situation and Abbassian discloses data sources including a sensed dataset from a cementing job reflecting of the actual situation, it would have been obvious to make the combination.
Regarding claim 13, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 11, as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) further comprising generating, by the model group, the numerical model, by a finite element analysis (FEA) process, from a first set of model inputs, wherein the first set of model inputs comprises [[a portion of the anchoring pile dataset.]] The cast-in-place pile model system made in Ansys numerical simulation software is modeled according to behavior parameters that are set (as an input) and adopted to the geometric model ((Zuo, ¶36-37) "In the ANSYS numerical simulation software, the large-diameter cast-in-place pile model is modeled at a completely proportional scale. The soil model adopts the MC elastoplastic model, while the cast-in-place piles and grouting materials are established using elastic models. During the modeling process, the soil is considered as an isotropic elastoplastic body. In the numerical simulation, the post-grouting only considers the seepage compaction effect and does not consider the splitting reinforcement effect. The pile end and pile side consolidation body are simplified into regular cylinders. Contact surface elements are used to simulate the contact surface between the pile wall and the soil. The pile top load is set as a uniformly distributed load when simulating the static load test."). Boundary conditions are added (inputting model inputs) to the meshed model such that the model is characterized by numeric values for calculated analysis ((Zuo, ¶38-40) "Step S11: Establish a meshed model: ANSYS software has powerful mesh modeling capabilities. A meshed model that meets the requirements can be established through command flow. The overall model obtained is shown in Figure 2, and the grouting body model obtained is shown in Figure 3. Step Sl2: Determine boundary conditions: Add certain displacement constraints to the bottom and around the model to limit the model's translation, vertical displacement and rotation. The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation. Step Sl3: Assign material property values to the model: Based on the design drawings, specifications, and geological survey data, select the most representative parameters to merge and simplify the soil. Based on past engineering experience and relevant test results, the minimum elastic modulus of the cement-soil consolidation body at the grouting end is 1770 MPa. Since the strength of the consolidation body formed by on-site grouting is lower than that of the laboratory model, the elastic modulus of the model consolidation body is usually selected as 1000 MPa. The calculation parameters are shown in Figure 4.")
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo does not disclose; however, in further view of Abbassian discloses comprises a portion of the anchoring pile dataset. A collection of data characterizing cement test wells, wherein cementing in well applications is understood to be associated with the foundational support such as with anchor piles is used to configure a cementing plan (See at least Abbassian Figures 32-37 depicting selecting user inputs characterizing a cement job plan); ((Abbassian, ¶186) "Clicking the "Create New Cement Plan" button 420 enables the user to create and configure the cement plan, and also configure the cementing smart agent. The cement plan is configured in the "cement component" section 422 of the configuration screen, as seen in FIG. 36. Components can be added or removed by clicking the appropriate buttons or icons (in one embodiment, a green"+" button is used to add components, and a red "X" button is used to delete components)."). ((Abbassian, ¶22) "In several embodiments, the system software comprises a database/server, a display or visualization module, one or more smart agents, one or more templates, and one or more "widgets." The database/server aggregates, distributes and manages real-time data being generated on the rig and received through the sensors"); ((Abbassian, ¶134) "The term "knowledge base" refers to a specialized database for the computerized collection, organization, and retrieval of knowledge, for example in connection with an expert system");
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination to incorporate the anchor pile dataset of Abbassian as the source of data for the model inputs of Zuo because some teaching, suggestion or motivation would have led one having ordinary skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses adding parameters to the numeric model but does not particularly disclose the source of the parameters, and merely indicates that the model information should be added according to the actual situation ((Zuo, ¶39) "The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation."). Abbassian discloses a collection of information by which to generate initial and updated cement job plans, which can be obtained as user input, from a knowledge base, sensor signals, or configuration files ((Abbassian, ¶135) "The present invention may be implemented into an expert computer hardware and software system, implemented and operating on multiple levels, to derive and apply specific tools at a drilling site from a common knowledge base, including, but not limited to, information from multiple drilling sites, production fields, drilling equipment, and drilling environments. At a highest level, a knowledge base is developed from attributes and measurements of prior and current wells, information regarding the subsurface of the production fields into which prior and current wells have been or are being drilled, lithology models for the subsurface at or near the drilling site, and the like."); ((Abbassian, ¶181) "FIG. 30 shows an example of a Cementing Console configuration screen, which is the main entry point for a cement job. Cement jobs can be configured and planned using this screen, although a stored configuration or plan file can be uploaded in some embodiments. The user can input or modify, validate, and save the various parameters 380 shown."); ((Abbassian, ¶203) “If the "sync with cement activity" option is selected, the widget will automatically start drawing real-time data when the cementing smart agent has detected that the cement job has started."). Because Zuo notes that model inputs can be obtained according to the actual situation and Abbassian discloses data sources including a sensed dataset from a cementing job reflecting of the actual situation, it would have been obvious to make the combination.
Regarding claim 14, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 11, as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) further comprising generating, by the model group, the set of operational loads by a load point model from a second set of model inputs, wherein the second set of modeling inputs comprises [[a portion of the anchoring pile dataset.]] A stress field is created by applied model parameter settings ((Zuo, ¶41) "Step S14: Forming the initial stress field: After assigning material parameters to the model using the command flow, the stress field under the initial stress state is solved using the SOLVE solver to ensure that the stress on the model is in a convergent state. The maximum unbalanced force during the calculation is shown in Figure 5. The rationality of the model parameter settings is verified. After the calculation is completed, the stress cloud map in the Z direction of the initial stress field is obtained, as shown in Figure 6."). Static loads are applied to the model after the stress field is obtained per S14 ((Zuo, ¶42) "Step SlS: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7.")
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo does not disclose; however in further view of Abbassian discloses a portion of the anchoring pile dataset A collection of data characterizing cement test wells, wherein cementing in well applications is understood to be associated with the foundational support such as with anchor piles is used to configure a cementing plan (See at least Abbassian Figures 32-37 depicting selecting user inputs characterizing a cement job plan); ((Abbassian, ¶186) "Clicking the "Create New Cement Plan" button 420 enables the user to create and configure the cement plan, and also configure the cementing smart agent. The cement plan is configured in the "cement component" section 422 of the configuration screen, as seen in FIG. 36. Components can be added or removed by clicking the appropriate buttons or icons (in one embodiment, a green"+" button is used to add components, and a red "X" button is used to delete components)."). ((Abbassian, ¶22) "In several embodiments, the system software comprises a database/server, a display or visualization module, one or more smart agents, one or more templates, and one or more "widgets." The database/server aggregates, distributes and manages real-time data being generated on the rig and received through the sensors"); ((Abbassian, ¶134) "The term "knowledge base" refers to a specialized database for the computerized collection, organization, and retrieval of knowledge, for example in connection with an expert system");
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination to incorporate the anchor pile dataset of Abbassian as the source of data for the model inputs of Zuo because some teaching, suggestion or motivation would have led one having ordinary skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses characterizing the load model based on an actual situation or design requirements but does not particularly disclose the source of the parameters, and merely indicates that the model information should be added according to the actual situation ((Zuo, ¶39) "The model itself needs to have its self-weight and pile top load added according to the actual situation."). Abbassian discloses a collection of information by which to generate initial and updated cement job plans, which can be obtained as user input, from a knowledge base, sensor signals, or configuration files ((Abbassian, ¶135) "The present invention may be implemented into an expert computer hardware and software system, implemented and operating on multiple levels, to derive and apply specific tools at a drilling site from a common knowledge base, including, but not limited to, information from multiple drilling sites, production fields, drilling equipment, and drilling environments. At a highest level, a knowledge base is developed from attributes and measurements of prior and current wells, information regarding the subsurface of the production fields into which prior and current wells have been or are being drilled, lithology models for the subsurface at or near the drilling site, and the like."); ((Abbassian, ¶181) "FIG. 30 shows an example of a Cementing Console configuration screen, which is the main entry point for a cement job. Cement jobs can be configured and planned using this screen, although a stored configuration or plan file can be uploaded in some embodiments. The user can input or modify, validate, and save the various parameters 380 shown."); ((Abbassian, ¶203) “If the "sync with cement activity" option is selected, the widget will automatically start drawing real-time data when the cementing smart agent has detected that the cement job has started."). Because Zuo notes that model inputs can be obtained according to the actual situation and Abbassian discloses data sources including a sensed dataset from a cementing job reflecting of the actual situation, it would have been obvious to make the combination.
Regarding claim 15, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 11, as stated previously. The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) further comprising generating, by the model group, the stress limit of the grout interface by a geophysical model from a third set of model inputs, wherein the grout interface is located between the grout material and a formation and wherein the third set of model inputs comprises [[a portion of the anchoring pile dataset.]] The elastic modulus of the cement-soil consolidation body (as the model representing the interface between the grout cement and the soil characterizing the geological formation) is derived and selected based on experience, test results, drawings, specifications, and survey data that define the model’s behavior ((Zuo, ¶40) " Step Sl3: Assign material property values to the model: Based on the design drawings, specifications, and geological survey data, select the most representative parameters to merge and simplify the soil. Based on past engineering experience and relevant test results, the minimum elastic modulus of the cement-soil consolidation body at the grouting end is 1770 MPa. Since the strength of the consolidation body formed by on-site grouting is lower than that of the laboratory model, the elastic modulus of the model consolidation body is usually selected as 1000 MPa. The calculation parameters are shown in Figure 4.")
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo does not disclose; however in further view of Abbassian discloses a portion of the anchoring pile dataset. A collection of data characterizing cement test wells, wherein cementing in well applications is understood to be associated with the foundational support such as with anchor piles is used to configure a cementing plan (See at least Abbassian Figures 32-37 depicting selecting user inputs characterizing a cement job plan); ((Abbassian, ¶186) "Clicking the "Create New Cement Plan" button 420 enables the user to create and configure the cement plan, and also configure the cementing smart agent. The cement plan is configured in the "cement component" section 422 of the configuration screen, as seen in FIG. 36. Components can be added or removed by clicking the appropriate buttons or icons (in one embodiment, a green"+" button is used to add components, and a red "X" button is used to delete components)."). ((Abbassian, ¶22) "In several embodiments, the system software comprises a database/server, a display or visualization module, one or more smart agents, one or more templates, and one or more "widgets." The database/server aggregates, distributes and manages real-time data being generated on the rig and received through the sensors"); ((Abbassian, ¶134) "The term "knowledge base" refers to a specialized database for the computerized collection, organization, and retrieval of knowledge, for example in connection with an expert system");
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination such that the model inputs to characterize the cement-soil interaction model of Zuo were obtained as part of a comprehensive dataset on an automated system as disclosed by Abbassian because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one having ordinary skill to combine the references in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses reliance on drawings, specification, geological survey data, past engineering experience, and relevant test results to identify the appropriate parameters for the model. Abbassian provides a centralized and digital corpus of information pertinent to the cementing applications for wellbores, wherein information can be acquired and stored in a database and wherein information can be acquired from multiple sources, including user input ((Abbassian, ¶135) "The present invention may be implemented into an expert computer hardware and software system, implemented and operating on multiple levels, to derive and apply specific tools at a drilling site from a common knowledge base, including, but not limited to, information from multiple drilling sites, production fields, drilling equipment, and drilling environments. At a highest level, a knowledge base is developed from attributes and measurements of prior and current wells, information regarding the subsurface of the production fields into which prior and current wells have been or are being drilled, lithology models for the subsurface at or near the drilling site, and the like."); ((Abbassian, ¶186) "Clicking the "Create New Cement Plan" button 420 enables the user to create and configure the cement plan, and also configure the cementing smart agent. The cement plan is configured in the "cement component" section 422 of the configuration screen, as seen in FIG. 36. Components can be added or removed by clicking the appropriate buttons or icons (in one embodiment, a green"+" button is used to add com ponents and a red "X" button is used to delete components)."). Accordingly because Zuo suggests that parameters may be set from knowledge obtained from multiple data sources and Abbassian provides a central and digital mechanism for acquiring such data for cement planning purposes, it would have accordingly been obvious to make the combination to a person having skill in the art.
Regarding claim 16, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 11, as stated previously. The proposed combination discloses in further view of Zuo wherein the model group comprising a least one model selected from a group consisting of a pile FEA model, a stress model, a load point model, and a geophysical model. The model of the pile is characterized by contact surfaces in a mesh, thereby indicating an FEA model (See also figure 3) ((Zuo, ¶37) "The pile end and pile side consolidation body are simplified into regular cylinders. Contact surface elements are used to simulate the contact surface between the pile wall and the soil. The pile top load is set as a uniformly distributed load when simulating the static load test."). A soil model is also modeled in the simulation (as a geophysical model) ((Zuo, ¶37) " The soil model adopts the MC elastoplastic model, while the cast-in-place piles and grouting materials are established using elastic models. During the modeling process, the soil is considered as an isotropic elastoplastic body"). A stress field is also modeled ((Zuo, ¶41) " Step S14: Forming the initial stress field: After assigning material parameters to the model using the command flow, the stress field under the initial stress state is solved using the SOLVE solver to ensure that the stress on the model is in a convergent state. The maximum unbalanced force during the calculation is shown in Figure 5. The rationality of the model parameter settings is verified. After the calculation is completed, the stress cloud map in the Z direction of the initial stress field is obtained, as shown in Figure 6.")
Regarding claim 17, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 11, as stated previously. The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses wherein the set of outputs from the model group comprises a numerical model of the anchoring pile system, the stress state of a grout material, a stress state of a grout interface, a stress limit of an interface located between the grout material and a formation, a distribution of an operational load to the anchoring pile system, a probability value of a failure of the grout material or a portion of the grout material, or combinations thereof. A numerical model of the anchoring pile system is established and characterized per simulation results as an output ((Zuo, ¶44) "The comparison between the simulation results and the test pile results shows that the numerical simulation results of the static load test of the single pile of the post-grouting bored"). The stress cloud of the pile and soil, as well as the settlement are generated as outputs of the simulation ((Zuo, ¶44) "Step S3: Comparison of ANSYS simulation results and test pile results: By simulating the load conditions of the test pile using AN SYS, the settlement at the pile end under different load levels can be obtained, and stress cloud diagrams of the pile and soil under different load conditions can be obtained.")
Regarding claim 18, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 11, as stated previously.
The proposed combination discloses in further view of Zuo discloses wherein the threshold value comprises a probability value for achieving a job objective, a lifecycle value for a grout, a stress state of the anchor pile system, or combinations thereof. Ensuring the injection of grout, construction safety, and project quality is a certain probability (100%) that the job objective will occur and avoiding loss is a 0% probability that loss will occur. The other objectives are indicative of reduced probability values ((Zuo, ¶21) "The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water-cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles."). Bearing capacity is further analyzed and quantified against a certain value for when it begins to decrease ((Zuo, ¶66) "Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9. The numerical simulation results show that: Starting with a water-cement ratio of 0.35, the bearing capacity of a single pile gradually increases with the increase of the water-cement ratio. When it reaches a certain value, the bearing capacity of a single pile shows a decreasing trend.")
Regarding claim 24, Zuo discloses The method of claim 23, further comprising: as stated herein under the grounds of Zuo in view of Chakrabarti..
Zuo further discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) [[retrieving,]] by the FEA process, [[from a database a plurality of customer inputs, a plurality of sensor data, a borehole path, a material inventory, or combinations thereof]]. A command flow is utilized create a meshed model that meets requirements
Zuo alone does not disclose; however, Zuo in view of Abbassian discloses retrieving, …, from a database, a plurality of customer inputs, a plurality of sensor data, a borehole path, a material inventory, or combinations thereof. ((Abbassian, ¶22) "In several embodiments, the system software comprises a database/server, a display or visualization module, one or more smart agents, one or more templates, and one or more "widgets." The database/server aggregates, distributes and manages real-time data being generated on the rig and received through the sensors"); ((Abbassian, ¶134) "The term "knowledge base" refers to a specialized database for the computerized collection, organization, and retrieval of knowledge, for example in connection with an expert system"); ((Abbassian, ¶135) "The present invention may be implemented into an expert computer hardware and software system, implemented and operating on multiple levels, to derive and apply specific tools at a drilling site from a common knowledge base, including, but not limited to, information from multiple drilling sites, production fields, drilling equipment, and drilling environments. At a highest level, a knowledge base is developed from attributes and measurements of prior and current wells, information regarding the subsurface of the production fields into which prior and current wells have been or are being drilled, lithology models for the subsurface at or near the drilling site, and the like."); ((Abbassian, ¶141) "According to another aspect of the invention, the software agents in the network of agents are controlled by the system to provide the recommendations to the drillers, using one or more rules, heuristics, and calibrations derived from the knowledge base and current sensor signals from the drill ing site, and as such in a situationally aware manner. In this regard, the software agents interact among multiple software servers and hardware states in order to provide recommendations that assist human drillers in the drilling of a borehole into the earth at a safely maximized drilling rate")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have incorporated the knowledge base of Abbassian into the grout optimization method of Zuo because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation would have led one having ordinary skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses that parameters for the model should be selected based on the actual situation but does not particularly provide reference to data which describes the actual situation. Abbassian describes an automated system for configuring cementing jobs for well applications that leverages real-time sensor data and information within a knowledge base in order to make real-time assessments and control of an active cementing job. Because Zuo indicates that actual situation data is pertinent to determining the inputs of the models and Abbassian provides a mechanism by which to acquire such data, the combination would have been obvious.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zuo et al (CN114117592A), hereinafter referred to as Zuo in view of Chakrabarti (Chakrabarti, S., “Handbook of Offshore Engineering- Chapter 6: Fixed Offshore Platform Design”, Elsevier, 2005), hereinafter referred to as Chakrabarti .
Regarding claim 23, Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) A method of designing an anchoring pile system, comprising: A method is described for analyzing a cast-in-place pile ((Zuo, ¶34) "The present invention provides a method for analyzing the water-cement ratio in grouting of large-diameter cast-in-place piles based on ANSYS numerical simulation, comprising: "). The simulation is performed according to design requirements ((Zuo, ¶40) "Step S13: Assign material property values to the model: Based on the design drawings, specifications, and geological survey data, select the most representative parameters to merge and simplify the soil."); ((Zuo, ¶40) " Step S15: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7.”).
generating, by a finite element analysis (FEA) process, a numerical model of the
anchoring pile system; See Figure 3, wherein a grid model is established using ANSYS modeling software to evaluate the finite elements of the model ((Zuo, ¶38) " Step S11: Establish a meshed model: ANSYS software has powerful mesh modeling capabilities. A meshed model that meets the requirements can be established through command flow. The overall model obtained is shown in Figure 2, and the grouting body model obtained is shown in Figure 3."). The model is described as being evaluating in numerical simulation, thereby indicating that the model is a numerical model ((Zuo, ¶3) " The technical solution uses ANSYS to establish a model to determine the grouting pressure through numerical simulation")
applying a set of operational loads to the numerical model, [[wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to an anchoring pile system via a sleeve;]] Load is applied to the simulated pile as part of the simulation ((Zuo, ¶42) "Step Sl5: Simulate static load test to obtain settlement results: According to the design requirements and the stress of a single pile, apply load to the pile end in the model step by step to obtain the Q-S curve of the post-grouting cast-in-place pile; during the load application process, the settlement cloud map in the Z direction of the model is shown in Figure 7.");((Zuo, ¶44) " Step S3: Comparison of ANSYS simulation results and test pile results: By simulating the load conditions of the test pile using ANSYS, the settlement at the pile end under different load levels can be obtained, and stress cloud diagrams of the pile and soil under different load conditions can be obtained.")
applying a set of material properties of a grout material to the numerical model; The ratio of water and cement are changed in the model to evaluate the influence of the material ((Zuo, ¶65-66) " The influence of post-grouting at the pile end on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. After the completion of the post-grouting bored pile, the bearing capacity of the pile end is improved by the combined action of the post-grouting grout and the soil at the pile end. Changing the water-cement ratio of the grout injected after pile tip can affect the extent and intensity of grout penetration into the soil pores, thereby affecting the bearing capacity of a single pile. Without changing other conditions, the influence of the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout on the bearing capacity of a single pile was analyzed by changing the water-cement ratio of the post-grouting grout. The Q-S curve comparison diagram under different water-cement ratios was obtained, as shown in Figure 9."); ((Zuo, ¶74) " Under otherwise unchanged conditions, the influence of the amount of grouting cement on the bearing capacity of a single pile of a post-grouting bored cast-in-place pile is analyzed by changing the mechanical properties and range of action of the grouting material at the pile tip.")
determining a risk of failure value for at least one grout location of the grout material on the anchoring pile system; and The bearing capacity value (wherein decreased/non-optimal bearing capacity is understood to be a failure) is determined for a single pile, based on the water-cement ratio of grout applied to the pile tip ((Zuo, ¶68) "Starting with a water-cement ratio of 0.35, the bearing capacity of a single pile gradually increases with the increase of the water-cement ratio. When it reaches a certain value, the bearing capacity of a single pile shows a decreasing trend."); ((Zuo, ¶74) " Under otherwise unchanged conditions, the influence of the amount of grouting cement on the bearing capacity of a single pile of a post-grouting bored cast-in-place pile is analyzed by changing the mechanical properties and range of action of the grouting material at the pile tip."). The optimal water-cement ratio ensures effective injection which insures construction safety, cost savings, quality and improved bearing capacity, wherein the opposite of these benefits may be considered a failure ((Zuo, ¶77) "After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water-cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss. By adopting a reasonable cement grout injection volume (2.St) under simulated geological conditions, cement consumption can be saved, and the problems of grout leakage and overflow caused by excessive cement injection can be solved. This ensures construction safety, effectively reduces construction costs, guarantees project quality, and improves the bearing capacity of single piles.")
generating an anchoring pile design in response to the risk of failure value exceeding a risk threshold value. Grouting parameters are optimized to obtain a reasonable ratio, wherein reasonableness is characterized by the avoidance of a large amount of grout loss or excessive waste that causes cross-hole phenomena. Based on the reasonable parameters, a water-cement ratio is determined. ((Zuo, ¶20-21) " Step S4: Adjust the ANSYS model to optimize grouting parameters: According to the columnar diffusion theory of grout, the grout is injected into the sandy soil from the grouting hole and diffuses in the soil layer in a columnar shape; according to Darcy's law, the grout flow rate, grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio, etc. are linked to the grouting model; by adjusting the size of the pile end grouting model, the purpose of adjusting the grouting pressure, cement content, water-cement ratio is achieved. The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles.")
The proposed combination fails to disclose the details of the FEA process so as to include the distribution of forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets that transfer the distributed forces to the pile system via a sleeve. However, the proposed combination in view of the teachings of Chakrabarti discloses wherein the FEA process distributes forces from a load point model to one or more template sockets, which transfer the distributed forces to an anchoring pile system via a sleeve; Details are provided for the detailed design of a fixed steel jacket tower type of an offshore platform to provide insights for subsequent computerized structural analyses ((Chakrabarti, Page 293, 3¶) " tower-type of an offshore platform (see fig. 6.11). Our initial efforts will concentrate on the problems surrounding the selection of the basic configuration and the major member sizes of a platform such that these will form a valid basis for the subsequent detailed engineering analyses and design activities. We will then spend some time on computerised structural analysis and code check. An analysis helps the designer answer questions about the adequacy or efficiency of his design. "). The jacket/tower design is characterized by a jacket (template) and skirt pile sleeves ((Chakrabarti, Page 296, ¶4) "Jacket/Tower– in addition to providing support for the deck, jacket (may also be called steel template or the tower) provides support for conductors and other substructures such as boat landings, barge bumpers, risers, sumps, j-tubes, walkways, mud-mats, etc. The major jacket structure components are:– Jacket legs– Braces (vertical, horizontal and diagonal),– Joints, which are the intersection points of legs and braces. Bracing stubs and cans may be provided to reduce stresses and improve the ductile behaviour of joints,– Launch runners and trusses, if the jacket will be transported and launched to sea from a launch barge using skid and tilting beams,– Skirt pile sleeves and braces (if skirt piles are needed),– Appurtenances (boat landings, barge bumpers, conductor bracing and guides, risers, clamps, grout and flooding lines, j-tubes, walkways, mud-mats, etc.)."). Connections are described as being achieved through grouting between the jacket and the sleeve, wherein the connections are characterized by the load transfer between such components ((Chakrabarti, Page 387, ¶5) "Grouted Pile to Sleeve Connections If the piles are driven through the skirt pile sleeves, the skirt pile to jacket connection could be achieved through grouting the piles inside the pile sleeves. In such connections, the jacket load is transferred to the pile by the sleeve across the grout. Tests on the strength of plain pile to sleeve grouted connections with no shear keys demonstrate high scatter and uncertainty because of the inadequate confinement due to flexibility of the large pile and sleeve diameters and difficulty of fully displacing the water in the annulus with surface pumped grout."). A 3D simulation and analysis of the jacket structure under actual loading conditions is performed according to design choices ((Chakrabarti, Page 333, ¶12-13) " Full three dimensional simulation and analysis of the jacket and deck structures under actual design loading conditions will result in a better determination of final member sizes (see next Section 6.2.4). Once estimates for the platform geometry and member sizes are available, these are input to a structural analysis computer program to perform a three-dimensional structural analysis. There are a number software programs available for offshore platform design and analysis [SACS, Sesam, StruCad]. A typical platform analysis program would compute the structural deflections, member loads, stresses, utilisation ratios and support reactions, given initial member sizes and platform loads. Generally, repeated structural computer analyses are performed to revise over or under-utilised member sizes and the platform loads and load combinations at each step (see the design spiral in Section 6.1.2). ")
Chakrabarti is analogous to the claimed invention because it is related to the same field of endeavor of anchoring pile design optimizations to included grouted configurations. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have modified the finite element analysis process disclosed by Zuo with the teachings of Chakrabarti because some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one having skill in the art to do so in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Zuo discloses the implementation of a numerical simulation as part of an optimization methodology for determining the appropriate water-cement ratio in grouting of large diameter anchor piles but does not particularly disclose the implementation details of the ANSYS simulation to describe what occurs within. Chakrabarti, however, discloses important considerations in the design of anchor pile systems, particularly noting the relationship between the transfer of jacket loads to the foundation piles is a significant consideration ((Chakrabarti, page 387, ¶4) "Safe transfer of the jacket loads to the foundation piles is an important design consideration. If piles are to be driven through the jacket legs, the axial load transfer could be achieved through use of a welded connection between the jacket leg top and the pile (fig. 6.50)."). Chakrabarti further describes how the loads are applied in such a configuration and details that the configuration can be input to a structural analysis program to evaluate the fatigue reactions of the system to the imparted loads. ((Chakrabarti, Page 396, ¶2) "Fatigue is a major design concern for deepwater platforms that are subject to dynamically amplified stress ranges. The fatigue analysis procedures for deepwater platforms are same as those described in Section 6.3.1.1– Fatigue Strength of Simple Tubular Joints. Fatigue behaviour of deepwater platforms can be improved by: Development of accurate site specific database, wave parameters, spectral characteristics and associated wave scatter diagrams, Generating accurate stress range RAOs by performing time domain analyses and using realistic structural damping values, Using accurate SCF formulations or performing special finite element analyses for calculating the SCFs of critical joints, Paying attention to the quality of the tubular joint welding. Using appropriate fatigue life improvement techniques, including weld profiling, buttering, grinding and peening justifying use of higher fatigue S–N curves, Considering use of specially contoured cast steel joint nodes with low SCF values for fatigue sensitive platform joints. "). Accordingly, because discloses an implementation of a numerical analysis without providing explicit details and Chakrabarti explicitly discloses a key relationship at particular joints in a configuration with a jacket and sleeve component whereby loads are distributed from the load point through the jacket and sleeve to the anchoring pile system and further discloses modeling the configuration to account for the loads imparted on such a configuration so as to aide in the design of an anchoring pile system which may include grouted joints, the combination would have accordingly been obvious to one having skill in the art.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zuo in view of Chun and Chakrabarti as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd (Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd, “Ground Anchor Installation”, YouTube.com, November 24, 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sky7QIhg_9M), hereinafter referred to as Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd.
Regarding claim 10, the proposed combination discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising: as stated previously.
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses except transporting the grout blend to a construction site [[with a plurality of pumping equipment]] in response to an output of the anchoring pile design, wherein the grout blend is included in the anchoring pile design, [[wherein the plurality of pumping equipment comprises a unit controller; ]] On-site piles (as a construction site) are grouted via injection of cement, wherein injection is described as moving grout from the grouting hole to sandy soil (as being transported), wherein the cement comprises a blend of water and cement ((Zuo, ¶21) " The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: After adjusting the AN SYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post-grouting adopts a reasonable water cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss; it can save cement usage, reduce grout cross-hole phenomena caused by excessive cement injection, ensure construction safety while effectively reducing construction costs, ensuring project quality, and improving the bearing capacity of single piles. ");((Zuo, ¶46) "According to the columnar diffusion theory of grout, assuming that the grouting soil layer is homogeneous and isotropic, the grout is a Newtonian fluid, the grout is injected into the sandy soil from the grouting hole, and the grout diffuses in the soil layer in a columnar shape ");((Zuo, ¶77) "After adjusting the ANSYS model to obtain reasonable grouting parameters, the on-site post grouting adopts a reasonable water-cement ratio that matches the corresponding engineering geological conditions, which can effectively ensure the injection volume of grout and avoid a large amount of grout loss.").
[[connecting the plurality of pumping equipment to the at least one borehole via the drilling assembly, wherein the plurality of pumping equipment is fluidically coupled to the at least one borehole via the drilling assembly;]]
[[beginning a grout placement procedure by the unit controller;]]
[[retrieving, by the unit controller, one or more datasets of periodic pumping data indicative of a pumping operation;]]
[[pumping a wet grout blend per a pumping procedure into the borehole via an inner passage of the drilling assembly;]]
[[coupling the drilling assembly to a sleeve;]]
[[disconnecting a workstring from the drilling assembly; and]]
[[coupling a set of operational loads to the sleeve.]]
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo does not disclose; however in further view of Chun discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]]))
The proposed combination in further view of Zuo discloses (except the limitations surrounded by brackets ([[..]])) … with a plurality of pumping equipment …wherein the plurality of pumping equipment comprises a unit controller; Equipment for performing a grouting operation to moves grout is described as including a grout material supply unit, a grout pump, sensors, pressure and flow controller and a computer in communication to the controller on the pump ((Chun, ¶63) "The grouting automatic management system is composed of a grout material supply unit, a grout pump that receives grout material from the grout material supply unit and pumps it, a sensor (pressure gauge, flow meter) that detects the pressure and flow rate of the grout material pumped through the grout pump, a controller that controls the pressure and flow rate of the grout material pumped through the grout pump, and a computer that communicates with the controller to display and store injection pressure and injection amount in real time.").
[[connecting the plurality of pumping equipment to the at least one borehole via the drilling assembly, wherein the plurality of pumping equipment is fluidically coupled to the at least one borehole via the drilling assembly;]]
beginning a grout placement procedure by the unit controller; The computer includes an automatic injection management program ((Chun, ¶71) " The above computer (laptop computer) has the configuration of a typical laptop computer, has an automatic injection management program installed, and displays the grouting progress in real time through the flow rate and pressure values transmitted from the controller via wired or wireless communication through the automatic management program, and at the same time stores the flow rate and pressure values, and when the flow rate values of the flow meter and the pressure meter and the discharge pressure value of the grout pump are preset by the user, these values are compared and a switching signal is output to control the valve so that the two values become the same."). The grout injection process is controlled by the injection management unit on the computer where progress can be monitored ((Chun, ¶74) " The above real-time injection management unit sets the discharge pressure value of the grout pump to correspond to the optimal injection conditions and limit injection conditions set by the customized grouting design unit, and graphically displays the injection progress of the grouting in real time, and at the same time displays the injection pressure, injection flow rate, and injection speed for each step in real time, and compares the flow rate and pressure values of the flow meter and the pressure meter and the discharge pressure value of the grout pump, and switches the valve to operate within the optimal injection conditions and limit injection conditions determined by the customized grouting design unit based on the comparison result, thereby controlling the pressure or flow rate, or outputs a control signal to the grout pump to change its discharge pressure value, thereby controlling the pressure or flow rate.")
retrieving, by the unit controller, one or more datasets of periodic pumping data indicative of a pumping operation; The automated grouting system (which comprises the computer equivalent to the unit control) receives sensed data in real time during a grouting injection ((Chun, ¶89) " When the current injection status sensed in real time from the automated grouting system during grouting injection matches even one of the five preset injection stop conditions, an automatic notification window is displayed and the current status is notified to the site manager via text message, etc., and the final termination point is when the grouting is stopped when it matches the first priority."). Sensing is described as occurring by time cycle as a period of time between acquiring data ((Chun, ¶18) " In addition, although the sensing of the sensing module is performed by depth, a timer may be provided for cases where the sensing is performed by time cycle, and a clock may be provided for indicating the schedule (year/month/day, time)."). Sensor data is collected during a pumping operation ((Chun, ¶63) "The grouting automatic management system is composed of a grout material supply unit, a grout pump that receives grout material from the grout material supply unit and pumps it, a sensor (pressure gauge, flow meter) that detects the pressure and flow rate of the grout material pumped through the grout pump, a controller that controls the pressure and flow rate of the grout material pumped through the grout pump, and a computer that communicates with the controller to display and store injection pressure and injection amount in real time.")
pumping a wet grout blend per a pumping procedure into the borehole [[via an inner passage of the drilling assembly;]] Grouting is described as being characterized by injecting grout material into voids of the boring hole ((Chun, ¶2) " In general, boring and grouting are methods of boring into the original ground for waterproofing or reinforcement in civil engineering or construction work, and injecting grout material into the voids, gaps or cracks in the boring hole"). A grout injection process where the operation of the pump is preset by the user as a procedure is performed ((Chun, ¶71) "The above computer (laptop computer) has the configuration of a typical laptop computer, has an automatic injection management program installed, and displays the grouting progress in real time through the flow rate and pressure values transmitted from the controller via wired or wireless communication through the automatic management program, and at the same time stores the flow rate and pressure values, and when the flow rate values of the flow meter and the pressure meter and the discharge pressure value of the grout pump are preset by the user, these values are compared and a switching signal is output to control the valve so that the two values become the same."); ((Chun, ¶80) "Other required data is automatically set in advance in the program."); ((Chun, ¶82) "3-2. Synchronized injection construction by algorithmic grouting. By inputting the detected injection pressure and the viscosity formula and yield strength formula of the injection material (automatic/manual possible), the predicted injection amount is first calculated by a real-time algorithm, and at the same time, the actual injection amount is synchronized to the predicted injection amount using an automatic valve and pump."). The ratio of the material used for injection of grout material is described as having viscosity, thereby indicating the fluid nature of the material ((Chun, ¶80) "The injection pressure detected in real time for injection with algorithm grouting, the viscosity formula of the material according to the mixing ratio, and the yield strength formula are the basis.")
[[coupling the drilling assembly to a sleeve;]]
[[disconnecting a workstring from the drilling assembly; and]]
[[coupling a set of operational loads to the sleeve.]]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have further modified the proposed combination to incorporate the grout placement via the unit controller, the data acquisition by the unit controller, and the actual pumping of the grout into a borehole as disclosed by Chun because combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Zuo discloses the construction of cast-in-place anchoring piles but does not particularly disclose how the construction is achieved. Chun discloses explicitly a grout pumping process controlled by a computing system that takes into consideration real-time sensor measurements during the process. One having skill in the art could combine the prior art references and have a reasonable expectation of success to achieve predictable results of achieving a monitored and automated grout placement process consequentially to determining the optimal grouting parameters.
The proposed combination does not disclose; however the proposed combination in view of Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd discloses connecting the plurality of pumping equipment to the at least one borehole via the drilling assembly, wherein the plurality of pumping equipment is fluidically coupled to the at least one borehole via the drilling assembly; Pumping equipment is at the surface and is in contact with the borehole drilled in the ground via casing (as the assembly). (Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd, 0:32)
PNG
media_image1.png
979
1483
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The equipment at the surface has grout flowing outwardly into the borehole through the casing and is therefore fluidically coupled. (Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd, 1:01)
PNG
media_image2.png
990
1460
media_image2.png
Greyscale
pumping grout into a borehole via an inner passage of the drilling assembly; Grout is filled through the inner casing. (Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd, 1:01)
PNG
media_image2.png
990
1460
media_image2.png
Greyscale
coupling the drilling assembly to a sleeve; The drilling assembly comprises an inner and outer casing, wherein the casing is understood to be components of a sleeve (Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd, 0:32)
PNG
media_image3.png
985
1485
media_image3.png
Greyscale
disconnecting a workstring from the drilling assembly; and The inner casing of the drilling assembly is removed, wherein the inner casing is considered a workstring for providing the grouted material to the borehole (Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd, 1:08)
PNG
media_image4.png
981
1480
media_image4.png
Greyscale
coupling a set of operational loads to the sleeve. Strand anchor is applied into the hole where the outer casing of the sleeve remains, wherein strand anchors are understood to be structural elements that transmit an applied tensile load into the ground(Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd, 1:14)
PNG
media_image5.png
930
1473
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention of grouted anchor pile construction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to which said subject matter pertains at the time the invention was filed to have incorporated the particular process of installing ground anchors as disclosed by Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd into the methodology of the proposed combination because combining known prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Zuo suggests the construction of cast-in-place anchor piles but does not explicitly disclose the methodology for constructing such anchor piles. Aarsleff Ground Engineering Ltd provides a specific approach to installing ground anchors. The predictable results of combining the references would be that the ground anchors would be constructed according to a method known in the art.
Conclusion
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 EMILY GORMAN LEATHERS whose telephone number is (571)272-1880. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 am-5:00 pm ET.
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, EMERSON PUENTE can be reached at (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 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.
/E.G.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2187
/EMERSON C PUENTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2187
Prosecution Insights