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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 18 July 2022 has/have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a multi-target simultaneous charging method. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the methods described herein are not incorporated into a structure which implements the limitation. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because each limitation, as described in greater detail below, could be implemented by a human carrying out decisions or doing the mental steps of mathematics.
Step 1
Each of claims 1-6 fall within one of the four statutory categories. See MPEP § 2106.03. For example, and each of claims 1-6 recite a method for multi-target simultaneous charging which falls within the category of process.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because each of claims 1-6 amount to the judicial exception of organized human activity. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Step 2A – Prong 1
Exemplary claim 1 contains the limitations “considering constraints of a charging current when charging a lithium battery, a charging weight coefficient is added to convert an energy loss and the charging current into a lithium battery pack charging cost model having the charging weight coefficient, an interior point method is adopted for solution processing to obtain a preset charging current sequence” is directed to the abstract idea of a mathematical process comprising weighted coefficients and the interior point method. These mathematical processes could be executed by a human and have no further elements incorporating the mathematical process into a practical application.
Claim 1 further contains the limitations “according to the preset charging current sequence, a charging time required for charging the lithium battery pack is calculated, and the charging weight coefficient in the lithium battery pack charging cost model is adjusted through an adaptive momentum gradient descent algorithm to obtain the charging weight coefficient within a shortest charging time, the charging weight coefficient is utilized to optimize the lithium battery pack charging cost model to acquire a new preset charging current sequence”, which is directed to the abstract idea of a mathematical process of calculated a charging time and adjusting a charging model with an adaptive momentum gradient descent algorithm, described in applicant specification ¶0018-¶0022.
Claim 2, step 5 contains the limitation “a simultaneous charging time function is established as follows” with a corresponding equation, described in more detail below to reject Claim 2 under 35 USC 112a and 35 USC 112b, and remains an abstract mathematical process. Claim 2 further recites the limitation “updated expression for the first weight coefficient
α
and the second weight coefficient
β
is” with a corresponding equation, which remains an abstract mathematical process. These limitations amount to a defining a variable in an abstract mathematical process.
Claim 3 defines the variable set and further limitations for step 1 of claim 2, which amounts to defining variables in a mathematical process.
Claim 4 defines the mathematical process of updating the state of charge parameters for step 1 claim 2, which amounts to defining variables in a mathematical process.
Claim 5 defines the mathematical format for the charging cost model, which is adding to the existing mathematical process.
Claim 6 contains the limitation “if the terminal voltage of the single cell exceeds a preset maximum open circuit voltage of a battery, the preset charging current” which is an additional mathematical process which can be executed by a person reviewing data and updating the input parameters.
Step 2A – Prong 2
Claims 1-6 do not include additional elements (when considered individually, as an order combination, and/or within the claim as a whole) that are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional elements are represented by the following underlined limitations:
Claim 1 contains the limitation “the new preset charging current sequence is adopted to implement charging, thereby implementing optimized multi-target simultaneous charging of the lithium battery pack” which is directed to more than the abstract idea of mathematical process, as recited above, but does not amount to a practical application because it is insignificant post solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05f)
Claim 2 recites the limitations
“step 1… an equivalent circuit model of the lithium battery pack is established”, the abstract idea of modelling which is able to be executed by a person.
“step 3… lithium battery pack charging cost model comprising the preset charging SOC , a battery temperature and a battery balance is established” , the abstract idea of modelling which is able to be executed by a person.
“step 4 a quadratic programming solution method is adopted to solve the lithium battery pack charging cost model”. Directed to more than the abstract idea of mathematical process, but does not bring in a practical process
“step 5 real-time detection of a SOC… and an optimal charging current sequence obtained after update is adopted to control charging of the lithium battery pack”, step 5 incorporates multiple mathematical processes to calculate an optimal charging current sequence which is not further incorporated to a practical application.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “step 1, a single cell equivalent circuit is established for each of the single cells of the lithium battery pack”, the abstract idea of modelling which is able to be executed by a person.
Claim 4 recites “equivalent circuit model of the single cell of the lithium battery pack is expressed by the following formula” the abstract idea of modelling which is able to be executed by a person
Claim 5 recites “in the step 3, the following lithium battery pack charging cost model is established… the constraints in the charging process are established”, claim 5 further contains limitations defined by data gathering and mathematical processes which are not further implemented into a practical application. This amounts to data gathering and mathematical processes.
Claim 6 contains the limitation “the preset charging current in the optimal charging current sequence obtained in step 4 is reduced” which is directed to more than the abstract idea of mathematical process, as recited above, but does not amount to a practical application because it is insignificant post solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05f)
In view of the above, the additional elements individually do not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. Furthermore, the additional elements in combination amount to a plurality of devices each with software, where such computer and software amount to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer(s) and/or mere use of a generic computer component as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Therefore, these elements in combination do not provide a practical application. The combination of additional elements does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, i.e. an environment of computer hardware/software in communication with one another (a network of computing devices), and for this additional reason, the combination of additional elements does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea.
Step 2B
Claim(s) 1-6 does/do not include additional elements, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The reasons for reaching this conclusion are substantially the same as the reasons given above in Step 2A – Prong 2. For brevity, those reasons are not repeated in this section.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventors at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. A definition for the term “interior point method” is not possessed within the specification. Specification ¶0006 states “an interior point method is adopted to solve the quadratic programming problem to obtain a preset charging current sequence”, which does not sufficiently describe or define what an interior point method is or how it is being applied to the current invention.
Claim 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventors at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 2 begins with step 1 which is proceeded by step 3, omitting step 2. Specification ¶0011, ¶0012, ¶0013, ¶0018, ¶0022, ¶0029, and ¶0043, as described in applicant amendment to specification, includes a step 2 which correlates to claim 2 step 3. This numbering error propagates through the remaining steps of claim 2, similarly the renumbering of steps in the specification is updated to account for original step 3 becoming updated step 2.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as failing to set forth the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The equation stated in claim 2 contains a typographical error, as depicted in the screen shot below. The middle equation has the mathematical phrase
|
x
i
k
-
x
i
k
|
, highlighted in yellow below, which can only have a null or zero result and is inconsistent with the claim language “the charging time, respectively,
x
i
(
k
)
and
x
j
k
represent”.
PNG
media_image1.png
724
862
media_image1.png
Greyscale
which is further supported by the equation in specification ¶0013 which does use the absolute value of the difference between
|
x
i
k
-
x
j
(
k
)
|
. Further the function
f
4
(
x
)
is not defined within the claim and it is indefinite what quantity or measurement is being claimed or calculated.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Christensen et al (US 20170338666 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Christensen teaches a multi-target simultaneous charging method for a lithium battery pack (¶0074 “ FIG. 6, at block 610, the battery management system 180 receives data from one or more sensors of the sensing circuitry 170 which measure one or more characteristics of one or more battery cells 102”),
characterized in that: considering constraints of a charging current when charging a lithium battery, a charging weight coefficient is added to convert an energy loss and the charging current into a lithium battery pack charging cost model having the charging weight coefficient (¶0051 “Recursive Least Squares (RLS) estimator minimizes the cost function related to the input signals and calculates adaptive gains for the parameters. In order to improve the sensitivity of the estimation a sensitivity covariance matrix may be generated that quantifies how highly two parameters or states are coupled over the dynamics of the system… he linear dependence between these coefficients is represented by larger (closer to one) off-diagonal values in a sensitivity covariance matrix, those parameters or states may be unidentifiable”)
an interior point method is adopted for solution processing to obtain a preset charging current sequence (¶0070 “FIGS. 5A, 5B, 5C and 5D are examples of staircase charging profiles for a lithium battery”, ¶0071 “The staircase charging 510 results in the battery having a greater state of charge during charging. Thus, illustrating that should charging of the batteries be interrupted prior to reaching a substantially fully charged state the amount of available power would be greatest for the battery charged via the staircase charging 510”);
next, according to the preset charging current sequence, a charging time required for charging the lithium battery pack is calculated (¶0070 “FIGS. 5A, 5B, 5C and 5D are examples of staircase charging profiles for a lithium battery”, ¶0071 “The staircase charging 510 additionally resulted in the battery reaching a substantially fully charged state in about 17 minutes while the comparative constant current-constant voltage charging (CCCV.sub.1 520 and CCCV.sub.2 530) required over 30 minutes and about 20 minutes, respectively, to reach a substantially fully charged state”),
and the charging weight coefficient in the lithium battery pack charging cost model is adjusted (¶0040 “the Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) can include estimation of both rapidly varying states of the battery cell 102 and estimation of slowly varying parameters of the battery cell 102… States of a battery cell may for example include the state-of charge (e.g., for a lithium battery the degree of lithiation) or overpotentials. Parameters of the battery cell 102 typically vary more slowly over time than the states of the battery cell 102. Additionally, a parameter may not be required for the model to predict the present output of the battery cell 102.”)
through an adaptive momentum gradient descent algorithm to obtain the charging weight coefficient within a shortest charging time (¶0071 “The staircase charging 510 additionally resulted in the battery reaching a substantially fully charged state in about 17 minutes while the comparative constant current-constant voltage charging (CCCV.sub.1 520 and CCCV.sub.2 530) required over 30 minutes and about 20 minutes, respectively, to reach a substantially fully charged state”),
the charging weight coefficient is utilized to optimize the lithium battery pack charging cost model to acquire a new preset charging current sequence (¶0051 “Recursive Least Squares (RLS) estimator minimizes the cost function related to the input signals and calculates adaptive gains for the parameters”, ¶0056 “FIG. 2 the state estimator 222 and/or parameter estimator 224 may include an EKF-based estimator, a Moving Horizon based estimator, a Recursive Least Squares based estimator and combinations thereof that estimates the states and/or parameters of the battery 290”),
the new preset charging current sequence is adopted to implement, thereby implementing optimized multi-target (one or more battery cells 102) simultaneous charging of the lithium battery pack charging (¶0053 “ battery management system 205 includes a closed loop control module 210 which further includes a feedforward module 212 and a feedback module 214. The feedforward module 212 is in operable communication with a state estimator 222 and a parameter estimator 224 as well as with external sources which can provide as inputs various commands such as desired outputs 230 and/or open loop commands 240”, ¶0054 “ The feedback module 214 receives the estimated states and parameters calculated by the state estimator 222 and/or parameter estimator 224 and may provide at least one control signal to the battery 290”).
Staircase charging, as taught by Christensen, uses a stepwise function to optimize the charging current sequence describe din ¶0040 “An Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) describes the process model as a nonlinear time varying model in discrete time, but uses a local linearization at each time step. The set of outputs from the electrochemical model via the Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) can include estimation of both rapidly varying states of the battery cell 102 and estimation of slowly varying parameters of the battery cell 102”. An interior point method is a type of stepwise function which optimizes a particular value, in application specification that is the current charging sequence. The staircase charging as taught by Christensen performs the same function as an interior point method. Further FIGs 5A-5D depict profiles of charging staircase 510 protocol compared to constant current-constant voltage charging protocols showing the time it takes for a battery to reach a full SOC, otherwise known as charging momentum.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christensen modified by Yoshida et al (US 20140159664 A1)
Regarding claim 2, Christensen teaches the multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack according to claim 1. Christensen further teaches a multi-target simultaneous method for a lithium battery pack characterized in that: a process of the method is as follows:
step 1: the lithium battery pack is composed of n independent single cells, according to basic dynamic characteristics of the lithium battery, an equivalent circuit model of the lithium battery pack is established (¶0038 “ non-electrochemical battery models (e.g., equivalent circuit model, single particle model) may be used to model the states and parameters of the battery cell 102”),
and model parameters are determined by using experimental data (¶0074 “block 620, the battery management system 180 receives one or more estimated characteristics of the one or more battery cells 102 from the state estimator 222 and/or parameter estimator 224”);
step 3: a charging target comprising an estimated charging time and a preset charging SOC (state of charge) is set, the lithium battery pack charging cost model comprising the preset charging SOC, a battery temperature and a battery balance is established (¶0067 “battery management system 205 to determine whether to switch between a first charging mode 410 and a second charging mode 420 (e.g., an internal temperature exceeds a predetermined threshold, a cathode overpotential exceeds a predetermined threshold, the battery is charged to a predetermined capacity, and/or the battery is charged for a predetermined time)”);
step 4: a quadratic programming solution method is adopted to solve the lithium battery pack charging cost model to obtain a preset charging current u, ,k of each of the single cells at each moment under the preset charging time and the preset charging SOC (¶0048 “Recursive Least Squares (RLS) estimation approximates a system as a linear model that is valid around a given operating point. In one example the operating point includes the observed states at the current time and the current estimation of the parameters”, ¶0067 “battery management system 205 to determine whether to switch between a first charging mode 410 and a second charging mode 420 (e.g., an internal temperature exceeds a predetermined threshold, a cathode overpotential exceeds a predetermined threshold, the battery is charged to a predetermined capacity, and/or the battery is charged for a predetermined time)”),
thereby forming an optimal charging current sequence, and the lithium battery pack is controlled with the optimal charging current sequence for charging (¶0059 “battery management system 205 regulates the charging of the battery based on one or more estimated states by using a “staircase” of alternating charging modes (e.g., one of substantially constant current, substantially constant voltage, or substantially constant power) that approximately traces the boundary set by the constraint of preventing deleterious effects”);
step 5: real-time detection of a SOCx,k of each of the single cells in a real-time state of a charging process is performed under the control of step 4 (¶0063 “properties of the battery 290 change over time, these changes can be reflected in the battery model of the battery 290 used by the battery management system 205 in the estimation and control algorithms of the battery 290”),
and a charging time
T
2
(
ϵ
2
)
(¶0071 “The staircase charging 510 additionally resulted in the battery reaching a substantially fully charged state in about 17 minutes while the comparative constant current-constant voltage charging (CCCV.sub.1 520 and CCCV.sub.2 530) required over 30 minutes and about 20 minutes, respectively, to reach a substantially fully charged state”, the staircase charging 15 reaches fully charged state in the least amount of time resulting in the minimization of
T
2
(
ϵ
2
)
)
are obtained according to the following formula, and a simultaneous charging time function is established as follows:
PNG
media_image2.png
168
754
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein,
T
2
(
ϵ
2
)
represents the charging time, respectively x,(k) and x,(k) represent a value of the SOC of the i-th single cell of the lithium battery pack at a time k, el and £2 represent a cut-off error of a convergence process and a charging process, respectively, T represents a sampling time, z represents a time variable, i and j represent ordinal numbers of the single cells in the lithium battery pack, and 2d represents a column vector of an expected value of the SOC of the single cell, which is a n x 1 column vector composed of the expected value of the SOC of the single cell (¶0045 “battery management system may assume that the noise covariance matrix in estimation of states and parameters is a time-varying matrix that depends on the sensitivity of output on states and parameters at each horizon”, ¶0054 “ feedback module 214 receives the estimated states and parameters calculated by the state estimator 222 and/or parameter estimator 224 and may provide at least one control signal to the battery 290”)
the adaptive momentum gradient descent algorithm is adopted to process the simultaneous charging time function, optimize a first weight coefficient
α
and a second weight coefficient
β
in the lithium battery pack charging cost model (¶0045 “ To determine an arrival cost gain for each parameter, the battery management system can use a Kalman Filter based method. In the implementation of the Kalman Filter based method in an arrival cost of the MHE method, the battery management system may assume that the probability density functions of the noises in states, parameters and output are shape invariant Gaussian distributions, that is, Gaussian distributions with time-invariant covariance matrices”)
and return to step 3 for update (¶0074 “FIG. 6 is a flowchart of a method 600 of managing the charging of a battery system 100… If the battery cell 102 is not fully charged, at block 650, the battery management system 180 regulates the charging of the battery cell 102 in a first charging mode. At block 660, the battery management system 180 switches from the first charging mode to a second charging mode based on estimates from the state estimator 222 and/or parameter estimator 224”),
an updated expression of the first weight coefficient a and the second weight coefficient is:
PNG
media_image3.png
79
374
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
88
338
media_image4.png
Greyscale
wherein Aa(k), Aa(k -1) represent increments of a at times k and k-1, respectively, Ap,(k), Ap,(k -1) represent increments of P at times k and k-1, respectively, VT(k), VT(k -1) represent increments of a simultaneous charging time T at the times k and k-1,respectively, wherein the simultaneous charging time T - max 'T(i),T,(sE)I,0 represents a momentum factor, co(k) represents an adaptive learning rate (¶0045 “battery management system may assume that the noise covariance matrix in estimation of states and parameters is a time-varying matrix that depends on the sensitivity of output on states and parameters at each horizon”, ¶0054 “ feedback module 214 receives the estimated states and parameters calculated by the state estimator 222 and/or parameter estimator 224 and may provide at least one control signal to the battery 290”);
and step 4 is repeated for processing, and an optimal charging current sequence obtained after update is adopted to control charging of the lithium battery pack (¶0074 “FIG. 6 is a flowchart of a method 600 of managing the charging of a battery system 100… If the battery cell 102 is not fully charged, at block 650, the battery management system 180 regulates the charging of the battery cell 102 in a first charging mode. At block 660, the battery management system 180 switches from the first charging mode to a second charging mode based on estimates from the state estimator 222 and/or parameter estimator 224”). The calculations expressed herein claim 2 relate battery parameters such as voltage, state of charge, temperature, etc… to the charging momentum or charging time. Christensen teaches a model for measuring charging time, referred to as the staircase model, to perform the same calculations. Christensen does not teach a multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack wherein,
T
1
(
ϵ
1
)
represents the convergence time.
Yoshida teaches a multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack wherein,
T
1
(
ϵ
1
)
represents the convergence time (¶0090 “ balance circuit 200 adjusts an amount of charge of each battery cell 100”, ¶0124 “ FIG. 11(a) and FIG. 11(b), the balance circuit operation step (S260) is during a period of time from the time t.sub.1 to time t.sub.2. As illustrated in FIG. 11(a), from the time t.sub.1 to the time t.sub.2, the voltage-maximum cell consumes electric power because of internal resistance of the balance circuit 200”).
Yoshida FIG 10 depicts a flowchart illustrating a charging method where at step S230 states “is voltage of voltage-maximum cell second reference voltage or above?”, indicating a battery cell being compared to a threshold of a charging parameter. This is similar to Christensen FIG 6 step 640 “batter cell < full charge?”, also indicated a battery cell being compared to a threshold of a charging parameter. Christensen teaches a method of multi-target simultaneous charging, and Yoshida discusses how those multi-targets are balanced during charging. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date, to modify the multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack according to Christensen wherein,
T
1
(
ϵ
1
)
represents the convergence time, as taught by Yoshida, for the purpose of improving charging efficiency and prolonging the lifespan of the battery pack by preventing overcharging or over-discharging any given cell.
Regarding claim 4, Christensen as modified by Yoshida teaches the multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack according to claim 2. Christensen as modified by Yoshida further a multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack characterized in that: in the step 1, the equivalent circuit model of the single cell of the lithium battery pack is expressed by the following formula (Yoshida ¶0038 “ non-electrochemical battery models (e.g., equivalent circuit model, single particle model) may be used to model the states and parameters of the battery cell 102”):
PNG
media_image5.png
129
320
media_image5.png
Greyscale
wherein Vsoc (k + 1) and Vsoc (k) represent a value of the SOC of the i-th single cell of the lithium battery pack at times k+1 and k, respectively,
η
represents a charging efficiency, T represents the sampling time, and I(k) represents a charging current value of the i-th single cell at the time k, Q represents a capacity of the single cell of the lithium battery pack, R represents an internal resistance of the single cell of the lithium battery pack, V(k) and Voc(k) represent an output terminal voltage and an open circuit voltage of the i-th single cell at the time k, respectively (Christensen ¶0065 “FIG. 3B the constant voltage charging (CV) 340 and constant voltage-constant current (CVCC) high charging 350 both result in the battery potential reaching about the same value after about 6 to 7 minutes. The constant voltage-constant current (CVCC) low charging 360 results in slower charging of the battery (e.g., battery 290)”).
Regarding claim 6, Christensen as modified by Yoshida teaches the multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack according to claim 2. Christensen as modified by Yoshida further a multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack characterized in that: during the charging process of the method, a terminal voltage of each of the single cells in the lithium battery pack is detected in real time (¶0071 “ FIG. 5A illustrates the state of charge of the batteries versus time of staircase charging 510 and comparative constant current-constant voltage charging (CCCV.sub.1 520 and CCCV.sub.2 530). The staircase charging 510 results in the battery having a greater state of charge during charging. ”),
if the terminal voltage of the single cell exceeds a preset maximum open circuit voltage of a battery, the preset charging current in the optimal charging current sequence obtained in step 4 is reduced (¶0069 “fourth charging mode, the current is gradually decreased such that the slope dV/dI (change in voltage with respect to current) is substantially constant, thereby allowing a charging path that more closely follows the curve 430 in FIG. 4”).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christensen as modified by Yoshida and further in view of Ziegler et al (DE 102019108579 A1)
Regarding claim 3, Christensen as modified by Yoshida teaches the multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack according to claim 2. Christensen as modified by Yoshida further a multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack characterized in that: in the step 1, a single cell equivalent circuit is established for each of the single cells of the lithium battery pack (Yoshida ¶0038 “ non-electrochemical battery models (e.g., equivalent circuit model, single particle model) may be used to model the states and parameters of the battery cell 102”)
wherein the voltage-controlled voltage source Voc is an SOC equivalent circuit composed of the capacitor Cb and the constant voltage source Vsoc arranged in parallel, the SOC equivalent circuit is configured to simulate a SOC change of the single cell (Christensen ¶0026 “Fig. 2 It can be seen that the internal cell voltage Ui , which is actually decisive for the charging and /or discharging of the battery cell Z, is always smaller than the externally accessible, measurable cell terminal voltage Uz”);
the voltage-controlled voltage source Voc and the internal resistance Ro are connected in series to form a voltage equivalent circuit, and the voltage equivalent circuit is configured to simulate a voltage change of the single cell (Christensen ¶0026 “Fig. 2 It can be seen that the internal cell voltage Ui , which is actually decisive for the charging and /or discharging of the battery cell Z, is always smaller than the externally accessible, measurable cell terminal voltage Uz”).
Christensen discloses in FIG 1 sensing circuitry 170 attached to a single battery cell 102 to measure the internal resistance of the battery cell as well as other battery parameters such as a controlled voltage source. Battery cell 102 is depicted having an anode 120 and a cathode 150, forming a capacitor inside, wherein ¶0032 “battery management system 180 is configured to receive data from the sensing circuitry 170 including current, voltage, temperature, and/or resistance measurements”. Christensen as modified by Yoshida does not explicitly disclose method for the lithium battery pack characterized in that: and the single cell equivalent circuit comprises a capacitor Cb, a constant voltage source Vsoc, a voltage controlled voltage source Voc and an internal resistance R
Ziegler teaches a multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack characterized in that: in the step 1, a single cell equivalent circuit is established for each of the single cells of the lithium battery pack (¶0026 “Fig. 2 shows an equivalent circuit diagram of an example battery cell Z.”),
and the single cell equivalent circuit comprises a capacitor Cb, a constant voltage source Vsoc, a voltage controlled voltage source Voc and an internal resistance R (¶0026 “A cell terminal voltage Uz measurable at the terminals of the battery cell Z is divided inside the battery cell Z into an internal cell voltage Ui and a voltage drop URi across the internal resistance Ri, which results from the product of the cell load current Iz supplied by the battery cell Z and the internal resistance Ri.”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date, to modify the multi-target simultaneous charging method for a lithium battery pack as taught by Christensen as modified by Yoshida wherein a single cell equivalent circuit is established for each of the single cells of the lithium battery pack as taught by Ziegler, for the purpose of improving computational efficiency allowing for faster charging applications and increased user experience.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: non-consecutive step number ordering.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following:
The set of three equations preceding ¶0014 (depicted below from applications corresponding PGPUB Chen et al (US 20230266392 A1)), particularly the equation defining
Τ
2
(
ϵ
2
)
containing the variable
x
(
k
)
which is missing a subindex
PNG
media_image6.png
595
703
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Appropriate correction is required.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the 101 rejection, and in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
To the best of the examiner’s ability Christensen in view of Yoshida, nor any other prior art, explicitly discloses a multi-target simultaneous charging method for the lithium battery pack wherein the charging cost model comprising vector and matrix elements particularly as underlined in the limitations of claim 5 below:
characterized in that: in the step 3, the following lithium battery pack charging cost model is established:
PNG
media_image7.png
260
638
media_image7.png
Greyscale
wherein, F(x) represents a vector of the lithium battery pack charging cost model, f1(x) represents a sum of SOC deviations between the single cells;
f2(x) represents the energy loss generated due to an internal resistance inside the lithium battery during the charging process, f3(x) represents a sum of deviations of the respective single cells charged to the same value, f4(x) represents the charging time;
α
represents the first weight coefficient,
β
represents the second weight coefficient, X,k represents the SOC of the i-th single cell at the time k, X,k represents the SOC of the j-th single cell at the time k, u,,k represents a charging current of the i-th single cell at the time k, dk represents a disturbance current at the time k, xd 20 represents an expected value of the SOC of the single cell, i and j represent ordinal numbers of the single cell in the lithium battery pack, n is a total number of the single cells in the lithium battery pack, and m is the number of charging steps; the constraints in the charging process are established, comprising:
A SOC column vector SOC(k) of batteries connected in series in the battery pack at time k satisfies
S
O
C
(
k
)
≤
S
O
C
u
Wherein SOC(k) and SOC_u are both column vectors of a length n, and SOC_u represents an upper limit value of the SOC of the lithium battery pack;
A charging current column vector I(k) of each of the single cells in the battery pack at time k satisfies
I
k
≤
I
M
Wherein I(k) and I_M are both column vectors of the length n, and I_M represents an upper limit value of the charging current of each of the single cells in the lithium battery pack;
a terminal voltage column vector U(k) of each of the sing cell sin the battery pack at time k satisfies:
U
k
≤
U
M
Wherein U(k) and U_M are both the column vectors of the length n, and U_M represents an upper limit value of a terminal voltage of each of the single cells of the lithium battery pack.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA M KOTOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3771. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8a-5p.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Julian Huffman can be reached at (571) 272-2147. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LISA KOTOWSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859