DETAILED ACTION
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janvier (Patent: US 9,449,430 B1) in view of Huang et al. (Publication: US 2017/0364608 A1), CN (Publication: CN 111626430 A1), Zeiger et al. (Patent: US 8860717 B1).
Regarding claim 1, see rejection on claim 13.
Regarding claim 3, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger disclose all the limitation of claim 1.
CN discloses
wherein the computing of a distribution of maximal curvature directions includes (Page 23 paragraph 6- there is directed edge pointing to all split state of output tensor data, a fully-connected mesh structure is formed between the split state set of input tensor data and the split state set of output tensor data.
Page 16 paragraph 6- any one of the tensor data is referred to as a split state s of the tensor data, the computer device after splitting the tensor data to obtain the sub-tensor data set. splitting state s is represented by corresponding sub-tensor data set. All possible resolution (s0, s1, s2, ...) constitutes the split state set S of the tensor data, which is a very large state space, which means that the space of the possible resolution mode of the operator represented by the split state of the tensor data is also very large.):
computing a curvature tensor field (KS) distributed over the mesh (Page 23 paragraph 6- there is directed edge pointing to all split state of output tensor data, a fully-connected mesh structure is formed between the split state set of input tensor data and the split state set of output tensor data.
Page 16 paragraph 6- any one of the tensor data is referred to as a split state s of the tensor data, the computer device after splitting the tensor data to obtain the sub-tensor data set. splitting state s is represented by corresponding sub-tensor data set. All possible resolution (s0, s1, s2, ...) constitutes the split state set S of the tensor data, which is a very large state space, which means that the space of the possible resolution mode of the operator represented by the split state of the tensor data is also very large.);
decomposing the computed tensor field (KS) into at least two sub-tensors, a first sub-tensor (KS^M WS^M X WS^M) corresponding to a maximal curvature, and a second sub-tensor (kMS wMS X wMS) corresponding to a minimal curvature(
Page 16 paragraph 6- any one of the tensor data is referred to as a split state s of the tensor data, the computer device after splitting the tensor data to obtain the sub-tensor data set. splitting state s is represented by corresponding sub-tensor data set. All possible resolution (s0, s1, s2, ...) constitutes the split state set S of the tensor data, which is a very large state space, which means that the space of the possible resolution mode of the operator represented by the split state of the tensor data is also very large.
the number of sub-operators after splitting should be guaranteed to be an integer power of 2. (KS^M WS^M X WS^M),
Assume KS^M =2 WS^M =1 WS^M =1 ; 1 power of 2 = 2 = (KS^M WS^M X WS^M) = (2X1 X1) = 2
Page 22 paragraph 6- Fig. 14D, One sub-tensor data can be split into several smaller sub-tensor data. In this way, the tensor data can be converted into the sub-tensor data obtained by splitting according to another mode according to any one of the split modes. the splitting form before adjusting is expressed as ((0, p1), (p1, p2), ..., (pn-1, end)), each segment represents a sub-segment after splitting the one-dimensional data, the splitting form after adjusting by the glue operator is ((0, q1), (q1, q2), ..., (qm-1, end)), if a certain adjacent two sections (pi-1, pi) before adjusting, (pi, pi + 1) is a certain section (qj, qj + 1) after adjusting, namely pi-1 = qj, pi + 1 = qj + 1, when adjusting the part, it only needs to splice (pi-1, pi), (pi, pi + 1) together.
Fig. 14 D C=C0+C1+C2=3
Assume kMS=3, wMS=1, wMS=1, C=C0+C1+C2 =3= (kMS wMS X wMS)=(3X1X1) =3 ) ; and
computing the distribution of maximal curvature directions based on the decomposed tensor field (XMS = (wms)^# ) (
Page 23 paragraph 6- there is directed edge pointing to all split state of output tensor data, a fully-connected mesh structure is formed between the split state set of input tensor data and the split state set of output tensor data.
Page 16 paragraph 6- any one of the tensor data is referred to as a split state s of the tensor data, the computer device after splitting the tensor data to obtain the sub-tensor data set. splitting state s is represented by corresponding sub-tensor data set. All possible resolution (s0, s1, s2, ...) constitutes the split state set S of the tensor data, which is a very large state space, which means that the space of the possible resolution mode of the operator represented by the split state of the tensor data is also very large.
the number of sub-operators after splitting should be guaranteed to be an integer power of 2.
Assume XMS = 2, wms=2, #=1, (wms)^# =2 ; 1 power of 2 = 2 = XMS = (wms)^# = 2^1 = 2 ).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger with wherein the computing of a distribution of maximal curvature directions includes:computing a curvature tensor field (KS) distributed over the mesh; decomposing the computed tensor field (KS) into at least two sub-tensors, a first sub-tensor (KS^M WS^M X WS^M) corresponding to a maximal curvature, and a second sub-tensor (kMS wMS X wMS) corresponding to a minimal curvature; and computing the distribution of maximal curvature directions based on the decomposed tensor field (XMS = (wms)^# ) as taught by CN. The motivation for doing so debugging can be performed in advance.
Regarding claim 4, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger and CN disclose all the limitation of claim 3.
Huang discloses wherein the computing of the curvature tensor field is performed according to a normal cycles approach, a quadric fitting approach, or a circle fitting approach ([0033] - consider if a filler or a circular faces is present in the mesh area with the susceptible to stress singularity, “circle”.
the value of an angle that determines sharpness defaults to 90° and less, and may be modified by the user. Identifying elements that lie in areas susceptible to stress singularity is possible due to the integration of a simulation process with a CAD system and is based on the mesh created by the simulation process and the CAD features created by the CAD system.) .
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger with wherein the computing of the curvature tensor field is performed according to a normal cycles approach, a quadric fitting approach, or a circle fitting approach as taught by Huang. The motivation for doing is to save time.
Regarding claim 5, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger disclose all the limitation of claim 2.
Janvier discloses for each face, one or more respective maximal curvature directions, the tracing of each integral curve including, starting from a respective seed point, iteratively face-by-face, integrating a planar curve on each respective face based on the one or more respective maximal curvature directions, each iteration stopping once the integrating reaches an edge of the respective face (Column 13 lines 55 to 66 - S30 determining maximal sub-graphs of the graphs for which the rigid motions represent by the arcs all respect a predetermined similarity criterion.
Column 21 lines 34 to 40 - Back to the example, the class computation and sub-graph extraction performed on graph B yield at S30 three maximal sub-graphs shown on FIGS. 20-22. Sub-graph C of FIG. 20, is due to the fact that rotations R.sub.i, i=1, . . . , 6 all have the same angle and the same radii, arcs, “curvature direction”.
Column 4 lines 17 to 22 - the method also comprises defining S20 a graph having nodes and arcs that each connect a pair of nodes. The nodes each represent a geometrical element of the set. The arcs each represent the rigid motion which transforms the geometrical element represented by one node of the pair into the geometrical element represented by the other node of the pair. The method also comprises determining S30 maximal sub-graphs of the graph. The maximal sub-graphs determined at S30 are among those for which the rigid motions represented by the arcs all respect a predetermined similarity criterion. The similarity criterion is weaker than a predetermined identity criterion. And the method also comprises identifying S40, within the determined sub-graphs (determined at S30), the set of connected components having the highest number of arcs and for which the rigid motions represented by the arcs all respect the identity criterion, “arc is curvature”
Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - Edges of the face’s boundary are connected together by sharing vertices. Faces are connected together by sharing edges. By definition, Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex. Surfaces, curves, and points may be linked together via their parameterization. For example, a value of the parameter of the parametric function defining a curve may be provided to define a bounding vertex.
Column 20 lines 15 to 20 - the process may be iteratively applied on successive simplified versions of graph B until no new pattern is recognized.).
Regarding claim 6, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger disclose all the limitation of claim 5.
Janvier discloses wherein the one or more maximal curvature directions of each respective face consist of a single maximal curvature direction which is constant for the face, the integrating of each planar curve on a respective face being based on said constant maximal curvature direction (
Column 13 lines 55 to 66 - S30 determining maximal sub-graphs of the graphs for which the rigid motions represent by the arcs all respect a predetermined similarity criterion.
Column 21 lines 34 to 40 - Back to the example, the class computation and sub-graph extraction performed on graph B yield at S30 three maximal sub-graphs shown on FIGS. 20-22. Sub-graph C of FIG. 20, is due to the fact that rotations R.sub.i, i=1, . . . , 6 all have the same angle and the same radii, arcs, “curvature direction”.
Column 4 lines 17 to 22 - the method also comprises defining S20 a graph having nodes and arcs that each connect a pair of nodes. The nodes each represent a geometrical element of the set. The arcs each represent the rigid motion which transforms the geometrical element represented by one node of the pair into the geometrical element represented by the other node of the pair. The method also comprises determining S30 maximal sub-graphs of the graph. The maximal sub-graphs determined at S30 are among those for which the rigid motions represented by the arcs all respect a predetermined similarity criterion. The similarity criterion is weaker than a predetermined identity criterion. And the method also comprises identifying S40, within the determined sub-graphs (determined at S30), the set of connected components having the highest number of arcs and for which the rigid motions represented by the arcs all respect the identity criterion, “arc is curvature”) ,
the planar curve thereby being a straight line (The geometrical entities may comprise 3D objects that are surfaces (e.g. planes, straight line), curves (e.g. lines) and/or points.
Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - Edges of the face’s boundary are connected together by sharing vertices. Faces are connected together by sharing edges. By definition, Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex. Surfaces, curves, and points may be linked together via their parameterization. For example, a value of the parameter of the parametric function defining a curve may be provided to define a bounding vertex.) .
Regarding claim 10, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger disclose all the limitation of claim 1.
Janvier discloses obtaining a first mesh representing an outer surface of a mechanical part (Column 8 lines 60 to 66 - Surfaces may be provided as functions of two parameters. Curves may simply be provided as functions of one parameter. And points may be provided as 3D positions. The topological entities may comprise faces, edges, and/or vertices. By its definition, a face corresponds to a bounded portion of a respective surface, named “supporting surface”.
PNG
media_image1.png
374
406
media_image1.png
Greyscale
);
segmenting the first mesh into a set of second meshes (Column 13 lines 60 to 66 - According to basic algebra, the similarity relation separates the set of arcs into maximal and disjoint subsets, which may be named “equivalence classes” in the following. If extended with the nodes connected by the arcs, these equivalence classes may constitute the sub-graphs determined at S30, “segmenting”.
Column 9 lines 10 to 15 - A vertex may be defined as a link to a point in 3D space. These entities are related to each other as follows. The bounded portion of a curve is defined by two points (the vertices) lying on the curve. The bounded portion of a surface is defined by its boundary, this boundary being a set of edges lying on the surface. Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - Edges of the face’s boundary are connected together by sharing vertices. Faces are connected together by sharing edges. By definition, Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex, “mesh”.); and
for one or more second meshes (Column 13 lines 60 to 66 - According to basic algebra, the similarity relation separates the set of arcs into maximal and disjoint subsets, which may be named “equivalence classes” in the following. If extended with the nodes connected by the arcs, these equivalence classes may constitute the sub-graphs determined at S30.):
determining curves over the second mesh that each follows maximal curvature directions of the second mesh (Column 13 lines 55 to 66 - S30 determining maximal sub-graphs of the graphs for which the rigid motions represent by the arcs all respect a predetermined similarity criterion.
Column 21 lines 34 to 40 - Back to the example, the class computation and sub-graph extraction performed on graph B yield at S30 three maximal sub-graphs shown on FIGS. 20-22. Sub-graph C of FIG. 20, is due to the fact that rotations R.sub.i, i=1, . . . , 6 all have the same angle and the same radii, arcs, “curvature direction”, “arc is curvature, , angel is curvature direction”
Column 9 lines 10 to 15 - A vertex may be defined as a link to a point in 3D space. These entities are related to each other as follows. The bounded portion of a curve is defined by two points (the vertices) lying on the curve. The bounded portion of a surface is defined by its boundary, this boundary being a set of edges lying on the surface. Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - Edges of the face’s boundary are connected together by sharing vertices. Faces are connected together by sharing edges. By definition, Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex, “mesh”.);
fitting each curve with a respective circle, thereby obtaining a set of circles (
Column 8 lines 60 to 65 - a B-Rep of a modeled object may include topological entities and geometrical entities. The geometrical entities may comprise surfaces (e.g. planes), curves (e.g. lines) and/or points.
(32) Column 9 lines 29 to 31 - FIGS. 4 and 5 illustrate the B-rep model of a cylindrical slot 80 including curve and circles.
(33) Column 9 lines 45 to 50 - FIG. 6 illustrates the “is bounded by” topological relationship of the B-rep model of slot 80. Nodes of higher layer 101 are faces, nodes of intermediate layer 103 are curves, edges and nodes of lower layer 105 are vertices. FIGS. 7 and 8 illustrate the relationship between topological entities (faces, edges, vertices) and the supporting geometries (infinite cylinder, infinite plane, infinite line, points). The B-rep model gathers in an appropriate data structure the “is bounded by” relationship and the relationship between topological entities and supporting geometries. The topologies indicate the fitting curves, edges to form circles.
PNG
media_image2.png
250
382
media_image2.png
Greyscale
);
detecting whether the second mesh is a [[fillet]] or not as a function of the value of the one or more statistics (Column 19 lines 55 to 66 - Within each connected component B of graph A, arcs are grouped into separate subsets according to similarity criteria classes. This is an example of the determining S30. 2. Then, the subset that includes the largest number of arcs is the best candidate to capture the most duplicated elementary structure. This is an example of the start of the identifying S40. 3. The sub graph C of B corresponding to this largest subset of arcs is considered, and connected components C.sub.i of C are computed. This is an example of the next phase of the identifying S40. 4. If all arcs of each connected component C.sub.i represent the same rigid motion, then an elementary pattern is recognized. This is an example of the end of the identifying S40. 5. Graph B is simplified into a new graph B′ by merging nodes of each connected component C.sub.i into a single node and by discarding useless arcs. This is an example of modifying the graph by collapsing the nodes of each connected component of the identified set of connected components.
(108) Column 20 lines 11 to 20 - The goal of steps 1 and 2 is to provide adequate conditions allowing the collection of sub-graphs that potentially capture elementary patterns. Column 20 lines 15 to 20 - the process may be iteratively applied on successive simplified versions of graph B until no new pattern is recognized.
Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex. Surfaces, curves, and points may be linked together via their parameterization.).
Huang discloses
detecting whether the second mesh is a fillet or not ([0033] - consider if a filler or a circular faces is present in the mesh area with the susceptible to stress singularity.
[0031] The present invention allows the user to narrow the search for high strain regions of an individual solid or surface body. This way multiple singularities on multiple bodies can be identified, ”second mesh”. .)
calculating a value of one or more statistics of the set of circles ([0033] - consider if a filler or a circular faces is present in the mesh area with the susceptible to stress singularity.
[0031] The present invention allows the user to narrow the search for high strain regions of an individual solid or surface body. This way multiple singularities on multiple bodies can be identified).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger with detecting whether the second mesh is a fillet or not ; calculating a value of one or more statistics of the set of circles; and as taught by Huang. The motivation for doing is to save time.
Regarding claim 11, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger disclose all the limitation of claim 10.
Janvier discloses when the detecting detects that a second is a [[fillet]], identifying adjacent faces input of the [[fillet]] ( Column 19 lines 55 to 66 - Within each connected component B of graph A, arcs are grouped into separate subsets according to similarity criteria classes. This is an example of the determining S30. 2. Then, the subset that includes the largest number of arcs is the best candidate to capture the most duplicated elementary structure. This is an example of the start of the identifying S40. 3. The sub graph C of B corresponding to this largest subset of arcs is considered, and connected components C.sub.i of C are computed. This is an example of the next phase of the identifying S40. 4. If all arcs of each connected component C.sub.i represent the same rigid motion, then an elementary pattern is recognized. This is an example of the end of the identifying S40. 5. Graph B is simplified into a new graph B′ by merging nodes of each connected component C.sub.i into a single node and by discarding useless arcs. This is an example of modifying the graph by collapsing the nodes of each connected component of the identified set of connected components.
(108) Column 20 lines 11 to 20 - The goal of steps 1 and 2 is to provide adequate conditions allowing the collection of sub-graphs that potentially capture elementary patterns. Column 20 lines 15 to 20 - the process may be iteratively applied on successive simplified versions of graph B until no new pattern is recognized.
Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex. Surfaces, curves, and points may be linked together via their parameterization.).
Huang discloses a second mesh is a fillet, identify fillet ([0033] - consider if a filler or a circular faces is present in the mesh area with the susceptible to stress singularity.
[0031] The present invention allows the user to narrow the search for high strain regions of an individual solid or surface body. This way multiple singularities on multiple bodies can be identified, ”second mesh”. . ).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger with a second mesh is a fillet, identify fillet as taught by Huang. The motivation for doing is to save time.
Regarding claim 12, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger disclose all the limitation of claim 10.
Janvier discloses obtaining the first mesh from a scan of the mechanical part; or obtaining the first mesh from a CAD design (Column 1 lines 20 to 23 - Many CAD systems now allow the user to design a 3D modeled object, based on a boundary representation (B-Rep) of the modeled object provided to the user. The B-Rep is a data format comprising a set of faces each defined as a bounded portion of a respective supporting surface.
Column 9 lines 10 to 15 - A vertex may be defined as a link to a point in 3D space. These entities are related to each other as follows. The bounded portion of a curve is defined by two points (the vertices) lying on the curve. The bounded portion of a surface is defined by its boundary, this boundary being a set of edges lying on the surface. Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - Edges of the face’s boundary are connected together by sharing vertices. Faces are connected together by sharing edges. By definition, Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex, “mesh”.).
Regarding claim 13, Janvier discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having recorded thereon a computer program that when executed by a processor causes the processor to implement a method comprising (column 7 lines 45 to 55 - A computer program product executed by at least one processor in communication with memory, the computer program product comprising: a non-transitory computer readable medium, the computer readable medium comprising program instructions for designing a three-dimensional modeled object the program instructions, when executed by the at least one processor cause the following methods: ):
obtaining a mesh representing a segment of an outer surface of a portion of a mechanical part (Fig.1 - receiving model object in S10
Column 9 lines 10 to 15 - A vertex may be defined as a link to a point in 3D space. These entities are related to each other as follows. The bounded portion of a curve is defined by two points (the vertices) lying on the curve. The bounded portion of a surface is defined by its boundary, this boundary being a set of edges lying on the surface. Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - Edges of the face’s boundary are connected together by sharing vertices “outer surface”. Faces are connected together by sharing edges. By definition, Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex, “mesh is made up of vertex, points, edges, and surfaces linked together”.
column 16 line 55 - The application may be mechanical design, the modeled object representing a product such as a part or an assembly of parts, where pattern recognition is particularly useful.);
determining curves over the mesh that each follows maximal curvature directions of the mesh (Column 13 lines 55 to 66 - S30 determining maximal sub-graphs of the graphs for which the rigid motions represent by the arcs all respect a predetermined similarity criterion, e.g. arc or angle “curvature”.
Column 21 lines 34 to 40 - Back to the example, the class computation and sub-graph extraction performed on graph B yield at S30 three maximal sub-graphs shown on FIGS. 20-22. Sub-graph C of FIG. 20, is due to the fact that rotations R.sub.i, i=1, . . . , 6 all have the same angle and the same radii, arcs, “curvature direction”, “arc is curvature, , angel is curvature direction”
Column 9 lines 10 to 15 - A vertex may be defined as a link to a point in 3D space. These entities are related to each other as follows. The bounded portion of a curve is defined by two points (the vertices) lying on the curve. The bounded portion of a surface is defined by its boundary, this boundary being a set of edges lying on the surface. Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - Edges of the face’s boundary are connected together by sharing vertices. Faces are connected together by sharing edges. By definition, Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex, “mesh”.);
starting from a plurality of seed points belonging to the mesh, tracing integral curves of the distribution of maximal curvature directions (
Column 1 lines 15 to 20 - arcs u.sub.1 and u.sub.2 are similar when one of the following conditions is true. 1. D.sub.1 and D.sub.2 are pure translations and their translation vectors have the same length. Formally: θ.sub.1=θ.sub.2=0 and |T.sub.1|=|T.sub.2|. 2. D.sub.1 and D.sub.2 are not pure translations. Their rotations have the same absolute angle, formally, |θ.sub.1|=|θ.sub.2|≠0. The radii of arcs u.sub.1 and u.sub.2 are equal, formally d.sub.1=d.sub.2. Arcs u.sub.1 and u.sub.2 are not similar otherwise.
Column 13 lines 55 to 66 - S30 determining maximal sub-graphs of the graphs for which the rigid motions represent by the arcs all respect a predetermined similarity criterion.
Column 21 lines 34 to 40 - Back to the example, the class computation and sub-graph extraction performed on graph B yield at S30 three maximal sub-graphs shown on FIGS. 20-22. Sub-graph C of FIG. 20, is due to the fact that rotations R.sub.i, i=1, . . . , 6 all have the same angle and the same radii, arcs, “curvature direction”, “arc is curvature, , angel is curvature direction”).
fitting each curve with a respective circle, thereby obtaining a set of circles (
Column 8 lines 60 to 65 - a B-Rep of a modeled object may include topological entities and geometrical entities. The geometrical entities may comprise surfaces (e.g. planes), curves (e.g. lines) and/or points.
(32) Column 9 lines 29 to 31 - FIGS. 4 and 5 illustrate the B-rep model of a cylindrical slot 80 including curve and circles.
(33) Column 9 lines 45 to 50 - FIG. 6 illustrates the “is bounded by” topological relationship of the B-rep model of slot 80. Nodes of higher layer 101 are faces, nodes of intermediate layer 103 are curves, edges and nodes of lower layer 105 are vertices. FIGS. 7 and 8 illustrate the relationship between topological entities (faces, edges, vertices) and the supporting geometries (infinite cylinder, infinite plane, infinite line, points). The B-rep model gathers in an appropriate data structure the “is bounded by” relationship and the relationship between topological entities and supporting geometries. The topologies indicate the fitting curves, edges to form circles.
PNG
media_image2.png
250
382
media_image2.png
Greyscale
);
calculating a value of one or more statistics of the set of circles (Column 21 lines 55 to 60 - arcs of component C.sub.1 are all labeled by rotation R.sub.1, arcs of component C.sub.2 are all labeled by rotation R.sub.2, etc. The algorithm of the example may recognize that each connected component is an elementary pattern, which is a small crown of three circles, “algorithm = calculating”. ).
Janvier does not however Huang discloses
detecting whether the mesh is a fillet or not as a function of the value of the one or more statistics ([0033] - consider if a filler or a circular faces is present in the mesh area with the susceptible to stress singularity.
After calculating the Von Mises stress values for each element, the elements that lie in areas susceptible to stress singularity (e.g., sharp edges, cuts, and corners) are identified as stress hot spots, the value of an angle that determines sharpness defaults to 90° and less “value of the one or more statistics”. ).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier with detecting whether the mesh is a fillet or not as a function of the value of the one or more statistics as taught by Huang. The motivation for doing is to save time.
Janvier in view of Huang disclose the determining of the curves as stated above. Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger do not however CN discloses
computing a distribution of maximal curvature directions over the mesh (Page 23 paragraph 6- there is directed edge pointing to all split state of output tensor data, a fully-connected mesh structure is formed between the split state set of input tensor data and the split state set of output tensor data.
Page 16 paragraph 6- any one of the tensor data is referred to as a split state s of the tensor data, the computer device after splitting the tensor data to obtain the sub-tensor data set. splitting state s is represented by corresponding sub-tensor data set. All possible resolution (s0, s1, s2, ...) constitutes the split state set S of the tensor data, which is a very large state space, which means that the space of the possible resolution mode of the operator represented by the split state of the tensor data is also very large.).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang with computing a distribution of maximal curvature directions over the mesh as taught by CN. The motivation for doing so debugging can be performed in advance.
Janvier in view of Huang, CN do not however Zeiger discloses obtaining a 3D polyhedral mesh representing a part (Column 8 lines 46 to 50 - Fig. 1, the searchable data of the 3D object includes a polygon mesh that defines the shape of a polyhedral object in 3D space that is representative of the 3D object.)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang, CN with obtaining a 3D polyhedral mesh representing a part as taught by Zeiger. The motivation for doing to be easily locate the distinct features.
Regarding claim 14, see rejection on claim 13.
Regarding claim 15, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger and CN disclose all the limitation of claim 3.
Janvier discloses wherein the mesh has faces and edges, the distribution of maximal curvature directions including (Column 13 lines 55 to 66 - S30 determining maximal sub-graphs of the graphs for which the rigid motions represent by the arcs all respect a predetermined similarity criterion.
Column 21 lines 34 to 40 - Back to the example, the class computation and sub-graph extraction performed on graph B yield at S30 three maximal sub-graphs shown on FIGS. 20-22. Sub-graph C of FIG. 20, is due to the fact that rotations R.sub.i, i=1, . . . , 6 all have the same angle and the same radii, arcs, “curvature direction”, “arc is curvature, , angel is curvature direction”
Column 9 lines 10 to 15 - A vertex may be defined as a link to a point in 3D space. These entities are related to each other as follows. The bounded portion of a curve is defined by two points (the vertices) lying on the curve. The bounded portion of a surface is defined by its boundary, this boundary being a set of edges lying on the surface. Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - Edges of the face’s boundary are connected together by sharing vertices. Faces are connected together by sharing edges. By definition, Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex, “mesh”.),
for each face, one or more respective maximal curvature directions, the tracing of each integral curve including, starting from a respective seed point, iteratively face-by-face, integrating a planar curve on each respective face based on the one or more respective maximal curvature directions, each iteration stopping once the integrating reaches an edge of the respective face (Column 13 lines 55 to 66 - S30 determining maximal sub-graphs of the graphs for which the rigid motions represent by the arcs all respect a predetermined similarity criterion.
Column 21 lines 34 to 40 - Back to the example, the class computation and sub-graph extraction performed on graph B yield at S30 three maximal sub-graphs shown on FIGS. 20-22. Sub-graph C of FIG. 20, is due to the fact that rotations R.sub.i, i=1, . . . , 6 all have the same angle and the same radii, arcs, “curvature direction”, “arc is curvature, , angel is curvature direction”
Column 19 lines 55 to 66 - Within each connected component B of graph A, arcs are grouped into separate subsets according to similarity criteria classes. This is an example of the determining S30. 2. Then, the subset that includes the largest number of arcs is the best candidate to capture the most duplicated elementary structure. This is an example of the start of the identifying S40. 3. The sub graph C of B corresponding to this largest subset of arcs is considered, and connected components C.sub.i of C are computed. This is an example of the next phase of the identifying S40. 4. If all arcs of each connected component C.sub.i represent the same rigid motion, then an elementary pattern is recognized. This is an example of the end of the identifying S40. 5. Graph B is simplified into a new graph B′ by merging nodes of each connected component C.sub.i into a single node and by discarding useless arcs. This is an example of modifying the graph by collapsing the nodes of each connected component of the identified set of connected components.
(108) Column 20 lines 11 to 20 - The goal of steps 1 and 2 is to provide adequate conditions allowing the collection of sub-graphs that potentially capture elementary patterns. Column 20 lines 15 to 20 - the process may be iteratively applied on successive simplified versions of graph B until no new pattern is recognized.
Column 9 lines 15 to 20 - two faces are adjacent if they share an edge. Similarly, two edges are adjacent if they share a vertex. Surfaces, curves, and points may be linked together via their parameterization. ).
Regarding claim 16, see rejection on claim 5.
Regarding claim 17, see rejection on claim 12.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janvier (Patent: US 9,449,430 B1) in view of Huang et al. (Publication: US 2017/0364608 A1), CN (Publication: CN 111626430 A1), Zeiger et al. (Patent: US 8860717 B1) and Yu et al. (Publication: US 2021/0303822 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger disclose all the limitation of claim 1.
Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger do not however Yu discloses
discloses wherein the one or more statistics include one or both of ([0105] At 1212, the second condition of the straight-line requirement is further applied to the determination of whether an edge projection voxel is good or not. In one embodiment, a mean squared error (MSE) representing the average distance between each edge point in the edge projection voxel and the fitted line is computed.):
a mean fitting error ([0105] At 1212, the second condition of the straight-line requirement is further applied to the determination of whether an edge projection voxel is good or not. In one embodiment, a mean squared error (MSE) representing the average distance between each edge point in the edge projection voxel and the fitted line is computed.) ,
the mesh being detected as a fillet if, and only if, the mean fitting error is below a first threshold, and
a radius variance, the mesh being detected as a fillet only when the radius variance is below a second threshold.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger with discloses wherein the one or more statistics include one or both of: a mean fitting error, the mesh being detected as a fillet if, and only if, the mean fitting error is below a first threshold, and a radius variance, the mesh being detected as a fillet only when the radius variance is below a second threshold as taught by Yu. The motivation for doing so 3D objects can be measured more accurately and efficiently.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janvier (Patent: US 9,449,430 B1) in view of Huang et al. (Publication: US 2017/0364608 A1), CN (Publication: CN 111626430 A1), Zeiger et al. (Patent: US 8860717 B1) and Gauderis et al. (Publication: US 2021/0240882 A1)
Regarding claim 8, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger disclose all the limitation of claim 1.
Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger do not however Gauderis discloses
determining a plane closest to the curve with respect to a least square distance ([0109] For each of the solids, the edges in the BREP are looped and for each type of edges the following numbers are stored in a list (one list per type per solid): [0110] linear edges: [0111] squared distance start to end point [0112] spherical orientation of the edge taken at the closest of start and end point [0113] elliptical edges (including circular edges): [0114] squared distance start to end point, [0115] squared spherical distance of center point of the ellipse [0116] squared distance center to mid-curve point [0117] major to minor axis ratio [0118] helical edges: [0119] squared distance start to end point, [0120] helix radius [0121] handedness (boolean) [0122] taper (angle) [0123] spherical orientation of helix axis taken at the projection of the closest of start and end point to the helix axis [0124] helix pitch [0125] spline edges: [0126] squared distance between start and end point [0127] number of control points [0128] squared spherical distances of the control points);
projecting the curve on the plane ([0123] spherical orientation of helix axis taken at the projection of the closest of start and end point to the helix axis
[0113] elliptical edges (including circular edges): [0114] squared distance start to end point, [0115] squared spherical distance of center point of the ellipse [0116] squared distance center to mid-curve point [0117] major to minor axis ratio [0118] helical edges: [0119] squared distance start to end point, [0120] helix radius [0121] handedness (boolean) [0122] taper (angle) [0123] spherical orientation of helix axis taken at the projection of the closest of start and end point to the helix axis [0124] helix pitch [0125] spline edges
[0135] spherical orientation of cylinder axis taken at the closest of the face vertices projected to the cylinder axis.); and
determining a circle closest to the projected curve with respect to a predetermined distance ([0109] For each of the solids, the edges in the BREP are looped and for each type of edges the following numbers are stored in a list (one list per type per solid): [0110] linear edges: [0111] squared distance start to end point [0112] spherical orientation of the edge taken at the closest of start and end point [0113] elliptical edges (including circular edges): [0114] squared distance start to end point, [0115] squared spherical distance of center point of the ellipse [0116] squared distance center to mid-curve point [0117] major to minor axis ratio [0118] helical edges: [0119] squared distance start to end point, [0120] helix radius [0121] handedness (boolean) [0122] taper (angle) [0123] spherical orientation of helix axis taken at the projection of the closest of start and end point to the helix axis [0124] helix pitch [0125] spline edges: [0126] squared distance between start and end point [0127] number of control points [0128] squared spherical distances of the control points).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger with determining a plane closest to the curve with respect to a least square distance; projecting the curve on the plane; and determining a circle closest to the projected curve with respect to a predetermined distance as taught by Gauderis. The motivation for doing so 3D objects can be measured to be efficiently to save computer resources.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janvier (Patent: US 9,449,430 B1) in view of Huang et al. (Publication: US 2017/0364608 A1), CN (Publication: CN 111626430 A1), Zeiger et al. (Patent: US 8860717 B1), and Kokawa et al. (Patent: US 6,137,115)
Regarding claim 9, Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger disclose all the limitation of claim 1.
Huang discloses when a fillet is detected, creating a fillet CAD ([0033] - consider if a filler or a circular faces is present in the mesh area with the susceptible to stress singularity. Identifying elements that lie in areas susceptible to stress singularity is possible due to the integration of a simulation process with a CAD system and is based on the mesh created by the simulation process and the CAD features created by the CAD system. By way of non-limiting example, a mesh area may not be considered susceptible to stress singularity if a fillet or a circular face is present in that mesh area.
[0002] - Create a 3D model based on the CAD software.
After calculating the Von Mises stress values for each element, the elements that lie in areas susceptible to stress singularity (e.g., sharp edges, cuts, and corners) are identified as stress hot spots, the value of an angle that determines sharpness defaults to 90° and less. ).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger with Huang discloses when a fillet is detected, creating a fillet CAD as taught by Huang. The motivation for doing is to save time.
Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger do not however Kokawa discloses
calculating an average radius of the set of circles (column 2 lines 25 to 40 - calculating the characteristic quantities such as radius corresponding to a circle, average radius relating to the respective particles, and the calculated characteristic quantities are processed to obtain the statistics. ); and
feature parameterized by the average radius (column 2 lines 25 to 40 - calculating the characteristic quantities such as radius corresponding to a circle, average radius relating to the respective particles, and the calculated characteristic quantities are processed to obtain the statistics.).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Janvier in view of Huang, CN, Zeiger with calculating an average radius of the set of circles; and feature parameterized by the average radius as taught by Kokawa. The motivation for doing is to measure surface to a nonometer.
Response to Arguments
Examiner suggests to amend a specific element in the claim that when reading a claim in light of the invention, it directs to a unique technology. The examiner can be reached at 571-270-0724 for further discussion.
Claim Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant asserts “the combination of Janvier and Huang does not disclose or suggest, at least, obtaining a 3D polyhedral mesh representing a segment of an outer surface of a portion of a mechanical part, determining curves over the mesh that each follows maximal curvature directions of the mesh, wherein the determining of the curves includes: computing a distribution of maximal curvature directions over the mesh, and starting from a plurality of seed points belonging to the mesh, tracing integral curves of the distribution of maximal curvature directions, fitting each curve with a respective circle, thereby obtaining a set of circles, calculating a value of one or more statistics of the set of circles, and detecting whether the mesh is a fillet or not as a function of the value of the one or more statistics.”
The argument has been fully considered and is persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Janvier in view of Huang, CN, and Zeiger references.
During patent examination, the pending claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. See MPEP § 2111. Further, although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). See also MPEP § 2145(VI).
Regarding claims 2 - 5, 7, 9, and 12 - 15, the Applicant asserts that they are not obvious over based on their dependency from independent claims 1, 6, 8, and 10 respectively. The examiner cannot concur with the Applicant respectfully from same reason noted in the examiner’s response to argument asserted from claims 1, 6, 8, and 10 respectively.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ming Wu whose telephone number is (571) 270-0724. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday and alternate Fridays (9:30am - 6:00pm) EST.
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, Devona Faulk can be reached on 571-272-7515. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Ming Wu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2618
Prosecution Insights