Not applicable.This Reissue Application is a reissue of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/903,503, filed Jan. 7, 2016, which issued on Aug. 15, 2017 as U.S. Pat. No. 9,733,120.
Fiber-optic sensors are increasingly being used as devices for sensing some quantity, typically temperature or mechanical strain, but sometimes also displacements, vibrations, pressure, acceleration, rotations, or concentrations of chemical species. The general principle of such devices is that light from a laser is sent through an optical fiber and there experiences subtle changes of its parameters either in the fiber itself or in one or several point-location sensing fiber Bragg gratings and then reaches a detector arrangement which measures these changes.
In particular a growing application field is the use of fiber optic sensing system for acoustic sensing, especially Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS). DAS optical fibers can be deployed into almost any region of interest and used to monitor for occurrences that generate acoustic perturbations. DAS is quickly becoming recognized as a powerful tool for remote sensing in oil and gas operations. The list of existing and potential applications in remote sensing for this new technology continues to grow and includes not only downhole or subsurface applications but other applications in which acoustic perturbations are of interest, such as subsea umbilical's and risers, and in the security field for perimeter security. Basically any structure can be monitored for acoustic perturbations in this way. Traditionally, DAS applications in the subsurface environment use pulsed electromagnetic waves to interrogate a fiber optic cable for sensing acoustic and vibration phenomena in an oil well, or reservoir. This type of sensor is sometimes referred to as a time-domain coherent optical reflectometer and utilizes a technique called time division multiplexing. In summary, a short electromagnetic coherent pulse (usually in the infrared) is injected into one end of a fiber optic. Pulses are back reflected or backscattered via Rayleigh scattering along a continuum of virtual reflectors in the fiber and these pulses are analyzed using interferometric techniques. A phase of the returned light is measured that is related to the local stretch in the fiber optic during its exposure to an acoustic pressure wave. The optical phase ideally will vary linearly with the acoustic pressure wave. Once a light pulse is injected, a period of time should be surpassed before injecting another pulse of light. This amount of time is twice the transit time of light from the injection location to the end of the fiber. This is done to ensure there is no light in the fiber when another pulse of light is injected. The pulse repetition frequency of the DAS is the reciprocal of the wait time between light injections. Half of the pulse repetition frequency is the well-known Nyquist frequency, which is the maximum acoustic bandwidth available for monitoring.
As the business intensity grows in the worldwide campaign to find and produce more oil there is increasing need to better monitor subsurface oil field operations using more sophisticated acoustic monitoring. In particular there are increasingly applications in which there is a need for detecting much higher frequency and higher bandwidth acoustic signals than that available with time division multiplexing alone. Examples include an increasing interest in listening for sand flow, high bandwidth telemetry, listening for proppant in hydraulic fracturing operations, measuring fluid flow by acoustic signatures (particularly with active ultrasonic flow monitoring systems), monitoring flow regimes, listening for wellbore leaks (often high frequency), listening for cavitation in flow, listening for plug leaks or inter-zone leaks, monitoring vortex shedding, and wireline sonic logging. These applications require a sensitive listening device with an increased audio bandwidth and an improved signal-to-noise ratio.
The technical approach to be described in this application does not rely on the pulsed laser time division multiplexing described above.
In the following detailed description, reference is made that illustrate embodiments of the present disclosure. These embodiments are described in sufficient detail to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art to practice these embodiments without undue experimentation. It should be understood, however, that the embodiments and examples described herein are given by way of illustration only, and not by way of limitation. Various substitutions, modifications, additions, and rearrangements may be made that remain potential applications of the disclosed techniques. Therefore, the description that follows is not to be taken in a limited sense, and the scope of the disclosure is defined only by the appended claims.
Traditional distributed acoustic sensing is analogous in some ways to radar techniques used in traditional pulse-echo so ranging techniques. A short electromagnetic coherent pulse (usually in the infrared) is injected into one end of a fiber optic. Pulses are back reflected via Rayleigh scattering along a continuum of virtual reflectors in the fiber and these pulses are analyzed using interferometric techniques. A phase is measured that is related to the local stretch in the fiber optic during its exposure to an acoustic pressure wave. The phase ideally will vary linearly with the acoustic pressure wave. In a sense, a conventional distributed acoustic sensor acts as a radar with a virtual continuum of reflections from Rayleigh scattering along the fiber, similar to radar measurements of extended bodies such as rain clouds.
An alternative to utilizing traditional pulsed ranging measurements is spread spectrum-ranging methods. Some spread spectrum modulation techniques make use of multiplexing and de-multiplexing methods commonly grouped into a technology known as code division multiplexing. This method consists of mixing or modulating a coherent (near) single frequency signal with a pseudo random signal code that has a broad spectrum relative to the signal being sensed. We will describe solutions employing bipolar codes having +1 and −1 values. The sequence does not allow zeroes since that would result in a signal chopped in time. The receiver demodulates or recovers the original signal with a binary code that is uniquely paired (or nearly so) with the original binary code. Each code sequence modulates the coherent signal for short period of time and is generally immediately followed by another code sequence modulation, followed by another, and so on, with requirements known to those skilled in the art.
Each of the reflected signals occupies a unique time-delay slot or bin. And by delaying and multiplying the code sequence and multiplying it by the received signal, we can recover the frequency-modulated signal. A master or carrier wave is modulated by a single code sequence and delayed by the appropriate time interval specific to a particular signal. All such signals are combined by the action of the fiber optic and the transmitted signal consists of a continuous wave pulse that is multiplied by a single coding sequence and transmitted as a composite optical signal to a receiver where these are collected and photo detected. By filtering the photo detected composite optical signal with the master or reference carrier wave, each individual optical signal is sorted or de-multiplexed into separate electronic signal channels.
The phase of the de-multiplexed signal can then be extracted by a frequency modulation (FM) demodulation scheme.
In conventional time-domain reflectometry using fiber optic cables or other mediums such as glass, air, water, etc. over lengths typical of wellbores, the maximum detectable acoustic bandwidth is bandwidth limited. For example, a 10 km fiber optic cable has a maximum acoustic bandwidth of 5 kHz. Time-domain reflectometry methods do not sample the optical medium fast enough to detect tens or hundreds of kilohertz bandwidth variations in the medium. There is a considerable range of events that occur in a well that produce acoustic perturbations. Multiple fluids and phases (gas bubbles, solids, and some liquid mixtures) may produce recognizable acoustic signatures. The extension of reflectometry into much higher frequencies by the use of the spread spectrum technique of this disclosure can open acoustic monitoring into a realm of new application space—to include an increasing interest in listening for sand flow, high bandwidth telemetry, listening for proppant in hydraulic fracturing operations, measuring fluid flow by acoustic signatures (particularly with active ultrasonic flow monitoring systems), monitoring flow regimes, listening for wellbore leaks (often high frequency), listening for cavitation in flow, listening for plug leaks or inter-zone leaks, monitoring vortex shedding, and wireline sonic logging.
These applications require a sensitive listening device with an increased audio bandwidth and an improved signal-to-noise ratio. Both are characteristics of spread spectrum techniques. It is anticipated that all of these applications can be addressed with the system and method described herein.
The approach also relates to fiber optic sensors and optical sensors generally. A fiber optic sensor array is typically time-domain multiplexed by the time-of-transversal of an interrogation light wave to each sensor and back to a common optical collection and detection point
In the technology to be described the continuous wave output of a long coherence length phase-stable infrared laser is modulated with pseudo-random binary code sequences. This is the spread spectrum modulation of a laser using special binary codes. These binary code sequences consist however of ones and negative ones instead of ones and zeros.
The construction or selection of a suitable binary code sequence, or sets of sequences, is not trivial. To guarantee efficient spread-spectrum communications, the pseudorandom number sequences must respect certain rules, such as length, auto-correlation, cross-correlation, orthogonality, correlation sidelobe behavior, and bits balancing. The more popular pseudorandom number sequences have names such as Barker, M-Sequence, Gold, Hadamard-Walsh, etc.
Good code sequences for this application have a high, narrow auto-correlation peak, when exactly lined up, which minimizes false synchronization. Auto-correlation is the same as cross-correlation, except with auto-correlation the code is compared against itself, with a relative shift of one chip at a time. With cross-correlation the code sequence is compared against another code sequence with a relative shift of one chip at a time.
In the approach to be described in this disclosure, the focus is on auto-correlation. The only property of the code currently being used is the fact that, when the code is multiplied by itself, the result is one when the two versions of the code are time-aligned and a small noise-like signal when they are not time-aligned. The auto-correlation function of the code informs us of how much time-delay we can impose on the code before the product becomes noise-like. The more impulsive the auto-correlation signal, the smaller the delay we need to have a noise-like signal. An example of the power of autocorrelation in providing strong signal-to-noise ratios is shown in
Pseudo-random spreading codes have a fixed length. After a fixed number of chips (the code length) they repeat themselves exactly. Codes may be formed using a shift register with feedback taps. For example a common useful series of codes (maximal length codes) of 127 chips long may be formed using a 7-bit shift register.
Furthermore, the correlation function of a signal with itself is negligible except when the function overlap is perfect or synchronized. The correlation function of two different signals of a binary code set result in a negligible output. The presence of other coded signals superimposed on particular coded signal does not appreciably or noticeably affect the detection of said code sequence.
Range determination along the fiber is made possible via the correlation properties of the spread spectrum encoding which uniquely encodes the time-of-flight along the length of the fiber. Note that the response at the receive end of the fiber will be the summation of Rayleigh backscattered signal from the continuum of virtual mirrors along the fiber. Each time-shifted signal can be treated independently since the signal from each virtual mirror will not correlate with each other. This is a key property and advantage of spread spectrum methods. Advantages of spread spectrum include resistance to interference, particularly from signals with different spread spectrum coded signals.
This is illustrated symbolically in
There are numerous binary sequences that have properties that are advantageous for particular cases. Some codes have so-called orthogonality properties and some have features related to auto-correlation and cross-correlation. These codes are sometimes referred to as pseudorandom noise (PRN) codes. Sometimes these are simply referred to as PN-codes. Pseudorandom noise code sequences are deterministically generated but have properties similar to random sequences generated by sampling a white noise process. Some commonly used PN codes include, but are not limited to, are
Overview—Spread Spectrum
To describe and clarify the techniques of the use of spread spectrum codes in this application and to further define the terminology the following mathematical description is presented. Spread spectrum begins by the insertion of a probe signal:
Ei(t)=c(t)cos(ωst),
where c(t) is a spread-spectrum code signal, such that ∫c(t)c(t+τ)dt=δ(τ), and ωs is the carrier frequency. This results in the reception of the signal:
Eb(t)=∫0zr(z)μAc(t−2cL−1{circumflex over (z)}(t,z))Esscos(ωs(t−2cL−1{circumflex over (Z)}
where cL is the speed of light, Ess and μA are constants, r(z) is the distributed reflection along the fiber, and
with p(t,z) being the pressure at position z and time t.
Then upon heterodyne (or homodyne) demodulation to a baseband signal (but with the signal still spread):
where hLP(t) is a low-pass filter that removes the undesired spectral components around 2ωs. In the case of homodyne demodulation Δω=0.
Then the demodulated baseband signal can be decoded by:
Where hPB(t) is a band pass filter for heterodyne demodulation or a low-pass filter for homodyne demodulation.
More information regarding decoding is provided in the next section.
Decoding Analysis
Incorporating the information from the pass-band filter hPB(t) into the de-spreader:
If we now assume that:
that is, that the time delay variation caused by the acoustic pressure is negligible when compared to the time delay caused by the time of flight of the optic wave; it is possible to write:
It will be considered that the code c(t) has bandwidth σc, and also has the following property:
where function d(t) is the result of spreading the code twice, and has a bandwidth of 2σc. Hence, the integration region in the z variable can be decomposed into two disjoint sets:
1={z|z≤zi+|cLϵ−1|}
2={z|z>zi+|cLϵ−1|}.
Thus the received signal can be written as:
If the FM signal bandwidth is σFM, then most of the information of region in 2 is spread by the function d(t), and has bandwidth 2(σc+σFM) and is centered around frequency Δω, and most of the information of region in 1 is concentrated in frequency, has a bandwidth of σFM, and is centered around frequency Δω.
With that information, it is possible to specify the filter hPB(t) with center frequency Δω and passband of σFM that removes most of the information from the region 2 while leaving the information from 1 unaltered.
The decoded signal, then, can be written as:
where v(t,z) is a nuisance signal. It is also possible to note:
Acoustic Signal and FM Signal Bandwidth
Ideally, the decoded FM signal captured at position zi is:
Carson's rule states that for a signal of the form:
sFM(t)=Ac cos(ωct+fΔΨ(t)),
and its bandwidth is:
σFM=2(fΔ+σA),
where σA is the bandwidth of the modulating signal.
Adapting the Carson's rule for the decoded signal, one obtains:
where this approximate σFM usually covers 98% of the energy of the FM signal. It should also be noted that σA is actually the bandwidth of the derivative of p(t, zi). In practice, since there are an infinite number of p(t,z) influencing the FM signal, the worst-case (largest possible value of σA) should be selected. Alternatively, a bandwidth for the acoustic pressure can be arbitrarily chosen and then the assumed FM signal bandwidth can be determined.
With this background and term definition we are now in a position to propose a code design.
Code Design
We have found that for the applications of this disclosure Maximal Length Sequences (M-Sequences) and the use of auto-correlation provide excellent code candidates. In particular, two parameters are of interest for the spread spectrum sensing using fiber optics: the ϵ of the sequence and its bandwidth. ϵ (epsilon) is the smallest delay to the signal for which the sequence can be recovered. Any delay larger than epsilon, produces a noise-like sequence.
M-Sequences are bipolar sequences that can be generated through the use of a feedback-shift register (FSR). For the sake of the following discussion, it will be considered that c(t)ϵ{−1,1} and that it is periodic with period equal Tb, also the minimum period that the code stays at a certain value is Tc.
The following properties are true for an m-sequence.
Code Requirements
Using the properties just defined in the previous section, the following specifications can be defined for a coding sequence.
The symbol period Tc is related to the autocorrelation properties of the sequence. Also, it can be seen that the shorter the period the more different two time shifted codes become. Hence, the parameter ϵ is directly proportional to Tc:
ϵ∝Tc,
The smaller the Tc, the better is the ability of the code to pick out the signal from a desired position.
The possible spatial sampling Δz of the z axis is also governed by the choice of Tc. A conservative separation between positions equal to
Thus, the smaller the period of the code the greater the number of positions that can be sampled.
The symbol period is also related to the code bandwidth. In order to yield a good separation of signals from neighboring regions, the code bandwidth should be greater than the bandwidth of the FM signal:
σc=2/Tc>>2(σΔ+σA),
where σΔ is the spread in frequency introduced by frequency modulation and σA is the acoustic signal bandwidth. so that,
Since the code is periodic, its period Tb should be greater than that of the time it takes for the light to transverse the whole fiber optic cable and arrive back at the receiver. Mathematically
where L is the length of the fiber optic.
Combining the equations above, one has
which gives a loose upper bound and a more tight lower bound for the requirement for the code length. Considering these bounds, a good strategy would be to use a code with length close to (but not equal to)
The following steps would then be employed to specify the system:
where ρ is small when compared to
Turning now to
A more detailed depiction of the detector system 7, to explain the separate functions of heterodyne or homodyne demodulation, decoding, and FM demodulation is shown in
Some possible configurations for deployment of distributed sensing systems in and around a wellbore are shown in
Then in step 430 N is chosen so that NTc=Tb and Tc so that
Although certain embodiments and their advantages have been described herein in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions and alterations could be made without departing from the coverage as defined by the appended claims. Moreover, the potential applications of the disclosed techniques is not intended to be limited to the particular embodiments of the processes, machines, manufactures, means, methods and steps described herein. As a person of ordinary skill in the art will readily appreciate from this disclosure, other processes, machines, manufactures, means, methods, or steps, presently existing or later to be developed that perform substantially the same function or achieve substantially the same result as the corresponding embodiments described herein may be utilized. Accordingly, the appended claims are intended to include within their scope such processes. machines, manufactures. means, methods or steps.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2013/054588 | 8/12/2013 | WO |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2015/023255 | 2/19/2015 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4238856 | Bucaro et al. | Dec 1980 | A |
4775216 | Layton | Oct 1988 | A |
4817101 | Wyeth et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4889986 | Kersey et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
4898443 | Epworth et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4968880 | Beller | Nov 1990 | A |
5000568 | Trutna et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5115332 | Naito et al. | May 1992 | A |
5146359 | Okoshi et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5177764 | Nilsson | Jan 1993 | A |
5194847 | Taylor et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5212825 | Layton | May 1993 | A |
5353627 | Diatschenko et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5371588 | Davis et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5633741 | Giles | May 1997 | A |
5635829 | Hamada | Jun 1997 | A |
5686986 | Li et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5694408 | Bott et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5696863 | Kleinerman | Dec 1997 | A |
5754293 | Farhadiroushan | May 1998 | A |
5844235 | Tachikawa et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5847816 | Zediker et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5847817 | Zediker et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5946131 | Wells et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5956355 | Swanson et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5991479 | Kleinerman | Nov 1999 | A |
6008487 | Tachikawa et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6034760 | Rees | Mar 2000 | A |
6043921 | Payton | Mar 2000 | A |
6111816 | Chiang et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6127948 | Hillis et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6173091 | Reich | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6216540 | Nelson et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6236652 | Preston et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6285806 | Kersey et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6571034 | Bhagavatula | May 2003 | B2 |
6597821 | Bohnert et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6626043 | Bailey et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6630658 | Bohnert et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6700655 | Uchiyama et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
7030971 | Payton | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7142736 | Patel et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7268863 | Payton | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7271884 | Payton | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7274441 | Payton | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7339721 | Berkey et al. | Mar 2008 | B1 |
7355163 | Watley et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7565334 | Rifkin et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7646944 | Kaplan | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7946341 | Hartog et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8045143 | Harres | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8408064 | Hartog et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8417490 | Preston et al. | Apr 2013 | B1 |
8514381 | Shao et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8587479 | Kurokawa | Nov 2013 | B2 |
9008506 | Hsiao et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9733120 | Stokely et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9766141 | Preston et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
9772238 | Preston et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
10203264 | Preston et al. | Feb 2019 | B2 |
20010050768 | Uchiyama et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020154291 | Uchiyama et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20040114939 | Taylor | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20050077455 | Townley-Smith et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050149264 | Tarvin et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050174563 | Evans et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050254038 | Harres | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060018586 | Kishida | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060028636 | Payton | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060066839 | Payton | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060126991 | Huang | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060227315 | Beller | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060232765 | Harres | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070018635 | Nebendahl | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070113649 | Bharti et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070171400 | Payton | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070194796 | Harrison et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20080036597 | Harman | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080145049 | Koyamada | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20090006840 | Birger et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090173494 | Tarvin et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090222541 | Monga et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090252491 | Healey | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100002226 | Hartog | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100098438 | Prat Goma et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100238429 | Hayward et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100284021 | Hacker | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100290035 | Wang et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110228255 | Li | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120067118 | Hartog et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20130229649 | Li et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20140130601 | Zhou et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140208855 | Skinner | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140255023 | Kishida et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140268110 | Hartog | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20150211983 | Speck | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20160124407 | Kallio et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160187223 | Preston et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160252414 | Preston et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160320232 | Nunes | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20170284895 | Preston et al. | Oct 2017 | A9 |
20190219478 | Preston et al. | Jul 2019 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
100346669 | Oct 2007 | CN |
201829006 | May 2011 | CN |
2950069 | Dec 2015 | EP |
2190186 | Nov 1987 | GB |
2372100 | Aug 2002 | GB |
2013079906 | May 2013 | JP |
2013181789 | Sep 2013 | JP |
1020130081062 | Jul 2013 | KR |
8707014 | Nov 1987 | WO |
9746870 | Dec 1997 | WO |
0068645 | Nov 2000 | WO |
2004034096 | Apr 2004 | WO |
2006017702 | Feb 2006 | WO |
2016033192 | Mar 2016 | WO |
2016033199 | Mar 2016 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“Fiber Couplers”, RP Photonics Encyclopedia, pp. 1-3, www.rp-photonics.com/fiber_couplers.html. |
Choi et al., “Distributed fiber-optic pressure/seismic sensor for low-cost monitoring of long perimeters”, Unattended Ground Sensor Technologies and Applications V, 2003, pp. 134-141, vol. 5090, Proceedings of SPIE. |
European Patent Office, “Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) from EP Application No. 05782661.2”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 11/056,630, dated Apr. 29, 2013, pp. 1-7, Published: EP. |
European Patent Office, “Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) from EP Application No. 15177492.4”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 11/056,630, dated Dec. 21, 2018, pp. 1-7, Published: EP. |
European Patent Office, “Extended European Search Report from EP Application No. 05782661.2”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 11/056,630, dated Feb. 7, 2011, pp. 1-48, Published: EP. |
European Patent Office, “Extended European Search Report from EP Application No. 15177492.4”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 11/056,630, dated Oct. 7, 2015, pp. 1-7, Published: EP. |
Hughes et al., “Static pressure sensitivity amplification in interferometric fiber-optic hydrophones”, Applied Optics, Jan. 1, 1980, pp. 98-107, vol. 19, No. 1. |
International Bureau, “International Preliminary Report on Patentability from PCT Application No. PCT/US2005/027821”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 11/056,630, dated Feb. 6, 2007, pp. 1-4, Published WO. |
International Bureau, “International Preliminary Report on Patentability from PCT Application No. PCT/US2015/046966”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,592, dated Mar. 9, 2017, pp. 1-9, Published: WO. |
International Bureau, “International Preliminary Report on Patentability from PCT Application No. PCT/US2015/046973”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,609, dated Mar. 9, 2017, pp. 1-7, Published: WO. |
International Searching Authority, “International Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT Application No. PCT/US15/46973”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,609, dated Nov. 30, 2015, pp. 1-8, Published: WO. |
International Searching Authority, “International Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT Application No. PCT/US2015/046966”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,592, dated Nov. 23, 2015, pp. 1-10, Published: WO. |
International Searching Authority, “Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority from PCT Application No. PCT/US05/27821”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 11/056,630, dated Feb. 17, 2006, pp. 1-3, Published: WO. |
Ishida et al., “Lightwave Scalar Network Analyser Employing Optical Heterodyne Detection”, Electronics Letters, Mar. 1, 1990, pp. 297-298, vol. 26, No. 5, Electronics Letters. |
Liokumovich et al., “Fundamentals of optical fiber sensing schemes based on coherent optical time domain reflectometry: Signal model under static fiber conditions”, Journal of Lightwave Technology, 2015, pp. 1-11, IEEE. |
Maughan et al., “Novel distributed fibre sensor using microwave heterodyne detection of spontaneous Brillouin backscatter”, Fourteenth International Conference on Optical Fiber Sensors, 2000, pp. 1-5, vol. 4185, SPIE. |
Park et al., “Fiber Optics Intrusion Sensor using Coherent Optical Time Domain Reflectometer”, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Jun. 2003, pp. 2481-2482, vol. 42, The Japan Society of Applied Physics. |
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “Advisory Action”, U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,592, dated Jan. 22, 2018, pp. 1-3, Published: US. |
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “Decision on Petition”, U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,592, dated Jun. 28, 2017, pp. 1-4, Published: US. |
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “Decision on Petition”, U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,609, dated Sep. 1, 2017, pp. 1-3, Published: US. |
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “Final Office Action”, U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,592, dated Nov. 8, 2017, pp. 1-21, Published: US. |
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “Office Action”, U.S. Appl. No. 14/190,478, dated Jun. 26, 2019, pp. 1-169, Published: US. |
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “Office Action”, U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,592, dated Mar. 12, 2018, pp. 1-15, Published: US. |
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “Office Action”, U.S. Appl. No. 14/837,592, dated May 11, 2017, pp. 1-31, Published: US. |
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “Office Action”, U.S. Appl. No. 15/154,161, dated Sep. 23, 2016, pp. 1-13, Published: US. |
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, “Office Action”, U.S. Appl. No. 14/686,161, dated Oct. 18, 2016, pp. 1-134, Published: US. |
European Patent Office, “Extended European Search Report from EP Application No. 05782661.2”, from Foreign Counterpart to U.S. Appl. No. 11/056,630, dated Feb. 7, 2011, pp. 1-15, Published: EP. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14903503 | Aug 2013 | US |
Child | 16542187 | US |