Patent Grant
8586491
The present invention relates generally to a composition for continuous glass fibers, and more particularly to a glass composition for use in high-strength applications as well as high-strength glass fibers and articles that have non-corrosive properties.
Fiberglass is manufactured from various raw materials combined in specific proportions to yield a desired chemical composition. This proportion is commonly termed a “glass batch.” The composition of the glass batch and the glass manufactured from it are typically expressed in terms of percentages of the components, which are expressed as oxides. SiO2, Al2O3, CaO, MgO, B2O, Na2O, K2O, Fe2O3, and minor amounts of other oxides are common components of a glass batch. Numerous types of glasses may be produced from varying the amounts of these oxides, or eliminating some of the oxides, in the glass batch. Examples of such glasses that may be produced include E-glass, S-glass, R-glass, and E-CR-glass. The glass composition determines the properties of the glass including properties such as the viscosity, the liquidus temperature, the durability, the density, the strength, and the Young's modulus of the glass.
To form glass fibers, typically the glass batch is melted, the molten glass is drawn into filaments through a bushing or orifice plate, and an aqueous sizing composition containing lubricants, coupling agents, and film-forming binder resins is applied to the filaments. After the sizing composition is applied, the fibers may be gathered into one or more strands and wound into a package or, alternatively, the fibers may be chopped while wet and collected. The collected chopped strands may then be dried and cured to form dry chopped fibers or they can be packaged in their wet condition as wet chopped fibers.
The most common glass composition for making continuous glass fiber strands is “E-glass.” The liquidus temperature of E-glass is approximately 2100° F. (1149° C.) or lower. One advantage of E-glass is that its liquidus temperature allows operating temperatures for producing glass fibers to be approximately 1900° F. to 2400° F. (1038° C. to 1316° C.). The ASTM D578 classification for E-glass fiber yarns used in printed circuit boards and aerospace applications defines the composition to be 52 to 56 weight % SiO2, 16 to 25 weight % CaO, 12 to 16 weight % Al2O3, 5 to 10 weight % B2O3, 0 to 5 weight % MgO, 0 to 2 weight % Na2O and K2O, 0 to 0.8 weight % TiO2, 0.05 to 0.4 weight % Fe2O3 and 0 to 1.0 weight % Fluorine. The phrase weight %, as used herein, is intended to be defined as the percent by weight of the total composition.
Boron-free fibers are sold under the trademark ADVANTEX (Owens Corning, Toledo, Ohio, USA). Boron-free fibers, such as are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,789,329 to Eastes, et al., which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety, offer a significant improvement in operating temperatures over boron-containing E-glass. Boron-free glass fibers fall under the ASTM D578 definition for E-glass fibers for use in general-use applications. In particular, the ASTM D578 classification for E-glass fibers for use in general use applications defines the composition to be 52 to 62 weight % SiO2, 16 to 25 weight % CaO, 12 to 16 weight % Al2O3, 0 to 10 weight % B2O3, 0 to 5 weight % MgO, 0 to 2 weight % Na2O and K2O, 0 to 1.5 weight % TiO2, 0.05 to 0.8 weight % Fe2O3 and 0 to 1.0 weight % Fluorine.
S-glass is a family of glasses composed primarily of the oxides of magnesium, aluminum, and silicon with a chemical composition that produces glass fibers that have a higher mechanical strength than E-glass fibers. The composition for forming S-glass includes approximately 65 weight % SiO2, 25 weight % Al2O3, and 10 weight % MgO. S-glass has a composition that was originally designed to be used in high-strength applications such as ballistic armor.
R-glass is a family of glasses that are composed primarily of the oxides of silicon, aluminum, magnesium, and calcium with a chemical composition that produces glass fibers with a higher mechanical strength than E-glass fibers. R-glass has a composition that contains about 58 to about 60 weight % SiO2, about 23.5 to about 25.5 weight % Al2O3, about 14 to about 17 weight % CaO plus MgO, 0% B2O3, 0% F2 and less than about 2 weight % of miscellaneous components. R-glass contains more alumina and silica than E-glass and requires higher melting and processing temperatures during fiber forming. Typically, the melting and processing temperatures for R-glass are at least about 160° C. higher than those for E-glass. This increase in processing temperature requires the use of a high-cost platinum-lined melter. In addition, the close proximity of the liquidus temperature to the forming temperature in R-glass requires that the glass be fiberized at a viscosity lower than E-glass, which is customarily fiberized at or near about 1000 poise. Fiberizing R-glass at the customary 1000 poise viscosity would likely result in glass devitrification, which causes process interruptions and reduced productivity.
Tables 1A-1E set forth the compositions for a number of conventional high-strength glass compositions.
Glass fibers formed from compositions such as those described above are used in a variety of applications. For example, glass fibers are commonly used as reinforcements in polymer matrices to form glass fiber reinforced plastics or composites. The glass fibers may be used to form structural composites such as door liners or hoodliners for automobiles, storage drums, aircraft flooring, wind turbine blades, and pressure vessels. Alternatively, the glass fibers may be used to form non-structural articles such as automobile panels, insulator rods, and ballistic panels. In some situations, such as storage drums formed from glass fibers, wind turbine blades, and pressure vessels, the glass fibers may come into contact with a corrosive substance, such as corrosive chemicals or saltwater. It is therefore desirable to have a glass composition that can be utilized to form glass fiber composite articles that are non-corrosive in nature and which optimally possess adequate strength for the desired application. Further, the costs of forming R-glass and S-glass fibers are dramatically higher than E-glass fibers due to the cost of producing these fibers in a platinum-lined melter.
Thus, there exists a need in the art for glass compositions useful in the formation of non-corrosive, high performance fibers that can be formed by a direct-melt process in a refractory-lined furnace.
The invention, in part, is a glass composition for the formation of continuous glass fibers that are suitable for use in high-strength applications. The composition of the present invention may be inexpensively formed into glass fibers using low-cost, direct melting in refractory-lined furnaces due to the relatively low fiberizing temperature of the glass fibers. Once formed into fibers, the glass composition provides the strength characteristics of higher-priced glass fibers such as S-glass. The composition of the present invention includes about 60.5 to about 70.5 weight % SiO2, about 10.0 to about 24.5 weight % Al2O3, about 6.0 to about 20.0 weight % RO, where RO equals the sum of MgO, CaO, SrO and BaO, and about 0.0 to about 3.0 weight % alkali metal oxides. In a preferred embodiment, the glass composition is composed of about 61 to about 68 weight % SiO2, about 15 to about 19 weight % Al2O3, about 15 to about 20 weight % RO, where RO equals the sum of MgO, CaO, SrO and BaO, and about 0 to about 3 weight % alkali metal oxides. The composition preferably does not contain more than about 4 weight % of oxides or halogens selected from the group consisting of ZnO, SO3, Fluorine, B2O3, TiO2, ZrO2 and Fe2O3. The desired properties of the glass composition of the present invention include a fiberizing temperature of less than about 2650° F. and a liquidus temperature that is preferably below the fiberizing temperature by at least about 80° F., more preferably by at least about 120° F., and most preferably by at least about 150° F. Additionally, fibers produced from the inventive composition are non-corrosive or substantially (e.g., nearly) non-corrosive in nature. The non-corrosive properties of the glass fibers formed from the inventive composition permit the glass fibers to be used in applications in which the fibers are in contact with corrosive substances.
It is an advantage of the present invention that glass fibers formed from the inventive composition can be melted in a refractory-lined melter because both its melting and fiberizing temperatures are below the upper use temperatures of conventional refractories.
It is another advantage of the present invention that glass fibers formed from the inventive composition possess corrosion-resistant properties.
It is yet another advantage of the present invention that the glass composition has a lower fiberizing temperature that allows for a higher throughput, which reduces production costs.
It is a feature of the present invention that glass fibers formed from the inventive composition have a fiberizing temperature of less than about 2650° F., a ΔT of at least about 80° F., and a coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) of about 2.28×10−6 in/in/° F. to about 2.77×10−6 in/in/° F.
It is another feature of the present invention that glass fibers made from the inventive composition possess corrosion resistant properties that are equal to or better than E-glass and boron-free glass fibers.
The foregoing and other objects, features, and advantages of the invention will appear more fully hereinafter from a consideration of the detailed description that follows. It is to be expressly understood, however, that the drawings are for illustrative purposes and are not to be construed as defining the limits of the invention.
The advantages of this invention will be apparent upon consideration of the following detailed disclosure of the invention, especially when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings wherein:
Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which the invention belongs. Although any methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described herein can be used in the practice or testing of the present invention, the preferred methods and materials are described herein. All references cited herein, including published or corresponding U.S. or foreign patent applications, issued U.S. or foreign patents, and any other references, are each incorporated by reference in their entireties, including all data, tables, figures, and text presented in the cited references. It is to be appreciated that in the drawings, the thickness of the lines, layers, and regions may be exaggerated for clarity.
Fiberizing properties of the glass composition of the present invention include the fiberizing temperature, the liquidus temperature, and delta-T. The fiberizing temperature is defined as the temperature that corresponds to a viscosity of about 1000 Poise. As discussed in more detail below, a lowered fiberizing temperature reduces the production cost of the fibers, allows for a longer bushing life, increases throughput, permits the glass to be melted in a refractory-lined melter, and reduces energy usage. For example, at a lower fiberizing temperature, a bushing operates at a cooler temperature and does not “sag” as quickly. Sag is a phenomenon that occurs in bushings that are held at an elevated temperature for extended periods of time. By lowering the fiberizing temperature, the sag rate of the bushing may be reduced and the bushing life can be increased. In addition, a lower fiberizing temperature allows for a higher throughput since more glass can be melted in a given period at a given energy input. As a result, production cost is reduced. In addition, a lower fiberizing temperature will also permit glass formed with the inventive composition to be melted in a refractory-lined melter since both its melting and fiberizing temperatures are below the upper use temperatures of many commercially available refractories.
The liquidus temperature is defined as the highest temperature at which equilibrium exists between liquid glass and its primary crystalline phase. At all temperatures above the liquidus temperature, the glass is free from crystals in its primary phase. At temperatures below the liquidus temperature, crystals may form.
Another fiberizing property is delta-T (ΔT), which is defined as the difference between the fiberizing temperature and the liquidus temperature. A larger ΔT offers a greater degree of flexibility during the formation of the glass fibers and helps to inhibit devitrification of the glass (that is, the formation of crystals within the melt) during melting and fiberizing. Increasing the ΔT also reduces the production cost of the glass fibers by allowing for a greater bushing life and by providing a wider process window for forming fibers.
The glasses of the present invention are suitable for melting in traditional commercially available refractory-lined glass melters, which are widely used in the manufacture of glass reinforcement fibers. Starting batch components typically include SiO2 (ground silica sand), and Al2O3 (calcined alumina), as well as chain modifiers from source materials such as MgCO3 (magnesite), CaCO3 (limestone), SrCO3 (strontianite), BaCO3 (witherite), ZrSiO4 (zircon), and Na2CO3 (natrite).
The glass batch is preferably composed of about 60.5 to about 70.5 weight percent SiO2, about 10.0 to about 24.5 weight percent Al2O3, about 6.0 to about 20.0 weight percent RO, where RO equals the sum of MgO, CaO, and SrO, and about 0.0 to about 3.0 weight percent alkali metal oxides. The phrase weight percent, as used in conjunction with the present invention, is intended to be defined as the percent by weight of the total composition. A fiber formed in accordance with the present invention will typically also include small amounts of ZnO, SO3, Fluorine, B2O3, TiO2 and Fe2O3, preferably in an amount of less than 4 weight percent. It is to be appreciated that impurities or tramp materials may be present in the glass composition without adversely affecting the glasses or the fibers. These impurities may enter the glass as raw material impurities or may be products formed by the chemical reaction of the molten glass with furnace components.
In general, glass fibers according to the present invention may be formed by obtaining the raw materials or ingredients and mixing or blending the components in a conventional manner in the appropriate quantities to give the desired weight percentages of the final composition. The mixed batch may then be melted in a refractory-lined melter, and the resulting molten glass may be passed along a forehearth and into platinum based bushings located along the bottom of the forehearth. The molten glass is pulled or attenuated through holes or orifices in the bottom or tip plate of the bushing to form individual glass filaments or fibers. Strands of glass fibers are formed by gathering the individual filaments together, such as with a gathering shoe. The strands are each formed of a plurality of individual glass filaments and may be wound on a forming tube mounted on a rotatable collet of a winding machine. The glass fibers may be further processed in a conventional manner suitable for the intended application.
A glass fiber formed in accordance with the present invention will preferably having a fiberizing temperature of less than about 2650° F., a ΔT of at least about 80° F., preferably a ΔT of at least about 120° F., and most preferably a ΔT of at least 150° F., and a coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) of about 2.28×10−6 in/in/° F. to about 2.77×10−6 in/in/° F. Further, the glass fibers of the present invention preferably have a strength in excess of about 600 KPSI, preferably a strength in excess of about 630 KPSI, and most preferably a strength in excess of about 695 KPSI. Further, the glass fibers will desirably have a modulus greater than about 12.0 MPSI, preferably greater then about 12.18 MPSI, and most preferably greater then about 12.6 MPSI. It will be appreciated that certain details of construction are not provided in view of such details being conventional and well within the skill of the art.
The present invention also includes a composite material including glass fibers, as described above, in combination with a hardenable matrix material. The composite material is especially useful in applications where high strength, high stiffness, and low weight are desired. Such applications include aircraft, automotive, and wind energy (such as windmill blades) as well as any other application where low weight, stiffness, and high strength are desired. Suitable hardenable matrix materials include thermoset and thermoplastic resins. By way of example, suitable thermoset matrix materials include vinyl esters, polyesters, resin epoxies and combinations or copolymers thereof. Typically, windmill blades are formed by any suitable composite fabrication technique, such as vacuum-assisted resin infusion or pre-impregnated reinforcement lay-up.
Additionally, glass fibers formed from the inventive composition are non-corrosive or substantially non-corrosive in nature. Due to the non-corrosive nature of the glass fibers, glass fibers made in accordance with the present invention may be used in applications where the glass fibers or a composite formed from the glass fibers are in contact with a corrosive substance. Thus, the glass fibers may be used in applications such as chemical drums, grating, sail battens, and wind turbine blades.
Having generally described this invention, a further understanding can be obtained by reference to certain specific examples illustrated below which are provided for purposes of illustration only and are not intended to be all inclusive or limiting unless otherwise specified.
The glasses in the examples set forth in Tables 2A-2P were melted in platinum crucibles or in a continuous platinum-lined melter for determining the mechanical and physical properties of the glass and fibers produced therefrom. The units of measurement for the physical properties are: Viscosity (° F.), Liquidus temperature (° F.) and ΔT (° F.). In some examples the glasses were fiberized and Strength (KPsi), Density (g/cc), Modulus (MPsi), Softening Point (° F.) and coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) (in/in/(° F.)) were measured.
The fiberizing temperature was measured using a rotating spindle viscometer. The fiberizing viscosity is defined as 1000 Poise. The liquidus temperature was measured by placing a platinum container filled with glass in a thermal gradient furnace for 16 hours. The greatest temperature at which crystals were present was considered the liquidus temperature. The modulus was measured using the sonic technique on a single fiber of glass. The tensile strength was measured on a pristine single fiber. The CTE was measured with a dilatometer over the range of temperature from 25 to 600° C. The softening point temperature was measured using the ASTM C338 fiber-elongation method.
As is understood in the art, the above exemplary inventive compositions do not always total 100% of the listed components due to statistical conventions (such as, rounding and averaging) and the fact that some compositions may include impurities that are not listed. Of course, the actual amounts of all components, including any impurities, in a composition always total 100%. Furthermore, it should be understood that where small quantities of components are specified in the compositions, for example, quantities on the order of about 0.05 weight percent or less, those components may be present in the form of trace impurities present in the raw materials, rather than intentionally added.
Additionally, components may be added to the batch composition, for example, to facilitate processing, that are later eliminated, thereby forming a glass composition that is essentially free of such components. Thus, for instance, minute quantities of components such as fluorine and sulfate may be present as trace impurities in the raw materials providing the silica, calcia, alumina, and magnesia components in commercial practice of the invention or they may be processing aids that are essentially removed during manufacture.
As apparent from the above examples, glass fiber compositions of the invention have advantageous properties, such as low fiberizing temperatures and wide differences between the liquidus temperatures and the fiberizing temperatures (high ΔT values). Other advantages and obvious modifications of the invention will be apparent to the artisan from the above description and further through practice of the invention). The high-performance glass of the present invention melts and refines at relatively low temperatures, has a workable viscosity over a wide range of relatively low temperatures, and a low liquidus temperature range.
Samples from rovings of glass fibers formed in accordance with the inventive composition and a sample from a roving of boron-free fibers were desized by heating the fibers in a furnace at 625° C. for 30 minutes. The bare fibers were then permitted to cool in a dessicator. Once the fibers were cool, the samples were taken from the dessicator and each of the bare fiber samples were weighed (W1) and recorded. A sample of basalt was also obtained, weighed (W1), and recorded. The samples (i.e., inventive bare fibers, boron-free bare fibers, and basalt) were individually placed in flasks to which 150 ml of 10% HNO3 was added. The flasks were placed in a bath at 96° C. for 24 hours, 100 hours, and 240 hours. At the end of their respective time period, the samples of inventive fibers, boron-free fibers, and basalt were removed from the flasks and filtered through filter paper. The paper filters were placed in cleaned crucibles and heated in a furnace at 625° C. for 30 minutes. The samples were then placed in a dessicator to cool. After the samples were cool, the final weight (W2) of each of the samples was recorded. The percent weight loss of the fibers and basalt was calculated using the formula 100·((W1−W2)/W1).
The results of the percent weight loss of the glass fibers formed from the inventive composition compared to the percent weight loss of the boron-free fibers and basalt are graphically illustrated in
Samples from rovings of glass fibers formed in accordance with the inventive composition, a sample from a roving of boron-free fibers, a sample from a roving of E-glass fibers, and a sample from a roving of E-CR glass were desized by heating the fibers in a furnace at 625° C. for 30 minutes. The bare fibers were then permitted to cool in a dessicator. Once the fibers were cool, the samples were taken from the dessicators and each of the bare fiber samples were weighed (W1) and recorded. A sample of basalt was also obtained, weighed (W1), and recorded. The samples (i.e., inventive bare fibers, boron-free bare fibers, E-glass bare fibers, E-CR bare fibers, and basalt) were individually placed in flasks and 150 ml of 5% H2SO4 was added. The flasks were then placed in a bath at 96° C. for 24 hours, 100 hours, and 240 hours. At the end of their respective time period, the samples of inventive fibers, boron-free fibers, E-glass fibers, E-CR glass fibers, and basalt were removed from the flasks and filtered through filter paper. The paper filters were placed in cleaned crucibles and heated in a furnace at 625° C. for 30 minutes. The samples were then placed in a dessicator to cool. After the samples were cooled, the weight (W2) of each of the samples was recorded. The percent weight loss of the fibers and basalt was calculated using the formula 100·((W1−W2)/W1).
The percentage of weight loss of the glass fibers and basalt is illustrated in
Samples from rovings of glass fibers formed in accordance with the inventive composition and a sample from a roving of boron-free fibers were desized by heating in a furnace at 625° C. for 30 minutes. The bare fibers were then permitted to cool in a dessicator. Once the fibers were cool, the samples were taken from the dessicator and each of the bare fiber samples were weighed (W1) and recorded. A sample of basalt was also obtained, weighed (W1), and recorded. The samples (i.e., inventive bare fibers, boron-free bare fibers, and basalt) were individually placed in flasks to which 150 ml of H2O was added. The flasks were then placed in a bath at 96° C. for 24 hours, 100 hours, and 240 hours. At the end of their respective time period, the samples of inventive fibers, boron-free fibers, and basalt were removed from the flasks and filtered through filter paper. The paper filters were placed in cleaned crucibles and heated in a furnace at 625° C. for 30 minutes. The samples were then placed in a dessicator to cool. After the samples were cooled, the weight (W2) of each of the samples was recorded. The percent weight loss was calculated using the formula 100·((W1−W2)/W1).
The results of the percent weight loss of the glass fibers formed from the inventive composition compared to the weight loss of the boron-free fibers and basalt are graphically illustrated in
Glass fibers were made by conventional glass forming techniques utilizing the inventive composition. In particular, molten glass containing the components of the inventive composition in the desired amounts is pulled or attenuated through holes or orifices in the bottom of a bushing to form individual glass filaments. The average filament diameter was determined to be 17 μm and the bundle tex was 1200 tex. Strands of glass fibers were formed by gathering the individual filaments together.
Five samples composed of approximately 30 yards of the inventive fiber strands were used for testing. In addition, five samples of approximately 30 yards of boron-free fiber strands (average filament diameter 17 μm with a bundle tex of 1200 tex) were obtained. One 30 yard sample of the inventive fiber strands and one 30 yard sample of the boron-free fiber strands were heated in accordance with the parameters set forth in ASTM D2584 to determine the percent of sizing on the glass fibers.
The remaining eight samples were placed in eight individual glass jars. Two jars (one with an inventive glass fiber strand sample and one with a boron-free glass strand sample) were filled with deionized water. Two jars (one with an inventive glass fiber strand sample, one with a boron-free glass strand sample) were filled with 5% salt water. Two jars (one with an inventive glass fiber strand sample and one with a boron-free glass strand sample) were filled with 1N sulfuric acid. Two jars (one with an inventive glass fiber strand sample and one with a boron-free glass strand sample) were filled with 1N nitric acid. Lids were placed on each of the jars and the jars were stored at 25° C. for 500 hours.
After 500 hours had elapsed, all eight samples were triple rinsed with 150° F. (65.5° C.) deionized water, dried, and weighed. The weight of each of the samples was recorded. The samples were then heated in accordance with ASTM D2584 to burn off any remaining sizing. The percent weight loss of the fibers was calculated using the formula 100·(W1−W2/W1), where W1 was the initial weight of the sample and W2 was the weight after treatment with the corrosive substance. The final percent glass loss was determined by subtracting the size LOI from the percent weight loss determined from the final weight burn-off. The results of the experiment are set forth in Table 3.
As shown in Table 3, the inventive fibers had glass loss percents that were significantly less than the percent of glass lost the boron-free glass fibers. The amount of glass that is eroded by the corrosive substance is another method of determining a fiber's resistance to corrosion. For example, the more glass that is eroded by the corrosive substance during a particular time period, the less the fiber is resistant to corrosion. From the results set forth in Table 3, it can be concluded that the fibers formed from the inventive composition had superior corrosion resistance compared to boron-free fibers. It can also be concluded that the inventive glass fibers would form commercial products that have corrosive properties at least equal to, and even superior to, current products formed from boron-free glass fibers.
Laminates formed from E-glass fibers, boron-free fibers, and inventive fibers were formed by dry winding the glass fibers and utilizing a conventional vacuum-assisted resin infusion process. The laminates thus formed were cured for 24 hours at 35° C., followed by a post-cure for 4 hours at 90° C. Samples having a thickness of 2.09 mm and a width of 13.44 mm were obtained. Samples of the laminates from the E-glass fibers, boron-free fibers, and inventive fibers were tested for their bending strength retention prior to aging. The results were recorded. Samples from each of the laminates were immersed in 5% H2SO4 under constant strain at room temperature for one month. In particular, the samples were tested with a four point bending test at two imposed strain levels (1.03% strain (load 1) and a 1.40% strain (load 2)) for one month. It was observed that the E-glass laminate samples broke after 48 hours. After one month, neither the boron-free laminate samples nor the inventive fiber laminate samples were broken.
To evaluate the bending strength retention, a three point bending test was utilized. In this test, the aged samples were placed on a testing apparatus in which the sample is horizontally stabilized by two supports separated a distance from each other and a force is applied vertically (i.e., downwardly) to the center of the samples. The force is applied until the sample breaks. The results of the three-point bending test are illustrated in
Inventive fibers, boron-free fibers, and E-glass fibers were tested for resistance to hydrolysis according to the standards set forth in ISO 720. Hydrolysis is one form of corrosion. According to ISO 720, utilizing HCl at 0.02N, classification HGA 1 is 0.10 ml, HGA 2 is 0.85 ml, and HGA 3 is 1.50 ml. The results are set forth in Table 4.
As shown in Table 4, based on the average weight loss, the inventive glass fibers were placed in the classification HGA 1, whereas the boron-free fibers and the E-glass fibers were classified as HGA 2. A classification of HGA 1 indicates a better resistance to hydrolysis (i.e., corrosion) than a classification of HGA 2. Thus, composite products formed from the inventive glass fibers would be expected to have a better hydrolysis resistance than products formed from boron-free glass fibers or E-glass fibers.
The invention of this application has been described above both generically and with regard to specific embodiments. Although the invention has been set forth in what is believed to be the preferred embodiments, a wide variety of alternatives known to those of skill in the art can be selected within the generic disclosure. Other advantages and obvious modifications of the invention will be apparent to the artisan from the above description and further through practice of the invention. The invention is not otherwise limited, except for the recitation of the claims set forth below.
This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/267,739 entitled “Composition For High Performance Glass, High Performance Glass Fibers, and Articles Therefrom” filed Nov. 4, 2005, the content of which is incorporated by reference in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3044888 | Provance | Jul 1962 | A |
| 3189471 | Thomas | Jun 1965 | A |
| 3220915 | Shannon | Nov 1965 | A |
| 3360386 | Kelley et al. | Dec 1967 | A |
| 3402055 | Harris et al. | Sep 1968 | A |
| 3408213 | Provance et al. | Oct 1968 | A |
| 3484259 | Lewis et al. | Dec 1969 | A |
| 3498805 | STalego | Mar 1970 | A |
| 3524738 | Grubb et al. | Aug 1970 | A |
| 3535096 | Bour et al. | Oct 1970 | A |
| 3709705 | Hagedorn | Jan 1973 | A |
| 3804646 | Dumbaugh, Jr. | Apr 1974 | A |
| 3833388 | Ohlberg | Sep 1974 | A |
| 3861926 | Irlam et al. | Jan 1975 | A |
| 3876481 | Erickson et al. | Apr 1975 | A |
| 3887386 | Majumdar | Jun 1975 | A |
| 3892581 | Burgman et al. | Jul 1975 | A |
| 3902881 | Pirooz | Sep 1975 | A |
| 3904423 | Guthrie | Sep 1975 | A |
| 3945838 | Erickson et al. | Mar 1976 | A |
| 4002482 | Coenen | Jan 1977 | A |
| 4012131 | Krohn | Mar 1977 | A |
| 4046948 | Zlochower | Sep 1977 | A |
| 4063001 | Zlochower | Dec 1977 | A |
| 4090882 | Rauschenfels | May 1978 | A |
| 4199364 | Neely | Apr 1980 | A |
| 4325724 | Froberg | Apr 1982 | A |
| 4366251 | Rapp | Dec 1982 | A |
| 4375527 | Zahner | Mar 1983 | A |
| 4386164 | Moser | May 1983 | A |
| 4491951 | Dunn | Jan 1985 | A |
| 4569471 | Ingemansson | Feb 1986 | A |
| 4582748 | Eastes | Apr 1986 | A |
| 4764487 | Lewis | Aug 1988 | A |
| 4824806 | Yokoi et al. | Apr 1989 | A |
| 4857485 | Brennan et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4882302 | Horiuchi et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
| 4892846 | Rogers et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
| 4935291 | Gunnink | Jun 1990 | A |
| 4976587 | Johnston et al. | Dec 1990 | A |
| 5212121 | Omata | May 1993 | A |
| 5248637 | Taneda et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
| 5302444 | Jackson et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
| 5332699 | Olds et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
| 5474425 | Lawlor | Dec 1995 | A |
| 5569629 | TenEyck et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5576252 | Rapp et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5585312 | TenEyck et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5691255 | Jensen et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5719092 | Arrington | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5789329 | Eastes et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5819614 | Jander | Oct 1998 | A |
| 5843853 | Heitmann | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5851932 | Dickson et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5935886 | Jensen et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5948535 | Chiurlo et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5962354 | Fyles et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5997977 | Zou et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6063470 | Zou et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6069100 | Naumann et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6089021 | Senanayake | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6101847 | Shamp | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6136735 | Gallo et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6156683 | Grove-Rasmussen et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6169047 | Nishizawa et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6214429 | Zou et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6237369 | LeBlanc et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6248678 | Pinckney | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6300264 | Ohara | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6306786 | Koyama et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6314760 | Chenoweth | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6329310 | Peuchert et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6358873 | Stewart | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6376403 | Koyama et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6399527 | Kishimoto et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6403676 | Jia et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6422041 | Simpson et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6451720 | Kishimoto | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6457943 | Olsen et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6458436 | Hansen et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6496706 | Jou et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6540508 | Simpson et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6579599 | Blum et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6686304 | Wallenberger | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6794322 | Sircar | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6809050 | McGinnis et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6818575 | Wallenberger | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6867158 | Peuchert | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6933045 | Tamura | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6933252 | Pierce | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6998361 | Lewis | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7022634 | Hamilton et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7189671 | Lewis | Mar 2007 | B1 |
| 7259118 | Jubb et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7285510 | Sakaguchi et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 7449419 | Li | Nov 2008 | B2 |
| 7509819 | Baker et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
| 7781355 | Berthereau et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7799713 | Hofmann et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7811954 | Berthereau et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7823417 | Hofmann et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 20010011058 | Tamura | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20020000101 | Chenoweth | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020045528 | Kusuno et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20030018855 | McWilliams et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030077178 | Stearns | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030100431 | Koyo et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030166446 | Lewis | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030188554 | Baker et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030207748 | Wallenberger | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030224922 | Wallenberger | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040092379 | Lewis | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040220038 | Wolff | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20050009683 | Hamilton et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050014624 | Jubb et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050031703 | Beier et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050084440 | Chacon et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050085369 | Jensen | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050090377 | Shelestak et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050107238 | Li | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050130825 | Kravchenko et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050232828 | Merry | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050234216 | Klein et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20060001005 | Kishimoto et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060003884 | Nishizawa et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060257240 | Naskali et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20070087139 | Creux et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070105701 | Hoffmann et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070107220 | Bakhuis et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20080009403 | Hofmann et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080053152 | Kurachi et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080141721 | Adams et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20090286440 | Lecomte et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20100069220 | McGinnis | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100093511 | Berthereau et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100160139 | McGinnis | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100160140 | McGinnis | Jun 2010 | A1 |
| 20100162772 | McGinnis | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100184345 | Lalande et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20110000263 | Hofmann | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110003678 | Hofmann | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110039681 | Lecomte et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 2528923 | Dec 2004 | CA |
| 1113893 | Dec 1995 | CN |
| 1243501 | Feb 2000 | CN |
| 1392870 | Jan 2003 | CN |
| 1678654 | Oct 2005 | CN |
| 101580344 | Nov 2009 | CN |
| 1015979140 | Dec 2009 | CN |
| 101691278 | Apr 2010 | CN |
| 101838110 | Sep 2010 | CN |
| 101549958 | Jan 2011 | CN |
| 1496520 | Aug 1969 | DE |
| 500325 | Aug 1992 | EP |
| 931774 | Jul 1999 | EP |
| 1357393 | Apr 1964 | FR |
| 1435073 | Apr 1966 | FR |
| 1534135 | Dec 1968 | FR |
| 1589410 | Mar 1970 | FR |
| 2223328 | Oct 1974 | FR |
| 2692248 | Dec 1993 | FR |
| 2856055 | Dec 2004 | FR |
| 2879591 | Jun 2006 | FR |
| 2916438 | Nov 2008 | FR |
| 428 720 | May 1935 | GB |
| 1006524 | Oct 1965 | GB |
| 1147718 | Apr 1969 | GB |
| 1209244 | Oct 1970 | GB |
| 1531287 | Nov 1978 | GB |
| 45-011228 | May 1970 | JP |
| 51-055308 | May 1976 | JP |
| 58 064243 | Apr 1983 | JP |
| 58064243 | Apr 1983 | JP |
| 58-088138 | May 1983 | JP |
| 1-189985 | Jul 1989 | JP |
| 1-239039 | Sep 1989 | JP |
| 3-112650 | May 1991 | JP |
| 4-050144 | Feb 1992 | JP |
| 6-211543 | Aug 1994 | JP |
| 6-219780 | Aug 1994 | JP |
| 6-305773 | Nov 1994 | JP |
| 7-010598 | Jan 1995 | JP |
| 8-231240 | Sep 1996 | JP |
| 2582361 | Feb 1997 | JP |
| 11-021147 | Jan 1999 | JP |
| 11-21147 | Jan 1999 | JP |
| 2000-247677 | Sep 2000 | JP |
| 2000-247683 | Sep 2000 | JP |
| 2001-206733 | Jul 2001 | JP |
| 2001-316961 | Nov 2001 | JP |
| 2002-003237 | Jan 2002 | JP |
| 2002-060252 | Feb 2002 | JP |
| 2002-069941 | Mar 2002 | JP |
| 2002-081022 | Mar 2002 | JP |
| 2002-154843 | May 2002 | JP |
| 2002-293574 | Oct 2002 | JP |
| 2003-137590 | May 2003 | JP |
| 2003-160350 | Jun 2003 | JP |
| 2003-171143 | Jun 2003 | JP |
| 2003-183031 | Jul 2003 | JP |
| 2003-239847 | Aug 2003 | JP |
| 2003-321247 | Nov 2003 | JP |
| 2004-091307 | Mar 2004 | JP |
| 9931021 | Jun 1999 | WO |
| 0015526 | Mar 2000 | WO |
| 0220419 | Mar 2002 | WO |
| 0242233 | May 2002 | WO |
| 2004020506 | Mar 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004094794 | Nov 2004 | WO |
| 2005092808 | Oct 2005 | WO |
| 2005093227 | Oct 2005 | WO |
| 2006064164 | Jun 2006 | WO |
| WO 2007055964 | May 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007055968 | May 2007 | WO |
| 2008073585 | Jun 2008 | WO |
| 2010075258 | Jul 2010 | WO |
| 2010075262 | Jul 2010 | WO |
| 2010075267 | Jul 2010 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Machine Translation of JP 2002-154843, May 28, 2002. |
| PCT Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration, Application PCT/US06/42437 dated Apr. 30, 2007. |
| PCT Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration, Application PCT/US06/42406 dated May 8, 2007. |
| European Search Report 06 82 7125 dated Dec. 10, 2008. |
| Thomson Scientific, London, GB; AN 1983 50368K Database WPI Week 198321. |
| Conference paper by G. Fredell, “Fiber metal laminates for improved structural integrity,” 1992. |
| Article by P. Joosee, Literature search of mechanical properties of fiber-reinforced plastics for wind turbine rotors, Dec. 1988. |
| U.S. Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,739 dated Dec. 18, 2008. |
| U.S. Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,739 dated Sep. 24, 2008. |
| PCT Notification Concerning Transmittal of International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Application PCT/US06/042406 dated May 15, 2008. |
| US Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,702 dated Sep. 24, 2008. |
| US Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,702 dated Dec. 23, 2008. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/703,234 dated Apr. 15, 2002. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/703,234 dated Sep. 6, 2002. |
| Advisory action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/703,234 dated Nov. 19, 2002. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/703,234 dated Feb. 4, 2003. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/703,234 dated Jul. 11, 2003. |
| Advisory action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/703,234 dated Oct. 24, 2003. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 09/703,234 dated Dec. 16, 2003. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 09/703,234 dated Jul. 6, 2004. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 10/560,068 dated Aug. 1, 2008. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 10/560,068 dated Dec. 15, 2008. |
| Advisory Action from U.S. Appl. No. 10/560,068 dated Feb. 25, 2009. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 10/560,068 dated May 7, 2009. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 10/560,068 dated Nov. 5, 2009. |
| Advisory Action from U.S. Appl. No. 10/560,068 dated Mar. 16, 2010. |
| Panel Decision of Pre-Appeal Brief from U.S. Appl. No. 10/560,068 dated Apr. 29, 2010. |
| Examiner's Answer from U.S. Appl. No. 10/560,068 dated Aug. 3, 2010. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,702 dated Jul. 29, 2009. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,702 dated Dec. 3, 2009. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,702 dated Jun. 16, 2010. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,739 dated Jul. 13, 2009. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,739 dated Dec. 3, 2009. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,739 dated Apr. 7, 2010. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/722,039 dated Oct. 28, 2009. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/722,039 dated Jun. 22, 2010. |
| Interview Summary from U.S. Appl. No. 11/722,039 dated Sep. 21, 2010. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/722,039 dated Oct. 19, 2010. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/722,039 dated Jun. 7, 2011. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/341,985 dated Nov. 17, 2010. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/341,985 dated Apr. 21, 2011. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/341,985 dated Oct. 12, 2011. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/344,130 dated Nov. 17, 2010. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/344,130 dated Apr. 20, 2011. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/344,130 dated Oct. 11, 2011. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/403,955 dated Dec. 9, 2011. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/847,206 dated Feb. 22, 2011. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/847,206 dated Oct. 14, 2011. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/880,289 dated Jul. 20, 2011. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/880,289 dated Dec. 22, 2011. |
| International Search Report from PCT/FR04/01431 dated Jun. 11, 2003. |
| International Search Report from PCT/FR05/51090 date Dec. 2, 2004. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT/US09/68949 dated May 7, 2010. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT/US09/68955 dated May 7, 2010. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT/US09/68965 dated May 7, 2010. |
| Office action from Australian Application No. 2006312015 dated May 5, 2011. |
| Office action from Australian Application No. 2006312106 dated May 5, 2011. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200580043075.7 dated Dec. 7, 2011. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200680041104.0 dated Aug. 4, 2010. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200680041104.0 dated Mar. 22, 2011. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200680041104.0 dated Jul. 14, 2011. |
| Office action from European Application No. 01987549.1 dated Aug. 5, 2011. |
| Office action from European Application No. 05825565.4 dated Dec. 14, 2007. |
| Office action from European Application No. 05825565.4 dated Nov. 19, 2010. |
| Office action from European Application No. 05825565.4 dated May 9, 2011. |
| Office action from European Application No. 05825565.4 dated Mar. 31, 2011. |
| Communication from EP application No. 06827125.3 dated Jun. 4, 2009 which includes the EP OA from Feb. 13, 2009 and the Search Report dated Dec. 10, 2008. |
| Office action from Indian Application No. 2108/KOLNP/2007 dated Jun. 28, 2011. |
| Office action from Japanese Application No. 2007-546144 dated Sep. 13, 2011. |
| Office action from Korean Application No. 2003-7005873 dated Jun. 26, 2007. |
| Office action from Korean Application No. 2003-7005873 dated Nov. 29, 2007. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. 07/006989 dated Oct. 24, 2011. |
| Communication regarding Mexican Application No. 08/05816 dated Mar. 15, 2011. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. 08/005819 dated Mar. 16, 2011. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. 08/005819 dated Jun. 3, 2011. |
| Office action from Russian Application No. 2008117091 dated Apr. 19, 2010. |
| Office action from Russian Application No. 2008117091 dated Dec. 13, 2010. |
| Office action from Russian Application No. 2008117092 dated Oct. 12, 2011. |
| Aslanova, “Steklyannye volokna”, Glass Fibers, Moscow, Khimiya, 1979, I, 256 pp. pp. 33, 34, Fig. 3.2). |
| Chernyak et alo. “Nepreryvnoe steklyannoe volokno” Continuous Glass Fiber, Moscow, Khimiya, 1965. |
| Popov, et al., “Proizvodstvo i primenenie plavlenolitykh ogneuporov”, Manufacture and Application of Molten Cast Refractory Materials, Moscow, Metallurgiya, 1985, IV, p. 212-213. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/722,039 dated Mar. 1, 2010. |
| Office action from Brazilian Application No. PI01149733 dated Mar. 10, 2009. |
| Office action from Canadian Application No. 2,528,923 dated Dec. 9, 2010 along with English translation of relevant portions of action. |
| Office action from Canadian Application No. 2,528,923 dated Jul. 12, 2011. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200480015986.4 dated Jul. 6, 2007. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200580043075.7 dated Feb. 5, 2010. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200680041114.4 dated Feb. 29, 2012. |
| Office action from European Application No. 04767297.7 dated Sep. 8, 2006. |
| Search Report from French Registration No. 635569 (FR 0306981) dated Feb. 13, 2004. |
| Search Report from French Registration No. 658923 (FR 0413443) dated Aug. 16, 2005. |
| Office action from Indian Application No. 00501/KOLNP/2003 dated Jul. 7, 2006. |
| Office action from Indian Application No. 00501/KOLNP/2003 dated May 14, 2007. |
| Office action from Indian Application No. 2546/KOLNP/2005 dated Jun. 15, 2007. |
| Office action from Japanese Application No. 2002-544374 dated Sep. 28, 2007. |
| Office action from Japanese Application No. 2002-544374 dated Jul. 27, 2009. |
| Office action from Japanese Application No. 2002-544374 dated Jul. 12, 2010. |
| Office action from Japanese Application No. 2006-516274 dated Jun. 22, 2010. |
| Office action from Japanese Application No. 2006-516274 dated Feb. 22, 2011. |
| Office action from Korean Application No. 10-2005-7023679 dated Mar. 3, 2011. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. PA/a/2002/000814 dated Feb. 22, 2006. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. PA/a/2002/00814 dated Sep. 9, 2005. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. PA/a/2002/00814 dated Jun. 23, 2005. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. PA/a/2002/00814 dated Sep. 26, 2002. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. 05/013323 dated Feb. 27, 2006. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. 05/013323 dated May 29, 2009. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. 07/06989 dated Aug. 22, 2007. |
| Office action from Russian Application No. 2007126843 dated Sep. 24, 2009. |
| Office action from Russian Application No. 2007126843 dated Dec. 11, 2009. |
| Office action from Canadian Application No. 2,426,637 dated Aug. 28, 2008. |
| Office action from Russian Application No. 2006100296/03 dated Jun. 8, 2008. |
| Office action from Russian Application No. 2006100296/03 dated Nov. 26, 2008. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/403,955 dated Apr. 24, 2012. |
| Office action from Taiwanese Application No. 094144552 dated May 7, 2012. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/344,130 dated Jun. 7, 2012. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/341,985 dated Jun. 11, 2012. |
| Office action from Russian Application No. 2008117093/03 dated Apr. 26, 2012. |
| Office action from Korean Application No. 2008-7010726 dated Nov. 14, 2012. |
| Office action from Korean Application No. 2008-7010727 dated Nov. 14, 2012. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. 07/06989 dated Jun. 26, 2012. |
| Office action from Japanese Application No. 2008-540053 dated Jul. 30, 2012. |
| Office action from Japanese Application No. 2008-540052 dated Jul. 30, 2012. |
| Office action from Korean Application No. 10-2007-7016026 dated Aug. 9, 2012. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/643,411 dated Aug. 17, 2012. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 11/722,039 dated Aug. 24, 2012. |
| Lund, “Tensile strength of glass fibers”, dated Feb. 18, 2010. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200680041104.0 dated Sep. 13, 2012. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/880,289 dated Aug. 31, 2012. |
| Office action from Japanese Application No. 2009-533917 dated Sep. 24, 2012. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/341,985 dated Oct. 11, 2012. |
| Appeal Decision from U.S. Appl. No. 10/560,068 dated Aug. 15, 2012. |
| Office action from Canadian Application No. 2,626,733 dated Oct. 9, 2012. |
| Office action from European Application No. 09796243.5 dated Oct. 2, 2012. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 20680041104.0 dated Jun. 13, 2012. |
| Office action from Canadian Application No. 2,591,026 dated May 15, 2012 along with English translation of relevant portions of action. |
| English Translation of JP Patent No. 2002-154843. Foreign patent along with English abstract previously submitted. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/643,411 dated Jan. 28, 2013. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200680041104.0 dated Jan. 14, 2013. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. 11/06712 dated Feb. 1, 2013 along with English translation of relevant portions of action. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200680041114.4 dated Oct. 24, 2012. |
| Office action from European Application No. 09796559.4 dated Dec. 19, 2012. |
| Office action from Indian Application No. 1733/KOLNP/2008 dated Dec. 6, 2012. |
| Office action and Search Report from Taiwanese Application No. 95139183 dated Nov. 5, 2012 along with English translation of relevant portions of action. |
| Office action and Search Report from Taiwanese Application No. 95139185 dated Oct. 24, 2012 along with English translation of relevant portions of action. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200680041114.4 dated Mar. 25, 2013. |
| Office action from Korean Application No. 10-2007-7016026 dated Feb. 25, 2012. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/847,206 dated Apr. 8, 2013. |
| Refusal Decision from Russian Application No. 2008117092/03 dated Mar. 15, 2013. |
| Office action from Brazilian Application No. PI0411336-5 dated Apr. 5, 2013. |
| Office action from Canadian Application No. 2,591,026 dated Mar. 25, 2013. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200980156454.5 dated Apr. 11, 2013. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200980156910.6 dated Apr. 16, 2013. |
| Office action from U.S. Appl. No. 12/989,225 dated Nov. 19, 2012. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/989,225 dated Mar. 11, 2013. |
| Office action from Saudi Arabian Application No. 109300629 dated Jun. 5, 2013 along with English translation of relevant portions of action. |
| Office action from Indian Application No. 1732/KOLNP/2008 dated Mar. 15, 2013. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200580043075.7 dated May 2, 2013. |
| Notice of Allowance from U.S. Appl. No. 12/847,206 dated Jul. 5, 2013. |
| Examiner's Answer from U.S. Appl. No. 11/722,039 dated Jul. 26, 2013. |
| Office action from Chinese Application No. 200680041114.4 dated Jul. 1, 2013. |
| Office action from Mexican Application No. 07/006989 dated Jun. 19, 2013. |
| Office action from Canadian Application No. 2,626,732 dated Jun. 13, 2013. |
| Office action from Canadian Application No. 2,626,733 dated Jun. 27, 2013. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20130217822 A1 | Aug 2013 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 11267739 | Nov 2005 | US |
| Child | 11699719 | US |
