Detailed Action
1. Claims 1-20 are pending in this Application.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 of this title, 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.
3. Claims 1-5 , 7-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ramamurthy et al. (hereafter Ramamurthy) , US 20170132775 A1,pub. 05/11/2017 ,in view of ONO YUKIHIKO et al. ( hereafter ONO), JP 2024000783 A, pub. 01/09/2024.
As to claim 1, Ramamurthy teaches method of manufacture ([003], [0039], An automated measurement system, comprise dimensional inspection of the machined diffuser holes is necessary for ensuring product quality and for controlling the cooling hole manufacturing process), comprising:
scanning a component ([0039], a methodology for automatically computing shaped cooling hole parameters from 3-D digital inspection data which may be obtained by any upstream metrology process, for example, but not limited to touch probe, 3-D optical sensors and computed-tomography (CT images)) with an external artifact and an internal artifact using a computed tomography machine to provide scan data ([0041]-[0042], referring to FIGS. 2 and 3, airfoil 102 includes an airfoil wall 106 with one or more cooling holes 108-116. Wall 106 includes an interior surface 118 and an exterior surface 120. Interior surface 118 may define at least a portion of an internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102. Exterior surface 120 may at least partially define a leading edge, a trailing edge, a pressure side surface or a suction side surface of airfoil 102. The external artifact and an internal artifact corresponds to the exterior surface 120 and Interior surface 118);
wherein the internal artifact is disposed within an interior of the component([0041]-[0042], Interior surface 118 may define at least a portion of an internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102.);
determining external artifact data and internal artifact data based on the scan data ([0039], [0041]-[0042] 3-D digital inspection data obtained by computed-tomography (CT , image utilized to scan the internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102).
wherein the external artifact data is indicative of a physical characteristic of the external artifact, and the internal artifact data is indicative of a physical characteristic of the internal artifact ([0041], FIGS. 2 and 3, airfoil 102 includes an airfoil wall 106 with one or more cooling holes 108-116. Wall 106 includes an interior surface 118 and an exterior
surface 120. Interior surface 118 may define at least a portion of an internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102. Exterior surface 120 may at least partially define a leading edge, a trailing edge, a pressure side surface or a suction side surface of airfoil 102);
registering a first external coordinate system for the component based on the external artifact data; registering an internal reference feature for the component based on the internal artifact data ([0063], [0017] FIG. 10 shows that the 3-D (x, y, z) Cartesian coordinates of these extracted points are mapped into an exemplary 3-D cylindrical coordinate representation (r, θ, z); transforming 1412 the 3-D position data points from a Cartesian representation to a cylinder coordinate representation (r, θ, z) );
providing manufacturing data for the component, wherein the internal reference feature is located within the first external coordinate system during the providing of the manufacturing data([0064], Method 1500 further includes assigning 1510 the sorted 3-D data points to a portion of the subsurface feature based on a sorted position of the sorted 3-D data points wherein the subsurface feature includes a workpiece surface portion, a diffuser portion, and a meter portion and extracting 1512 parameters that define a shape of at least one of the workpiece surface portion, the diffuser portion, and the meter portion); and
It is noted that Ramamurthy does not specifically teach “forming a feature into the component using the manufacturing data”
On the other hand in the same filed of endeavor plant configuration measurement device based on 3D image data of ONO teaches forming a feature into the component using the manufacturing data (Abstract A plant configuration measurement device comprises a plant configuration measurement sensor 111 that acquires data for generating a point cloud representing a detailed configuration of a plant; a voxel map generation unit 113 that generates a voxel map for a plant 200; and a 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 that generates point cloud data based on information from the plant configuration)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate ONO's 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 which generates point cloud data from plant configurations into Ramamurthy. This modification would have motivated users of ONO's to automatically generate precise, high-fidelity 3D environments from 2D schematics, thereby enabling rapid clash detection and optimized equipment layouts that reduce project costs.
As to claim 17, Ramamurthy teaches A method of manufacture ([003], [0039], An automated measurement system, comprise dimensional inspection of the machined diffuser holes is necessary for ensuring product quality and for controlling the cooling hole manufacturing process) comprising:
computed tomography scanning a component assembly to provide scan data ([0039], a methodology for automatically computing shaped cooling hole parameters from 3-D digital inspection data which may be obtained by any upstream metrology process, for example, but not limited to touch probe, 3-D optical sensors and computed-tomography (CT images))), wherein the component assembly includes a component, a fixture and an external artifact, the component is mounted to the fixture () and comprises an internal artifact within an interior of the component , and the external artifact is arranged external to the component ([0038], the manipulation device might be a robot, a coordinate movement system, or manual fixtures. A series of images are collected at each view angle from respective focus planes or view planes, each with a fixed spacing along the optical axis of the senso),;
determining external artifact data and internal artifact data based on the scan data ([0039], [0041]-[0042] 3-D digital inspection data obtained by computed-tomography (CT , image utilized to scan the interior surface 118 an exterior surface 120 surface of and the internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102).), wherein the external artifact data is indicative of a scanned geometry of the external artifact, and the internal artifact data is indicative of a scanned geometry of the internal artifact ([0041], FIGS. 2 and 3, airfoil 102 includes an airfoil wall 106 with one or more cooling holes 108-116. Wall 106 includes an interior surface 118 and an exterior surface 120. Interior surface 118 may define at least a portion of an internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102. Exterior surface 120 may at least partially define a leading edge, a trailing edge, a pressure side surface or a suction side surface of airfoil 102);
registering a first external coordinate system for the component based on the external artifact data; registering an internal reference point for the component based on the internal artifact data ([0063], [0017] FIG. 10 shows that the 3-D (x,y,z) Cartesian coordinates of these extracted points are mapped into an exemplary 3-D cylindrical coordinate representation (r, θ, z); transforming 1412 the 3-D position data points from a Cartesian representation to a cylinder coordinate representation (r, θ, z));
it is noted that Ramamurthy does not specifically teach “updating a machining program based on data indicative of or derived from a location of the internal reference point within the first external coordinate system to provide an updated machining program; and machining a feature into the component using the updated machining program.”
On the other hand ONO teaches updating a machining program based on data indicative of or derived from a location of the internal reference point within the first external coordinate system to provide an updated machining program( Fig.5, page 3 par., 4- par.,7, In step S301, the position and orientation of the three-dimensional position recognition device 112 are updated from the inertial momentum acquired by the IMU 115.When the positioning information is acquired by the GNSS receiver 114 in step S302, the position and orientation updated in step S301 are corrected in step S304 using the positioning information acquired in step S302.); and
machining the feature into the component using the updated machining program (Fig.5, Abstract, page 3 par., 4- par.,7a 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 that generates
point cloud data based on information from the plant configuration that includes the updated three-dimensional data).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate ONO's 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 which generates point cloud data from plant configurations into Ramamurthy. This modification would have motivated users of ONO's to automatically generate precise, high-fidelity 3D environments from 2D schematics, thereby enabling rapid clash detection and optimized equipment layouts that reduce project costs.
Regarding claim 19, all the limitations of claim 19 are included in claims 17 and 8. Thus, the rejections presented above for claims 17 and 8 are also applicable to claim 19. The motivation applied to claim 17 above also applied to claim 19
As to claim 2, Ramamurthy teaches the scanning of the component comprises scanning an external surface feature of the component (([0039], [0041]-[0042], FIGS. 2 and 3, airfoil 102 includes an airfoil wall 106 with one or more cooling holes 108-116. Wall 106 includes an interior surface 118 and an exterior surface 120. The 3-D digital inspection data ( point cloud data) is obtained by computed-tomography (CT , image utilized to scan the internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102 and an exterior surface 120), and
the manufacturing data locates the internal reference feature relative to the external surface feature of the component within the first external coordinate system ([0063], [0017] FIG. 10, the 3-D (x,y,z) Cartesian coordinates of these extracted points of interior surface 118 and an exterior surface 120 are mapped into an exemplary 3-D cylindrical coordinate representation (r, θ, z)).
As to claim 3, ONO teaches the forming of the feature into the component comprises machining the feature into the component (Abstract, page 3 2nd par., The 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 that generates point cloud data based on information from the plant configuration. The 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 matches the point cloud representing the shape of the plant stored in the point cloud database 144 with the partial CAD model of the plant piping etc. )
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate ONO's 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 which generates point cloud data from plant configurations into Ramamurthy. This modification would have motivated users of ONO's to automatically generate precise, high-fidelity 3D environments from 2D schematics, thereby enabling rapid clash detection and optimized equipment layouts that reduce project costs.
As to claim 4, ONO teaches the forming of the feature into the component comprises updating a machining program for forming the feature into the component using the manufacturing data to provide an updated machining program (Fig.5, page 3 par., 4- par.,7, In step S301, the position and orientation of the three-dimensional position recognition device 112 are updated from the inertial momentum acquired by the IMU 115.When the positioning information is acquired by the GNSS receiver 114 in step S302, the position and orientation updated in step S301 are corrected in step S304 using the positioning information acquired in step S302.); and
machining the feature into the component using the updated machining program (Fig.5, Abstract, page 3 par., 4- par.,7a 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 that generates
point cloud data based on information from the plant configuration that includes the updated three-dimensional data).
As to claim 5, Ramamurthy teaches registering a second external coordinate system for the component using a measurement device discrete from the computed tomography machine, wherein the second external coordinate system is identical to or relatable to the first external coordinate system (Claim 11, distance threshold value relative to the estimated axi-symmetric shape to further refine the estimation of the shape axis; map the 3 D Cartesian coordinates (x,y,z) of the extracted points into 3 D cylinder coordinates (r, θ, z), thereby defining a plurality of r-values; and assign the points into one of a plurality of θ bins based on their θ-values.)
It is noted that Ramamurthy does not specifically teach “ the machining of the feature into the component is performed using the updated machining program and the second external coordinate system “
On the other hand ONO teaches the machining of the feature into the component is performed using the updated machining program and the second external coordinate system ( Abstract, Fig.5, page 3 par., 4- par.,7, In step S301, the position and orientation of the three-dimensional position recognition device 112 are updated from the inertial momentum acquired by the IMU 115.When the positioning information is acquired by the GNSS receiver 114 in step S302, the position and orientation updated in step S301 are corrected in step S304 using the positioning information acquired in step S302, model generation unit 146 that generates point cloud data based on information from the plant configuration that includes the updated three-dimensional data).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate ONO's 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 which generates point cloud data from plant configurations into Ramamurthy. This modification would have motivated users of ONO's to automatically generate precise, high-fidelity 3D environments from 2D schematics, thereby enabling rapid clash detection and optimized equipment layouts that reduce project costs.
As to claim 7, Ramamurthy teaches the internal reference feature is a reference point ([0017] FIG. 10 shows that the 3-D (x,y,z) Cartesian coordinates of these extracted points are mapped into an exemplary 3-D cylindrical coordinate representation (r, θ, z). The reference point corresponds to the extracted points).
As to claim 8, Ramamurthy teaches the internal reference feature is a reference vector([0017] FIG. 10 shows that the 3-D (x,y,z) Cartesian coordinates of these extracted points are mapped into an exemplary 3-D cylindrical coordinate representation (r, θ, z). The extracted points are represented using the 3-D (x,y,z) coordinates which represent a vector).
As to claim 9, Ramamurthy teaches the component comprises an airfoil, and the internal artifact is disposed within an internal volume within the airfoil ([0041], FIGS. 2 and 3, airfoil 102 includes an airfoil wall 106 with one or more cooling holes 108-116. Wall 106 includes an interior surface 118 and an exterior surface 120. Interior surface 118 may define at least a portion of an internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102. Exterior surface 120 may at least partially define a leading edge, a trailing edge).
As to claim10, Ramamurthy teaches the internal artifact comprises an annular cylinder (Fig.8 and 9, [0054] FIG. 9 shows that all 3-D position data points 900 within an inner radial threshold value 902 and an outer radial threshold value 904 relative to estimated cylinder 806 are extracted to further refine the cylinder axis estimation.).
As to claim11, Ramamurthy teaches the internal artifact comprises an airflow turbulator within the component([0041], FIGS. 2 and 3, airfoil 102 includes an airfoil wall 106 with one or more cooling holes 108-116. Wall 106 includes an interior surface 118 and an exterior surface 120. Interior surface 118 may define at least a portion of an internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102).
As to claim12, Ramamurthy teaches the internal artifact comprises a cooling element within the component([0061] FIG. 13 shows points in a bin 1300, sorted along a length of cylinder axis 1200 where the point sorting is performed by noting that the general shape of cooling holes 108-116 diffuser holes transition from cylindrical on the coolant side of airfoil 102).
As to claim13, Ramamurthy teaches the internal artifact comprises an aperture in the interior of the component(Fig.8 [0053], on-line of sight data inside cooling holes 108-116 (shown in FIG. 2), such as corners of internal cavity 122. The free boundaries in the tessellated data are found inside the cooling hole at the bottom where line of sight terminates into internal cavity 122.)
As to claim14, Ramamurthy teaches the internal artifact is one of a plurality of internal artifacts within the interior of the component, and the internal artifact data is indicative of a physical characteristic of each of the plurality of internal artifacts and/or a collective physical characteristic of the plurality of internal artifacts ([0042] One or more of cooling holes 108-116 each extends through wall 106 between interior surface 118 and exterior surface 120. . One or more of cooling holes 108-116 may each include a shaped meter portion 124 and a diffuser portion 126 shaped the same or differently from meter portion 124,).
As to claim15, Ramamurthy teaches the external artifact is one of a plurality of external artifacts scanned using the computed tomography machine, and the external artifact data is indicative of a physical characteristic of each of the plurality of external artifacts and/or a collective physical characteristic of the plurality of external artifacts ([0041]-[0042], FIGS. 2 and 3, airfoil 102 includes an airfoil wall 106 with one or more cooling holes 108-116. Wall 106
includes an interior surface 118 and an exterior surface 120. Exterior surface 120 may
at least partially define a leading edge, a trailing edge, a pressure side surface or a suction side surface of airfoil 102.)
As to claim18, Ramamurthy teaches the internal artifact projects into an internal volume within the component([0041], [0053], FIGS. 2 and 3, airfoil 102 includes an airfoil wall 106 with one or more cooling holes 108-116. Wall 106 includes an interior surface 118 and an exterior surface 120. Interior surface 118 may define at least a portion of an internal cavity 122 of airfoil 102, .Free boundaries in the tessellated data are found inside the cooling hole at the bottom where line of sight terminates into internal cavity 122. It is well known that in CAD & Mechanical Design, “the internal artifact projects into an internal volume within the component” implies a geometric feature (e.g., a pin, wall, or sensor) extends into an interior cavity of a part)
As to claim 20, ONO teaches the internal artifact comprises a protrusion within the interior of the component (Abstract a 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 that generates point cloud data based on information from the plant configuration measurement sensor 111, and generates a 3D-CAD model of the plant 200.It is well known that creating a protrusion is a fundamental operation in CAD (Computer-Aided Design). It adds solid material to a model, typically by taking a 2D sketch and extruding or revolving it into a 3D shape).
4. Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ramamurthy , US 20170132775 A1 ,in view of ONO, JP 2024000783 A, further in view of Heide et al., (hereafter Heide), US 20070233298 A1, pub. 10/04/2007.
As to claim6, Ramamurthy teaches the manufacturing data for the component is provided using the first compute (Abstract [004]-[005])
It is noted that Ramamurthy does not specifically teaches “communicating the manufacturing data from a first computer to a second computer; the machining of the feature into the component is performed using the second computer.”
On the other hand ONO teaches the machining of the feature into the component is performed using the second computer (Fig.1 and Fig.4)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate ONO's 3D-CAD model generation unit 146 which generates point cloud data from plant configurations into Ramamurthy. This modification would have motivated users of ONO's to automatically generate precise, high-fidelity 3D environments from 2D schematics, thereby enabling rapid clash detection and optimized equipment layouts that reduce project costs.
It is noted that the combination of Ramamurthy and ONO does not specifically teach “communicating the manufacturing data from a first computer to a second computer”
On the other hand Heide teaches communicating the manufacturing data from a first computer to a second computer ([0130] FIG. 17 is a flow diagram of system 192 for building 3D objects pursuant to method 14, with the various embodied steps, as discussed above. System 192 includes computer 194, and rapid manufacturing system 196, which communicate with each other via line 198. Computer 194 may be any type of computer-based system that is capable of directly or indirectly communicating with one or more rapid manufacturing systems, and may include printer server operations, 3D CAD environments, and client environments)
Prior to the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a skilled in the art to integrate Heide's communication line into the combination of Ramamurthy and ONO.
The motivation was to link ONO's CAD system to Ramamurthy's 3D cloud generator, establishing a digital thread for real-time collaboration and instant manufacturing updates.
5. Claims 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ramamurthy , US 20170132775 A1 ,in view of ONO, JP 2024000783 A, further in view of REID et al., (hereafter REID ), EP 2881490 B1, pub. 02/21/2018
As to claim 16, Ramamurthy teaches cooling aperture ([003], [0039], this limitation discussed in claim 1above)
It is noted that the combination of Ramamurthy and ONO does not specifically teach “the
feature formed into the component is a cooling aperture machined into the component”
On the other hand REID teaches the feature formed into the component is a cooling aperture machined into the component (claim 1, . detecting the data about the at least one characteristic of the plurality of cooling apertures (18, 19, 20) in the turbomachine component, wherein the data about the characteristic of the plurality of cooling apertures (18, 19, 20) includes detection data (16) about a location of the plurality of cooling apertures (18, 19, 20) and data obtained from a computer-aided design (CAD) data model of the turbomachine component; wherein the characteristic of the plurality of cooling apertures (18, 19, 20) includes at least one of a size of each of the plurality of cooling apertures (18, 19, 20), a shape of each of the plurality of cooling apertures (18, 19, 20), a type of each of the plurality of cooling apertures or a location of each of the plurality of cooling apertures (18, 19 ,20), wherein the computer-aided design (CAD) data model includes data about the size and/or shape of apertures (18, 19, 20) in the turbomachine component)
Prior to the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to integrate the 3D CAD modeling method for cooling apertures (18, 19, 20) taught by REID into the combined teachings of Ramamurthy and ONO. The motivation for this combination is to enable users of Ramamurthy to generate a CAD model of a plurality of cooling apertures that clearly illustrates their specific size and/or shape.
Prior art not used in rejections but pertinent to the claims or disclosure
“Coordinate Measuring Apparatus And Method For Measuring An Object”, US 20080075227 A1, pub. 03/276/2008, to Christoph et al., disclosed:
The invention offers the following particular advantages: Complete detection of all fixed and free form geometries of a workpiece in a single measurement procedure. Measuring interior geometries and inaccessible features (e.g. obscured edges, undercuts). High precision measurement of functional dimensions with tactile or optical sensor system. Recirculation of tomographic measurement results through multisensory technology. Combine measuring with tomography and other sensors in a measurement cycle. 2D- and 3D- measurements of form, dimensions and position. Comprehensive functions for 2D-measurement in x-ray images. 3D-target-actual comparison as 3D- deviation display in comparison with 3D-CAD-model. Generation of 3D-CAD-data from acquired CT-data ( see [0099]-[0107], Fig.2)
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Mekonen Bekele whose telephone number is (469) 295-9077.The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 9:00AM to 6:50 PM Eastern Time.
If attempt to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Eng, George can be reached on (571) 272-7495.The fax phone number for the organization where the application or proceeding is assigned is 571-237-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published application may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished application is available through Privet PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have question on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.
/MEKONEN T BEKELE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699
Prosecution Insights