Office Action 1: Non-Final Rejection (2025-06-13)
Rejection types: 103 - Obviousness, 112 - Written Description/Enablement

CLAIMS:
What is claimed is:
1\. A rope system for system level recoil control comprising: a first rope component comprising: a first rope subcomponent, the first rope subcomponent having predetermined failure strength, the first rope subcomponent designed and configured to be a controlled failure point for the system; and a second rope subcomponent, the second rope subcomponent having a predetermined elongation capability; and a second rope component connected in series to the first rope component; wherein the rope system contains strain energy when the first and second rope components are in tension, and each rope component contains a fraction of the rope system’s strain energy; and wherein, upon failure of the first rope subcomponent, the second rope subcomponent is configured to elongate to absorb a predetermined amount of predetermined operational strain energy of the rope system and to stretch over a predetermined distance and/or predetermined period of time before the second rope subcomponent fails.
2\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein the first rope subcomponent further comprises a surface modification.
3\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein the predetermined elongation capability of the second rope subcomponent corresponds to at least 50% of the predetermined operational strain energy of the rope system, and the at least 50% of the predetermined operational strain energy of the rope system is dissipated through the elongation of the second rope subcomponent prior to failure of the second rope subcomponent.
4\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein the first rope component comprises three, eight, or twelve strands.
5\. The rope system of claim 1, the rope component comprises a core and jacket, wherein the first rope subcomponent forms the core, and the second rope subcomponent forms the jacket.
6\. The rope system of claim 1, the rope component further comprises a core and jacket, wherein the first rope subcomponent forms the jacket, and the second rope subcomponent forms the core.
7\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein a tenacity of the first rope subcomponent is greater than approximately six grams per denier.
8\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein a tenacity of the second rope subcomponent is greater than approximately 0.5 grams per denier.
9\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein the first rope component is a braided or twisted rope.
10\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein the first rope component is a mainline, and the second rope component is a tail.
11\. The rope system of claim 1, further comprising at least one non-rope hardware component contributing to the rope system’s strain energy.
12\. The rope system of claim 11, wherein the at least one non-rope hardware component comprises a winch, fairlead, chock, bitt, cleat, or combinations thereof.
13\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein the second rope component comprises a first rope subcomponent and second rope subcomponent.
14\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein the relative difference in elongation at break between the first and second rope subcomponents ranges between 2% and 200%.
15\. The rope system of claim 1, wherein the relative difference in elongation at break between the first and second rope subcomponents ranges between 6% and 19 %.
16\. A rope system for system level recoil control comprising: a rope component comprising: a first rope subcomponent, the first rope subcomponent having predetermined failure strength, the first rope subcomponent designed and configured to be a controlled failure point for the system; and a second rope subcomponent, the second rope subcomponent having a predetermined elongation capability; wherein the rope system contains strain energy when the rope component is in tension, and the rope component contains a fraction of the rope system’s strain energy; and wherein, upon failure of the first rope subcomponent, the second rope subcomponent is configured to elongate to absorb at least 70% of predetermined operational strain energy of the rope system prior to failure of the second rope subcomponent.
17\. A method for providing a rope system for system level recoil control comprising: identifying components of a rope system having at least two rope components connected in series, at least one of the rope components having a first rope subcomponent and a second rope subcomponent; determining total maximum strain energy of at least the two rope components when the rope system is subject to a predetermined operational load; determining elongation of the second rope subcomponent to absorb at least 50% of the determined total maximum strain energy upon failure of the first rope subcomponent of the first rope component; and providing the first rope component having the first rope subcomponent with predetermined failure strength and having the second rope subcomponent with elongation greater than or equal to the determined elongation.
18\. The method of claim 17, wherein determining the total maximum strain energy includes accounting for operational wear of the rope system.
19\. The method of claim 17, further comprising using a mathematical model in determining the total maximum strain energy of at least the two rope components when the rope system is subject to a predetermined operational load.
20\. The method of claim 17, further comprising determining the relative difference in elongation at break between the first and second rope subcomponents ranging between 2% and 200%.

OFFICE ACTION:
DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA  or AIA  Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
100.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b)  CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In regards to Claim 5, the phrase “the rope component” is unclear.  Is this the first rope component, the second rope component, or both?
In regards to Claim 6, the phrase “the rope component” is unclear.  Is this the first rope component, the second rope component, or both?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA  35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA  to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-6, and 9-14 is/are rejected, to the degree definite, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilke et al (7127878) in view of Fields (20220063768).
In regards to Claim 1, Wilke teaches a rope system capable of system level recoil control (Title) comprising:
a first rope component (Detail 20) comprising:
a first rope subcomponent (Detail 22), the first rope subcomponent having predetermined failure strength, the first rope subcomponent designed and configured to be a controlled failure point for the system; and
a second rope subcomponent (Detail 24), the second rope subcomponent having a predetermined elongation capability;
wherein, upon failure of the first rope subcomponent, the second rope subcomponent is configured to elongate to absorb a predetermined amount of predetermined operational strain energy of the rope system and to stretch over a predetermined distance and/or predetermined period of time before the second rope subcomponent fails (Column 2 line 65 - Column 3 line 15; Column 3 line 54 - Column 4 line 8).
While Wilke essentially teaches the invention as detailed, it fails to specifically teach the rope system comprises a second rope component.  Fields, however, teaches a rope system having a first and second rope component, the second rope component connected in series to the first rope component, wherein the rope system contains strain energy when the first and second rope components are in tension, and each rope component contains a fraction of the rope system’s strain energy (Figure 1).  It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included a second rope component as taught by Fields, so as to better control the failure of the rope system.
In regards to Claim 2, Wilke teaches the first rope subcomponent further comprises a surface modification (Column 4, lines 37-40).
In regards to Claim 4, Wilke teaches the first rope component comprises three, eight, or twelve strands (Figure 3).
In regards to Claims 5 and 6, Wilke teaches the rope component comprises a core and jacket, wherein the first rope subcomponent and the second rope subcomponent can form the core or the jacket (Figure 2; Table A).
In regards to Claim 9, Wilke teaches the first rope component is a braided or twisted rope (Figure 2).
In regards to Claim 10, Fields teaches the first rope component is a mainline, and the second rope component is a tail (Figure 1).
In regards to Claim 11, Fields teaches at least one non-rope hardware component contributing to the rope system’s strain energy (Detail 16).  It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included such a non-rope hardware component, so as to properly attach the rope system between the vessel and the dock.
In regards to Claim 12, Fields teaches in Paragraph 54 winch pull, which would require a winch.
In regards to Claim 13, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the second rope component of the combination similarly to that of the first rope component, so as to better control the failure of the rope.
In regards to Claim 14, while the combination does not specifically teach the difference in elongation at break between the first and second rope subcomponents, it would have been obvious to have had a difference in the range of 2 and 200%.  This is a very large range, and the ordinarily skilled artisan would have understood the basic concept of having the elongation at break for each subcomponent be different, but not so different that the elongation properties are not agreeable for the intended use.  Applicant provides no criticality or unexpected results for the large claimed range, and it would have obviously been found through routine experimentation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-20 are allowed.  The prior art of record is silent as to the predetermined operational strain energy of the subcomponents, and their relationship to one another.
Claims 3, 7, 8, and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.  See of Record.
Specifically, at least Plaia et al (9573661) Abstract, Figure 2, Fields (WO 2013163094) Figures, Fields (WO 2010009360) Figures, and Foote et al (4321854) Abstract teach elements similar to those as currently claimed.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKSThis Response is filed in response to the Non-Final Office Action dated June 13, 2025.Upon entry of this Response, claims 1-2 and 4-22 will be pending in the Application, claims 1 and 5-6 being amended and claim 3 being cancelled by this response. Claims 21-22 are new.In the outstanding Office Action, the Examiner objected to the drawings, rejected claims 5-6 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite, rejected claims 1-2, 4-6, and 9-14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 7,127,878 (hereinafter "Wilke") in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0063768 (hereinafter "Fields"), claims 16-20 were allowed, and claims 3, 7-8, and 15 were objected to.Claims 1 and 5-6 are amended. Claims 21-22 are new. No new matter is introduced. Support for the amendment to claim 1 can be found, inter alia, at claims 1 and 3 of the application, as originally filed. Claims 5-6 were only amended for antecedent basis. Support for new claim 21 can be found, inter alia, at claims 1 and 15 of the application, as originally filed. Support for new claim 22 can be found, inter alia, at claims 1 and 7-8 of the application, as originally filed.The drawings are also amended. No new matter is introduced. Support for the amendment to FIG. 1 can be found, inter alia, at paragraphs [0030]-[0031] of the specification as originally filed.Also submitted herewith is a supplemental information disclosure statement.Reconsideration and allowance of all pending claims is respectfully requested.ALLOWABLE SUBJECT MATTERApplicant gratefully acknowledges the Examiner's statement that claims 16-20 are allowed.Claims 3, 7-8, and 15 were objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but were indicated as allowable if rewritten in independent form.In response thereto, the features of claim 3 were incorporated into claim 1, claim 15 was rewritten in independent form as new claim 21, and claims 7 and 8 were combined by an "or" and rewritten in independent form as new claim 22.Therefore, amended independent claim 1 and new independent claims 21 and 22 should now be allowable. Dependent claims 2 and 4-15, being dependent upon and further limiting amended independent claim 1, should also now be allowable for that reason as well as the additional features that each claim includes that further distinguishing over the prior art.DRAWING OBJECTIONSThe drawings were objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5).Specifically, the Examiner stated that the drawings do not include reference numeral 100, referenced in the specification.In response thereto, FIG. 1 has been amended to include reference numeral 100.Reconsideration and withdrawal of the objection are respectfully requested.REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. 112 Claims 5-6 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite.Specifically, the Examiner stated that "the rope component" in claims 5 and 6 is unclear.In response thereto, claims 5 and 6 have been amended to specify "the first rope component".Reconsideration and withdrawal of the rejection are respectfully requested.REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. 103 Claims 1-2, 4-6, and 9-14 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilke in view of Fields. Claim 1 is independent.As noted above, claim 1 is currently amended to incorporate the subject matter of dependent claim 3, which the Examiner indicated as allowable.Therefore, claim 1 should now be allowable.Dependent claims 2, 4-6, and 9-14, being dependent upon and further limiting amended independent claim 1, should also now be allowable for that reason as well as the additional features that each claim includes that further distinguishing over the prior art.Reconsideration and withdrawal of the rejection are respectfully requested.CONCLUSIONIn view of the above, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration of the Application and withdrawal of the outstanding objections and rejections. As a result of the amendments and remarks presented herein, Applicant respectfully submits that the claims are not anticipated by nor rendered obvious by the applied references or their combination and thus, are in condition for allowance. As the claims are not anticipated by nor rendered obvious in view of the applied art, Applicant requests allowance of all pending claims in a timely manner. If the Examiner believes that prosecution of this Application could be expedited by a telephone conference, the Examiner is encouraged to contact the Applicant.The Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any additional fees and credit any overpayments to Deposit Account No. 50-1059.Respectfully submitted, McNEES WALLACE & NURICK LLC /KLH #57457/ By Kraig L. Haverstick Reg. No. 57,457 100 Pine Street P.O. Box 1166 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166 Dated: July 23, 2025

NEXT OFFICE ACTION: DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA  or AIA  Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The replacement drawings were received on 23 July 2025.  These drawings are acceptable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 2, and 4-22 are allowed.
Conclusion

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US9573661B1: Claims:
A rope system adapted to be connected between first and second structures comprising: a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, and a second recoil control assembly defining a second length; wherein the second length is longer than the first length; the recoil control assembly is arranged between the first and second structures such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration; at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly is in a folded configuration when the recoil control system is in the first configuration; and when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration.
a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, and a second recoil control assembly defining a second length; wherein
a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, and
a second recoil control assembly defining a second length; wherein
the second length is longer than the first length;
the recoil control assembly is arranged between the first and second structures such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration;
at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly is in a folded configuration when the recoil control system is in the first configuration; and
when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , further comprising a rope assembly connected between the recoil control system and one of the first and second structures.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , in which the first predetermined recoil control maximum limit is less than a predetermined rope limit at which the rope assembly fails.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , in which at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly is in an unfolded configuration when the recoil control system is in the second configuration.
an unfolded configuration when the recoil control system is in the second configuration.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , in which the first recoil control assembly takes the form of a cover that extends around at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , in which the at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly is twisted around at least a portion of the first recoil control assembly when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , further comprising a cover that extends around at least a portion of the first and second recoil control assemblies when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , further comprising at least one strap that extends around at least a portion of the first and second recoil control assemblies when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , further comprising a third recoil control assembly defining a third length, in which: the second recoil control assembly defines a second predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the second recoil control assembly fails when under tension; the third length is longer than the second length; and when the second recoil control assembly fails, the recoil control system reconfigures into a third configuration.
the second recoil control assembly defines a second predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the second recoil control assembly fails when under tension;
the third length is longer than the second length; and
when the second recoil control assembly fails, the recoil control system reconfigures into a third configuration.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , in which at least one of the first and second recoil control assemblies defines an endless loop.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , in which the first and second recoil control assemblies each defines an endless loop.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , in which at least one of the first and second recoil control assemblies defines first and second loops connected by a middle portion.
A rope system as recited in claim 1 , in which the first and second recoil control assemblies each defines first and second loops connected by a middle portion.
A method of connecting first and second structures comprising the steps of: providing a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension; providing a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, where the second length is longer than the first length; combining the first and second recoil control assemblies to form a recoil control system in a first configuration, where at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly is in a folded configuration when the recoil control system is in the first configuration; arranging the recoil control assembly between the first and second structures in the first configuration such that, when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration.
providing a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension;
providing a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, where the second length is longer than the first length;
combining the first and second recoil control assemblies to form a recoil control system in a first configuration, where at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly is in a folded configuration when the recoil control system is in the first configuration;
arranging the recoil control assembly between the first and second structures in the first configuration such that, when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration.
A method as recited in claim 15 , further comprising the step of arranging a rope assembly between the recoil control system and at least one of the first and second structures.
A recoil control system adapted to be connected between a rope assembly and a structure, comprising: a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension; and a second recoil control assembly defining a second length; wherein the second length is longer than the first length; the recoil control assembly is arranged between the rope and the structure such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration; and when tension is applied from the rope assembly to the structure through the recoil control system, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration.
a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension; and
the recoil control assembly is arranged between the rope and the structure such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration; and
when tension is applied from the rope assembly to the structure through the recoil control system, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration.
A recoil control system as recited in claim 17 , in which a predetermined rope limit at which the rope assembly fails is greater than the first predetermined recoil control maximum limit.
A recoil control system as recited in claim 17 , in which at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly is in a folded configuration when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
A rope system adapted to be connected between first and second structures comprising: a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, and a second recoil control assembly defining a second length; wherein the second length is longer than the first length; the recoil control assembly is arranged between the first and second structures such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration; when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration; and the first recoil control assembly takes the form of a cover that extends around at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration; and
the first recoil control assembly takes the form of a cover that extends around at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
A rope system adapted to be connected between first and second structures comprising: a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, and a second recoil control assembly defining a second length; wherein the second length is longer than the first length; the recoil control assembly is arranged between the first and second structures such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration; when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration; and the at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly is twisted around at least a portion of the first recoil control assembly when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
the at least a portion of the second recoil control assembly is twisted around at least a portion of the first recoil control assembly when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
A rope system adapted to be connected between first and second structures comprising: a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, and a cover; wherein the second length is longer than the first length; the recoil control assembly is arranged between the first and second structures such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration; when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration; and the cover extends around at least a portion of the first and second recoil control assemblies when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, and a cover; wherein
a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension,
a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, and a cover; wherein
the cover extends around at least a portion of the first and second recoil control assemblies when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
A rope system adapted to be connected between first and second structures comprising: a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, and at least one strap; wherein the second length is longer than the first length; the recoil control assembly is arranged between the first and second structures such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration; when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration; and the at least one strap extends around at least a portion of the first and second recoil control assemblies when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, and at least one strap; wherein
a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, and
at least one strap; wherein
the at least one strap extends around at least a portion of the first and second recoil control assemblies when the recoil control system is in the first configuration.
A rope system adapted to be connected between first and second structures comprising: a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, and a third recoil control assembly defining a third length; wherein the second length is longer than the first length; the recoil control assembly is arranged between the first and second structures such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration; when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration; the second recoil control assembly defines a second predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the second recoil control assembly fails when under tension; the third length is longer than the second length; and when the second recoil control assembly fails, the recoil control system reconfigures into a third configuration.
a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, a second recoil control assembly defining a second length, and a third recoil control assembly defining a third length; wherein
a third recoil control assembly defining a third length; wherein
when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration;
the second recoil control assembly defines a second predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the second recoil control assembly fails when under tension; the third length is longer than the second length; and
A rope system adapted to be connected between first and second structures comprising: a recoil control system comprising a first recoil control assembly defining a first length and a first predetermined recoil control maximum limit at which the first recoil control assembly fails when under tension, and a second recoil control assembly defining a second length; wherein the second length is longer than the first length; the recoil control assembly is arranged between the first and second structures such that the recoil control system is in a first configuration; when at least one of the first and second structures moves away from another of the first and second structures, the first recoil control assembly fails and the recoil control system reconfigures into a second configuration; and at least one of the first and second recoil control assemblies defines an endless loop.
at least one of the first and second recoil control assemblies defines an endless loop.
A rope system as recited in claim 25 , in which the first and second recoil control assemblies each defines an endless loop.
A rope system as recited in claim 25 , in which at least one of the first and second recoil control assemblies defines first and second loops connected by a middle portion.
A rope system as recited in claim 25 , in which the first and second recoil control assemblies each defines first and second loops connected by a middle portion.
Ref US20220063768A1: Claims:
A mooring loop comprising: an outer jacket and an inner core defining a rope; and a first controlled failure point in the rope defined by segmented ends that sever the inner core within the outer jacket, wherein there is only the outer jacket and there is no inner core in the rope at the first controlled failure point.
an outer jacket and an inner core defining a rope; and
a first controlled failure point in the rope defined by segmented ends that sever the inner core within the outer jacket, wherein there is only the outer jacket and there is no inner core in the rope at the first controlled failure point.
The mooring loop of claim 1 , further comprising: a ratio of volume of material of the outer jacket to volume of material of the inner core in a range from 1:1 to 8:1.
a ratio of volume of material of the outer jacket to volume of material of the inner core in a range from 1:1 to 8:1.
The mooring loop of claim 2 , wherein the ratio is 4:1.
The mooring loop of claim 1 , further comprising: a splice connecting first and second ends of the rope to form a continuous loop.
a splice connecting first and second ends of the rope to form a continuous loop.
The mooring loop of claim 4 , further comprising: a position of the first controlled failure point located a distance from the splice, wherein the first controlled failure point is located between first and second ends of the mooring loop.
a position of the first controlled failure point located a distance from the splice, wherein the first controlled failure point is located between first and second ends of the mooring loop.
The mooring loop of claim 4 , further comprising: a plurality of coils defined by the continuous loop, wherein the plurality of coils define first and second ends of the mooring loop; wherein the first controlled failure point is located between
[Truncated to input limit]