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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 6 and 7 are too faint, making them difficult to read. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claims 1 and 7: “an air pressure determination component to receive a pressure value of air”, “a valve features determination component to receive characteristics of a fluid flow control valve”, “a trim determination component to receive a plurality of elements of a releasing trim”, “a fluid delivery output component to estimate a discharge time of the fire suppressing fluid”, and “a sprinkler system generator component to identify …”.
Claims 5 and 13: “the valve features determination component to receive a volume of a transmitting fluid of the releasing trim”.
Claims 6 and 12: “the trim determination component to receive a pressure value at a location within the releasing trim and a volume of a pipe within the releasing trim”.
Claim 10: “the trim determination component to receive a length value of a pipe of the releasing trim”.
Claim 11: “the trim determination component to receive a vertical displacement value defined between two points within the releasing trim”.
Claim 14: “the valve features determination component to receive a stiffness value of a portion of the fluid flow control valve”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Claim 1.
STEP 1: Yes. The claim is directed to a “system” which is a manufacture.
STEP 2A PRONE ONE:
The claim recites mathematical abstractions and mental processes.
a fluid delivery output component to estimate a discharge time of the fire suppressing fluid based on the plurality of inputs; and
This is a mathematical abstraction that can be a calculation, relationship, or equation / formula. In this case, computing a mathematical estimate of a discharge time based on the inputs.
a sprinkler system generator component to identify a dry sprinkler system configuration that includes a network of pipes, the fluid flow control valve, and at least one sprinkler coupled with a portion of the network of pipes.
This describes an observation, evaluation, judgment or opinion that can be done in the mind or with the aid of pen and paper. In this case an observation to select and identify “… a dry sprinkler system configuration that includes a network of pipes, the fluid flow control valve, and at least one sprinkler coupled with a portion of the network of pipes.”.
STEP 2A PRONG TWO: The claim does not integrate the exception into a practical application.
STEP 2B: The claim does not recite an inventive concept or significantly more than the exception.
a data processing system having:
MPEP 2106.05(f) – This is generic computer components to apply the abstract idea.
a plurality of input components to receive a plurality of inputs, the plurality of input components including:
a fluid pressure determination component to receive a pressure value of a fire suppressing fluid;
MPEP 2106.05(g) – This is mere data gathering using generic computer components.
an air pressure determination component to receive a pressure value of air;
MPEP 2106.05(g) – This is mere data gathering using generic computer components.
a valve features determination component to receive characteristics of a fluid flow control valve; and
MPEP 2106.05(g) – This is mere data gathering using generic computer components.
a trim determination component to receive a plurality of elements of a releasing trim;
MPEP 2106.05(g) – This is mere data gathering using generic computer components.
Conclusion: Claim 1 is directed to multiple mathematical abstractions and mental processes, not integrated into a practical application and lacks an inventive concept. Therefore, it is ineligible under 35 U.S.C 101.
Regarding Claim 2:
This claim merely links the abstract idea to a field of use MPEP 2106.05(h). Reciting the wet portion, dry portion, separating valve, and sprinkler arrangement (claim 2) describes the standard topology of a dry pipe sprinkler system as part of the modeled configuration of claim 1, not a physical component the data processing system interacts with and adds no use of the estimated discharge time. This does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims do not resolve the issues from the claims they depend upon.
Regarding Claims 3-6:
These claims merely add pre solution data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g), or narrow the input data type. Specifying that the inputs come from a user (claim 3) or a database (claim 4) only identifies the source of the gathered data. Specifying that the inputs include transmitting fluid volume (claim 5) or the releasing trim pressure and pipe volume (claim 6) only narrows which parameters are gathered, with no use of those parameters beyond the estimate already recited in claim 1. This does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims do not resolve the issues from the claims they depend upon.
Claim 7.
STEP 1: Yes. The claim is directed to a “system” which is a manufacture.
STEP 2A PRONE ONE:
The claim recites mathematical abstractions and mental processes.
a fluid delivery output component to determine a discharge time of the fire suppressing fluid to a sprinkler of the dry sprinkler system configuration; and
This is a mathematical abstraction that can be a calculation, relationship, or equation / formula. In this case, computing a mathematical estimate of a discharge time based on the inputs.
a sprinkler system generator component to identify the dry sprinkler system configuration that includes a network of pipes, the fluid flow control valve, and at least one sprinkler coupled with a portion of the network of pipes.
This describes an observation, evaluation, judgment or opinion that can be done in the mind or with the aid of pen and paper. In this case an observation to select and identify “… a dry sprinkler system configuration that includes a network of pipes, the fluid flow control valve, and at least one sprinkler coupled with a portion of the network of pipes.”.
STEP 2A PRONG TWO: The claim does not integrate the exception into a practical application.
STEP 2B: The claim does not recite an inventive concept or significantly more than the exception.
a data processing system having:
MPEP 2106.05(f) – This is generic computer components to apply the abstract idea.
a plurality of input components to receive a plurality of inputs, the plurality of input components including:
a fluid pressure determination component to receive a pressure value of a fire suppressing fluid;
MPEP 2106.05(g) – This is mere data gathering using generic computer components.
an air pressure determination component to receive a pressure value of air;
MPEP 2106.05(g) – This is mere data gathering using generic computer components.
a valve features determination component to receive characteristics of a fluid flow control valve; and
MPEP 2106.05(g) – This is mere data gathering using generic computer components.
a trim determination component to receive a plurality of elements of a releasing trim;
MPEP 2106.05(g) – This is mere data gathering using generic computer components.
Conclusion: Claim 7 is directed to multiple mathematical abstractions and mental processes, not integrated into a practical application and lacks an inventive concept. Therefore, it is ineligible under 35 U.S.C 101.
Regarding Claim 8-9:
This claim merely adds pre-solution data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g). Specifying that the inputs come from a user (claim 8) or a database (claim 9) only identifies the source of the gathered data. This does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims do not resolve the issues from the claims they depend upon.
Regarding Claims 10-14:
These claims merely narrow the input data type, MPEP 2106.05(g). Specifying that the inputs include the trim pipe length (claim 10), the trim vertical displacement (claim 11), the trim pressure (claim 12), the transmitting fluid volume (claim 13), or the valve stiffness (claim 14) only identifies which parameters are gathered, with no use of those parameters beyond the determination already recited in claim 7. This does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims do not resolve the issues from the claims they depend upon.
Claim 15.
STEP 1: Yes. The claim is directed to a “method” which is a process.
STEP 2A PRONE ONE:
The claim recites mathematical abstractions and mental processes.
determining, via the data processing system, a discharge time of a fire suppressing fluid to at least one sprinkler based on the plurality of inputs;
This is a mathematical abstraction that can be a calculation, relationship, or equation / formula. In this case, computing a mathematical estimate of a discharge time based on the inputs.
STEP 2A PRONG TWO: The claim does not integrate the exception into a practical application.
STEP 2B: The claim does not recite an inventive concept or significantly more than the exception.
receiving, via a data processing system, a plurality of inputs based on conditions at a plurality of locations of the dry sprinkler system configuration;
MPEP 2106.05(g) – This is mere data gathering using generic computer components.
the dry sprinkler system configuration including a network of pipes having a dry portion, a wet portion fluidly coupled with the dry portion, and a fluid flow control valve separating the wet portion from the dry portion; and
the at least one sprinkler fluidly coupled with the dry portion of the network of pipes, the at least one sprinkler to receive the fire suppressing fluid from the wet portion of the network of pipes.
MPEP 2106.05(h) – This limitation merely links the field of use by reciting a configuration including a dry portion, a wet portion, a separating valve, and a couple sprinkler.
Conclusion: Claim 15 is directed to multiple mathematical abstractions and mental processes, not integrated into a practical application and lacks an inventive concept. Therefore, it is ineligible under 35 U.S.C 101.
Regarding Claims 16-17:
These claims merely add pre-solution data gathering, MPEP 2106.05(g). Receiving the inputs via a user (claim 16) or a database (claim 17) only identifies the source of the gathered data. This does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims do not resolve the issues from the claims they depend upon.
Regarding Claims 18-21:
These claims merely narrow the input data type, MPEP 2106.05(g). Receiving a supply pressure at a plurality of location (claim 18), an air pressure downstream of the valve (claim 19), a transmitting fluid volume within valve (claim 20), or releasing trim characteristics (claim 21) only identifies which parameters are gathered, with no use of those parameters beyond the determination already recited in claim 15. This does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims do not resolve the issues from the claims they depend upon.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-13, 15-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 102 as being unpatentable over US 8065110 B2 by GOLINVEAUX et al. [herein “GOLINVEAUX”] (2011).
Regarding Claim 1, GOLINVEAUX teaches
A dry sprinkler simulation system, comprising:
a data processing system having:
a plurality of input components to receive a plurality of inputs, the plurality of input components including:
“The computer program 20 can be embodied as a computer readable program on a computer readable medium such as, for example, a computer disc, CD-ROM, hard disk, centralized server or any other computer memory storage device. The computer program 20 can be accessed by a computer processing device such as a laptop or PC to design a dry pipe system 10.”. (0030).
“The computer program 20 can include a user interface or input module 22 in communication with one more computational engines 24. The input module 22 can be configured to provide an interface for a sprinkler system designer to enter parameters, requirements and elements of the system 10 to be modeled.”. (0028).
“Specifically shown is the input module 22' including one or more input files to capture characteristics of the piping system to be modeled. The input files can include one or more of a pipes, nodes, fluid, fluid supply and program parameter files.”. (0029).
This shows a laptop or pc running a dry pipe simulation program and an input module that receives several user entered and file-based inputs.
a fluid pressure determination component to receive a pressure value of a fire suppressing fluid;
“The supply node 132 can be defined by an array containing a set of points on a Pressure vs. Flow function.”. (0057).
“For example, a city main array can contain at least two points such as, for example, the static and the residual. A pump properties window can characterize the pressure boosting function of the pump by a set of data points in a pressure vs. flow function.”. (0057).
“It is noted that in the preferred embodiments, the fluid is a fire fighting fluid such as water or Inergen.RTM. extinguishing agent and the gas is nitrogen or ambient air.”. (0064).
This shows the program receiving supply pressure values (the static and residual pressures and pump pressure points) for water, which is a fire suppressing fluid (a fluid pressure determination component).
an air pressure determination component to receive a pressure value of air;
“For example, if the piping network is unsupervised, and contains air at atmospheric pressure, this can be entered into the model using the specific gravity of air and a pressure of 14.7 psi, or one bar.”. (0064).
“
PNG
media_image1.png
736
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
”. (FIG. 6B).
“Typical sizes of dry pipe fire protection system are as follows: Head opening (sprinkler head) diameter: 0.25 . . . 2.5 cm; Branch lines diameter: 5 . . . 8 cm; Branch lines length: 20 . . . 45 m; Cross mains diameter: 10 . . . 16 cm; Cross mains length: 15 . . . 90 m; Riser nipples diameter: 5 . . . 8 cm; Riser nipples length: 0 . . . 1.2 m; Feed main length: 10 . . . 25 cm; Feed main length: 5 . . . 50 m; Drops/sprigs diameters: 1.2 . . . 3.8 cm; Drops length: 30 . . . 60 cm; Water pressure: up to 11 atm; Initial gas pressure: 1.7 . . . 4 atm; DPV trip pressure: 1.35 . . . 3.1 atm.”. (0038).
This shows the system receiving an air pressure value for the dry piping, both as the FIG. 6B entry field and as entered pressure values (an air pressure determination component).
a valve features determination component to receive characteristics of a fluid flow control valve; and
“Accordingly, a valve properties window, for example, as seen in FIG. 6A, can provide for specifying a valve type, valve size, and/or a non-linear pressure drop function defined by a user with the help of a special table Pressure Drop vs. Flow Rate function.”. (0054).
“The computer 20 can provide additional data fields to model the DPV 138. For example, a DPV properties window or interface can be provided to enter additional parameters such as, for example, Differential Trip Ratio, Pressure Differential for optional DPV accelerator, and Fixed Trip Time--the time delay for the DPV to trip after the accelerator has reached its pressure Differential Setting Value. An additional window can be incorporated or added to characterize and model a valve assembly for example, a check valve assembly.”. (0054).
“
PNG
media_image2.png
674
659
media_image2.png
Greyscale
”. (FIG. 6A).
This shows the program receiving the dry pipe valve type, size, pressure loss curve, etc. (a valve feature determination component that receives characteristics of a fluid control valve).
a trim determination component to receive a plurality of elements of a releasing trim;
“For example, a DPV properties window or interface can be provided to enter additional parameters such as, for example, Differential Trip Ratio, Pressure Differential for optional DPV accelerator, and Fixed Trip Time--the time delay for the DPV to trip after the accelerator has reached its pressure Differential Setting Value. An additional window can be incorporated or added to characterize and model a valve assembly for example, a check valve assembly.”. (0054).
“The preferred embodiments can also model preaction systems for the case where the Dry Pipe Valve opens prior to sprinkler(s), including single-interlock, double-interlock and non-interlock preaction systems.”. (0021).
“
PNG
media_image3.png
458
438
media_image3.png
Greyscale
”. (FIG. 6B).
This shows the program receiving the accelerator’s pressure differential and fixed trip time, the preaction interlock arrangement, and the DPV trip time. These are the valve and control arrangement that releases water into the system, so together they are a plurality of elements of a releasing trim.
a fluid delivery output component to estimate a discharge time of the fire suppressing fluid based on the plurality of inputs; and
“The computational engine 24 can further include a calculating module 28 in communication with the model generator 26 to be able to simulate gas and liquid flow through the system 10 as the fluid moves from the wet portion to the dry portion such that the liquid of the wet portion displaces the gas in the dry portion.”. (0028).
“The window 250 can be configured to perform an analysis of the model 100 so as to determine, for example, trip time, water delivery time and operating time.”. (0058).
“The water delivery time can be defined as the period between when a sprinkler, preferably the first sprinkler, opens and when the water first reaches an open sprinkler. More preferably, the water delivery time is the sum of the trip time and the transit time.”. (0058).
This shows a calculating module that uses the model built from the entered inputs to compute the water delivery time a to a sprinkler (a fluid delivery output component that estimates a discharge time of the fire suppressing fluid based on the plurality of inputs).
a sprinkler system generator component to identify a dry sprinkler system configuration that includes a network of pipes, the fluid flow control valve, and at least one sprinkler coupled with a portion of the network of pipes.
“The computer program 20 can include a user interface or module 22 in communication with the computational engine 24, and more specifically the model or tree generator 26, to build a model dry pipe system such as, for example, model 100.”. (0041).
“To build a model 100 using the preferred computer program 20, the user can create a dry pipe sprinkler system by specifying a total number of sprinklers based on the number of branch pipes multiplied with the number of sprinklers per branch …”. (0041).
“The DPV is shown as connecting the wet portion 130 to the node 112 of the dry portion.”. (0039).
This shows the tree generator building a dry pipe system model (a sprinkler system generator component that identifies a dry sprinkler system configuration). The model has branch pipes (pipe network), the DPV (the fluid control valve), and sprinklers on each branch (at least one sprinkler coupled with a portion of the network of pipes).
Regarding Claim 2, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The dry sprinkler simulation system of claim 1, comprising:
the network of pipes having a dry portion, a wet portion fluidly coupled with the dry portion, the fluid flow control valve separating the wet portion from the dry portion, and the at least one sprinkler to receive the fire suppressing fluid via the wet portion of the network of pipes.
“The dry portion of the system is preferably separated from the wet portion of the system by a dry pipe valve 8 (DPV). The dry pipe valve 8 can be configured to activate or trip to supply the liquid from the wet portion to a network of pipes, pipe fittings, sprinkler heads and/or valves (not shown) downstream of the dry valve.”. (0027).
“
PNG
media_image4.png
467
469
media_image4.png
Greyscale
”. (FIG. 1).
“The "wet" part or portion 130 of the system is constantly filled with liquid and is preferably defined as being located between the supply node and the DPV.”. (0039 and FIG. 5).
This shows a dry portion and a wet portion, with the DPV separating them (the fluid control valve separating the wet portion from the dry portion). When the valve trips, it supplies liquid from the wet portion to the sprinkler heads (the at least one sprinkler receives the fire suppressing fluid via the wet portion).
Regarding Claim 3, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The dry sprinkler simulation system of claim 1, comprising:
the data processing system to receive the plurality of inputs from an end user.
“The input module 22 can be configured to provide an interface for a sprinkler system designer to enter parameters, requirements and elements of the system 10 to be modeled.”. (0028 and FIG. 2.).
“More specifically, the input module 22 can communicate with the input peripheral devices such as, for example, keyboards, mouse or other pointing device for entry of user defined parameters of the dry pipe system 10.”. (0030).
This shows a sprinkler system designer entering the inputs through a keyboard and mouse i.e. a data processing system receiving the plurality of inputs from an end user.
Regarding Claim 4, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The dry sprinkler simulation system of claim 1, comprising:
the data processing system to receive the plurality of inputs from a database.
“In addition, the computational engine 24 can include a database of piping elements and characteristics to build the model of the system 10.”. (0028 and FIG. 2.).
“Specifically shown is the input module 22' including one or more input files to capture characteristics of the piping system to be modeled. The input files can include one or more of a pipes, nodes, fluid, fluid supply and program parameter files.”. (0029).
This shows the program building the model from a database of piping elements and from store input files (the data processing system receiving the plurality of inputs from a database).
Regarding Claim 5, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The dry sprinkler simulation system of claim 1, comprising:
the valve features determination component to receive a volume of a transmitting fluid of the releasing trim.
“The network of piping downstream of the DPV 8 is filled with a gas such as, for example, air. The DPV 8 can be activated by a drop in pressure downstream of the valve thereby releasing the liquid from the wet portion into the dry portion.”. (0027).
“To relate the change in pressure, volume and temperature to the mass flow rate of the gas, the following equation is used:
dd.function..times..times. ##EQU00009##
where V.sub.a is the total volume of gas in the system.
To relate the change in mass flow rate {dot over (m)}.sub.a to pressure, velocity, density, and cross-sectional area, the following equation is used:
”. (0111-0114).
“
PNG
media_image5.png
494
464
media_image5.png
Greyscale
”. (FIG. 6B.).
This shows the program taking in volume of the air that holds the dry pipe valve closed and is released to open it and using that volume to compute trip time (receiving a volume of a transmitting fluid of the releasing trim).
Regarding Claim 6, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The dry sprinkler simulation system of claim 1, comprising:
the trim determination component to receive a pressure value at a location within the releasing trim and a volume of a pipe within the releasing trim.
“The node properties window or interface can provide for modeling an Exhauster. An exhauster is a special device which can be opened for accelerating gas depletion or blowoff when the gas pressure is decreasing. The exhauster parameters can include, for example, K-factor, Orifice Size, Pressure Setting to trip, and Closing Time after water has reached the exhauster. The pressure required to trip the exhauster can be set either as a differential pressure or as gauge pressure.”. (0056).
To relate the change in pressure, volume and temperature to the mass flow rate of the gas, the following equation is used:
dd.function..times..times. ##EQU00009##
where V.sub.a is the total volume of gas in the system.
To relate the change in mass flow rate {dot over (m)}.sub.a to pressure, velocity, density, and cross-sectional area, the following equation is used:
rho..times..times..times..times. ##EQU00010##
where S is the cross sectional area of the pipe. In (Eq. 8) and (Eq. 9):
”. (0111-0114).
“Similarly, a pipe properties window can be provided for the user to specify, for example, pipe starting and ending nodes, pipe schedule, size, internal diameter, Hazen Williams C-Factor, absolute roughness, length, fittings, equivalent length, total length, and other suitable attributes in modeling the dry pipe system.”. (0055).
This shows the program receiving a gauge pressure at the exhauster node, which is part of the valve release arrangement (a pressure value at a location within the releasing trim). It also receives each pipe’s internal diameter and length, which defines the pipe’s volume of the air that holds the valve closed (a volume of a pipe within the releasing trim).
Claims 7-9 and 12-13 recite substantially the same limitations as claims 1 and 3-6 except these claims are directed to a “data processing system”. Therefore, these claims are rejected under the same rationale as addressed above.
Regarding Claim 10, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The data processing system of claim 7, comprising:
the trim determination component to receive a length value of a pipe of the releasing trim.
“Similarly, a pipe properties window can be provided for the user to specify, for example, pipe starting and ending nodes, pipe schedule, size, internal diameter, Hazen Williams C-Factor, absolute roughness, length, fittings, equivalent length, total length, and other suitable attributes in modeling the dry pipe system.”. (0055).
This shows the program receiving the length of each pipe that holds the air keeping the dry pipe valve closed (a length value of a pipe of the releasing trim).
Regarding Claim 11, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The data processing system of claim 7, comprising:
the trim determination component to receive a vertical displacement value defined between two points within the releasing trim.
“The user preferably provides information such as the number of branch lines, the number of sprinkler heads from the left side of the system relative to the main and preferably to the cross-main. The user can further provide information such as, for example, location and length of the feed main; elevations of the sprinklers and pipes; and a fluid supply.”. (0041).
“For example, a window configured with necessary data entry fields, drop down menus or look-up tables can permit a user to specify cross-, loop- and/or feed-main properties such as, for example, length, number of sprinkler head to the left or right of a given main, pipe direction and elevation of the given main.”. (0044).
This shows the program receiving the elevations of pipes and sprinklers. The difference between two elevations is a vertical displacement between two points (a vertical displacement value defined between two points within the releasing trim).
Regarding Claim 15, GOLINVEAUX teaches
A method of determining a dry sprinkler system configuration, comprising:
receiving, via a data processing system, a plurality of inputs based on conditions at a plurality of locations of the dry sprinkler system configuration;
“If the predicted transit time for the design is less than sixty seconds or any desired threshold value, the computer program can be used to adjust the physical attributes of the design by the user so that the predicted transit duration conforms to a desired duration.”. (0460).
“The supply node 132 can be defined by an array containing a set of points on a Pressure vs. Flow function.”. (0057).
“
PNG
media_image5.png
494
464
media_image5.png
Greyscale
”. (FIG. 6B).
This shows a computer program that receives inputs for different locations in a dry pipe system and adjusts the design (a method of determining a dry sprinkler system configuration). The inputs are the supply pressure at the supply node, the gas pressure in the dry piping, and each sprinkler at its specified location (a plurality of inputs based on conditions at a plurality of locations).
determining, via the data processing system, a discharge time of a fire suppressing fluid to at least one sprinkler based on the plurality of inputs;
“The computer program would predict a liquid delivery time (i.e., trip time and transit time) between an actuation of a dry pipe valve and delivery of fluid at a sprinkler head.”. (0460).
“The window 250 can be configured to perform an analysis of the model 100 so as to determine, for example, trip time, water delivery time and operating time.”. (0058).
This shows the program computing, from the model built on those inputs, the time for water to reach a sprinkler i.e. determining a discharge time of a fire suppressing fluid to at least one sprinkler based on the plurality of inputs.
the dry sprinkler system configuration including a network of pipes having a dry portion, a wet portion fluidly coupled with the dry portion, and a fluid flow control valve separating the wet portion from the dry portion; and
“The dry portion of the system is preferably separated from the wet portion of the system by a dry pipe valve 8 (DPV). The dry pipe valve 8 can be configured to activate or trip to supply the liquid from the wet portion to a network of pipes, pipe fittings, sprinkler heads and/or valves (not shown) downstream of the dry valve. The network of piping downstream of the DPV 8 is filled with a gas such as, for example, air. The DPV 8 can be activated by a drop in pressure downstream of the valve thereby releasing the liquid from the wet portion into the dry portion.”. (0027).
“
PNG
media_image6.png
457
448
media_image6.png
Greyscale
”. (FIG. 1.).
This shows a network of pipes with a wet portion and a dry portion, with the DPV separating them (a fluid flow control valve separating the wet portion from the dry portion).
the at least one sprinkler fluidly coupled with the dry portion of the network of pipes, the at least one sprinkler to receive the fire suppressing fluid from the wet portion of the network of pipes.
“More specifically shown is the dry portion 110 of the model 100 having a plurality of interconnected nodes 111. The nodes 111 can represent a point of transition from one pipe size to another including such nodal devices such as, for example, elbows, bends, tees and laterals, an exhauster, or an exit opening such as, for example, a sprinkler head or nozzle capable of opening to ambient.”. (0038).
“The dry portion of the system is preferably separated from the wet portion of the system by a dry pipe valve 8 (DPV). The dry pipe valve 8 can be configured to activate or trip to supply the liquid from the wet portion to a network of pipes, pipe fittings, sprinkler heads and/or valves (not shown) downstream of the dry valve.”. (0027).
This shows sprinkler heads on the dry portion that receive the liquid from the wet portion when the valve trips.
Regarding Claim 16, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The method of claim 15, comprising:
receiving, via an end user, the plurality of inputs.
“The input module 22 can be configured to provide an interface for a sprinkler system designer to enter parameters, requirements and elements of the system 10 to be modeled.”. (0028).
“More specifically, the input module 22 can communicate with the input peripheral devices such as, for example, keyboards, mouse or other pointing device for entry of user defined parameters of the dry pipe system 10.”. (0030).
This shows a sprinkler system designer entering the inputs through a keyboard and mouse i.e. receiving, via an end user, a plurality of inputs.
Regarding Claim 17, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The method of claim 15, comprising:
receiving, via a database, the plurality of inputs.
“In addition, the computational engine 24 can include a database of piping elements and characteristics to build the model of the system 10.”. (0028).
“Specifically shown is the input module 22' including one or more input files to capture characteristics of the piping system to be modeled. The input files can include one or more of a pipes, nodes, fluid, fluid supply and program parameter files.”. (0029).
This shows the program building the model from a database of piping elements and from stored input files i.e. receiving, via a database, the plurality of inputs.
Regarding Claim 18, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The method of claim 15, comprising:
receiving a supply pressure value of the fire suppressing fluid at a first plurality of locations of the dry sprinkler system configuration.
“The supply node 132 can be defined by an array containing a set of points on a Pressure vs. Flow function. The space between points can be approximated with any type of functional dependence, for instance, the polynomial of the flow rate raised in 1.85 power. A node properties window or interface can include points on the supply function. For example, a city main array can contain at least two points such as, for example, the static and the residual. A pump properties window can characterize the pressure boosting function of the pump by a set of data points in a pressure vs. flow function.”. (0057).
“In simulating liquid and gas flow through the model 100, the simulation can provide that after the DPV trips, the fire pump can be activated when pressure at its outlet drops below user specified pressure value and after the user specified delay period. Both values can be specified in the pump properties window or interface.”. (0057).
This shows the program receiving supply pressure values of the water at the supply node and at the fire pump outlet, which are two locations of the system i.e. a supply pressure value of the fire suppressing fluid at a first plurality of locations.
Regarding Claim 19, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The method of claim 15, comprising:
receiving a pressure value of air at a location downstream of the fluid flow control valve.
“The network of piping downstream of the DPV 8 is filled with a gas such as, for example, air. The DPV 8 can be activated by a drop in pressure downstream of the valve thereby releasing the liquid from the wet portion into the dry portion.”. (0027).
“
PNG
media_image7.png
463
415
media_image7.png
Greyscale
”. (FIG. 6B.).
This shows the program receiving the pressure of the air that fills the piping downstream of the dry pipe valve i.e. a pressure value of air at a location downstream of the fluid flow control valve.
Regarding Claim 21, GOLINVEAUX teaches
The method of claim 15, comprising:
receiving a plurality of characteristics of a releasing trim of the fluid flow control valve.
“For example, a DPV properties window or interface can be provided to enter additional parameters such as, for example, Differential Trip Ratio, Pressure Differential for optional DPV accelerator, and Fixed Trip Time--the time delay for the DPV to trip after the accelerator has reached its pressure Differential Setting Value.”. (0054).
“The preferred embodiments can also model preaction systems for the case where the Dry Pipe Valve opens prior to sprinkler(s), including single-interlock, double-interlock and non-interlock preaction systems.”. (0021).
“
PNG
media_image7.png
463
415
media_image7.png
Greyscale
”. (FIG. 6B.).
This shows the program receiving the accelerator’s pressure differential and fixed trip time, the preaction interlock arrangement, and the DPV trip time. These are characteristics of the valve and control arrangement that releases water through the dry pipe valve i.e. a plurality of characteristics of a releasing trim of the fluid control valve.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 non-obviousness.
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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over US 8065110 B2 by GOLINVEAUX et al. [herein “GOLINVEAUX”] (2011) and in view of “CFD simulation of a safety relief valve for improvement of a one-dimensional valve model in RELAP5” by BUDZISZEWSKI et al. [herein “BUDZISZEWSKI”] (2012).
Regarding Claim 14, GOLINVEAUX does not explicitly teach but BUDZISZEWSKI teaches
The data processing system of claim 7, comprising:
the valve features determination component to receive a stiffness value of a portion of the fluid flow control valve.
“The pipes are connected to the volumes with junctions. Each pipe is divided into several segments linked together by junctions. The valve itself is modeled as a junction component between the two defined pipes.”. (Pg. 33).
“In the servo valve model in this project the control variables are used in order to calculate the forces acting on the spindle. These calculations are very similar to the calculations in the UDF which was used in FLUENT. The following forces are included in the servo valve model; the gravity force, the spring force and the total hydraulic force. Ftot = Fg +Fs +Fh Fg = mg Fs =−k(xo +h) (5.2.2) (5.2.3) (5.2.4)”. (Pg. 35).
“For the spring, two constants were specified; the spring constant k and the initial tension force F0, see equation (2.3.8). The value of k was chosen as a mean value of measured k values during a series of three experiments conducted by the valve manufacturer. The value of F0 was calculated as the force acting on the bottom surface of the spindle at completely closed position at the set pressure 31 bar(g). The used constants are k = 722150 N/m2 F0 = 7126 N”. (Pg. 36).
This shows simulations software modeling a valve in pipe systems, with the valve spring’s constant k supplied as an input (receiving a stifness value of a portion of the fluid flow control valve).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate BUDZISZEWSKI’s teaching of a valve simulation that receives a spring constant of the valve with GOLINVEAUX’s method of receiving valve characteristics to simulate a dry pipe sprinkler system. The reason for doing so would have been to model the opening and closing of the valve from the force acting on it, including the spring force, rather than treating the valve as opening instantly. As expressed by BUDZISZEWSKI, “With the servo valve model the opening and closing processes of the valve are controlled with control variables. The control variables allow the user to specify what calculations that should be performed during simulation, which makes the servo valve model the most flexible model to use when simulating 22 a valve in RELAP5. Variables such as pressure, mass flow, density, temperature etc. can be accessed through the control variables. In the servo valve model in this project the control variables are used in order to calculate the forces acting on the spindle.”. (Pg. 22-23).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over US 8065110 B2 by GOLINVEAUX et al. [herein “GOLINVEAUX”] (2011) and in view of “Dynamic Simulation and Validation of a Vent and Safety Valve for Cryogenic Flight Tanks” by MANIMARAN et al. [herein “MANIMARAN”] (2016).
Regarding Claim 20, GOLINVEAUX does not explicitly teach but MANIMARAN teaches
The method of claim 15, comprising:
receiving a volume of a transmitting fluid within the fluid flow control valve.
“An orifice called the communication orifice drilled in the main valve body allows the inlet pressure to be communicated to the bellow internal chamber.”. (Pg. 1323).
“The opening of the pilot poppet causes the bellow internal pressure to decay since the size of the communication orifice (inflow) is lower than the pilot valve inlet orifice (outflow). This results in a pressure differential across the main bellow with higher pressure at the external and lower in the internal. This resultant opening force is opposed only by the spring force which is very small compared to the pressure-differential force. This causes the main poppet to open suddenly or pop to its full open position.”. (Pg. 1323).
“The simulation is carried out for a valve with geometrical parameters as given in table 1. The valve is simulated for ground conditions with the ambient as 1bar and 300K.”. (Pg. 1328).
This shows a valve with a chamber inside its body that holds gas pressure to keep the valve closed and is vented to open it, with the simulation taking that chamber’s volume as an input i.e. receiving a volume of a transmitting fluid within the fluid flow control valve.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate MANIMARAN’s teaching of valve simulation that receives the volume of the chamber fluid holding the valve closed with GOLINVEAUX’s method of receiving valve characteristics to determine the discharge time of dry sprinkler system. The reason for doing so would have been to simulate how the valve opens, from the pressure of the fluid venting out of that chamber, rather than treating the valve as opening instantly. As expressed by MANIMARAN, “The pressure, temperature, flow rate, seat stress and lift thus obtained are plotted to find the characteristic parameters such as cracking pressure, full flow pressure, reseal pressure, opening and closing response, tank pressure decay rate and full flow rate.”. (Abstract).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-20020134956-A1 teaches position control for a solenoid actuated valve, and more particularly to a control including a model-based feed-forward control component.
US-8065110-B2 teaches a method to model a complex system of pipes. The model takes into account the physical processes in a tree-type piping system and provides for an accurate modeling of a real world tree-type piping system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NARCISO EDUARDO MONTES whose telephone number is (571)272-5773. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, REHANA PERVEEN, can be reached at (571) 272-3676. 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.
/N.E.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2189
/REHANA PERVEEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2189
Prosecution Insights