DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In view of the amendment filed 07/02/2026:
The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection of claims 102 is withdrawn.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 4, 5, 7, and 8 are withdrawn.
The 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1 and 9-12 as being anticipated by Buller
et al. (US20200139631) and as being anticipated by Fink et al. (US20090326706) is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-8 and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2, and similarly claim 13, recite the limitation “a process range” in line 4. It is unclear whether the process range recited in claim 2 and claim 13 are the same or different from the process range recited in claim 1, which claim 2 depends from, and in claim 10, which claim 13 depends from. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret the process range in claim 2 and claim 13 to be equivalent to the process range recited in claim 1 and claim 10. However, clarification, and correction is required.
Claim 3, and similarly claim 4, claim 8, claim 14, claim 15, and claim 19 recite the limitation “a laser output power”, “a scan speed”, or both. It is unclear whether the laser output power or the scan speed are the same or different from the laser output power or a scan speed recited in claim 1 or claim 13. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret the laser output power or the scan speed to be equivalent to the laser output power or the scan speed recited in claim 1 and claim 13. However, clarification and correction is required.
Claim 6, and similarly claim 17, recites “a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape… a process range”. It is unclear whether the hexahedral body, upper portion, base plate, lower portion, circular cross section, same size and shape, and process range are the same or different from said limitations as recited in claim 1 and claim 13. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret said limitations to be equivalent to the limitations recited in claim 1 and claim 13. However, clarification and correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buller et al. (US20200139631), and further in view of Fink et al. () and Joo et al. (KR102233737B1- Machine translation provided herein).
Regarding claim 1, Buller teaches a thermal-analysis-based output stabilization
(Abstract: Provided herein are apparatuses, and non-transitory computer readable media
regarding data assurance for instructions data utilized in forming at least one requested 3D
object, and methods associated therewith) method comprising:
performing, by one or more processors of an output stabilization system ([0131] and [0150] The pre-formation environment may comprise one or more components, e.g., modules, stages, and/or processors. The pre-formation environment may generate instructions data related to the formation of a requested 3D object), a first stacking thermal analysis with respect to a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens in which a process range corresponding to normal output quality is set ([0117] FIG. 2B depicts an example of a Formation Environment application 250. In the example of FIG. 2B, a forming area (e.g., a platform) 260 is disposed below an arrangement of a plurality of 3D object models (e.g., 255, 257, and 270) that correspond to a plurality of requested 3D objects… Formation Environment application provides a capability to modify (e.g., a selected portion of) a virtual model of a requested 3D object. The modification may comprise adjusting one 3D object with respect to another 3D object above the forming area and/or in the forming volume. The adjustment may be with respect to one or more directly adjacent 3D object models. In some embodiments, a modification to at least one 3D object may be made (e.g., directly) from within a Formation Environment application. The optimization may be regarding formation speed, space utilization, fidelity of the object(s) (e.g., considering heat dissipation) and [0146] In some embodiments, a target thermal signal is obtained from one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 405; FIG. 5, 505), e.g., any simulation described herein. The target signal may be a value, a set of values, or a
function (e.g., a time dependent function). The one or more 3D objects may optionally be
analyzed (e.g., FIG. 4, 416; FIG. 5, 516). In some embodiments, a target (e.g., thermal) signal is
obtained from historical data of 3D objects (or portions thereof) that have been analyzed);
wherein the first stacking thermal analysis comprises quantitatively predicting overheating and supercooling aspects in a stacking process by performing a thermal analysis with respect to a virtual area under a same condition as an energy density of a real output situation ([0111] a physics model comprises calculations that consider a type of material (e.g., type of alloy) and an expected thermo-mechanical reaction of that material to the forming process, e.g., that causes deformation… the physics model can be used to calculate a predicted deformation substantially in real time (e.g., before, during and/or following formation of at least a portion of the 3D object). The real time calculations can be used in a feed forward and/or feedback (closed loop) control system(s) that controls the forming process, [0145] Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve) at and/or in a location in proximity to (e.g., vicinity of) an irradiation spot on the target surface during printing of a 3D object. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area of at least about 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, or 10 FLS (e.g., diameter) of a melt pool. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area between any of the afore-mentioned values (e.g., from about 1 FLS to about 10 FLS, from about 1 FLS to about 5 FLS, from about 5 FLS to about 10 FLS, or from about 1 FLS to about 6 FLS) of irradiation spots. The thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal signature curve) during the formation process and [0146] In some embodiments, a target thermal signal is obtained from one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 405; FIG. 5, 505), e.g., any simulation described herein. The target signal may be a value, a set of values, or a function (e.g., a time dependent function) … In some embodiments, a target (e.g., thermal) signal is obtained from historical data of 3D objects (or portions thereof) that have been analyzed),
performing, by the one or more processors, a second stacking thermal analysis with respect to a real additive manufacturing product in a same method as the first stacking thermal analysis method, based on the result of the first stacking thermal analysis ([0135] In a forming process (e.g., 3D printing), a requested 3D object can be formed (e.g., printed) according to forming (e.g., printing) instructions. The forming instructions may at least in part consider a (e.g., geometric) model of a requested 3D object and [0145] Monitoring can comprise using one or more detectors that detect one or more outputs (e.g., thermal, optical, chemical and/or tactile signals). The detector can comprise a sensor. In some cases, monitoring is performed in real-time during formation of the one or more 3D objects. In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value)… Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve));
examining, by the one or more processors, stability with respect to a stacking result of the additive manufacturing product, based on the result of the second stacking thermal analysis result ([0146] the analysis data is compared to requested data. For example, a geometry of the printed object(s) may be compared with the geometry of the requested object(s). In some embodiments, the analysis data is used (e.g., FIG. 4, 417; FIG. 5, 517) to adjust the simulation (e.g., FIG. 4, 410; FIG. 5, 510). The adjusted simulation may be used, for example, in formation of subsequent object(s)); and
adjusting, by the one or more processors, at least one of a laser output power and a scan speed during stacking of the additive manufacturing product based on the examined stability, so as to maintain a stacking temperature of the additive manufacturing product within the process range corresponding to the normal output quality ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance).
While Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected ([0103] A user-guided selection may comprise a lasso selection, a (e.g., closed) shape selection (e.g., rectangle), or a circular selection. A selection may comprise a geometry-based selection based on the geometry of the virtual model of the 3D object (e.g., a surface patch and/or edge)) and that a threshold value is set for parameters to be monitored such as thermal signals ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve)), Buller fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens comprises: a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape, and wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to an additive manufacturing method, Joo
teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see plurality of specimens
130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in Figure 3) comprises:
a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion (upper portion 132; Figure 4); and
a base plate disposed on a lower portion (lower portion 134; Figure 4) of each of the
bodies and having a square cross section ([0037] 4 to 5, the specimen 130 is composed of an
upper portion 132 in the form of a square column and a lower portion 134 in the form of an
inverted square pyramid), wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional
diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower
sides along a height direction ([0037] a lower portion 134 in the form of an inverted square
pyramid). When the examination specimen is composed of an upper and lower portion, the
material cost is reduced, the examination specimen can be easily removed from the powder
bed, it is easy to check whether there is an error in the laser movement, and it is easy to check
an overhang quality ([0039]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the examination specimen of Buller
to comprise an upper and lower portion, as taught by Joo, for the benefit of reducing material cost, easily removing the examination specimen from the powder bed, easily checking whether there is an error in the laser movement, and easily checking an overhang quality.
Further, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the lower portion of Buller and Joo to have a circular cross section, Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected, including a circular section as noted above. Buller teaches the 3D object may comprise curved surfaces ([0181] e 3D plane may be planar, curved, or assume an amorphous 3D shape. The 3D plane may be a strip, a blade, or a ledge. The 3D plane may comprise a curvature. The 3D plane may be curved), and therefore one of ordinary skill would be motivated to develop a thermal analysis for curved surfaces to minimize deviations in thermal processing during the formation of a 3D object.
Further, Joo teaches the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape from
a 1st column to an N-th column (see plurality of specimens 130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in
Figure 3), and that having several examination specimens makes it possible to easily find an
optimized processing condition composed of several process factors within a short time at low
cost ([0050]).
While Buller modified with Joo fails to teach cross-sectional diameters of lowermost sides of the base plates gradually decrease from the 1St column to the N-th column, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to shapes from the 1st column to the N-th column, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the cross-sectional
diameters of the lowermost sides of the base plates to gradually decrease by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). The cross-sectional diameter of the lowermost side of the
base plate is a result effective variable that forms the 3D part geometry, and the 3D part
geometry will depend on parameters such as scan speed and beam power density. Such parameters will be modified to yield a target temperature that is within a tolerance such that
the built 3D object closely resembles the modelled 3D object and minimizes the formation of
defects ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a
transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of
the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a
scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along
the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along
a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an
energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path,
(e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the
energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within
a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to
optimize the cross-sectional area of an examination specimen to establish a relationship
between part geometry and 3D object formation parameters that enables 3D objects to be
formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 2, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 1. While Buller teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see Figure 2B) may be placed in a horizontal or vertical direction ([0116] The organization may be relative to a platform above which the 3D objects are to be manufactured. The organization of the 3D object(s) may be in a horizontal direction and/or vertical direction) and that their placement may be optimized ([0117] The adjustment may comprise placement optimization), Buller fails to explicitly teach the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged along a plurality of columns and a plurality of rows.
Further, while Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat
quantity examination specimens may be selected ([0103] A user-guided selection may comprise
a lasso selection, a (e.g., closed) shape selection (e.g., rectangle), or a circular selection. A
selection may comprise a geometry-based selection based on the geometry of the virtual model
of the 3D object (e.g., a surface patch and/or edge)) and that a threshold value is set for parameters to be monitored such as thermal signals ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done
before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as
an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of
formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4,
413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more
aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions
(e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one
or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal
signature curve)), Buller fails to explicitly teach the plurality of residual heat quantity
examination specimens are formed to have different contact cross-sectional areas along the
plurality of columns, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic
according to a shape.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to a method for additive manufacturing, Fink
teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged along a
plurality of columns and a plurality of rows (see plurality of Z-Tensile arrays 104 arranged in
columns and rows in Figure 6), wherein the plurality of residual heat quantity examination
specimens can be either flat or cylindrical dumbbell shaped and can be produced in any
dimension or location ([0053] The Z-tensile arrays are either flat or cylindrical dumbbell shaped
and can be produced in any dimension or location within and among the rapid prototyping
machine parts… the Z-Tensile array can take any dimension), and a process range is set by a
structural heat dissipation characteristic according to a shape ([0053] material characteristics
derived from mechanical testing and other forms and mechanical manipulation of the Z-Tensile array are also determined per step 60. Results of the above inspection and testing are recorded
as material characteristics data at step 54 and [0054] Testing of all the parts across the entire
parts bed provides a more complete set of data which is, in turn, incorporated into material
characteristics at step 54 (FIG. 3) and ultimately used in the parameter optimization step 48).
Testing various specimens around an entire part bed provides a more complete data set which
provides information related to part geometry in the parameter optimization step ([0054]
Testing of all the parts across the entire parts bed provides a more complete set of data which
is, in turn, incorporated into material characteristics at step 54 (FIG. 3) and ultimately used in
the parameter optimization step 48). Further, providing an array of specimens across the part
bed provides a thermal map that can detect thermal gradients ([0059] The thermal analysis of
the part bed as mentioned above provides a thermal map of the rapid prototyping machine
parts bed. A thermal analysis of the parts bed is performed to detect thermal gradients within
the parts bed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the plurality of residual heat
quantity examination specimens of Buller modified with Fink and Joo be arranged along a plurality of columns and a plurality of rows, as taught by Fink, for the benefit of obtaining a more complete thermal map that can detect thermal gradients along a part bed.
Further, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the plurality of residual heat quantity
examination specimens of Buller to have different contact cross-sectional areas along the
plurality of columns, as taught by Fink, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to a shape. Buller teaches a plurality of residual heat
quantity examination specimens with different geometries in Figure 2B, and that when a
printed part does not match the examination specimen due to a deformation then a structural
correction is taken ([0106] The introduced deformation may be such that, upon transformation
and hardening, the at least the portion of the 3D object assumes a requested (e.g., intended)
shape (e.g., geometry). The simulation may comprise a computational model. The
computational model may comprise the use of mathematics, statistics, physics and/or
computer science. The computational model may consider historical data. The computational
model may utilize machine learning. Examples of machine learning can be found in patent
application serial number PCT/US17/54043, titled “THREE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECTS AND THEIR
FORMATION” that was filed on Sep. 28, 2017, that is incorporated herein by reference in its
entirety. The computational model may consider a physics model. The structural correction
may comprise any pre-print correction to the model of the requested 3D object that may result
in reduced deformation of the formed 3D object and adherence to the requested
dimensionality constraints of the 3D object that is formed. The structural correction may
comprise a geometric correction to the geometric model of the requested 3D object).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to have different contact cross-sectional
areas along the plurality of columns to identify a process range by a structural heat dissipation
characteristic such that a user can then quantitatively determine the necessary amount of
structural correction.
Regarding claim 3, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 2.
Buller teaches the method further comprising conducting, by the one or more processors, an experiment for setting the process range corresponding to the normal output quality ([0145] The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value)) according to a laser output power and a scan speed ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed… alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam) by using the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens before performing the first stacking thermal analysis ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value)).
Regarding claim 4, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 2. Further, Buller teaches conducting, by the one or more processors, an experiment comprises conducting the experiment by controlling a laser output power and a scan speed ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed… alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam) by using the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens before performing the first stacking thermal analysis ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value)).
Buller also teaches deviations from a request object may occur in at least one material
property including transformation density ([0129] In some embodiments, tampering comprises
an alteration to at least a portion of a file, e.g., that is related to forming instructions. The
alteration may comprise a change that causes a formed 3D object to deviate from a requested
3D object. The deviation may comprise a deviation in a (a) geometry, or (b) at least one
material property, of the formed 3D object. the deviation may comprise a deviation that is
outside of a threshold value (e.g., tolerance) and [0145] One or more characteristics of a
transforming agent may be altered during formation of the 3D object to adjust the (e.g., real
time) thermal signal to (e.g., substantially) match the target temperature. The alteration to the
transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation
strength)), such that it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the laser output power and scan speed
of Buller modified with Fink to be controlled in order to determine a moving tendency of a
process window. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to avoid alterations in laser output
power and scan speed that lead to deviations such as an overheating situation in a stacking
process of a real additive manufacturing product to ensure that the real additive manufacturing
product is not defective (see [0105] of Buller).
Regarding claim 5, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 4. Further, Buller wherein the conducting the experiment
comprises measuring surface densities of output results of the plurality of residual heat
quantity examination specimens (surface densities will be interpreted as transformation
densities as described in claim 4 above; ([0129] In some embodiments, tampering comprises an
alteration to at least a portion of a file, e.g., that is related to forming instructions. The
alteration may comprise a change that causes a formed 3D object to deviate from a requested
3D object. The deviation may comprise a deviation in a (a) geometry, or (b) at least one
material property, of the formed 3D object. the deviation may comprise a deviation that is
outside of a threshold value (e.g., tolerance) and [0145] One or more characteristics of a
transforming agent may be altered during formation of the 3D object to adjust the (e.g., real
time) thermal signal to (e.g., substantially) match the target temperature. The alteration to the
transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation
strength)).
Further, Buller teaches deviations from a request object may occur in at least one
material property including transformation density, as noted in the rejection of claim 4 above,
such that it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to
a person having ordinary skill in the art for a process range corresponding to the normal output
quality of measured surface densities to be set to ensure that the real additive manufacturing
product is not defective (see [0105] of Buller).
Regarding claim 6, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 2. While Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected ([0103] A user-guided selection may comprise a lasso selection, a (e.g., closed) shape selection (e.g., rectangle), or a circular selection. A selection may comprise a geometry-based selection based on the geometry of the virtual model of the 3D object (e.g., a surface patch and/or edge)) and that a threshold value is set for parameters to be monitored such as thermal signals ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve)), Buller fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens comprises: a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the
bodies and having a circular cross section.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to an additive manufacturing method, Joo
teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see plurality of specimens
130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in Figure 3) comprises:
a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion (upper portion 132; Figure 4); and
a base plate disposed on a lower portion (lower portion 134; Figure 4) of each of the
bodies and having a square cross section ([0037] 4 to 5, the specimen 130 is composed of an
upper portion 132 in the form of a square column and a lower portion 134 in the form of an
inverted square pyramid), wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional
diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower
sides along a height direction ([0037] a lower portion 134 in the form of an inverted square
pyramid). When the examination specimen is composed of an upper and lower portion, the
material cost is reduced, the examination specimen can be easily removed from the powder
bed, it is easy to check whether there is an error in the laser movement, and it is easy to check
an overhang quality ([0039]- [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the examination specimen of Buller
modified with Fink to comprise an upper and lower portion, as taught by Joo, for the benefit of
reducing material cost, easily removing the examination specimen from the powder bed, easily
checking whether there is an error in the laser movement, and easily checking an overhang
quality.
Further, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the lower portion of Buller modified with Fink and Joo to have a circular cross section, Buller teaches that different geometries for
the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected, including a
circular section as noted above. Buller teaches the 3D object may comprise curved surfaces
([0181] e 3D plane may be planar, curved, or assume an amorphous 3D shape. The 3D plane
may be a strip, a blade, or a ledge. The 3D plane may comprise a curvature. The 3D plane may
be curved), and therefore one of ordinary skill would be motivated to develop a thermal
analysis for curved surfaces to minimize deviations in thermal processing during the formation
of a 3D object.
Further, Joo teaches the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape from
a 1st column to an N-th column (see plurality of specimens 130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in
Figure 3), and that having several examination specimens makes it possible to easily find an
optimized processing condition composed of several process factors within a short time at low
cost ([0050]).
While Buller modified with Fink and Joo fails to teach cross-sectional diameters of
lowermost sides of the base plates gradually decrease from the 1St column to the N-th column,
so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to shapes
from the 1st column to the N-th column, it would have been obvious before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the cross-sectional
diameters of the lowermost sides of the base plates to gradually decrease by routine
optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). The cross-sectional diameter of the lowermost side of the
base plate is a result effective variable that forms the 3D part geometry, and the 3D part
geometry will depend on parameters such as scan speed and beam power density. Such parameters will be modified to yield a target temperature that is within a tolerance such that
the built 3D object closely resembles the modelled 3D object and minimizes the formation of
defects ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a
transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of
the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a
scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along
the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along
a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an
energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path,
(e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the
energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within
a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to
optimize the cross-sectional area of an examination specimen to establish a relationship
between part geometry and 3D object formation parameters that enables 3D objects to be
formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 7, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based
output stabilization method of claim 6.
Further, Fink teaches wherein, when the plurality of residual heat quantity examination
specimens are arranged from the 1st column to a 7th column (see plurality of Z-Tensile arrays
104 arranged in columns and rows in Figure 6).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to routinely optimize the cross-sectional area of the base plates of Buller modified with Fink and Joo such that a cross- sectional area of a lowermost end
of the base plate disposed in the 1st column is 80% of a cross-sectional area of the body, and
ratios of cross-sectional areas of lowermost ends of the base plates arranged from the 2nd
column to a 7th column to cross-sectional areas of the bodies are gradually reduced by 10%
from the cross section ratio of the lowermost end of the base plate disposed in the 1st column,
and eventually, the cross-sectional area of the lowermost end of the base plate disposed in a
7th column is 20% of the cross- sectional area of the body (see MPEP 2144.05.II).
The cross-sectional diameter of the lowermost side of the base plate is a result effective
variable that forms the 3D part geometry, and the 3D part geometry will depend on parameters
such as scan speed and beam power density. Such parameters will be modified to yield a target
temperature that is within a tolerance such that the built 3D object closely resembles the
modelled 3D object and minimizes the formation of defects ([0145] The alteration to the
transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation
strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target
surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the
transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an
intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target
surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power
density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size,
(f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source
generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-
determined) tolerance). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to optimize the cross-sectional area of an examination specimen by gradually decreasing the cross-sectional
area from 80% to 20% of the cross- sectional area of the body to establish a relationship
between part geometry and 3D object formation parameters that enables 3D objects to be
formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 8, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based
output stabilization method of claim 6. Buller teaches a scan speed of an energy beam ranging
from 0.05 m/sec to 50 m/s ([0092] 50 mm/sec to about 3000 mm/sec, or from about 3000
mm/sec to about 50000 mm/sec) such that it would have been obvious before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to routinely
optimize the scan speed of Buller modified with Fink and Joo at a step of conducting the
experiment, where when the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are
arranged from an A row to a G row, the scan speed is set to gradually increase from the A row
to the G row, the scan speed of the A row is 0.7 m/s, the scan speed to the G row gradually
increases by 0.1 m/s in each row, and eventually, the scan speed in the G row reaches 1.3 m/s
(see MPEP 2144.05.II). Buller teaches a scan speed range including the claimed optimization
range, and one of ordinary skill would be motivated to avoid alterations in scan speeds that
lead to deviations such as an overheating situation in a stacking process of a real additive
manufacturing product to ensure that the real additive manufacturing product is not defective
(see [0105] of Buller). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would look to establishing a relationship
between scan speed and cross-sectional areas through routine optimization that enables 3D
objects to be formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 9, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 1.
Further, Buller teaches wherein the examining the stability comprises examining stability with respect to a stacking result of the additive manufacturing product by comparing the result of the first stacking thermal analysis and the result of the second stacking thermal analysis which reflect a structural heat dissipation characteristic ([0145] one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve) at and/or in a location in proximity to (e.g., vicinity of) an irradiation spot on the target surface during printing of a 3D object. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area of at least about 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, or 10 FLS (e.g., diameter) of a melt pool. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area between any of the afore-mentioned values (e.g., from about 1 FLS to about 10 FLS, from about 1 FLS to about 5 FLS, from about 5 FLS to about 10 FLS, or from about 1 FLS to about 6 FLS) of irradiation spots. The thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal signature curve) during the formation process. One or more characteristics of a transforming agent may be altered during formation of the 3D object to adjust the (e.g., real time) thermal signal to (e.g., substantially) match the target temperature. The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance).
Regarding claim 10, Buller teaches a thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system
(computer system 1300; Figure 13) comprising:
one or more processors configured to store data ([0131], [0150] The pre-formation environment may comprise one or more components, e.g., modules, stages, and/or processors. The pre-formation environment may generate instructions data related to the formation of a requested 3D object, and [0190] Methods as described herein can be implemented by way of machine (e.g., computer processor) executable code stored on an electronic storage location of the computer system, such as, for example, on the memory 1302 or electronic storage unit 1304) regarding a process range corresponding to normal output quality, which is pre-set for a
plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens ([0145] The monitoring may use
historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring
of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the
forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4,
415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly)
modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations
(e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time)
thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve));
perform a first stacking thermal analysis with respect to the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens in which the process range corresponding to the normal output quality is set, by using the stored data ([0117] FIG. 2B depicts an example of a Formation Environment application 250. In the example of FIG. 2B, a forming area (e.g., a platform) 260 is disposed below an arrangement of a plurality of 3D object models (e.g., 255, 257, and 270) that
correspond to a plurality of requested 3D objects… Formation Environment application
provides a capability to modify (e.g., a selected portion of) a virtual model of a requested 3D object. The modification may comprise adjusting one 3D object with respect to another 3D
object above the forming area and/or in the forming volume. The adjustment may be with
respect to one or more directly adjacent 3D object models. In some embodiments, a
modification to at least one 3D object may be made (e.g., directly) from within a Formation
Environment application. The optimization may be regarding formation speed, space utilization,
fidelity of the object(s) (e.g., considering heat dissipation) and [0146] In some embodiments, a
target thermal signal is obtained from one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 405; FIG. 5, 505),
e.g., any simulation described herein. The target signal may be a value, a set of values, or a
function (e.g., a time dependent function). The one or more 3D objects may optionally be
analyzed (e.g., FIG. 4, 416; FIG. 5, 516). In some embodiments, a target (e.g., thermal) signal is
obtained from historical data of 3D objects (or portions thereof) that have been analyzed),
wherein the first stacking thermal analysis comprises quantitatively predicting overheating and supercooling aspects in a stacking process by performing a thermal analysis with respect to a virtual area under a same condition as an energy density of a real output situation ([0111] a physics model comprises calculations that consider a type of material (e.g., type of alloy) and an expected thermo-mechanical reaction of that material to the forming process, e.g., that causes deformation… the physics model can be used to calculate a predicted deformation substantially in real time (e.g., before, during and/or following formation of at least a portion of the 3D object). The real time calculations can be used in a feed forward and/or feedback (closed loop) control system(s) that controls the forming process, [0145] Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve) at and/or in a location in proximity to (e.g., vicinity of) an irradiation spot on the target surface during printing of a 3D object. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area of at least about 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, or 10 FLS (e.g., diameter) of a melt pool. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area between any of the afore-mentioned values (e.g., from about 1 FLS to about 10 FLS, from about 1 FLS to about 5 FLS, from about 5 FLS to about 10 FLS, or from about 1 FLS to about 6 FLS) of irradiation spots. The thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal signature curve) during the formation process and [0146] In some embodiments, a target thermal signal is obtained from one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 405; FIG. 5, 505), e.g., any simulation described herein. The target signal may be a value, a set of values, or a function (e.g., a time dependent function) … In some embodiments, a target (e.g., thermal) signal is obtained from historical data of 3D objects (or portions thereof) that have been analyzed),
performing, by the one or more processors, a second stacking thermal analysis with respect to a real additive manufacturing product in a same method as the first stacking thermal analysis method, based on the result of the first stacking thermal analysis ([0135] In a forming process (e.g., 3D printing), a requested 3D object can be formed (e.g., printed) according to forming (e.g., printing) instructions. The forming instructions may at least in part consider a (e.g., geometric) model of a requested 3D object and [0145] Monitoring can comprise using one or more detectors that detect one or more outputs (e.g., thermal, optical, chemical and/or tactile signals). The detector can comprise a sensor. In some cases, monitoring is performed in real-time during formation of the one or more 3D objects. In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value)… Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve));
examining, by the one or more processors, stability with respect to a stacking result of the additive manufacturing product, based on the result of the second stacking thermal analysis result ([0146] the analysis data is compared to requested data. For example, a geometry of the printed object(s) may be compared with the geometry of the requested object(s). In some embodiments, the analysis data is used (e.g., FIG. 4, 417; FIG. 5, 517) to adjust the simulation (e.g., FIG. 4, 410; FIG. 5, 510). The adjusted simulation may be used, for example, in formation of subsequent object(s)); and
adjusting, by the one or more processors, at least one of a laser output power and a scan speed during stacking of the additive manufacturing product based on the examined stability, so as to maintain a stacking temperature of the additive manufacturing product within the process range corresponding to the normal output quality ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance).
While Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected ([0103] A user-guided selection may comprise a lasso selection, a (e.g., closed) shape selection (e.g., rectangle), or a circular selection. A selection may comprise a geometry-based selection based on the geometry of the virtual model of the 3D object (e.g., a surface patch and/or edge)) and that a threshold value is set for parameters to be monitored such as thermal signals ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve)), Buller fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens comprises: a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape, and wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to an additive manufacturing method, Joo
teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see plurality of specimens
130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in Figure 3) comprises:
a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion (upper portion 132; Figure 4); and
a base plate disposed on a lower portion (lower portion 134; Figure 4) of each of the
bodies and having a square cross section ([0037] 4 to 5, the specimen 130 is composed of an
upper portion 132 in the form of a square column and a lower portion 134 in the form of an
inverted square pyramid), wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional
diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower
sides along a height direction ([0037] a lower portion 134 in the form of an inverted square
pyramid). When the examination specimen is composed of an upper and lower portion, the
material cost is reduced, the examination specimen can be easily removed from the powder
bed, it is easy to check whether there is an error in the laser movement, and it is easy to check
an overhang quality ([0039]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the examination specimen of Buller
to comprise an upper and lower portion, as taught by Joo, for the benefit of reducing material cost, easily removing the examination specimen from the powder bed, easily checking whether there is an error in the laser movement, and easily checking an overhang quality.
Further, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the lower portion of Buller and Joo to have a circular cross section, Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected, including a circular section as noted above. Buller teaches the 3D object may comprise curved surfaces ([0181] e 3D plane may be planar, curved, or assume an amorphous 3D shape. The 3D plane may be a strip, a blade, or a ledge. The 3D plane may comprise a curvature. The 3D plane may be curved), and therefore one of ordinary skill would be motivated to develop a thermal analysis for curved surfaces to minimize deviations in thermal processing during the formation of a 3D object.
Further, Joo teaches the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape from
a 1st column to an N-th column (see plurality of specimens 130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in
Figure 3), and that having several examination specimens makes it possible to easily find an
optimized processing condition composed of several process factors within a short time at low
cost ([0050]).
While Buller modified with Joo fails to teach cross-sectional diameters of lowermost sides of the base plates gradually decrease from the 1St column to the N-th column, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to shapes from the 1st column to the N-th column, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the cross-sectional
diameters of the lowermost sides of the base plates to gradually decrease by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). The cross-sectional diameter of the lowermost side of the
base plate is a result effective variable that forms the 3D part geometry, and the 3D part
geometry will depend on parameters such as scan speed and beam power density. Such parameters will be modified to yield a target temperature that is within a tolerance such that
the built 3D object closely resembles the modelled 3D object and minimizes the formation of
defects ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a
transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of
the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a
scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along
the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along
a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an
energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path,
(e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the
energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within
a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to
optimize the cross-sectional area of an examination specimen to establish a relationship
between part geometry and 3D object formation parameters that enables 3D objects to be
formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 11, Buller teaches a processor-implemented thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method comprising:
performing, by an output stabilization system, a second stacking thermal
analysis with respect to a real additive manufacturing product in a same method as a first
stacking thermal analysis method ([0135] In a forming process (e.g., 3D printing), a requested
3D object can be formed (e.g., printed) according to forming (e.g., printing) instructions. The
forming instructions may at least in part consider a (e.g., geometric) model of a requested 3D
object and [0145] Monitoring can comprise using one or more detectors that detect one or
more outputs (e.g., thermal, optical, chemical and/or tactile signals). The detector can comprise
a sensor. In some cases, monitoring is performed in real-time during formation of the one or
more 3D objects. In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The
monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value)… Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to
(e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more
simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g.,
real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve)),
based on a result of the first stacking thermal analysis which is obtained by performing
the first stacking thermal analysis with respect to a plurality of residual heat quantity
examination specimens in which a process range corresponding to normal output quality is set
([0117] FIG. 2B depicts an example of a Formation Environment application 250. In the example
of FIG. 2B, a forming area (e.g., a platform) 260 is disposed below an arrangement of a plurality
of 3D object models (e.g., 255, 257, and 270) that correspond to a plurality of requested 3D
objects… Formation Environment application provides a capability to modify (e.g., a selected
portion of) a virtual model of a requested 3D object. The modification may comprise adjusting
one 3D object with respect to another 3D object above the forming area and/or in the forming
volume. The adjustment may be with respect to one or more directly adjacent 3D object
models. In some embodiments, a modification to at least one 3D object may be made (e.g.,
directly) from within a Formation Environment application. The optimization may be regarding
formation speed, space utilization, fidelity of the object(s) (e.g., considering heat dissipation),
[0145] The thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal
signature curve) during the formation process. One or more characteristics of a transforming
agent may be altered during formation of the 3D object to adjust the (e.g., real time) thermal
signal to (e.g., substantially) match the target temperature, and [0146] In some embodiments,
a target thermal signal is obtained from one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 405; FIG. 5, 505), e.g., any simulation described herein. The target signal may be a value, a set of values, or a
function (e.g., a time dependent function). The one or more 3D objects may optionally be
analyzed (e.g., FIG. 4, 416; FIG. 5, 516). In some embodiments, a target (e.g., thermal) signal is
obtained from historical data of 3D objects (or portions thereof) that have been analyzed); and
examining, by the output stabilization system, stability with respect to a stacking result of the additive manufacturing product, based on the result of the second stacking thermal analysis result ([0146] the analysis data is compared to requested data. For example, a geometry of the printed object(s) may be compared with the geometry of the requested object(s). In some embodiments, the analysis data is used (e.g., FIG. 4, 417; FIG. 5, 517) to adjust the simulation (e.g., FIG. 4, 410; FIG. 5, 510). The adjusted simulation may be used, for example, in formation of subsequent object(s)); and
adjusting, by the output stabilization system, at least one of a laser output power and a scan speed during stacking of the additive manufacturing product based on the examined stability, so as to maintain a stacking temperature of the additive manufacturing product within the process range corresponding to the normal output quality ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance).
While Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected ([0103] A user-guided selection may comprise a lasso selection, a (e.g., closed) shape selection (e.g., rectangle), or a circular selection. A selection may comprise a geometry-based selection based on the geometry of the virtual model of the 3D object (e.g., a surface patch and/or edge)) and that a threshold value is set for parameters to be monitored such as thermal signals ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve)), Buller fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens comprises: a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape, and wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to an additive manufacturing method, Joo
teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see plurality of specimens
130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in Figure 3) comprises:
a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion (upper portion 132; Figure 4); and
a base plate disposed on a lower portion (lower portion 134; Figure 4) of each of the
bodies and having a square cross section ([0037] 4 to 5, the specimen 130 is composed of an
upper portion 132 in the form of a square column and a lower portion 134 in the form of an
inverted square pyramid), wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional
diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower
sides along a height direction ([0037] a lower portion 134 in the form of an inverted square
pyramid). When the examination specimen is composed of an upper and lower portion, the
material cost is reduced, the examination specimen can be easily removed from the powder
bed, it is easy to check whether there is an error in the laser movement, and it is easy to check
an overhang quality ([0039]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the examination specimen of Buller
to comprise an upper and lower portion, as taught by Joo, for the benefit of reducing material cost, easily removing the examination specimen from the powder bed, easily checking whether there is an error in the laser movement, and easily checking an overhang quality.
Further, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the lower portion of Buller and Joo to have a circular cross section, Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected, including a circular section as noted above. Buller teaches the 3D object may comprise curved surfaces ([0181] e 3D plane may be planar, curved, or assume an amorphous 3D shape. The 3D plane may be a strip, a blade, or a ledge. The 3D plane may comprise a curvature. The 3D plane may be curved), and therefore one of ordinary skill would be motivated to develop a thermal analysis for curved surfaces to minimize deviations in thermal processing during the formation of a 3D object.
Further, Joo teaches the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape from
a 1st column to an N-th column (see plurality of specimens 130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in
Figure 3), and that having several examination specimens makes it possible to easily find an
optimized processing condition composed of several process factors within a short time at low
cost ([0050]).
While Buller modified with Joo fails to teach cross-sectional diameters of lowermost sides of the base plates gradually decrease from the 1St column to the N-th column, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to shapes from the 1st column to the N-th column, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the cross-sectional
diameters of the lowermost sides of the base plates to gradually decrease by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). The cross-sectional diameter of the lowermost side of the
base plate is a result effective variable that forms the 3D part geometry, and the 3D part
geometry will depend on parameters such as scan speed and beam power density. Such parameters will be modified to yield a target temperature that is within a tolerance such that
the built 3D object closely resembles the modelled 3D object and minimizes the formation of
defects ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a
transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of
the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a
scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along
the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along
a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an
energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path,
(e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the
energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within
a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to
optimize the cross-sectional area of an examination specimen to establish a relationship
between part geometry and 3D object formation parameters that enables 3D objects to be
formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 12, Buller teaches a thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method
comprising:
a step of conducting, by an output stabilization system, an experiment for setting a
process range corresponding to normal output quality according to a laser output power and a
scan speed by using a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens ([0145] In some
cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use
historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring
of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the
forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4,
415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly)
modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time)
thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve) at and/or in a location in proximity to
(e.g., vicinity of) an irradiation spot on the target surface during printing of a 3D object. The
location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area of at least about 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5,
3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, or 10 FLS (e.g., diameter) of a melt pool. The
location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area between any of the afore-
mentioned values (e.g., from about 1 FLS to about 10 FLS, from about 1 FLS to about 5 FLS, from
about 5 FLS to about 10 FLS, or from about 1 FLS to about 6 FLS) of irradiation spots. The
thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal signature
curve) during the formation process. One or more characteristics of a transforming agent may
be altered during formation of the 3D object to adjust the (e.g., real time) thermal signal to
(e.g., substantially) match the target temperature. The alteration to the transforming may
comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a
trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch
spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as
it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the
transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target surface. For example, the
alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target
surface);
performing, by the output stabilization system, a first stacking thermal analysis
with respect to the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens in which the
process range is set ([0117] FIG. 2B depicts an example of a Formation Environment application 250. In the example of FIG. 2B, a forming area (e.g., a platform) 260 is disposed below an
arrangement of a plurality of 3D object models (e.g., 255, 257, and 270) that correspond to a
plurality of requested 3D objects… Formation Environment application provides a capability to
modify (e.g., a selected portion of) a virtual model of a requested 3D object. The modification
may comprise adjusting one 3D object with respect to another 3D object above the forming
area and/or in the forming volume. The adjustment may be with respect to one or more
directly adjacent 3D object models. In some embodiments, a modification to at least one 3D
object may be made (e.g., directly) from within a Formation Environment application. The
optimization may be regarding formation speed, space utilization, fidelity of the object(s) (e.g.,
considering heat dissipation) and [0146] In some embodiments, a target thermal signal is
obtained from one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 405; FIG. 5, 505), e.g., any simulation
described herein. The target signal may be a value, a set of values, or a function (e.g., a time
dependent function). The one or more 3D objects may optionally be analyzed (e.g., FIG. 4, 416;
FIG. 5, 516). In some embodiments, a target (e.g., thermal) signal is obtained from historical
data of 3D objects (or portions thereof) that have been analyzed);
wherein the first stacking thermal analysis comprises quantitatively predicting overheating and supercooling aspects in a stacking process by performing a thermal analysis with respect to a virtual area under a same condition as an energy density of a real output situation ([0111] a physics model comprises calculations that consider a type of material (e.g., type of alloy) and an expected thermo-mechanical reaction of that material to the forming process, e.g., that causes deformation… the physics model can be used to calculate a predicted deformation substantially in real time (e.g., before, during and/or following formation of at least a portion of the 3D object). The real time calculations can be used in a feed forward and/or feedback (closed loop) control system(s) that controls the forming process, [0145] Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve) at and/or in a location in proximity to (e.g., vicinity of) an irradiation spot on the target surface during printing of a 3D object. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area of at least about 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, or 10 FLS (e.g., diameter) of a melt pool. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area between any of the afore-mentioned values (e.g., from about 1 FLS to about 10 FLS, from about 1 FLS to about 5 FLS, from about 5 FLS to about 10 FLS, or from about 1 FLS to about 6 FLS) of irradiation spots. The thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal signature curve) during the formation process and [0146] In some embodiments, a target thermal signal is obtained from one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 405; FIG. 5, 505), e.g., any simulation described herein. The target signal may be a value, a set of values, or a function (e.g., a time dependent function) … In some embodiments, a target (e.g., thermal) signal is obtained from historical data of 3D objects (or portions thereof) that have been analyzed),
performing, by the output stabilization system, a second stacking thermal analysis with respect to a real additive manufacturing product in a same method as the first stacking thermal analysis method, based on the result of the first stacking thermal analysis ([0135] In a forming process (e.g., 3D printing), a requested 3D object can be formed (e.g., printed) according to forming (e.g., printing) instructions. The forming instructions may at least in part consider a (e.g., geometric) model of a requested 3D object and [0145] Monitoring can comprise using one or more detectors that detect one or more outputs (e.g., thermal, optical, chemical and/or tactile signals). The detector can comprise a sensor. In some cases, monitoring is performed in real-time during formation of the one or more 3D objects. In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value)… Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve)).
While Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected ([0103] A user-guided selection may comprise a lasso selection, a (e.g., closed) shape selection (e.g., rectangle), or a circular selection. A selection may comprise a geometry-based selection based on the geometry of the virtual model of the 3D object (e.g., a surface patch and/or edge)) and that a threshold value is set for parameters to be monitored such as thermal signals ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve)), Buller fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens comprises: a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape, and wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to an additive manufacturing method, Joo
teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see plurality of specimens
130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in Figure 3) comprises:
a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion (upper portion 132; Figure 4); and
a base plate disposed on a lower portion (lower portion 134; Figure 4) of each of the
bodies and having a square cross section ([0037] 4 to 5, the specimen 130 is composed of an
upper portion 132 in the form of a square column and a lower portion 134 in the form of an
inverted square pyramid), wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional
diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower
sides along a height direction ([0037] a lower portion 134 in the form of an inverted square
pyramid). When the examination specimen is composed of an upper and lower portion, the
material cost is reduced, the examination specimen can be easily removed from the powder
bed, it is easy to check whether there is an error in the laser movement, and it is easy to check
an overhang quality ([0039]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the examination specimen of Buller
to comprise an upper and lower portion, as taught by Joo, for the benefit of reducing material cost, easily removing the examination specimen from the powder bed, easily checking whether there is an error in the laser movement, and easily checking an overhang quality.
Further, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the lower portion of Buller and Joo to have a circular cross section, Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected, including a circular section as noted above. Buller teaches the 3D object may comprise curved surfaces ([0181] e 3D plane may be planar, curved, or assume an amorphous 3D shape. The 3D plane may be a strip, a blade, or a ledge. The 3D plane may comprise a curvature. The 3D plane may be curved), and therefore one of ordinary skill would be motivated to develop a thermal analysis for curved surfaces to minimize deviations in thermal processing during the formation of a 3D object.
Further, Joo teaches the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape from
a 1st column to an N-th column (see plurality of specimens 130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in
Figure 3), and that having several examination specimens makes it possible to easily find an
optimized processing condition composed of several process factors within a short time at low
cost ([0050]).
While Buller modified with Joo fails to teach cross-sectional diameters of lowermost sides of the base plates gradually decrease from the 1St column to the N-th column, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to shapes from the 1st column to the N-th column, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the cross-sectional
diameters of the lowermost sides of the base plates to gradually decrease by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). The cross-sectional diameter of the lowermost side of the
base plate is a result effective variable that forms the 3D part geometry, and the 3D part
geometry will depend on parameters such as scan speed and beam power density. Such parameters will be modified to yield a target temperature that is within a tolerance such that
the built 3D object closely resembles the modelled 3D object and minimizes the formation of
defects ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a
transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of
the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a
scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along
the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along
a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an
energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path,
(e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the
energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within
a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to
optimize the cross-sectional area of an examination specimen to establish a relationship
between part geometry and 3D object formation parameters that enables 3D objects to be
formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 13, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 10.
While Buller teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see Figure 2B) may be placed in a horizontal or vertical direction ([0116] The organization may be relative to a platform above which the 3D objects are to be manufactured. The organization of the 3D object(s) may be in a horizontal direction and/or vertical direction) and that their placement may be optimized ([0117] The adjustment may comprise placement optimization), Buller fails to explicitly teach the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged along a plurality of columns and a plurality of rows.
Further, while Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat
quantity examination specimens may be selected ([0103] A user-guided selection may comprise
a lasso selection, a (e.g., closed) shape selection (e.g., rectangle), or a circular selection. A
selection may comprise a geometry-based selection based on the geometry of the virtual model
of the 3D object (e.g., a surface patch and/or edge)) and that a threshold value is set for parameters to be monitored such as thermal signals ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done
before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as
an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of
formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4,
413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more
aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions
(e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one
or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal
signature curve)), Buller fails to explicitly teach the plurality of residual heat quantity
examination specimens are formed to have different contact cross-sectional areas along the
plurality of columns, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic
according to a shape.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to a method for additive manufacturing, Fink
teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged along a
plurality of columns and a plurality of rows (see plurality of Z-Tensile arrays 104 arranged in
columns and rows in Figure 6), wherein the plurality of residual heat quantity examination
specimens can be either flat or cylindrical dumbbell shaped and can be produced in any
dimension or location ([0053] The Z-tensile arrays are either flat or cylindrical dumbbell shaped
and can be produced in any dimension or location within and among the rapid prototyping
machine parts… the Z-Tensile array can take any dimension), and a process range is set by a
structural heat dissipation characteristic according to a shape ([0053] material characteristics
derived from mechanical testing and other forms and mechanical manipulation of the Z-Tensile array are also determined per step 60. Results of the above inspection and testing are recorded
as material characteristics data at step 54 and [0054] Testing of all the parts across the entire
parts bed provides a more complete set of data which is, in turn, incorporated into material
characteristics at step 54 (FIG. 3) and ultimately used in the parameter optimization step 48).
Testing various specimens around an entire part bed provides a more complete data set which
provides information related to part geometry in the parameter optimization step ([0054]
Testing of all the parts across the entire parts bed provides a more complete set of data which
is, in turn, incorporated into material characteristics at step 54 (FIG. 3) and ultimately used in
the parameter optimization step 48). Further, providing an array of specimens across the part
bed provides a thermal map that can detect thermal gradients ([0059] The thermal analysis of
the part bed as mentioned above provides a thermal map of the rapid prototyping machine
parts bed. A thermal analysis of the parts bed is performed to detect thermal gradients within
the parts bed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the plurality of residual heat
quantity examination specimens of Buller modified with Fink and Joo be arranged along a plurality of columns and a plurality of rows, as taught by Fink, for the benefit of obtaining a more complete thermal map that can detect thermal gradients along a part bed.
Further, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the plurality of residual heat quantity
examination specimens of Buller to have different contact cross-sectional areas along the
plurality of columns, as taught by Fink, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to a shape. Buller teaches a plurality of residual heat
quantity examination specimens with different geometries in Figure 2B, and that when a
printed part does not match the examination specimen due to a deformation then a structural
correction is taken ([0106] The introduced deformation may be such that, upon transformation
and hardening, the at least the portion of the 3D object assumes a requested (e.g., intended)
shape (e.g., geometry). The simulation may comprise a computational model. The
computational model may comprise the use of mathematics, statistics, physics and/or
computer science. The computational model may consider historical data. The computational
model may utilize machine learning. Examples of machine learning can be found in patent
application serial number PCT/US17/54043, titled “THREE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECTS AND THEIR
FORMATION” that was filed on Sep. 28, 2017, that is incorporated herein by reference in its
entirety. The computational model may consider a physics model. The structural correction
may comprise any pre-print correction to the model of the requested 3D object that may result
in reduced deformation of the formed 3D object and adherence to the requested
dimensionality constraints of the 3D object that is formed. The structural correction may
comprise a geometric correction to the geometric model of the requested 3D object).
Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to have different contact cross-sectional
areas along the plurality of columns to identify a process range by a structural heat dissipation
characteristic such that a user can then quantitatively determine the necessary amount of
structural correction.
Regarding claim 14, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 13.
Further, Buller teaches conducting, by the one or more processors, an experiment comprises conducting the experiment by controlling a laser output power and a scan speed ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed… alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam) by using the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens before performing the first stacking thermal analysis ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value)).
Buller also teaches deviations from a request object may occur in at least one material
property including transformation density ([0129] In some embodiments, tampering comprises
an alteration to at least a portion of a file, e.g., that is related to forming instructions. The
alteration may comprise a change that causes a formed 3D object to deviate from a requested
3D object. The deviation may comprise a deviation in a (a) geometry, or (b) at least one
material property, of the formed 3D object. the deviation may comprise a deviation that is
outside of a threshold value (e.g., tolerance) and [0145] One or more characteristics of a
transforming agent may be altered during formation of the 3D object to adjust the (e.g., real
time) thermal signal to (e.g., substantially) match the target temperature. The alteration to the
transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation
strength)), such that it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed
invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the laser output power and scan speed
of Buller modified with Fink to be controlled in order to determine a moving tendency of a
process window. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to avoid alterations in laser output
power and scan speed that lead to deviations such as an overheating situation in a stacking
process of a real additive manufacturing product to ensure that the real additive manufacturing
product is not defective (see [0105] of Buller).
Regarding claim 15, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 14. Further, Buller teaches wherein, for the conducting the experiment, the one or more processors are further configured to control a laser output power and a scan speed in order to determine a moving tendency of a process window on the assumption of an overheating situation in a stacking process of a real additive manufacturing product ([0145] n some cases, monitoring is performed in real-time during formation of the one or more 3D objects. In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve) at and/or in a location in proximity to (e.g., vicinity of) an irradiation spot on the target surface during printing of a 3D object. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area of at least about 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, or 10 FLS (e.g., diameter) of a melt pool. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area between any of the afore-mentioned values (e.g., from about 1 FLS to about 10 FLS, from about 1 FLS to about 5 FLS, from about 5 FLS to about 10 FLS, or from about 1 FLS to about 6 FLS) of irradiation spots. The thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal signature curve) during the formation process. One or more characteristics of a transforming agent may be altered during formation of the 3D object to adjust the (e.g., real time) thermal signal to (e.g., substantially) match the target temperature. The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance).
Regarding claim 16, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 15.
Further, Buller teaches wherein, for the conducting the experiment, the one or more processors are configured to measure surface densities of output results of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens, and set the process range corresponding to the normal output quality ([0093], [0106] In some embodiments, an object simulation module comprises an analysis (e.g., simulation) of an outcome of manufacturing instructions to result in a analyzed virtual example of manufacturing 3D object…. (ii) deformation of transformed material as it hardens to form at least a portion of the requested 3D object, (iii) the manner of temperature depletion during the printing process, (iv) the manner of deformation of the transformed material as a function of the density of the pre-transformed material within the material bed (e.g., powder material within a powder bed) in which the 3D object was formed).
Regarding claim 17, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 13.
Further, Joo teaches the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape from
a 1st column to an N-th column (see plurality of specimens 130, 130a, 130b, 130c, 130d in
Figure 3), and that having several examination specimens makes it possible to easily find an
optimized processing condition composed of several process factors within a short time at low
cost ([0050]).
While Buller modified with Joo fails to teach cross-sectional diameters of lowermost sides of the base plates gradually decrease from the 1St column to the N-th column, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to shapes from the 1st column to the N-th column, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the cross-sectional
diameters of the lowermost sides of the base plates to gradually decrease by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). The cross-sectional diameter of the lowermost side of the
base plate is a result effective variable that forms the 3D part geometry, and the 3D part
geometry will depend on parameters such as scan speed and beam power density. Such parameters will be modified to yield a target temperature that is within a tolerance such that
the built 3D object closely resembles the modelled 3D object and minimizes the formation of
defects ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a
transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of
the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a
scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along
the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along
a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an
energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path,
(e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the
energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within
a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to
optimize the cross-sectional area of an examination specimen to establish a relationship
between part geometry and 3D object formation parameters that enables 3D objects to be
formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 18, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 17.
Further, Fink teaches wherein, when the plurality of residual heat quantity examination
specimens are arranged from the 1st column to a 7th column (see plurality of Z-Tensile arrays
104 arranged in columns and rows in Figure 6).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to routinely optimize the cross-sectional area of the base plates of Buller modified with Fink and Joo such that a cross- sectional area of a lowermost end
of the base plate disposed in the 1st column is 80% of a cross-sectional area of the body, and
ratios of cross-sectional areas of lowermost ends of the base plates arranged from the 2nd
column to a 7th column to cross-sectional areas of the bodies are gradually reduced by 10%
from the cross section ratio of the lowermost end of the base plate disposed in the 1st column,
and eventually, the cross-sectional area of the lowermost end of the base plate disposed in a
7th column is 20% of the cross- sectional area of the body (see MPEP 2144.05.II).
The cross-sectional diameter of the lowermost side of the base plate is a result effective
variable that forms the 3D part geometry, and the 3D part geometry will depend on parameters
such as scan speed and beam power density. Such parameters will be modified to yield a target
temperature that is within a tolerance such that the built 3D object closely resembles the
modelled 3D object and minimizes the formation of defects ([0145] The alteration to the
transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation
strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target
surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the
transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an
intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target
surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power
density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size,
(f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source
generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-
determined) tolerance). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be motivated to optimize the cross-sectional area of an examination specimen by gradually decreasing the cross-sectional
area from 80% to 20% of the cross- sectional area of the body to establish a relationship
between part geometry and 3D object formation parameters that enables 3D objects to be
formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 19, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 17.
Buller teaches a scan speed of an energy beam ranging from 0.05 m/sec to 50 m/s ([0092] 50 mm/sec to about 3000 mm/sec, or from about 3000 mm/sec to about 50000 mm/sec) such that it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to routinely optimize the scan speed of Buller modified with Fink and Joo at a step of conducting the experiment, where when the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged from an A row to a G row, the scan speed is set to gradually increase from the A row to the G row, the scan speed of the A row is 0.7 m/s, the scan speed to the G row gradually increases by 0.1 m/s in each row, and eventually, the scan speed in the G row reaches 1.3 m/s (see MPEP 2144.05.II). Buller teaches a scan speed range including the claimed optimization range, and one of ordinary skill would be motivated to avoid alterations in scan speeds that lead to deviations such as an overheating situation in a stacking process of a real additive manufacturing product to ensure that the real additive manufacturing product is not defective (see [0105] of Buller). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would look to establishing a relationship between scan speed and cross-sectional areas through routine optimization that enables 3D objects to be formed within tolerance while minimizing the defect formation.
Regarding claim 20, Buller modified with Fink and Joo teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 10.
Further, Buller teaches wherein the examining the stability comprises examining stability with respect to a stacking result of the additive manufacturing product by comparing the result of the first stacking thermal analysis and the result of the second stacking thermal analysis which reflect a structural heat dissipation characteristic ([0145] one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve) at and/or in a location in proximity to (e.g., vicinity of) an irradiation spot on the target surface during printing of a 3D object. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area of at least about 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, or 10 FLS (e.g., diameter) of a melt pool. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area between any of the afore-mentioned values (e.g., from about 1 FLS to about 10 FLS, from about 1 FLS to about 5 FLS, from about 5 FLS to about 10 FLS, or from about 1 FLS to about 6 FLS) of irradiation spots. The thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal signature curve) during the formation process. One or more characteristics of a transforming agent may be altered during formation of the 3D object to adjust the (e.g., real time) thermal signal to (e.g., substantially) match the target temperature. The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance).
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buller et al. (US20200139631), and further in view of Bhattad et al. (US20220371094).
Regarding claim 1 and similarly claims 10-12, Buller teaches a thermal-analysis-based output stabilization
(Abstract: Provided herein are apparatuses, and non-transitory computer readable media
regarding data assurance for instructions data utilized in forming at least one requested 3D
object, and methods associated therewith) method comprising:
performing, by one or more processors of an output stabilization system ([0131] and [0150] The pre-formation environment may comprise one or more components, e.g., modules, stages, and/or processors. The pre-formation environment may generate instructions data related to the formation of a requested 3D object.), a first stacking thermal analysis with respect to a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens in which a process range corresponding to normal output quality is set ([0117] FIG. 2B depicts an example of a Formation Environment application 250. In the example of FIG. 2B, a forming area (e.g., a platform) 260 is disposed below an arrangement of a plurality of 3D object models (e.g., 255, 257, and 270) that correspond to a plurality of requested 3D objects… Formation Environment application provides a capability to modify (e.g., a selected portion of) a virtual model of a requested 3D object. The modification may comprise adjusting one 3D object with respect to another 3D object above the forming area and/or in the forming volume. The adjustment may be with respect to one or more directly adjacent 3D object models. In some embodiments, a modification to at least one 3D object may be made (e.g., directly) from within a Formation Environment application. The optimization may be regarding formation speed, space utilization, fidelity of the object(s) (e.g., considering heat dissipation) and [0146] In some embodiments, a target thermal signal is obtained from one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 405; FIG. 5, 505), e.g., any simulation described herein. The target signal may be a value, a set of values, or a
function (e.g., a time dependent function). The one or more 3D objects may optionally be
analyzed (e.g., FIG. 4, 416; FIG. 5, 516). In some embodiments, a target (e.g., thermal) signal is
obtained from historical data of 3D objects (or portions thereof) that have been analyzed);
wherein the first stacking thermal analysis comprises quantitatively predicting overheating and supercooling aspects in a stacking process by performing a thermal analysis with respect to a virtual area under a same condition as an energy density of a real output situation ([0111] a physics model comprises calculations that consider a type of material (e.g., type of alloy) and an expected thermo-mechanical reaction of that material to the forming process, e.g., that causes deformation… the physics model can be used to calculate a predicted deformation substantially in real time (e.g., before, during and/or following formation of at least a portion of the 3D object). The real time calculations can be used in a feed forward and/or feedback (closed loop) control system(s) that controls the forming process, [0145] Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve) at and/or in a location in proximity to (e.g., vicinity of) an irradiation spot on the target surface during printing of a 3D object. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area of at least about 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, or 10 FLS (e.g., diameter) of a melt pool. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area between any of the afore-mentioned values (e.g., from about 1 FLS to about 10 FLS, from about 1 FLS to about 5 FLS, from about 5 FLS to about 10 FLS, or from about 1 FLS to about 6 FLS) of irradiation spots. The thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal signature curve) during the formation process and [0146] In some embodiments, a target thermal signal is obtained from one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 405; FIG. 5, 505), e.g., any simulation described herein. The target signal may be a value, a set of values, or a function (e.g., a time dependent function) … In some embodiments, a target (e.g., thermal) signal is obtained from historical data of 3D objects (or portions thereof) that have been analyzed),
performing, by the one or more processors, a second stacking thermal analysis with respect to a real additive manufacturing product in a same method as the first stacking thermal analysis method, based on the result of the first stacking thermal analysis ([0135] In a forming process (e.g., 3D printing), a requested 3D object can be formed (e.g., printed) according to forming (e.g., printing) instructions. The forming instructions may at least in part consider a (e.g., geometric) model of a requested 3D object and [0145] Monitoring can comprise using one or more detectors that detect one or more outputs (e.g., thermal, optical, chemical and/or tactile signals). The detector can comprise a sensor. In some cases, monitoring is performed in real-time during formation of the one or more 3D objects. In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value)… Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve));
examining, by the one or more processors, stability with respect to a stacking result of the additive manufacturing product, based on the result of the second stacking thermal analysis result ([0146] the analysis data is compared to requested data. For example, a geometry of the printed object(s) may be compared with the geometry of the requested object(s). In some embodiments, the analysis data is used (e.g., FIG. 4, 417; FIG. 5, 517) to adjust the simulation (e.g., FIG. 4, 410; FIG. 5, 510). The adjusted simulation may be used, for example, in formation of subsequent object(s)); and
adjusting, by the one or more processors, at least one of a laser output power and a scan speed during stacking of the additive manufacturing product based on the examined stability, so as to maintain a stacking temperature of the additive manufacturing product within the process range corresponding to the normal output quality ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance).
While Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected ([0103] A user-guided selection may comprise a lasso selection, a (e.g., closed) shape selection (e.g., rectangle), or a circular selection. A selection may comprise a geometry-based selection based on the geometry of the virtual model of the 3D object (e.g., a surface patch and/or edge)) and that a threshold value is set for parameters to be monitored such as thermal signals ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve)), Buller fails to explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens comprises: a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape, and wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to an additive manufacturing method, Bhattad teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see example test part build 300 with array 308 of test parts in Figure 6) comprises:
a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion (see example test part 500 with straight fins 508 on upper portion in Figure 11 and example test part 540 with straight fins 548 in Figure 12); and
a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section (see frustoconical portion 520 in Figure 11 and frustoconical portion 564 in Figure 12),
wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape (Each of the straight fins 548 has substantially the same thickness as the others of the straight fins 548 in Figure 12), and
wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction (see tapering cross-sectional diameters of frustoconical portion 520 in Figure 11 and frustoconical portion 564 in Figure 12). Further, Bhattad teaches circular cross sections with varying diameters (vertical rods 12 in Figure 11) and varying thicknesses (see straight fins 508 in Figure 11). Assessing multiple test parts configured in a matrix on a single part bed with various features, including various feature shapes and sizes, allows for development cycles on the order of days versus weeks or months. By reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters ([0048] The present disclosure describes systems and methods for rapid development of and use of material-specific additive manufacturing parameter sets. While prior art development cycles for additive manufacturing parameter sets occurred on the order of weeks or months, the present disclosure allows for development cycles on the order of days and, in some cases, less than 24 or 48 hours. By reducing the length of this design cycle, manufacturers (that is, anyone implementing additive manufacturing processes) can take advantage of tuned printing parameters.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens of Buller to comprise a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape, and wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction, as taught by Bhattad to more rapidly assess multiple test parts representative of 3D parts to be formed on a single part bed with various representative features, including various feature shapes and sizes. Such rapid testing can decrease development cycles from weeks or months to days, and by reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters.
Regarding claim 2, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 1.
Further, Bhattad teaches wherein the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged along a plurality of columns and a plurality of rows (see Figure 6), and are formed to have different contact cross- sectional areas along the plurality of columns (see difference cross-sectional areas of Figure 11 and Figure 12), so that a process range is set according to a shape ([0050]-[0051]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens of Buller modified with Bhattad to be arranged along a plurality of columns and a plurality of rows and are formed to have different contact cross- sectional areas along the plurality of columns so that a process range is set by the structural heat dissipation of Buller characteristic according to a shape, as suggested by Bhattad, to more rapidly assess multiple test parts representative of 3D parts to be formed on a single part bed with various representative features, including various feature shapes and sizes. Such rapid testing can decrease development cycles from weeks or months to days, and by reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters.
Regarding claim 3, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 2.
Buller teaches the method further comprising conducting, by the one or more processors, an experiment for setting the process range corresponding to the normal output quality according to a laser output power and a scan speed by using the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens before performing the first stacking thermal analysis, as discussed in the rejection of claim 3 in view of Fink and Joo above.
Regarding claim 4, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 3.
Buller teaches wherein the conducting the experiment comprises conducting the experiment by controlling a laser output power and a scan speed in order to determine a moving tendency of a process window on the assumption of an overheating situation in a stacking process of a real additive manufacturing product, as discussed in the rejection of claim 4 in view of Fink and Joo above.
Regarding claim 5, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 4.
Buller teaches wherein the conducting the experiment comprises measuring surface densities of output results of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens, and setting the process range corresponding to the normal output quality , as discussed in the rejection of claim 5 in view of Fink and Joo above..
Regarding claim 6, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 1.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to an additive manufacturing method, Bhattad teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see example test part build 300 with array 308 of test parts in Figure 6) comprises:
a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion (see example test part 500 with straight fins 508 on upper portion in Figure 11 and example test part 540 with straight fins 548 in Figure 12); and
a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section (see frustoconical portion 520 in Figure 11 and frustoconical portion 564 in Figure 12),
wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape (Each of the straight fins 548 has substantially the same thickness as the others of the straight fins 548 in Figure 12), and
wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction (see tapering cross-sectional diameters of frustoconical portion 520 in Figure 11 and frustoconical portion 564 in Figure 12). Further, Bhattad teaches circular cross sections with varying diameters (vertical rods 12 in Figure 11) and varying thicknesses (see straight fins 508 in Figure 11). Assessing multiple test parts configured in a matrix on a single part bed with various features, including various feature shapes and sizes, allows for development cycles on the order of days versus weeks or months. By reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters ([0048] The present disclosure describes systems and methods for rapid development of and use of material-specific additive manufacturing parameter sets. While prior art development cycles for additive manufacturing parameter sets occurred on the order of weeks or months, the present disclosure allows for development cycles on the order of days and, in some cases, less than 24 or 48 hours. By reducing the length of this design cycle, manufacturers (that is, anyone implementing additive manufacturing processes) can take advantage of tuned printing parameters.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens of Buller to comprise a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape from a 1st column to an N-th column, and wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction and cross-sectional diameters of lowermost sides of the base plates gradually decrease from the 1St column to the N-th column, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to shapes from the 1St column to the N-th column, as suggested by Bhattad to more rapidly assess multiple test parts representative of 3D parts to be formed on a single part bed with various representative features, including various feature shapes and sizes. Such rapid testing can decrease development cycles from weeks or months to days, and by reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters.
Regarding claim 7, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 6.
Bhattad teaches wherein, when the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged from the 1st column to a 6th column (see Figure 6). Further, Bhattad teaches circular cross sections with varying diameters (vertical rods 12 in Figure 11) and varying thicknesses (see straight fins 508 in Figure 11), and varying ratios of cross-sectional areas of lowermost ends of the base plates (see 520 and 564 in Figure 11 and Figure 12) such that the ratio decreases.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the examination specimens of Buller modified with Bhattad to be arranged from the 1st column to a 7th column, and where the base plates are formed such that a cross- sectional area of a lowermost end of the base plate disposed in the 1St column is 80% of a cross-sectional area of the body, and ratios of cross-sectional areas of lowermost ends of the base plates arranged from the 2nd column to the 7th column to cross-sectional areas of the bodies are gradually reduced by 10% from the cross section ratio of the lowermost end of the base plate disposed in the 1st column, and eventually, the cross-sectional area of the lowermost end of the base plate disposed in the 7th column is 20% of the cross-sectional area of the body, as suggested by Bhattad, by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). Bhattad teaches a matrix configuration has a benefit of more rapidly assessing multiple test parts representative of 3D parts to be formed on a single part bed with various representative features, including various feature shapes and sizes. Such rapid testing can decrease development cycles from weeks or months to days, and by reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters.
Regarding claim 8, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 6.
Further, Bhattad teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged from an A row to a G row (see Figure 6 of Bhattad), and Buller teaches varying scan speeds that encompass the range of 0.7 m/s and 1.3 m/s, as discussed in the rejection of claim 8 above in view of Fink and Joo.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for a scan speed of Buller modified with Bhattad to be set to gradually increase from the A row to the G row, and, when a scan speed of the A row is 0.7 m/s, a scan speed to the G row gradually increases by 0.1 m/s in each row, and eventually, a scan speed in the G row reaches 1.3 m/s, as suggested by Bhattad, by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). Bhattad teaches a matrix configuration has a benefit of more rapidly assessing multiple test parts representative of 3D parts to be formed on a single part bed with various representative features, including various feature shapes and sizes. Such rapid testing can decrease development cycles from weeks or months to days, and by reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters.
Regarding claim 9, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 1. Further, Buller teaches wherein the examining the stability comprises examining stability with respect to a stacking result of the additive manufacturing product by comparing the result of the first stacking thermal analysis and the result of the second stacking thermal analysis which reflect structural heat dissipation characteristic, as discussed in the rejection of claim 9 above in view of Fink and Joo.
Regarding claim 13, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 10.
Buller teaches that different geometries for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens may be selected ([0103] A user-guided selection may comprise a lasso selection, a (e.g., closed) shape selection (e.g., rectangle), or a circular selection. A selection may comprise a geometry-based selection based on the geometry of the virtual model of the 3D object (e.g., a surface patch and/or edge)) and that a threshold value is set for parameters to be monitored such as thermal signals ([0145] In some cases, monitoring is done before, during and/or after printing. The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of
formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4,
413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more
aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions
(e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one
or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal
signature curve)).
Further, Bhattad teaches wherein the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged along a plurality of columns and a plurality of rows (see Figure 6 of Bhattad), and are formed to have different contact cross-sectional areas along the plurality of columns (see Figure 11 and Figure 12 of Bhattad). Further, Buller teaches establishing a process range by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to a shape.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for a process range to be set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to a shape, as suggested by Buller and Bhattad, by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). Bhattad teaches a matrix configuration has a benefit of more rapidly assessing multiple test parts representative of 3D parts to be formed on a single part bed with various representative features, including various feature shapes and sizes. Such rapid testing can decrease development cycles from weeks or months to days, and by reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters.
Regarding claim 14, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 13.
Further, Buller teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to conduct an experiment for setting the process range corresponding to the normal output quality according to a laser output power and a scan speed by using the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens before performing the first stacking thermal analysis, as discussed in the rejection of claim 13 above in view of Fink and Joo.
Regarding claim 15, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 14.
Further, Buller teaches wherein, for the conducting the experiment, the one or more processors are further configured to control a laser output power and a scan speed in order to determine a moving tendency of a process window on the assumption of an overheating situation in a stacking process of a real additive manufacturing product, as discussed in the rejection of claim 15 above in view of Fink and Joo.
Regarding claim 16, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization system of claim 15.
Further, Buller teaches wherein, for the conducting the experiment, the one or more processors are configured to measure surface densities of output results of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens, and set the process range corresponding to the normal output quality, as discussed in the rejection of claim 16 above in view of Fink and Joo.
Regarding claim 17, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 13.
In the same field of endeavor pertaining to an additive manufacturing method, Bhattad teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens (see example test part build 300 with array 308 of test parts in Figure 6) comprises:
a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion (see example test part 500 with straight fins 508 on upper portion in Figure 11 and example test part 540 with straight fins 548 in Figure 12); and
a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section (see frustoconical portion 520 in Figure 11 and frustoconical portion 564 in Figure 12),
wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape (Each of the straight fins 548 has substantially the same thickness as the others of the straight fins 548 in Figure 12), and
wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction (see tapering cross-sectional diameters of frustoconical portion 520 in Figure 11 and frustoconical portion 564 in Figure 12). Further, Bhattad teaches circular cross sections with varying diameters (vertical rods 12 in Figure 11) and varying thicknesses (see straight fins 508 in Figure 11). Assessing multiple test parts configured in a matrix on a single part bed with various features, including various feature shapes and sizes, allows for development cycles on the order of days versus weeks or months. By reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters ([0048] The present disclosure describes systems and methods for rapid development of and use of material-specific additive manufacturing parameter sets. While prior art development cycles for additive manufacturing parameter sets occurred on the order of weeks or months, the present disclosure allows for development cycles on the order of days and, in some cases, less than 24 or 48 hours. By reducing the length of this design cycle, manufacturers (that is, anyone implementing additive manufacturing processes) can take advantage of tuned printing parameters.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens of Buller to comprise a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, wherein the bodies are formed to have a same size and a same shape from a 1st column to an N-th column, and wherein the base plates are formed to have their cross-sectional diameters gradually decrease from uppermost sides connected with the bodies toward lower sides along a height direction and cross-sectional diameters of lowermost sides of the base plates gradually decrease from the 1St column to the N-th column, so that a process range is set by a structural heat dissipation characteristic according to shapes from the 1St column to the N-th column, as suggested by Bhattad to more rapidly assess multiple test parts representative of 3D parts to be formed on a single part bed with various representative features, including various feature shapes and sizes. Such rapid testing can decrease development cycles from weeks or months to days, and by reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters.
Regarding claim 18, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 17.
Bhattad teaches wherein, when the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged from the 1st column to a 6th column (see Figure 6). Further, Bhattad teaches circular cross sections with varying diameters (vertical rods 12 in Figure 11) and varying thicknesses (see straight fins 508 in Figure 11), and varying ratios of cross-sectional areas of lowermost ends of the base plates (see 520 and 564 in Figure 11 and Figure 12) such that the ratio decreases.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for the examination specimens of Buller modified with Bhattad to be arranged from the 1st column to a 7th column, and where the base plates are formed such that a cross- sectional area of a lowermost end of the base plate disposed in the 1St column is 80% of a cross-sectional area of the body, and ratios of cross-sectional areas of lowermost ends of the base plates arranged from the 2nd column to the 7th column to cross-sectional areas of the bodies are gradually reduced by 10% from the cross section ratio of the lowermost end of the base plate disposed in the 1st column, and eventually, the cross-sectional area of the lowermost end of the base plate disposed in the 7th column is 20% of the cross-sectional area of the body, as suggested by Bhattad, by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). Bhattad teaches a matrix configuration has a benefit of more rapidly assessing multiple test parts representative of 3D parts to be formed on a single part bed with various representative features, including various feature shapes and sizes. Such rapid testing can decrease development cycles from weeks or months to days, and by reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters.
Regarding claim 19, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 17.
Further, Bhattad teaches a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens are arranged from an A row to a G row (see Figure 6 of Bhattad), and Buller teaches varying scan speeds that encompass the range of 0.7 m/s and 1.3 m/s, as discussed in the rejection of claim 8 above in view of Fink and Joo.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art for a scan speed of Buller modified with Bhattad to be set to gradually increase from the A row to the G row, and, when a scan speed of the A row is 0.7 m/s, a scan speed to the G row gradually increases by 0.1 m/s in each row, and eventually, a scan speed in the G row reaches 1.3 m/s, as suggested by Bhattad, by routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05.II). Bhattad teaches a matrix configuration has a benefit of more rapidly assessing multiple test parts representative of 3D parts to be formed on a single part bed with various representative features, including various feature shapes and sizes. Such rapid testing can decrease development cycles from weeks or months to days, and by reducing the design cycle length, manufacturers can more readily tune printing parameters.
Regarding claim 20, Buller modified with Bhattad teaches the thermal-analysis-based output stabilization method of claim 10. Further, Buller teaches wherein the examining the stability comprises examining stability with respect to a stacking result of the additive manufacturing product by comparing the result of the first stacking thermal analysis and the result of the second stacking thermal analysis which reflect structural heat dissipation characteristic, as discussed in the rejection of claim 20 above in view of Fink and Joo.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
While Examiner agrees with Applicant’s assertion that Buller does not teach the specific structure for the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens as recited in the claims (see pg. 16-17 of Remarks), Examiner noted on pg. 29-31 of the Office Action mailed 04/03/2026 that Buller fails to teach wherein each of the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens comprises: a hexahedral body disposed on an upper portion; and a base plate disposed on a lower portion of each of the bodies and having a circular cross section, where the lowermost sides of the cross-sectional diameters of the base plates graduate decrease from the 1St column to the Nth column. However, Examiner relied on Joo (KR102233737) to establish an obviousness rejection that cures the deficiencies of Buller and Fink (see response to arguments regarding Joo further below).
Applicant asserts that Buller teaches a system that operates on virtual models of 3D objects and not on physical specimens with specific structural heat dissipation characteristics, such that Buller fails to teach the limitation of “a first stacking thermal analysis with respect to a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens in which a process range corresponding to normal output quality is set” (see pg. 17 of Remarks).
However, the limitation “a first stacking thermal analysis with respect to a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens in which a process range corresponding to normal output quality is set” as currently recited does not require the plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens to be physical specimens, in comparison to “a second stacking thermal analysis with respect to a real additive manufacturing product” as recited in claim 1 line 15-16. Further, claim 1 recites “wherein the first stacking thermal analysis comprises quantitatively predicting overheating and supercooling aspects… by performing a thermal analysis with respect to a virtual area” where limitations such as “predicting” and “performing… with a respect to a virtual area” suggest the first stacking thermal analysis could be conducted on a plurality of residual heat quantity examination specimens in a virtual environment.
Further, while Buller’s system operates on virtual models of 3D objects, it also relies on physical specimens that are used to quantitatively map a relationship between structural heat dissipation characteristic and thermal behavior ([0145] The monitoring may use historical measurements (e.g., as an analytical tool and/or to set a threshold value). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the forming instructions (e.g., FIG. 4, 413) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 4, 415). Monitoring of one or more aspects of formation can optionally be used to (e.g., directly) modify the layout instructions (e.g., FIG. 5, 513) and/or adjust the one or more simulations (e.g., FIG. 5, 515). For example, one or more thermal detectors may gather (e.g., real time) thermal signals (e.g., real time thermal signature curve) at and/or in a location in proximity to (e.g., vicinity of) an irradiation spot on the target surface during printing of a 3D object. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area of at least about 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, or 10 FLS (e.g., diameter) of a melt pool. The location in proximity to the irradiation spot may include an area between any of the afore-mentioned values (e.g., from about 1 FLS to about 10 FLS, from about 1 FLS to about 5 FLS, from about 5 FLS to about 10 FLS, or from about 1 FLS to about 6 FLS) of irradiation spots. The thermal signals can be compared to a target thermal signal (e.g., target thermal signature curve) during the formation process. One or more characteristics of a transforming agent may be altered during formation of the 3D object to adjust the (e.g., real time) thermal signal to (e.g., substantially) match the target temperature).
Further, Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s assertion that Buller does not disclose the claimed features of “adjusting laser output power and/or scan speed based on an examined stability to maintain a stacking temperature within a process range corresponding to normal output quality” ([0145] The alteration to the transforming may comprise an alteration to (i) a transformation density (or transformation strength), (ii) a trajectory, (iii) a FLS of a footprint of the transforming agent on the target surface, (iv) a hatch spacing, (v) a scan speed, (vi) a scanning scheme (v) a dwell time of the transforming agent, as it progresses along a path along the target surface, or (vi) an intermission time of the transforming agent as it progresses along a path along the target surface. For example, the alteration may comprise an alteration to an energy beam (a) power density at the target surface, (b) wavelength, (c) cross section, (d) path, (e) irradiation spot size, (f) scan speed, (g) dwell time, (h) intermission time, or (i) power of the energy source generating the energy beam. Matching the target temperature may be to within a (e.g., pre-determined) tolerance).
Regarding Applicant’s assertion that substituting Joo’s square cross-section base plate for a circular cross-section base plate would not be a routine design choice, but would require recognition that circular cross-section specimens yield a more uniform and predictable heat dissipation characteristic, and that gradually tapering diameters along the height direction with a column-by-column variation in the lowermost cross-sectional areas from 80% to 20% of the body's cross-sectional area is a purposefully engineered design that reflects Applicant’s inventive contribution rather than a predictable result of routine experimentation (see pg. 19-20 of Remarks), Examiner notes that changes in shape are a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed specimen cross-section was significant (see MPEP 2144.IV.B.). The Applicant recognizing that circular cross-section specimens yield a more uniform and predictable heat dissipation characteristic than square cross-section specimens does not negate the obviousness of making a change to the cross-section shape.
Further, Applicant recognizing that gradually tapering diameters along the height direction is a purposefully engineered design that reflects Applicant’s inventive contribution does not demonstrate unexpected results when an extent of a taper is changed.
If Applicant is not convinced by Examiner’s argument, an alternate rejection in view of Bhattad et al. (US20220371094) is found above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARIELLA MACHNESS whose telephone number is (408)918-7587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 6:30-2:30 PT.
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, Galen Hauth can be reached at 571-270-5516. 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.
/ARIELLA MACHNESS/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights