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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/20/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the
examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Fig. 12 recites “production”, which should be “product”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Figs 21-23 include reference number 105, which is not in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 20-22, 24, 27, and 31 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 19 line 2 recites “vibration mode”, which should have a comma afterwards.
Claim 20 line 2, Claim 24 line 2, and Claim 31 line 2 recite “vibration application”, which should be “the vibration application”.
Claim 21 line 5 and Claim 22 line 24 recite “vibration response”, which should be “the vibration response”.
Claim 27 line 2 recites “At”, which should be “at”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 19, 22-26, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 19 (lines 3-4) and 30 (line 3) recite “a predetermined value”. Neither the specification nor the drawings recite “a predetermined value” for the change from the second natural frequency to the fourth natural frequency. Therefore, applicant has not demonstrated possession and the Claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Claim 22 lines 14-16 recite “the estimation circuitry includes a natural frequency calculation circuitry which calculates a first natural frequency” and line 18 recites “calculates a third natural frequency”. The specification and the drawings indicate that the natural frequency calculation circuitry is not part of the estimation circuitry, but rather part of the data recording unit 50 (See Fig. 1). Therefore, applicant has not demonstrated possession and Claim 22, along with the corresponding dependent claims 23-26, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
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 1-2, 23, and 27-31 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 1 lines 9-11 recite “a first probability distribution with respect to change of a support condition for the inspection target object calculated from the natural frequency recorded in the data recording circuitry and a second natural frequency”. It is unclear if the “first probability distribution” or the “change of a support condition” is calculated from the first natural frequency and the second natural frequency, rendering this limitation in the claim as indefinite.
Claim 1 lines 10-11 recite “the natural frequency recorded in the data recording circuitry”. The data recording circuitry only records a change of the natural frequency, not the natural frequency itself, rendering this limitation in the claim as indefinite.
Claim 23 lines 2-4 recite “the natural frequency calculating circuitry and the natural frequency change amount calculating circuitry of the estimation circuitry are placed at a predetermined distance
from the estimation circuitry”. It is unclear how the natural frequency calculating circuitry and the natural frequency change amount calculating circuitry of the estimation circuitry can be a predetermined distance from the estimating circuitry while being included in the estimation circuitry, rendering this limitation in the claim as indefinite.
Claim 27 lines 11-13 recite “a first probability distribution with respect to change of a support condition for the inspection target object calculated from the recorded natural frequency and a second natural frequency”. It is unclear if the “first probability distribution” or the “change of a support condition” is calculated from the recorded natural frequency and the second natural frequency, rendering this limitation in the claim as indefinite.
Claim 27 line 12 recites “calculated from the recorded natural frequency”. The change of the natural frequency was recorded, not the natural frequency itself, rendering this limitation in the claim as indefinite.
Closest Prior Art of Record
Kinoshita (US 20210131930 A1) discloses a damage detection apparatus, method, and program. Kinoshita teaches a dominant frequency acquisition unit (i.e. a data recording circuit) that receives a dominant frequency for further analysis and processing to determine the damage in a support (See Abstract), where the dominant frequency acquisition unit generates a temporal change of vibration (i.e. records a change of a natural frequency, see Para[0038] “The dominant frequency acquisition unit 120 generates a wave pattern of a temporal change of vibration from vibration information input by the sensor information input unit 110.” Examiner notes that Kinoshita also records the change, see Para[0057] “The CPU 101 is a processor that temporarily stores temporary data used for processing in the memory 102, reads a program stored in the storage device 103, and performs various processing operations such as calculation, control, determination, or the like on the temporary data in accordance with the program. Further, the CPU 101 stores data of a process result in the storage device 103”.). Kinoshita further teaches a vibration sensor (i.e. a measurement circuit) that receives vibration information from the supported object (See Fig. 2). Furthermore, Kinoshita teaches a damage determination unit (i.e. an estimation circuitry, See Fig. 2).
Kinoshita does not teach that the estimation circuitry estimates both the rigidity and the size of damage of the inspection target object simultaneously on the basis of change of a first probability distribution with respect to change of a support condition for the inspection target object calculated from the natural frequency recorded in the data recording circuitry and a second natural frequency obtained by measuring the inspection target object whose damage has already been known, a fourth natural frequency of the inspection target object calculated from the vibration response measured by the measurement circuitry, and the change of the natural frequency recorded in the data recording circuitry.
Diamond (US 20200249074 A1) discloses a method to determine the vibration behavior of the blades of a turbomachine using Bayesian inference. Diamond teaches a prior distribution and a likelihood distribution (i.e. a first probability distribution and a second probability distribution, see Para[0039] “The prior probabilities and likelihood function may be chosen as any probability distribution, or probabilistic model.”), in addition to a posterior distribution (i.e. a third probability distribution by multiplying the prior and likelihood distributions, See Para[0038] “using Bayes' theorem to convert the prior probability and likelihood function into a posterior probability over the model coefficients.”)
Although Diamond teaches two probability distributions that serve to calculate the posterior, the prior does not contain information about the first and second natural frequencies, as Diamond does not teach either. In Diamond, the prior is a Gaussian distribution (See Para[0088] “The prior information is an initial estimate of the assumed model parameters before considering the measured data. The prior information can be uninformative, as is often the case. Another common choice for prior information is a multivariate Gaussian distribution. The prior information assumed for this vibration model takes the form of the multivariate Gaussian distribution”). In addition, the likelihood does not contain information about the change of the first and third natural frequencies, nor of the change of the second and fourth natural frequencies, as Diamond only teaches the fourth natural frequency (See Abstract “expressing blade tip vibration behaviour as a Bayesian statistical model consisting of intermediate model parameters”), as the fourth natural frequency reflects the vibration response of the inspection target object.
Ao (CN 112100874 A) discloses a method to determine the damage severity in a rotor blade. Ao teaches a numerical model that is corrected by a case where there is no damage in the rotor blade as a reference model (i.e. the inspection target object whose damage has already been known, See Abstract “A finite element model is corrected according to modal information measured in an initial non-crack state of the rotor blade”). Ao further teaches a change of natural frequency (See Page 2 line 24 “the modal frequency change before and after the rotor blade is damaged (i.e. a change of the natural frequency); fd and fu (i.e. the second and fourth natural frequencies) respectively represent the actual blade mode measured by the sensor before and after the rotor blade is damaged”).
Ao does not teach the first and third natural frequencies, the first probability distribution and the second probability distribution, and the Bayesian inferencing method to determine a size of damage and the rigidity of the inspection target object.
Yan (CN 113221271 A) teaches a method to determine cracks in a rotating blade. Yan teaches a a method to calculate the rigidity of the object (See Abstract “the generalized rigidity matrix”), a fourth natural frequency (See Abstract “ obtaining the natural frequency of each step in the rotating state of the blade entity through the blade end timing technology (i.e. a measurement circuitry)”), a prior distribution, a likelihood distribution, and a posterior distribution (See Abstract “calculating the likelihood function (i.e. a second probability distribution) of the damage parameter; group sparse prior distribution (i.e. a first probability distribution), so as to calculate the posterior probability distribution (i.e. a third probability distribution)”), and a Bayesian inferencing method to determine the crack of the rotating blade (See Abstract).
Yan does not teach the four natural frequencies as recited in the instant application, nor does Yan teach that the prior probability distribution is dependent on the first and second natural frequencies and the likelihood probability distribution is dependent on the change of the first and third natural frequencies, as well as the change of the second and fourth natural frequencies, as Yan does not teach a change of natural frequencies.
The combination of Kinoshita, Diamond, Ao, and Yan fails to teach the first probability distribution that is dependent on the first natural frequency and the second natural frequency, the second probability distribution that is dependent on the change of the first and third natural frequencies and the change of the second and fourth natural frequencies, the calculation of the size of damage and the rigidity of the object simultaneously by using a product of the first and second probability distributions and maximizing the product. Although Ao teaches a case where there is no damage in the rotor blade, the combination of Kinoshita, Diamond, Ao, and Yan fails to disclose that the first and third natural frequencies are calculated from the case when there is zero damage in the object (for the first natural frequency) and when there is damage in the object (for the third natural frequency), before inspection of the inspection target object.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOSTOFA AHMED HISHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 a.m. - 4 p.m. ET.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at (571) 270-0349. 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.
/MOSTOFA AHMED HISHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights