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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-20 set forth in the amendment submitted 9/18/2025 form the basis of the present examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 7-14, filed 9/15/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1-3, 9, 11-15 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1, the ejection of Claim(s) 4-5 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of HASELHUHN et al. (Hereinafter, “Haselhuhn”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20200386714 A1, the rejection of Claim(s) 6 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1, the rejection of Claim(s)s 7-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1, the rejection of Claim(s)s 10 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Lepage (Hereinafter, “Lepage”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20080315871 A1, the rejection of Claim(s) 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of McKnight et al. (Hereinafter, “McKnight”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20040056656 A1 and the rejection of Claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by DECITRE et al. (Hereinafter, “Decitre”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20190293605 A1 have been fully considered as follows:
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 7-8, of the remarks, filed on 9/18/2025, regarding the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1-3, 9, 11-15 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1, that “Beaulieu does not disclose a flexible support structure configured to deform in response to an applied pressure to the liftoff spacing assembly. …………If the inspection fixture 268 is assumed, without admitting, to be (Remarks-Page 7) a flexible support structure, Beaulieu does not disclose or suggest the inspection fixture is "configured to deform in response to an applied pressure to the liftoff spacing assembly". Instead, Beaulieu states: "The inspection fixture 268 can be robotically manipulated to be translated along an object under test 258, or as shown illustratively in FIG. 2C, the inspection fixture 268 can be supported by or incorporated in a frame assembly, with the object under test 258 being translated relative to the probe assembly 250 and inspection fixture 268. (Beaulieu, para. [0033]). Applicants respectfully submit therefore Beaulieu is incapable of anticipating claim 1 since Beaulieu does not disclose at least the feature of "a flexible support structure configured to deform in response to an applied pressure to the liftoff spacing assembly." as recited in claim 1.
For at least the foregoing reasons, Applicants respectfully submit this rejection of claim 1 and, thus, the rejections of its dependent claims should be withdrawn (Remarks-page 8).”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 7-8 (stated above), filed 9/18/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1-3, 9, 11-15 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 6/18/2025 have been fully considered and is persuasive. Because, applicant has amended the claims and added the limitation, “a flexible support structure configured to deform in response to an applied pressure to the liftoff spacing assembly” which overcomes the present rejection of Claim(s) 1-3, 9, 11-15 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 6/18/2025. However, the present amendment necessitates a new ground of rejection. NISHIMIZU et al. (Hereinafter, “Nishimizu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20090009162 A1, is applied to meet at least the new amended limitation. Therefore, claim(s) 1-3, 7-9, 11-15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1 in view of NISHIMIZU et al. (Hereinafter, “Nishimizu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20090009162 A1, as set forth below. Applicant’s argument is moot in view of newly applied combination of references. See the rejection set forth below.
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 8-9, of the remarks, filed on 9/18/2025, regarding the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 14 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1, that “Applicants respectfully submit Beaulieu does not disclose or suggest such an assembly. In particular, Beaulieu does not disclose an electrically-conductive core layer disposed at the first side.
…………. Applicants respectfully submit Beaulieu does not disclose or suggest an electrically-conductive core layer for the eddy current probe array. ……… Beaulieu does not disclose or suggest the rigid portion 266 would increase the magnetic flux density of the incident magnetic field in a similar scope or manner as the electrically-conductive core. Instead, FIG. 2C of Beaulieu suggests the function of the rigid portion is to provide a mounting surface to attach to the inspection fixture 268. Applicants respectfully submit therefore Beaulieu is incapable of anticipating claim 14 since Beaulieu does not disclose at least the feature of "an electrically-conductive core layer disposed at the first side" as recited in claim 14.
For at least the foregoing reasons, Applicants respectfully submit this rejection of claim 14 and, thus, the rejections of its dependent claims should be withdrawn (Remarks-Page 9).”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 8-9 (stated above), filed 9/18/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 14 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 6/18/2025 have been fully considered and is not persuasive. Because claim recites, “an electrically-conductive core layer for the eddy current probe array”. Sylvain discloses in paragraph [0031], “FIG. 2A illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250, such as having a curved shape. The probe assembly 250 can include a rigid portion 266, such as can include an interconnect for coupling electrical conductors in the probe assembly 250 to other test instrumentation”. The rigid portion 266 includes interconnect to connect electrical conductor and therefore the rigid portion 266 is electrically conductive as the rigid portion includes interconnect. Therefore, applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Applicant’s argument that Beaulieu does not disclose or suggest the rigid portion 266 would increase the magnetic flux density of the incident magnetic field in a similar scope or manner as the electrically-conductive core is not persuasive. Because the limitation is not recited in the claim.
In response to Applicant’s argument that does not include certain features of Applicant's invention, the limitations on which the Applicant relies (i.e., The core layer 76 may facilitate increased magnetic flux density of the incident magnetic field) are not stated in the claims. It is the claims that define the claimed invention, and it is claims, not specifications that are anticipated or unpatentable. Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices Inc., 7 USPQ2d 1064.
Claim is read in light of the specification however the limitation is not incorporated from the specification to differentiate the present application from the prior art references.
In response to Applicant's argument that Beaulieu does not disclose or suggest the rigid portion 266 would increase the magnetic flux density of the incident magnetic field, applicant misinterprets the principle that claims are interpreted in the light of the specification. Although these elements (Para. [0045] of the current application recites: "the core layer 76 may be formed, for example, by an electrically-conductive tape (e.g., a ferrite tape) disposed on the first side 58. Alternatively, the drive coil 72 and/or the sense coil 74 may include a conductive core with the wire, printed conductive material, or another suitable electrical conductor of the drive coil 72 and/or the sense coil 74 wound about or otherwise surrounding the conductive core. The conductive core may be formed, entirely or in substantial part, by a ferromagnetic metal or metal alloy (e.g., iron or iron alloy) or a ferrimagnetic compound." Para. [0053] of the current application further recites: "The core layer 76 may facilitate increased magnetic flux density of the incident magnetic field.") are found as examples or embodiments in the specification, they were not claimed explicitly. Nor were the words that are used in the claims defined in the specification to require these limitations. A reading of the specification provides no evidence to indicate that these limitations must be imported into the claims to give meaning to disputed terms. Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices Inc., 7 USPQ2d 1064. Applicant’s argument is therefore not persuasive. Claim(s) 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1, as set forth below. See the rejection set forth below.
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 10-11, of the remarks, filed on 9/18/2025, regarding the rejection(s) of the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 18 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1 and the rejection of Claim(s) 6 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1, that “Applicants respectfully submit therefore Beaulieu is incapable of anticipating claim 18 since Beaulieu does not disclose at least the features of the "a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side, the outer sleeve side is disposed at the flexible sheet, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity, and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side" as recited in claim 18 (Remarks-Page 10).
………
The Office Action alleges the sleeve is unpatentable in view of the expandable elastic element 42. However, FIG. 2 and FIG. 3 of Trantow illustrate the expandable elastic element 42 as a solid a part which does not contain a cavity filled with a deformable medium as claimed in claim 18. Additionally, claim 18 recites: "the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side, the outer sleeve side is disposed at the second side [of the flexible sheet] and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side". Therefore, the sleeve is disposed between two flexible sheets which permit the sleeve to conform to both concave and convex surfaces…… Applicants respectfully submit such a combination does not teach or suggest at least features of the "a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side, the outer sleeve side is disposed at the flexible sheet, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity, and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side" as recited in claim 18 (Remarks-Page 11)”.
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 10-11 (stated above), filed 9/18/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 18 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1 and the rejection of Claim(s) 6 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 6/18/2025 have been fully considered and is not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument that Beaulieu does not disclose the amended limitation of claim 18 is not persuasive. Because Beaulieu never applied in the rejection to reject the amended limitation (before it was dependent claim 6), Trantow was applied to meet the limitation in previous claim 6.
In response to Applicant’s argument that does not include certain features of Applicant's invention, the limitations on which the Applicant relies (i.e., a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side, the outer sleeve side is disposed at the flexible sheet, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity, and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side) are rejected under Trantow. Beaulieu is never applied in the rejection to reject those limitations. Beaulieu teaches all the limitation of the independent claims and Trantow was applied to remedy the deficiency of Beaulieu as Beaulieu does not teach, the amended limitation in claim 1 (previously dependent claim 6). So, applicant’s argument that Beaulieu reference cannot be combined is not persuasive.
Trantow discloses, “To avoid damaging the array 44, the expandable element 42 preferentially stretches outside the portion attached to the array and does not substantially stretch in the portion attached to the array. To improve the ease with which the element 42 expands and flexes outside the portion attached to the array 44, slots 48 are formed in the element; Paragraph [0018]”. Therefore, Trantow the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side, the outer sleeve side is disposed at the second side. Trantow also discloses, “When the interior space 46 is in the collapsed position the probe 12 is sized and shaped for inserting the probe into and removing the probe from the opening 18 in the component 20, and when the interior space is in the expanded position the probe is sized and shaped for at least partially filling the opening and for contacting the preselected surface 16 of the component to inspect the surface (Paragraph [0018]).” Therefore, Trantow discloses the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity [18], the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity, and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side. Therefore, applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Applicant’s argument that, “Therefore, the sleeve is disposed between two flexible sheets which permit the sleeve to conform to both concave and convex surfaces……”. However, these limitations are not in the claim and therefore is not rejected under any references. To reject he limitation the limitation should be in the claim.
In response to Applicant’s argument that does not include certain features of Applicant's invention, the limitations on which the Applicant relies (i.e., the sleeve is disposed between two flexible sheets which permit the sleeve to conform to both concave and convex surfaces……) are not stated in the claims. It is the claims that define the claimed invention, and it is claims, not specifications that are anticipated or unpatentable. Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices Inc., 7 USPQ2d 1064.
Although the limitation is stated in the specification, to reject the limitation the limitation should need to be recited in the claim. Claim is rejected in light of the specification however the limitation from specification is not incorporated in the claim for rejecting.
In response to Applicant's argument that the sleeve is disposed between two flexible sheets which permit the sleeve to conform to both concave and convex surfaces……, applicant misinterprets the principle that claims are interpreted in the light of the specification. Although these elements (the sleeve is disposed between two flexible sheets which permit the sleeve to conform to both concave and convex surfaces……) are found as examples or embodiments in the specification, they were not claimed explicitly. Nor were the words that are used in the claims defined in the specification to require these limitations. A reading of the specification provides no evidence to indicate that these limitations must be imported into the claims to give meaning to disputed terms. Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices Inc., 7 USPQ2d 1064.
Therefore, applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Trantow still can be applied to reject the amended limitation. Applicant has amended the claim and added the limitation, “a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side, the outer sleeve side is disposed at the second side, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity, and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side” which was rejected with reference Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1. Therefore Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1 is applied here to meet the amended limitation of claim 18. Claims 17-18 are now rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1, as set forth below. See the rejection set forth below.
Applicant’s Argument:
Applicant argues on page 13-14, of the remarks, filed on 9/18/2025, regarding the rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by DECITRE et al. (Hereinafter, “Decitre”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20190293605 A1, that “Applicants respectfully submit McKnight does not disclose or suggest such an assembly. In particular, Applicants respectfully submit McKnight does not disclose at least the above (Remarks-Page 13) underlined features of claim 1. …..
For at least the foregoing reasons, Applicants respectfully submit this rejection of claim 1 and, thus, the rejections of its dependent claims should be withdrawn.”
Examiner Response:
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 13-14 (stated above), filed 9/18/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of rejection(s) of Claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by DECITRE et al. (Hereinafter, “Decitre”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20190293605 A1, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 6/18/2025 have been fully considered and is persuasive. Because, applicant has amended the claims and added the limitation, “a flexible support structure configured to deform in response to an applied pressure to the liftoff spacing assembly” which overcomes the present rejection of Claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by DECITRE et al. (Hereinafter, “Decitre”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20190293605 A1, as applied to the Non-Final office Action mailed on 6/18/2025. However, the present amendment necessitates a new ground of rejection. NISHIMIZU et al. (Hereinafter, “Nishimizu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20090009162 A1, is applied to meet at least the new amended limitation. Therefore, claim(s) 1 is now rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DECITRE et al. (Hereinafter, “Decitre”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20190293605 A1 in view of NISHIMIZU et al. (Hereinafter, “Nishimizu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20090009162 A1, as set forth below. Applicant’s argument is moot in view of newly applied combination of references. See the rejection set forth below.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks page 12-13, filed 9/18/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of rejection of dependent claims 4-5 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of HASELHUHN et al. (Hereinafter, “Haselhuhn”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20200386714 A1, the rejection of Claim(s) 6 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1, the rejection of Claim(s)s 7-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1, the rejection of Claim(s)s 10 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Lepage (Hereinafter, “Lepage”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20080315871 A1, the rejection of Claim(s) 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of McKnight et al. (Hereinafter, “McKnight”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20040056656 A1 is also not persuasive because of the same reason as stated above regarding independent claims 1, 14 and 18, as set forth below. Dependent Claim(s) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Nishimizu ‘162 A1, and further in view of HASELHUHN et al. (Hereinafter, “Haselhuhn”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20200386714 A1, Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Nishimizu ‘162 A1 and further in view of Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1, Claim(s)s 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Nishimizu ‘162 A1, and further in view of in view of Lepage (Hereinafter, “Lepage”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20080315871 A1, Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of HASELHUHN et al. (Hereinafter, “Haselhuhn”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20200386714 A1, Claim(s)s 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow ‘496 A1, as applied to claim 18 above and further in view of Lepage (Hereinafter, “Lepage”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20080315871 A1 and Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow ‘496 A1, and further in view of McKnight et al. (Hereinafter, “McKnight”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20040056656 A1, as set forth below. See the rejection set forth below.
For expedite prosecution Applicant is invited to call to discuss the present rejection also if any further clarification needed and to discuss any possible amendment to overcome the references to make the claims allowable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1.
Regarding claim 14, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly (apparatus and techniques for performing eddy current inspection including establishing configurations for enabling or disabling respective eddy current sensor elements in an eddy current probe assembly; Paragraph [0002] Line 3-5; FIG. 2A illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly, such as having a curved shape; Paragraph [0012] Line 1-2; FIG. 2B illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly comprising respective spacers, such as to maintain a specified stand-off distance between the ECA probe assembly and an object under test; Paragraph [0013] Line 1-3) comprising:
a flexible sheet [264] (flexible substrate 264) (The probe assembly 250 can include a flexible substrate 264, such as having a curved profile. The flexible substrate 264 can include or support respective eddy current sensors (e.g., an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N).; Paragraph [0031] Line 4-7) extending between and to a first side and a second side (Figure 2A, 2B shows a flexible sheet [264] extending between and to a first side and a second side);
an eddy current probe array [250] in Figure 2A including a plurality of eddy current probes [254A, 254N] (FIG. 2A illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250, such as having a curved shape; Paragraph [0031] Line 1-2) disposed on the flexible sheet [264] (The probe assembly 250 can include a flexible substrate 264, such as having a curved profile. The flexible substrate 264 can include or support respective eddy current sensors (e.g., an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N); Paragraph [0031] Line 4-7; Similar to the example of the probe assembly 250 of FIG. 2A, the probe assembly 250 of FIG. 2B includes a rigid portion 266, a flexible substrate 264, and sensors such as an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N); Paragraph [0032] Line 4-6);
an electrically-conductive core layer [266] (rigid portion 266 as the core layer) disposed at the first side ([0031] FIG. 2A illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250, such as having a curved shape. The probe assembly 250 can include a rigid portion 266, such as can include an interconnect for coupling electrical conductors in the probe assembly 250 to other test instrumentation; Figure 2A shows the eddy current probe array [250] further includes an electrically-conductive core layer [266] (rigid portion 266 as the core layer) disposed at the first side); and
each eddy current probe [250] of the plurality of eddy current probes includes a drive coil and a sense coil [coils] (For example, the probe assembly 250 can include a linear array of EC sensors, such as including 16 coils. Other fixturing, such as a rigid core, can provide a shape to which the flexible substrate 264 can conform. In this manner, a common flexible probe configuration can be used across multiple different profiles by bending or curving the flexible substrate 264 accordingly; Paragraph [0031] Line 7-12);
a liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] (A first spacer 262A, a second spacer 262B, and a third spacer 262C as the liftoff spacing assembly) mounted to the flexible sheet [264] (Figure 2B shows a liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] (A first spacer 262A, a second spacer 262B, and a third spacer 262C as the liftoff spacing assembly) mounted to the flexible sheet [264]; FIG. 2B illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250 comprising respective spacers, such as to maintain a specified stand-off distance between the ECA probe assembly and an object under test; Paragraph [0032] Line 1-4; A first spacer 262A, a second spacer 262B, and a third spacer 262C can maintain a specified stand-off distance between the probe assembly 250 and an object under test 258 (e.g., the foot of a railway rail in the example of FIG. 2B); Paragraph [0032] Line 6-9), and
the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] extends a length from the flexible sheet [264] to a distal end of the liftoff spacing assembly outward of the flexible sheet and the eddy current probe array [ 254A through EC sensor 254N] (In this manner, the first spacer 262A, second spacer 262B, and third spacer 262C can be abrasion and damage resistant, such as protecting the probe assembly 250 EC sensor 254A through EC sensor 254N from damage, and maintaining a specified distance, “h,” between the flexible substrate 264, with EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N, and the object under test 258; Paragraph [0032] Line 11-16; Figure 2B shows the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] extends a length from the flexible sheet [264] to a distal end of the liftoff spacing assembly outward of the flexible sheet and the eddy current probe array [ 254A through EC sensor 254N]); and
a controller including a processor [102] in Figure 1 (The front-end circuit 122 can be coupled to and controlled by one or more processor circuits, such as a processor circuit 102 included as a portion of the test instrument 140; Paragraph [0029] Line 1-3) in communication with a non-transitory memory [104] storing instructions (The processor circuit can be coupled to a memory circuit 104, such as to execute instructions that cause the test instrument 140 to perform one or more of EC inspection, processing, or storage of data relating to an EC inspection; Paragraph [0029] Line 3-5), which instructions when executed by the processor [102] (For example, performance of one or more techniques as shown and described herein can be accomplished on-board the test instrument 140 or using other processing or storage facilities such as using a compute facility 108 or a general - purpose computing device such as a laptop 132, tablet, smart-phone, desktop computer, or the like; Paragraph [0030] Line 1-5), cause the processor [102] (FIG. 9 illustrates a block diagram of an example comprising a machine 900 upon which any one or more of the techniques (e.g., methodologies) discussed herein may be performed. Machine 900 (e.g., computer system) may include a hardware processor 902 (e.g., a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), a hardware processor core, or any combination thereof), a main memory 904 and a static memory 906, connected via an interlink 930 (e.g., link or bus); Paragraph [0046] Line 1-6) to:
direct an electrical current flow through the drive coil of each eddy current probe of the plurality of eddy current probes [250] (FIG. 8 illustrates generally a technique 800, such as a machine-implemented method, that can include indicating respective ones of eddy current sensors to activate in support of an inspection operation, such as using received models. At 805, a model can be received defining a contour of an object under test. As mentioned above, such a model can include a data structure comprising a point cloud representation, or other representation. At 810, a model of an eddy current array probe can be received, such as including a data structure comprising a point cloud representation, or other representation. The models mentioned above can be selected or established by a user, such as stored, and the machine-implemented method can receive such models by retrieving them from storage, such as in response to a user selection. At 815, an indication can be received of a location of the ECA probe (e.g., a location of the model representing the ECA probe) relative to the object under test (e.g., a model of the object under test, or at least a portion thereof). Receiving such an indication can include retrieving data indicative of the stored location or receiving a user input orienting or positioning a representation of the ECA probe relative to the object under test, such as using a graphical user interface as shown and described in relation to other examples herein. At 825, respective ones of eddy current sensors amongst a plurality of eddy current sensors of the ECA probe can be indicated as active (e.g., indicated as to be activated during a corresponding inspection operation). Such indication can be performed using the received model defining the contour of the object under test, the received model of ECA probe, and the received indication of the location of the ECA probe. For example, such indication can be the result one or more criteria such as using normal vectors, and respective EC sensor distances from the object under test, as described elsewhere herein. Optionally, as shown at 830, a presentation can be generated for a user indicating a location of the ECA probe, including a location of at least one spacer, including whether the at least one spacer is within a specified locus; Paragraph [0045] Line 1-26; signal can be voltage or current or any signal); and
measure an output voltage of the sense coil of each eddy current probe of the plurality of eddy current probes [250] (FIG. 8 illustrates generally a technique 800, such as a machine-implemented method, that can include indicating respective ones of eddy current sensors to activate in support of an inspection operation, such as using received models. At 805, a model can be received defining a contour of an object under test. As mentioned above, such a model can include a data structure comprising a point cloud representation, or other representation. At 810, a model of an eddy current array probe can be received, such as including a data structure comprising a point cloud representation, or other representation. The models mentioned above can be selected or established by a user, such as stored, and the machine-implemented method can receive such models by retrieving them from storage, such as in response to a user selection. At 815, an indication can be received of a location of the ECA probe (e.g., a location of the model representing the ECA probe) relative to the object under test (e.g., a model of the object under test, or at least a portion thereof). Receiving such an indication can include retrieving data indicative of the stored location or receiving a user input orienting or positioning a representation of the ECA probe relative to the object under test, such as using a graphical user interface as shown and described in relation to other examples herein. At 825, respective ones of eddy current sensors amongst a plurality of eddy current sensors of the ECA probe can be indicated as active (e.g., indicated as to be activated during a corresponding inspection operation). Such indication can be performed using the received model defining the contour of the object under test, the received model of ECA probe, and the received indication of the location of the ECA probe. For example, such indication can be the result one or more criteria such as using normal vectors, and respective EC sensor distances from the object under test, as described elsewhere herein. Optionally, as shown at 830, a presentation can be generated for a user indicating a location of the ECA probe, including a location of at least one spacer, including whether the at least one spacer is within a specified locus; Paragraph [0045] Line 1-26; signal can be voltage or current or any signal).
Regarding claim 15, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly,
wherein the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] includes a plurality of studs (spacing assembly can be a pin or cylindrical structure and therefore can be consider as a stud) disposed at the second side (FIG. 2B illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250 comprising respective spacers, such as to maintain a specified stand-off distance between the ECA probe assembly and an object under test. Similar to the example of the probe assembly 250 of FIG. 2A, the probe assembly 250 of FIG. 2B includes a rigid portion 266, a flexible substrate 264, and sensors such as an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N). A first spacer 262A, a second spacer 262B, and a third spacer 262C can maintain a specified stand-off distance between the probe assembly 250 and an object under test 258 (e.g., the foot of a railway rail in the example of FIG. 2B); Paragraph [0032] Line 1-9; Figure 2B shows that the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] includes a plurality of studs disposed at the second side),
and each stud of the plurality of studs includes a stud body extending the length from the flexible sheet to the distal end (As an illustration, the spacers (first spacer 262A, second spacer 262B, and third spacer 262C) can include a carbide material, such as defining carbide pins or cylindrical structures. In this manner, the first spacer 262A, second spacer 262B, and third spacer 262C can be abrasion and damage resistant, such as protecting the probe assembly 250 EC sensor 254A through EC sensor 254N from damage, and maintaining a specified distance, “h,” between the flexible substrate 264, with EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N, and the object under test 258; Paragraph [0032] Line 9-16; Figure 2B shows each stud of the plurality of studs includes a stud body extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end, and the length forms at least a portion of the liftoff distance [h]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-9 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BEAULIEU SYLVAIN et al. (Hereinafter, “Sylvain”) in the Patent Application Publication Number WO 2023164763 A1 in view of NISHIMIZU et al. (Hereinafter, “Nishimizu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20090009162 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly (apparatus and techniques for performing eddy current inspection including establishing configurations for enabling or disabling respective eddy current sensor elements in an eddy current probe assembly; Paragraph [0002] Line 3-5; FIG. 2A illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly, such as having a curved shape; Paragraph [0012] Line 1-2; FIG. 2B illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly comprising respective spacers, such as to maintain a specified stand-off distance between the ECA probe assembly and an object under test; Paragraph [0013] Line 1-3) comprising:
a flexible sheet [264] (flexible substrate 264) (The probe assembly 250 can include a flexible substrate 264, such as having a curved profile. The flexible substrate 264 can include or support respective eddy current sensors (e.g., an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N).; Paragraph [0031] Line 4-7) extending between and to a first side and a second side (Figure 2A, 2B shows a flexible sheet [264] extending between and to a first side and a second side);
an eddy current probe array [250] in Figure 2A including a plurality of eddy current probes [254A, 254N] (FIG. 2A illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250, such as having a curved shape; Paragraph [0031] Line 1-2) disposed at the second side (The probe assembly 250 can include a flexible substrate 264, such as having a curved profile. The flexible substrate 264 can include or support respective eddy current sensors (e.g., an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N); Paragraph [0031] Line 4-7; Similar to the example of the probe assembly 250 of FIG. 2A, the probe assembly 250 of FIG. 2B includes a rigid portion 266, a flexible substrate 264, and sensors such as an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N); Paragraph [0032] Line 4-6);
wherein each eddy current probe includes a drive coil and a sense coil (For example, the probe assembly 250 can include a linear array of EC sensors, such as including 16 coils. Other fixturing, such as a rigid core, can provide a shape to which the flexible substrate 264 can conform. In this manner, a common flexible probe configuration can be used across multiple different profiles by bending or curving the flexible substrate 264 accordingly; Paragraph [0031] Line 7-12; 16 coils include drive coil and a sense coil);
a liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] (A first spacer 262A, a second spacer 262B, and a third spacer 262C as the liftoff spacing assembly) disposed at the plurality of eddy current probes [250] (FIG. 2B illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250 comprising respective spacers, such as to maintain a specified stand-off distance between the ECA probe assembly and an object under test; Paragraph [0032] Line 1-4; A first spacer 262A, a second spacer 262B, and a third spacer 262C can maintain a specified stand-off distance between the probe assembly 250 and an object under test 258 (e.g., the foot of a railway rail in the example of FIG. 2B); Paragraph [0032] Line 6-9), and
the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] forms a liftoff distance [h] between the plurality of eddy current probes [ 254A through EC sensor 254N] and a distal end of the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] (In this manner, the first spacer 262A, second spacer 262B, and third spacer 262C can be abrasion and damage resistant, such as protecting the probe assembly 250 EC sensor 254A through EC sensor 254N from damage, and maintaining a specified distance, “h,” between the flexible substrate 264, with EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N, and the object under test 258; Paragraph [0032] Line 11-16).
Sylvain fails to teach a flexible support structure configured to deform in response to an applied pressure to the liftoff spacing assembly.
Nishimizu teaches an eddy current flaw detection probe that detects a flaw in an inspection target by sequentially selecting one of a plurality of coils and detecting a flaw detection signal from a detection coil (Paragraph [0002] Line 2-5),
wherein a flexible support structure [5]in Figure 1/2A/2B configured to deform in response to an applied pressure [ pressure section 6] to the liftoff spacing assembly [3] (The eddy current flaw detection probe 100 includes a flaw sensor 1, which faces the surface of an inspection target; elastic bodies 3, 5, which bring the flaw sensor 1 into contact with the inspection target; and a pressure section 6, which presses the flaw sensor 1 against the inspection target via the elastic bodies 3, 5; Paragraph [0040] Line 1-6; The pressure section 6 is made, for instance, of Bakelite or aluminum and used to press the flaw sensor 1 via the elastic bodies 3, 5; Paragraph [0044] Line 1-3; The other elastic body 5 does not permanently deform even when it is bent with the minimum curvature radius of the surface of an inspection target; Paragraph [0043] Line 1-3). The purpose of doing so is to press the probe against an inspection target whose curvature varies, to maintain a constant lift-off, to obtain accurate inspection results.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain in view of Nishimizu, because Nishimizu teaches to include a flexible support structure to deform in response to an applied pressure to the liftoff spacing assembly can press the probe against an inspection target whose curvature varies (Paragraph [0009]), maintains a constant lift-off, obtains accurate inspection results (Paragraph [0006]).
Regarding claim 2, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly,
wherein the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] includes a plurality of studs (spacing assembly can be a pin or cylindrical structure and therefore can be consider as a stud) disposed at the second side (Figure 2B shows that the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] includes a plurality of studs disposed at the second side),
each stud of the plurality of studs includes a stud body extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end, and the length forms at least a portion of the liftoff distance [h] (As an illustration, the spacers (first spacer 262A, second spacer 262B, and third spacer 262C) can include a carbide material, such as defining carbide pins or cylindrical structures. In this manner, the first spacer 262A, second spacer 262B, and third spacer 262C can be abrasion and damage resistant, such as protecting the probe assembly 250 EC sensor 254A through EC sensor 254N from damage, and maintaining a specified distance, “h,” between the flexible substrate 264, with EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N, and the object under test 258; Paragraph [0032] Line 9-16; Figure 2B shows each stud of the plurality of studs includes a stud body extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end, and the length forms at least a portion of the liftoff distance [h]).
Regarding claim 3, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly,
wherein each stud of the plurality of studs further includes a threaded fastener (pins as the threaded fastener) engaged with the flexible sheet [264] (As an illustration, the spacers (first spacer 262A, second spacer 262B, and third spacer 262C) can include a carbide material, such as defining carbide pins or cylindrical structures. In this manner, the first spacer 262A, second spacer 262B, and third spacer 262C can be abrasion and damage resistant, such as protecting the probe assembly 250 EC sensor 254A through EC sensor 254N from damage, and maintaining a specified distance, “h,” between the flexible substrate 264, with EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N, and the object under test 258; Paragraph [0032] Line 9-16).
Regarding claim 7, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly,
wherein the plurality of eddy current probes have an average probe diameter (Claim: 3. The machine-implemented method of any one of claims 1 or 2, wherein the received model defining the ECA probe defines a plurality of spacers, the plurality of spacers establishing a specified stand-off distance between the plurality of eddy current sensors and the object under test when respective ones of the plurality of spacers are in contact with the object under test).
Sylvain and Nishimizu discloses the claimed invention except for the plurality of eddy current probes have an average probe diameter less than 0.8 mm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the plurality of eddy current probes have an average probe diameter less than 0.8 mm, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine Skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 8, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly,
wherein the plurality of eddy current probes have an average edge-to-edge distance between 0.05 mm and 0.2 mm (As an illustrative example, sensors can be indicated as activated if a distance between the sensor and a contour of the object under test is less than three millimeters as indicated by a corresponding normal vector (e.g., three millimeters can be a lift-off limit or detection limit for the probe assembly 450); Paragraph [0037] Line 16-20; eddy current probes distance is less than three millimeter which includes the range between 0.05 mm and 0.2 mm).
Sylvain and Nishimizu discloses the claimed invention except for the plurality of eddy current probes have an average edge-to-edge distance between 0.05 mm and 0.2 mm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the plurality of eddy current probes have an average edge-to-edge distance between 0.05 mm and 0.2 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 9, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly,
further comprising a flexible support structure [268] (inspection fixture 268 as the flexible support structure), and the flexible support structure [268] includes a plurality of rotatable pivot arms mounted to the flexible sheet at the first side (FIG. 2C illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250 included as a portion of an inspection fixture 268, the inspection fixture having respective actuators. As mentioned above, a flexible portion of the probe assembly 250 can be mounted in the inspection fixture 268. The inspection fixture 268 can be robotically manipulated to be translated along an object under test 258, or as shown illustratively in FIG. 2C, the inspection fixture 268 can be supported by or incorporated in a frame assembly, with the object under test 258 being translated relative to the probe assembly 250 and inspection fixture 268. For example, as shown illustratively in FIG. 2C, the object under test 258 can include a railway rail, and the rail can be conveyed past the inspection fixture 268; Paragraph [0033] Line 1-10; Figure 2C shows that the flexible support structure [268] includes a plurality of rotatable pivot arms mounted to the flexible sheet at the first side).
.
Regarding claim 11, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly,
wherein the eddy current probe array [250] further includes an electrically-conductive core layer [266] (rigid portion 266 as the core layer) disposed at the first side.
0031] FIG. 2A illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250, such as having a curved shape. The probe assembly 250 can include a rigid portion 266, such as can include an interconnect for coupling electrical conductors in the probe assembly 250 to other test instrumentation; Figure 2A shows the eddy current probe array [250] further includes an electrically-conductive core layer [266] (rigid portion 266 as the core layer) disposed at the first side)
Regarding claim 12, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly,
further comprising a controller including a processor [102] in Figure 1 (The front-end circuit 122 can be coupled to and controlled by one or more processor circuits, such as a processor circuit 102 included as a portion of the test instrument 140; Paragraph [0029] Line 1-3) in communication with a non-transitory memory [104] storing instructions (The processor circuit can be coupled to a memory circuit 104, such as to execute instructions that cause the test instrument 140 to perform one or more of EC inspection, processing, or storage of data relating to an EC inspection; Paragraph [0029] Line 3-5), which instructions when executed by the processor [102] (For example, performance of one or more techniques as shown and described herein can be accomplished on-board the test instrument 140 or using other processing or storage facilities such as using a compute facility 108 or a general - purpose computing device such as a laptop 132, tablet, smart-phone, desktop computer, or the like; Paragraph [0030] Line 1-5), cause the processor [102] (FIG. 9 illustrates a block diagram of an example comprising a machine 900 upon which any one or more of the techniques (e.g., methodologies) discussed herein may be performed. Machine 900 (e.g., computer system) may include a hardware processor 902 (e.g., a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), a hardware processor core, or any combination thereof), a main memory 904 and a static memory 906, connected via an interlink 930 (e.g., link or bus); Paragraph [0046] Line 1-6) to:
measure an output voltage of the sense coil of each eddy current probe of the plurality of eddy current probes [250] (FIG. 8 illustrates generally a technique 800, such as a machine-implemented method, that can include indicating respective ones of eddy current sensors to activate in support of an inspection operation, such as using received models. At 805, a model can be received defining a contour of an object under test. As mentioned above, such a model can include a data structure comprising a point cloud representation, or other representation. At 810, a model of an eddy current array probe can be received, such as including a data structure comprising a point cloud representation, or other representation. The models mentioned above can be selected or established by a user, such as stored, and the machine-implemented method can receive such models by retrieving them from storage, such as in response to a user selection. At 815, an indication can be received of a location of the ECA probe (e.g., a location of the model representing the ECA probe) relative to the object under test (e.g., a model of the object under test, or at least a portion thereof). Receiving such an indication can include retrieving data indicative of the stored location or receiving a user input orienting or positioning a representation of the ECA probe relative to the object under test, such as using a graphical user interface as shown and described in relation to other examples herein. At 825, respective ones of eddy current sensors amongst a plurality of eddy current sensors of the ECA probe can be indicated as active (e.g., indicated as to be activated during a corresponding inspection operation). Such indication can be performed using the received model defining the contour of the object under test, the received model of ECA probe, and the received indication of the location of the ECA probe. For example, such indication can be the result one or more criteria such as using normal vectors, and respective EC sensor distances from the object under test, as described elsewhere herein. Optionally, as shown at 830, a presentation can be generated for a user indicating a location of the ECA probe, including a location of at least one spacer, including whether the at least one spacer is within a specified locus; Paragraph [0045] Line 1-26; signal can be voltage or current or any signal).
Regarding claim 13, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly,
wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor [102] in Figure 1 (The front-end circuit 122 can be coupled to and controlled by one or more processor circuits, such as a processor circuit 102 included as a portion of the test instrument 140; Paragraph [0029] Line 1-3; For example, performance of one or more techniques as shown and described herein can be accomplished on-board the test instrument 140 or using other processing or storage facilities such as using a compute facility 108 or a general - purpose computing device such as a laptop 132, tablet, smart-phone, desktop computer, or the like; Paragraph [0030] Line 1-5), further cause the processor [102] (FIG. 9 illustrates a block diagram of an example comprising a machine 900 upon which any one or more of the techniques (e.g., methodologies) discussed herein may be performed. Machine 900 (e.g., computer system) may include a hardware processor 902 (e.g., a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), a hardware processor core, or any combination thereof), a main memory 904 and a static memory 906, connected via an interlink 930 (e.g., link or bus); Paragraph [0046] Line 1-6) to:
direct an electrical current flow through the drive coil of each eddy current probe of the plurality of eddy current probes [250] (FIG. 8 illustrates generally a technique 800, such as a machine-implemented method, that can include indicating respective ones of eddy current sensors to activate in support of an inspection operation, such as using received models. At 805, a model can be received defining a contour of an object under test. As mentioned above, such a model can include a data structure comprising a point cloud representation, or other representation. At 810, a model of an eddy current array probe can be received, such as including a data structure comprising a point cloud representation, or other representation. The models mentioned above can be selected or established by a user, such as stored, and the machine-implemented method can receive such models by retrieving them from storage, such as in response to a user selection. At 815, an indication can be received of a location of the ECA probe (e.g., a location of the model representing the ECA probe) relative to the object under test (e.g., a model of the object under test, or at least a portion thereof). Receiving such an indication can include retrieving data indicative of the stored location or receiving a user input orienting or positioning a representation of the ECA probe relative to the object under test, such as using a graphical user interface as shown and described in relation to other examples herein. At 825, respective ones of eddy current sensors amongst a plurality of eddy current sensors of the ECA probe can be indicated as active (e.g., indicated as to be activated during a corresponding inspection operation). Such indication can be performed using the received model defining the contour of the object under test, the received model of ECA probe, and the received indication of the location of the ECA probe. For example, such indication can be the result one or more criteria such as using normal vectors, and respective EC sensor distances from the object under test, as described elsewhere herein. Optionally, as shown at 830, a presentation can be generated for a user indicating a location of the ECA probe, including a location of at least one spacer, including whether the at least one spacer is within a specified locus; Paragraph [0045] Line 1-26; signal can be voltage or current or any signal).
Claim(s) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Nishimizu ‘162 A1, as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of HASELHUHN et al. (Hereinafter, “Haselhuhn”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20200386714 A1.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Sylvain and Nishimizu fails to teach an eddy current probe assembly, wherein the liftoff spacing assembly includes a plurality of roller assemblies, each roller assembly of the plurality of roller assemblies includes a roller extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end, and the length forms at least a portion of the liftoff distance.
Haselhuhn teaches a probe for detecting discontinuities includes: a body portion; a head portion; one or more inductor coils located in the head portion (Paragraph [0007]),
wherein the liftoff spacing assembly includes a plurality of roller assemblies [904] in Figure 9 (In further features, the plurality of positioning devices includes rollers; Paragraph [0014] Line 1; As shown the examples of FIGS. 9-10, the positioning devices 316 include rollers 904 located at the distal end 908 of the head portion 508. The rollers 904 may be spring-loaded and may be, for example, ball casters, ball transfers, Hudson bearings, or another suitable type of roller. The rollers 904 may maintain the approximately constant distance between the inductor coils 308 and the surface of the weld 112 during rotation of the inductor coils 308. The rollers 904 may be non-electrically conductive (e.g., polymer, nylon, etc.) or electrically conductive; Paragraph [0069] Line 1-10),
each roller assembly [904] of the plurality of roller assemblies includes a roller extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end, and the length forms at least a portion of the liftoff distance (As shown in FIG. 9, one, more than one, or all of the rollers 904 may be located radially inwardly of a radially outer edge 912 of the head portion 508. As shown in FIG. 10, one, more than one, or all of the rollers 904 may be located radially outwardly of the radially outer edge of the head portion 508. While two of the rollers 904 are shown in the example of FIG. 10, a third roller may be located underneath the extension 516. In the example of FIG. 10, the extension 516 may not rest on the surface of one of the metal sheets. Instead, the rollers maintain the extension 516 separated from the surface of the one of the metal sheets. In various implementations, the rollers 904 may define a circle that has a diameter that is less than the diameter of the weld 112. Additionally or alternatively, the rollers 904 may define a circle that has a diameter that is greater than the diameter of the weld 112; Paragraph [0070] Line 1-16). The purpose of doing so is to maintain the one or more inductor coils approximately a predetermined distance from the surface, to maintain an approximately constant distance between inductor coils of the probe and a surface of a spot weld, to measures an approximately constant inductance in the absence of cracks while the inductor coils are moved around the spot weld, to detect crack more reliable as a change (e.g., an increase) in the inductance measured by the probe is more likely to be due to the presence of a crack than a change in the distance between the inductor coils and the surface of the spot weld.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain and Nishimizu in view of Haselhuhn, because Haselhuhn teaches to include a plurality of roller assemblies, each roller assembly of the plurality of roller assemblies includes a roller extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end maintains the one or more inductor coils approximately a predetermined distance from the surface (Paragraph [0007]), maintain an approximately constant distance between inductor coils of the probe and a surface of a spot weld, to measures an approximately constant inductance in the absence of cracks while the inductor coils are moved around the spot weld, to detect crack more reliable as a change (e.g., an increase) in the inductance measured by the probe is more likely to be due to the presence of a crack than a change in the distance between the inductor coils and the surface of the spot weld (Paragraph [0049]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Sylvain and Nishimizu fails to teach an eddy current probe assembly, wherein each roller assembly of the plurality of roller assemblies further includes a first mount portion, a second mount portion, and a shaft, the first mount portion and the second mount portion are disposed at the first side, the shaft extends between and to the first mount portion and the second mount portion, the roller is rotatably mounted on the shaft, and the roller extends through the flexible sheet to the distal end.
Haselhuhn teaches a probe for detecting discontinuities includes: a body portion; a head portion; one or more inductor coils located in the head portion (Paragraph [0007]),
wherein each roller assembly of the plurality of roller assemblies [904] further includes a first mount portion [508], a second mount portion [516], and a shaft [904], the first mount portion and the second mount portion are disposed at the first side (In further features, the plurality of positioning devices includes rollers; Paragraph [0014] Line 1; As shown the examples of FIGS. 9-10, the positioning devices 316 include rollers 904 located at the distal end 908 of the head portion 508. The rollers 904 may be spring-loaded and may be, for example, ball casters, ball transfers, Hudson bearings, or another suitable type of roller. The rollers 904 may maintain the approximately constant distance between the inductor coils 308 and the surface of the weld 112 during rotation of the inductor coils 308. The rollers 904 may be non-electrically conductive (e.g., polymer, nylon, etc.) or electrically conductive; Paragraph [0069] Line 1-10; Figure 10 shows the first mount portion and the second mount portion are disposed at the first side),
the shaft extends between and to the first mount portion and the second mount portion (Figure 10 shows the shaft extends between and to the first mount portion and the second mount portion, the roller is rotatably mounted on the shaft, and the roller extends through the flexible sheet to the distal end (As shown in FIG. 9, one, more than one, or all of the rollers 904 may be located radially inwardly of a radially outer edge 912 of the head portion 508. As shown in FIG. 10, one, more than one, or all of the rollers 904 may be located radially outwardly of the radially outer edge of the head portion 508. While two of the rollers 904 are shown in the example of FIG. 10, a third roller may be located underneath the extension 516. In the example of FIG. 10, the extension 516 may not rest on the surface of one of the metal sheets. Instead, the rollers maintain the extension 516 separated from the surface of the one of the metal sheets. In various implementations, the rollers 904 may define a circle that has a diameter that is less than the diameter of the weld 112. Additionally or alternatively, the rollers 904 may define a circle that has a diameter that is greater than the diameter of the weld 112; Paragraph [0070] Line 1-16). The purpose of doing so is to maintain the one or more inductor coils approximately a predetermined distance from the surface, to maintain an approximately constant distance between inductor coils of the probe and a surface of a spot weld, to measures an approximately constant inductance in the absence of cracks while the inductor coils are moved around the spot weld, to detect crack more reliable as a change (e.g., an increase) in the inductance measured by the probe is more likely to be due to the presence of a crack than a change in the distance between the inductor coils and the surface of the spot weld.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain and Nishimizu in view of Haselhuhn, because Haselhuhn teaches to include a plurality of roller assemblies, each roller assembly of the plurality of roller assemblies includes a roller extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end maintains the one or more inductor coils approximately a predetermined distance from the surface (Paragraph [0007]), maintain an approximately constant distance between inductor coils of the probe and a surface of a spot weld, to measures an approximately constant inductance in the absence of cracks while the inductor coils are moved around the spot weld, to detect crack more reliable as a change (e.g., an increase) in the inductance measured by the probe is more likely to be due to the presence of a crack than a change in the distance between the inductor coils and the surface of the spot weld (Paragraph [0049]).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Nishimizu ‘162 A1, as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Sylvain and Nishimizu fails to teach an eddy current probe assembly, further comprising a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side, the outer sleeve side is disposed at the flexible sheet, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity, and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side.
Trantow teaches eddy current inspection probes for inspecting a surface of a manufactured component, and more particularly to a probe having an improved fit with the surface of the component (Paragraph [0001] Line 1-3),
further comprising a sleeve [42], a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve [42] extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side (Figure 2 shows the sleeve [42] extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side),
the outer sleeve side is disposed at the flexible sheet, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity [46], and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side (The probe 12 generally comprises a base 30, a support 32 extending downward from the base, and a head (generally designated by 34) mounted on an end of the support opposite the base. As illustrated in FIG. 2, the head 34 comprises a core 40, an expandable elastic element 42 and an eddy current array 44. Although the core 40 may be made of other materials without departing from the scope of the present invention, the core of the preferred embodiment is molded from semi-rigid polyurethane. The core 40 and the elastic element 42 define an interior space 46 (FIG. 3) which is expandable by introducing a pressurized fluid therein from a collapsed position as illustrated in FIG. 2 to an expanded position as illustrated in FIG. 3. When the interior space 46 is in the collapsed position the probe 12 is sized and shaped for inserting the probe into and removing the probe from the opening 18 in the component 20, and when the interior space is in the expanded position the probe is sized and shaped for at least partially filling the opening and for contacting the preselected surface 16 of the component to inspect the surface. Although the expandable element 42 may be made of other materials without departing from the scope of the present invention, the element of the preferred embodiment is made from polyurethane sheet. To avoid damaging the array 44, the expandable element 42 preferentially stretches outside the portion attached to the array and does not substantially stretch in the portion attached to the array. To improve the ease with which the element 42 expands and flexes outside the portion attached to the array 44, slots 48 are formed in the element; Paragraph [0018] Line 1-29). The purpose of doing so is to inspect the surface, to prevent pressurized fluid from leaking out of the probe, to inspect a surface of a manufactured component, and more particularly to a probe having an improved fit with the surface of the component.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain and Nishimizu in view of Trantow, because Trantow teaches to include a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side inspects the surface (Paragraph [0018]), prevents pressurized fluid from leaking out of the probe (Paragraph [0019]), inspects a surface of a manufactured component, and more particularly to a probe having an improved fit with the surface of the component (Paragraph [0001]).
Claim(s)s 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Nishimizu ‘162 A1, as applied to claim 1 and further in view of in view of Lepage (Hereinafter, “Lepage”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20080315871 A1.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Sylvain and Nishimizu fails to teach an eddy current probe assembly, wherein the plurality of rotatable pivot arms includes a primary pivot arm, a plurality of secondary pivot arms, and a plurality of tertiary pivot arms, each secondary pivot arm of the plurality of secondary pivot arms is rotatably mounted to the primary pivot arm, each tertiary pivot arm of the plurality of tertiary pivot arms is rotatably mounted to one secondary pivot arm of the plurality of secondary pivot arms, and each tertiary pivot arm of the plurality of tertiary pivot arms is mounted on the flexible sheet at the first side.
Lepage teaches array probes for non-destructive testing and inspection, and more particularly, to a flexibly eddy current or ultrasonic array probe assembly which can be applied and used to inspect contoured surfaces of varying cross-sectional geometry (Paragraph [0002] Line 1-4), wherein
the plurality of rotatable pivot arms (The present disclosure describes a flexible eddy current array probe comprising a plurality of thin array element mounting fins (referred to herein as "probe fins") coupled together with sets of pivot mechanisms thereby allowing probe elements fixed to the probe fins to rotate in exactly one dimension; Paragraph [0030] Line 1-6) includes a primary pivot arm, a plurality of secondary pivot arms, and a plurality of tertiary pivot arms, each secondary pivot arm of the plurality of secondary pivot arms is rotatably mounted to the primary pivot arm, each tertiary pivot arm of the plurality of tertiary pivot arms is rotatably mounted to one secondary pivot arm of the plurality of secondary pivot arms, and each tertiary pivot arm of the plurality of tertiary pivot arms is mounted on the flexible sheet at the first side (FIG. 4 illustrates a third alternate embodiment wherein each of the probe fins 401 is fixed with multiple probe element housings 402 and consequently probe elements 403. FIG. 4 depicts the cylindrical tab/slot pivot mechanism as used in the preferred embodiment, but this embodiment is not limited in this regard. Indeed, any of the three pivot mechanisms (cylindrical slot/tab, spacer ball, or chain) can be used with this multiple probe element housing technique; Paragraph [0038] Line 1-9; FIG. 5 illustrates a completely assembled flexible array probe built using the preferred embodiment of the present disclosure. A plurality of probe fins 501 are brought together using the tab/slot pivot mechanism illustrated in FIG. 1 and held together using the sets of wires also show there; Paragraph [0039] line 1-6). The purpose of doing so is to allow the elements of the array to rotate in exactly one dimension, while preserving a tight element arrangement and inherently aligning the elements orthogonally with the surface of the structure under test, to provide the resulting flexible array probe pliant enough to respond to variations in the cross-sectional geometry of a structure under test, to allow probe elements fixed to the probe fins to rotate in exactly one dimension, to realize a flexible array probe of any size and shape.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain and Nishimizu in view of Lepage, because Lepage teaches to include a primary pivot arm, a plurality of secondary pivot arms, and a plurality of tertiary pivot arms allows the elements of the array to rotate in exactly one dimension, while preserving a tight element arrangement and inherently aligning the elements orthogonally with the surface of the structure under test, provides the resulting flexible array probe pliant enough to respond to variations in the cross-sectional geometry of a structure under test (Paragraph [0010]), allows probe elements fixed to the probe fins to rotate in exactly one dimension, realizes a flexible array probe of any size and shape (Paragraph [0030]).
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of HASELHUHN et al. (Hereinafter, “Haselhuhn”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20200386714 A1.
Regarding claim 16, Sylvain fails to teach an eddy current probe assembly, wherein the liftoff spacing assembly includes a plurality of roller assemblies, and each roller assembly of the plurality of roller assemblies includes a roller extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end.
Haselhuhn teaches a probe for detecting discontinuities includes: a body portion; a head portion; one or more inductor coils located in the head portion (Paragraph [0007])
wherein the liftoff spacing assembly includes a plurality of roller assemblies [904] in Figure 9 (In further features, the plurality of positioning devices includes rollers; Paragraph [0014] Line 1; As shown the examples of FIGS. 9-10, the positioning devices 316 include rollers 904 located at the distal end 908 of the head portion 508. The rollers 904 may be spring-loaded and may be, for example, ball casters, ball transfers, Hudson bearings, or another suitable type of roller. The rollers 904 may maintain the approximately constant distance between the inductor coils 308 and the surface of the weld 112 during rotation of the inductor coils 308. The rollers 904 may be non-electrically conductive (e.g., polymer, nylon, etc.) or electrically conductive; Paragraph [0069] Line 1-10), and
each roller assembly [904] of the plurality of roller assemblies includes a roller extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end (As shown in FIG. 9, one, more than one, or all of the rollers 904 may be located radially inwardly of a radially outer edge 912 of the head portion 508. As shown in FIG. 10, one, more than one, or all of the rollers 904 may be located radially outwardly of the radially outer edge of the head portion 508. While two of the rollers 904 are shown in the example of FIG. 10, a third roller may be located underneath the extension 516. In the example of FIG. 10, the extension 516 may not rest on the surface of one of the metal sheets. Instead, the rollers maintain the extension 516 separated from the surface of the one of the metal sheets. In various implementations, the rollers 904 may define a circle that has a diameter that is less than the diameter of the weld 112. Additionally or alternatively, the rollers 904 may define a circle that has a diameter that is greater than the diameter of the weld 112; Paragraph [0070] Line 1-16). The purpose of doing so is to maintain the one or more inductor coils approximately a predetermined distance from the surface, to maintain an approximately constant distance between inductor coils of the probe and a surface of a spot weld, to measures an approximately constant inductance in the absence of cracks while the inductor coils are moved around the spot weld, to detect crack more reliable as a change (e.g., an increase) in the inductance measured by the probe is more likely to be due to the presence of a crack than a change in the distance between the inductor coils and the surface of the spot weld.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain in view of Haselhuhn, because Haselhuhn teaches to include a plurality of roller assemblies, each roller assembly of the plurality of roller assemblies includes a roller extending a length from the flexible sheet to the distal end maintains the one or more inductor coils approximately a predetermined distance from the surface (Paragraph [0007]), maintain an approximately constant distance between inductor coils of the probe and a surface of a spot weld, to measures an approximately constant inductance in the absence of cracks while the inductor coils are moved around the spot weld, to detect crack more reliable as a change (e.g., an increase) in the inductance measured by the probe is more likely to be due to the presence of a crack than a change in the distance between the inductor coils and the surface of the spot weld (Paragraph [0049]).
Claim(s) 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow et al. (Hereinafter, “Trantow”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20030025496 A1.
Regarding claim 17, Sylvain fails to teach an eddy current probe assembly, further comprising a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side, the outer sleeve side is disposed at the flexible sheet, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity, and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side.
Trantow teaches eddy current inspection probes for inspecting a surface of a manufactured component, and more particularly to a probe having an improved fit with the surface of the component (Paragraph [0001] Line 1-3),
further comprising a sleeve [42], a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve [42] extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side (Figure 2 shows the sleeve [42] extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side),
the outer sleeve side is disposed at the flexible sheet, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity [46], and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side (The probe 12 generally comprises a base 30, a support 32 extending downward from the base, and a head (generally designated by 34) mounted on an end of the support opposite the base. As illustrated in FIG. 2, the head 34 comprises a core 40, an expandable elastic element 42 and an eddy current array 44. Although the core 40 may be made of other materials without departing from the scope of the present invention, the core of the preferred embodiment is molded from semi-rigid polyurethane. The core 40 and the elastic element 42 define an interior space 46 (FIG. 3) which is expandable by introducing a pressurized fluid therein from a collapsed position as illustrated in FIG. 2 to an expanded position as illustrated in FIG. 3. When the interior space 46 is in the collapsed position the probe 12 is sized and shaped for inserting the probe into and removing the probe from the opening 18 in the component 20, and when the interior space is in the expanded position the probe is sized and shaped for at least partially filling the opening and for contacting the preselected surface 16 of the component to inspect the surface. Although the expandable element 42 may be made of other materials without departing from the scope of the present invention, the element of the preferred embodiment is made from polyurethane sheet. To avoid damaging the array 44, the expandable element 42 preferentially stretches outside the portion attached to the array and does not substantially stretch in the portion attached to the array. To improve the ease with which the element 42 expands and flexes outside the portion attached to the array 44, slots 48 are formed in the element; Paragraph [0018] Line 1-29). The purpose of doing so is to inspect the surface, to prevent pressurized fluid from leaking out of the probe, to inspect a surface of a manufactured component, and more particularly to a probe having an improved fit with the surface of the component.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain in view of Trantow, because Trantow teaches to include a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side inspects the surface (Paragraph [0018]), prevents pressurized fluid from leaking out of the probe (Paragraph [0019]), inspects a surface of a manufactured component, and more particularly to a probe having an improved fit with the surface of the component (Paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 18, Sylvain teaches an eddy current probe assembly (apparatus and techniques for performing eddy current inspection including establishing configurations for enabling or disabling respective eddy current sensor elements in an eddy current probe assembly; Paragraph [0002] Line 3-5; FIG. 2A illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly, such as having a curved shape; Paragraph [0012] Line 1-2; FIG. 2B illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly comprising respective spacers, such as to maintain a specified stand-off distance between the ECA probe assembly and an object under test; Paragraph [0013] Line 1-3) comprising:
a flexible support structure [268] (inspection fixture 268 as the flexible support structure; FIG. 2C illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250 included as a portion of an inspection fixture 268, the inspection fixture having respective actuators. As mentioned above, a flexible portion of the probe assembly 250 can be mounted in the inspection fixture 268. The inspection fixture 268 can be robotically manipulated to be translated along an object under test 258, or as shown illustratively in FIG. 2C, the inspection fixture 268 can be supported by or incorporated in a frame assembly, with the object under test 258 being translated relative to the probe assembly 250 and inspection fixture 268. For example, as shown illustratively in FIG. 2C, the object under test 258 can include a railway rail, and the rail can be conveyed past the inspection fixture 268; Paragraph [0033] Line 1-10);
a flexible sheet [264] (flexible substrate 264) (The probe assembly 250 can include a flexible substrate 264, such as having a curved profile. The flexible substrate 264 can include or support respective eddy current sensors (e.g., an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N).; Paragraph [0031] Line 4-7) extending between and to a first side and a second side (Figure 2A, 2B shows a flexible sheet [264] extending between and to a first side and a second side);
an eddy current probe array [250] in Figure 2A including a plurality of eddy current probes [254A, 254N] (FIG. 2A illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250, such as having a curved shape; Paragraph [0031] Line 1-2) disposed on the flexible sheet [264] (The probe assembly 250 can include a flexible substrate 264, such as having a curved profile. The flexible substrate 264 can include or support respective eddy current sensors (e.g., an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N); Paragraph [0031] Line 4-7; Similar to the example of the probe assembly 250 of FIG. 2A, the probe assembly 250 of FIG. 2B includes a rigid portion 266, a flexible substrate 264, and sensors such as an EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N); Paragraph [0032] Line 4-6); and
each eddy current probe [250] of the plurality of eddy current probes includes a drive coil and a sense coil [coils] (For example, the probe assembly 250 can include a linear array of EC sensors, such as including 16 coils. Other fixturing, such as a rigid core, can provide a shape to which the flexible substrate 264 can conform. In this manner, a common flexible probe configuration can be used across multiple different profiles by bending or curving the flexible substrate 264 accordingly; Paragraph [0031] Line 7-12);
a liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] (A first spacer 262A, a second spacer 262B, and a third spacer 262C as the liftoff spacing assembly) mounted to the flexible sheet [264] (Figure 2B shows a liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] (A first spacer 262A, a second spacer 262B, and a third spacer 262C as the liftoff spacing assembly) mounted to the flexible sheet [264]; FIG. 2B illustrates generally an example comprising an eddy current array (ECA) probe assembly 250 comprising respective spacers, such as to maintain a specified stand-off distance between the ECA probe assembly and an object under test; Paragraph [0032] Line 1-4; A first spacer 262A, a second spacer 262B, and a third spacer 262C can maintain a specified stand-off distance between the probe assembly 250 and an object under test 258 (e.g., the foot of a railway rail in the example of FIG. 2B); Paragraph [0032] Line 6-9), and
the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] extends a length from the flexible sheet [264] to a distal end of the liftoff spacing assembly outward of the flexible sheet [264] and the eddy current probe array [ 254A through EC sensor 254N] (In this manner, the first spacer 262A, second spacer 262B, and third spacer 262C can be abrasion and damage resistant, such as protecting the probe assembly 250 EC sensor 254A through EC sensor 254N from damage, and maintaining a specified distance, “h,” between the flexible substrate 264, with EC sensor 254A through an EC sensor 254N, and the object under test 258; Paragraph [0032] Line 11-16; Figure 2B shows the liftoff spacing assembly [262A, 262B, 262C] extends a length from the flexible sheet [264] to a distal end of the liftoff spacing assembly outward of the flexible sheet and the eddy current probe array [ 254A through EC sensor 254N]).
Sylvain fails to teach an eddy current probe assembly, further comprising a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side, the outer sleeve side is disposed at the flexible sheet, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity, and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side.
Trantow teaches eddy current inspection probes for inspecting a surface of a manufactured component, and more particularly to a probe having an improved fit with the surface of the component (Paragraph [0001] Line 1-3),
further comprising a sleeve [42], a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve [42] extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side (Figure 2 shows the sleeve [42] extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side),
the outer sleeve side is disposed at the flexible sheet, the sleeve surrounds and forms an internal cavity, the deformable medium is disposed within the internal cavity [46], and the inner flexible sheet is disposed at the inner sleeve side (The probe 12 generally comprises a base 30, a support 32 extending downward from the base, and a head (generally designated by 34) mounted on an end of the support opposite the base. As illustrated in FIG. 2, the head 34 comprises a core 40, an expandable elastic element 42 and an eddy current array 44. Although the core 40 may be made of other materials without departing from the scope of the present invention, the core of the preferred embodiment is molded from semi-rigid polyurethane. The core 40 and the elastic element 42 define an interior space 46 (FIG. 3) which is expandable by introducing a pressurized fluid therein from a collapsed position as illustrated in FIG. 2 to an expanded position as illustrated in FIG. 3. When the interior space 46 is in the collapsed position the probe 12 is sized and shaped for inserting the probe into and removing the probe from the opening 18 in the component 20, and when the interior space is in the expanded position the probe is sized and shaped for at least partially filling the opening and for contacting the preselected surface 16 of the component to inspect the surface. Although the expandable element 42 may be made of other materials without departing from the scope of the present invention, the element of the preferred embodiment is made from polyurethane sheet. To avoid damaging the array 44, the expandable element 42 preferentially stretches outside the portion attached to the array and does not substantially stretch in the portion attached to the array. To improve the ease with which the element 42 expands and flexes outside the portion attached to the array 44, slots 48 are formed in the element; Paragraph [0018] Line 1-29). The purpose of doing so is to inspect the surface, to prevent pressurized fluid from leaking out of the probe, to inspect a surface of a manufactured component, and more particularly to a probe having an improved fit with the surface of the component.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain in view of Trantow, because Trantow teaches to include a sleeve, a deformable medium, and an inner flexible sheet, the sleeve extends between and to an inner sleeve side and an outer sleeve side inspects the surface (Paragraph [0018]), prevents pressurized fluid from leaking out of the probe (Paragraph [0019]), inspects a surface of a manufactured component, and more particularly to a probe having an improved fit with the surface of the component (Paragraph [0001]).
Claim(s)s 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow ‘496 A1, as applied to claim 18 above and further in view of Lepage (Hereinafter, “Lepage”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20080315871 A1.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Sylvain and Trantow fails to teach an eddy current probe assembly, wherein the plurality of rotatable pivot arms includes a primary pivot arm, a plurality of secondary pivot arms, and a plurality of tertiary pivot arms, each secondary pivot arm of the plurality of secondary pivot arms is rotatably mounted to the primary pivot arm, each tertiary pivot arm of the plurality of tertiary pivot arms is rotatably mounted to one secondary pivot arm of the plurality of secondary pivot arms, and each tertiary pivot arm of the plurality of tertiary pivot arms is mounted on the flexible sheet at the first side.
Lepage teaches array probes for non-destructive testing and inspection, and more particularly, to a flexibly eddy current or ultrasonic array probe assembly which can be applied and used to inspect contoured surfaces of varying cross-sectional geometry (Paragraph [0002] Line 1-4), wherein
the plurality of rotatable pivot arms (The present disclosure describes a flexible eddy current array probe comprising a plurality of thin array element mounting fins (referred to herein as "probe fins") coupled together with sets of pivot mechanisms thereby allowing probe elements fixed to the probe fins to rotate in exactly one dimension; Paragraph [0030] Line 1-6) includes a primary pivot arm, a plurality of secondary pivot arms, and a plurality of tertiary pivot arms, each secondary pivot arm of the plurality of secondary pivot arms is rotatably mounted to the primary pivot arm, each tertiary pivot arm of the plurality of tertiary pivot arms is rotatably mounted to one secondary pivot arm of the plurality of secondary pivot arms, and each tertiary pivot arm of the plurality of tertiary pivot arms is mounted on the flexible sheet at the first side (FIG. 4 illustrates a third alternate embodiment wherein each of the probe fins 401 is fixed with multiple probe element housings 402 and consequently probe elements 403. FIG. 4 depicts the cylindrical tab/slot pivot mechanism as used in the preferred embodiment, but this embodiment is not limited in this regard. Indeed, any of the three pivot mechanisms (cylindrical slot/tab, spacer ball, or chain) can be used with this multiple probe element housing technique; Paragraph [0038] Line 1-9; FIG. 5 illustrates a completely assembled flexible array probe built using the preferred embodiment of the present disclosure. A plurality of probe fins 501 are brought together using the tab/slot pivot mechanism illustrated in FIG. 1 and held together using the sets of wires also show there; Paragraph [0039] line 1-6). The purpose of doing so is to allow the elements of the array to rotate in exactly one dimension, while preserving a tight element arrangement and inherently aligning the elements orthogonally with the surface of the structure under test, to provide the resulting flexible array probe pliant enough to respond to variations in the cross-sectional geometry of a structure under test, to allow probe elements fixed to the probe fins to rotate in exactly one dimension, to realize a flexible array probe of any size and shape.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain and Trantow in view of Lepage, because Lepage teaches to include a primary pivot arm, a plurality of secondary pivot arms, and a plurality of tertiary pivot arms allows the elements of the array to rotate in exactly one dimension, while preserving a tight element arrangement and inherently aligning the elements orthogonally with the surface of the structure under test, provides the resulting flexible array probe pliant enough to respond to variations in the cross-sectional geometry of a structure under test (Paragraph [0010]), allows probe elements fixed to the probe fins to rotate in exactly one dimension, realizes a flexible array probe of any size and shape (Paragraph [0030]).
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sylvain ‘763 A1 in view of Trantow ‘496 A1, as applied to claim 18 above and further in view of McKnight et al. (Hereinafter, “McKnight”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20040056656 A1.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Sylvain and Trantow fails to teach an eddy current probe assembly, wherein the liftoff spacing assembly includes one or more layers of Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) tape disposed at the second side and on the plurality of eddy current probes.
McKnight teaches an eddy current array probe having a complaint body molded around a rigid insert. A flexible eddy current array circuit is wrapped around the outer surface of the compliant body (Abstract),
wherein the liftoff spacing assembly includes one or more layers of Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) tape disposed at the second side and on the plurality of eddy current probes (The cover 24 may be formed from an adhesive-backed tape, for example a tape made of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin, KAPTON polyimide film, or a similar material. The cover 24 adheres to the probe body 12 and retains the eddy current array circuit 22 in position; Paragraph [0022] Line 11-16). The purpose of doing so is to adhere to the probe body and to retain the eddy current array circuit in position.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain and Trantow in view of McKnight, because McKnight teaches to include one or more layers of Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) tape disposed at the second side adheres to the probe body 12 and retains the eddy current array circuit 22 in position (Paragraph [0022]).
Claim(s) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DECITRE et al. (Hereinafter, “Decitre”) in the US patent Application Publication Number US 20190293605 A1 in view of NISHIMIZU et al. (Hereinafter, “Nishimizu”) in the US Patent Application Publication Number US 20090009162 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Decitre teaches an eddy current probe assembly (non-destructive testing with eddy currents of conductive materials, and in particular relates to a test head for eddy-current sensors; Paragraph [0001] Line 1-3; FIG. 1 schematically illustrates a cross-sectional view of a test head according to one embodiment of the invention; Paragraph [0032] Line 1-3) comprising:
a flexible sheet [106] (compressible material 106 as the flexible sheet) ((a thickness of compressible material 106 is fastened under the substrate 108 and bears against a rigid counter-form 104. The compressible material (a foam) allows a force to be exerted on all of the substrate in order to ensure a good contact with the part 100 to be tested; Paragraph [0048] Line 9-13) extending between and to a first side and a second side (Figure 1: Modified Figure 1 of Decitre below shows a flexible sheet [106] extending between and to a first side and a second side);
an eddy current probe array including a plurality of eddy current probes [110] (In particular, in one preferred embodiment, the test head is designed to equip multielement flexible eddy-current NDT sensors; Paragraph [0041] Line 1-3) disposed at the second side (The multielement character of a sensor is obtained by duplicating many times a given pattern over the flexible substrate 108, forming a multielement array 110. In one particular embodiment, the patterns may be arranged staggered. In order to detect very small surface defects (of about 100 to 400 μm in length), and whatever their position with respect to the patterns of a sensor, the arrayed patterns form a high-density matrix array of emitting/receiving elements; Paragraph [0046] Line 1-8; Figure 1: Modified Figure 1 of Decitre below shows an eddy current probe array including a plurality of eddy current probes disposed at the second side); and
a liftoff spacing assembly [112] (metal foil 112 is the liftoff spacing assembly because claim does not recite any specific element as the liftoff spacing assembly [112]) disposed at the plurality of eddy current probes [110] (In one preferred embodiment, a layer consisting of a metal foil 112 covers the entirety of the external face of the test head. Such as schematically illustrated in FIG. 1, the metal foil 112 directly covers all of the layer formed by the substrate 108; Paragraph [0049] Line 1-5), and
the liftoff spacing assembly [112] forms a liftoff distance between the plurality of eddy current probes [110] and a distal end of the liftoff spacing assembly [112] (Preferably, the metal foil is a stainless-steel foil. Such a foil has the advantage of having a low conductivity and may be non-magnetic or not very magnetic, so that losses in the foil are limited. In addition, such foils are easily found on the market in several very thin thicknesses, because they are used in mechanics to form spacers of calibrated thickness, and are therefore of perfectly uniform thickness; Paragraph [0050] Line 1-8; Figure 1: Modified Figure 1 of Decitre below shows the liftoff spacing assembly [112] forms a liftoff distance between the plurality of eddy current probes [110] and a distal end of the liftoff spacing assembly [112]).
PNG
media_image1.png
616
876
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Modified Figure 1 of Decitre
Decitre fails to teach a flexible support structure configured to deform in response to an applied pressure to the liftoff spacing assembly.
Nishimizu teaches an eddy current flaw detection probe that detects a flaw in an inspection target by sequentially selecting one of a plurality of coils and detecting a flaw detection signal from a detection coil (Paragraph [0002] Line 2-5),
wherein a flexible support structure [5]in Figure 1/2A/2B configured to deform in response to an applied pressure [ pressure section 6] to the liftoff spacing assembly [3] (The eddy current flaw detection probe 100 includes a flaw sensor 1, which faces the surface of an inspection target; elastic bodies 3, 5, which bring the flaw sensor 1 into contact with the inspection target; and a pressure section 6, which presses the flaw sensor 1 against the inspection target via the elastic bodies 3, 5; Paragraph [0040] Line 1-6; The pressure section 6 is made, for instance, of Bakelite or aluminum and used to press the flaw sensor 1 via the elastic bodies 3, 5; Paragraph [0044] Line 1-3; The other elastic body 5 does not permanently deform even when it is bent with the minimum curvature radius of the surface of an inspection target; Paragraph [0043] Line 1-3). The purpose of doing so is to press the probe against an inspection target whose curvature varies, to maintain a constant lift-off, to obtain accurate inspection results.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sylvain in view of Decitre, because Decitre teaches to include a flexible support structure to deform in response to an applied pressure to the liftoff spacing assembly can press the probe against an inspection target whose curvature varies (Paragraph [0009]), maintains a constant lift-off, obtains accurate inspection results (Paragraph [0006]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
KOENIG et al. (US 20160290966 A1) discloses, “SYSTEM FOR IN-LINE INSPECTION USING A DYNAMIC PULSED EDDY CURRENT PROBE AND METHOD THEREOF- [0002] The present invention relates generally to a system and method for in-line inspection and more generally relates to a system and method for in-line inspection of pipelines utilizing a dynamic pulsed eddy current probe. [0045] Referring now specifically to the drawings, an inspection system is described herein and illustrated in FIGS. 1-3 and is shown generally at reference numeral 10. The inspection system 10 comprises a remote computer 12, at least one dynamic pulsed eddy current probe 16, at least one data acquisition device 18, at least one embedded computing device 22, a data transmission device 24, and a delivery apparatus 20 used for in-line inspection of pipelines. A schematic of the improved in-line inspection system is shown in FIGS. 1 and 2. [0046] The system includes at least one server that can be the remote computer 12 for use by a user that, in terms of hardware architecture, generally includes a processor, input/output (I/O) interfaces, a network interface, memory, and a data store. The components are communicatively coupled via a local interface. The local interface can be, for example but not limited to, one or more buses or other wired or wireless connections, as is known in the art. The local interface can have additional elements, which are omitted for simplicity, such as controllers, buffers (caches), drivers, repeaters, and receivers, among many others, to enable communications. Further, the local interface can include address, control, and/or data connections to enable appropriate communications among the aforementioned components. [0053] Referring now specifically to the drawings, an example of the dynamic eddy current probe 16 is illustrated in FIGS. 4 and 5 that is used in the system and method disclosed herein. The probe 16 is generally designed for the nondestructive examination of electrically conductive materials using a dynamic pulsed eddy current technique while simultaneously scanning and acquiring data on the specimen. The probe 16 includes at least two magnetizing yokes—a first magnetizing yoke and a second magnetizing yoke. A coil is positioned around a portion of the first magnetizing yoke and second magnetizing yoke, and at least one sensor array is disposed within the coil-However KOENIG does not disclose a liftoff spacing assembly disposed at the plurality of eddy current probes, and the liftoff spacing assembly forms a liftoff distance between the plurality of eddy current probes and a distal end of the liftoff spacing assembly.”
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 NASIMA MONSUR whose telephone number is (571)272-8497. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am-6:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at (571) 272-4448. 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.
/NASIMA MONSUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858