DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 8, 11-13, 15, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lutjen et al. (US 2013/0323033 A1; reference provided in IDS filed on 05/18/2026) hereinafter Lutjen.
Regarding claim 1, Lutjen teaches a ring segment cooling structure comprising:
a wavy-shaped cooling channel (42A) formed inside a shield wall (wall of ring segment 30A) of a ring segment (Figs. 4-4A) mounted to a casing (24) that accommodates blades (26) (Fig. 1, paras. 0019-0020) the cooling channel allowing cooling air to flow therethrough;
and a rib turbulator (80A) installed in the wavy-shaped cooling channel (Fig. 4A, paras. 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 4, Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Lutjen further teaches the rib turbulator is formed to protrude from each of upper and lower surfaces of the cooling channel in mutually opposing directions (Figs. 3-4A, paras. 0030, 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 5, Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Lutjen further teaches the cooling channel has a shape in which a plurality of unit channel sections is connected in series with each of the unit channel sections having one convex portion and one concave portion, and the rib turbulator comprises a plurality of rib turbulators provided in each of the unit channel sections (Fig. 4A, paras. 0030, 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 6, Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Lutjen further teaches wherein the rib turbulator is installed at a portion at which the convex portion and the concave portion are in contact with each other (Fig. 4A, Fig. 4A, paras. 0030, 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 8, Lutjen teaches a ring segment comprising:
a shield wall (32A) facing an inner wall of a turbine casing that accommodates blades (26) (Figs. 1-4A, paras. 0022, paras. 0040-0041);
a first hook portion (44A) and a second hook portion (46A) protruding from the shield wall toward the turbine casing and coupled to the turbine casing (Figs. 1-4; paras. 0040-0041);
a main cavity formed between the first hook portion and the second hook portion (Fig. 4); and
a cooling structure which is formed within the shield wall and through which cooling air flows, wherein the cooling structure comprises:
a wavy-shaped cooling channel (42A) which is formed within the shield wall and through which cooling air flows (Figs. 4-4A); and
a rib turbulator (80A) installed in the wavy-shaped cooling channel (Fig. 4A, paras. 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 11, Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 8. Lutjen further teaches the rib turbulator is formed to protrude from each of upper and lower surfaces of the cooling channel in mutually opposing directions (Figs. 3-4A, paras. 0030, 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 12, Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 8. Lutjen further teaches the cooling channel has a shape in which a plurality of unit channel sections is connected in series with each of the unit channel sections having one convex portion and one concave portion, and the rib turbulator comprises a plurality of rib turbulators provided in each of the unit channel sections (Fig. 4A, paras. 0030, 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 13, Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Lutjen further teaches wherein the rib turbulator is installed at a portion at which the convex portion and the concave portion are in contact with each other (Fig. 4A, Fig. 4A, paras. 0030, 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 15, a gas turbine comprising:
a plurality of blades (26) installed on a rotatable rotor disk (Figs. 1-4A, paras. 0022, paras. 0040-0041);
a turbine casing (24) configured to accommodate the blades (Figs. 1-2); and
a plurality of ring segments (30) coupled to the turbine casing and positioned outside the blades (Fig. 2, para. 0001, 0040-0041), wherein each of the ring segments comprises:
a shield wall (32A) facing an inner wall of a turbine casing that accommodates blades (26) (Figs. 1-4A, paras. 0022, paras. 0040-0041);
a first hook portion (44A) and a second hook portion (46A) protruding from the shield wall toward the turbine casing and coupled to the turbine casing (Figs. 1-4; paras. 0040-0041);
a main cavity formed between the first hook portion and the second hook portion (Fig. 4); and
a cooling structure which is formed within the shield wall and through which cooling air flows, wherein the cooling structure comprises:
a wavy-shaped cooling channel (42A) which is formed within the shield wall and through which cooling air flows (Figs. 4-4A); and
a rib turbulator (80A) installed in the wavy-shaped cooling channel (Fig. 4A, paras. 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 17, Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 15. Lutjen further teaches the rib turbulator is formed to protrude from each of upper and lower surfaces of the cooling channel in mutually opposing directions (Figs. 3-4A, paras. 0030, 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 18, Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 15. Lutjen further teaches the cooling channel has a shape in which a plurality of unit channel sections is connected in series with each of the unit channel sections having one convex portion and one concave portion, and the rib turbulator comprises a plurality of rib turbulators provided in each of the unit channel sections (Fig. 4A, paras. 0030, 0043-0044).
Regarding claim 19, Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 18. Lutjen further teaches wherein the rib turbulator is installed at a portion at which the convex portion and the concave portion are in contact with each other (Fig. 4A, Fig. 4A, paras. 0030, 0043-0044).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 7, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lutjen in view of Townes et al. (US 2021/0123352 A1) hereinafter Townes.
Lutjen teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claims 1, 8 and 15 respectively but fails to recite that the rib turbulators are manufactured using additive manufacturing.
However, Townes teaches a gas turbine component comprising a cooling cavity and a plurality of rib turbulators (80) disposed in the cooling cavity (para. 0044; Fig. 3). Townes further teaches that the rib turbulators are manufactured by additive manufacturing (para. 0023).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Lutjen by manufacturing the rib turbulator using additive manufacturing in order to save time and cost.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-13, 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang (US 2022/0268173 A1) in view of Lee (US 8,840,363 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Jang teaches: a ring segment cooling structure comprising:
a wavy-shaped cooling channel (120) formed inside a shield wall of a ring segment (110) mounted to a casing that accommodates blades (22) (Figs. 1-4, paras. 0047-0058), the cooling channel allowing cooling air to flow therethrough (Fig. 4)
Jang fails to teach a rib turbulator installed in the wavy-shaped cooling channel.
However, Lee discloses a turbine engine component (14) defining a cooling system (40); the cooling system comprising a wavy-shaped cooling channel (44), and a plurality of rib turbulators (52) installed in the wavy-shaped cooling channel to increase cooling (Figs. 1-1A; Col. 4, line 30-Col. 5, line 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Jang by including rib turbulators in the wavy-shaped cooling channel as taught by Lee in order to increase cooling.
Regarding claim 2, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1: the cooling channel defines a width W and a height H, the rib turbulator defines a lateral dimension w and a height dimension e. Jang as modified by Lee does not appear to explicitly disclose that 0.1≤w≤0.3W and 0.1≤e≤0.3H.
However, a careful examination of the specification reveals that no criticality for the specific dimensions has been shown nor any reason as to why the ring segment of the applicant with the claimed dimensions would operate any different than the ring segment of Jang modified by Lee, and Applicant has not disclosed that this design with the specific dimensions provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Hence this design for 0.1≤w≤0.3W and 0.1≤e≤0.3H is a design choice by the applicant. One ordinary skill in art, furthermore, would have expected the ring segment of Jang as modified by Lee, and Applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with the width and height taught by Jang as modified by Lee or the claimed width or height, because both would perform the same function.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the claimed dimensions with the ring segment of Jang modified by Lee in order to achieve a desired dimension, shape, or configuration, as they are a matter of design choice. Such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claim 3, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 2. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches
an angle α formed between a longitudinal direction of the rib turbulator and a central axis satisfies 90°≤α≤135° (Lee, annotated FIG. 1A below).
PNG
media_image1.png
438
682
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as sated above in claim 1. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches the rib turbulator is formed to protrude from each of upper and lower surfaces of the cooling channel in mutually opposing directions (Lee, Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 5, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 5. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches the cooling channel has a shape in which a plurality of unit channel sections is connected in series with each of the unit channel sections having one convex portion and one concave portion, and the rib turbulator comprises a plurality of rib turbulators provided in each of the unit channel sections (Jang, Fig. 3; para. 0052; Lee, Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 6, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches the rib turbulator is installed at a portion at which the convex portion and the concave portion are in contact with each other (incorporating the turbulators of Lee into the wavy-cooling channel of Jang, would place rib turbulator at a portion at which the convex portion and the concave portion are in contact with each other; Jang, Fig. 3; Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 8, Jang teaches a ring segment comprising:
a shield wall (wall of the segment body 110, Figs. 2-4) facing an inner wall of a turbine casing (11) that accommodates blades (22) (Fig. 1; para. 0047)
a first hook portion (140) and a second hook portion (140) protruding from the shield wall toward the turbine casing and coupled to the turbine casing (Figs. 2-4; paras. 0050-0051)
a main cavity (150) formed between the first hook portion and the second hook portion (Figs. 2-4); and a cooling structure which is formed within the shield wall and through which cooling air flows;
wherein the cooling structure comprises:
a wavy-shaped cooling channel (120) which is formed within the shield wall and through which cooling air flows Figs. 1-4, paras. 0047-0058).
Jang fails to teach a rib turbulator installed in the wavy-shaped cooling channel.
However, Lee discloses a turbine engine component (14) defining a cooling system (40); the cooling system comprising a wavy-shaped cooling channel (44), and a plurality of rib turbulators (52) installed in the wavy-shaped cooling channel to increase cooling (Figs. 1-1A; Col. 4, line 30-Col. 5, line 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Jang by including rib turbulators in the wavy-shaped cooling channel as taught by Lee in order to increase cooling.
Regarding claim 9, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 8 including: the cooling channel defines a width W and a height H, the rib turbulator defines a lateral dimension w and a height dimension e. Jang as modified by Lee does not appear to explicitly disclose that 0.1≤w≤0.3W and 0.1≤e≤0.3H.
However, a careful examination of the specification reveals that no criticality for the specific dimensions has been shown nor any reason as to why the ring segment of the applicant with the claimed dimensions would operate any different than the ring segment of Jang modified by Lee, and Applicant has not disclosed that this design with the specific dimensions provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Hence this design for 0.1≤w≤0.3W and 0.1≤e≤0.3H is a design choice by the applicant. One ordinary skill in art, furthermore, would have expected the ring segment of Jang as modified by Lee, and Applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with the width and height taught by Jang as modified by Lee or the claimed width or height, because both would perform the same function.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the claimed dimensions with the ring segment of Jang modified by Lee in order to achieve a desired dimension, shape, or configuration, as they are a matter of design choice. Such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claim 10, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 9. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches
an angle α formed between a longitudinal direction of the rib turbulator and a central axis satisfies 90°≤α≤135° (Lee, annotated FIG. 1A above).
Regarding claim 11, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as sated above in claim 8. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches the rib turbulator is formed to protrude from each of upper and lower surfaces of the cooling channel in mutually opposing directions (Lee, Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 12, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 8. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches the cooling channel has a shape in which a plurality of unit channel sections is connected in series with each of the unit channel sections having one convex portion and one concave portion, and the rib turbulator comprises a plurality of rib turbulators provided in each of the unit channel sections (Jang, Fig. 3; para. 0052; Lee, Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 13, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 12. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches the rib turbulator is installed at a portion at which the convex portion and the concave portion are in contact with each other (incorporating the turbulators of Lee into the wavy-cooling channel of Jang, would place rib turbulator at a portion at which the convex portion and the concave portion are in contact with each other; Jang, Fig. 3; Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 15, Jang teaches a gas turbine engine comprising:
a plurality of blades (22) installed on a rotatable rotor disk (21) (Fig. 1, para. 0047);
a turbine casing (11) configured to accommodate the blades (Fig. 1, para. 0047); and
a plurality of ring segments (100) coupled to the turbine casing and positioned outside the blades (Figs. 1-4, paras. 0007, 0050-0052);
wherein each segment comprises:
a shield wall (wall of the segment body 110, Figs. 2-4) facing an inner wall of a turbine casing (11) that accommodates blades (22) (Fig. 1, para. 0047)
a first hook portion (140) and a second hook portion (140) protruding from the shield wall toward the turbine casing and coupled to the turbine casing (Figs. 2-4; paras. 0050-0051)
a main cavity (150) formed between the first hook portion and the second hook portion (Figs. 2-4); and a cooling structure which is formed within the shield wall and through which cooling air flows,
wherein the cooling structure comprises:
a wavy-shaped cooling channel (120) which is formed within the shield wall and through which cooling air flows Figs. 1-4, paras. 0047-0058).
Jang fails to teach a rib turbulator installed in the wavy-shaped cooling channel.
However, Lee discloses a turbine engine component (14) defining a cooling system (40); the cooling system comprising a wavy-shaped cooling channel (44), and a plurality of rib turbulators (52) installed in the wavy-shaped cooling channel to increase cooling (Figs. 1-1A; Col. 4, line 30-Col. 5, line 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Jang by including rib turbulators in the wavy-shaped cooling channel as taught by Lee in order to increase cooling.
Regarding claim 16, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 15 including an angle α formed between a longitudinal direction of the rib turbulator and a central axis satisfies 90°≤α≤135° (Lee, annotated FIG. 1A above).
Jang as modified by Lee also discloses the cooling channel defines a width W and a height H, the rib turbulator defines a lateral dimension w and a height dimension e. Jang as modified by Lee does not appear to explicitly disclose that 0.1≤w≤0.3W and 0.1≤e≤0.3H.
However, a careful examination of the specification reveals that no criticality for the specific dimensions has been shown nor any reason as to why the ring segment of the applicant with the claimed dimensions would operate any different than the ring segment of Jang modified by Lee, and Applicant has not disclosed that this design with the specific dimensions provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Hence this design for 0.1≤w≤0.3W and 0.1≤e≤0.3H is a design choice by the applicant. One ordinary skill in art, furthermore, would have expected the ring segment of Jang as modified by Lee, and Applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with the width and height taught by Jang as modified by Lee or the claimed width or height, because both would perform the same function.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the claimed dimensions with the ring segment of Jang modified by Lee in order to achieve a desired dimension, shape, or configuration, as they are a matter of design choice. Such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claim 17, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 15. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches the rib turbulator is formed to protrude from each of upper and lower surfaces of the cooling channel in mutually opposing directions (Lee, Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 18, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 15. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches the cooling channel has a shape in which a plurality of unit channel sections is connected in series with each of the unit channel sections having one convex portion and one concave portion, and the rib turbulator comprises a plurality of rib turbulators provided in each of the unit channel sections (Jang, Fig. 3; para. 0052; Lee, Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 19, Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 18. Jang as modified by Lee further teaches the rib turbulator is installed at a portion at which the convex portion and the concave portion are in contact with each other (incorporating the turbulators of Lee into the wavy-cooling channel of Jang, would place rib turbulator at a portion at which the convex portion and the concave portion are in contact with each other; Jang, Fig. 3; Fig. 1A).
Claim(s) 7, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang in view of Lee and further in view of Townes et al. (US 2021/0123352 A1) hereinafter Townes.
Jang as modified by Lee teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claims 1, 8 and 15 respectively but fails to recite that the rib turbulators are manufactured using additive manufacturing.
However, Townes teaches a gas turbine component comprising a cooling cavity and a plurality of rib turbulators (80) disposed in the cooling cavity (para. 0044; Fig. 3). Townes further teaches that the rib turbulators are manufactured by additive manufacturing (para. 0023).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Jang by manufacturing the rib turbulator using additive manufacturing in order to save time and cost.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2019/0368365 discloses a ring segment with a wavy shape cooling channel.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAXIME M ADJAGBE whose telephone number is (571)272-4920. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8-6.
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, NATHANIEL E WIEHE can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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.
/MAXIME M ADJAGBE/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights