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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on -02/13/2015, 2/10/2025 and 06/04/2024- is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 7-9 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.
Regarding claim 7, it is unclear for the limitation “classify one or more of the detected peaks in the vibration velocity…” because a vibration velocity need to be detected before the vibration velocity is classified as in claim 1.
Examiner views the applicant should include a limitation of detecting the vibration velocity after the speed in monitored to overcome this rejection.
Claim 8 and 9 are also rejected under 112 due dependencies on claim 7.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-6, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poczka et al US 20130173178 A1 herein after “Poczka” in view of Mitchell et al US 20070062291 A1
Regarding claim 1, Poczka teaches an apparatus for detecting hydraulic shock events in a fluid system (para [0002] The invention relates to an apparatus and method for monitoring a steam plant),
the apparatus comprising a vibration sensor operable to output a vibration sensor signal indicative of sensed vibrations of one or more components of the fluid system (para [0121] Accordingly, a sensor unit 10 having a vibro-acoustic sensor 11 is positioned at the inlet of each of the steam traps 6a, 6b, 6c (although only the sensor unit 10 associated with the steam trap 6a is shown) to record the vibro-acoustic behaviour of the adjacent conduit. Specifically, each vibro-acoustic sensor 11 is clamped onto the drain line 5a, 5b, 5c at or near the inlet of the steam traps 6a, 6b, 6c)
Examiner views vibro-acoustic sensor (i.e., vibration sensor) is operably position at the drain line to sense the vibration of the steam system (i.e., fluid system),
and a processing unit configured to (para [0137] Accordingly, the electronics unit 13 comprises signal processing electronics, such as a Digital Signal Processor, which are pre-programmed with algorithms to process data.):
- obtain a vibration velocity signal from the vibration sensor signal, the vibration velocity signal being indicative of a vibration velocity of the one or more components of the fluid system (para [0248] Vibration of the target surface creates a Doppler shift in the frequency of the measurement beam. The output of the detector is a frequency modulated signal, with the Bragg cell frequency as the carrier frequency, and the Doppler shift as the modulation frequency. This signal can be demodulated to derive the velocity as a function of time for the vibrating target surface.);
Examiner views a detector detects a vibrating velocity from the vibrating fluid system.
Poczka does not teach detect one or more peaks in the vibration velocity signal; and
classify one or more of the detected peaks as a hydraulic shock event.
Mitchell teaches detect one or more peaks in the vibration velocity signal (para [0002] In many industrial facilities, there may be many hundreds of metres of pipe-work for conveying fluids. Each section of pipe-work will require periodic checking. For instance, the pipe may be conveying an explosive or toxic fluid, possibly at high pressure, and so the consequences of pipe failure may be great. For pipe-work, the most common failure modes associated with vibration are that of fatigue, loosening and fretting failure.
[0063] The combination of the two frequencies in the time domain, along with their individual responses, is detailed in FIG. 4. Examination of the combined curve indicates a peak-to-peak velocity of 65 mm/sec at 10 Hz, the frequency of the lower response. Converted to rms values this is 23 mm/sec rms at 10 Hz. This value is considerably closer to the true value (labelled "actual" in FIG. 3) and is in fact within the `danger` band, well above the "Superimposed" points.);
In Fig. 3 and 4 examiner views peaks in the vibration velocity signal of fluid system and
classify one or more of the detected peaks as a hydraulic shock event (para [0068] If it is determined using the vibration criterion that no action is required since vibration levels are acceptable then a classification of "OK" is displayed. If it is determined that the level of vibration is above this safe level and further analysis is required to determine if modifications must be undertaken to prevent possible high cycle fatigue failure then a classification of "Concern" is displayed. If it is determined that the level of vibration is above this intermediate level and modifications must be undertaken to prevent high cycle fatigue failures then a classification of "Problem" is displayed. This is shown in FIG. 6.).
In Fig. 6 examiner views the classification of peaks as ok, concern, problem due to fluid pressure (i.e., hydraulic shock) event in the pipe.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Mitchell into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a vibration velocity peak in a fluid system due to fluid pressure or shock so that the appropriate condition or failure of the fluid system can be determined.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Poczka and Mitchell teach an apparatus according to claim 1, Mitchell teaches wherein the processing unit is further configured to compute a measure of severity of the hydraulic shock event from the vibration velocity signal (para [0068] If it is determined using the vibration criterion that no action is required since vibration levels are acceptable then a classification of "OK" is displayed. If it is determined that the level of vibration is above this safe level and further analysis is required to determine if modifications must be undertaken to prevent possible high cycle fatigue failure then a classification of "Concern" is displayed. If it is determined that the level of vibration is above this intermediate level and modifications must be undertaken to prevent high cycle fatigue failures then a classification of "Problem" is displayed. This is shown in FIG. 6.).
In Fig. 6 examiner views the classification (i.e., severity of hydraulic pressure or shock) from peaks as ok, concern, problem due to fluid pressure (i.e., hydraulic shock) event in the pipe is determined from the vibration velocity signal.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Mitchell into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a vibration velocity peak in a fluid system due to fluid pressure or shock so that the appropriate condition or failure of the fluid system can be determined.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Poczka and Mitchell teach an apparatus according to claim 1, Mitchell teaches wherein the vibration sensor is a vibration velocity sensor configured to sense vibration velocity, wherein the vibration sensor signal represents a vibration velocity signal and wherein obtaining the vibration velocity signal comprises receiving the vibration velocity signal from the vibration velocity sensor (para [0065] FIG. 5 shows a vibration analysing device 10 for determining the vibrational response of a structural element, such as a pipe (not shown). The device 10 includes a vibration sensor, such as an accelerometer (not shown), for providing an output in response to a force input imparted to the pipe.
[0067] Display means 20 is provided. This includes a display 22 for the determined classification, as well as a display 24 for the determined peak frequency and a display 26 for the determined single RMS velocity value.).
In Fig. 5 examiner views the device 10 as a vibration velocity sensor measuring vibration velocity 26 in a fluid system, pipe. The vibration velocity is obtained from the device 10.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Mitchell into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a vibration velocity in a fluid system due to fluid pressure or shock by using a vibration velocity sensor so that the accurate condition or failure of the fluid system can be determined using the sensor.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Poczka and Mitchell teach an apparatus according to claim 2, Mitchell teaches wherein the vibration sensor is an accelerometer operable to sense accelerations of one or more components of the fluid system, wherein the vibration sensor signal represents a vibration acceleration signal and wherein obtaining the vibration velocity signal comprises receiving the vibration acceleration signal and transforming the received vibration acceleration signal into a vibration velocity signal (para [0013] Preferably the structural element comprises a conduit, such as a pipe. Preferably the force input comprises one or more sources of excitation including, but not limited to, the flow, pulsation and transmission. [0014] Preferably the vibration sensor comprises an accelerometer and the output comprises acceleration data.
[0030] Preferably the method includes integrating one of the acceleration data and the frequency response data determined from the acceleration data to determine velocity data for the structural element. Preferably the method includes determining a single Root Mean Square (RMS) amplitude value from the velocity data.).
In Fig. 5 examiner views the device 10 as a vibration acceleration sensor measuring vibration acceleration in a fluid system, pipe. The vibration velocity is obtained by integrating the vibration acceleration data collection from the device 10.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Mitchell into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a vibration acceleration in a fluid system due to fluid pressure or shock by using a vibration acceleration sensor and the integrate the acceleration data to get the velocity data so that the accurate condition or failure of the fluid system can be determined using the velocity data.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Poczka and Mitchell teach an apparatus according to claim 1, Mitchell teaches wherein the processing unit is configured to classify one or more of the detected peaks as a hydraulic shock event responsive to the one or more of the detected peaks fulfilling one or more trigger criteria, in particular a magnitude of the one or more of the detected peaks exceeding a threshold (para [0004] There are many different methods employed in the interpretation of vibrational test data and no formal standard exists on the matter. However, a number of predetermined vibration criteria are known, such as those developed by Walter Von Nimitz, J C Wachel, C L Bates and South West Research Institute which have become an industry standard.
[0058] FIG. 1 shows a number of known predetermined vibration criteria for structural elements such as pipes. These criteria, developed by Walter Von Nimitz, J C Wachel, C L Bates and South West Research Institute (SWRI), use displacement with respect to frequency. While the criteria tend to be conservative for long flexible piping spans, they have become the industry standard for pipe applications.).
In Fig. 1 examiner views the predetermined classified vibration criteria (i.e., magnitude of peak detection or perception threshold, Danger as exceeding threshold -for example) in the fluid system (i.e., pipe) due to hydraulic shock event.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Mitchell into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a vibration in a fluid system due to fluid pressure or shock by using a vibration threshold data so that the accurate condition of the fluid system can be determined.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Poczka and Mitchell teach an apparatus according to claim 1, wherein obtaining the vibration velocity signal comprises performing an envelope computation to obtain a vibration velocity amplitude signal indicative of an amplitude of an oscillating vibration velocity as a function of time ([0029] Preferably the method includes filtering the output. Preferably the output is filtered in the range of 2 to 2000 Hz.
[0063] The combination of the two frequencies in the time domain, along with their individual responses, is detailed in FIG. 4. Examination of the combined curve indicates a peak-to-peak velocity of 65 mm/sec at 10 Hz, the frequency of the lower response.);
Examiner views the signal filtering provides an output vibration velocity signal with an amplitude (i.e., an envelope between -30 to 30in Fig. 4) of vibrating fluid system (i.e., oscillating) with the vibration velocity with respect to time as shown in Fig. 4.
and wherein the processing unit is further configured to:
detect one or more peaks in the vibration velocity amplitude signal (please see fig. 4, where one or peaks in the vibration velocity amplitude signal is shown),
compute respective magnitudes of the detected one or more peaks (From Fig. 4 examiner views the magnitudes of the peaks (i.e., highest vertical point from the origin) are or can be detected), and
classify one or more of the detected peaks as a hydraulic shock event responsive to the computed magnitude exceeding a threshold (para [0063] Converted to rms values this is 23 mm/sec rms at 10 Hz. This value is considerably closer to the true value (labelled "actual" in FIG. 3) and is in fact within the `danger` band, well above the "Superimposed" points.).
Examiner views converted rms value as the magnitude of the signal which is at the danger band (i.e, above the average threshold) shown in Fig. 3.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Mitchell into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a vibration magnitude in a fluid system due to fluid pressure or shock data so that the accurate condition of the fluid system can be determined by comparing with the threshold data.
Claim 10 is rejected as claim 1 having same claim limitation.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Poczka and Mitchell in view of Munk et al US 20170241422 A1.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Poczka and Mitchell teach an apparatus according to claim 1, Pockza teaches wherein the fluid system comprises a pump assembly (para [0017] The condensate may be stored temporarily in the receiver tank 8 before being raised to a condensate return main (not shown) by a pump 9),
Mitchell teaches classify one or more of the detected peaks in the vibration velocity signal as a hydraulic shock event (please see claim 1.),
However, the combination does not teach the pump assembly comprising a pump and a pump motor, wherein the apparatus further comprises means for monitoring a pump speed of the pump and/or a motor frequency of the pump motor, and
wherein the processing unit is configured to: detect a variation in the monitored pump speed and/or motor frequency; and
classify one or more of the detected peaks in the vibration velocity signal as a hydraulic shock event, responsive to detecting a corresponding variation in the monitored pump speed and/or motor frequency.
Munk teaches the pump assembly comprising a pump and a pump motor (para [0100] FIG. 1 shows a fault detection system 10 according to the invention for detecting faults in a pump assembly 20, which comprises a pump and an electrical motor (not shown).), wherein the apparatus further comprises means for monitoring a pump speed of the pump and/or a motor frequency of the pump motor (para [0091] FIG. 6 illustrates steps involved in estimating the rotational speed of a shaft in a pump assembly by use of measured sound signals,), and
wherein the processing unit is configured to: detect a variation in the monitored pump speed and/or motor frequency (para [0064] Accordingly, the measurements may be carried out at a plurality of different discrete rotational speeds of the at least one rotating shaft e.g. to find optimum measurement conditions.); and
responsive to detecting a corresponding variation in the monitored pump speed and/or motor frequency ([0149] The sound signal used in FIG. 11 has been recorded on a motor with a defect bearing (outer raceway). In FIGS. 11c and 11d, the shaft speed is swept from 10 Hz to 50 Hz (500 to 2,500 rpm) during 60 seconds. It is very interesting to inspect the corresponding spectrogram in FIG. 11c.).
Examiner views the sound or vibration is detected in the pump in response to the swept of frequency (i.e., change in speed) of the pump.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Munk into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a vibration in a fluid system due to pump speed, so that the vibration data can be used to analyze the condition of the pump.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Poczka, Mitchell and Munk teach an apparatus according to claim 7, Mitchell teaches wherein the processing unit is configured to classify a detected peak in the vibration velocity signal as a hydraulic shock event responsive to the detected peak in the vibration velocity (para [0063] The combination of the two frequencies in the time domain, along with their individual responses, is detailed in FIG. 4. Examination of the combined curve indicates a peak-to-peak velocity of 65 mm/sec at 10 Hz, the frequency of the lower response. Converted to rms values this is 23 mm/sec rms at 10 Hz. This value is considerably closer to the true value (labelled "actual" in FIG. 3) and is in fact within the `danger` band, well above the "Superimposed" points.);
[0068] If it is determined using the vibration criterion that no action is required since vibration levels are acceptable then a classification of "OK" is displayed. If it is determined that the level of vibration is above this safe level and further analysis is required to determine if modifications must be undertaken to prevent possible high cycle fatigue failure, then a classification of "Concern" is displayed. If it is determined that the level of vibration is above this intermediate level and modifications must be undertaken to prevent high cycle fatigue failures then a classification of "Problem" is displayed. This is shown in FIG. 6.).
In Fig. 6 examiner views the classification of peaks as ok, concern, problem due to fluid pressure (i.e., hydraulic shock) event a fluid system by using a detected vibration velocity. Examiner views Mitchell’s vibration sensor or accelerometer is also application to monitor vibration and vibration velocity at pumps.
signal having a predetermined temporal relationship with the detected variation in the monitored pump speed and/or motor frequency (para [0042] Further, the method has advantages over fault detection methods utilising accelerometers or vibrometers, since these are sensitive to the position on the pump assembly.
[0063] In a particular advantageous embodiment, the at least one rotating shaft is swept from a first rotational speed to a second rotational speed over a pre-set time period, and wherein the method a spectrogram is measured and processed. Thus, the processed signal is analysed in order to compare operational conditions in a diagram plotted with two variables, e.g. the rotational speed and the sound frequency.).
Examiner views the vibration signal in a pump is detected by an accelerometer or vibrometer due to change in rotational speed of the pump.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Munk into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a vibration in a fluid system due to pump speed, so that the vibration data can be used to analyze the condition of the pump.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Poczka, Mitchell and Munk in view of Medvedev et al US 20160228628 A1 herein after “Medvedev”.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Poczka, Mitchell and Munk teach an apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the processing unit is configured to:
Munk teaches compute a magnitude of the detected fluctuation ([0047] The estimation of the rotational speed may be carried out via a spectral analysis. This may for instance be carried out by sampling and optionally down-sampling the measured sound signal after which the sampled signal is run through a Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT), and wherein the FFT signal is analysed in order to locate peaks. The peaks will correspond to the rotational speed of the shaft.)
Examiner views the FFT provide magnitude in the detected change in speed.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Munk into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a speed signal fluctuation magnitude so that the accurate functioning of the pump like failure or safe operation can be determined.
Munk does not teach one or more of the detected peaks in the vibration velocity signal as a hydraulic shock event responsive to detecting a corresponding variation in the monitored speed, the detected variation having a computed magnitude exceeding a threshold,
detect fluctuations in a pump speed and/or motor frequency signal indicative of the monitored speed, in particular in a filtered pump speed and/or motor frequency signal
Mitchell teaches classify one or more of the detected peaks in the vibration velocity signal as a hydraulic shock event responsive to detecting a corresponding variation in the monitored speed, the detected variation having a computed magnitude exceeding a threshold ((para [0063] Converted to rms values this is 23 mm/sec rms at 10 Hz. This value is considerably closer to the true value (labelled "actual" in FIG. 3) and is in fact within the `danger` band, well above the "Superimposed" points.).
Examiner views converted rms value as the magnitude of the signal which is at the danger band (i.e, above the average threshold) shown in Fig. 3.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Mitchell into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a vibration magnitude in a fluid system due to fluid pressure or shock data so that the accurate condition of the fluid system can be determined by comparing with the threshold data.
the combination of Poczka, Mitchell and Munk does not teach detect fluctuations in a pump speed and/or motor frequency signal indicative of the monitored speed, in particular in a filtered pump speed and/or motor frequency signal
Medvedev teaches detect fluctuations in a pump speed and/or motor frequency signal indicative of the monitored speed, in particular in a filtered pump speed and/or motor frequency signal ([005] The method also includes determining a speed synchronization start point at which time the motor of the heart assist pump device will begin a change in speed of operation based on the filtered signal.)
Examiner views the pump speed change or fluctuation is detected based on the filtered signal.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Medvedev into Poczka for the purpose of detecting a change in a pump speed of a filtered signal, so that the pump speed can be controlled for a target speed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Clifton US 20160076535 A1 discuss monitoring a pump system due to water pressure using a vibration sensor.
Davidson US 20210123443 A1 discusses monitoring pump due to fluid flow rates pressure using vibration sensors
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARAD TIMILSINA whose telephone number is (571)272-7104. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00.
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.
/SHARAD TIMILSINA/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights