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 .
Summary
This is the initial Office action based on application 17945476 filed 9/15/22.
Claims 1-4 are pending and have been fully considered.
Information Disclosure Statement
IDS filed on 9/15/22 have been considered by the examiner and copies of the Form PTO/SB/08 are attached to the office action.
Drawings
The Drawings filed on 9/15/22 are acknowledged and accepted by the examiner.
Specification
The Specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. MPEP § 608.01
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 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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HIROTAKA ET AL. (WO2020050050A1; 3/12/2020, filed on IDS 9/15/22) in view of TAKASHI ET AL. (JP2011255368, 12/22/2011; filed on IDS 9/15/22) in their entirety. Hereby referred to as HIROTAKA and TAKASHI.
Regarding claims 1-4:
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0029] FIG 1 and 2 show a configuration of a method and apparatus for predicting ash deposition in a coal-fired boiler according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. [0030] First, an example of a coal-fired boiler to which an embodiment of the method and apparatus of the present invention is applied will be outlined with reference to FIG. The coal-fired boiler 100 includes a boiler body 130 that includes a furnace 110 formed of a furnace wall tube (heat transfer tube) and a heat back-transfer section 120 . A burner 140 for injecting and burning pulverized coal fuel is disposed below the furnace 110 of the boiler body 130. Above the furnace 110 of the boiler body 130, a secondary superheater 111, a tertiary superheater 112, a final superheater 113, and a secondary reheater 114 are installed, forming an upper heat transfer section 115. The post-heat transfer section 120 of the boiler body 130 is provided with a primary superheater 121, a primary reheater 122, and a coal economizer 123. These heat exchangers are made up of heat transfer tubes. When pulverized coal fuel is injected from the burner 140 into the interior of the furnace 110 of the boiler body 130 and burned, the combustion gas heats the heat transfer tubes that make up the furnace wall of the furnace 110, and then heats the upper heat transfer section 115 at the top of the furnace 110, which consists of a secondary superheater 111, a tertiary superheater 112, a final superheater 113, and a secondary reheater 114. Subsequently, the combustion gas heats the primary superheater 121, the primary reheater 122 and the economizer 123 of the post-heat transfer section 120. The combustion gas (exhaust gas) from which heat has been removed by heat exchange is led to the boiler outlet exhaust gas duct 150, where nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, etc. are removed by a flue gas treatment device (not shown) for de-nitration, desulfurization, etc. located downstream, and dust is removed by a dust collector (not shown) before being released into the atmosphere.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0031] As shown in FIG. 1, the method for predicting ash adhesion in a coal-fired boiler according to this embodiment includes a coal ash production process, a sintered ash production process, an adhesion degree measurement process, a correlation calculation process, an exhaust gas temperature prediction process, and an adhesion prediction process. FIG. 2 shows a schematic configuration of a coal-fired boiler ash deposition prediction device that implements the coal-fired boiler ash deposition prediction method.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0032] The coal ash production step is a step of producing coal ash by incinerating various coals, such as high-quality coal and low-quality coal, which are used as fuel in a coal-fired boiler 100 (see FIG. 7) (see step 510 in FIG. 1). Each coal is incinerated at 815°C in accordance with the JIS method to obtain coal ash. The coal ash is produced in a coal ash generator 10 shown in FIG.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0033] The sintered ash production process is a process in which the coal ash produced in the coal ash production process is heated at multiple temperatures within the combustion temperature range of the coal-fired boiler 100 to produce sintered ash at each heating temperature (see step S20 in Figure 1). The coal ash is sintered by placing the coal ash in a magnetic boat 21 as a sintered ash generator 20 as shown in FIG. 2 and heating the coal ash at a predetermined temperature, thereby obtaining sintered ash. The heating temperature at this time is in the temperature range of approximately 1000°C to 1400°C, which can cover the temperature at least in the vicinity of the upper heat transfer section 115 of the coal-fired boiler 100, and the material is heated and sintered at multiple temperatures (for example, multiple temperatures at temperature intervals of 50°C) to obtain sintered ash at each heating temperature.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0034] The adhesion degree measurement process is a process in which each sintered ash produced in the sintered ash production process is rotated and separated using a rattle tester 30 (see Figure 2), and the adhesion degree is measured from the weight ratio of the sintered ash before and after rotation and separation (see step S30 in Figure 1). The rattle tester 30 is used to evaluate sintered metals and is a device that rotates a cylindrical wire mesh 31 (mesh opening: 1 mm) having a diameter of about 100 mm and a length of about 120 mm at 80 rpm on a rotating shaft 32 . The rattler tester 30 places a sample of the sintered ash inside the cylindrical wire mesh 31, rotates the cylindrical wire mesh 31 at a constant rotation speed set in the setting section 33, and during this time, sintered ash particles that separate from the sintered ash and fall through the meshes of the cylindrical wire mesh 31 are received in a passing material receiving tray 34. The cylindrical wire mesh 31 is covered with a cover 35. The ratio of the weight of the sintered ash after the test divided by the weight of the sintered ash before the test is determined as the degree of stickiness by the stickiness measuring device 40 (see FIG. 2). That is, the degree of stickiness = weight of sintered ash after the test / weight of sintered ash before the test.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0036] The exhaust gas temperature prediction step is a step of predicting the exhaust gas temperature from the degree of agglutination of the coal used as fuel based on the correlation between the degree of agglutination and the exhaust gas temperature obtained in the correlation calculation step (see step 550 in Figure 1). The exhaust gas temperature is predicted by an exhaust gas temperature predictor 60 (see FIG. 2) from the diagram shown in FIG.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0037] The adhesion prediction step is a step of predicting ash adhesion to the heat transfer tubes in the coal-fired boiler 100 based on the exhaust gas temperature predicted in the exhaust gas temperature prediction step (see step S60 in FIG. 1). Ash adhesion to the heat transfer tubes in the coal-fired boiler 100 is predicted by an adhesion predictor 70 (see FIG. 2). The adhesion predictor 70 indicates that the higher the exhaust gas temperature, the more likely it is that ash will be adhering to the heat transfer tube. For example, it may be of a type that displays the predicted state of ash adhesion to the heat transfer tube on a screen or that issues an audio warning.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0040] First, various types of coal, such as high-quality coal and low-quality coal, used as fuel in a coal-fired boiler 100 (see FIG. 7 ) are incinerated at 815°C in a coal ash generator 10 shown in FIG. 2 in accordance with the JIS method to generate coal ash (see the coal ash generation step of step S10 in FIG. 1 ).
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0046] Here, the increase in the temperature of the exhaust gas means that ash has adhered to the heat transfer tubes, inhibiting heat exchange between the heat transfer tubes and the exhaust gas. That is, when coal, which generates high exhaust gas temperatures, is used as fuel in the coalfired boiler 100, clogging problems may occur due to ash adhesion. The present inventors have found that by measuring the degree of agglutination as a coal property parameter and creating a diagram of the correlation between the degree of agglutination and the flue gas temperature as shown in FIG. 8, it is possible to predict the flue gas temperature from the degree of agglutination, and to predict ash damage based on the flue gas temperature. This is a characteristic feature of this embodiment.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0047] In other words, in the case of this embodiment, if the correlation between the degree of agglutination and the exhaust gas temperature is obtained as a diagram such as that shown in Figure 8 in the correlation calculation process, the exhaust gas temperature can be predicted simply by measuring the degree of agglutination of the coal to be used as fuel, and the adhesion of ash to the heat transfer tubes in the coal-fired boiler 100 can be predicted. At this time, it is not necessary to stop the operation of the coal-fired boiler 100.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0054] The adhesion level measuring device 40, the correlation calculator 50, and the coal selector 80 shown in FIG. 4 can be configured by a personal computer.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0055] Next, the operation of the embodiment of the method and apparatus for preventing ash adhesion in a coal-fired boiler will be described.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0056] In the method and apparatus for preventing ash adhesion in a coal-fired boiler shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, the steps from the coal ash generation step to the correlation calculation step are performed in the same manner as in the method and apparatus for predicting ash adhesion in a coal-fired boiler shown in FIGS. 1 and 2.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0057] Next, based on the correlation between the degree of agglutination and the exhaust gas temperature obtained in the correlation calculation process, coal with a degree of agglutination that will result in an exhaust gas temperature below a set value (e.g., approximately 374 to 376°C) is selected as fuel by the coal selector 80 (see Figure 4) (see the coal selection process of step S70 in Figure 3).
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0058] If the coal selected by the coal selector 80 is used as fuel, the exhaust gas temperature can be kept below a set value, making it difficult for ash to adhere to the heat transfer tubes and preventing the heat exchange with the exhaust gas in the heat transfer tubes from being hindered.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0066] Next, the operation of the embodiment of the coal-fired boiler operating method and apparatus will be described. [0067] In the coal-fired boiler operation method and apparatus shown in FIGS. 5 and 6, the steps from the coal ash generation step to the flue gas temperature prediction step are performed in the same manner as in the coal-fired boiler ash deposition prediction method and apparatus shown in FIGS. 1 and 2. [0068] Subsequently, the combustion time of the coal is adjusted by a combustion time adjuster 90 (see FIG. 6) based on the exhaust gas temperature predicted in the exhaust gas temperature prediction step (see the combustion time adjustment step of step S80 in FIG. 5).
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0069] For example, in the diagram shown in FIG. 8, if coal G, coal H, or a mixture of these coals is used, the degree of agglutination will be 0.5 or more, and the exhaust gas temperature is expected to exceed 376°C. However, even in such cases, it is possible to prevent ash from adhering to the heat transfer tubes by setting the combustion time to a short time, and then switch to coal with a degree of adhesion that keeps the exhaust gas temperature low.
HIROTAKA teaches in para [0074] Coal ash generator 20 Sintered ash generator 21 Magnetic boat 30 Rattler tester 31 Cylindrical wire mesh 32 Rotating shaft 33 Setting unit 34 Passing object tray 35 Cover 40 Adhesion degree measuring device 50 Correlation calculator 60 Exhaust gas temperature predictor 70 Adhesion predictor 80 Coal selector 90 Combustion time controller 100 Coal-fired boiler 110 Furnace 111 Secondary superheater 112 Tertiary superheater 113 Final superheater 114 Secondary reheater 115 Upper heat transfer section 120 Back heat transfer section 121 Primary superheater 122 Primary reheater 123 Coal economizer 130 Boiler body 140 Burner 150 Boiler outlet exhaust gas duct 160 Temperature detector.
A person skilled in the art could easily adopt, as the fuel HIROTAKA, a fuel obtained by mixing biomass with coal serving as a main fuel at a prescribed addition rate, and thus meets the claims limitation. In addition, obtaining the degree of sticking for a plurality sets of test ash with different addition rates of biomass to coal, and evaluating, as the optimum addition rate, the addition rate of biomass for which the degree of sticking is the maximum within the adhesion safety range is merely a design matter that could be addressed, as appropriate and as necessary, by a person skilled in the art.
Having a prescribed correlation between the adhesion result of combustion ash and the degree of sticking is a well-known matter, for example, see to para [0032] of TAKASHI. A person skilled in the art could easily identify the adhesion safety range of the degree of sticking that does not cause ash damage in an actual coal-mixed combustion boiler on the basis of the disclosures of HIROTAKA and the abovementioned well-known. Obtaining the degree of sticking for a plurality sets of test ash with different addition rates of biomass to coal, and evaluating, as the optimum addition rate, the addition rate of biomass for which the degree of sticking is the maximum within the adhesion safety range is merely a design matter by a person skilled in the art.
Identifying a region having a degree of sticking of 0.5 or less as an adhesion safety range on the basis of the disclosures in HIROTAKA and the abovementioned well-known features is merely a design matter by a person skilled in the art.
From the teachings of the all the references, it is apparent that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, the invention as a whole was prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, as evidenced by the references, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Also, a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)
In addition, “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, “[i]nclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims.” In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)). In In re Young, a claim to a machine for making concrete beams included a limitation to the concrete reinforced members made by the machine as well as the structural elements of the machine itself. The court held that the inclusion of the article formed within the body of the claim did not, without more, make the claim patentable
Additionally, the claimed changes in the sequence of performing steps is considered to be prima facie obvious because the time at which a particular step is performed is simply a matter of operator preference, especially since the same result is obtained regardless of when the step occurs. See Ex parte RUBIN, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. App. 1959). See also In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946) (selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results).
Nevertheless, an intended result of a process being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims when the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art. Furthermore, it has been held that obviousness is not rebutted by merely recognizing additional advantages or latent properties present in the prior art process and composition. Further, the fact that applicant has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd.Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art to have selected appropriate conditions, as guided by the prior art, in order to obtain the desired products. It is not seen where such selections would result in any new or unexpected results. Please see MPEP 2144.05, II: noting obviousness within prior art conditions or through routine experimentation.
If it is the applicant's position that this would not be the case, evidence would need to be provided to support the applicant's position.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANTEL GRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5563. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH 9:00 am - 7:00 pm.
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, Prem Singh can be reached on 571-272-6381. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHANTEL L GRAHAM/
Examiner, Art Unit 1771
/ELLEN M MCAVOY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771