Baseball and softball governing bodies have imposed various bat performance limits over the years with the goal of regulating batted ball speeds. Each association generally independently develops various standards and methods to achieve a desired level of play.
During repeated use of bats made from composite materials, the matrix or resin of the composite material tends to crack and the fibers tend to stretch or break. Sometimes the composite material develops interlaminar failures, which involve plies or layers of composite materials in a composite bat separating or delaminating from each other along a failure plane between the layers. This break-in tends to reduce stiffness and increase the elasticity or trampoline effect of a bat against a ball, which tends to temporarily increase bat performance.
As a bat breaks in, and before it fully fails (for example, before the bat wall experiences a through-thickness failure), it may exceed performance limitations specified by a governing body, such as limitations related to batted ball speed. Some such limitations are specifically aimed at regulating the performance of a bat that has been broken in from normal use (such as BBCOR, or “Bat-Ball Coefficient of Restitution”).
Some unscrupulous players choose to intentionally break in composite bats to increase performance. Intentional break-in processes may be referred to as accelerated break-in (ABI) and may include techniques such as “rolling” a bat or otherwise compressing it, or generating hard hits to the bat with an object other than a ball. Such processes tend to be more abusive than break-in during normal use. A rolled or otherwise intentionally broken-in bat may temporarily exceed limitations established by a governing body. Accordingly, unscrupulous users may be able to perform an ABI procedure to increase performance without causing catastrophic failure of the bat that would render it useless.
Representative embodiments of the present technology include a ball bat with a handle, a barrel attached to or continuous with the handle along a longitudinal axis of the bat, and a reduced-durability region positioned in the barrel. The reduced-durability region may include two adjacent stacks of composite laminate plies, wherein the stacks are spaced apart from each other along the longitudinal axis to form a first gap therebetween. A separation ply may be positioned in the first gap between the stacks. In some embodiments, the separation ply may include a composite fiber mat. In some embodiments, the separation ply may include a release ply. In some embodiments, the separation ply includes a non-woven fiber mat material. At least one cap ply element may be positioned around an end of one of the stacks. In some embodiments, an axis of the first gap is oriented at an oblique angle relative to the longitudinal axis of the bat. In some embodiments, at least one of the stacks includes one or more fibrous bundles, the one or more fibrous bundles being oriented transverse to the at least one of the stacks and extending at least partially circumferentially about the barrel.
The barrel may further include an outwardly facing skin facing away from the barrel and an inwardly facing skin facing an interior hollow region of the barrel. At least one of the outwardly facing skin or the inwardly facing skin may include a discontinuity forming a second gap in the at least one of the outwardly facing skin or the inwardly facing skin along the longitudinal axis, the first gap and the second gap being connected to each other. A cover layer may be positioned over the second gap. The cover layer may include carbon fiber composite.
Other features and advantages will appear hereinafter. The features described above can be used separately or together, or in various combinations of one or more of them.
In the drawings, wherein the same reference number indicates the same element throughout the views:
The present technology is directed to ball bats with reduced-durability regions for deterring alteration, and associated systems and methods. Various embodiments of the technology will now be described. The following description provides specific details for a thorough understanding and enabling description of these embodiments. One skilled in the art will understand, however, that the invention may be practiced without many of these details. Additionally, some well-known structures or functions, such as structures or functions common to ball bats and composite materials, may not be shown or described in detail so as to avoid unnecessarily obscuring the relevant description of the various embodiments. Accordingly, embodiments of the present technology may include additional elements or exclude some of the elements described below with reference to
The terminology used in the description presented below is intended to be interpreted in its broadest reasonable manner, even though it is being used in conjunction with a detailed description of certain specific embodiments of the invention. Certain terms may even be emphasized below; however, any terminology intended to be interpreted in any restricted manner will be overtly and specifically defined as such in this detailed description section.
Where the context permits, singular or plural terms may also include the plural or singular term, respectively. Moreover, unless the word “or” is expressly limited to mean only a single item exclusive from the other items in a list of two or more items, then the use of “or” in such a list is to be interpreted as including (a) any single item in the list, (b) all of the items in the list, or (c) any combination of items in the list. Further, unless otherwise specified, terms such as “attached” or “connected” are intended to include integral connections, as well as connections between physically separate components.
Specific details of several embodiments of the present technology are described herein with reference to baseball or softball. The technology may also be used in other sporting good implements or in other sports or industries in which it may be desirable to discourage tampering, damage, or overuse in composites or other structures. Conventional aspects of ball bats and composite materials may be described in reduced detail herein for efficiency and to avoid obscuring the present disclosure of the technology. In various embodiments, a number of different composite materials suitable for use in ball bats may be used, including, for example, composites formed from carbon fiber, fiberglass, aramid fibers, or other composite materials or combinations of matrices, resins, fibers, laminates, and meshes forming composite materials.
Turning now to the drawings,
The bat 100 may have any suitable dimensions. For example, the bat 100 may have an overall length of 20 to 40 inches, or 26 to 34 inches. The overall barrel diameter may be 2.0 to 3.0 inches, or 2.25 to 2.75 inches. Typical ball bats have diameters of 2.25, 2.625, or 2.75 inches. Bats having various combinations of these overall lengths and barrel diameters, or any other suitable dimensions, are contemplated herein. The specific preferred combination of bat dimensions is generally dictated by the user of the bat 100, and may vary greatly among users.
The barrel portion 110 may be constructed with one or more composite materials. Some examples of suitable composite materials include plies reinforced with fibers of carbon, glass, graphite, boron, aramid (such as Kevlar®), ceramic, or silica (such as Astroquartz®). The handle portion 120 may be constructed from the same materials as, or different materials than, the barrel portion 110. In a two-piece ball bat, for example, the handle portion 120 may be constructed from a composite material (the same or a different material than that used to construct the barrel portion 110), a metal material, or any other material suitable for use in a striking implement such as the bat 100.
A reduced-durability region 230 may include two or more stacks 240 of plies 250 of laminate materials positioned on each side of a discontinuity or gap region 260 inside the wall 200. Although the gap region 260 is described as being located between two or more stacks 240, the gap region 260 may also be considered a discontinuity in what would otherwise be a continuous single stack 240 of plies 250. Although five plies 250 are illustrated in each stack 240, any suitable number of plies 250 may form each stack 240, and the stacks 240 may have different quantities of plies 250 from each other. In various embodiments, the plies 250 forming the stacks 240 may be formed from any material or materials suitable for use in ball bats, striking implements, or other equipment, including, for example, carbon fiber in a matrix, glass fiber in a matrix, aramid fibers in a matrix, or other composite materials or combinations of matrices, resins, fibers, or meshes forming composite laminate layers, including other composite materials described herein. The plies 250, the outwardly facing skin 220, and the inwardly facing skin 210 may be formed from pre-impregnated material cured in a mold. In some embodiments, resin transfer molding processes may be used to form the various layers of embodiments of the technology.
In a conventional bat that does not include a gap region 260 (in other words, in a bat with a continuous stack of plies), stresses in the bat wall would generally be distributed along the length of the plies (generally along a longitudinal axis of the bat). In such a conventional bat, forces from impact or other stresses would generally cause the plies to delaminate from each other. The gap region 260 focuses or directs the stress concentration between the stacks 240, thereby creating a new failure plane in addition to existing failure modes, such as delamination. For example, when a bat is rolled or otherwise tampered with, or when a bat has been overly broken in or overused, the wall 200 may break through and along the gap region 260, such as along the Z-axis (labeled “z”) of the bat wall 200 or otherwise along a path between the inwardly facing skin 210 and the outwardly facing skin 220. Such a break may cause the wall 200 to fail (destroying the bat) before significant delamination occurs that would otherwise improve performance (including performance that may violate league or organization rules or is otherwise undesirable).
In some bats with gaps or discontinuities between stacks of plies, the gap may be too strong or too narrow to reliably provide such a break after overuse or abuse. In other words, in some bats with gap regions that are too strong, delamination may occur to a significant (or undesirable) degree before a break in the gap region causes total failure of the wall. For example, during the molding process for a composite bat with a gap (such as the gap region 260), plies (such as the plies 250) may move, narrowing or even closing the gap, which may delay or disrupt the failure along the gap. According to embodiments of the present technology, to prevent such movement and to lower the energy needed to trigger the thickness failure along the gap region 260 to a level at which the thickness failure occurs before the plies 250 in the stacks 240 delaminate, a separation ply 270 may be positioned in the gap region 260.
The separation ply 270 also reduces or prevents interweaving, nesting, or bonding of the stacks 240 across the gap region 260, thereby resisting or preventing an undesirable increase in strength at the gap region 260 relative to a gap without such a separation ply 270. For example, if the separation ply 270 allows some bonding between the stacks 240, the gap region 260 may be stronger. If the separation ply 270 is a barrier, it may allow only minimal bonding or no bonding at all across the gap region 260, resulting in a weaker gap region 260. By managing the strength of the wall 200 at the gap region 260, the level of energy at which failure of the wall 200 occurs at the gap region 260 can be tailored to be lower than the energy required to delaminate the stacks 240 in a particular bat configuration.
The separation ply 270 may be formed from any suitable material, depending on the level of bonding desired between the stacks 240. For example, in a heavier bat or in a bat with a relatively high moment of inertia (for example, near or above 6000 ounce-square inch), in which a strong gap region 260 is desired, a strong material may be used, such as one or more carbon fiber or glass fiber composite mats or other fiber composite mats. In some embodiments, the separation ply 270 may be rigid or semi-rigid, while in other embodiments it may be flexible. In a lighter bat or in a bat with a relatively low moment of inertia (for example, near or below 6000 ounce-square inch), in which a gap region 260 may not need to be as strong, a release ply material, such as polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE, commercially available as TEFLON), nylon sheet, or other release plies may be used. In some embodiments, the release ply material may be perforated or porous, which may increase the strength of the gap region 260 by allowing limited bonding between the stacks 240.
In a particular representative embodiment, the separation ply 270 may be formed from a non-woven mat material having a fiber aerial weight of approximately 30 grams per square meter. Such a material may include a variety of types of fibers and treatments and may function as an inexpensive and reliable material for providing a desired strength in the gap region 260.
The reduced-durability region 230 (centered around the middle of the gap region 260) may be located along the straight section 160 of the bat barrel 110 (see
When a crack forms in the gap region 260, the cap ply elements 310 prevent (or at least resist) proliferation of the crack to the stacks 240 of plies 250. In other words, the cap ply elements 310 prevent or resist delamination of the stacks 240 of plies 250 by preventing or resisting spreading of the crack along the axial length of the bat (i.e., along the longitudinal or x-axis of the bat, marked with “x” in
The cap ply elements 310 may be formed from a foam material, a plastic material, or another material suitable for being folded, molded, or otherwise shaped around an edge of each of the stacks 240. In some embodiments, the cap ply elements 310 may be formed from similar materials as the separation ply 260. In some embodiments, the cap ply elements 310 may be rigid. In other embodiments, the cap ply elements 310 may be flexible (for example, they may be formed with an elastomer material to make the cap ply elements 310 resilient). Because
For example,
Although two cover layers 650 are illustrated, in some embodiments with only one discontinuity 640, only one cover layer 650 may be used. The cover layers 650 may be formed with intermediate modulus carbon fiber composite (which may have a Young's Modulus or elastic modulus between approximately 42 million pounds per square inch and 55 million pounds per square inch) or another composite or non-composite material suitable for allowing through-failure of the bat wall 600 before significant delamination occurs in the stacks 240 of plies 250. Intermediate modulus carbon fiber materials may be beneficial because they generally provide more stiffness per unit weight than standard carbon fiber materials (which may have elastic modulus values around 33 million pounds per square inch). Intermediate modulus materials provide more stiffness than standard fiber materials while generally being less costly and less brittle than higher modulus fiber materials (which have elastic modulus values greater than 55 million pounds per square inch). The embodiment of the wall 600 and the reduced-durability region 630 illustrated and described with regard to
In some embodiments, when the angle 760 is relatively small, the wall 700 and the reduced-durability region 730 increase in strength. For example, the wall 700 and the reduced-durability region 730 may withstand more forces before experiencing a through-failure in the gap region 260.
Although
Embodiments of the present technology provide reduced-durability regions to deter or discourage alteration. For example, if a user attempts to roll or perform other ABI processes, stresses in the bat wall will be focused along the gap between composite stacks rather than between the plies in the stacks, which will cause the wall of the bat to fail (destroying the bat) before significant delamination occurs that would otherwise improve performance. In addition, the present technology may provide a visual or tactile indicator of a failure of the bat wall prior to delamination (if any) between plies. Accordingly, the present technology allows for improved testing, improved indication of bat failure, and it may deter players from attempting to alter a bat.
From the foregoing, it will be appreciated that specific embodiments of the disclosed technology have been described for purposes of illustration, but that various modifications may be made without deviating from the technology, and elements of certain embodiments may be interchanged with those of other embodiments, and that some embodiments may omit some elements. For example, in various embodiments of the present technology, more than one separation ply may be used, or separation plies may be omitted. One or more cap ply elements (such as cap ply elements 310) may be omitted.
Further, while advantages associated with certain embodiments of the disclosed technology have been described in the context of those embodiments, other embodiments may also exhibit such advantages, and not all embodiments need necessarily exhibit such advantages to fall within the scope of the technology. Accordingly, the disclosure and associated technology may encompass other embodiments not expressly shown or described herein, and the invention is not limited except as by the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1611858 | Middlekauff | Dec 1926 | A |
4014542 | Tanikawa | Mar 1977 | A |
4025377 | Tanikawa | May 1977 | A |
4132130 | Fletcher et al. | Jan 1979 | A |
4150291 | Gulley | Apr 1979 | A |
4505479 | Souders | Mar 1985 | A |
4604319 | Evans et al. | Aug 1986 | A |
4780346 | Denoel | Oct 1988 | A |
4804315 | Ferris et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4818584 | Eisenmann | Apr 1989 | A |
4848745 | Bohannan et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4867399 | Therond | Sep 1989 | A |
4931247 | Yeh | Jun 1990 | A |
4963408 | Huegli | Oct 1990 | A |
5048441 | Quigley | Sep 1991 | A |
5057353 | Maranci et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5131651 | You | Jul 1992 | A |
5301940 | Seki et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5303917 | Uke | Apr 1994 | A |
5362046 | Sims | Nov 1994 | A |
5364095 | Easton et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5380003 | Lanctot | Jan 1995 | A |
5395108 | Sounders et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5415398 | Eggiman | May 1995 | A |
RE35081 | Quigley | Nov 1995 | E |
5490669 | Smart | Feb 1996 | A |
5511777 | McNeely | Apr 1996 | A |
5516097 | Huddleston | May 1996 | A |
5556695 | Mazelsky | Jul 1996 | A |
5593158 | Filice et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5624115 | Baum | Apr 1997 | A |
5641366 | Hohman | Jun 1997 | A |
5676610 | Bhatt et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5711728 | Marcelo | Jan 1998 | A |
5759113 | Lai et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5772541 | Buiatti | Jun 1998 | A |
5833561 | Kennedy et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5899823 | Eggiman | May 1999 | A |
5964673 | MacKay, Jr. | Oct 1999 | A |
6007439 | MacKay | Dec 1999 | A |
6010417 | Young et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6033758 | Kocher et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6042493 | Chauvin et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6053828 | Pitsenberger | Apr 2000 | A |
6265333 | Dzenis et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6287222 | Pitsenberger | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6344007 | Feeney et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6352485 | Philpot et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6383101 | Eggiman et al. | May 2002 | B2 |
6398675 | Eggiman et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6425836 | Misono et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6440017 | Anderson | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6461260 | Higginbotham | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6497631 | Fritzke et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6508731 | Feeney et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6634969 | Forsythe et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6663517 | Chauvin et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6723012 | Sutherland | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6723127 | Ralph et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6729983 | Vakili et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6755757 | Sutherland | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6761653 | Higginbotham et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6764419 | Giannetti et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6776735 | Belanger et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6808464 | Van Nguyen | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6863628 | Brandt | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6866598 | Gianetti et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6872156 | Ogawa et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6997826 | Sutherland | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7006947 | Tryon, III et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7087296 | Porter | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7115054 | Giannetti | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7163475 | Gianetti | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7344461 | Van Nguyen | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7431655 | McCarty et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7442134 | Giannetti et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7585235 | Misono et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7699725 | McNamee et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7749115 | Cruz | Jul 2010 | B1 |
7857719 | Gianetti et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7867114 | Sutherland | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7874946 | Smith | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7914404 | Gianetti et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7980970 | Watari | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7985149 | Watari | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8029391 | McNamee et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8182377 | Chuang et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8197366 | Chauvin | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8282516 | Chauvin et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8376881 | Chuang et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8409038 | MacDougall | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8512174 | Epling et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8602924 | Kazuhiko et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8708845 | Chuang et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8814733 | Tsukamoto | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8979682 | Chuang et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9067109 | Epling et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9149697 | Epling et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9211460 | Slater et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9238163 | Slater et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9427640 | Davis et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9744416 | Chuang | Aug 2017 | B2 |
20010014634 | Mackay, III | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20020016230 | Okuyama et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020091022 | Fritzke et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020098924 | Houser et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020151392 | Buiatti et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020198071 | Snow | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030153416 | Anderson | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030186763 | Eggiman et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030195066 | Eggiman et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040077439 | Eggiman et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040132563 | Gianetti et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040132564 | Gianetti | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040176197 | Sutherland | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040209716 | Vacek et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050070384 | Fitzgerald et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050070387 | Fitzgerald | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050143203 | Sounders et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050227795 | Fritzke | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060025251 | Giannetti et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060247078 | Gianetti et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060247079 | Sutherland et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070202974 | Gianetti | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070205201 | Cundiff et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070219027 | Chong | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080039241 | Pope et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080070726 | Watari et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20090065299 | Vito et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090085299 | Shibayama | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090130425 | Whitaker | May 2009 | A1 |
20090181813 | Gianetti et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090215560 | McNamee et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090280935 | Watari et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100160095 | Chauvin et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20110165976 | Chuang et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110195808 | Chauvin et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110287875 | Vander Pol et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120142461 | Chuang et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130116070 | Xun | May 2013 | A1 |
20130165279 | Chuang et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130184108 | Epling | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130316859 | Burger et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140080642 | Epling | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140213395 | Chuang et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20150018139 | Slater et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20170056736 | Fitzgerald et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20180174495 | Chauvin et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20190022484 | Chauvin et al. | Jan 2019 | A1 |
20190054357 | Epling et al. | Feb 2019 | A1 |
20190381377 | Chauvin et al. | Dec 2019 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2577184 | Apr 2014 | CA |
1067388 | Dec 1992 | CN |
2684892 | Mar 2005 | CN |
0585965 | Mar 1994 | EP |
2004062734 | Jul 2004 | WO |
2006015160 | Feb 2006 | WO |
2011084847 | Jul 2011 | WO |
2013101465 | Jul 2013 | WO |
Entry |
---|
ASTM International, F2219-14 Standard Test Methods for Measuring High-Speed Bat Performance, USA Baseball ABI Protocol, May 2016. |
Canadian Intellectual Property, Office, “Search Report and Written Opinion”, for PCT/CA2016/051007, dated Nov. 3, 2016, 8 pgs. |
IP Australia, “Patent Examination Report No. 1”, for AU2012362912, Nov. 18, 2016. |
Japanese Patent Office, “Office Action”, for JP2014-550320, with English translation dated Oct. 25, 2016. |
State Intellectual Property Office, China PRC, “First Office Action”, for CN201280064601.8 with English Translation, dated Aug. 18, 2015. |
Taiwan Intellectual Property Office, Official Letter and Search Report for TW101148678, with English Translation, dated Jul. 12, 2016. |
USPTO, Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US10/62083, dated Apr. 6, 2011. |
USPTO, Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US12/069268, dated Apr. 15, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/012,085, filed Jun. 19, 2018, Chauvin et al. |
Canadian Intellectual Property Office, “Examiner's Report” for Application No. 2,852,513, dated Oct. 19, 2018, 10 pages. |
Fibre Reinforced Plastic, “Sandwich Composite and Core Material Web Page”, available at http://www.fibre-reinforced-plastic.com/2010/12/sandwich-composite-and-core-material.html, dated Dec. 12, 2010, website visited Jun. 18, 2018. |
Global Plastic Sheeting, “GPS Diamond Scrim”, available at https://www.globalplasticsheeting.com/gps-diamond-scrim-30-36-45-lldpe, exact publication date unknown, website visited Dec. 27, 2017. |
Global Plastic Sheeting, “Poly Scrim Crawl Space Vapor Barriers”, available at https://www.globalplasticsheeting.com/ultra-scrim-crawl-space-vapor-barriers, exact publication date unknown, website visited Dec. 27, 2017. |
Mustone et al., “Using LS-DYNA to Develop a Baseball Bat Performance and Design Tool”, 6th International LS-DYNA Users Conference, Apr. 9-10, 2000, Detroit, MI. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/244,566, “Non-Final Office Action”, dated Jun. 18, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/244,566, “Final Office Action”, dated Dec. 14, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/244,566, “Non-Final Office Action”, dated May 31, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/244,566, “Final Office Action”, dated Nov. 23, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/385,268, “Non-Final Office Action”, dated Jun. 29, 2018. |
USPTO, “International Search Report and Written Opinion” for PCT/US05/026872, dated Dec. 5, 2005. |
USPTO, Final Office Action, for U.S. Appl. No. 15/385,268, dated Feb. 1, 2019. |
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action, for U.S. Appl. No. 15/385,268, dated Jul. 5, 2019. |
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action, for U.S. Appl. No. 16/132,199, dated Mar. 29, 2019. |
USPTO, Final Office Action, dated Sep. 26, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/132,199, 22 pages. |
USPTO, Final Office Action, dated Sep. 27, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/012,085, 33 pages. |
USPTO, Non-Final Office Action, dated Apr. 2, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/012,085, 42 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190022483 A1 | Jan 2019 | US |