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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0085156 (Gaisnon et al.).
With regards to claim 1, Gaisnon et al. discloses a device for inspecting parts of a turbine engine comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-9, an inspection method comprising inserting an actuator and a sensor 18 (e.g. inspection probe like an ultrasound probe includes an actuator and a sensor; paragraphs [0027],[0031]) into an interior of a powerplant such that the powerplant comprising a component 50,52,54,58 (e.g. turbine engine having rotor blades, disks, stator vanes rotor wall; paragraph [0043]; Figure 8) within the interior of the powerplant (e.g. powerplant having turbine engine; paragraphs [0042]-[0046]; Figures 5-8); arranging the actuator and the sensor with the component within the interior of the powerplant (e.g. paragraph [0046]; Figures 5-8); inducing first vibrations in the component at a first inspection location using the actuator, and measuring a first vibratory response in the component excited by the first vibrations using the sensor to provide first sensor data (e.g. implicitly indicated in paragraphs [0013],[0014],[0031] and paragraph [0046] indicates “It is possible to begin inspecting the wall 58 by means of the probe 18”); rotating the component a first number of degrees about a rotational axis of the component (e.g. rotor wall is moved in rotation; paragraph [0046]); inducing second vibrations in the component at a second inspection location using the actuator, and measuring a second vibratory response in the component excited by the second vibrations using the sensor to provide second sensor data (e.g. implicitly indicated in paragraphs [0013],[0014],[0031] and paragraph [0046] indicates “The rotor wall 58 is moved in rotation … to inspect … of said wall by means of the probe”). (See, paragraphs [0026] to [0046]).
With regards to claims 2, 3 and 4, Gaisnon et al. further discloses the first number of degrees is greater than zero degrees and equal to or less than sixty degrees; or the first number of degrees is greater than sixty degrees and equal to or less than one hundred and twenty degrees; or the first number of degrees is greater than one hundred and twenty degrees and equal to or less than one hundred and eighty degrees (e.g. different annular zones/positions over 360 degrees; paragraphs [0015],[0046]).
With regards to claims 5 and 6, Gaisnon et al. further discloses rotating the component a second number of degrees about the rotational axis of the component; inducing third vibrations in the component at a third inspection location using the actuator, and measuring a third vibratory response in the component excited by the third vibrations using the sensor; the second number of degrees is equal to the first number of degrees (e.g. paragraph [0046] implicitly indicates the inspection of an entire annular zone implies the repetition of the acoustic testing at different angular positions/zones).
With regards to claim 7, Gaisnon et al. further discloses determining a first characteristic (e.g. broadly interpreted such that paragraph [0002] indicates “verify the state” of the turbine engine) of the component at least about the first inspection location based on the first sensor data (e.g. paragraph [0046] indicates the inspection of an entire annular zone implies the repetition of the acoustic testing at different angular positions/zones); determining a second characteristic (e.g. broadly interpreted such that paragraph [0002] indicates “verify the state” of the turbine engine) of the component at least about the second inspection location based on the second sensor data (e.g. paragraph [0046] indicates the inspection of an entire annular zone implies the repetition of the acoustic testing at different angular positions/zones).
With regards to claim 8, Gaisnon et al. further discloses determining a first characteristic (e.g. broadly interpreted such that paragraph [0002] indicates “verify the state” of the turbine engine) of the component based on the first sensor data and the second sensor data (e.g. broadly interpreted such that paragraph [0046] indicates the inspection of an entire annular zone implies the repetition of the acoustic testing at different angular positions/zones, then one can use the first data and the second data to “verify the state” of the turbine engine),
With regards to claim 9, Gaisnon et al. implicitly further discloses detecting a defect (e.g. a well-known concept that non-destructive inspection of turbine engine using ultrasound probe inspects and detects defects, like crack and other anomalies) internal to the component using at least one of the first sensor data or the second sensor data
With regards to claim 10, Gaisnon et al. implicitly further discloses the first vibrations are induced in the component while the actuator is in contact with the component at the first inspection location, and the second vibrations are induced in the component while the actuator is in contact with the component at the second inspection location; moving the actuator to disengage from the component following the inducing of the first vibrations and prior to the rotating of the component; moving the actuator to contact the component following the rotating of the component and prior to the inducing of the second vibrations (e.g. paragraphs [0013] and [0015] indicates the ultrasound probe includes the actuator is positioned at different zones by moving the ultrasound probe such that the ultrasound probe is pressed against the surface of the part for inspection. Hence, it is interpreted that the ultrasound probe induces vibrations to the part when pressed against the part for inspection at the first location, then is disengage from the surface of the part when being moved to the second inspection location where the ultrasonic probe induces vibrations to the part when pressed against the part for inspection at the second location).
With regards to claim 11, Gaisnon et al. implicitly further discloses the first vibratory response is measured while the sensor is in contact with the component at the first inspection location, and the second vibratory response is measured while the sensor is in contact with the component at the second inspection location; moving the sensor to disengage from the component following the measuring of the first vibratory response and prior to the rotating of the component; moving the sensor to contact the component following the rotating of the component and prior to the measuring of the second vibratory response (e.g. paragraphs [0013] and [0015] indicates the ultrasound probe includes the sensor is positioned at different zones by moving the ultrasound probe such that the ultrasound probe is pressed against the surface of the part for inspection. Hence, it is interpreted that the ultrasound probe measures vibratory response to the part when pressed against the part for inspection at the first location, then is disengage from the surface of the part when being moved to the second inspection location where the ultrasonic probe measures vibratory response to the part when pressed against the part for inspection at the second location).
With regards to claim 12, Gaisnon et al. further discloses inserting a head 12 (e.g. longitudinal stick; paragraph [0027]) of an inspection scope 10 (e.g. device; paragraph [0027]) into the interior of a powerplant, the head of the inspection scope comprising the actuator 18 (e.g. inspection probe like an ultrasound probe includes an actuator and a sensor; paragraphs [0027],[0031]); arranging the head of the inspection scope with the component within the interior of the powerplant (e.g. paragraph [0042]; observed in Figures 5-8).
With regards to claim 13, Gaisnon et al. further discloses the head of the inspection scope further comprises the sensor 18 (e.g. inspection probe like an ultrasound probe includes an actuator and a sensor; paragraphs [0027],[0031]).
With regards to claim 14, Gaisnon et al. further discloses fixing a position of the head of the inspection scope within the interior of the powerplant using a scope anchor 20 (e.g. bearing skid; paragraphs [0027],[0032]-[0037],[0040],[0046]).
With regards to claim 15, Gaisnon et al. further discloses the powerplant comprises a turbine engine (e.g. turbine engine; paragraphs [0002],[0025]).
With regards to claim 16, Gaisnon et al. further discloses the component is configured as a rotor disk (e.g. rotor disk; paragraph [0043]).
With regards to claim 17, Gaisnon et al. further discloses the powerplant is installed with an aircraft (e.g. the powerplant comprising the component 50,52,54,58 like turbine engine having rotor blades, disks, stator vanes rotor wall are components for an aircraft for propulsion; paragraph [0043]; Figure 8) during the inserting, the arranging, the inducing of the first vibrations, the measuring of the first vibratory response, the rotating, the inducing of the second vibrations, and the measuring of the second vibratory response.
With regards to claim 18, the claim is directed to an inspection method claim and is commensurate in scope with method claims 1,9,12 and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth above.
With regards to claim 19, the claim is commensurate in scope with claims 10-11 and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth above.
With regards to claim 20, the claim is directed to an inspection method claim and is commensurate in scope with method claims 1,9-12 and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The references cited, particularly Yoon and Sato, are related to nondestructive testing system for defects in engine of power plane and a system for stress measuring to determine a defect of a test object.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Helen C Kwok whose telephone number is (571)272-2197. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7:30 to 4:00 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/HELEN C KWOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights