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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 9 and 20 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. The claims recite “any number of additional sensing probes” which is unclear and/or redundant. It is unclear what “any number” means, i.e., one more, a million more, pi additional probes, etc.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-11 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over DE 19944047 to Wagner.
Regarding Claim 1, Wagner discloses an acoustic fluid monitoring system (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, device for measuring concentration/density and particles in a fluid using ultrasound; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004]), comprising: a first sensing probe and a second sensing probe acoustically coupled to an outer surface of a wall of a pipe through which a fluid is flowing; wherein the first sensing probe operates at a first resonance frequency and the second sensing probe operates at a second resonance frequency (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]); wherein the first sensing probe and the second sensing probe are configured to record a first acoustic signal and a second acoustic signal, respectively, corresponding to an acoustic wave propagating through the wall of the pipe (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]); and wherein characteristics of the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal, as well as a relationship between the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal, relate to one or more properties of the fluid flowing through the pipe (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies to allow particle concentration to be measured with the piezoelectric plates 11, 12 and 14, 15, while the smallest particles and flow velocity 19 can be measured with the piezoelectric plates 13 and 16 due to the Doppler effect; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 2, Wagner discloses the one or more properties of the fluid relate to at least one of solid particles flowing through the pipe or a flow regime within the pipe (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, particle concentration measured with the piezoelectric plates 11, 12 and 14, 15, while the smallest particles and flow velocity 19 measured with piezoelectric plates 13 and 16 due to the Doppler effect; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 4, Wagner discloses the relationship between the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal is expressed as at least one of a ratio or another mathematical function between at least one component of the first acoustic signal and at least one corresponding component of the second acoustic signal (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, piezoelectric oscillator plates 11 and 14 can transmit and receive at a piezoelectric frequency of 1 MHz, and piezoelectric oscillator plates 12 and 15 at a piezoelectric frequency of 4 MHz, while the piezoelectric oscillator plates 13 and 16 transmit and receive at a piezoelectric frequency of 8 MHz; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 5, Wagner discloses the first sensing probe and the second sensing probe are configured as a single sensing unit (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, three piezoelectric transducers can be positioned exactly opposite each other, i.e. they have a radiation axis of 90° to the flow direction with measurements taken sequentially by switching to the respective frequency channel; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0070], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 6, Wagner discloses the first sensing probe and the second sensing probe are configured as a first sensing unit and a second sensing unit, respectively (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 7, Wagner discloses the first sensing unit and the second sensing unit are positioned at a same location along a length of the pipe and are circumferentially separated by 45 degrees to 180 degrees around the outer surface of the wall of the pipe (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 8, Wagner discloses the first sensing unit and the second sensing unit are positioned at separate locations along a length of the pipe and are separated along the length of the pipe by a distance of less than one to two times a diameter of the pipe (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall spaced along flow direction 19; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 9, Wagner discloses any number of additional sensing probes, wherein each additional sensing probe operates at a specific resonance frequency and is configured to record a corresponding acoustic signal (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 10, Wagner discloses a method for monitoring fluid flow within a pipe using an acoustic fluid monitoring system (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, device for measuring concentration/density and particles in a fluid using ultrasound; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004]), comprising: receiving, at a computing system, data corresponding to a first acoustic signal and a second acoustic signal (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, control and evaluation circuit with a digital signal processor (DSP) receiving signals from sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0044]-[0045], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0096]), wherein the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal relate to an acoustic wave propagating through a wall of a pipe through which a fluid is flowing, and wherein the data corresponding to the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal are obtained using a passive acoustic fluid monitoring system comprising a first sensing probe and a second sensing probe, respectively, that are acoustically coupled to an outer surface of the wall of the pipe and are configured to operate at a first resonance frequency and a second resonance frequency, respectively (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, control and evaluation circuit with a digital signal processor (DSP) receiving signals from sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0044]-[0045], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0096]); and processing, via the computing system, the data based on characteristics of the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal, as well as a relationship between the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal, to determine one or more properties of the fluid flowing through the pipe (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, control and evaluation circuit with a digital signal processor (DSP) receiving and processing signals from sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies to allow particle concentration to be measured with the piezoelectric plates 11, 12 and 14, 15, while the smallest particles and flow velocity 19 can be measured with the piezoelectric plates 13 and 16 due to the Doppler effect; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 11, Wagner discloses processing the data to determine the one or more properties of the fluid flowing through the pipe comprises processing the data to determine one or more properties relating to at least one of solid particles flowing through the pipe or a flow regime within the pipe (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, control and evaluation circuit with a digital signal processor (DSP) receiving and processing signals from sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies to allow particle concentration to be measured with the piezoelectric plates 11, 12 and 14, 15, while the smallest particles and flow velocity 19 can be measured with the piezoelectric plates 13 and 16 due to the Doppler effect; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 14, Wagner discloses processing the data based, at least in part, on the relationship between the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal comprises analyzing at least one of a ratio or another mathematical function between at least one component of the first acoustic signal and at least one corresponding component of the second acoustic signal (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, piezoelectric oscillator plates 11 and 14 can transmit and receive at a piezoelectric frequency of 1 MHz, and piezoelectric oscillator plates 12 and 15 at a piezoelectric frequency of 4 MHz, while the piezoelectric oscillator plates 13 and 16 transmit and receive at a piezoelectric frequency of 8 MHz; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Claim(s) 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wagner as applied to claims 2 and 11 above, and further in view of US 20180149505 to Ploss.
Regarding Claim 3, Wagner discloses the acoustic fluid monitoring system of claim 2, and further discloses the one or more properties relating to the solid particles comprise solid particle sizes (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies to allow particle concentration to be measured with the piezoelectric plates 11, 12 and 14, 15, while the smallest particles and flow velocity 19 can be measured with the piezoelectric plates 13 and 16 due to the Doppler effect and to divide particles into different size bands, for example 4,500 particles with a size of 5 to 10 µm and 3,000 particles with a size of 11 to 25 µm, etc.; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0037], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]), and wherein a first range of solid particles sizes are encompassed by a first bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the first resonance frequency and a second range of solid particle sizes are encompassed by a second bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the second resonance frequency (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies to allow particle concentration to be measured with the piezoelectric plates 11, 12 and 14, 15, while the smallest particles and flow velocity 19 can be measured with the piezoelectric plates 13 and 16 due to the Doppler effect and to divide particles into different size bands, for example 4,500 particles with a size of 5 to 10 µm and 3,000 particles with a size of 11 to 25 µm, etc.; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0037], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
However, Wagner does not explicitly disclose center frequencies for a first range of particles sizes are encompassed by a first bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the first resonance frequency and center frequencies for a second range of particle sizes are encompassed by a second bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the second resonance frequency. Ploss discloses center frequencies for a first range of particles sizes are encompassed by a first bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the first resonance frequency and center frequencies for a second range of particle sizes are encompassed by a second bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the second resonance frequency (Figs. 1-6, resonance frequencies which lie within the bandwidth of respective ultrasonic transducers A, B; ¶¶ [0012], [0039], [0051], [0078]-[0080]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the application to modify the invention of Wagner by providing center frequencies for a first range of particles sizes are encompassed by a first bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the first resonance frequency and center frequencies for a second range of particle sizes are encompassed by a second bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the second resonance frequency as in Ploss in order to provide for greater accuracy.
Regarding Claim 13, Wagner discloses the method of claim 11, and further discloses a first range of solid particles sizes are encompassed by a first bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the first resonance frequency and a second range of solid particle sizes are encompassed by a second bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the second resonance frequency (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies to allow particle concentration to be measured with the piezoelectric plates 11, 12 and 14, 15, while the smallest particles and flow velocity 19 can be measured with the piezoelectric plates 13 and 16 due to the Doppler effect and to divide particles into different size bands, for example 4,500 particles with a size of 5 to 10 µm and 3,000 particles with a size of 11 to 25 µm, etc.; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0037], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]), and wherein processing the data comprises determining an approximate range of solid particles sizes present within the fluid based on at least one of characteristics of the first acoustic signal with respect to the first bandwidth or characteristics of the second acoustic signal with respect to the second bandwidth(Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies to allow particle concentration to be measured with the piezoelectric plates 11, 12 and 14, 15, while the smallest particles and flow velocity 19 can be measured with the piezoelectric plates 13 and 16 due to the Doppler effect and to divide particles into different size bands, for example 4,500 particles with a size of 5 to 10 µm and 3,000 particles with a size of 11 to 25 µm, etc.; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0037], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
However, Wagner does not explicitly disclose center frequencies for a first range of particles sizes are encompassed by a first bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the first resonance frequency and center frequencies for a second range of particle sizes are encompassed by a second bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the second resonance frequency. Ploss discloses center frequencies for a first range of particles sizes are encompassed by a first bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the first resonance frequency and center frequencies for a second range of particle sizes are encompassed by a second bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the second resonance frequency (Figs. 1-6, resonance frequencies which lie within the bandwidth of respective ultrasonic transducers A, B; ¶¶ [0012], [0039], [0051], [0078]-[0080]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the application to modify the invention of Wagner by providing center frequencies for a first range of particles sizes are encompassed by a first bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the first resonance frequency and center frequencies for a second range of particle sizes are encompassed by a second bandwidth with a corresponding frequency that is closer to the second resonance frequency as in Ploss in order to provide for greater accuracy.
Claim(s) 12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wagner in view of US 20110301882 to Andersen.
Regarding Claim 12, Wagner discloses the method of claim 11, and further discloses processing the data based on the characteristics of the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal, as well as the relationship between the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies to allow particle concentration to be measured; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0037], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
However, Wagner does not explicitly disclose processing to distinguish sound caused by impingement of at least a portion of the solid particles with an inner surface of the wall of the pipe from background noise caused by the flow regime within the pipe. Andersen discloses processing to distinguish sound caused by impingement of at least a portion of the solid particles with an inner surface of the wall of the pipe from background noise caused by the flow regime within the pipe (Figs. 1-4, sensor/detector mounted externally on pipeline for ultrasonic frequency range, picking up acoustic noise induced by particle impingement or scouring against the inside pipe wall, with `background noise` G(..)subtracted to isolate sand noise level (numerator of Eq. 1), which in turn is converted to sand rate by division with a reference sand noise level F(..); ¶¶ [0001]-[0021], [0033]-[0047], [0054]-[0056]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the application to modify the invention of Wagner by providing processing to distinguish sound caused by impingement of at least a portion of the solid particles with an inner surface of the wall of the pipe from background noise caused by the flow regime within the pipe as in Andersen in order to provide for greater accuracy.
Regarding Claim 15, Wagner discloses detecting an unplanned sand production event based on a change in the at least one of the ratio or the other mathematical function between the at least one component of the first acoustic signal and the at least one corresponding component of the second acoustic signal (Figs. 1-4, sensor/detector mounted externally on pipeline for ultrasonic frequency range, picking up acoustic noise induced by particle impingement or scouring against the inside pipe wall, with `background noise` G(..)subtracted to isolate sand noise level (numerator of Eq. 1), which in turn is converted to sand rate by division with a reference sand noise level F(..); ¶¶ [0001]-[0021], [0033]-[0047], [0054]-[0056]).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wagner in view of US 20200011169 to Haghshenas.
Regarding Claim 16, Wagner discloses the method of claim 10, and further discloses the computing system (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, , control and evaluation circuit with a digital signal processor (DSP) receiving signals; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0044]-[0045]). However, Wagner is silent regarding recommending one or more operating condition changes for a wellbore corresponding to the pipe based on the one or more determined properties of the fluid flowing through the pipe. Haghshenas discloses recommending one or more operating condition changes for a wellbore corresponding to the pipe based on the one or more determined properties of the fluid flowing through the pipe (Figs. 1-2, integrity logs used to determine a rate of change for feature of wellbore and determining a preventive action or a risk analysis is outside the standard of the preventive and risk study; and changing at least a portion of the tubular or plugging the wellbore; ¶¶ [0053]-[0055], [0089]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the application to modify the invention of Wagner by providing recommending one or more operating condition changes for a wellbore corresponding to the pipe based on the one or more determined properties of the fluid flowing through the pipe as in Haghshenas in order to provide for greater safety.
Claim(s) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wagner in view of US 20160341029 to Phillips.
Regarding Claim 17, Wagner discloses an acoustic fluid monitoring system (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, device for measuring concentration/density and particles in a fluid using ultrasound; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004]), comprising: a first sensing probe and a second sensing probe acoustically coupled to an outer surface of a wall of a pipe through which a fluid comprising solid particles is flowing; wherein the first sensing probe operates at a first resonance frequency and the second sensing probe operates at a second resonance frequency (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]); wherein the first sensing probe and the second sensing probe are configured to record a first acoustic signal and a second acoustic signal, respectively, corresponding to an acoustic wave propagating through the wall of the pipe (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]); and wherein characteristics of the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal, as well as a relationship between the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal, relate to properties of the fluid and the solid particles within the fluid (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies to allow particle concentration to be measured with the piezoelectric plates 11, 12 and 14, 15, while the smallest particles and flow velocity 19 can be measured with the piezoelectric plates 13 and 16 due to the Doppler effect; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
However, Wagner does not disclose the fluid is a hydrocarbon fluid; and the sensing probe positioned within three times a diameter of the pipe from a point at which a direction of flow is altered within the pipe; wherein the acoustic wave propagating through the wall of the pipe is as a result, at least in part, of an impingement of at least a portion of the solid particles within the hydrocarbon fluid with an inner surface of the wall of the pipe at the point at which the direction of flow is altered within the pipe. Phillips discloses the fluid is a hydrocarbon fluid (Title); and the sensing probe positioned within three times a diameter of the pipe from a point at which a direction of flow is altered within the pipe (Figs. 1-6, christmas tree assembly 1 with acoustic sensors 15, 16, 17 located at or near sharp bends 7, 8 in flow pipeline 4 to detect particle impact; ¶¶ [0039]-[0057]); wherein the acoustic wave propagating through the wall of the pipe is as a result, at least in part, of an impingement of at least a portion of the solid particles within the hydrocarbon fluid with an inner surface of the wall of the pipe at the point at which the direction of flow is altered within the pipe (Figs. 1-6, christmas tree assembly 1 with acoustic sensors 15, 16, 17 located at or near sharp bends 7, 8 in flow pipeline 4 to detect particle impact; ¶¶ [0039]-[0057]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the application to modify the invention of Wagner by providing the fluid is a hydrocarbon fluid; and the sensing probe positioned within three times a diameter of the pipe from a point at which a direction of flow is altered within the pipe; wherein the acoustic wave propagating through the wall of the pipe is as a result, at least in part, of an impingement of at least a portion of the solid particles within the hydrocarbon fluid with an inner surface of the wall of the pipe at the point at which the direction of flow is altered within the pipe as in Phillips in order to provide for greater accuracy.
Regarding Claim 18, Wagner discloses the relationship between the first acoustic signal and the second acoustic signal is expressed as at least one of a ratio or another mathematical function between at least one component of the first acoustic signal and at least one corresponding component of the second acoustic signal (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, piezoelectric oscillator plates 11 and 14 can transmit and receive at a piezoelectric frequency of 1 MHz, and piezoelectric oscillator plates 12 and 15 at a piezoelectric frequency of 4 MHz, while the piezoelectric oscillator plates 13 and 16 transmit and receive at a piezoelectric frequency of 8 MHz; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 19, Wagner discloses the first sensing probe and the second sensing probe are configured as a first sensing unit and a second sensing unit, and wherein the first sensing unit and the second sensing unit are: positioned at a same location along a length of the pipe and circumferentially separated by 45 degrees to 180 degrees around the outer surface of the wall of the pipe; or positioned at separate locations along a length of the pipe and separated along the length of the pipe by a distance of less than one to two times a diameter of the pipe (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Regarding Claim 20, Wagner discloses any number of additional sensing probes, wherein each additional sensing probe operates at a specific resonance frequency and is configured to record a corresponding acoustic signal (Figs. 1-4 and 8-9, sound conductors 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 provided on its outer end face with piezoelectric resonator plates 11, 12, 13 or 14, 15, 16 respectively on opposite sides of measuring tube/piping/measuring channel 1 wall, each of which emit/receive ultrasonic signals of different piezoelectric resonant frequencies; ¶¶ [0001]-[0004], [0068], [0077], [0092]-[0095]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J BOLDUC whose telephone number is (571)270-1602. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 10am-6pm.
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, Walter Lindsay, Jr. can be reached at (571) 272-1672. 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.
/DAVID J BOLDUC/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights