DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks in section II and III and amendments, filed 11/19/2025, with respect to the objection of claim 22 and the rejections of claims 1-18 and 21-24 under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claim 22 and the rejections of claims 1-18 and 21-24 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks in section IV and associated claim amendments, filed 11/19/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6, 14-18, and 19-21 under 35 USC 102a1 as anticipated by Stone have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection of claim(s) 1-2, 4-6, 14-18, and 19-21 under 35 USC 103a is made in view of Stone and newly applied secondary reference Pini.
As Stone, however, does not disclose staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor, or that the controller controls the first and second cutting systems and placement robots with respect to the first and second conveyors.
However, Pini discloses using staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor. See especially the embodiment of Figure 9, showing the pair of conveyors 12. Additionally, Pini teaches first and second cutting systems (such as guillotine shears 6 and punching machine 8) and placement robots (SCARA robots 13 and parallel robots 61), similar to that in Stone. See especially paragraphs 0045-47, disclosing:
[0045] FIG. 9 finally shows again a further embodiment of the inventive method for the production of preforms of a different nature. In the facility, represented in FIG. 9, two different preforms are produced in parallel next to one another, in the left track from so-called unidirectional ribbons 4 that are fed from rolls 2 on a revolver storage to guillotine shears 6. On the right side, glass mat reinforced thermoplastic (GMT) panels 7 are used as semi-finished product, that are cut in a punching machine 8. The further conveying occurs for both on a conveyor belt 12, wherein the precuts 11 are brought in a second phase (3) to a vertical automated carousel 23 in a manner analogous to the method described hereabove, by means for example of SCARA robots 13 arranged on a linear axis 17. In the feeding zone, precuts 21 are stored and on the opposite side precuts 25 are ready for transfer to a support plate in order to produce the final preform. In the representation according to FIG. 9, the precuts are for example either rectangular or trapezoidal. These can of course also be bent. Depending on the panel thickness or the thickness of the ribbon, the precuts have a different thickness. For example, the thicker the UD tape, the fewer precuts will be needed and thus the laying time will be reduced.
[0046] A wastage of 2.5% can also be expected for GMT panels of different size.
[0047] The precuts stored in the intermediate storage are finally stored by means of two parallel robots 61 placed side-by-side onto a preforming table 62 each, each with a welding plotter 63, wherein the welding takes finally takes place by means of a respective welding head 65. The preforming table represents the preforming tool and is executed as a plotter and takes over the function of holding and welding the precuts together (for example by ultrasound welding).
[0048] The sequence of movements and arrangements represented in FIGS. 1 to 9 are only examples that are suitable for explaining the present invention better. It is of course possible to provide one or several robots cutting precuts from one or several rolls, panels, ribbons or the like of semi-finished material, to provide several cutting elements on the cutter etc. etc. It is also possible for the intermediate storage areas, if provided, to be designed in a different manner reap, to store the temporarily stored precuts using a different organization.
[0049] One or several robots of different designs can also be provided for the arrangement of the precuts finally on one or several preforming tools, one or several tools can be provided etc. etc. The method of the invention is also in now way limited to carbon fiber reinforced materials, other reinforcement materials such as glas fibers, aramide fibers, PE fibers, basalt fibers etc. can also be used.
See also Figure 9, below:
PNG
media_image1.png
1052
834
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor, and that the controller controls the first and second cutting systems and placement robots with respect to the first and second conveyors as disclosed by Pini in order to achieve the capability that “two different preforms are produced in parallel next to one another” for use on the final lay-up.
Additionally, applicants remarks in section V have been considered and the subsequent rejections under 35 USC 103a (of claims 7-13, 16, and 22-25) have been substantially maintained, but the introductory statement has been amended to reflect that the Pini reference has been applied in parent claims 1-2, 4-18 and 19-21.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-6 and 14-18 and 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone (US 20180339469 A1) and Pini (US 20130306233 A1).
As to claim 1, Stone discloses a multi-ply lamination system comprising:
a first cutting system (“each ply cutter 130”) and a second cutting system each configured to independently cut materials having fibers oriented in an initial orientation to form courses and to move the courses into staging positions (see paragraph 0026, disclosing “In this embodiment, ply cutter 130 comprises blade 132 and rotary table 134.”);
placement robots (pick and place devices 140; see paragraph 0026, disclosing that “Each ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 from tape 114, which are laid-up onto laminate 170 by a corresponding pick-and-place device 140.”); and
a controller (controller 180) in communication with the first cutting system and the second cutting system and the placement robots (paragraph 0027, disclosing: “Controller 180 manages the operations of lamination units 110, in-line laminator 160, and/or surface 150 in order to control layup for laminate 170.”), wherein the controller is configured to:
control the first cutting system to cut and move a first group of courses into the staging positions; control the placement robots to pick up and place the first group of courses from the staging positions to a layup surface (surface 150) to form a first ply of a multi-ply laminate, changing an orientation of the fibers from the initial orientation to a desired orientation for the first ply; control the second cutting system to cut and move a second group of courses into the staging positions while the placement robots are picking up and placing the first group of courses; and control the placement robots to pick up and place the second group of courses from the staging positions to the layup surface to form a second ply of the multi-ply laminate, after the first ply has been formed, changing the orientation of the fibers from the initial orientation to the desired orientation for the second ply (see paragraph 0053, disclosing “Controller 180 may adjust the angles of ply cutters 130 before laminate 170 reverses direction, in order to provide a new set of fiber orientations.”).
See marked up Figure 1, below:
PNG
media_image2.png
590
818
media_image2.png
Greyscale
See also paragraph 0025-29 and 0037 and 0053, disclosing:
[0025] Frame 152 of lamination system 100 provides support for surface 150 (e.g., a surface of a mandrel). In this embodiment, surface 150 is the upper surface of a belt of a conveyor that conveys laminate 170 along direction D. In further embodiments, surface 150 may comprise a surface of a shuttle table, or a surface of a stationary table that lamination units 110 move relative to. In most embodiments, the movement is linear. However, further embodiments may involve arcing or even circular movement. Layup may initiate with in-line laminator 160, which is held by support 162 and utilizes infeed roller (tape dispenser) 112 to feed material 113 onto laminate 170. Material 113 supplied by in-line laminator 160 has a fiber orientation which is parallel to direction D. As laminate 170 continues along direction D, lamination units 110 are reached. Each lamination unit 110 includes an infeed roller (composite material supply device) 112 that stores and supplies tape 114. Tape 114 is drawn from an infeed roller 112 via drive rollers 116, which are spun in order to apply force to tape 114 that drives tape 114 forward. During this process, a disposable backing 122 is separated from tape 114 and stored on take-up reel 124.
[0026] Each ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 from tape 114, which are laid-up onto laminate 170 by a corresponding pick-and-place device 140. In this embodiment, ply cutter 130 comprises blade 132 and rotary table 134. Pick-and-place devices 140 are held in place by supports 142, and may comprise devices that utilize gripping components or components that apply a differential vacuum to a piece 118 in order to hold a piece 118 during movement.
[0027] Controller 180 is also depicted in FIG. 1. Controller 180 manages the operations of lamination units 110, in-line laminator 160, and/or surface 150 in order to control layup for laminate 170. For example, controller 180 may execute one or more Numerical Control (NC) programs to manage the operations of pick-and-place devices 140, ply cutters 130, etc. Controller 180 may be implemented, for example, as custom circuitry, as a hardware processor executing programmed instructions, or some combination thereof.
[0028] Lamination system 100 is unlike systems which rely on an FTLM to slowly lay up a laminate by constantly re-orienting and repositioning a mobile head. Specifically, lamination system 100 enhances overall layup speed by eliminating the need for an FTLM entirely while also enabling multiple layers (e.g., one for each lamination unit 110) to be laid-up simultaneously at laminate 170. Furthermore, the use of pick and place devices, 140 instead of a complex FTLM, allows for less complicated (and less expensive) machinery to be utilized during fabrication. Furthermore, pick and place devices 140 may avoid the need for maneuvering FTLM through rotations, translations and twists, and hence may avoid associated dynamics/kinematics issues.
[0029] Further details of lamination system 100 are provided in FIG. 2, which is a side view illustrated by view arrows 2 of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts components illustrated in FIG. 1, and further depicts a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid). Sensor 144 may be utilized by pick-and-place device 140 ensure that pieces 118 of material 113 are laid-up onto laminate 170 without forming gaps at laminate 170. For example, sensor 144 may detect the presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148 and may further detect position of the piece 118 relative to the end effector 148. That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.
…
[0037] As surface 150 and/or lamination units 110 advance, tape 114 is drawn from infeed rollers 112 by action of drive rollers 116, and ply cutters 130 cut tape 114 into pieces 118 at lamination units 110 (step 506). The amount of tape drawn over time may be regulated by controller 180 based on a tension sensor (not shown) at infeed roller 112. The angle of each ply cutter 130 is adjustable, and controller 180 controls lamination units 110 such that various lamination units 110 may cut tape 114 at different angles with respect to each other. Such a technique may cause each layer of laminate 170 to exhibit a different fiber orientation, which desirably enhances strength across multiple dimensions.
…
[0053] With layup completed for the first set of layers, laminate 170 reverses direction D as shown in FIG. 9, resulting in additional layup performed as laminate 170 retreats along X. Controller 180 may adjust the angles of ply cutters 130 before laminate 170 reverses direction, in order to provide a new set of fiber orientations. Lay up then continues for layers at L5 (starting at X4), L6 (starting at X3), L7 (starting at X2), and L8 (starting at X1) as laminate 170 continues along the newly reversed direction D.
Stone, however, does not disclose staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor, or that the controller controls the first and second cutting systems and placement robots with respect to the first and second conveyors.
However, Pini discloses using staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor. See especially the embodiment of Figure 9, showing the pair of conveyors 12. Additionally, Pini teaches first and second cutting systems (such as guillotine shears 6 and punching machine 8) and placement robots (SCARA robots 13 and parallel robots 61), similar to that in Stone. See especially paragraphs 0045-47, disclosing:
[0045] FIG. 9 finally shows again a further embodiment of the inventive method for the production of preforms of a different nature. In the facility, represented in FIG. 9, two different preforms are produced in parallel next to one another, in the left track from so-called unidirectional ribbons 4 that are fed from rolls 2 on a revolver storage to guillotine shears 6. On the right side, glass mat reinforced thermoplastic (GMT) panels 7 are used as semi-finished product, that are cut in a punching machine 8. The further conveying occurs for both on a conveyor belt 12, wherein the precuts 11 are brought in a second phase (3) to a vertical automated carousel 23 in a manner analogous to the method described hereabove, by means for example of SCARA robots 13 arranged on a linear axis 17. In the feeding zone, precuts 21 are stored and on the opposite side precuts 25 are ready for transfer to a support plate in order to produce the final preform. In the representation according to FIG. 9, the precuts are for example either rectangular or trapezoidal. These can of course also be bent. Depending on the panel thickness or the thickness of the ribbon, the precuts have a different thickness. For example, the thicker the UD tape, the fewer precuts will be needed and thus the laying time will be reduced.
[0046] A wastage of 2.5% can also be expected for GMT panels of different size.
[0047] The precuts stored in the intermediate storage are finally stored by means of two parallel robots 61 placed side-by-side onto a preforming table 62 each, each with a welding plotter 63, wherein the welding takes finally takes place by means of a respective welding head 65. The preforming table represents the preforming tool and is executed as a plotter and takes over the function of holding and welding the precuts together (for example by ultrasound welding).
[0048] The sequence of movements and arrangements represented in FIGS. 1 to 9 are only examples that are suitable for explaining the present invention better. It is of course possible to provide one or several robots cutting precuts from one or several rolls, panels, ribbons or the like of semi-finished material, to provide several cutting elements on the cutter etc. etc. It is also possible for the intermediate storage areas, if provided, to be designed in a different manner reap, to store the temporarily stored precuts using a different organization.
[0049] One or several robots of different designs can also be provided for the arrangement of the precuts finally on one or several preforming tools, one or several tools can be provided etc. etc. The method of the invention is also in now way limited to carbon fiber reinforced materials, other reinforcement materials such as glas fibers, aramide fibers, PE fibers, basalt fibers etc. can also be used.
See also Figure 9, below:
PNG
media_image1.png
1052
834
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor, and that the controller controls the first and second cutting systems and placement robots with respect to the first and second conveyors as disclosed by Pini in order to achieve the capability that “two different preforms are produced in parallel next to one another” for use on the final lay-up.
As to claim 2, Stone discloses an automated tape layup machine (such as “in line laminator 160”, or alternatively, the third of “lamination unit 110”) positioned to place a material having fibers in the initial orientation onto the layup surface, wherein the controller is configured to: control the automated tape layup machine to place the material to form a third ply of the multi-ply laminate with the third ply having the fibers oriented in the initial orientation. See paragraph 0025, disclosing:
[0025] Frame 152 of lamination system 100 provides support for surface 150 (e.g., a surface of a mandrel). In this embodiment, surface 150 is the upper surface of a belt of a conveyor that conveys laminate 170 along direction D. In further embodiments, surface 150 may comprise a surface of a shuttle table, or a surface of a stationary table that lamination units 110 move relative to. In most embodiments, the movement is linear. However, further embodiments may involve arcing or even circular movement. Layup may initiate with in-line laminator 160, which is held by support 162 and utilizes infeed roller (tape dispenser) 112 to feed material 113 onto laminate 170. Material 113 supplied by in-line laminator 160 has a fiber orientation which is parallel to direction D. As laminate 170 continues along direction D, lamination units 110 are reached. Each lamination unit 110 includes an infeed roller (composite material supply device) 112 that stores and supplies tape 114. Tape 114 is drawn from an infeed roller 112 via drive rollers 116, which are spun in order to apply force to tape 114 that drives tape 114 forward. During this process, a disposable backing 122 is separated from tape 114 and stored on take-up reel 124.
As to claim 4, Stone discloses wherein at least one of the first and the second cutting machine is configured to cut the courses from a roll of a material (see “an infeed roller (composite material supply device) 112”).
As to claim 5, Stone discloses further comprising: a layup conveyor, wherein the layup surface is on the layup conveyor. See paragraph 0025, disclosing “In this embodiment, surface 150 is the upper surface of a belt of a conveyor that conveys laminate 170 along direction D.”
As to claim 6, Stone discloses further comprising: a layup table, wherein the layup surface is on the layup table. “In further embodiments, surface 150 may comprise a surface of a shuttle table, or a surface of a stationary table that lamination units 110 move relative to.”
As to claim 14, Stone discloses wherein desired orientations for the courses are selected from a group consisting of 15 degrees, 30 degrees, 45, degrees, 75 degrees, and 90 degrees relative to the initial orientation. See paragraph 0049, disclosing:
[0049] FIGS. 6-9 illustrate build-up of laminate 170 as laminate 170 moves relative to lamination units 110. Specifically, FIG. 6 is a side view of laminate 170 during layup. Lateral positions illustrated in these FIGS. include X1, X2, X4, and X4. Meanwhile, vertical positions illustrated in these FIGS. include L1, L2, L3, etc. As laminate 170 proceeds past X1, a first layer 610 is laid up at L1 by in-line laminator 160. Laminate 170 continues, and as laminate 170 passes X2, a second layer 620 is laid-up at L2 by the lamination unit 110 at X2. Layer 620 formed by multiple cut pieces 118. Boundaries 650 between pieces 118 are also illustrated. Layup continues in a similar fashion as portions of laminate 170 advance past X3 (resulting in layer 630 at L3), and X4 (resulting in layer 640 at L4). As laminate 170 may be substantially long (e.g., tens of feet, such as sixty feet), in-line laminator 160, and lamination units 110 may operate in parallel to continuously lay up their layers at the same time as laminate 170 moves relative to lamination units 110. Each layer may exhibit a different fiber orientation (e.g., 0°, +45°, −45°, 90°, etc.), but layers that have the same fiber orientations may also be laid-up.
As to claim 15, Stone discloses wherein a desired orientation for a first ply is different from the desired orientation for a second ply. See paragraph 0049, disclosing:
[0049] FIGS. 6-9 illustrate build-up of laminate 170 as laminate 170 moves relative to lamination units 110. Specifically, FIG. 6 is a side view of laminate 170 during layup. Lateral positions illustrated in these FIGS. include X1, X2, X4, and X4. Meanwhile, vertical positions illustrated in these FIGS. include L1, L2, L3, etc. As laminate 170 proceeds past X1, a first layer 610 is laid up at L1 by in-line laminator 160. Laminate 170 continues, and as laminate 170 passes X2, a second layer 620 is laid-up at L2 by the lamination unit 110 at X2. Layer 620 formed by multiple cut pieces 118. Boundaries 650 between pieces 118 are also illustrated. Layup continues in a similar fashion as portions of laminate 170 advance past X3 (resulting in layer 630 at L3), and X4 (resulting in layer 640 at L4). As laminate 170 may be substantially long (e.g., tens of feet, such as sixty feet), in-line laminator 160, and lamination units 110 may operate in parallel to continuously lay up their layers at the same time as laminate 170 moves relative to lamination units 110. Each layer may exhibit a different fiber orientation (e.g., 0°, +45°, −45°, 90°, etc.), but layers that have the same fiber orientations may also be laid-up.
As to claim 16, the apparatus of Stone is capable of being used wherein the multi-ply laminate is used in a charge that is used to form a part selected from a group comprising an elongate composite part, a wing stringer, a fuselage stringer, an empennage a stringer, floor beam, a wing spar, and an empennage spar. See MPEP 2114 and 2115.
Stone discloses forming composite parts and stringers and floor beams. See paragraph 0002, disclosing “Multi-layer laminates of material (e.g., uncured Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP)) may be formed into any of a variety of shapes for curing into a composite part, such as a stringer, floor beam, or other component.”
As to claim 17, the apparatus of Stone is capable of being used, and discloses the capability to be used, wherein the placement robots (pick and place device 140) are configured to change the orientation of the fibers in at least one of the courses by re-orienting a course as it is picked up from a staging position and placed on the layup surface to form a ply; wherein the ply has a width defined by exterior edges of the ply; and wherein the course is re-oriented so that one or more cut edges of the course forms a part of an exterior edge of the ply when placed on the layup surface. See paragraph 0029, disclosing “each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer.” See also MPEP 2114 and 2115.
As to claim 18, Stone discloses A multi-ply lamination system that comprises:
a first cutting system (“each ply cutter 130”) and a second cutting system each configured to independently cut materials having fibers oriented in an initial orientation to form courses and to move the courses into staging positions (see paragraph 0026, disclosing “In this embodiment, ply cutter 130 comprises blade 132 and rotary table 134.”);
placement robots (pick and place devices 140; see paragraph 0026, disclosing that “Each ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 from tape 114, which are laid-up onto laminate 170 by a corresponding pick-and-place device 140.”);
an automated tape layup machine positioned to place a material having fibers in the initial orientation onto a layup surface (such as “in line laminator 160”, or alternatively, the third of “lamination unit 110”); and
a controller (controller 180) in communication with the first cutting system, the second cutting system, the placement robots, and the automated tape layup machine (paragraph 0027, disclosing: “Controller 180 manages the operations of lamination units 110, in-line laminator 160, and/or surface 150 in order to control layup for laminate 170.”), wherein the controller is configured to:
control the first cutting system to cut and move a first group of courses into the staging positions;
control the placement robots to pick up and place the first group of courses from the staging positions to a layup surface (surface 150) to form a first ply of a multi-ply laminate, changing an orientation of the fibers from the initial orientation to a desired orientation for the first ply;
control the second cutting system to cut and move a second group of courses into the staging positions while the placement robots are picking up and placing the first group of courses; control the placement robots to pick up and place the second group of courses from the staging positions to the layup surface to form a second ply of the multi-ply laminate, after the first ply has been formed, changing the orientation of the fibers from the initial orientation to the desired orientation for the second ply; and
control the automated tape layup machine to place the material to form a ply of the multi-ply laminate, with the ply having the fibers oriented in the initial orientation. (see paragraph 0053, disclosing “Controller 180 may adjust the angles of ply cutters 130 before laminate 170 reverses direction, in order to provide a new set of fiber orientations.”).
See marked up Figure 1, below:
PNG
media_image2.png
590
818
media_image2.png
Greyscale
See also paragraph 0025-29 and 0037 and 0053, disclosing:
[0025] Frame 152 of lamination system 100 provides support for surface 150 (e.g., a surface of a mandrel). In this embodiment, surface 150 is the upper surface of a belt of a conveyor that conveys laminate 170 along direction D. In further embodiments, surface 150 may comprise a surface of a shuttle table, or a surface of a stationary table that lamination units 110 move relative to. In most embodiments, the movement is linear. However, further embodiments may involve arcing or even circular movement. Layup may initiate with in-line laminator 160, which is held by support 162 and utilizes infeed roller (tape dispenser) 112 to feed material 113 onto laminate 170. Material 113 supplied by in-line laminator 160 has a fiber orientation which is parallel to direction D. As laminate 170 continues along direction D, lamination units 110 are reached. Each lamination unit 110 includes an infeed roller (composite material supply device) 112 that stores and supplies tape 114. Tape 114 is drawn from an infeed roller 112 via drive rollers 116, which are spun in order to apply force to tape 114 that drives tape 114 forward. During this process, a disposable backing 122 is separated from tape 114 and stored on take-up reel 124.
[0026] Each ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 from tape 114, which are laid-up onto laminate 170 by a corresponding pick-and-place device 140. In this embodiment, ply cutter 130 comprises blade 132 and rotary table 134. Pick-and-place devices 140 are held in place by supports 142, and may comprise devices that utilize gripping components or components that apply a differential vacuum to a piece 118 in order to hold a piece 118 during movement.
[0027] Controller 180 is also depicted in FIG. 1. Controller 180 manages the operations of lamination units 110, in-line laminator 160, and/or surface 150 in order to control layup for laminate 170. For example, controller 180 may execute one or more Numerical Control (NC) programs to manage the operations of pick-and-place devices 140, ply cutters 130, etc. Controller 180 may be implemented, for example, as custom circuitry, as a hardware processor executing programmed instructions, or some combination thereof.
[0028] Lamination system 100 is unlike systems which rely on an FTLM to slowly lay up a laminate by constantly re-orienting and repositioning a mobile head. Specifically, lamination system 100 enhances overall layup speed by eliminating the need for an FTLM entirely while also enabling multiple layers (e.g., one for each lamination unit 110) to be laid-up simultaneously at laminate 170. Furthermore, the use of pick and place devices, 140 instead of a complex FTLM, allows for less complicated (and less expensive) machinery to be utilized during fabrication. Furthermore, pick and place devices 140 may avoid the need for maneuvering FTLM through rotations, translations and twists, and hence may avoid associated dynamics/kinematics issues.
[0029] Further details of lamination system 100 are provided in FIG. 2, which is a side view illustrated by view arrows 2 of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts components illustrated in FIG. 1, and further depicts a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid). Sensor 144 may be utilized by pick-and-place device 140 ensure that pieces 118 of material 113 are laid-up onto laminate 170 without forming gaps at laminate 170. For example, sensor 144 may detect the presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148 and may further detect position of the piece 118 relative to the end effector 148. That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.
…
[0037] As surface 150 and/or lamination units 110 advance, tape 114 is drawn from infeed rollers 112 by action of drive rollers 116, and ply cutters 130 cut tape 114 into pieces 118 at lamination units 110 (step 506). The amount of tape drawn over time may be regulated by controller 180 based on a tension sensor (not shown) at infeed roller 112. The angle of each ply cutter 130 is adjustable, and controller 180 controls lamination units 110 such that various lamination units 110 may cut tape 114 at different angles with respect to each other. Such a technique may cause each layer of laminate 170 to exhibit a different fiber orientation, which desirably enhances strength across multiple dimensions.
…
[0053] With layup completed for the first set of layers, laminate 170 reverses direction D as shown in FIG. 9, resulting in additional layup performed as laminate 170 retreats along X. Controller 180 may adjust the angles of ply cutters 130 before laminate 170 reverses direction, in order to provide a new set of fiber orientations. Lay up then continues for layers at L5 (starting at X4), L6 (starting at X3), L7 (starting at X2), and L8 (starting at X1) as laminate 170 continues along the newly reversed direction D.
Stone, however, does not disclose staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor, or that the controller controls the first and second cutting systems and placement robots with respect to the first and second conveyors.
However, Pini discloses using staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor. See especially the embodiment of Figure 9, showing the pair of conveyors 12. Additionally, Pini teaches first and second cutting systems (such as guillotine shears 6 and punching machine 8) and placement robots (SCARA robots 13 and parallel robots 61), similar to that in Stone. See especially paragraphs 0045-47, disclosing:
[0045] FIG. 9 finally shows again a further embodiment of the inventive method for the production of preforms of a different nature. In the facility, represented in FIG. 9, two different preforms are produced in parallel next to one another, in the left track from so-called unidirectional ribbons 4 that are fed from rolls 2 on a revolver storage to guillotine shears 6. On the right side, glass mat reinforced thermoplastic (GMT) panels 7 are used as semi-finished product, that are cut in a punching machine 8. The further conveying occurs for both on a conveyor belt 12, wherein the precuts 11 are brought in a second phase (3) to a vertical automated carousel 23 in a manner analogous to the method described hereabove, by means for example of SCARA robots 13 arranged on a linear axis 17. In the feeding zone, precuts 21 are stored and on the opposite side precuts 25 are ready for transfer to a support plate in order to produce the final preform. In the representation according to FIG. 9, the precuts are for example either rectangular or trapezoidal. These can of course also be bent. Depending on the panel thickness or the thickness of the ribbon, the precuts have a different thickness. For example, the thicker the UD tape, the fewer precuts will be needed and thus the laying time will be reduced.
[0046] A wastage of 2.5% can also be expected for GMT panels of different size.
[0047] The precuts stored in the intermediate storage are finally stored by means of two parallel robots 61 placed side-by-side onto a preforming table 62 each, each with a welding plotter 63, wherein the welding takes finally takes place by means of a respective welding head 65. The preforming table represents the preforming tool and is executed as a plotter and takes over the function of holding and welding the precuts together (for example by ultrasound welding).
[0048] The sequence of movements and arrangements represented in FIGS. 1 to 9 are only examples that are suitable for explaining the present invention better. It is of course possible to provide one or several robots cutting precuts from one or several rolls, panels, ribbons or the like of semi-finished material, to provide several cutting elements on the cutter etc. etc. It is also possible for the intermediate storage areas, if provided, to be designed in a different manner reap, to store the temporarily stored precuts using a different organization.
[0049] One or several robots of different designs can also be provided for the arrangement of the precuts finally on one or several preforming tools, one or several tools can be provided etc. etc. The method of the invention is also in now way limited to carbon fiber reinforced materials, other reinforcement materials such as glas fibers, aramide fibers, PE fibers, basalt fibers etc. can also be used.
See also Figure 9, below:
PNG
media_image1.png
1052
834
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor, and that the controller controls the first and second cutting systems and placement robots with respect to the first and second conveyors as disclosed by Pini in order to achieve the capability that “two different preforms are produced in parallel next to one another” for use on the final lay-up.
As to claim 19, Stone discloses a method of forming a multi-ply laminate, the method comprising:
controlling (via a controller 180) a first cutting system (“each ply cutter 130”) to cut and move a first group of courses into staging positions (see paragraph 0026, disclosing “In this embodiment, ply cutter 130 comprises blade 132 and rotary table 134.”);
controlling placement robots to pick up and place the first group of courses from the staging positions to a layup surface to form a first ply of the multi-ply laminate (pick and place devices 140; see paragraph 0026, disclosing that “Each ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 from tape 114, which are laid-up onto laminate 170 by a corresponding pick-and-place device 140.”), changing an orientation of fibers from an initial orientation to a desired orientation for the first ply (see paragraph 0053, disclosing “Controller 180 may adjust the angles of ply cutters 130 before laminate 170 reverses direction, in order to provide a new set of fiber orientations.”);
controlling a second cutting system (“each ply cutter 130”) to cut and move a second group of courses into the staging positions while the placement robots are picking up and placing the first group of courses;
controlling the placement robots to pick up and place the second group of courses from the staging positions to the layup surface to form a second ply of the multi-ply laminate after the first ply has been formed, changing the orientation of the fibers from the initial orientation to the desired orientation for the second ply (see paragraph 0053, disclosing “Controller 180 may adjust the angles of ply cutters 130 before laminate 170 reverses direction, in order to provide a new set of fiber orientations.”); and
controlling an automated tape layup machine to place a material to form a third ply of the multi-ply laminate with the third ply having the fibers oriented in the initial orientation (see paragraph 0053, disclosing “Controller 180 may adjust the angles of ply cutters 130 before laminate 170 reverses direction, in order to provide a new set of fiber orientations.”).
See marked up Figure 1, below:
PNG
media_image2.png
590
818
media_image2.png
Greyscale
See also paragraph 0025-29 and 0037 and 0053, disclosing:
[0025] Frame 152 of lamination system 100 provides support for surface 150 (e.g., a surface of a mandrel). In this embodiment, surface 150 is the upper surface of a belt of a conveyor that conveys laminate 170 along direction D. In further embodiments, surface 150 may comprise a surface of a shuttle table, or a surface of a stationary table that lamination units 110 move relative to. In most embodiments, the movement is linear. However, further embodiments may involve arcing or even circular movement. Layup may initiate with in-line laminator 160, which is held by support 162 and utilizes infeed roller (tape dispenser) 112 to feed material 113 onto laminate 170. Material 113 supplied by in-line laminator 160 has a fiber orientation which is parallel to direction D. As laminate 170 continues along direction D, lamination units 110 are reached. Each lamination unit 110 includes an infeed roller (composite material supply device) 112 that stores and supplies tape 114. Tape 114 is drawn from an infeed roller 112 via drive rollers 116, which are spun in order to apply force to tape 114 that drives tape 114 forward. During this process, a disposable backing 122 is separated from tape 114 and stored on take-up reel 124.
[0026] Each ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 from tape 114, which are laid-up onto laminate 170 by a corresponding pick-and-place device 140. In this embodiment, ply cutter 130 comprises blade 132 and rotary table 134. Pick-and-place devices 140 are held in place by supports 142, and may comprise devices that utilize gripping components or components that apply a differential vacuum to a piece 118 in order to hold a piece 118 during movement.
[0027] Controller 180 is also depicted in FIG. 1. Controller 180 manages the operations of lamination units 110, in-line laminator 160, and/or surface 150 in order to control layup for laminate 170. For example, controller 180 may execute one or more Numerical Control (NC) programs to manage the operations of pick-and-place devices 140, ply cutters 130, etc. Controller 180 may be implemented, for example, as custom circuitry, as a hardware processor executing programmed instructions, or some combination thereof.
[0028] Lamination system 100 is unlike systems which rely on an FTLM to slowly lay up a laminate by constantly re-orienting and repositioning a mobile head. Specifically, lamination system 100 enhances overall layup speed by eliminating the need for an FTLM entirely while also enabling multiple layers (e.g., one for each lamination unit 110) to be laid-up simultaneously at laminate 170. Furthermore, the use of pick and place devices, 140 instead of a complex FTLM, allows for less complicated (and less expensive) machinery to be utilized during fabrication. Furthermore, pick and place devices 140 may avoid the need for maneuvering FTLM through rotations, translations and twists, and hence may avoid associated dynamics/kinematics issues.
[0029] Further details of lamination system 100 are provided in FIG. 2, which is a side view illustrated by view arrows 2 of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts components illustrated in FIG. 1, and further depicts a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid). Sensor 144 may be utilized by pick-and-place device 140 ensure that pieces 118 of material 113 are laid-up onto laminate 170 without forming gaps at laminate 170. For example, sensor 144 may detect the presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148 and may further detect position of the piece 118 relative to the end effector 148. That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.
…
[0037] As surface 150 and/or lamination units 110 advance, tape 114 is drawn from infeed rollers 112 by action of drive rollers 116, and ply cutters 130 cut tape 114 into pieces 118 at lamination units 110 (step 506). The amount of tape drawn over time may be regulated by controller 180 based on a tension sensor (not shown) at infeed roller 112. The angle of each ply cutter 130 is adjustable, and controller 180 controls lamination units 110 such that various lamination units 110 may cut tape 114 at different angles with respect to each other. Such a technique may cause each layer of laminate 170 to exhibit a different fiber orientation, which desirably enhances strength across multiple dimensions.
…
[0053] With layup completed for the first set of layers, laminate 170 reverses direction D as shown in FIG. 9, resulting in additional layup performed as laminate 170 retreats along X. Controller 180 may adjust the angles of ply cutters 130 before laminate 170 reverses direction, in order to provide a new set of fiber orientations. Lay up then continues for layers at L5 (starting at X4), L6 (starting at X3), L7 (starting at X2), and L8 (starting at X1) as laminate 170 continues along the newly reversed direction D.
Stone, however, does not disclose staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor, or controlling the first and second cutting systems and placement robots with respect to the first and second conveyors.
However, Pini discloses using staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor. See especially the embodiment of Figure 9, showing the pair of conveyors 12. Additionally, Pini teaches first and second cutting systems (such as guillotine shears 6 and punching machine 8) and placement robots (SCARA robots 13 and parallel robots 61), similar to that in Stone. See especially paragraphs 0045-47, disclosing:
[0045] FIG. 9 finally shows again a further embodiment of the inventive method for the production of preforms of a different nature. In the facility, represented in FIG. 9, two different preforms are produced in parallel next to one another, in the left track from so-called unidirectional ribbons 4 that are fed from rolls 2 on a revolver storage to guillotine shears 6. On the right side, glass mat reinforced thermoplastic (GMT) panels 7 are used as semi-finished product, that are cut in a punching machine 8. The further conveying occurs for both on a conveyor belt 12, wherein the precuts 11 are brought in a second phase (3) to a vertical automated carousel 23 in a manner analogous to the method described hereabove, by means for example of SCARA robots 13 arranged on a linear axis 17. In the feeding zone, precuts 21 are stored and on the opposite side precuts 25 are ready for transfer to a support plate in order to produce the final preform. In the representation according to FIG. 9, the precuts are for example either rectangular or trapezoidal. These can of course also be bent. Depending on the panel thickness or the thickness of the ribbon, the precuts have a different thickness. For example, the thicker the UD tape, the fewer precuts will be needed and thus the laying time will be reduced.
[0046] A wastage of 2.5% can also be expected for GMT panels of different size.
[0047] The precuts stored in the intermediate storage are finally stored by means of two parallel robots 61 placed side-by-side onto a preforming table 62 each, each with a welding plotter 63, wherein the welding takes finally takes place by means of a respective welding head 65. The preforming table represents the preforming tool and is executed as a plotter and takes over the function of holding and welding the precuts together (for example by ultrasound welding).
[0048] The sequence of movements and arrangements represented in FIGS. 1 to 9 are only examples that are suitable for explaining the present invention better. It is of course possible to provide one or several robots cutting precuts from one or several rolls, panels, ribbons or the like of semi-finished material, to provide several cutting elements on the cutter etc. etc. It is also possible for the intermediate storage areas, if provided, to be designed in a different manner reap, to store the temporarily stored precuts using a different organization.
[0049] One or several robots of different designs can also be provided for the arrangement of the precuts finally on one or several preforming tools, one or several tools can be provided etc. etc. The method of the invention is also in now way limited to carbon fiber reinforced materials, other reinforcement materials such as glas fibers, aramide fibers, PE fibers, basalt fibers etc. can also be used.
See also Figure 9, below:
PNG
media_image1.png
1052
834
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized staging positions on a first conveyor and staging positions on a second conveyor, and controlling the first and second cutting systems and placement robots with respect to the first and second conveyors as disclosed by Pini in order to achieve the capability that “two different preforms are produced in parallel next to one another” for use on the final lay-up.
As to claim 20, Stone discloses wherein each subsequent ply is formed by placing at least some of the material of each subsequent ply to at least partially overlap a prior ply. See paragraph 0024, disclosing “For example, in one embodiment each lamination unit 110 lays up a single layer of laminate 170, and the fibers of each layer are oriented parallel to each other.” See also paragraph 0029, disclosing “That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.” See also paragraph 0033, disclosing:
[0033] FIG. 4 provides a further illustration of lamination system 100 in the form of a top view indicated by view arrows 4 of FIG. 2. FIG. 4 illustrates that in-line laminator 160 and lamination units 110 each occupy a different position along D (e.g., along the X axis). These positions are labeled as X1, X2, X3, and X4. As laminate 170 advances in direction D, in-line laminator 160 applies a first layer of material 113, a lamination unit 110 at X2 applies a second layer of material 113, a lamination unit 110 at X3 applies a third layer of material 113, and a lamination unit 110 at X2 applies a fourth layer of material 113. For example, piece 400 is laid up in a fourth layer of material 113 at laminate 170. Thus, laminate 170 increases in thickness as it traverses along D. Illustrations of this layup process are provided with respect to FIGS. 6-9, which are described below. In some embodiments, a much wider tape than typical may be used at by in-line laminator 160 at position X1. Wider tapes than typical for an FTLM can also be used at positions X2, X3 and X4 as these stations do not have to move.
As to claim 21, Stone discloses wherein the orientation of the fibers in at least one of the courses is changed by re-orienting a course as it is picked up from a staging position and placed on the layup surface to form a ply; wherein the ply has a width defined by exterior edges of the ply; and wherein the course is re-oriented so that one or more cut edges of the course forms a part of an exterior edge of the ply when placed on the layup surface. See paragraph 0024, disclosing “For example, in one embodiment each lamination unit 110 lays up a single layer of laminate 170, and the fibers of each layer are oriented parallel to each other.” See also paragraph 0029, disclosing “That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.”
Claim(s) 7 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone (US 20180339469 A1) and Pini (US 20130306233 A1) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6 and 14-18 and 19-21 above, and further in view of Holmes (US 20200283171 A1).
As to claim 7, Stone does not disclose further comprising: an inspection system configured to determine whether any of the courses have anomalies that are out of tolerance.
However, Holmes discloses further comprising: an inspection system (including IR camera 145 and controller 112) configured to determine whether any of the courses have anomalies that are out of tolerance. See paragraph 0050, disclosing:
[0047] In step 206, IR camera 145 generates thermographic images 118 of the lanes 160 of the tape 154 as applied to the laminate 150. Each thermographic image 118 may depict a portion of all lanes within a course, and thermographic images 118 may be stitched together to depict the layup resulting from an entire course. Because lanes may extend for tens of feet, multiple thermographic images 118 may need to be analyzed in order to detect the specific start locations and stop locations of individual lanes within a course. Thus, the thermographic images 118 may be acquired periodically (e.g., once every few seconds, once every ten feet of movement of head 140, etc.), to ensure that there are no gaps in coverage between images during layup.
[0048] In step 208, controller 112 analyzes contrast within the thermographic images 118 to identify a feature at laminate 150 that is thermally distinct from its surroundings. Each pixel within a thermographic image 118 is assigned a value corresponding with a temperature, and thermally distinct features may be detected by identifying contiguous sets of pixels that are within a range of temperatures (e.g., fifty degrees Fahrenheit, ten degrees Fahrenheit, etc.) that are surrounded by pixels outside of the range (e.g., more than one degree Fahrenheit different than the contiguous set of pixels). Each feature may have an associated temperature or range of temperatures, a known shape, and a known size in terms of width or number of pixels. In further embodiments, a thermographic image may be altered by applying an edge detection algorithm (such as a Laplacian or other filter) before the image is analyzed.
[0049] In step 210, controller 112 classifies the feature based on at least one of a size of the feature, a shape of the feature, or a difference in temperature between the feature and its surroundings. For example, lanes 160 of tape 154 are expected to exhibit known ranges of temperature differences from an underlying laminate. These ranges are discussed above. If a region is within the expected range of temperature difference with respect to another region, it may be classified based on whether is hotter or colder than that other region.
[0050] In step 212 controller 112 determines features that are out of tolerance (e.g., too large, as identified by a filtering process performed on the feature's properties). If features are out of tolerance, then controller 112 reports the out of tolerance features for review. These features/conditions may be reported graphically on a representation of laminate 150, or in a textual report. During this step, controller 112 may further filter the features based on their size and type, in order to automatically indicate and highlight out of tolerance features without a need for human intervention.
…
[0058] Because thermal imaging may be utilized to quantify aspects of various features such as the locations of ends of lanes, the locations of foreign debris, and the locations of layup inconsistencies, the time and labor spent reworking the laminate 400 is reduced. That is, because out of tolerance features of the laminate 400 are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned. Furthermore, because the laminate 400 remains green and uncured during the inspection process, the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate. This is not possible after the laminate has been cured into a composite part.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized further comprising: an inspection system configured to determine whether any of the courses have anomalies that are out of tolerance as suggested by Holmes because if out of tolerance features of the laminate are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned and the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate.
As to claim 12, Stone discloses wherein the inspection system comprises at least one of a camera system (“camera”), a thermal camera, an infrared light camera, a visible light camera, a laser scanner (paragraph 0030, disclosing “one or more sensors 144 (e.g., a pressure sensor, camera, laser or ultrasonic distancing device, etc.)”), an x-ray imaging machine, and a laser shearography system (see paragraph 0029, disclosing “a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid)”).
Additionally, Holmes as applied above in claim 7 also discloses a camera system which is a thermal camera and an infrared light camera. See paragraph 0047, disclosing “In step 206, IR camera 145 generates thermographic images 118 of the lanes 160 of the tape 154 as applied to the laminate 150.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized wherein the inspection system comprises at least one of a camera system, a thermal camera, an infrared light camera, a visible light camera, a laser scanner, an x-ray imaging machine, and a laser shearography system as suggested by Holmes because if out of tolerance features of the laminate are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned and the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate.
Claim(s) 8, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone (US 20180339469 A1) and Pini (US 20130306233 A1) and Holmes (US 20200283171 A1) as applied to claims 7 and 12 above, and further in view of Krajca (US 20220176649 A1).
As to claim 8, Stone discloses wherein the inspection system comprises robot cameras connected to the placement robots, wherein the robot cameras are positioned to generate top images of a top surface of the courses; and wherein the controller is configured to: generate the top images of the top surface of the courses in response the placement robots moving to pick up the courses. See paragraphs 0029-30, disclosing:
[0029] Further details of lamination system 100 are provided in FIG. 2, which is a side view illustrated by view arrows 2 of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts components illustrated in FIG. 1, and further depicts a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid). Sensor 144 may be utilized by pick-and-place device 140 ensure that pieces 118 of material 113 are laid-up onto laminate 170 without forming gaps at laminate 170. For example, sensor 144 may detect the presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148 and may further detect position of the piece 118 relative to the end effector 148. That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.
[0030] In this embodiment, a heater 146 (e.g., a radiant heater) at pick-and-place device 140 heats pieces 118 to a tacking temperature (e.g., 190° F.) before laying up pieces 118. FIG. 2 further depicts region 3 in which backing 122 is separated from tape 114 after exiting infeed roller 112,and one or more sensors 144 (e.g., a pressure sensor, camera, laser or ultrasonic distancing device, etc.) placed along lamination system 100. Sensors 144 may be utilized to sense locations of pieces 118 prior to or during cutting by ply cutters 130. Sensors 144 may further provide sensor data that may be utilized to sense pieces 118 during movement of an end effector 148 of a pick and place device 140 to acquire pieces 118, may be utilized to sense a presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148, and may be utilized to sense the location of an end effector 148 relative to a pick up or drop off location. Sensor input may further be utilized to sense the position/orientation of end effector 148 relative to the pick up or drop off location, to determine a pressure used to apply a piece 118 to laminate 170, to sense that a piece 118 has been placed at laminate 170, and/or even to sense a temperature of piece 118. Further details of sensors 144 are provided with respect to FIG. 5 below.
Stone does not disclose that the controller is configured to analyze the top images for the anomalies that are out of tolerance; and control the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location.
However, Holmes discloses that the controller is configured to analyze the top images for the anomalies that are out of tolerance and control the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance (including IR camera 145 and controller 112). See paragraph 0050, disclosing:
[0047] In step 206, IR camera 145 generates thermographic images 118 of the lanes 160 of the tape 154 as applied to the laminate 150. Each thermographic image 118 may depict a portion of all lanes within a course, and thermographic images 118 may be stitched together to depict the layup resulting from an entire course. Because lanes may extend for tens of feet, multiple thermographic images 118 may need to be analyzed in order to detect the specific start locations and stop locations of individual lanes within a course. Thus, the thermographic images 118 may be acquired periodically (e.g., once every few seconds, once every ten feet of movement of head 140, etc.), to ensure that there are no gaps in coverage between images during layup.
[0048] In step 208, controller 112 analyzes contrast within the thermographic images 118 to identify a feature at laminate 150 that is thermally distinct from its surroundings. Each pixel within a thermographic image 118 is assigned a value corresponding with a temperature, and thermally distinct features may be detected by identifying contiguous sets of pixels that are within a range of temperatures (e.g., fifty degrees Fahrenheit, ten degrees Fahrenheit, etc.) that are surrounded by pixels outside of the range (e.g., more than one degree Fahrenheit different than the contiguous set of pixels). Each feature may have an associated temperature or range of temperatures, a known shape, and a known size in terms of width or number of pixels. In further embodiments, a thermographic image may be altered by applying an edge detection algorithm (such as a Laplacian or other filter) before the image is analyzed.
[0049] In step 210, controller 112 classifies the feature based on at least one of a size of the feature, a shape of the feature, or a difference in temperature between the feature and its surroundings. For example, lanes 160 of tape 154 are expected to exhibit known ranges of temperature differences from an underlying laminate. These ranges are discussed above. If a region is within the expected range of temperature difference with respect to another region, it may be classified based on whether is hotter or colder than that other region.
[0050] In step 212 controller 112 determines features that are out of tolerance (e.g., too large, as identified by a filtering process performed on the feature's properties). If features are out of tolerance, then controller 112 reports the out of tolerance features for review. These features/conditions may be reported graphically on a representation of laminate 150, or in a textual report. During this step, controller 112 may further filter the features based on their size and type, in order to automatically indicate and highlight out of tolerance features without a need for human intervention.
…
[0058] Because thermal imaging may be utilized to quantify aspects of various features such as the locations of ends of lanes, the locations of foreign debris, and the locations of layup inconsistencies, the time and labor spent reworking the laminate 400 is reduced. That is, because out of tolerance features of the laminate 400 are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned. Furthermore, because the laminate 400 remains green and uncured during the inspection process, the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate. This is not possible after the laminate has been cured into a composite part.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized wherein the controller is configured to analyze the top images for the anomalies that are out of tolerance and control the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance as suggested by Holmes because if out of tolerance features of the laminate are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned and the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate.
Additionally, Krajca discloses a scrap location and would make obvious that the controller controls the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes. See especially paragraphs 0053-55 and 0092-94, disclosing:
[0053] Referring now to FIGS. 2-4, the sub-systems of the system 100 are generally arranged in operational sequence with each other within a manufacturing environment. In one or more examples, the lamination system 112 is in sequential relation to the carrier preparation system 162. In one or more examples, the trim system 114 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 is in sequential relation to the trim system 114. In one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the scrap removal system 142. In one or more examples, the forming system 122 is in sequential relation to the transfer system 116. In one or more examples, the film removal system 160 is in sequential relation to the forming system 122.
[0054] It should be recognized that not every sub-system is required, or certain sub-systems may not be utilized in every implementation of the disclosed system 100. For example, in certain implementations, the carrier preparation system 162, the trim system 114 and/or the scrap removal system 142 may not be utilized in fabrication of the composite structure 102 and, thus, may not be included as a sub-system within the system 100. As such, in one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112.
[0055] It should also be recognized that one or more of the sub-systems may be co-located or otherwise share an operational station of the system 100. As an example, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operational station of the system 100. As such, movement of the ply carrier 104 from the trim system 114 to the scrap removal system 142 (e.g., between a trimming operation and a scrap removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time. As another example, the forming system 122 and the film removal system 160 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operation station of the system 100. As such, movement of the forming tool 120 from the forming system 122 to the film removal system 160 (e.g., between a forming operation and a film removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time.
…
[0092] In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes at least one scrap-removing device 182. The scrap-removing device 182 is configured to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply 106. The scrap-removing device 182 may be any machine or device capable of manipulating the remnant and removing the remnant from the ply carrier 104. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 includes, or takes the form of, a robotic end effector. The scrap-removing device 182 includes parts and components (e.g., drive motors, actuators, grippers, sensors and the like) that enable the scrap-removing device 182 to automatically remove the remnant. As an example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a pick-and-place gripper. As another example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a vacuum gripper or vacuum roller.
[0093] The scrap-removing device 182 is movable relative to the ply carrier 104. For example, the scrap-removing device 182 operates in a three-dimensional X, Y, Z coordinate system. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes a support platform 184 that is configured to selectively move and position the scrap-removing device 182 relative to the carrier transfer device 110 and, thus, the ply carrier 104. The support platform 184 may be any suitable machine capable of automatically driving and controlling movement of the scrap-removing device 182, such as a robot, a robotic arm, and overhead gantry and the like. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 may be configured to automatically place scrap remnants in a scrap container for subsequent removal.
[0094] In one or more examples, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may be integrated within a single workstation. In these examples, the cutting device 178 and the scrap-removing device 182 may share the same support platform.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized a scrap location and would make obvious that the controller controls the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes by using the teachings as taught by Krajca in order to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply as well as other errors such as those in Holmes.
As to claim 10, Stone discloses wherein the inspection system comprises a cutting camera system (paragraph 0030, disclosing “Sensors 144 may be utilized to sense locations of pieces 118 prior to or during cutting by ply cutters 130.”), wherein the cutting camera system is positioned to generate top images of a top surface of the courses cut by the first cutting system and the second cutting system, wherein the controller is configured to: generate the top images of the courses in response to the first cutting system and the second cutting system cutting the courses. See paragraph 0029-30, disclosing:
[0029] Further details of lamination system 100 are provided in FIG. 2, which is a side view illustrated by view arrows 2 of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts components illustrated in FIG. 1, and further depicts a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid). Sensor 144 may be utilized by pick-and-place device 140 ensure that pieces 118 of material 113 are laid-up onto laminate 170 without forming gaps at laminate 170. For example, sensor 144 may detect the presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148 and may further detect position of the piece 118 relative to the end effector 148. That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.
[0030] In this embodiment, a heater 146 (e.g., a radiant heater) at pick-and-place device 140 heats pieces 118 to a tacking temperature (e.g., 190° F.) before laying up pieces 118. FIG. 2 further depicts region 3 in which backing 122 is separated from tape 114 after exiting infeed roller 112,and one or more sensors 144 (e.g., a pressure sensor, camera, laser or ultrasonic distancing device, etc.) placed along lamination system 100. Sensors 144 may be utilized to sense locations of pieces 118 prior to or during cutting by ply cutters 130. Sensors 144 may further provide sensor data that may be utilized to sense pieces 118 during movement of an end effector 148 of a pick and place device 140 to acquire pieces 118, may be utilized to sense a presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148, and may be utilized to sense the location of an end effector 148 relative to a pick up or drop off location. Sensor input may further be utilized to sense the position/orientation of end effector 148 relative to the pick up or drop off location, to determine a pressure used to apply a piece 118 to laminate 170, to sense that a piece 118 has been placed at laminate 170, and/or even to sense a temperature of piece 118. Further details of sensors 144 are provided with respect to FIG. 5 below.
Stone does not disclose that the controller is configured to analyze the top images for the anomalies that are out of tolerance; and control the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location.
However, Holmes discloses that the controller is configured to analyze the top images for the anomalies that are out of tolerance and control the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance (including IR camera 145 and controller 112). See paragraph 0050, disclosing:
[0047] In step 206, IR camera 145 generates thermographic images 118 of the lanes 160 of the tape 154 as applied to the laminate 150. Each thermographic image 118 may depict a portion of all lanes within a course, and thermographic images 118 may be stitched together to depict the layup resulting from an entire course. Because lanes may extend for tens of feet, multiple thermographic images 118 may need to be analyzed in order to detect the specific start locations and stop locations of individual lanes within a course. Thus, the thermographic images 118 may be acquired periodically (e.g., once every few seconds, once every ten feet of movement of head 140, etc.), to ensure that there are no gaps in coverage between images during layup.
[0048] In step 208, controller 112 analyzes contrast within the thermographic images 118 to identify a feature at laminate 150 that is thermally distinct from its surroundings. Each pixel within a thermographic image 118 is assigned a value corresponding with a temperature, and thermally distinct features may be detected by identifying contiguous sets of pixels that are within a range of temperatures (e.g., fifty degrees Fahrenheit, ten degrees Fahrenheit, etc.) that are surrounded by pixels outside of the range (e.g., more than one degree Fahrenheit different than the contiguous set of pixels). Each feature may have an associated temperature or range of temperatures, a known shape, and a known size in terms of width or number of pixels. In further embodiments, a thermographic image may be altered by applying an edge detection algorithm (such as a Laplacian or other filter) before the image is analyzed.
[0049] In step 210, controller 112 classifies the feature based on at least one of a size of the feature, a shape of the feature, or a difference in temperature between the feature and its surroundings. For example, lanes 160 of tape 154 are expected to exhibit known ranges of temperature differences from an underlying laminate. These ranges are discussed above. If a region is within the expected range of temperature difference with respect to another region, it may be classified based on whether is hotter or colder than that other region.
[0050] In step 212 controller 112 determines features that are out of tolerance (e.g., too large, as identified by a filtering process performed on the feature's properties). If features are out of tolerance, then controller 112 reports the out of tolerance features for review. These features/conditions may be reported graphically on a representation of laminate 150, or in a textual report. During this step, controller 112 may further filter the features based on their size and type, in order to automatically indicate and highlight out of tolerance features without a need for human intervention.
…
[0058] Because thermal imaging may be utilized to quantify aspects of various features such as the locations of ends of lanes, the locations of foreign debris, and the locations of layup inconsistencies, the time and labor spent reworking the laminate 400 is reduced. That is, because out of tolerance features of the laminate 400 are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned. Furthermore, because the laminate 400 remains green and uncured during the inspection process, the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate. This is not possible after the laminate has been cured into a composite part.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized wherein the controller is configured to analyze the top images for the anomalies that are out of tolerance and control the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance as suggested by Holmes because if out of tolerance features of the laminate are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned and the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate.
Additionally, Krajca discloses a scrap location and would make obvious that the controller controls the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes. See especially paragraphs 0053-55 and 0092-94, disclosing:
[0053] Referring now to FIGS. 2-4, the sub-systems of the system 100 are generally arranged in operational sequence with each other within a manufacturing environment. In one or more examples, the lamination system 112 is in sequential relation to the carrier preparation system 162. In one or more examples, the trim system 114 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 is in sequential relation to the trim system 114. In one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the scrap removal system 142. In one or more examples, the forming system 122 is in sequential relation to the transfer system 116. In one or more examples, the film removal system 160 is in sequential relation to the forming system 122.
[0054] It should be recognized that not every sub-system is required, or certain sub-systems may not be utilized in every implementation of the disclosed system 100. For example, in certain implementations, the carrier preparation system 162, the trim system 114 and/or the scrap removal system 142 may not be utilized in fabrication of the composite structure 102 and, thus, may not be included as a sub-system within the system 100. As such, in one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112.
[0055] It should also be recognized that one or more of the sub-systems may be co-located or otherwise share an operational station of the system 100. As an example, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operational station of the system 100. As such, movement of the ply carrier 104 from the trim system 114 to the scrap removal system 142 (e.g., between a trimming operation and a scrap removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time. As another example, the forming system 122 and the film removal system 160 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operation station of the system 100. As such, movement of the forming tool 120 from the forming system 122 to the film removal system 160 (e.g., between a forming operation and a film removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time.
…
[0092] In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes at least one scrap-removing device 182. The scrap-removing device 182 is configured to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply 106. The scrap-removing device 182 may be any machine or device capable of manipulating the remnant and removing the remnant from the ply carrier 104. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 includes, or takes the form of, a robotic end effector. The scrap-removing device 182 includes parts and components (e.g., drive motors, actuators, grippers, sensors and the like) that enable the scrap-removing device 182 to automatically remove the remnant. As an example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a pick-and-place gripper. As another example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a vacuum gripper or vacuum roller.
[0093] The scrap-removing device 182 is movable relative to the ply carrier 104. For example, the scrap-removing device 182 operates in a three-dimensional X, Y, Z coordinate system. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes a support platform 184 that is configured to selectively move and position the scrap-removing device 182 relative to the carrier transfer device 110 and, thus, the ply carrier 104. The support platform 184 may be any suitable machine capable of automatically driving and controlling movement of the scrap-removing device 182, such as a robot, a robotic arm, and overhead gantry and the like. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 may be configured to automatically place scrap remnants in a scrap container for subsequent removal.
[0094] In one or more examples, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may be integrated within a single workstation. In these examples, the cutting device 178 and the scrap-removing device 182 may share the same support platform.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized a scrap location and would make obvious that the controller controls the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes by using the teachings as taught by Krajca in order to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply as well as other errors such as those in Holmes.
As to claim 11, Stone and Holmes does not disclose a number of scrap robots positioned to remove the courses cut by the first cutting system and the second cutting system with the anomalies that are out of the tolerance to the scrap location.
However, Krajca discloses a number of scrap robots positioned to remove the courses cut by the first cutting system and the second cutting system with the anomalies that are out of the tolerance to the scrap location. See especially paragraphs 0053-55 and 0092-94, disclosing:
[0053] Referring now to FIGS. 2-4, the sub-systems of the system 100 are generally arranged in operational sequence with each other within a manufacturing environment. In one or more examples, the lamination system 112 is in sequential relation to the carrier preparation system 162. In one or more examples, the trim system 114 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 is in sequential relation to the trim system 114. In one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the scrap removal system 142. In one or more examples, the forming system 122 is in sequential relation to the transfer system 116. In one or more examples, the film removal system 160 is in sequential relation to the forming system 122.
[0054] It should be recognized that not every sub-system is required, or certain sub-systems may not be utilized in every implementation of the disclosed system 100. For example, in certain implementations, the carrier preparation system 162, the trim system 114 and/or the scrap removal system 142 may not be utilized in fabrication of the composite structure 102 and, thus, may not be included as a sub-system within the system 100. As such, in one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112.
[0055] It should also be recognized that one or more of the sub-systems may be co-located or otherwise share an operational station of the system 100. As an example, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operational station of the system 100. As such, movement of the ply carrier 104 from the trim system 114 to the scrap removal system 142 (e.g., between a trimming operation and a scrap removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time. As another example, the forming system 122 and the film removal system 160 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operation station of the system 100. As such, movement of the forming tool 120 from the forming system 122 to the film removal system 160 (e.g., between a forming operation and a film removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time.
…
[0092] In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes at least one scrap-removing device 182. The scrap-removing device 182 is configured to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply 106. The scrap-removing device 182 may be any machine or device capable of manipulating the remnant and removing the remnant from the ply carrier 104. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 includes, or takes the form of, a robotic end effector. The scrap-removing device 182 includes parts and components (e.g., drive motors, actuators, grippers, sensors and the like) that enable the scrap-removing device 182 to automatically remove the remnant. As an example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a pick-and-place gripper. As another example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a vacuum gripper or vacuum roller.
[0093] The scrap-removing device 182 is movable relative to the ply carrier 104. For example, the scrap-removing device 182 operates in a three-dimensional X, Y, Z coordinate system. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes a support platform 184 that is configured to selectively move and position the scrap-removing device 182 relative to the carrier transfer device 110 and, thus, the ply carrier 104. The support platform 184 may be any suitable machine capable of automatically driving and controlling movement of the scrap-removing device 182, such as a robot, a robotic arm, and overhead gantry and the like. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 may be configured to automatically place scrap remnants in a scrap container for subsequent removal.
[0094] In one or more examples, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may be integrated within a single workstation. In these examples, the cutting device 178 and the scrap-removing device 182 may share the same support platform.
Additionally, duplication of parts is often obvious. MPEP 2144.04 VI B. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.). In this case, such a duplication would enable an increase in the rate of scrap removal which is not a new and unexpected result.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized a number of scrap robots positioned to remove the courses cut by the first cutting system and the second cutting system with the anomalies that are out of the tolerance to the scrap location as taught by Krajca in order to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply.
Claim(s) 22 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone (US 20180339469 A1) and Pini (US 20130306233 A1) as applied to claims 19 above, and further in view of Holmes (US 20200283171 A1) and Krajca (US 20220176649 A1).
As to claim 22, Stone discloses further comprising: generating top images of a top surface of the courses using robot cameras connected to the placement robots in response the placement robots moving to pick up the courses; analyzing the top images. See paragraphs 0029-30, disclosing:
[0029] Further details of lamination system 100 are provided in FIG. 2, which is a side view illustrated by view arrows 2 of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts components illustrated in FIG. 1, and further depicts a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid). Sensor 144 may be utilized by pick-and-place device 140 ensure that pieces 118 of material 113 are laid-up onto laminate 170 without forming gaps at laminate 170. For example, sensor 144 may detect the presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148 and may further detect position of the piece 118 relative to the end effector 148. That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.
[0030] In this embodiment, a heater 146 (e.g., a radiant heater) at pick-and-place device 140 heats pieces 118 to a tacking temperature (e.g., 190° F.) before laying up pieces 118. FIG. 2 further depicts region 3 in which backing 122 is separated from tape 114 after exiting infeed roller 112,and one or more sensors 144 (e.g., a pressure sensor, camera, laser or ultrasonic distancing device, etc.) placed along lamination system 100. Sensors 144 may be utilized to sense locations of pieces 118 prior to or during cutting by ply cutters 130. Sensors 144 may further provide sensor data that may be utilized to sense pieces 118 during movement of an end effector 148 of a pick and place device 140 to acquire pieces 118, may be utilized to sense a presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148, and may be utilized to sense the location of an end effector 148 relative to a pick up or drop off location. Sensor input may further be utilized to sense the position/orientation of end effector 148 relative to the pick up or drop off location, to determine a pressure used to apply a piece 118 to laminate 170, to sense that a piece 118 has been placed at laminate 170, and/or even to sense a temperature of piece 118. Further details of sensors 144 are provided with respect to FIG. 5 below.
Stone does not disclose analyzing the top images for anomalies that are out of a tolerance; and controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of the tolerance to scrap location.
However, Holmes discloses analyzing the top images for anomalies that are out of a tolerance and controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies (by using IR camera 145 and controller 112). See paragraph 0050, disclosing:
[0047] In step 206, IR camera 145 generates thermographic images 118 of the lanes 160 of the tape 154 as applied to the laminate 150. Each thermographic image 118 may depict a portion of all lanes within a course, and thermographic images 118 may be stitched together to depict the layup resulting from an entire course. Because lanes may extend for tens of feet, multiple thermographic images 118 may need to be analyzed in order to detect the specific start locations and stop locations of individual lanes within a course. Thus, the thermographic images 118 may be acquired periodically (e.g., once every few seconds, once every ten feet of movement of head 140, etc.), to ensure that there are no gaps in coverage between images during layup.
[0048] In step 208, controller 112 analyzes contrast within the thermographic images 118 to identify a feature at laminate 150 that is thermally distinct from its surroundings. Each pixel within a thermographic image 118 is assigned a value corresponding with a temperature, and thermally distinct features may be detected by identifying contiguous sets of pixels that are within a range of temperatures (e.g., fifty degrees Fahrenheit, ten degrees Fahrenheit, etc.) that are surrounded by pixels outside of the range (e.g., more than one degree Fahrenheit different than the contiguous set of pixels). Each feature may have an associated temperature or range of temperatures, a known shape, and a known size in terms of width or number of pixels. In further embodiments, a thermographic image may be altered by applying an edge detection algorithm (such as a Laplacian or other filter) before the image is analyzed.
[0049] In step 210, controller 112 classifies the feature based on at least one of a size of the feature, a shape of the feature, or a difference in temperature between the feature and its surroundings. For example, lanes 160 of tape 154 are expected to exhibit known ranges of temperature differences from an underlying laminate. These ranges are discussed above. If a region is within the expected range of temperature difference with respect to another region, it may be classified based on whether is hotter or colder than that other region.
[0050] In step 212 controller 112 determines features that are out of tolerance (e.g., too large, as identified by a filtering process performed on the feature's properties). If features are out of tolerance, then controller 112 reports the out of tolerance features for review. These features/conditions may be reported graphically on a representation of laminate 150, or in a textual report. During this step, controller 112 may further filter the features based on their size and type, in order to automatically indicate and highlight out of tolerance features without a need for human intervention.
…
[0058] Because thermal imaging may be utilized to quantify aspects of various features such as the locations of ends of lanes, the locations of foreign debris, and the locations of layup inconsistencies, the time and labor spent reworking the laminate 400 is reduced. That is, because out of tolerance features of the laminate 400 are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned. Furthermore, because the laminate 400 remains green and uncured during the inspection process, the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate. This is not possible after the laminate has been cured into a composite part.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized analyzing the top images for anomalies that are out of a tolerance and controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies as suggested by Holmes because if out of tolerance features of the laminate are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned and the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate.
Additionally, Krajca discloses a scrap location and would make obvious controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of the tolerance to scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes. See especially paragraphs 0053-55 and 0092-94, disclosing:
[0053] Referring now to FIGS. 2-4, the sub-systems of the system 100 are generally arranged in operational sequence with each other within a manufacturing environment. In one or more examples, the lamination system 112 is in sequential relation to the carrier preparation system 162. In one or more examples, the trim system 114 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 is in sequential relation to the trim system 114. In one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the scrap removal system 142. In one or more examples, the forming system 122 is in sequential relation to the transfer system 116. In one or more examples, the film removal system 160 is in sequential relation to the forming system 122.
[0054] It should be recognized that not every sub-system is required, or certain sub-systems may not be utilized in every implementation of the disclosed system 100. For example, in certain implementations, the carrier preparation system 162, the trim system 114 and/or the scrap removal system 142 may not be utilized in fabrication of the composite structure 102 and, thus, may not be included as a sub-system within the system 100. As such, in one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112.
[0055] It should also be recognized that one or more of the sub-systems may be co-located or otherwise share an operational station of the system 100. As an example, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operational station of the system 100. As such, movement of the ply carrier 104 from the trim system 114 to the scrap removal system 142 (e.g., between a trimming operation and a scrap removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time. As another example, the forming system 122 and the film removal system 160 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operation station of the system 100. As such, movement of the forming tool 120 from the forming system 122 to the film removal system 160 (e.g., between a forming operation and a film removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time.
…
[0092] In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes at least one scrap-removing device 182. The scrap-removing device 182 is configured to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply 106. The scrap-removing device 182 may be any machine or device capable of manipulating the remnant and removing the remnant from the ply carrier 104. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 includes, or takes the form of, a robotic end effector. The scrap-removing device 182 includes parts and components (e.g., drive motors, actuators, grippers, sensors and the like) that enable the scrap-removing device 182 to automatically remove the remnant. As an example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a pick-and-place gripper. As another example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a vacuum gripper or vacuum roller.
[0093] The scrap-removing device 182 is movable relative to the ply carrier 104. For example, the scrap-removing device 182 operates in a three-dimensional X, Y, Z coordinate system. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes a support platform 184 that is configured to selectively move and position the scrap-removing device 182 relative to the carrier transfer device 110 and, thus, the ply carrier 104. The support platform 184 may be any suitable machine capable of automatically driving and controlling movement of the scrap-removing device 182, such as a robot, a robotic arm, and overhead gantry and the like. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 may be configured to automatically place scrap remnants in a scrap container for subsequent removal.
[0094] In one or more examples, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may be integrated within a single workstation. In these examples, the cutting device 178 and the scrap-removing device 182 may share the same support platform.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized a scrap location and would make obvious controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of the tolerance to scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes by using the teachings as taught by Krajca in order to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply as well as other errors such as those in Holmes.
As to claim 24, Stone discloses further comprising: generating top images of the courses using a cutting camera system(paragraph 0030, disclosing “Sensors 144 may be utilized to sense locations of pieces 118 prior to or during cutting by ply cutters 130.”) in response to the first cutting system and the second cutting system cutting the courses. See paragraph 0029-30, disclosing:
[0029] Further details of lamination system 100 are provided in FIG. 2, which is a side view illustrated by view arrows 2 of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts components illustrated in FIG. 1, and further depicts a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid). Sensor 144 may be utilized by pick-and-place device 140 ensure that pieces 118 of material 113 are laid-up onto laminate 170 without forming gaps at laminate 170. For example, sensor 144 may detect the presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148 and may further detect position of the piece 118 relative to the end effector 148. That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.
[0030] In this embodiment, a heater 146 (e.g., a radiant heater) at pick-and-place device 140 heats pieces 118 to a tacking temperature (e.g., 190° F.) before laying up pieces 118. FIG. 2 further depicts region 3 in which backing 122 is separated from tape 114 after exiting infeed roller 112,and one or more sensors 144 (e.g., a pressure sensor, camera, laser or ultrasonic distancing device, etc.) placed along lamination system 100. Sensors 144 may be utilized to sense locations of pieces 118 prior to or during cutting by ply cutters 130. Sensors 144 may further provide sensor data that may be utilized to sense pieces 118 during movement of an end effector 148 of a pick and place device 140 to acquire pieces 118, may be utilized to sense a presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148, and may be utilized to sense the location of an end effector 148 relative to a pick up or drop off location. Sensor input may further be utilized to sense the position/orientation of end effector 148 relative to the pick up or drop off location, to determine a pressure used to apply a piece 118 to laminate 170, to sense that a piece 118 has been placed at laminate 170, and/or even to sense a temperature of piece 118. Further details of sensors 144 are provided with respect to FIG. 5 below.
Stone does not disclose analyzing the top images for anomalies that are out of a tolerance; and controlling robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location.
However, Holmes discloses analyzing the top images for anomalies that are out of a tolerance; and controlling robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance (including IR camera 145 and controller 112). See paragraph 0050, disclosing:
[0047] In step 206, IR camera 145 generates thermographic images 118 of the lanes 160 of the tape 154 as applied to the laminate 150. Each thermographic image 118 may depict a portion of all lanes within a course, and thermographic images 118 may be stitched together to depict the layup resulting from an entire course. Because lanes may extend for tens of feet, multiple thermographic images 118 may need to be analyzed in order to detect the specific start locations and stop locations of individual lanes within a course. Thus, the thermographic images 118 may be acquired periodically (e.g., once every few seconds, once every ten feet of movement of head 140, etc.), to ensure that there are no gaps in coverage between images during layup.
[0048] In step 208, controller 112 analyzes contrast within the thermographic images 118 to identify a feature at laminate 150 that is thermally distinct from its surroundings. Each pixel within a thermographic image 118 is assigned a value corresponding with a temperature, and thermally distinct features may be detected by identifying contiguous sets of pixels that are within a range of temperatures (e.g., fifty degrees Fahrenheit, ten degrees Fahrenheit, etc.) that are surrounded by pixels outside of the range (e.g., more than one degree Fahrenheit different than the contiguous set of pixels). Each feature may have an associated temperature or range of temperatures, a known shape, and a known size in terms of width or number of pixels. In further embodiments, a thermographic image may be altered by applying an edge detection algorithm (such as a Laplacian or other filter) before the image is analyzed.
[0049] In step 210, controller 112 classifies the feature based on at least one of a size of the feature, a shape of the feature, or a difference in temperature between the feature and its surroundings. For example, lanes 160 of tape 154 are expected to exhibit known ranges of temperature differences from an underlying laminate. These ranges are discussed above. If a region is within the expected range of temperature difference with respect to another region, it may be classified based on whether is hotter or colder than that other region.
[0050] In step 212 controller 112 determines features that are out of tolerance (e.g., too large, as identified by a filtering process performed on the feature's properties). If features are out of tolerance, then controller 112 reports the out of tolerance features for review. These features/conditions may be reported graphically on a representation of laminate 150, or in a textual report. During this step, controller 112 may further filter the features based on their size and type, in order to automatically indicate and highlight out of tolerance features without a need for human intervention.
…
[0058] Because thermal imaging may be utilized to quantify aspects of various features such as the locations of ends of lanes, the locations of foreign debris, and the locations of layup inconsistencies, the time and labor spent reworking the laminate 400 is reduced. That is, because out of tolerance features of the laminate 400 are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned. Furthermore, because the laminate 400 remains green and uncured during the inspection process, the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate. This is not possible after the laminate has been cured into a composite part.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized analyzing the top images for anomalies that are out of a tolerance; and controlling robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance as suggested by Holmes because if out of tolerance features of the laminate are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned and the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate.
Additionally, Krajca discloses a scrap location and would make controlling robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes. See especially paragraphs 0053-55 and 0092-94, disclosing:
[0053] Referring now to FIGS. 2-4, the sub-systems of the system 100 are generally arranged in operational sequence with each other within a manufacturing environment. In one or more examples, the lamination system 112 is in sequential relation to the carrier preparation system 162. In one or more examples, the trim system 114 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 is in sequential relation to the trim system 114. In one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the scrap removal system 142. In one or more examples, the forming system 122 is in sequential relation to the transfer system 116. In one or more examples, the film removal system 160 is in sequential relation to the forming system 122.
[0054] It should be recognized that not every sub-system is required, or certain sub-systems may not be utilized in every implementation of the disclosed system 100. For example, in certain implementations, the carrier preparation system 162, the trim system 114 and/or the scrap removal system 142 may not be utilized in fabrication of the composite structure 102 and, thus, may not be included as a sub-system within the system 100. As such, in one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112.
[0055] It should also be recognized that one or more of the sub-systems may be co-located or otherwise share an operational station of the system 100. As an example, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operational station of the system 100. As such, movement of the ply carrier 104 from the trim system 114 to the scrap removal system 142 (e.g., between a trimming operation and a scrap removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time. As another example, the forming system 122 and the film removal system 160 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operation station of the system 100. As such, movement of the forming tool 120 from the forming system 122 to the film removal system 160 (e.g., between a forming operation and a film removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time.
…
[0092] In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes at least one scrap-removing device 182. The scrap-removing device 182 is configured to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply 106. The scrap-removing device 182 may be any machine or device capable of manipulating the remnant and removing the remnant from the ply carrier 104. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 includes, or takes the form of, a robotic end effector. The scrap-removing device 182 includes parts and components (e.g., drive motors, actuators, grippers, sensors and the like) that enable the scrap-removing device 182 to automatically remove the remnant. As an example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a pick-and-place gripper. As another example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a vacuum gripper or vacuum roller.
[0093] The scrap-removing device 182 is movable relative to the ply carrier 104. For example, the scrap-removing device 182 operates in a three-dimensional X, Y, Z coordinate system. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes a support platform 184 that is configured to selectively move and position the scrap-removing device 182 relative to the carrier transfer device 110 and, thus, the ply carrier 104. The support platform 184 may be any suitable machine capable of automatically driving and controlling movement of the scrap-removing device 182, such as a robot, a robotic arm, and overhead gantry and the like. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 may be configured to automatically place scrap remnants in a scrap container for subsequent removal.
[0094] In one or more examples, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may be integrated within a single workstation. In these examples, the cutting device 178 and the scrap-removing device 182 may share the same support platform.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized a scrap location and would make obvious controlling robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes by using the teachings as taught by Krajca in order to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply as well as other errors such as those in Holmes.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone (US 20180339469 A1) and Pini (US 20130306233 A1) and Holmes (US 20200283171 A1) as applied to claims 7 and 12 above, and further in view of Krajca (US 20220176649 A1) and Dubois (DE 102022104989 A1).
As to claim 9, Stone discloses wherein the inspection system comprises cameras wherein the robot cameras are positioned to generate images of a surface of the courses; and wherein the controller is configured to: generate the images of the surface of the courses in response the placement robots moving to pick up the courses. See paragraph 0029, disclosing:
[0029] Further details of lamination system 100 are provided in FIG. 2, which is a side view illustrated by view arrows 2 of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts components illustrated in FIG. 1, and further depicts a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid). Sensor 144 may be utilized by pick-and-place device 140 ensure that pieces 118 of material 113 are laid-up onto laminate 170 without forming gaps at laminate 170. For example, sensor 144 may detect the presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148 and may further detect position of the piece 118 relative to the end effector 148. That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.
Stone does not disclose the full limitation that wherein the inspection system comprises upward cameras connected to camera stations, wherein the upward cameras are positioned to generate bottom images of a bottom surface of the courses held by the placement robots, wherein the controller is configured to: generate the bottom images of the bottom surface of the courses; analyze the bottom images for the anomalies that are out of tolerance; and control the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location.
However, Holmes discloses cameras and a controller, wherein that the controller is configured to analyze the images for the anomalies that are out of tolerance and control the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance (including IR camera 145 and controller 112). See paragraph 0050, disclosing:
[0047] In step 206, IR camera 145 generates thermographic images 118 of the lanes 160 of the tape 154 as applied to the laminate 150. Each thermographic image 118 may depict a portion of all lanes within a course, and thermographic images 118 may be stitched together to depict the layup resulting from an entire course. Because lanes may extend for tens of feet, multiple thermographic images 118 may need to be analyzed in order to detect the specific start locations and stop locations of individual lanes within a course. Thus, the thermographic images 118 may be acquired periodically (e.g., once every few seconds, once every ten feet of movement of head 140, etc.), to ensure that there are no gaps in coverage between images during layup.
[0048] In step 208, controller 112 analyzes contrast within the thermographic images 118 to identify a feature at laminate 150 that is thermally distinct from its surroundings. Each pixel within a thermographic image 118 is assigned a value corresponding with a temperature, and thermally distinct features may be detected by identifying contiguous sets of pixels that are within a range of temperatures (e.g., fifty degrees Fahrenheit, ten degrees Fahrenheit, etc.) that are surrounded by pixels outside of the range (e.g., more than one degree Fahrenheit different than the contiguous set of pixels). Each feature may have an associated temperature or range of temperatures, a known shape, and a known size in terms of width or number of pixels. In further embodiments, a thermographic image may be altered by applying an edge detection algorithm (such as a Laplacian or other filter) before the image is analyzed.
[0049] In step 210, controller 112 classifies the feature based on at least one of a size of the feature, a shape of the feature, or a difference in temperature between the feature and its surroundings. For example, lanes 160 of tape 154 are expected to exhibit known ranges of temperature differences from an underlying laminate. These ranges are discussed above. If a region is within the expected range of temperature difference with respect to another region, it may be classified based on whether is hotter or colder than that other region.
[0050] In step 212 controller 112 determines features that are out of tolerance (e.g., too large, as identified by a filtering process performed on the feature's properties). If features are out of tolerance, then controller 112 reports the out of tolerance features for review. These features/conditions may be reported graphically on a representation of laminate 150, or in a textual report. During this step, controller 112 may further filter the features based on their size and type, in order to automatically indicate and highlight out of tolerance features without a need for human intervention.
…
[0058] Because thermal imaging may be utilized to quantify aspects of various features such as the locations of ends of lanes, the locations of foreign debris, and the locations of layup inconsistencies, the time and labor spent reworking the laminate 400 is reduced. That is, because out of tolerance features of the laminate 400 are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned. Furthermore, because the laminate 400 remains green and uncured during the inspection process, the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate. This is not possible after the laminate has been cured into a composite part.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized wherein the controller is configured to analyze the images for the anomalies that are out of tolerance and control the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance as suggested by Holmes because if out of tolerance features of the laminate are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned and the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate.
Additionally, Dubois makes obvious an arrangement wherein the inspection system comprises upward cameras connected to camera stations, wherein the upward cameras are positioned to generate bottom images of a bottom surface of the courses held by the placement robots, wherein the controller is configured to: generate the bottom images of the bottom surface of the courses. See the translation, disclosing:
The present invention also relates to a device for depositing semi-finished products for the production of, in particular fiber-reinforced, fiber-plastic composites, with a handling robot with one end -of-arm tool for picking up a semi-finished product from a semi-finished product magazine and depositing the semi-finished product at a storage position and a control or regulating device for the handling robot.
…
lso shows a handling robot 3 with an end-of-arm tool 4 for picking up a semi-finished product H from a semi-finished product magazine 5.
In 1 is also a control or regulating device 6 for the handling robot 3, which is configured to carry out a method according to the invention.
The control or regulating device 6 is connected to the measuring system 9 and the handling robot 3 using signals.
The semi-finished product H picked up with the end-of-arm tool 4 of the handling robot 3 is transported to the testing station 7 . The test station 7 has a transparent plate 8 and the measuring system 9 (here a camera).
See especially Figure 1, below:
PNG
media_image3.png
620
924
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Although Dubois teaches a single upward camera connected to camera station; duplication of parts is often obvious. MPEP 2144.04 VI B. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.).
In this case, such a duplication would enable an increase in the amount of camera imaging which is not a new and unexpected result.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized an arrangement wherein the inspection system comprises upward cameras connected to camera stations, wherein the upward cameras are positioned to generate bottom images of a bottom surface of the courses held by the placement robots, wherein the controller is configured to: generate the bottom images of the bottom surface of the courses in order to achieve testing and imaging of the composite materials as taught by Dubois.
Additionally, Krajca discloses a scrap location and would make obvious that the controller controls the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes. See especially paragraphs 0053-55 and 0092-94, disclosing:
[0053] Referring now to FIGS. 2-4, the sub-systems of the system 100 are generally arranged in operational sequence with each other within a manufacturing environment. In one or more examples, the lamination system 112 is in sequential relation to the carrier preparation system 162. In one or more examples, the trim system 114 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 is in sequential relation to the trim system 114. In one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the scrap removal system 142. In one or more examples, the forming system 122 is in sequential relation to the transfer system 116. In one or more examples, the film removal system 160 is in sequential relation to the forming system 122.
[0054] It should be recognized that not every sub-system is required, or certain sub-systems may not be utilized in every implementation of the disclosed system 100. For example, in certain implementations, the carrier preparation system 162, the trim system 114 and/or the scrap removal system 142 may not be utilized in fabrication of the composite structure 102 and, thus, may not be included as a sub-system within the system 100. As such, in one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112.
[0055] It should also be recognized that one or more of the sub-systems may be co-located or otherwise share an operational station of the system 100. As an example, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operational station of the system 100. As such, movement of the ply carrier 104 from the trim system 114 to the scrap removal system 142 (e.g., between a trimming operation and a scrap removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time. As another example, the forming system 122 and the film removal system 160 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operation station of the system 100. As such, movement of the forming tool 120 from the forming system 122 to the film removal system 160 (e.g., between a forming operation and a film removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time.
…
[0092] In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes at least one scrap-removing device 182. The scrap-removing device 182 is configured to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply 106. The scrap-removing device 182 may be any machine or device capable of manipulating the remnant and removing the remnant from the ply carrier 104. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 includes, or takes the form of, a robotic end effector. The scrap-removing device 182 includes parts and components (e.g., drive motors, actuators, grippers, sensors and the like) that enable the scrap-removing device 182 to automatically remove the remnant. As an example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a pick-and-place gripper. As another example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a vacuum gripper or vacuum roller.
[0093] The scrap-removing device 182 is movable relative to the ply carrier 104. For example, the scrap-removing device 182 operates in a three-dimensional X, Y, Z coordinate system. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes a support platform 184 that is configured to selectively move and position the scrap-removing device 182 relative to the carrier transfer device 110 and, thus, the ply carrier 104. The support platform 184 may be any suitable machine capable of automatically driving and controlling movement of the scrap-removing device 182, such as a robot, a robotic arm, and overhead gantry and the like. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 may be configured to automatically place scrap remnants in a scrap container for subsequent removal.
[0094] In one or more examples, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may be integrated within a single workstation. In these examples, the cutting device 178 and the scrap-removing device 182 may share the same support platform.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized a scrap location and would make obvious that the controller controls the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes by using the teachings as taught by Krajca in order to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply as well as other errors such as those in Holmes.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone (US 20180339469 A1) and Pini (US 20130306233 A1) as applied to claims 19 above, and further in view of Holmes (US 20200283171 A1), Krajca (US 20220176649 A1) and Dubois (DE 102022104989 A1).
As to claim 23, Stone discloses further comprising: generating images of a surface of the courses using held by the placement robots using cameras connected to camera stations. See paragraph 0029, disclosing:
[0029] Further details of lamination system 100 are provided in FIG. 2, which is a side view illustrated by view arrows 2 of FIG. 1. FIG. 2 depicts components illustrated in FIG. 1, and further depicts a sensor 144 (e.g., a camera that acquires images of a projected laser grid). Sensor 144 may be utilized by pick-and-place device 140 ensure that pieces 118 of material 113 are laid-up onto laminate 170 without forming gaps at laminate 170. For example, sensor 144 may detect the presence of a piece 118 on an end effector 148 and may further detect position of the piece 118 relative to the end effector 148. That is, each pick-and-place device 140 may arrange pieces 118 onto laminate 170 into a different contiguous layer. For example, if a ply cutter 130 cuts pieces 118 at a forty five degree angle, a corresponding pick-and-place device 140 may rotate pieces 118 forty five degrees, and place pieces 118 contiguously with each other at laminate 170 to form a single layer without gaps having a forty five degree fiber orientation. In this manner, the fiber orientation of each layer corresponds with the angle of a ply cutter 130 that is cutting pieces 118 for that layer.
Stone does not disclose the full limitation of further comprising: generating bottom images of a bottom surface of the courses using held by the placement robots using upward cameras connected to camera stations; analyzing the bottom images for anomalies that are out of a tolerance; and controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location.
However, Holmes discloses analyzing the images for anomalies that are out of a tolerance (by using IR camera 145 and controller 112) and controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance. See paragraph 0050, disclosing:
[0047] In step 206, IR camera 145 generates thermographic images 118 of the lanes 160 of the tape 154 as applied to the laminate 150. Each thermographic image 118 may depict a portion of all lanes within a course, and thermographic images 118 may be stitched together to depict the layup resulting from an entire course. Because lanes may extend for tens of feet, multiple thermographic images 118 may need to be analyzed in order to detect the specific start locations and stop locations of individual lanes within a course. Thus, the thermographic images 118 may be acquired periodically (e.g., once every few seconds, once every ten feet of movement of head 140, etc.), to ensure that there are no gaps in coverage between images during layup.
[0048] In step 208, controller 112 analyzes contrast within the thermographic images 118 to identify a feature at laminate 150 that is thermally distinct from its surroundings. Each pixel within a thermographic image 118 is assigned a value corresponding with a temperature, and thermally distinct features may be detected by identifying contiguous sets of pixels that are within a range of temperatures (e.g., fifty degrees Fahrenheit, ten degrees Fahrenheit, etc.) that are surrounded by pixels outside of the range (e.g., more than one degree Fahrenheit different than the contiguous set of pixels). Each feature may have an associated temperature or range of temperatures, a known shape, and a known size in terms of width or number of pixels. In further embodiments, a thermographic image may be altered by applying an edge detection algorithm (such as a Laplacian or other filter) before the image is analyzed.
[0049] In step 210, controller 112 classifies the feature based on at least one of a size of the feature, a shape of the feature, or a difference in temperature between the feature and its surroundings. For example, lanes 160 of tape 154 are expected to exhibit known ranges of temperature differences from an underlying laminate. These ranges are discussed above. If a region is within the expected range of temperature difference with respect to another region, it may be classified based on whether is hotter or colder than that other region.
[0050] In step 212 controller 112 determines features that are out of tolerance (e.g., too large, as identified by a filtering process performed on the feature's properties). If features are out of tolerance, then controller 112 reports the out of tolerance features for review. These features/conditions may be reported graphically on a representation of laminate 150, or in a textual report. During this step, controller 112 may further filter the features based on their size and type, in order to automatically indicate and highlight out of tolerance features without a need for human intervention.
…
[0058] Because thermal imaging may be utilized to quantify aspects of various features such as the locations of ends of lanes, the locations of foreign debris, and the locations of layup inconsistencies, the time and labor spent reworking the laminate 400 is reduced. That is, because out of tolerance features of the laminate 400 are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned. Furthermore, because the laminate 400 remains green and uncured during the inspection process, the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate. This is not possible after the laminate has been cured into a composite part.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized analyzing the images for anomalies that are out of a tolerance and controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance as suggested by Holmes because if out of tolerance features of the laminate are immediately detected during layup, only a section of a course will need to be dispositioned and the rebuilding process is a simple matter of directly removing and re-applying lanes of tape to the laminate.
Additionally, Dubois makes obvious generating bottom images of a bottom surface of the courses using held by the placement robots using upward cameras connected to camera stations and analyzing the bottom images for anomalies. See the translation, disclosing:
The present invention also relates to a device for depositing semi-finished products for the production of, in particular fiber-reinforced, fiber-plastic composites, with a handling robot with one end -of-arm tool for picking up a semi-finished product from a semi-finished product magazine and depositing the semi-finished product at a storage position and a control or regulating device for the handling robot.
…
lso shows a handling robot 3 with an end-of-arm tool 4 for picking up a semi-finished product H from a semi-finished product magazine 5.
In 1 is also a control or regulating device 6 for the handling robot 3, which is configured to carry out a method according to the invention.
The control or regulating device 6 is connected to the measuring system 9 and the handling robot 3 using signals.
The semi-finished product H picked up with the end-of-arm tool 4 of the handling robot 3 is transported to the testing station 7 . The test station 7 has a transparent plate 8 and the measuring system 9 (here a camera).
See especially Figure 1, below:
PNG
media_image3.png
620
924
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Although Dubois teaches a single upward camera connected to camera station; duplication of parts is often obvious. MPEP 2144.04 VI B. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.).
In this case, such a duplication would enable an increase in the amount of camera imaging which is not a new and unexpected result.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized generating bottom images of a bottom surface of the courses using held by the placement robots using upward cameras connected to camera stations and analyzing the bottom images for anomalies as taught by Dubois.
Additionally, Krajca discloses a scrap location and would make obvious controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes. See especially paragraphs 0053-55 and 0092-94, disclosing:
[0053] Referring now to FIGS. 2-4, the sub-systems of the system 100 are generally arranged in operational sequence with each other within a manufacturing environment. In one or more examples, the lamination system 112 is in sequential relation to the carrier preparation system 162. In one or more examples, the trim system 114 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 is in sequential relation to the trim system 114. In one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the scrap removal system 142. In one or more examples, the forming system 122 is in sequential relation to the transfer system 116. In one or more examples, the film removal system 160 is in sequential relation to the forming system 122.
[0054] It should be recognized that not every sub-system is required, or certain sub-systems may not be utilized in every implementation of the disclosed system 100. For example, in certain implementations, the carrier preparation system 162, the trim system 114 and/or the scrap removal system 142 may not be utilized in fabrication of the composite structure 102 and, thus, may not be included as a sub-system within the system 100. As such, in one or more examples, the transfer system 116 is in sequential relation to the lamination system 112.
[0055] It should also be recognized that one or more of the sub-systems may be co-located or otherwise share an operational station of the system 100. As an example, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operational station of the system 100. As such, movement of the ply carrier 104 from the trim system 114 to the scrap removal system 142 (e.g., between a trimming operation and a scrap removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time. As another example, the forming system 122 and the film removal system 160 may share a location in the manufacturing environment or be part of the same operation station of the system 100. As such, movement of the forming tool 120 from the forming system 122 to the film removal system 160 (e.g., between a forming operation and a film removing operation) may not be required, thereby reducing cycle time.
…
[0092] In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes at least one scrap-removing device 182. The scrap-removing device 182 is configured to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply 106. The scrap-removing device 182 may be any machine or device capable of manipulating the remnant and removing the remnant from the ply carrier 104. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 includes, or takes the form of, a robotic end effector. The scrap-removing device 182 includes parts and components (e.g., drive motors, actuators, grippers, sensors and the like) that enable the scrap-removing device 182 to automatically remove the remnant. As an example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a pick-and-place gripper. As another example, the scrap-removing device 182 may be a vacuum gripper or vacuum roller.
[0093] The scrap-removing device 182 is movable relative to the ply carrier 104. For example, the scrap-removing device 182 operates in a three-dimensional X, Y, Z coordinate system. In one or more examples, the scrap removal system 142 includes a support platform 184 that is configured to selectively move and position the scrap-removing device 182 relative to the carrier transfer device 110 and, thus, the ply carrier 104. The support platform 184 may be any suitable machine capable of automatically driving and controlling movement of the scrap-removing device 182, such as a robot, a robotic arm, and overhead gantry and the like. In one or more examples, the scrap-removing device 182 may be configured to automatically place scrap remnants in a scrap container for subsequent removal.
[0094] In one or more examples, the trim system 114 and the scrap removal system 142 may be integrated within a single workstation. In these examples, the cutting device 178 and the scrap-removing device 182 may share the same support platform.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized a scrap location and controlling the placement robots to move any of the courses having the anomalies that are out of tolerance to a scrap location in combination with the robots of Stone and Holmes by using the teachings as taught by Krajca in order to locate, engage and remove the remnant of the composite ply as well as other errors such as those in Holmes.
Claim(s) 13 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone (US 20180339469 A1) and Pini (US 20130306233 A1) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6 and 14-18 and 19-21 above, and further in view of Martin (US 20180326621 A1).
As to claim 13, Stone does not disclose further comprising: a spare cutting machine, wherein the controller is configured to: synchronize operation of the spare cutting machine to cut the courses in response to swapping the spare cutting machine with a cutting machine in one of the first cutting system and the second cutting system.
However, Martin discloses and makes obvious further comprising: a spare cutting machine, wherein the controller is configured to: synchronize operation of the spare cutting machine to cut the courses in response to swapping the spare cutting machine with a cutting machine in one of the first cutting system and the second cutting system. Martin teaches removing and replacing cutting machines to facilitate maintenance. See paragraph 0056, disclosing “In additional configurations the entire cutting mechanism may be easily removed or replaced from the rest of the system to allow for facilitated maintenance.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized further comprising: a spare cutting machine, wherein the controller is configured to: synchronize operation of the spare cutting machine to cut the courses in response to swapping the spare cutting machine with a cutting machine in one of the first cutting system and the second cutting system as suggested by Martin to allow for facilitated maintenance
As to claim 25, Stone does not disclose further comprising: replacing a cutting machine in one of a first cutting machine in the first cutting system and a second cutting machine in the second cutting system with a spare cutting machine in response to one of the first cutting machine and the second cutting machine needing maintenance; and synchronizing operation of the spare cutting machine to cut the courses in response to swapping the spare cutting machine with one of and first cutting machine and the second cutting machine.
However, Martin discloses and makes obvious further comprising: replacing a cutting machine in one of a first cutting machine in the first cutting system and a second cutting machine in the second cutting system with a spare cutting machine in response to one of the first cutting machine and the second cutting machine needing maintenance; and synchronizing operation of the spare cutting machine to cut the courses in response to swapping the spare cutting machine with one of and first cutting machine and the second cutting machine. Martin teaches removing and replacing cutting machines to facilitate maintenance. See paragraph 0056, disclosing “In additional configurations the entire cutting mechanism may be easily removed or replaced from the rest of the system to allow for facilitated maintenance.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized further comprising: replacing a cutting machine in one of a first cutting machine in the first cutting system and a second cutting machine in the second cutting system with a spare cutting machine in response to one of the first cutting machine and the second cutting machine needing maintenance; and synchronizing operation of the spare cutting machine to cut the courses in response to swapping the spare cutting machine with one of and first cutting machine and the second cutting machine as suggested by Martin to allow for facilitated maintenance.
Claim(s) 16 is/are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stone (US 20180339469 A1) and Pini (US 20130306233 A1) as applied to claims 1-2, 4-6 and 14-18 and 19-21 above, and further in view of Smith (US 20220153435 A1)
As to claim 16, the apparatus of Stone is capable of being used wherein the multi-ply laminate is used in a charge that is used to form a part selected from a group comprising an elongate composite part, a wing stringer, a fuselage stringer, an empennage a stringer, floor beam, a wing spar, and an empennage spar. See MPEP 2114 and 2115.
Stone discloses forming composite parts and stringers and floor beams. See paragraph 0002, disclosing “Multi-layer laminates of material (e.g., uncured Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP)) may be formed into any of a variety of shapes for curing into a composite part, such as a stringer, floor beam, or other component.”
Additionally, Smith discloses wherein the multi-ply laminate is used in a charge that is used to form a part selected from a group comprising an elongate composite part, a wing stringer, a fuselage stringer, an empennage a stringer, floor beam, a wing spar, and an empennage spar. See paragraph 0084, disclosing “an aircraft 50 comprises a fuselage 52, a pair of wings 54 and an empennage 55. The empennage 55 includes a pair of horizontal stabilizers 56, and a vertical stabilizer 58.” See also paragraph 0087, disclosing “moving production line 88 for producing wing panels 75 of the type described above, as well as other types of airfoils such as horizontal and vertical stabilizers 56, 58 comprising stiffener reinforced composite wing skins.” See also paragraph 0136, disclosing forming a stringer:
[0136] FIGS. 33-40 illustrate one example a method of fabricating a stringer preform 74 at the forming stations 228 mentioned previously. In this example, the stringer preform 74 is of the inverted T-type shown in FIG. 27, wherein the blade 244 is inclined relative to the base 246. Beginning with FIG. 33, mandrels 226a and 226b are mounted on a tool base 262 at the forming station 228. In FIG. 34, a PNP machine (not shown) places one or more flat charges 224 on each of the mandrels 226a, 226b. Next, as shown in FIG. 35, the flat charges 224 are formed down onto the surfaces of the mandrels 226a, 226b. Referring to FIG. 36, one or more additional flat charges 224c, 224d are placed on the mandrels 226a, 226b, overlying the flat charges 224a, 224b that have been previously formed. These additional flat charges 224c, 224d are likewise formed, resulting in the formation of a first preform 264 and a second preform 266, which form the L-shaped sections 248 of the stringer preforms 74 (FIG. 32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to have utilized wherein the multi-ply laminate is used in a charge that is used to form a part selected from a group comprising an elongate composite part, a wing stringer, a fuselage stringer, an empennage a stringer, floor beam, a wing spar, and an empennage spar by manufacturing the empennage or stringer of Smith in order to form a stiffened reinforced composite wing.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE R KOCH whose telephone number is (571) 272-5807. The examiner can also be reached by E-mail at george.koch@uspto.gov if the applicant grants written authorization for e-mails. Authorization can be granted by filling out the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form.
The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6:30.
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, PHILIP C TUCKER can be reached at (571)272-1095. 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.
/GEORGE R KOCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1745
GRK