DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/16/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to amendments and remarks filed on 11/17/2025. The examiner notes the following adjustments to the claims by the applicant:
Claims 1, 11, and 15-16 are amended;
Claims 2-4, 14, and 18-20 are newly cancelled.
Therefore, Claims 1, 6-13, 15-17 and 21 are pending examination, in which Claims 1, 11 and 16 are independent claims.
In light of the instant amendments and arguments:
Further examination resulted in a new rejection of Claims 1, 6-13, 15-17 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, as detailed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant presents the following arguments regarding the previous office action:
To overcome the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection, the applicant has amended each independent claim to include the additional underlined limitations (or the equivalent): " determine an acceleration of the rotational assembly using the measured rotation speed; determine an identification threshold by selecting the identification threshold from a plurality of identification thresholds stored in memory based on the determined acceleration; identify a presence or an absence of a rubbing condition for only a subset of a rotation speed range of the rotational assembly by comparing the rotational parameter tothe identification threshold for the rotational parameter, and the presence of the rubbing condition is identified where the rotational parameter exceeds the identification threshold; wherein the rotational parameter and the identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly";
“Applicants respectfully submit that it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teaching of Thirumalasetty to include the teachings of Hill because Thirumalasetty teaches away from the features of claim 1.”;
“Thirumalasetty teaches away from the feature "identify a presence or an absence of a rubbing condition for only a subset of a rotation speed range of the rotational assembly by comparing the rotational parameter to the identification threshold for the rotational parameter" as recited in claim 1 because Thirumalasetty criticizes, discredits, and discourages monitoring a single engine operation parameter, let alone a subset of the single engine operation parameter.”;
“there is no indication that modifying Thirumalasetty in view of Hill would predict a result that a system rub would be detected in Thirumalasetty based on a change in a second derivative of rotation speed of a rotor as taught by Hill. Therefore, even if the teachings of Thirumalasetty were modified by the teachings of Hill as alleged in the Office Action (assuming without admitting proper combination), Applicants respectfully submit such a combination fails to teach or suggest "identify a presence or an absence of a rubbing condition for only a subset of a rotation speed range of the rotational assembly by comparing the rotational parameter to the identification threshold for the rotational parameter, and the presence of the rubbing condition is identified where the rotational parameter exceeds the identification threshold; wherein the rotational parameter and the identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly" as recited in claim 1.”.
Applicant's arguments A., B., C. and D. appear to be directed to the instantly amended subject matter. Accordingly, they have been addressed in the rejections below.
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.
Claims 1, 6-13, 15-17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Thirumalasetty et al. (US 11,639,670 B2, henceforth Thirumalasetty) and Mylaraswamy et al. (US 7,369,965 B2, henceforth Mylaraswamy), and Altieri (US 12,025,013 B2, henceforth Altieri).
Regarding Claim 1, Thirumalasetty explicitly teaches the limitations: an assembly for an aircraft propulsion system {“Systems and techniques that facilitate predictive core rub diagnostics are provided. A sensor component can collect real-time operation parameters of a gas turbine engine.”, Abstract}, the assembly comprising: an engine {fielded engine 104, Figs. 1&3} including a rotational assembly {“the fielded engine 104 can be any suitable type of gas turbine engine (e.g., P20, LEAP, jet engines, turbofan engines, and so on)”, Col. 6, Lns. 32-34}, and the rotational assembly includes a bladed turbine rotor and a shaft configured for rotation about a rotational axis {“such tight clearances can increase the risk of rotor-to-stator and/or rotor-to-rotor rubs.”, Col. 4, Lns. 40-41}; a rotation speed sensor disposed at the rotational assembly, and the rotation speed sensor is configured to measure a rotation speed of the rotational assembly {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via a sensor component 108, receive measurements from one or more sensors of the fielded engine 104, thereby yielding fielded engine data 110. In various aspects, the sensors can include any of temperature sensors, pressure sensors, voltage sensors, current sensors, air mass flow rate sensors, fuel mass flow rate sensors, stress/strain sensors, rotational speed sensors, vibration amplitude sensors, accelerometers, and so on. Any other suitable sensors and/or sensor data associated with the fielded engine 104 can be incorporated in various embodiments.”, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64}, and a controller {“FADEC component 1202 can be a full authority digital engine control logic and/or program that can operate the fielded engine 104. In various aspects, the FADEC component 1202 can generate intended and/or planned actions/operations for the fielded engine 104 (e.g., full throttle acceleration, some other rate of acceleration, maximum deceleration, some other rate of deceleration, stalling, powering down, and so on).”, Col. 25, Lns. 55-62 and Fig. 12} including a processor in communication with a non-transitory memory storing instructions, which instructions when executed by the processor, cause the processor {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can comprise a processor 302 (e.g., computer processing unit, microprocessor, and so on) and a computer-readable memory 304 that is operably and/or operatively and/or communicatively connected/coupled to the processor 302. The memory 304 can store computer-executable instructions which, upon execution by the processor 302, can cause the processor 302 and/or other components of the core rub diagnostic system 102 (e.g., sensor component 108, analysis component 112, classification component 122, and so on) to perform one or more acts.”, Col. 13, Lns. 10-24} to: monitor a rotational parameter of the rotational assembly while the rotational assembly is rotating {sensor component 108 of core rub diagnostic system 102, Fig. 2, includes multiple sensors including rotational sensors, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64}, and the rotational parameter is determined using the measured rotation speed from the rotation speed sensor {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via a sensor component 108, receive measurements from one or more sensors of the fielded engine 104….rotational speed sensors, vibration amplitude sensors, accelerometers, and so on. Any other suitable sensors and/or sensor data associated with the fielded engine 104 can be incorporated in various embodiments.”, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, wherein analysis component 112, Fig. 1, carries out calculations associated with mode placement, blade-passing-frequency and operation parameters, such as the Fast-Fourier-Transform analysis in Col. 7, Lns. 18-26, for example}; determine an acceleration of the rotational assembly using the measured rotation speed {comparison of measured fielded engine data and (no rubbing) baseline engine data 106 is described in Col. 12, Ln. 60 through Col. 13, Ln. 9, which includes rotational speed; with the full range of data, including rotational speeds and accelerations, being described in Col. 6, Ln. 44-50}; determine the identification threshold {Fig. 9A shows rub indicator values exceeding rub limit 902, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9, wherein the rub indicator values include factoring in the vibrational and operational parameter data in Figs. 3A&8B, respectively, corresponding, in part, to the output from “a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”. Col. 7, Lns. 4-6; additionally, Fig. 9B shows that the slope of the rub indicator over time can be used as an to identify a significant issue related to parts rubbing together} by selecting the identification threshold from a plurality of identification thresholds stored in memory {304, Fig. 5} based on the determined acceleration {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via an analysis component 112, perform a three-pronged analysis to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106. More specifically, in one or more embodiments, the analysis component 112 can perform a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62, which can be combined into an overall rub indicator: “Based on these comparisons, a rub indicator (e.g., continuous scalar value) can be generated, which can be used to detect, predict, and/or characterize engine rubs”, Col 5, Lns. 43-46, and includes the use of rotational speed sensors and accelerometers, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, to capture operational parameters, including rotational speeds and accelerations, Col. 6, Ln. 44-50}; identify a presence or an absence of a rubbing condition {Col. 6, Ln. 65 - Col. 7, Ln. 6; see also, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62} for the rotational assembly by comparing the rotational parameter to an identification threshold for the rotational parameter {“a specialized computer for carrying out defined tasks related to engine core rub diagnostics (e.g., collection of real-time operation parameters of the gas turbine engine, generation of first values based on a comparison of fundamental mode placements of the engine with baseline mode placements, generation of second values based on a comparison of vibration spectra of the engine with baseline vibration spectra, generation of third values based on a comparison of real-time operation parameters of the engine with baseline operation parameters, statistical combination of the first, second, and third values to form a rub indicator for the engine, detecting/predicting rubs based on the rub indicator…to accurately categorize detected and/or predicted types of rubs”, Col. 5, Ln. 64 – Col. 6, Ln. 18}, and the presence of the rubbing condition is identified where the rotational parameter exceeds the identification threshold {Fig. 9A shows rub indicator values exceeding rub limit 902, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9, wherein the rub indicator values include factoring in the vibrational and operational parameter data in Figs. 3A&8B, respectively, corresponding, in part, to the output from “a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”. Col. 7, Lns. 4-6}; and wherein the rotational parameter [is a] rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly {per Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, the “one or more sensors” may be an accelerometer, and, one skilled in the art will appreciate that the voltage output from an accelerometer may be used to determine the rate-of-change of acceleration by dividing the output voltage by the sensitivity of the accelerometer}.
Thirumalasetty does not appear to explicitly recite the limitation: wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to identify the presence or the absence of the rubbing condition for only a subset of a rotation speed range of the rotational assembly; and wherein the rotational parameter and the identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly.
However, Mylaraswamy explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to identify the presence or the absence of the rubbing condition for only a subset of a rotation speed range of the rotational assembly {anomalies detected from sensor data for a limited range of rotational speeds: “in the preferred system and method of anomaly detection, at least a portion of the sensor data taken during engine spin down is formatted into an appropriate sensor data matrix. Again, the portion of sensor data is preferably selected to be that portion that is most indicative of anomalies in the turbine engine. For example, the portion can be defined as a selected set of sensor data taken from each engine over a range of rotational speeds. Selecting the portion of sensor data used for each engine independently compensates for any differences in the start of the spin down between individual engines or individual occurrences”. Col. 5, Lns. 1-12}.
Thirumalasetty and Mylaraswamy are analogous art because they both deal with identifying turbine engine anomalies.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Thirumalasetty and Mylaraswamy before them, to modify the teachings of Thirumalasetty to include the teachings of Mylaraswamy to minimize the chance of false positives {Col. 4, Lns. 34-61}.
The combination of Thirumalasetty and Mylaraswamy does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitation: wherein the rotational parameter and the identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly.
However, Altieri explicitly recites limitation: wherein the rotational parameter and the identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly {use of accelerometers to determine a rub event: “2) measure the acceleration at or local to the blade clearance sensor to detect a rub event.”, Col. 2, Lns. 23-34, and “detecting wear on the abradable layer includes using an accelerometer sensor embed in or near the blade clearance sensor. FIG. 18 shows an example system 1800 including an accelerometer 1802 embedded internal to the sensor. In other cases, the accelerometer may be mounted proximate to the blade clearance. The high local acceleration from a rub occurrence can trigger a rub detection using standard signal processing and thresholding techniques. The rub detection is then used adjust the calibration of the sensor.”, Col. 7, Lns. 52-60; one skilled in the art will appreciate that the voltage output from an accelerometer may be used to determine the rate-of-change of acceleration by dividing the output voltage by the sensitivity of the accelerometer}.
The combination of Thirumalasetty and Mylaraswamy along with Altieri are analogous art because they detect turbine engine rubbing events.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri before them, to modify the teachings of the combination of Thirumalasetty and Mylaraswamy to include the teachings of Altieri to provide real-time wear and/or rub detection {Col. 2, Lns. 27-28}.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitations: the engine includes a second rotational assembly, and the second rotational assembly includes a bladed second turbine rotor and a second shaft configured for rotation about the rotational axis {two distinct rotational assemblies associated with the same engine: “A gas turbine engine can experience different types, categories, and/or severities of rubs….A rub can be categorized as axial (e.g., rubbing of the rotor's annular shaft with other components on the engine's central shaft, and so on), radial (e.g., rubbing of the rotor's blade tips with the sidewall of the engine's casing and/or with stator blades protruding radially inward from the sidewall of the engine's casing, and so on), or a combination of the two.”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62}; the assembly further comprises a second rotation speed sensor disposed at the second rotational assembly, and the second rotation speed sensor is configured to measure a second rotation speed of the second rotational assembly {the various sensors associated with the core rub diagnostic system 102, Fig. 1, described in Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, are aimed for detecting various types of rubbing and the location of the rubbing, including the axial and radial rubbing, aforementioned: “the rub indicator can identify and/or designate that the fielded engine 104 has a particular type, location, and severity of rub, which rub can make such acceleration risky and/or dangerous (e.g., accelerating at the intended rate can exacerbate the existing rub and/or otherwise cause damage to the fielded engine 104, and so on).”, Col. 26, Lns. 2-8}; and the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to: monitor a second rotational parameter of the second rotational assembly while the second rotational assembly is rotating, and the second rotational parameter is determined using the measured second rotation speed from the second rotation speed sensor {measuring rotational speeds, Col. 8, Lns. 40-51, of differing combination of components, for example: “such tight clearances can increase the risk of rotor-to-stator and/or rotor-to-rotor rubs.”, Col. 4, Lns. 40-41}; determine a second identification threshold for the second rotational parameter {comparison with baseline (i.e., no rubbing) engine parameters: “the operation parameter analysis 118 can include comparing the real-time operation parameters of the fielded engine 104 (e.g., the temperature measurements, pressure measurements, voltage measurements, current measurements, air/fuel mass flow rate measurements, stress/strain measurements, and so from the fielded engine data 110) with baseline operation parameters (e.g., baseline temperature measurements, pressure measurements, voltage measurements, current measurements, air/fuel mass flow rate measurements, stress/strain measurements, and so on that correspond to proper/healthy performance of the fielded engine 104)”, Col. 8, Lns. 40-51}; and identify a presence or an absence of a rubbing condition {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via an analysis component 112, perform a three-pronged analysis to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106. More specifically, in one or more embodiments, the analysis component 112 can perform a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”, Col. 6, Ln. 65 - Col. 7, Ln. 6} for the second rotational assembly by comparing the second rotational parameter to the second identification threshold {“the operation parameter analysis 118 can include comparing the real-time operation parameters of the fielded engine 104 (e.g., the temperature measurements, pressure measurements, voltage measurements, current measurements, air/fuel mass flow rate measurements, stress/strain measurements, and so from the fielded engine data 110) with baseline operation parameters (e.g., baseline temperature measurements, pressure measurements, voltage measurements, current measurements, air/fuel mass flow rate measurements, stress/strain measurements, and so on that correspond to proper/healthy performance of the fielded engine 104)”, Col. 8, Lns. 40-51}, and the presence of the rubbing condition for the second rotational assembly is identified where the second rotational parameter exceeds the second identification threshold {“the rub limit 902 can be a threshold above which a rub is deemed to be present (e.g., detected) and below which a rub is deemed to not yet be present (e.g., not detected). In such embodiments, a rub can be detected if the rub indicator exceeds the rub limit 902. In some embodiments, the rub limit 902 can be a threshold above which a rub is deemed plausible and/or imminent (e.g., predicted) and below which a rub is deemed not plausible and/or imminent (e.g., not predicted). In such embodiments, a rub can be predicted as imminent and/or likely to soon occur if the rub indicator exceeds the rub limit 902.”, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9}.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 6, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the shaft and the second shaft are concentric {“A rub can be categorized as axial (e.g., rubbing of the rotor's annular shaft with other components on the engine's central shaft, and so on)”, Col. 4, Lns. 54-57}.
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 6, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to identify a cause of the presence of the rubbing condition for one or both of the rotational assembly and the second rotational assembly {“the rub indicator can identify and/or designate that the fielded engine 104 has a particular type, location, and severity of rub, which rub can make such acceleration risky and/or dangerous (e.g., accelerating at the intended rate can exacerbate the existing rub and/or otherwise cause damage to the fielded engine 104, and so on).”, Col. 26, Lns. 2-8}.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 8, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to identify the cause as a shaft-to-shaft rubbing condition where the presence of the rubbing condition is identified for both of the rotational assembly and the second rotational assembly {“such tight clearances can increase the risk of rotor-to-stator and/or rotor-to-rotor rubs.”, Col. 4, Lns. 40-41, and “A gas turbine engine can experience different types, categories, and/or severities of rubs….A rub can be categorized as axial (e.g., rubbing of the rotor's annular shaft with other components on the engine's central shaft, and so on), radial (e.g., rubbing of the rotor's blade tips with the sidewall of the engine's casing and/or with stator blades protruding radially inward from the sidewall of the engine's casing, and so on), or a combination of the two.”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62}.
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 8, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to identify the cause as a shaft-to-structure rubbing condition where the presence of the rubbing condition is identified for only one of the rotational assembly or the second rotational assembly {“such tight clearances can increase the risk of rotor-to-stator and/or rotor-to-rotor rubs.”, Col. 4, Lns. 40-41, and “A gas turbine engine can experience different types, categories, and/or severities of rubs….A rub can be categorized as axial (e.g., rubbing of the rotor's annular shaft with other components on the engine's central shaft, and so on), radial (e.g., rubbing of the rotor's blade tips with the sidewall of the engine's casing and/or with stator blades protruding radially inward from the sidewall of the engine's casing, and so on), or a combination of the two.”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62}.
Regarding Claim 11, Thirumalasetty explicitly teaches the limitations: a method for identifying a rubbing condition for a rotational assembly of an engine for an aircraft {“Systems and techniques that facilitate predictive core rub diagnostics are provided. A sensor component can collect real-time operation parameters of a gas turbine engine.”, Abstract}, the method comprising: monitoring a rotational parameter of the rotational assembly while the rotational assembly is rotating by measuring a rotation speed of the rotational assembly {sensor component 108 of core rub diagnostic system 102, Fig. 2, includes multiple sensors including rotational sensors, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64} and determining the rotational parameter using the measured rotation speed {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via a sensor component 108, receive measurements from one or more sensors of the fielded engine 104….rotational speed sensors, vibration amplitude sensors, accelerometers, and so on. Any other suitable sensors and/or sensor data associated with the fielded engine 104 can be incorporated in various embodiments.”, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, wherein analysis component 112, Fig. 1, carries out calculations associated with mode placement, blade-passing-frequency and operation parameters, such as the Fast-Fourier-Transform analysis in Col. 7, Lns. 18-26, for example}; determining an identification threshold for the rotational parameter using an acceleration {comparison of measured fielded engine data and (no rubbing) baseline engine data 106 is described in Col. 12, Ln. 60 through Col. 13, Ln. 9, which includes rotational speed; with the full range of data, including rotational speeds and accelerations, being described in Col. 6, Ln. 44-50} of the rotational assembly {“the rub indicator can identify and/or designate that the fielded engine 104 has a particular type, location, and severity of rub, which rub can make such acceleration risky and/or dangerous (e.g., accelerating at the intended rate can exacerbate the existing rub and/or otherwise cause damage to the fielded engine 104, and so on).”, Col. 26, Lns. 2-8}; and identifying a presence or an absence of a rubbing condition {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via an analysis component 112, perform a three-pronged analysis to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106. More specifically, in one or more embodiments, the analysis component 112 can perform a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”, Col. 6, Ln. 65 - Col. 7, Ln. 6; see also, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62} for the rotational assembly by comparing the rotational parameter to the identification threshold {“a specialized computer for carrying out defined tasks related to engine core rub diagnostics (e.g., collection of real-time operation parameters of the gas turbine engine, generation of first values based on a comparison of fundamental mode placements of the engine with baseline mode placements, generation of second values based on a comparison of vibration spectra of the engine with baseline vibration spectra, generation of third values based on a comparison of real-time operation parameters of the engine with baseline operation parameters, statistical combination of the first, second, and third values to form a rub indicator for the engine, detecting/predicting rubs based on the rub indicator…to accurately categorize detected and/or predicted types of rubs”, Col. 5, Ln. 64 - Col. 6, Ln. 18}, and the presence of the rubbing condition is identified where the rotational parameter exceeds the identification threshold {Fig. 9A shows rub indicator values exceeding rub limit 902, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9, wherein the rub indicator values include factoring in the vibrational and operational parameter data in Figs. 3A&8B, respectively, corresponding, in part, to the output from “a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”. Col. 7, Lns. 4-6}; wherein the rotational parameter [is a] rate of change of acceleration value[s] for the rotational assembly {per Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, the “one or more sensors” may be an accelerometer, and, one skilled in the art will appreciate that the voltage output from an accelerometer may be used to determine the rate-of-change of acceleration by dividing the output voltage by the sensitivity of the accelerometer}.
Thirumalasetty does not appear to explicitly recite the limitation: wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to identify the presence or the absence of the rubbing condition for only a subset of a rotation speed range of the rotational assembly; and wherein the rotational parameter and the identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly.
However, Mylaraswamy explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the identifying the presence or the absence of the rubbing condition comprises identifying the presence or the absence of the rubbing condition for only a subset of a rotation speed range of the rotational assembly {anomalies detected from sensor data for a limited range of rotational speeds: “in the preferred system and method of anomaly detection, at least a portion of the sensor data taken during engine spin down is formatted into an appropriate sensor data matrix. Again, the portion of sensor data is preferably selected to be that portion that is most indicative of anomalies in the turbine engine. For example, the portion can be defined as a selected set of sensor data taken from each engine over a range of rotational speeds. Selecting the portion of sensor data used for each engine independently compensates for any differences in the start of the spin down between individual engines or individual occurrences”. Col. 5, Lns. 1-12}.
The combination of Thirumalasetty and Mylaraswamy does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitation: wherein the rotational parameter and the identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly.
However, Altieri explicitly recites limitation: wherein the rotational parameter and the identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly {use of accelerometers to determine a rub event: “2) measure the acceleration at or local to the blade clearance sensor to detect a rub event.”, Col. 2, Lns. 23-34, and “detecting wear on the abradable layer includes using an accelerometer sensor embed in or near the blade clearance sensor. FIG. 18 shows an example system 1800 including an accelerometer 1802 embedded internal to the sensor. In other cases, the accelerometer may be mounted proximate to the blade clearance. The high local acceleration from a rub occurrence can trigger a rub detection using standard signal processing and thresholding techniques. The rub detection is then used adjust the calibration of the sensor.”, Col. 7, Lns. 52-60; one skilled in the art will appreciate that the voltage output from an accelerometer may be used to determine the rate-of-change of acceleration by dividing the output voltage by the sensitivity of the accelerometer}.
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 11, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitation: wherein determining the identification threshold {Fig. 9A shows rub indicator values exceeding rub limit 902, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9, wherein the rub indicator values include factoring in the vibrational and operational parameter data in Figs. 3A&8B, respectively, corresponding, in part, to the output from “a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”. Col. 7, Lns. 4-6; additionally, Fig. 9B shows that the slope of the rub indicator over time can be used as an to identify a significant issue related to parts rubbing together} for the rotational parameter {comparison of measured fielded engine data and (no rubbing) baseline engine data 106 is described in Col. 12, Ln. 60 through Col. 13, Ln. 9, which includes rotational speed; with the full range of data, including rotational speeds and accelerations, being described in Col. 6, Ln. 44-50} includes selecting the identification threshold from a plurality of identification thresholds stored in memory {304, Fig. 5} based on the acceleration {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via an analysis component 112, perform a three-pronged analysis to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106. More specifically, in one or more embodiments, the analysis component 112 can perform a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62, which can be combined into an overall rub indicator: “Based on these comparisons, a rub indicator (e.g., continuous scalar value) can be generated, which can be used to detect, predict, and/or characterize engine rubs”, Col 5, Lns. 43-46, and includes the use of rotational speed sensors and accelerometers, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, to capture operational parameters, including rotational speeds and accelerations, Col. 6, Ln. 44-50}.
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 12, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the plurality of identification thresholds includes at least a first identification threshold and a second identification threshold {Fig. 9A shows rub indicator values exceeding rub limit 902, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9, wherein the rub indicator values include factoring in the vibrational and operational parameter data in Figs. 3A&8B, respectively, corresponding, in part, to the output from “a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”. Col. 7, Lns. 4-6; additionally, Fig. 9B shows that the slope of the rub indicator over time can be used as an to identify a significant issue related to parts rubbing together}, the determined identification threshold is the first identification threshold for a first range of values of the acceleration, the determined identification threshold is the second identification threshold for a second range of values of the acceleration {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via an analysis component 112, perform a three-pronged analysis to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106. More specifically, in one or more embodiments, the analysis component 112 can perform a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62, which can be combined into an overall rub indicator: “Based on these comparisons, a rub indicator (e.g., continuous scalar value) can be generated, which can be used to detect, predict, and/or characterize engine rubs”, Col 5, Lns. 43-46, and includes the use of rotational speed sensors and accelerometers, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, to capture operational parameters, including rotational speeds and accelerations, Col. 6, Ln. 44-50}, and the first range of values is different than the second range of values {the rub indicator threshold in Fig. 9A, is comprised of “a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”. Col. 7, Lns. 4-6, wherein 114, 116 and 118, or any combination of the three, can be additional thresholds, as appreciate by one skilled in the art}.
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 13, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the first identification threshold has a first rate of change of acceleration value {per Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, the “one or more sensors” may be an accelerometer, and, one skilled in the art will appreciate that the voltage output from an accelerometer may be used to determine the rate-of-change of acceleration by dividing the output voltage by the sensitivity of the accelerometer}, the second identification threshold has a second rate of change of acceleration value, and the first rate of change of acceleration value is different than the second rate of change of acceleration value {comparison of measured fielded engine data and (no rubbing) baseline engine data 106 is described in Col. 12, Ln. 60 through Col. 13, Ln. 9, which includes rotational speed; with the full range of data for analysis, including rotational speeds and accelerations, being described in Col. 6, Ln. 44-50; core rub diagnostic system 102, Figs. 1&7, includes a data analysis component 112 (which includes, respectively, an operation parameter analysis/component, 118/702) that receives the sensor data (including the aforementioned rotational speeds and accelerations) “to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106”, Col. 6, Ln. 67 through Col. 7, Ln. 2}.
Regarding Claim 16, Thirumalasetty explicitly teaches the limitations: an assembly for an aircraft propulsion system {“Systems and techniques that facilitate predictive core rub diagnostics are provided. A sensor component can collect real-time operation parameters of a gas turbine engine.”, Abstract}, the assembly comprising: an engine {fielded engine 104, Figs. 1&3} including a first rotational assembly and a second rotational assembly {“the fielded engine 104 can be any suitable type of gas turbine engine (e.g., P20, LEAP, jet engines, turbofan engines, and so on)”, Col. 6, Lns. 32-34}, and the first rotational assembly and the second rotational assembly are concentric and configured for rotation about a rotational axis {“such tight clearances can increase the risk of rotor-to-stator and/or rotor-to-rotor rubs.”, Col. 4, Lns. 40-41, and “A gas turbine engine can experience different types, categories, and/or severities of rubs….A rub can be categorized as axial (e.g., rubbing of the rotor's annular shaft with other components on the engine's central shaft, and so on), radial (e.g., rubbing of the rotor's blade tips with the sidewall of the engine's casing and/or with stator blades protruding radially inward from the sidewall of the engine's casing, and so on), or a combination of the two.”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62}; a first rotation speed sensor disposed at the first rotational assembly, and the first rotation speed sensor is configured to measure a first rotation speed of the first rotational assembly; a second rotation speed sensor disposed at the second rotational assembly {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via a sensor component 108, receive measurements from one or more sensors of the fielded engine 104, thereby yielding fielded engine data 110. In various aspects, the sensors can include any of temperature sensors, pressure sensors, voltage sensors, current sensors, air mass flow rate sensors, fuel mass flow rate sensors, stress/strain sensors, rotational speed sensors, vibration amplitude sensors, accelerometers, and so on. Any other suitable sensors and/or sensor data associated with the fielded engine 104 can be incorporated in various embodiments.”, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64}, and the second rotation speed sensor is configured to measure a second rotation speed of the second rotational assembly {the various sensors associated with the core rub diagnostic system 102, Fig. 1, described in Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, are aimed for detecting various types of rubbing and the location of the rubbing, including the axial and radial rubbing, aforementioned: “the rub indicator can identify and/or designate that the fielded engine 104 has a particular type, location, and severity of rub, which rub can make such acceleration risky and/or dangerous (e.g., accelerating at the intended rate can exacerbate the existing rub and/or otherwise cause damage to the fielded engine 104, and so on).”, Col. 26, Lns. 2-8}; a controller {“FADEC component 1202 can be a full authority digital engine control logic and/or program that can operate the fielded engine 104. In various aspects, the FADEC component 1202 can generate intended and/or planned actions/operations for the fielded engine 104 (e.g., full throttle acceleration, some other rate of acceleration, maximum deceleration, some other rate of deceleration, stalling, powering down, and so on).”, Col. 25, Lns. 55-62 and Fig. 12} including a processor in communication with a non-transitory memory storing instructions, which instructions when executed by the processor, cause the processor {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can comprise a processor 302 (e.g., computer processing unit, microprocessor, and so on) and a computer-readable memory 304 that is operably and/or operatively and/or communicatively connected/coupled to the processor 302. The memory 304 can store computer-executable instructions which, upon execution by the processor 302, can cause the processor 302 and/or other components of the core rub diagnostic system 102 (e.g., sensor component 108, analysis component 112, classification component 122, and so on) to perform one or more acts.”, Col. 13, Lns. 10-24} to: monitor a first rotational parameter of the first rotational assembly and a second rotational parameter of the second rotational assembly using the first rotation speed sensor and the second rotation speed sensor, respectively {sensor component 108 of core rub diagnostic system 102, Fig. 2, includes multiple sensors including rotational sensors, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64}; determine a first identification threshold for the first rotational parameter using a first acceleration of the first rotational assembly, and the first acceleration is determined using the first rotation speed sensor {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via an analysis component 112, perform a three-pronged analysis to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106. More specifically, in one or more embodiments, the analysis component 112 can perform a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62, which can be combined into an overall rub indicator: “Based on these comparisons, a rub indicator (e.g., continuous scalar value) can be generated, which can be used to detect, predict, and/or characterize engine rubs”, Col 5, Lns. 43-46, and includes the use of rotational speed sensors and accelerometers, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, to capture operational parameters, including rotational speeds and accelerations, Col. 6, Ln. 44-50}; monitor a rotational parameter of the rotational assembly while the rotational assembly is rotating, and the rotational parameter is determined using the measured rotation speed from the rotation speed sensor {sensor component 108 of core rub diagnostic system 102, Fig. 2, includes multiple sensors including rotational sensors, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64}; determine a second identification threshold for the second rotational parameter using a second acceleration of the second rotational assembly, and the second acceleration is determined using the second rotation speed sensor {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via an analysis component 112, perform a three-pronged analysis to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106. More specifically, in one or more embodiments, the analysis component 112 can perform a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62, which can be combined into an overall rub indicator: “Based on these comparisons, a rub indicator (e.g., continuous scalar value) can be generated, which can be used to detect, predict, and/or characterize engine rubs”, Col 5, Lns. 43-46, and includes the use of rotational speed sensors and accelerometers, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, to capture operational parameters, including rotational speeds and accelerations, Col. 6, Ln. 44-50}; identify a presence or an absence of a rubbing condition for the first rotational assembly by comparing the first rotational parameter to the first identification threshold {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via an analysis component 112, perform a three-pronged analysis to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106. More specifically, in one or more embodiments, the analysis component 112 can perform a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”, Col. 6, Ln. 65 - Col. 7, Ln. 6; see also, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62}; identify a presence or an absence of a rubbing condition for the second rotational assembly by comparing the second rotational parameter to the second identification threshold {Fig. 9A shows rub indicator values exceeding rub limit 902, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9, wherein the rub indicator values include factoring in the vibrational and operational parameter data in Figs. 3A&8B, respectively, corresponding, in part, to the output from “a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”. Col. 7, Lns. 4-6}; and identify a cause of the rubbing condition for one or both of the first rotational assembly or the second rotational assembly using the identified presence or absence of the rubbing condition for the first rotational assembly {“the rub limit 902 can be a threshold above which a rub is deemed to be present (e.g., detected) and below which a rub is deemed to not yet be present (e.g., not detected). In such embodiments, a rub can be detected if the rub indicator exceeds the rub limit 902. In some embodiments, the rub limit 902 can be a threshold above which a rub is deemed plausible and/or imminent (e.g., predicted) and below which a rub is deemed not plausible and/or imminent (e.g., not predicted). In such embodiments, a rub can be predicted as imminent and/or likely to soon occur if the rub indicator exceeds the rub limit 902.”, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9} and the identified presence or absence of the rubbing condition for the second rotational assembly {Fig. 9A shows rub indicator values exceeding rub limit 902, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9, wherein the rub indicator values include factoring in the vibrational and operational parameter data in Figs. 3A&8B, respectively, corresponding, in part, to the output from “a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”. Col. 7, Lns. 4-6; additionally, Fig. 9B shows that the slope of the rub indicator over time can be used as an to identify a significant issue related to parts rubbing together}; and generate, in a state in which the presence of the rubbing condition for one of or both the first rotation assembly and the second rotation assembly, a warning signal indicating: the identification of the rubbing condition for one or both of the first rotational assembly or the second rotational assembly; and the cause of the rubbing condition for one or both of the first rotational assembly or the second rotational assembly {“the on-ground digital twin component 1102 can monitor performance of the fielded engine 104 (e.g., monitoring the rub indicator, rub classification report, and/or fielded engine data 110, and so on). In various embodiments, the on-ground digital twin component 1102 can recommend corrective, preventative, and/or ameliorative actions to the fielded engine 104 (e.g., to the FADEC logic controlling the fielded engine 104) and/or to human operators of the fielded engine 104, based on the rub indicator, rub classification report, and/or fielded engine data 110, and so on.”, Col. 23, Lns. 26-36}; wherein the rotational parameter [is a] rate of change of acceleration value[s] for the rotational assembly {per Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, the “one or more sensors” may be an accelerometer, and, one skilled in the art will appreciate that the voltage output from an accelerometer may be used to determine the rate-of-change of acceleration by dividing the output voltage by the sensitivity of the accelerometer}.
Thirumalasetty does not appear to explicitly recite the limitation: wherein the first rotational parameter and the first identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the first rotational assembly; and wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to identify the presence or the absence of the rubbing condition for the first rotational assembly for only a subset of a rotation speed range of the first rotational assembly.
However, Mylaraswamy explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to identify the presence or the absence of the rubbing condition for the first rotational assembly for only a subset of a rotation speed range of the first rotational assembly {anomalies detected from sensor data for a limited range of rotational speeds: “in the preferred system and method of anomaly detection, at least a portion of the sensor data taken during engine spin down is formatted into an appropriate sensor data matrix. Again, the portion of sensor data is preferably selected to be that portion that is most indicative of anomalies in the turbine engine. For example, the portion can be defined as a selected set of sensor data taken from each engine over a range of rotational speeds. Selecting the portion of sensor data used for each engine independently compensates for any differences in the start of the spin down between individual engines or individual occurrences”. Col. 5, Lns. 1-12}.
The combination of Thirumalasetty and Mylaraswamy does not appear to explicitly disclose the limitation: wherein the first rotational parameter and the first identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the first rotational assembly.
However, Altieri explicitly recites limitation: wherein the rotational parameter and the identification threshold are rate of change of acceleration values for the rotational assembly {use of accelerometers to determine a rub event: “2) measure the acceleration at or local to the blade clearance sensor to detect a rub event.”, Col. 2, Lns. 23-34, and “detecting wear on the abradable layer includes using an accelerometer sensor embed in or near the blade clearance sensor. FIG. 18 shows an example system 1800 including an accelerometer 1802 embedded internal to the sensor. In other cases, the accelerometer may be mounted proximate to the blade clearance. The high local acceleration from a rub occurrence can trigger a rub detection using standard signal processing and thresholding techniques. The rub detection is then used adjust the calibration of the sensor.”, Col. 7, Lns. 52-60; one skilled in the art will appreciate that the voltage output from an accelerometer may be used to determine the rate-of-change of acceleration by dividing the output voltage by the sensitivity of the accelerometer}.
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 16, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitation: wherein determining the first identification threshold {Fig. 9A shows rub indicator values exceeding rub limit 902, Col. 21, Lns. 4-9, wherein the rub indicator values include factoring in the vibrational and operational parameter data in Figs. 3A&8B, respectively, corresponding, in part, to the output from “a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”. Col. 7, Lns. 4-6; additionally, Fig. 9B shows that the slope of the rub indicator over time can be used as an to identify a significant issue related to parts rubbing together} for the first rotational parameter {comparison of measured fielded engine data and (no rubbing) baseline engine data 106 is described in Col. 12, Ln. 60 through Col. 13, Ln. 9, which includes rotational speed; with the full range of data, including rotational speeds and accelerations, being described in Col. 6, Ln. 44-50} includes selecting the first identification threshold from a plurality of first identification thresholds stored in memory {304, Fig. 5} based on the acceleration {“the core rub diagnostic system 102 can, via an analysis component 112, perform a three-pronged analysis to detect and/or predict rubs in the fielded engine 104, by comparing the fielded engine data 110 with the baseline engine data 106. More specifically, in one or more embodiments, the analysis component 112 can perform a mode placement analysis 114, a blade passing frequency analysis 116, and/or an operation parameter analysis 118”, Col. 4, Lns. 45-62, which can be combined into an overall rub indicator: “Based on these comparisons, a rub indicator (e.g., continuous scalar value) can be generated, which can be used to detect, predict, and/or characterize engine rubs”, Col 5, Lns. 43-46, and includes the use of rotational speed sensors and accelerometers, Col. 6, Lns. 53-64, to capture operational parameters, including rotational speeds and accelerations, Col. 6, Ln. 44-50}.
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of Thirumalasetty, Mylaraswamy and Altieri discloses all the limitations of Claim 16, as discussed supra. In addition, Thirumalasetty explicitly recites the limitation: wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to initiate a shutdown of the engine in response to identification of the presence of the rubbing condition for one or both of the first rotational assembly or the second rotational assembly {damage assessment by the system can lead to an appropriate action to protect the engine from damage: “The rub indicator can identify and/or designate that the fielded engine 104 has a particular type, location, and severity of rub, which rub can make such acceleration risky and/or dangerous (e.g., accelerating at the intended rate can exacerbate the existing rub and/or otherwise cause damage to the fielded engine 104, and so on). In various aspects, the FADEC component 1202 can leverage the rub indicator to determine that the intended rate of acceleration is inappropriate given the detected rub and the extent and/or likelihood of damage that can result if such intended acceleration is implemented with the detected rub. The FADEC component 1202 can then determine a more appropriate course of action given the detected rub (e.g., maintain thrust, decelerate, request landing, and so on).”, Col. 26, Lns. 2-26}.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD EDWIN GEIST whose telephone number is (703)756-5854. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-6pm.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.
/R.E.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665