DETAILED ACTION
This non-final office action is in response to claims filed on 06/27/2024.
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 02/10/2026 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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention, “User-Interactable Design For Manufacturability of Sheet Metal”, is directed to an abstract idea, specifically Mental Processes and Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity, without significantly more. The claims as a whole do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually or in combination provide mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer.
Step 1: Claims 1-20 are directed to a statutory category, namely a machine.
Step 2A (1): Independent claims 1, 14, and 20 are directed to an abstract idea of Mental Processes and Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity, based on the following claim limitations:
Mental Processes:
access an input file submitted by a user, the input file comprising a representation of a sheet metal part;
determine manufacturability of the sheet metal part by applying one or more virtual bending operations to a flat pattern based on the sheet metal part, wherein the one or more virtual bending operations are performed in accordance with manufacturing configurations available to one or more manufacturing facilities;
generate a modified sheet metal part by modifying the sheet metal part based on user selection or modification of at least one of the one or more sheet metal part characteristics…;
determine manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part by applying one or more second virtual bending operations to a modified flat pattern based on the modified sheet metal part, wherein the one or more second virtual bending operations are performed in accordance with the manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities;
Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (e.g. commercial interaction):
and in response to determining that the modified sheet metal part is manufacturable with particular manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities:
automatically determine or update a price of manufacturing the modified sheet metal part based on the particular manufacturing configurations; and
selectively enable order placement functionality…that triggers manufacturing of the modified sheet metal part at the one or more manufacturing facilities.
These claims describe a process of analyzing and evaluating sheet metal design concepts for manufacturability and offering suggestions for modifications to a user, which can practically be done in the human mind with pen and paper (e.g. drawings proposal). The claims also reflects facilitating a commercial interaction between a user and a manufacturer with creating a design, pricing, and ordering options. Dependent claims 2-13 and 15-19 further describe the process of analyzing and evaluating the design concepts for manufacturability and offering suggestions for modifications to a user. Therefore, these limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the abstract groupings of Mental Processes which include concepts performed in the human mind such as observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions and Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity which encompasses fundamental economic principles or practices, commercial or legal interactions, and managing personal behavior, relationships or interactions between people. Mental Processes include claims directed to collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis even if they are claimed as being performed on a computer. The courts have found claims requiring a generic computer or nominally reciting a generic computer may still recite a mental process even though the claim limitations are not performed entirely in the human mind. Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity can encompass the activity of a single person (e.g. a person following a set of instructions), activity that involve multiple people (e.g. a commercial interaction), and certain activity between a person and a computer (e.g. a method of anonymous loan shopping) (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). Therefore, claims 1-20 are directed to an abstract idea and are not patent eligible.
Step 2A (2): The claims as a whole do not integrate this abstract idea into a practical application. In particular, claims 1, 2, 11, 12, 14, and 20 recite additional elements of “A system for facilitating user-interactable design for manufacturability of sheet metal, the system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable recording media that store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to; cause presentation of an indication of manufacturability of the sheet metal part within a user interface; cause presentation of one or more sheet metal part characteristics within the user interface that enables user selection or modification of the one or more sheet metal part characteristics for the sheet metal part, wherein the one or more sheet metal part characteristics comprise bend radius or bend angle for one or more bends of the sheet metal part; cause presentation of an indication of manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part within the user interface; (claims 1, 14, and 20); wherein the input file comprises a 3D model file…(claim 2); wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to cause alternate or simultaneous presentation of the modified sheet metal part and the sheet metal part within the user interface (claim 11); wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to cause, within the user interface, presentation of a simulation of manufacturing the sheet metal part or the modified sheet metal part using manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities (claim 12); ”. The Examiner evaluated the claims in light of the Applicant’s specification and determined that the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the claims do not recite (a) an improvement to another technology or technical field and (b) an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself and (c) implementing the abstract idea with or by use of a particular machine, (d) effecting a particular transformation or reduction of an article, or (e) applying the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. These additional elements evaluated individually and in combination are viewed as computing and display devices that are used to perform the abstract process identified in Step 2A(1). Limitations that recite mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea are not indicative of integration into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). Also, limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment (e.g. computer, virtual) in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Therefore, claims 1-20 as a whole do not include individual or a combination of additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and thus are not patent eligible.
Step 2B: The claims as a whole do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Claims 1, 2, 11, 12, 14, and 20 recite additional elements of “A system for facilitating user-interactable design for manufacturability of sheet metal, the system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable recording media that store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to; cause presentation of an indication of manufacturability of the sheet metal part within a user interface; cause presentation of one or more sheet metal part characteristics within the user interface that enables user selection or modification of the one or more sheet metal part characteristics for the sheet metal part, wherein the one or more sheet metal part characteristics comprise bend radius or bend angle for one or more bends of the sheet metal part; cause presentation of an indication of manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part within the user interface; (claims 1, 14, and 20); wherein the input file comprises a 3D model file…(claim 2); wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to cause alternate or simultaneous presentation of the modified sheet metal part and the sheet metal part within the user interface (claim 11); wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to cause, within the user interface, presentation of a simulation of manufacturing the sheet metal part or the modified sheet metal part using manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities (claim 12); ”. These additional elements are viewed as mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer and merely indicates a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception. Applying an abstract idea on a computer does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). Therefore, claims 1-20 as a whole do not include individual or a combination of additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea and thus are not patent eligible.
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.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phinney et al. (US 2019/0065629 A1) in view of Ulrich et al. (US 5,396,265) and in further view of Jacobs, II et al. (US 2021/0089002 A1).
As per claim 1, Phinney teaches a system for facilitating user-interactable design for manufacturability of sheet metal, the system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable recording media that store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to (Phinney e.g. Provided are systems and methods for identifying manufacturability improvements to a component prior to the design being provided to a manufacturer (Abstract). FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a system for suggesting modifications to a manufacturing design in accordance with an example embodiment [0008]. The user (e.g., designer) may establish a high level of connection with the insight such as classifying the component as being a machined part, a sheet metal part, a cast part, or the like [0029]. FIG. 7 illustrates a computing system 700 that can perform an object copy operation, in accordance with an example embodiment [0048].):
Phinney teaches access an input file submitted by a user, the input file comprising a representation of a sheet metal part; (Phinney e.g. The system may receive a model or a file of a component design (e.g., CAD model, etc.) and extract one or more geometric features of interest [0021]. Geometric features include holes, bends, surfaces, distance from other features, accessibility of the feature to a tool approaching from various directions, and the like, which may have attributes such as size, depth, location, shape, and/or the like [0021]. FIG. 1 illustrates a system 100 for providing insights and suggestions to a manufacturing design in accordance with an example embodiment. Referring to FIG. 1, the system 100 includes an insight server 120 that may receive a model 110 of a component to be manufactured from a user device (not shown) [0024]. The user (e.g., designer) may establish a high level of connection with the insight such as classifying the component as being a machined part, a sheet metal part, a cast part, or the like [0029].)
Phinney teaches determine manufacturability of the sheet metal part… (Phinney e.g. The system may perform a mathematical/geometric analysis of the CAD model based on a boundary representation geometry of a part or other item included within the CAD model. The system may analyze a geometric feature of interest and identify one or more changes to the feature that will reduce manufacturing complexity (e.g., time, cost, tools, machining processes, etc.) [0021]. Geometric features include holes, bends, surfaces, distance from other features, accessibility of the feature to a tool approaching from various directions, and the like, which may have attributes such as size, depth, location, shape, and/or the like [0021].)
Phinney teaches cause presentation of an indication of manufacturability of the sheet metal part within a user interface; (Phinney e.g. The system may output suggestions to a user via a user interface during a design of the component. In other words, the suggestions may be provided while the component is being designed (e.g., during CAD creation) thereby making such suggestions prior to the component being manufactured [0022]. The system may display feedback about a current manufacturing evaluation of a component and offer ways in which the efficiency can be improved to the user. The system, via the user interface, may guide the user to a more efficient complexity through an iterative process the iteratively provides feedback while the user is changing the design of the product [0022].)
Phinney teaches cause presentation of one or more sheet metal part characteristics within the user interface that enables user selection or modification of the one or more sheet metal part characteristics for the sheet metal part, wherein the one or more sheet metal part characteristics comprise bend radius or bend angle for one or more bends of the sheet metal part; (Phinney e.g. The system may output suggestions to a user via a user interface during a design of the component. In other words, the suggestions may be provided while the component is being designed (e.g., during CAD creation) thereby making such suggestions prior to the component being manufactured [0022]. FIG. 3 illustrates a process 300 of determining a manufacturing design for a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0035]. Referring to FIG. 3, in step 310, the insight system identifies a number of features included in a geometric design of a sheet metal component 300 to be manufactured which may be included in a graphical model (CAD model, etc.) received by the system [0035]. In this example, the system identifies five features that might be modifiable. For example, the five features include a form, two types of bends, and two holes which may be automatically identified by the system based on a geometric design of the sheet metal component 300 (or drawing thereof) and may be further analyzed to determine if a modification is possible to any of the features to reduce manufacturing complexity [0035]. FIG. 4 illustrates a user interface 400 displaying manufacturing attributes of a component in accordance with an example embodiment, and FIG. 5 illustrates a user interface 500 displaying suggested corrections or other modifications for designing a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0040]. Referring to the user interface 500 of FIG. 5, the user may drill down into a bend issue 510 which can cause the system to identify an issue identified from the geometric design of the component, an label of the geometric feature (e.g., straight bend), the current amount of bend, and the suggested amount of bend [0042].)
Phinney teaches generate a modified sheet metal part by modifying the sheet metal part based on user selection or modification of at least one of the one or more sheet metal part characteristics at the user interface; (Phinney e.g. Based on a computer-aided design (CAD) model, CAD file, or other geometric model in graphical format submitted to the system, one or more geometric features of interest can be detected from the CAD model or CAD file and modifications to the geometric feature can be automatically provided to reduce the complexity of manufacture [0017]. The system may output suggestions to a user via a user interface during a design of the component. In other words, the suggestions may be provided while the component is being designed (e.g., during CAD creation) thereby making such suggestions prior to the component being manufactured [0022]. FIG. 6 illustrates a method 600 for generating suggested design modifications for manufacturing a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0043]. In 650, the method may include displaying, via a user interface, a suggestion on how to modify the geometric design of the component based on the determined suggestion of the recognized geometric feature. For example, the suggestion that is output on the user interface may include a suggestion on changing a size, a shape, a depth, a location, a material, and the like, of the geometric feature [0047]. As another example, the suggestion may include changing a bend from a rounded edge to a straight edge to enable manufacturing on a press-brake instead of a forming process, etc. [0047].)
Phinney teaches cause presentation of an indication of manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part within the user interface; and (Phinney e.g. The system may output suggestions to a user via a user interface during a design of the component. In other words, the suggestions may be provided while the component is being designed (e.g., during CAD creation) thereby making such suggestions prior to the component being manufactured [0022]. The system may display feedback about a current manufacturing evaluation of a component and offer ways in which the efficiency can be improved to the user. The system, via the user interface, may guide the user to a more efficient complexity through an iterative process the iteratively provides feedback while the user is changing the design of the product [0022]. FIG. 4 illustrates a user interface 400 displaying manufacturing attributes of a component in accordance with an example embodiment, and FIG. 5 illustrates a user interface 500 displaying suggested corrections or other modifications for designing a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0040]. Referring to FIG. 4, the user interface 400 illustrates examples of costs based on category of manufacture 410. In this case, the costs are broken down into material, labor, overhead, setup, investment, and “other.” As another example, the costs may be displayed based on process type as shown in cost by process 420 [0040].)
Phinney teaches in response to determining that the modified sheet metal part is manufacturable with particular manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities: automatically determine or update a price of manufacturing the modified sheet metal part based on the particular manufacturing configurations; cause presentation of the price of manufacturing the modified sheet metal part within the user interface; and (Phinney e.g. FIG. 1 illustrates a system 100 for providing insights and suggestions to a manufacturing design in accordance with an example embodiment. Referring to FIG. 1, the system 100 includes an insight server 120 that may receive a model 110 of a component to be manufactured from a user device (not shown) [0024]. The insight server 120 may provide guidance and suggestions on reducing complexity. In addition, the insight server 120 may display estimates on what it would cost to manufacture a certain part, etc. [0025]. For example, the insight server 120 may identify multiple viable design variations and identify a lowest costing design variation, a least time consuming time variation, basic (easiest to manufacture) design variation, and the like [0028]. Referring to FIG. 4, the user interface 400 illustrates examples of costs based on category of manufacture 410. In this case, the costs are broken down into material, labor, overhead, setup, investment, and “other.” As another example, the costs may be displayed based on process type as shown in cost by process 420 [0040].)
Phinney does not explicitly teach, however, Ulrich teaches the following:
Ulrich teaches by applying one or more virtual bending operations to a flat pattern based on the sheet metal part, wherein the one or more virtual bending operations are performed in accordance with manufacturing configurations available to one or more manufacturing facilities; (Ulrich e.g. A tactile computer input device which simulates an object being designed is used with a computer aided design (CAD) system (Abstract). The design begins with a virtual metal sheet which is then manipulated by a user through manual manipulation of the input device. Bending of the virtual object is accomplished by bending of the input device (Abstract). Other functions for manipulating the virtual sheet metal object include cutting, embossing, and punching (Abstract). The input device bends at the hinge as a result of manual manipulation of the input device. The bending of the input device generates an output to the data processor which results in a similar bending of the representation generated by the data processor (col. 2 lines 13-17). Shown in FIG. 1 is a computer aided drafting (CAD) system including an input device 10 to a computer 9 having display monitor 20a and keyboard 22 (col. 3 lines 36-38). When a user first enters the CAD system, the system is in Design mode and the user is presented with two distinct views: a large window containing a flat virtual sheet metal piece shown in perspective view and a smaller window containing some other view or views of the virtual metal part (col. 3 lines 59-65). In Design mode, the sheet metal CAD system enables engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal using the hand held input device 10. Tactile and spatial inputs received from the device 10 are interpreted as design function commands by the system's software. Eight design functions are available to the user in this mode: Move, Bend,* Cut/Emboss,* Punch,* Stretch,* Shrink,* Lock, and Undo (col. 4 lines 14-29).)
Ulrich teaches determine manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part by applying one or more second virtual bending operations to a modified flat pattern based on the modified sheet metal part, wherein the one or more second virtual bending operations are performed in accordance with the manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities; (Ulrich e.g. A preferred embodiment is directed toward the design of sheet metal parts (Abstract). The design begins with a virtual metal sheet which is then manipulated by a user through manual manipulation of the input device. Bending of the virtual object is accomplished by bending of the input device (Abstract). The input device bends at the hinge as a result of manual manipulation of the input device. The bending of the input device generates an output to the data processor which results in a similar bending of the representation generated by the data processor (col. 2 lines 13-17). The system can operate in two distinct modes; Design Mode and Menu Mode. A user gains access to the modes and functions by pressing the appropriate buttons on the input device (col. 3 lines 55-58). When a user first enters the CAD system, the system is in Design mode and the user is presented with two distinct views: a large window containing a flat virtual sheet metal piece shown in perspective view and a smaller window containing some other view or views of the virtual metal part (col. 3 lines 59-65). In Design mode, the sheet metal CAD system enables engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal using the hand held input device 10. Tactile and spatial inputs received from the device 10 are interpreted as design function commands by the system's software. Eight design functions are available to the user in this mode: Move, Bend,* Cut/Emboss,* Punch,* Stretch,* Shrink,* Lock, and Undo (col. 4 lines 14-29). The Bend function allows bends of ± 180° to be placed in the virtual sheet metal piece at arbitrary locations and orientations (col. 4 lines 36-38). The Bend function enables designers to place bends of any magnitude in the virtual piece of material. All bends are subject to material constraints imposed by the system (col. 7 lines 30-33). The system performs automatic interference checking and alerts the user if the current bend will cause virtual part planes to intersect (col. 8 lines 2-4). Several checks are performed during this marking routine to ensure that desired bend is valid. For instance, the system will verify that points A and B lie on either an external edge or a cut in the part. If neither is true, the bend is declared invalid and the bend function is aborted. Such bends are not permitted because the system does not allow bend lines to intersect (col. 21 lines 26-32).)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
Phinney nor Ulrich explicitly teach, however, Jacobs teaches selectively enable order placement functionality within the user interface that triggers manufacturing of the modified sheet metal part at the one or more manufacturing facilities. (Jacobs e.g. The present invention generally relates to the field of manufacturing. More particularly, the present invention is directed to ordering expedited production or supply of designed products [0002]. FIG. 1A is a high-level flowchart of an exemplary method of correlating 3D computer models to suitable suppliers [0009]. The system may receive an order for an expedited processing option (also referred to herein as an expedited manufacturing reservation) from a user. This order can take any of a number of forms [0027]. A user may provide a 3D computer model for an ordered product and optionally additional user inputs such as quantity required and other production options (such as a particular finish) that may not be specified in the 3D computer model [0028]. FIG. 4A illustrates a more detailed method 1000A corresponding to supplier-correlation method 100A of FIG. 1A. In step 405 in FIG. 4A a user inputs a command to request identification of best supplier [0082]. At step 425 a best supplier may be identified for each model division, and at step 430 manufacturing orders may be placed with identified best suppliers, as described above with reference to FIG. 4A [0087].)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney in view of Ulrich’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Jacob’s CAD Method and System that enable manufacturing ordering and supplier selection in order to enable expedited manufacture of one or more instantiations of a structure modeled as a 3D computer model (Jacobs e.g. [0006])
As per claim 2, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, Phinney teaches wherein the input file comprises a 3D model file, and wherein the flat pattern based on the sheet metal part is obtained by applying one or more virtual inverse bending operations to the sheet metal part as represented in the 3D model file (Phinney e.g. FIG. 6 illustrates a method 600 for generating suggested design modifications for manufacturing a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0043]. Referring to FIG. 6, in 610, the method may include receiving an image including a geometric design of a component. As an example, the image may include a model created with the use of computer software such as an electronic design automation (EDA), computer-aided design (CAD), assembly bill of materials (BOMs), purchased parts lists, composite ply layup tables, or the like [0043]. The image may include a two-dimensional model a three-dimensional model of a component such as a part, a piece, an assembly of parts/pieces, or the like, which is to be manufactured via a machining process, a cutting process, a punching process, a casting process, and/or the like [0043].).
As per claim 3, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, Phinney teaches wherein determining manufacturability of sheet metal part comprises iteratively applying virtual bending operations to the flat pattern using different manufacturing configurations. (Phinney e.g. FIG. 3 illustrates a process 300 of determining a manufacturing design for a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0035]. Referring to FIG. 3, in step 310, the insight system identifies a number of features included in a geometric design of a sheet metal component 300 to be manufactured which may be included in a graphical model (CAD model, etc.) received by the system [0035]. In this example, the system identifies five features that might be modifiable. For example, the five features include a form, two types of bends, and two holes which may be automatically identified by the system based on a geometric design of the sheet metal component 300 (or drawing thereof) and may be further analyzed to determine if a modification is possible to any of the features to reduce manufacturing complexity [0035]. In the example of FIG. 3, the system identifies multiple routes 320A and 320B for manufacturing the sheet metal component 300 and identifies the complexities of both routes. In particular, a first manufacturing route 320A will apply a laser cut to manufacture the component 300 while a second manufacturing route 320B will apply a turret press to manufacture the component 300. Each complete process route is shown with solid lines indicating required processes while dashed lines are optional [0036]. In this example, the system determines that the laser cut process route 320A cannot manufacture a form of the component 300 because it has no process that can create the form feature, however the turret press process route 320B can create the form feature. Further, both process routes 320A and 320B have optional bend brake processes capable of designing the two types of bends [0037]. In this example, because the laser cut process route 320A has an error in that the form cannot be manufactured, the system may choose the turret press process route 320B because it has the highest confidence of a successful manufacture [0039].)
As per claim 4, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, Phinney teaches wherein the manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities comprise one or more punch configurations, one or more die configurations, one or more back gauge configurations, one or more bend sequence configurations, one or more machine selection configurations, or one or more part orientation configurations. (Phinney e.g. Referring to FIG. 6, in 610, the method may include receiving an image including a geometric design of a component. As an example, the image may include a model created with the use of computer software such as an electronic design automation (EDA), computer-aided design (CAD), assembly bill of materials (BOMs), purchased parts lists, composite ply layup tables, or the like [0043]. The image may include a two-dimensional model a three-dimensional model of a component such as a part, a piece, an assembly of parts/pieces, or the like, which is to be manufactured via a machining process, a cutting process, a punching process, a casting process, and/or the like [0043].)
As per claim 5, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, wherein, when the sheet metal part is not manufacturable, the indication of manufacturability of the sheet metal part indicates one or more problem regions associated with the sheet metal part (Phinney e.g. The system may detect a component that is not capable of manufacture due to one or more design constraints. In this example, the system can notify the designer of such a flawed design before the design is submitted for manufacture. Furthermore, the system can suggest changes to the design to meet manufacturing requirements [0018]. The system described herein addresses these problems by automatically suggesting changes to a component design to reduce manufacturing complexity of the component [0021]. The presence of certain features may create complexity while hindering manufacturing efficiency, and they can include unnecessary tolerances, dimensions that are too large, too small, materials that are not compatible with certain manufacturing processes, and the like. The insight server 120 can identify these problems and suggest alternatives that still satisfy the object of the component being designed. In some cases, the suggested changes are to enable the component to be manufactured [0028]. Referring to the user interface 500 of FIG. 5, the user may drill down into a bend issue 510 which can cause the system to identify an issue identified from the geometric design of the component, an label of the geometric feature (e.g., straight bend), the current amount of bend, and the suggested amount of bend [0042].)
As per claim 6, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, Phinney teaches wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to cause presentation of the one or more sheet metal part characteristics in response to determining that the sheet metal part is not manufacturable (Phinney e.g. The system may detect a component that is not capable of manufacture due to one or more design constraints. In this example, the system can notify the designer of such a flawed design before the design is submitted for manufacture [0018]. The system may display feedback about a current manufacturing evaluation of a component and offer ways in which the efficiency can be improved to the user. The system, via the user interface, may guide the user to a more efficient complexity through an iterative process the iteratively provides feedback while the user is changing the design of the product [0022]. The insight server 120 may make multiple suggestions which are output via the user interface and which enable the designer to make the final choice on how best to proceed. The presence of certain features may create complexity while hindering manufacturing efficiency, and they can include unnecessary tolerances, dimensions that are too large, too small, materials that are not compatible with certain manufacturing processes, and the like. The insight server 120 can identify these problems and suggest alternatives that still satisfy the object of the component being designed. In some cases, the suggested changes are to enable the component to be manufactured [0028]. FIG. 4 illustrates a user interface 400 displaying manufacturing attributes of a component in accordance with an example embodiment, and FIG. 5 illustrates a user interface 500 displaying suggested corrections or other modifications for designing a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0040].)
As per claim 7, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, Phinney does not explicitly teach, however, Ulrich teaches wherein user selection or modification of the bend angle for one or more bends of the sheet metal part causes selection of one or more punch configurations for the one or more second virtual bending operations (Ulrich e.g. Shown in FIG. 1 is a computer aided drafting (CAD) system including an input device 10 to a computer 9 having display monitor 20a and keyboard 22 (col. 3 lines 36-38). The system can operate in two distinct modes; Design Mode and Menu Mode. A user gains access to the modes and functions by pressing the appropriate buttons on the input device (col. 3 lines 55-58). In Design mode, the sheet metal CAD system enables engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal using the hand held input device 10. Tactile and spatial inputs received from the device 10 are interpreted as design function commands by the system's software. Eight design functions are available to the user in this mode: Move, Bend,* Cut/Emboss,* Punch,* Stretch,* Shrink,* Lock, and Undo (col. 4 lines 14-29). The Bend function allows bends of ± 180° to be placed in the virtual sheet metal piece at arbitrary locations and orientations (col. 4 lines 36-38). The Move function allows the virtual input device to be moved to different locations on the virtual sheet metal piece. Such movements enable bends and cuts to be placed at arbitrary positions in the sheet (col. 4 lines 46-50). Shown in FIG. 3 is the tactile input device 10 (col. 4 lines 66). The Move button 15, the Bend button 17, the Cut button 19, and the Punch button 21 are all on the front of the input device 10 (col. 5 lines 3-5). The rotation of the body halves 12, 14 10 relative to one another allows a bending operation to be performed on a sheet metal object depicted on a computer aided drafting (CAD) system (col. 5 lines 10-13). To place a bend in the design object a user presses and holds the Bend button 17, specifies the bend magnitude by bending the input device 10 in three-space about hinge assembly 16, then releases the button 17 to implement the bend (col. 5 lines 59-64). The Bend function enables designers to place bends of any magnitude in the virtual piece of material. All bends are subject to material constraints imposed by the system (col. 7 lines 30-33). During the actual bending operation, the position of the input device icon 26 relative the virtual sheet metal piece is held constant and the angular displacements of the actual input device 10 are mapped to the angular displacements in the virtual sheet metal planes (col. 7 lines 60-64). The following table (Table 1) summarizes the menu options presented to the designer for each design functions. The bend function includes bend angle (cols. 12-13 lines 66-20).)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
As per claim 8, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, Phinney does not explicitly teach, however, Ulrich teaches wherein the presentation of the bend radius for one or more bends enables users to manually select a bend radius or trigger automatic selection of a bend radius (Ulrich e.g. The system can operate in two distinct modes; Design Mode and Menu Mode. A user gains access to the modes and functions by pressing the appropriate buttons on the input device (col. 3 lines 55-58). Two groups of Menu functions are of particular interest. First, the Bend Menu allows users to alter the following virtual material parameters: Metal Type; Metal Thickness, and; Minimum Bend Radius. Each of these options is a hierarchical menu (col. 13 lines 21-26). The "Bend Radius" option allows designers to select the default bend radius for the entire sheet from a given list. The system calculates the minimum allowable bend radius and forces the user's selection to be greater (col. 13 lines 33-37).).
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
As per claim 9, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 8, Phinney does not explicitly teach, however, Ulrich teaches wherein bend radius options presented for manual selection are constrained by the manufacturing configurations available at the one or more manufacturing facilities (Ulrich e.g. The system can operate in two distinct modes; Design Mode and Menu Mode. A user gains access to the modes and functions by pressing the appropriate buttons on the input device (col. 3 lines 55-58). The Bend function enables designers to place bends of any magnitude in the virtual piece of material. All bends are subject to material constraints imposed by the system (col. 7 lines 30-33). Two groups of Menu functions are of particular interest. First, the Bend Menu allows users to alter the following virtual material parameters: Metal Type; Metal Thickness, and; Minimum Bend Radius. Each of these options is a hierarchical menu (col. 13 lines 21-26). The "Bend Radius" option allows designers to select the default bend radius for the entire sheet from a given list. The system calculates the minimum allowable bend radius and forces the user's selection to be greater (col. 13 lines 33-37).).
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
As per claim 10, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, wherein user selection or modification of the bend radius for one or more bends of the sheet metal part causes selection of one or more die configurations for the one or more second virtual bending operations (Ulrich e.g. The system can operate in two distinct modes; Design Mode and Menu Mode. A user gains access to the modes and functions by pressing the appropriate buttons on the input device (col. 3 lines 55-58). Two groups of Menu functions are of particular interest. First, the Bend Menu allows users to alter the following virtual material parameters: Metal Type; Metal Thickness, and; Minimum Bend Radius. Each of these options is a hierarchical menu (col. 13 lines 21-26). The "Bend Radius" option allows designers to select the default bend radius for the entire sheet from a given list. The system calculates the minimum allowable bend radius and forces the user's selection to be greater (col. 13 lines 33-37).) Conceptually, bending of the sheet metal part is accomplished by wrapping the virtual metal around an imaginary cylinder of a specified diameter, as demonstrated n FIG. 19A (col. 21 lines 55-58).)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
As per claim 11, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to cause alternate or simultaneous presentation of the modified sheet metal part and the sheet metal part within the user interface.(Phinney e.g. The system may output suggestions to a user via a user interface during a design of the component. In other words, the suggestions may be provided while the component is being designed (e.g., during CAD creation) thereby making such suggestions prior to the component being manufactured [0022]. The system may display feedback about a current manufacturing evaluation of a component and offer ways in which the efficiency can be improved to the user. The system, via the user interface, may guide the user to a more efficient complexity through an iterative process the iteratively provides feedback while the user is changing the design of the product [0022]. Although shown as an image, the suggestions may be output through a user interface enabling the user to view the changes numerically [0027].)
As per claim 12, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 1, Phinney teaches wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to cause, within the user interface, presentation of a simulation of manufacturing the sheet metal part or the modified sheet metal part using manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities. (Phinney e.g. The example embodiments are directed to a system and method that can identify and suggest design modifications to a component thereby reducing manufacturing complexity prior to manufacture [0017]. Based on a computer-aided design (CAD) model, CAD file, or other geometric model in graphical format submitted to the system, one or more geometric features of interest can be detected from the CAD model or CAD file and modifications to the geometric feature can be automatically provided to reduce the complexity of manufacture [0017]. The system described herein may perform a full simulation of the manufacturing process, which allows the results to be more complete and avoid some of the “false alarms.” [0018].)
As per claim 13, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 12, Phinney does not explicitly teach, however, Ulrich teaches wherein the simulation of manufacturing the modified sheet metal part uses (i) one or more punch configurations selected based on user selection or modification of the bend angle for one or more bends or (ii) one or more die configurations selected based on user selection or modification of the bend radius for one or more bends (Ulrich e.g. The system can operate in two distinct modes; Design Mode and Menu Mode. A user gains access to the modes and functions by pressing the appropriate buttons on the input device (col. 3 lines 55-58). In Design mode, the sheet metal CAD system enables engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal using the hand held input device 10. Tactile and spatial inputs received from the device 10 are interpreted as design function commands by the system's software. Eight design functions are available to the user in this mode: Move, Bend,* Cut/Emboss,* Punch,* Stretch,* Shrink,* Lock, and Undo (col. 4 lines 14-29). The Bend function allows bends of ± 180° to be placed in the virtual sheet metal piece at arbitrary locations and orientations (col. 4 lines 36-38). The move function enables designers to reposition he virtual input device icon 26 with respect to the object representing the virtual sheet metal piece. Movements of this icon 26, relative to the virtual part, are necessary to allow cuts, bends and holes to be placed in the material at desired locations (col. 6 lines 12-17). The following table (Table 1) summarizes the menu options presented to the designer for each design functions (cols. 12-13 lines 66-20).)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
As per claim 14, Phinney teaches a system for facilitating user-interactable design for manufacturability of sheet metal, the system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable recording media that store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to (Phinney e.g. Provided are systems and methods for identifying manufacturability improvements to a component prior to the design being provided to a manufacturer (Abstract). FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a system for suggesting modifications to a manufacturing design in accordance with an example embodiment [0008]. The user (e.g., designer) may establish a high level of connection with the insight such as classifying the component as being a machined part, a sheet metal part, a cast part, or the like [0029]. FIG. 7 illustrates a computing system 700 that can perform an object copy operation, in accordance with an example embodiment [0048].):
Phinney teaches access an input file submitted by a user, the input file comprising a representation of a sheet metal part; (Phinney e.g. The system may receive a model or a file of a component design (e.g., CAD model, etc.) and extract one or more geometric features of interest [0021]. Geometric features include holes, bends, surfaces, distance from other features, accessibility of the feature to a tool approaching from various directions, and the like, which may have attributes such as size, depth, location, shape, and/or the like [0021]. FIG. 1 illustrates a system 100 for providing insights and suggestions to a manufacturing design in accordance with an example embodiment. Referring to FIG. 1, the system 100 includes an insight server 120 that may receive a model 110 of a component to be manufactured from a user device (not shown) [0024]. The user (e.g., designer) may establish a high level of connection with the insight such as classifying the component as being a machined part, a sheet metal part, a cast part, or the like [0029].)
Phinney teaches cause presentation of one or more sheet metal part characteristics within a user interface that enables user selection or modification of the one or more sheet metal part characteristics for the sheet metal part, wherein the one or more sheet metal part characteristics comprise bend radius or bend angle for one or more bends of the sheet metal part; (Phinney e.g. The system may output suggestions to a user via a user interface during a design of the component. In other words, the suggestions may be provided while the component is being designed (e.g., during CAD creation) thereby making such suggestions prior to the component being manufactured [0022]. FIG. 3 illustrates a process 300 of determining a manufacturing design for a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0035]. Referring to FIG. 3, in step 310, the insight system identifies a number of features included in a geometric design of a sheet metal component 300 to be manufactured which may be included in a graphical model (CAD model, etc.) received by the system [0035]. In this example, the system identifies five features that might be modifiable. For example, the five features include a form, two types of bends, and two holes which may be automatically identified by the system based on a geometric design of the sheet metal component 300 (or drawing thereof) and may be further analyzed to determine if a modification is possible to any of the features to reduce manufacturing complexity [0035]. FIG. 4 illustrates a user interface 400 displaying manufacturing attributes of a component in accordance with an example embodiment, and FIG. 5 illustrates a user interface 500 displaying suggested corrections or other modifications for designing a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0040]. Referring to the user interface 500 of FIG. 5, the user may drill down into a bend issue 510 which can cause the system to identify an issue identified from the geometric design of the component, an label of the geometric feature (e.g., straight bend), the current amount of bend, and the suggested amount of bend [0042].)
Phinney teaches generate a modified sheet metal part by modifying the sheet metal part based on user selection or modification of at least one of the one or more sheet metal part characteristics at the user interface; (Phinney e.g. Based on a computer-aided design (CAD) model, CAD file, or other geometric model in graphical format submitted to the system, one or more geometric features of interest can be detected from the CAD model or CAD file and modifications to the geometric feature can be automatically provided to reduce the complexity of manufacture [0017]. The system may output suggestions to a user via a user interface during a design of the component. In other words, the suggestions may be provided while the component is being designed (e.g., during CAD creation) thereby making such suggestions prior to the component being manufactured [0022]. FIG. 6 illustrates a method 600 for generating suggested design modifications for manufacturing a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0043]. In 650, the method may include displaying, via a user interface, a suggestion on how to modify the geometric design of the component based on the determined suggestion of the recognized geometric feature. For example, the suggestion that is output on the user interface may include a suggestion on changing a size, a shape, a depth, a location, a material, and the like, of the geometric feature [0047]. As another example, the suggestion may include changing a bend from a rounded edge to a straight edge to enable manufacturing on a press-brake instead of a forming process, etc. [0047].)
Phinney teaches determine manufacturability of the sheet metal part… (Phinney e.g. The system may perform a mathematical/geometric analysis of the CAD model based on a boundary representation geometry of a part or other item included within the CAD model. The system may analyze a geometric feature of interest and identify one or more changes to the feature that will reduce manufacturing complexity (e.g., time, cost, tools, machining processes, etc.) [0021]. Geometric features include holes, bends, surfaces, distance from other features, accessibility of the feature to a tool approaching from various directions, and the like, which may have attributes such as size, depth, location, shape, and/or the like [0021].)
Phinney teaches in response to determining that the modified sheet metal part is manufacturable with particular manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities: automatically determine or update a price of manufacturing the modified sheet metal part based on the particular manufacturing configurations; cause presentation of the price of manufacturing the modified sheet metal part within the user interface; (Phinney e.g. FIG. 1 illustrates a system 100 for providing insights and suggestions to a manufacturing design in accordance with an example embodiment. Referring to FIG. 1, the system 100 includes an insight server 120 that may receive a model 110 of a component to be manufactured from a user device (not shown) [0024]. The insight server 120 may provide guidance and suggestions on reducing complexity. In addition, the insight server 120 may display estimates on what it would cost to manufacture a certain part, etc. [0025]. For example, the insight server 120 may identify multiple viable design variations and identify a lowest costing design variation, a least time consuming time variation, basic (easiest to manufacture) design variation, and the like [0028]. Referring to FIG. 4, the user interface 400 illustrates examples of costs based on category of manufacture 410. In this case, the costs are broken down into material, labor, overhead, setup, investment, and “other.” As another example, the costs may be displayed based on process type as shown in cost by process 420 [0040].)
Phinney does not explicitly teach, however, Ulrich teaches the following:
Ulrich teaches by applying one or more virtual bending operations to a flat pattern based on the sheet metal part, wherein the one or more virtual bending operations are performed in accordance with manufacturing configurations available to one or more manufacturing facilities; (Ulrich e.g. A tactile computer input device which simulates an object being designed is used with a computer aided design (CAD) system (Abstract). The design begins with a virtual metal sheet which is then manipulated by a user through manual manipulation of the input device. Bending of the virtual object is accomplished by bending of the input device (Abstract). Other functions for manipulating the virtual sheet metal object include cutting, embossing, and punching (Abstract). The input device bends at the hinge as a result of manual manipulation of the input device. The bending of the input device generates an output to the data processor which results in a similar bending of the representation generated by the data processor (col. 2 lines 13-17). Shown in FIG. 1 is a computer aided drafting (CAD) system including an input device 10 to a computer 9 having display monitor 20a and keyboard 22 (col. 3 lines 36-38). When a user first enters the CAD system, the system is in Design mode and the user is presented with two distinct views: a large window containing a flat virtual sheet metal piece shown in perspective view and a smaller window containing some other view or views of the virtual metal part (col. 3 lines 59-65). In Design mode, the sheet metal CAD system enables engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal using the hand held input device 10. Tactile and spatial inputs received from the device 10 are interpreted as design function commands by the system's software. Eight design functions are available to the user in this mode: Move, Bend,* Cut/Emboss,* Punch,* Stretch,* Shrink,* Lock, and Undo (col. 4 lines 14-29).)
Ulrich teaches determine manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part by applying one or more second virtual bending operations to a modified flat pattern based on the modified sheet metal part, wherein the one or more second virtual bending operations are performed in accordance with the manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities; (Ulrich e.g. A preferred embodiment is directed toward the design of sheet metal parts (Abstract). The design begins with a virtual metal sheet which is then manipulated by a user through manual manipulation of the input device. Bending of the virtual object is accomplished by bending of the input device (Abstract). The input device bends at the hinge as a result of manual manipulation of the input device. The bending of the input device generates an output to the data processor which results in a similar bending of the representation generated by the data processor (col. 2 lines 13-17). The system can operate in two distinct modes; Design Mode and Menu Mode. A user gains access to the modes and functions by pressing the appropriate buttons on the input device (col. 3 lines 55-58). When a user first enters the CAD system, the system is in Design mode and the user is presented with two distinct views: a large window containing a flat virtual sheet metal piece shown in perspective view and a smaller window containing some other view or views of the virtual metal part (col. 3 lines 59-65). In Design mode, the sheet metal CAD system enables engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal using the hand held input device 10. Tactile and spatial inputs received from the device 10 are interpreted as design function commands by the system's software. Eight design functions are available to the user in this mode: Move, Bend,* Cut/Emboss,* Punch,* Stretch,* Shrink,* Lock, and Undo (col. 4 lines 14-29). The Bend function allows bends of ± 180° to be placed in the virtual sheet metal piece at arbitrary locations and orientations (col. 4 lines 36-38). The Bend function enables designers to place bends of any magnitude in the virtual piece of material. All bends are subject to material constraints imposed by the system (col. 7 lines 30-33). The system performs automatic interference checking and alerts the user if the current bend will cause virtual part planes to intersect (col. 8 lines 2-4). Several checks are performed during this marking routine to ensure that desired bend is valid. For instance, the system will verify that points A and B lie on either an external edge or a cut in the part. If neither is true, the bend is declared invalid and the bend function is aborted. Such bends are not permitted because the system does not allow bend lines to intersect (col. 21 lines 26-32).)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
Phinney nor Ulrich explicitly teach, however, Jacobs teaches selectively enable order placement functionality within the user interface that triggers manufacturing of the modified sheet metal part at the one or more manufacturing facilities. (Jacobs e.g. The present invention generally relates to the field of manufacturing. More particularly, the present invention is directed to ordering expedited production or supply of designed products [0002]. FIG. 1A is a high-level flowchart of an exemplary method of correlating 3D computer models to suitable suppliers [0009]. The system may receive an order for an expedited processing option (also referred to herein as an expedited manufacturing reservation) from a user. This order can take any of a number of forms [0027]. A user may provide a 3D computer model for an ordered product and optionally additional user inputs such as quantity required and other production options (such as a particular finish) that may not be specified in the 3D computer model [0028]. FIG. 4A illustrates a more detailed method 1000A corresponding to supplier-correlation method 100A of FIG. 1A. In step 405 in FIG. 4A a user inputs a command to request identification of best supplier [0082]. At step 425 a best supplier may be identified for each model division, and at step 430 manufacturing orders may be placed with identified best suppliers, as described above with reference to FIG. 4A [0087].)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney in view of Ulrich’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Jacob’s CAD Method and System that enable manufacturing ordering and supplier selection in order to enable expedited manufacture of one or more instantiations of a structure modeled as a 3D computer model (Jacobs e.g. [0006]).
As per claim 15, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 14, Phinney does not explicitly teach, however, Ulrich teaches wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to cause presentation of a representation of the modified sheet metal part or the modified flat pattern, wherein the representation of the modified flat pattern depicts die contact area for one or more bends of the modified flat pattern (Ulrich e.g. When a user first enters the CAD system, the system is in Design mode and the user is presented with two distinct views: a large window containing a flat virtual sheet metal piece shown in perspective view and a smaller window containing some other view or views of the virtual metal part (col. 3 lines 59-65). An example of the two windows, after a virtual design piece has been cut and bent, is shown in FIG. 2 (col. 3 lines 66-68). As shown, the large window 24a shows a three-dimensional perspective view of the part, and the smaller window 24 shows a flat two-dimensional view of the part (cols 3-4 lines 66-3). The system can operate in two distinct modes; Design Mode and Menu Mode. A user gains access to the modes and functions by pressing the appropriate buttons on the input device (col. 3 lines 55-58). During the actual bending operation, the position of the input device icon 26 relative the virtual sheet metal piece is held constant and the angular displacements of the actual input device 10 are mapped to the angular displacements in the virtual sheet metal planes (col. 7 lines 60-64).Two groups of Menu functions are of particular interest. First, the Bend Menu allows users to alter the following virtual material parameters: Metal Type; Metal Thickness, and; Minimum Bend Radius. Each of these options is a hierarchical menu (col. 13 lines 21-26). Conceptually, bending of the sheet metal part is accomplished by wrapping the virtual metal around an imaginary cylinder of a specified diameter, as demonstrated n FIG. 19A (col. 21 lines 55-58).)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
As per claim 16, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 14, Phinney teaches wherein determining manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part comprises iteratively applying virtual bend operations to the modified flat pattern using different manufacturing configurations (Phinney e.g. FIG. 3 illustrates a process 300 of determining a manufacturing design for a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0035]. Referring to FIG. 3, in step 310, the insight system identifies a number of features included in a geometric design of a sheet metal component 300 to be manufactured which may be included in a graphical model (CAD model, etc.) received by the system [0035]. In this example, the system identifies five features that might be modifiable. For example, the five features include a form, two types of bends, and two holes which may be automatically identified by the system based on a geometric design of the sheet metal component 300 (or drawing thereof) and may be further analyzed to determine if a modification is possible to any of the features to reduce manufacturing complexity [0035]. In the example of FIG. 3, the system identifies multiple routes 320A and 320B for manufacturing the sheet metal component 300 and identifies the complexities of both routes. In particular, a first manufacturing route 320A will apply a laser cut to manufacture the component 300 while a second manufacturing route 320B will apply a turret press to manufacture the component 300. Each complete process route is shown with solid lines indicating required processes while dashed lines are optional [0036]. In this example, the system determines that the laser cut process route 320A cannot manufacture a form of the component 300 because it has no process that can create the form feature, however the turret press process route 320B can create the form feature. Further, both process routes 320A and 320B have optional bend brake processes capable of designing the two types of bends [0037]. In this example, because the laser cut process route 320A has an error in that the form cannot be manufactured, the system may choose the turret press process route 320B because it has the highest confidence of a successful manufacture [0039].)
As per claim 17, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 14, Phinney teaches wherein the particular manufacturing configurations comprise a particular punch configuration, a particular die configuration, a particular back gauge configuration, a particular bend sequence configuration, a particular machine selection configuration, or a particular part orientation configuration (Phinney e.g. Referring to FIG. 6, in 610, the method may include receiving an image including a geometric design of a component. As an example, the image may include a model created with the use of computer software such as an electronic design automation (EDA), computer-aided design (CAD), assembly bill of materials (BOMs), purchased parts lists, composite ply layup tables, or the like [0043]. The image may include a two-dimensional model a three-dimensional model of a component such as a part, a piece, an assembly of parts/pieces, or the like, which is to be manufactured via a machining process, a cutting process, a punching process, a casting process, and/or the like [0043].).
As per claim 18, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 14, Phinney does not explicitly teach, however, Ulrich teaches wherein determining manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part comprises determining a set of manufacturing configurations that minimizes collisions between the modified sheet metal part and one or more manufacturing components (Ulrich e.g. During the actual bending operation, the position of the input device icon 26 relative the virtual sheet metal piece is held constant and the angular displacements of the actual input device 10 are mapped to the angular displacements in the virtual sheet metal planes (col. 7 lines 60-64). In addition, a ghost image of the previous part geometry remains, allowing the designer to assess the consequences of the bending operation (cols. 7-8 lines 67-2). The system performs automatic interference checking and alerts the user if the current bend will cause virtual part planes to intersect (col. 8 lines 2-4).)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
As per claim 19, Phinney in view of Ulrich and Jacob teach the system of claim 18, Phinney teaches wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to, in response to determining that the modified sheet metal part is not manufacturable, cause presentation of an indication of non-manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part that indicates one or more problem regions associated with the modified sheet metal part (Phinney e.g. The system may detect a component that is not capable of manufacture due to one or more design constraints. In this example, the system can notify the designer of such a flawed design before the design is submitted for manufacture [0018]. The system may display feedback about a current manufacturing evaluation of a component and offer ways in which the efficiency can be improved to the user. The system, via the user interface, may guide the user to a more efficient complexity through an iterative process the iteratively provides feedback while the user is changing the design of the product [0022]. The insight server 120 may make multiple suggestions which are output via the user interface and which enable the designer to make the final choice on how best to proceed. The presence of certain features may create complexity while hindering manufacturing efficiency, and they can include unnecessary tolerances, dimensions that are too large, too small, materials that are not compatible with certain manufacturing processes, and the like. The insight server 120 can identify these problems and suggest alternatives that still satisfy the object of the component being designed. In some cases, the suggested changes are to enable the component to be manufactured [0028]. FIG. 4 illustrates a user interface 400 displaying manufacturing attributes of a component in accordance with an example embodiment, and FIG. 5 illustrates a user interface 500 displaying suggested corrections or other modifications for designing a component in accordance with an example embodiment [0040].).
As per claim 20, Phinney teaches a system for facilitating user-interactable design for manufacturability of sheet metal, the system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable recording media that store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to configure the system to (Phinney e.g. Provided are systems and methods for identifying manufacturability improvements to a component prior to the design being provided to a manufacturer (Abstract). FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a system for suggesting modifications to a manufacturing design in accordance with an example embodiment [0008]. The user (e.g., designer) may establish a high level of connection with the insight such as classifying the component as being a machined part, a sheet metal part, a cast part, or the like [0029]. FIG. 7 illustrates a computing system 700 that can perform an object copy operation, in accordance with an example embodiment [0048].):
Phinney teaches access an input file submitted by a user, the input file comprising a representation of a sheet metal part; (Phinney e.g. The system may receive a model or a file of a component design (e.g., CAD model, etc.) and extract one or more geometric features of interest [0021]. Geometric features include holes, bends, surfaces, distance from other features, accessibility of the feature to a tool approaching from various directions, and the like, which may have attributes such as size, depth, location, shape, and/or the like [0021]. FIG. 1 illustrates a system 100 for providing insights and suggestions to a manufacturing design in accordance with an example embodiment. Referring to FIG. 1, the system 100 includes an insight server 120 that may receive a model 110 of a component to be manufactured from a user device (not shown) [0024]. The user (e.g., designer) may establish a high level of connection with the insight such as classifying the component as being a machined part, a sheet metal part, a cast part, or the like [0029].)
Phinney teaches cause, within a user interface, presentation of one or more manufacturing configurations available to one or more manufacturing facilities for manufacturing the sheet metal part or a modified sheet metal part based on the sheet metal part, wherein the presentation enables user selection or modification of the one or more manufacturing configurations, wherein the one or more manufacturing configurations comprise one or more punch configurations, one or more die configurations, one or more back gauge configurations, one or more bend sequence configurations, one or more machine selection configurations, or one or more part orientation configurations; (Phinney e.g. A computing system may include one or more of a processor configured to one or more of receive an image including a geometric design of a component, receive an identification of a type of manufacturing process for the component from among a plurality of types of manufacturing processes, recognize a geometric feature of the component from the image based on the type of manufacturing process, and determine a modification to one or more of a size, a shape, and a location of the recognized geometric feature to reduce manufacturing complexity, and an output configured to output, to a user interface, a suggestion on how to modify the geometric design of the component based on the determined modification of the recognized geometric feature [0005]. FIG. 3 illustrates a process 300 of determining a manufacturing design for a component in accordance with an example embodiment. Referring to FIG. 3, in step 310, the insight system identifies a number of features included in a geometric design of a sheet metal component 300 to be manufactured which may be included in a graphical model (CAD model, etc.) received by the system. In this example, the system identifies five features that might be modifiable. For example, the five features include a form, two types of bends, and two holes which may be automatically identified by the system based on a geometric design of the sheet metal component 300 (or drawing thereof) and may be further analyzed to determine if a modification is possible to any of the features to reduce manufacturing complexity [0035]. In the example of FIG. 3, the system identifies multiple routes 320A and 320B for manufacturing the sheet metal component 300 and identifies the complexities of both routes. In particular, a first manufacturing route 320A will apply a laser cut to manufacture the component 300 while a second manufacturing route 320B will apply a turret press to manufacture the component 300. Each complete process route is shown with solid lines indicating required processes while dashed lines are optional [0036]. Referring to FIG. 6, in 610, the method may include receiving an image including a geometric design of a component. As an example, the image may include a model created with the use of computer software such as an electronic design automation (EDA), computer-aided design (CAD), assembly bill of materials (BOMs), purchased parts lists, composite ply layup tables, or the like [0043]. The image may include a two-dimensional model a three-dimensional model of a component such as a part, a piece, an assembly of parts/pieces, or the like, which is to be manufactured via a machining process, a cutting process, a punching process, a casting process, and/or the like [0043].)
Phinney teaches determine manufacturability of the sheet metal part… (Phinney e.g. The system may perform a mathematical/geometric analysis of the CAD model based on a boundary representation geometry of a part or other item included within the CAD model. The system may analyze a geometric feature of interest and identify one or more changes to the feature that will reduce manufacturing complexity (e.g., time, cost, tools, machining processes, etc.) [0021]. Geometric features include holes, bends, surfaces, distance from other features, accessibility of the feature to a tool approaching from various directions, and the like, which may have attributes such as size, depth, location, shape, and/or the like [0021].)
Phinney teaches in response to determining that the modified sheet metal part is manufacturable with particular manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities: automatically determine or update a price of manufacturing the modified sheet metal part based on the particular manufacturing configurations; cause presentation of the price of manufacturing the modified sheet metal part within the user interface; (Phinney e.g. FIG. 1 illustrates a system 100 for providing insights and suggestions to a manufacturing design in accordance with an example embodiment. Referring to FIG. 1, the system 100 includes an insight server 120 that may receive a model 110 of a component to be manufactured from a user device (not shown) [0024]. The insight server 120 may provide guidance and suggestions on reducing complexity. In addition, the insight server 120 may display estimates on what it would cost to manufacture a certain part, etc. [0025]. For example, the insight server 120 may identify multiple viable design variations and identify a lowest costing design variation, a least time consuming time variation, basic (easiest to manufacture) design variation, and the like [0028]. Referring to FIG. 4, the user interface 400 illustrates examples of costs based on category of manufacture 410. In this case, the costs are broken down into material, labor, overhead, setup, investment, and “other.” As another example, the costs may be displayed based on process type as shown in cost by process 420 [0040].)
Phinney does not explicitly teach, however, Ulrich teaches the following:
Ulrich teaches by applying one or more virtual bending operations to a flat pattern based on the sheet metal part, wherein the one or more virtual bending operations are performed in accordance with manufacturing configurations available to one or more manufacturing facilities; (Ulrich e.g. A tactile computer input device which simulates an object being designed is used with a computer aided design (CAD) system (Abstract). The design begins with a virtual metal sheet which is then manipulated by a user through manual manipulation of the input device. Bending of the virtual object is accomplished by bending of the input device (Abstract). Other functions for manipulating the virtual sheet metal object include cutting, embossing, and punching (Abstract). The input device bends at the hinge as a result of manual manipulation of the input device. The bending of the input device generates an output to the data processor which results in a similar bending of the representation generated by the data processor (col. 2 lines 13-17). Shown in FIG. 1 is a computer aided drafting (CAD) system including an input device 10 to a computer 9 having display monitor 20a and keyboard 22 (col. 3 lines 36-38). When a user first enters the CAD system, the system is in Design mode and the user is presented with two distinct views: a large window containing a flat virtual sheet metal piece shown in perspective view and a smaller window containing some other view or views of the virtual metal part (col. 3 lines 59-65). In Design mode, the sheet metal CAD system enables engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal using the hand held input device 10. Tactile and spatial inputs received from the device 10 are interpreted as design function commands by the system's software. Eight design functions are available to the user in this mode: Move, Bend,* Cut/Emboss,* Punch,* Stretch,* Shrink,* Lock, and Undo (col. 4 lines 14-29).)
Ulrich teaches determine manufacturability of the modified sheet metal part by applying one or more second virtual bending operations to a modified flat pattern based on the modified sheet metal part, wherein the one or more second virtual bending operations are performed in accordance with the manufacturing configurations available to the one or more manufacturing facilities; (Ulrich e.g. A preferred embodiment is directed toward the design of sheet metal parts (Abstract). The design begins with a virtual metal sheet which is then manipulated by a user through manual manipulation of the input device. Bending of the virtual object is accomplished by bending of the input device (Abstract). The input device bends at the hinge as a result of manual manipulation of the input device. The bending of the input device generates an output to the data processor which results in a similar bending of the representation generated by the data processor (col. 2 lines 13-17). The system can operate in two distinct modes; Design Mode and Menu Mode. A user gains access to the modes and functions by pressing the appropriate buttons on the input device (col. 3 lines 55-58). When a user first enters the CAD system, the system is in Design mode and the user is presented with two distinct views: a large window containing a flat virtual sheet metal piece shown in perspective view and a smaller window containing some other view or views of the virtual metal part (col. 3 lines 59-65). In Design mode, the sheet metal CAD system enables engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal using the hand held input device 10. Tactile and spatial inputs received from the device 10 are interpreted as design function commands by the system's software. Eight design functions are available to the user in this mode: Move, Bend,* Cut/Emboss,* Punch,* Stretch,* Shrink,* Lock, and Undo (col. 4 lines 14-29). The Bend function allows bends of ± 180° to be placed in the virtual sheet metal piece at arbitrary locations and orientations (col. 4 lines 36-38). The Bend function enables designers to place bends of any magnitude in the virtual piece of material. All bends are subject to material constraints imposed by the system (col. 7 lines 30-33). The system performs automatic interference checking and alerts the user if the current bend will cause virtual part planes to intersect (col. 8 lines 2-4). Several checks are performed during this marking routine to ensure that desired bend is valid. For instance, the system will verify that points A and B lie on either an external edge or a cut in the part. If neither is true, the bend is declared invalid and the bend function is aborted. Such bends are not permitted because the system does not allow bend lines to intersect (col. 21 lines 26-32).)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Ulrich’s CAD system design functions that include virtual bending operations in order to enable engineers to create parts by performing various production-like design operations on the virtual piece of sheet metal (Ulrich e.g. col. 4 lines 14-17).
Phinney nor Ulrich explicitly teach, however, Jacobs teaches selectively enable order placement functionality within the user interface that triggers manufacturing of the modified sheet metal part at the one or more manufacturing facilities. (Jacobs e.g. The present invention generally relates to the field of manufacturing. More particularly, the present invention is directed to ordering expedited production or supply of designed products [0002]. FIG. 1A is a high-level flowchart of an exemplary method of correlating 3D computer models to suitable suppliers [0009]. The system may receive an order for an expedited processing option (also referred to herein as an expedited manufacturing reservation) from a user. This order can take any of a number of forms [0027]. A user may provide a 3D computer model for an ordered product and optionally additional user inputs such as quantity required and other production options (such as a particular finish) that may not be specified in the 3D computer model [0028]. FIG. 4A illustrates a more detailed method 1000A corresponding to supplier-correlation method 100A of FIG. 1A. In step 405 in FIG. 4A a user inputs a command to request identification of best supplier [0082]. At step 425 a best supplier may be identified for each model division, and at step 430 manufacturing orders may be placed with identified best suppliers, as described above with reference to FIG. 4A [0087].)
The Examiner submits that before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Phinney in view of Ulrich’s Manufacturing Design Modification System with Jacob’s CAD Method and System that enable manufacturing ordering and supplier selection in order to enable expedited manufacture of one or more instantiations of a structure modeled as a 3D computer model (Jacobs e.g. [0006]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure include FOR: Liu, S. (WO-2008118329-A1) "Computer Implemented Direct Sheet Metal Unfolding Method..." and NPL: T.R., Kannan. (2013). "Building Next-Generation Sheet Metal CAM".
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ayanna Minor whose telephone number is (571)272-3605. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5 pm.
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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached at 571-272-6787. 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.
/A.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/Jerry O'Connor/Supervisory Patent Examiner,Group Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights