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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “[to vary] an amount of the first voltage” has already been introduced in the same claim at “[selectively control] an amount of the first voltage” and should be changed to “[to vary] the amount of the first voltage”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 13-19 are objected to due to dependency upon objected-to claim.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“at least one voltage manipulation element” in claims 1 and 20.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
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 1-6 and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ziebart et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 20230202660 A1, in further view of Maunoury, EP Patent Application Publication No. 4134260 A1.
Claim 1. Ziebart discloses a power distribution system for an aircraft, comprising (Ziebart, Fig. 1 is a block diagram of an aircraft 100, including a power distribution system 112.)
at least one wing of the aircraft, (Ziebart, Fig. 1 shows wings 106.)
a power supply circuit including at least one DC power bus having a first voltage, (Ziebart, [0019] “The power distribution system 112 converts the electricity received from the electrical generators 122 into electricity usable by components of the systems 114 of the aircraft 100. For example, the power distribution system 112 converts a first portion of the electricity received from the electrical generators 122 into 3-phase alternating current (AC) electricity associated with a first voltage and a second portion of the electricity received from the electrical generators 122 into direct current (DC) electricity associated with a second voltage” where the voltage received from the electrical generators as DC electricity corresponds to the claimed first voltage of the DC power bus.)
To perform its function of converting electricity received from an electrical generator into electricity usable by components, such as converting AC electricity to DC electricity, the power distribution system 112 implies the inclusion of a power supply circuit, which is known to one of ordinary skill in the art as a system that converts alternating current (AC) from the main electricity supply into a more stable, direct voltage (DC) output.
Furthermore, the art establishes the power distribution system as being the source of DC electricity usable by the components of many different systems. To perform its function of distributing DC electricity to multiple downstream systems, the power distribution system 112 implies the inclusion of a DC bus or busbar, which is known to one of ordinary skill in the art as a component which conducts and distributes electricity from a source to multiple circuits, such as those present in multiple downstream systems.
at least one resistive heating element electrically connected with the at least one DC power bus and coupled with the at least one wing of the aircraft, and (Ziebart, [0002] “As another example, an electrical ice protection system uses electrical heaters to heat particular aircraft surfaces to reduce icing”; and [0003] “The ice protection system also includes a controller configured to, in response to a first determination indicating presence of an icing condition, determine a setpoint temperature for a first location of an outer surface of the wing configured to be heated by a heater of the one or more heaters.”; and [0029] “The heaters 146 are electro-thermal (e.g., resistance) heaters that are conformed, or are conformable, to portions of the aircraft 100 to be heated to prevent unacceptable icing.”)
Ziebart does not explicitly disclose at least one voltage manipulation element configured to selectively adjust an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element, and a controller electrically connected to the at least one voltage manipulation element of the power supply circuit and configured to regulate the first voltage of the DC power bus, the controller programmed to selectively control the at least one voltage manipulation element in response to the first voltage of the DC power bus being greater than a first threshold voltage to vary an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element to cause the at least one resistive heating element to convert the amount of the first voltage into heat and thereby regulate overvoltage of the first voltage of the DC power bus.
Maunoury discloses at least one voltage manipulation element configured to selectively adjust an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element, and (Maunoury, Fig. 5A shows switches that control the voltage the electrical resistors receive in a decentralized power control system, configured to adjust voltage based on temperature input, shown as a dotted line labeled “T*” and overvoltage of the electrical network (see Maunoury Abstract).)
a controller electrically connected to the at least one voltage manipulation element of the power supply circuit and configured to regulate the first voltage of the DC power bus, (Maunoury, [0072] “… flow control is preferably implemented by means of pulse width modulation (PWM)… Thus, the power flow diverted to the resistive loads can be controlled.”)
the controller programmed to selectively control the at least one voltage manipulation element in response to the first voltage of the DC power bus being greater than a first threshold voltage to vary an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element to cause the at least one resistive heating element to convert the amount of the first voltage into heat and thereby regulate overvoltage of the first voltage of the DC power bus. (Maunoury, [0015] “The system comprises a voltage monitoring device for measuring the voltage in the electrical network and detecting whether or not the voltage exceeds a predetermined upper threshold value. The system further comprises a power control device coupled to the voltage monitoring device to receive a voltage measurement result as an input for diverting and regulating the excess power to flow to one or more dissipation devices including resistive loads located in or on the aircraft in a controlled manner when it is detected that the voltage exceeds the upper threshold value. The system further comprises the one or more dissipation devices for transforming electrical power into heat and dissipating the electrical power as thermal power in the resistive loads.”; and Fig. 2 show S20, which dictate what steps to take when measured voltage in the electrical network is greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold voltage.)
Ziebart and Maunoury are analogous art because they are related to managing and regulating power of an aircraft. Ziebart differs from the claimed invention only in that it does not disclose the intentional use of de-icers or heaters to help regulate overvoltage of the aircraft power distribution system using the voltage manipulation elements controlled by a controller. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the controller 142 and components designed to adjust the power supplied to the heaters 146 as taught by Ziebart with the PMW and voltage monitoring device responsible for diverting and regulating excess power above a threshold value towards the dissipation devices which transform electrical power into heat using resistance, as taught by Maunoury. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to “protect the aircraft electrical network from overvoltages that may occur” (see Maunoury, Abstract) such as when there is a failure of network management system that will lead to more systems connected to the same amount of electrical generators, such as electrical propulsion engines that regenerate power, leading to “an excess power flow that cannot be consumed otherwise by components of an aircraft” (see Maunoury, [0004]-[0005]).
Claim 2. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 1.
wherein the at least one voltage manipulation element is connected across the DC power bus and is a gate switch configured to be arranged in an on position and an off position, and (Maunoury, Fig. 5A shows an electrical diagram illustrating the electrical connections between the power source and dissipation devices. The decentralized switches that control the power to the electrical resistance dissipation devices are in parallel.)
wherein the controller is configured to selectively control the gate switch to the on and off positions. (Maunoury, [0072] “… that flow control is preferably implemented by means of pulse width modulation (PWM). This means that when a particular one of the illustrated connections shall be "closed", the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently. Thus, the power flow diverted to the resistive loads can be controlled.”)
Claim 3. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 2.
wherein the gate switch is arranged along an electrical line extending between and electrically connecting a negative side of the DC power bus and the at least one resistive heating element. (Maunoury, Fig. 5A shows the voltage control switches situated between a positive electrical line from the power source and the electrical resistance dissipation devices.)
Ziebart and Maunoury are analogous art because they are related to managing and regulating power of an aircraft. Maunoury differs from the claimed invention only in that it is connected to the positive line instead of the claimed negative line of the resistive load. However, the configurations where a switch is placed on the positive side or the negative side of a resistive load are functionally equivalent to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore it would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to place the switch on the negative side of the resistive load as claimed. Since the applicant has not disclosed that the claimed feature of placing the switch on the negative side of the resistive load solves any problem or is for a particular reason, it appears that the claimed invention would perform equally well with the switch arranged on the positive side of the resistive load.
Claim 4. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 2.
wherein the controller is configured to send a duty cycle signal to the gate switch indicative of a duty cycle to be applied to the gate switch, (Maunoury, [0072] “… flow control is preferably implemented by means of pulse width modulation (PWM). This means that when a particular one of the illustrated connections shall be "closed", the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently.”)
wherein the duty cycle to be applied to the gate switch is equal to a first duration in which the gate switch remains in the on position divided by a total cycle duration of the duty cycle signal, the total cycle duration being the first duration plus a second duration in which the gate switch in is the off position, and (Maunoury, [0072] “…the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently” where the “duty ratio” is the ratio of “on” time over total “on and off” time of a switch.)
wherein the duty cycle signal causes the gate switch to move between the on position and the off position such that the gate switch remains in the on position for the first duration such that the desired amount of the first voltage is directed to the at least one resistive heating element during the first duration. (Maunoury, [0072] “…the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently. Thus, the power flow diverted to the resistive loads can be controlled.”)
Claim 5. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 4, wherein the controller is configured to repeatedly send the duty cycle signal to the gate switch so as to repeatedly move the gate switch between the on and off positions at a first frequency. (Maunoury, [0072] “…the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently.”)
Claim 6. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 4.
wherein the duty cycle to be applied to the gate switch is based on a difference between the first voltage and the first threshold voltage. (Maunoury, [0015] “The system further comprises a power control device coupled to the voltage monitoring device to receive a voltage measurement result as an input for diverting and regulating the excess power to flow to one or more dissipation devices including resistive loads located in or on the aircraft in a controlled manner when it is detected that the voltage exceeds the upper threshold value.”; [0058] “…as indicated at step S42, regulation is performed so as to achieve a situation, wherein the measured voltage drops down below the predetermined threshold.”; and Fig. 2 steps S30, S40, S42, S44 shows a cycle to regulate the power flow to the resistive load based on a measured voltage in the electrical network and the threshold voltage.)
Claim 10. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 6, further comprising:
at least one sensor connected to the DC power bus and configured to measure the first voltage of the DC power bus. (Maunoury, [0048] “The voltage monitoring module and the temperature monitoring module are further coupled to the power control device for communicating the results to the power control device. As indicated above, voltage monitoring is, in principle, possible at every position of the aircraft electrical network, because the voltage can be assumed to be equal throughout the network.”; and “Processing starts at step S10, wherein the voltage of the electrical network of the aircraft is monitored through measurement by the voltage monitoring device.”)
Ziebart and Maunoury are analogous art because they are related to managing and regulating power of an aircraft. Ziebart differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose a sensor connected to the electrical network of the aircraft in order to measure or monitor overvoltage of the voltage received from the electrical generators, which corresponds to the claimed first voltage of the DC power bus. However, Maunoury discloses voltage monitoring for the aircraft electrical network. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the electrical network of Ziebart with the voltage monitoring devices as taught by Maunoury. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to protect the aircraft electrical network from overvoltages that may occur during operation (see Maunoury, Abstract).
Claim 11. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 1, further comprising:
at least one additional resistive heating element electrically connected across the at least one DC power bus and arranged within a further component of the aircraft separate from the at least one wing. (Maunoury, [0022] “More specifically, this may be realized by placing the resistive loads of the dissipation devices in the air ducts of the associated electrical propulsion engines. Alternatively, the dissipation devices (resistive loads) could be implemented on the wing of the aircraft. Both implementations get the benefit of the engine airflow or the aircraft airflow as cooling medium” where the engine airduct corresponds with the claimed further component of the aircraft separate from at least one wing; and Fig. 5A shows each electrical resistance dissipation device is connected in parallel with one common power source.)
Claim 12. Ziebart discloses a power distribution system for an aircraft, comprising (Ziebart, Fig. 1 is a block diagram of an aircraft 100, including a power distribution system 112.)
a power supply circuit including at least one DC power bus having a first voltage and (Ziebart, [0019] “The power distribution system 112 converts the electricity received from the electrical generators 122 into electricity usable by components of the systems 114 of the aircraft 100. For example, the power distribution system 112 converts a first portion of the electricity received from the electrical generators 122 into 3-phase alternating current (AC) electricity associated with a first voltage and a second portion of the electricity received from the electrical generators 122 into direct current (DC) electricity associated with a second voltage” where the voltage received from the electrical generators as DC electricity corresponds to the claimed first voltage of the DC power bus.)
To perform its function of converting electricity received from an electrical generator into electricity usable by components, such as converting AC electricity to DC electricity, the power distribution system 112 implies the inclusion of a power supply circuit, which is known to one of ordinary skill in the art as a system that converts alternating current (AC) from the main electricity supply into a more stable, direct voltage (DC) output.
Furthermore, the art establishes the power distribution system as being the source of DC electricity usable by the components of many different systems. To perform its function of distributing DC electricity to multiple downstream systems, the power distribution system 112 implies the inclusion of a DC bus or busbar, which is known to one of ordinary skill in the art as a component which conducts and distributes electricity from a source to multiple circuits, such as those present in multiple downstream systems.
at least one electrical resistive element electrically connected with the at least one DC power bus, and (Ziebart, [0002] “As another example, an electrical ice protection system uses electrical heaters to heat particular aircraft surfaces to reduce icing”; and [0003] “The ice protection system also includes a controller configured to, in response to a first determination indicating presence of an icing condition, determine a setpoint temperature for a first location of an outer surface of the wing configured to be heated by a heater of the one or more heaters.”; and [0029] “The heaters 146 are electro-thermal (e.g., resistance) heaters that are conformed, or are conformable, to portions of the aircraft 100 to be heated to prevent unacceptable icing.”)
Ziebart does not explicitly disclose at least one voltage manipulation element configured to selectively adjust an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element, and a controller electrically connected to the at least one voltage manipulation element of the power supply circuit and configured to regulate the first voltage of the DC power bus, the controller programmed to selectively control the at least one voltage manipulation element in response to the first voltage of the DC power bus being greater than a first threshold voltage to vary an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element to cause the at least one resistive heating element to convert the amount of the first voltage into heat and thereby regulate overvoltage of the first voltage of the DC power bus.
a controller electrically connected to the power supply circuit and configured to regulate the first voltage of the DC power bus, (Maunoury, [0072] “… flow control is preferably implemented by means of pulse width modulation (PWM)… Thus, the power flow diverted to the resistive loads can be controlled.”)
the controller being configured to selectively control an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one electrical resistive element in response to the first voltage being greater than a first threshold voltage to vary an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one electrical resistive element to cause the at least one electrical resistive element to regulate overvoltage of the first voltage of the DC power bus. (Maunoury, [0015] “The system comprises a voltage monitoring device for measuring the voltage in the electrical network and detecting whether or not the voltage exceeds a predetermined upper threshold value. The system further comprises a power control device coupled to the voltage monitoring device to receive a voltage measurement result as an input for diverting and regulating the excess power to flow to one or more dissipation devices including resistive loads located in or on the aircraft in a controlled manner when it is detected that the voltage exceeds the upper threshold value. The system further comprises the one or more dissipation devices for transforming electrical power into heat and dissipating the electrical power as thermal power in the resistive loads.”; and Fig. 2 show S20, which dictate what steps to take when measured voltage in the electrical network is greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold voltage.)
Ziebart and Maunoury are analogous art because they are related to managing and regulating power of an aircraft. Ziebart differs from the claimed invention only in that it does not disclose the intentional use of de-icers or heaters to help regulate overvoltage of the aircraft power distribution system using the voltage manipulation elements controlled by a controller. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the controller 142 and components designed to adjust the power supplied to the heaters 146 as taught by Ziebart with the PMW and voltage monitoring device responsible for diverting and regulating excess power above a threshold value towards the dissipation devices which transform electrical power into heat using resistance, as taught by Maunoury. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to “protect the aircraft electrical network from overvoltages that may occur” (see Maunoury, Abstract) such as when there is a failure of network management system that will lead to more systems connected to the same amount of electrical generators, such as electrical propulsion engines that regenerate power, leading to “an excess power flow that cannot be consumed otherwise by components of an aircraft” (see Maunoury, [0004]-[0005]).
Claim 13. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 12, further comprising at least one component of the aircraft, wherein the at least one electrical resistive element is coupled with the at least one component of the aircraft. (Ziebart, Fig. 2 shows one of the slats of the aircraft coupled with a plurality of heaters, which may be electro-thermal heaters (see Ziebart, [0029].)
Claim 14. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 13,
wherein the power supply circuit further includes at least one voltage manipulation element configured to selectively adjust an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element, and wherein the controller is programmed to selectively control the at least one voltage manipulation element in response to the first voltage of the DC power bus being greater than the first threshold voltage. (Maunoury, Fig. 5A shows multiple gates situated between the electrical resistance dissipation devices and the power supply, which controls the amount of voltage each dissipation device receives from electrical generators according to the steps shown in Fig. 2, particularly S20.)
Ziebart and Maunoury are analogous art because they are related to managing and regulating power of an aircraft. The power distribution system and power supply circuit taught by Ziebart is functionally equivalent to the electrical network taught by Maunoury in that they both receive power from electrical generators, resulting in a “first voltage” of the system. Ziebart differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose a voltage manipulation element configured to adjust the amount of the first voltage directed to at least one heating element. However, Maunoury’s electrical network has been improved similarly as claimed in that it has implemented steps and devices to monitor the voltage of the electrical network as “measured voltage”. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to improve the power distribution system and power supply circuit of Ziebart similarly to Maunoury in order to arrive at the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such an improvement in order to “protect the aircraft electrical network from overvoltages that may occur” (see Maunoury, Abstract) such as when there is a failure of network management system that will lead to more systems connected to the same amount of electrical generators, such as electrical propulsion engines that regenerate power, leading to “an excess power flow that cannot be consumed otherwise by components of an aircraft” (see Maunoury, [0004]-[0005]).
Claim 15. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 14,
wherein the at least one voltage manipulation element is connected across the DC power bus and is a gate switch configured to be arranged in an on position and an off position, and (Maunoury, Fig. 5A shows an electrical diagram illustrating the electrical connections between the power source and dissipation devices. The decentralized switches that control the power to the electrical resistance dissipation devices are in parallel.)
wherein the controller is configured to selectively control the gate switch to the on and off positions. (Maunoury, [0072] “… that flow control is preferably implemented by means of pulse width modulation (PWM). This means that when a particular one of the illustrated connections shall be "closed", the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently. Thus, the power flow diverted to the resistive loads can be controlled.”)
Claim 16. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 15,
wherein the controller is configured to send a duty cycle signal to the gate switch indicative of a duty cycle to be applied to the gate switch, (Maunoury, [0072] “… flow control is preferably implemented by means of pulse width modulation (PWM). This means that when a particular one of the illustrated connections shall be "closed", the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently.”)
wherein the duty cycle to be applied to the gate switch is equal to a first duration in which the gate switch remains in the on position divided by a total cycle duration of the duty cycle signal, the total cycle duration being the first duration plus a second duration in which the gate switch in is the off position, and (Maunoury, [0072] “…the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently” where the “duty ratio” is the ratio of “on” time over total “on and off” time of a switch.)
wherein the duty cycle signal causes the gate switch to move between the on position and the off position such that the gate switch remains in the on position for the first duration such that the desired amount of the first voltage is directed to the at least one resistive heating element during the first duration. (Maunoury, [0072] “…the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently. Thus, the power flow diverted to the resistive loads can be controlled.”)
Claim 17. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 16,
wherein the duty cycle to be applied to the gate switch is based on a difference between the first voltage and the first threshold voltage. (Maunoury, [0072] “…the power control is achieved by opening and closing the respective power control switches in an alternating manner with a predetermined frequency (duty ratio) rather than having it closed permanently.”)
Claim 18. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 17,
wherein the first duration in which the gate switch remains in the on position of the duty cycle to be applied to the gate switch is directly proportional to the difference between the first voltage and the first threshold voltage. (Maunoury, [0063] “As can be seen therefrom, power dissipation starts at a time when the threshold is reached from below and stops at the time when the measured voltage drops back down below the threshold.”)
Claim 19. The power distribution system of claim 18,
wherein the at least one resistive heating element includes a plurality of resistive heating elements arranged within the at least one component, and (Ziebart, Fig. 2 shows a slat of a wing with multiple heater zones; and [0029] “The heaters 146 are electro-thermal (e.g., resistance) heaters that are conformed, or are conformable, to portions of the aircraft 100 to be heated to prevent unacceptable icing.”)
wherein each resistive heating element of the plurality of resistive heating elements includes a corresponding gate switch electrically connected thereto and configured to adjust an amount of the first voltage that flows to the corresponding resistive heating element. (Maunoury, Fig. 5A shows each electrical resistance dissipation device has a corresponding gate voltage control switch to control the electrical flow to the dissipation device.)
Claim 20. A method comprising: providing at least one wing of an aircraft, (Ziebart, Fig. 1 is a block diagram of an aircraft 100, including a power distribution system 112 and wings 106.)
providing a power supply circuit, including providing at least one DC power bus having a first voltage, (Ziebart, [0019] “The power distribution system 112 converts the electricity received from the electrical generators 122 into electricity usable by components of the systems 114 of the aircraft 100. For example, the power distribution system 112 converts a first portion of the electricity received from the electrical generators 122 into 3-phase alternating current (AC) electricity associated with a first voltage and a second portion of the electricity received from the electrical generators 122 into direct current (DC) electricity associated with a second voltage” where the voltage received from the electrical generators as DC electricity corresponds to the claimed first voltage of the DC power bus.)
To perform its function of converting electricity received from an electrical generator into electricity usable by components, such as converting AC electricity to DC electricity, the power distribution system 112 implies the inclusion of a power supply circuit, which is known to one of ordinary skill in the art as a system that converts alternating current (AC) from the main electricity supply into a more stable, direct voltage (DC) output.
Furthermore, the art establishes the power distribution system as being the source of DC electricity usable by the components of many different systems. To perform its function of distributing DC electricity to multiple downstream systems, the power distribution system 112 implies the inclusion of a DC bus or busbar, which is known to one of ordinary skill in the art as a component which conducts and distributes electricity from a source to multiple circuits, such as those present in multiple downstream systems.
electrically connecting at least one resistive heating element with the at least one DC power bus, (Ziebart, Fig. 1 shows the heating elements 145 part of the primary systems 128 are connected to the power distribution system 112; and [0029] “The heaters 146 are electro-thermal (e.g., resistance) heaters that are conformed, or are conformable, to portions of the aircraft 100 to be heated to prevent unacceptable icing.”)
coupling the at least one resistive heating element with the at least one wing of the aircraft, and (Ziebart, Fig. 2 shows a slat of the wing of the aircraft and a plurality of heaters.)
Ziebart does not explicitly disclose arranging at least one voltage manipulation element in the power supply circuit that is configured to selectively adjust an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element, and electrically connecting a controller to the at least one voltage manipulation element of the power supply circuit the controller being configured to regulate the first voltage of the DC power bus, the controller being programmed to selectively control the at least one voltage manipulation element in response to the first voltage of the DC power bus being greater than a first threshold voltage to vary an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element to cause the at least one resistive heating element to convert the amount of the first voltage into heat and thereby regulate overvoltage of the first voltage of the DC power bus.
arranging at least one voltage manipulation element in the power supply circuit that is configured to selectively adjust an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element, and (Maunoury, Fig. 5A shows switches that control the voltage the electrical resistors receive in a decentralized power control system, configured to adjust voltage based on temperature input, shown as a dotted line labeled “T*” and overvoltage of the electrical network (see steps in Maunoury, Fig. 2).)
electrically connecting a controller to the at least one voltage manipulation element of the power supply circuit, the controller being configured to regulate the first voltage of the DC power bus, (Maunoury, [0072] “… flow control is preferably implemented by means of pulse width modulation (PWM)… Thus, the power flow diverted to the resistive loads can be controlled.”)
the controller being programmed to selectively control the at least one voltage manipulation element in response to the first voltage of the DC power bus being greater than a first threshold voltage to vary an amount of the first voltage that is directed to the at least one resistive heating element to cause the at least one resistive heating element to convert the amount of the first voltage into heat and thereby regulate overvoltage of the first voltage of the DC power bus. (Maunoury, [0015] “The system comprises a voltage monitoring device for measuring the voltage in the electrical network and detecting whether or not the voltage exceeds a predetermined upper threshold value. The system further comprises a power control device coupled to the voltage monitoring device to receive a voltage measurement result as an input for diverting and regulating the excess power to flow to one or more dissipation devices including resistive loads located in or on the aircraft in a controlled manner when it is detected that the voltage exceeds the upper threshold value. The system further comprises the one or more dissipation devices for transforming electrical power into heat and dissipating the electrical power as thermal power in the resistive loads.”; and Fig. 2 show S20, which dictate what steps to take when measured voltage in the electrical network is greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold voltage.)
Ziebart and Maunoury are analogous art because they are related to managing and regulating power of an aircraft. Ziebart differs from the claimed invention only in that it does not disclose the intentional use of de-icers or heaters to help regulate overvoltage of the aircraft power distribution system using the voltage manipulation elements controlled by a controller. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the controller 142 and components designed to adjust the power supplied to the heaters 146 as taught by Ziebart with the PMW and voltage monitoring device responsible for diverting and regulating excess power above a threshold value towards the dissipation devices which transform electrical power into heat using resistance, as taught by Maunoury. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to “protect the aircraft electrical network from overvoltages that may occur” (see Maunoury, Abstract) such as when there is a failure of network management system that will lead to more systems connected to the same amount of electrical generators, such as electrical propulsion engines that regenerate power, leading to “an excess power flow that cannot be consumed otherwise by components of an aircraft” (see Maunoury, [0004]-[0005]).
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ziebart et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 20230202660 A1, in further view of Maunoury, EP Patent Application Publication No. 4134260 A1 and in further view of Rozman, US Patent Application Publication No. 20200076340 A1.
Claim 7. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 6.
Modified Ziebart does not explicitly disclose wherein the first duration in which the gate switch remains in the on position of the duty cycle to be applied to the gate switch is directly proportional to the difference between the first voltage and the first threshold voltage.
Rozman teaches wherein the first duration in which the gate switch remains in the on position of the duty cycle to be applied to the gate switch is directly proportional to the difference between the first voltage and the first threshold voltage. (Rozman, [0017] “According to any prior disclosed embodiment of a unit, a duty cycle of the PWM signal is proportional to a difference between the feedback voltage and the reference voltage.”)
Ziebart, Maunoury and Rozman are analogous art because they are related to managing and regulating power of an aircraft. Modified Ziebart differs than the claimed invention only in that it does not explicitly disclose the program that operates the gate switch. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the PWM control of Maunoury with the proportional duty cycle control taught by Rozman. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination because comparing the feedback voltage to the reference voltage allows the controller to control the switches even when the load is variable, leading to stable voltage regulation of the electrical network (see Rozman, [0044]). This is simply the application of a known technique to a known piece of art ready for improvement (see MPEP 2143 C).
Claim 8. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 7.
wherein the at least one resistive heating element includes a plurality of resistive heating elements arranged within the at least one wing, and (Ziebart, Fig. 2 shows a slat of a wing with multiple heater zones; and [0024] “The heaters 146 are electro-thermal (e.g., resistance) heaters that are conformed, or are conformable, to portions of the aircraft 100 to be heated to prevent unacceptable icing.”)
wherein each resistive heating element of the plurality of resistive heating elements includes a corresponding gate switch electrically connected thereto and configured to adjust an amount of the first voltage that flows to the corresponding resistive heating element. (Maunoury, Fig. 5A shows each electrical resistance dissipation device has a corresponding gate voltage control switch to control the electrical flow to the dissipation device.)
Claim 9. Modified Ziebart discloses the power distribution system of claim 8,
wherein the plurality of resistive heating elements include at least one group of at least two resistors arranged in parallel. (Maunoury, Fig. 5A shows the electrical resistance dissipation devices arranged in parallel between each wing.)
Ziebart and Maunoury are analogous art because they are related to managing and regulating power of an aircraft. Ziebart differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose the plurality of heaters used in the wings as being arranged in parallel. However, Maunoury shows control of multiple heat generating dissipation devices arranged in parallel connected to a common power source. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the arrangement of the heaters in each wing as taught by Ziebart with the parallel arrangement used to control multiple dissipation devices as taught by Maunoury. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to proper and reliable operation as it is desirable for the resistive loads to be distributed rather than centralized in a single resistive load for redundancy, enabling the system to “dissipate more excess power in the resistive loads that are better cooled down” and allowing the system to “be able to stop supply power to any overheated resistive load and direct the excess power flow to the others” (see Maunoury, [0038]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRYSTENE NHELLE B MACEDA whose telephone number is (571)272-2380. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30a-5:00p.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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.
/K.B.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/JUSTIN C DODSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761