DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . in the amendment of 1/14/2026 claims 1-10 were amended and claims 11-13 were added as new claims. Therefore, Claims 1-13 are still pending in this Application.
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Applicant’s argument/remarks, on pages 8-13, with respect to rejections to claims 1-10 under 35 USC § 103(a) have been fully considered and they are respectfully unpersuasive. Therefore, rejections to the claims have been maintained.
On page 9, the Applicant argues that:
“1. Bignucolo's battery adjustment setpoint is not "calculated on the basis of said total power". These arguments are unpersuasive because Bignucolo was not cited to teach this limitation.
While Bignucolo calculates a difference in power (delta power) in the system which is difference in power in the system from generated power of active hydro power plants, and desired target power in the system Bignucolo seems to use the battery for second approach or use and determines the BESS setpoint related to the detected frequency, wherein the frequency change is caused by a power difference cause by a generation surplus (see page 2, par. 3 generation surplus is power generated is generated is greater than an overall target power/needed power). However, the secondary reference Haj-Maharsi clearly teaches supplying a battery power adjustment setpoint to the local controller for the battery calculated on the basis of said total power produced by the set of power plants (see Fig. 2 central control 36 obtains the total power; also see [0081] “the Power Plant Controller (PPC) determines the power output from the one or more wind turbines 12 P(wtg), and in Step S6 the PPC determines whether this power output is sufficient to meet the power requirement that the power generation system 10 must supply to the grid 18. If it is not, then in step S8, the PPC 36 sends a signal to the ESS 22 instructing it to increase its power reference and output more power (see equation 1 above) so that any shortfall is met”).
The battery in the current application is used to compensate for frequency deviation and in addition to compensate for fluctuation in the output of the hydro power plant. However, claim 1 is directed to use the battery to provide power to compensate for fluctuation in the output of the hydro power plant with respect to a desired output.
It was very well known to use batteries for a plurality of conditions including: • • Grid and/or Island operation
• • Decentralized energy generation
• • Integration of Decentralized Renewable Energies
• • Control of different renewable energy sources
• • Control of Battery Systems (BMS Battery Management System)
• • Consumption load management peak load smoothing
• • Network Services, Voltage Frequency Keeping Reactive Power
Compensation
• • pos. neg., second control power (SRL), minute control power (MRL)
• • Seamless Power Supply
• • Black startability
• • Balancing of Power Generation, Peak Smoothing
• • Control of reactive and apparent power, flicker compensation
• • Mobile and stationary applications as required
• • Interfaces for Multiple EEQ (Renewable Energy Sources) ( DE102016008666A1 and more citations in the conclusion)
On page 11, the Applicant further argues that:
“2. Bignucolo does not disclose modifying the control of the battery by the local controller so as to compensate for a variation in said total power relative to an overall target power for the set of hydroelectric power plants as a direct consequence of the above, in Bignucolo the battery power adjustment is made only to account for the connection or disconnection of individual hydro unit…Any inaccuracy in the hydro units' power response, which is inherent in older hydroelectric plants, is not corrected, and therefore propagates into the total hybrid system output”. These arguments are not persuasive.
The argued limitation is an intended use of the adjustment of the battery. Also, compensating a variation of power generated and an overall target is broad, the overall target power is a broad term that can represent a target consumption/load in the system, wherein the variation can be caused by a frequency deviation caused by an increase in load/consumption, losses in the system for weather related variables, loss a of hydro plant at any time (which is the case of Bignucolo) or hydro plant conditions. The original disclosure clearly states that the variation can be caused in frequency variation in the system (see 0088-0089). However, the secondary reference Haj-Maharsi et al (US 20140316592) had been provided that clearly uses a battery to compensate in mismatch between a target desired power and power generated by a group of power plants.
On page 11, the Applicant further argues that:
“3. Bignucolo does not disclose modifying the control of the battery by the local controller in a closed-loop control over power of hydroelectric origin so as to compensate for real-time power fluctuations from the set of hydroelectric power plants. Thus, Bignucolo fails to disclose or even suggest the claimed feature of using the battery to compensate for variations in total hydro output relative to an overall hydro target”. These arguments are unpersuasive.
These arguments 3 are similar to arguments 1 and 2, and same rationale applies herein.
On page 12, the Applicant further argues that:
“Notwithstanding above the outstanding Office Action reliance on the combination of Bignucolo and Haj-Maharsi fails to account for the specific technical problem of "mechanical lag" and the inaccurate power response inherent to hydroelectric turbines.
While Haj-Maharsi concerns wind power plants, wind generation technology does not possess the significant mechanical inertia or hydraulic transients, such as the "opposite sign" power variations mentioned in Bignucolo, that characterize hydroelectric origin. Furthermore, the limitation. Furthermore, the limitation "closed-loop control over power of hydroelectric origin" is not a mere optimization of power dispatch to fill a "shortfall" as taught in Haj-Maharsi, but a specialized corrective loop designed to "dampen" or "mask" these hydraulic transients in real-time. Haj-Maharsi does not teach adjusting battery power setpoint”.
“Furthermore, the Examiner's combination fails to teach a centralized controller that monitors total hydroelectric power specifically to adjust a battery setpoint in a closed-loop fashion to ensure a precise aggregate response”. These arguments are unpersuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “fails to account for the specific technical problem of "mechanical lag" and the inaccurate power response inherent to hydroelectric turbines”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Also, Haj-Maharsi was not cited to teach hydro plants, Haj-Maharsi was used to teach a function of using a central controller to account for detecting a difference based on total power produced by a power plant and an overall target power, and based on the difference, control the setpoints of a battery to provide/reduce power to stabilize the difference. The combination of Bignucolo and Haj-Maharsi as a whole was cited to teach the limitations of claims 1-10
With respect to the third argument, Haj-Maharsi clearly teaches a central controller (Fig. 2 36), controlling a battery in real time in a closed loop manner to provide power to compensate for any deviation or real time power fluctuation of the plant (see the algorithm of Fig. 4 power output of the plant is constantly checked and if a variation occurred of difference is found the system uses the battery for said fluctuation; closed loop meaning providing power aggregated to the output of the power plant to meet the desired overall target power).
With respect to arguments to new introduced claims 11-13 directed to new amendments/claims, these arguments are unpersuasive at this moment because these claims were not in the previous office action.
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) 1-6, 8-9 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bignucolo et al (“Integration of Lithium-Ion Battery Storage Systems in Hydroelectric Plants for Supplying Primary Control Reserve”) in view Haj-Maharsi et al (US 20140316592).
As per claim 1, Bignucolo teaches a method, implemented by a centralized controller, for controlling a virtual electric power plant connected to the power grid (see Fig. 4 and Fig. 7), the virtual power plant comprising at least one battery and a set of hydroelectric power plants (see Fig. 4 the system comprises a least one battery or BESS and set of hydroelectric units; also, see Fig. 7), the battery being controlled by a local controller configured to perform primary frequency control of the power grid (see Fig. 4 BESS controller; also, see Fig. 5 BESS controller), each hydroelectric power plant being controlled by a corresponding local controller (see Fig. 4 and Fig. 6 local hydroelectric controller, and see page 11 “...independent controller regulate the hydroelectric units…”), the method comprising:
by at least one measurement, obtaining a total power produced by the set of hydroelectric power plants at a given time (see page 10 last para. “The internal scheme of the block Hydroelectric Controller in Figure 4 is detailed in Figure 6. On the left-hand side, the required upward power contribution Pru is computed knowing the state of the hydroelectric units Ox and their rated power Prix (x = 1,…, U), according to (2). The available power Pth is computed as the sum of the power availabilities Pth,x of each xth unit…”; also, see equation 3 ),
obtaining a measurement of a frequency of the power grid at the given time (see Fig. 3 frequency measurement ft),
supplying a battery power adjustment setpoint to the local controller for the battery (see Fig. 3 the BESS setpoint will depend to a change of power detected/calculated), (see Fig. 3 required power delta.P), said battery power adjustment setpoint being intended to modify the control of the battery by the local controller in a closed-loop control over power of hydroelectric origin so as to compensate for real-time power fluctuations from the set of hydroelectric power plants relative to an overall target power for the set of hydroelectric power plants (This is an intended use for the Battery setpoint wherein any change to the BESS will compensate for a variation in a desired target and VPP/hydro plant production. For instance, any variation/difference/delta in the power grid is caused by a difference in power generation and load/consumption of the system. see page 2, pars. 1 and 3 “the overall system inertia is reduced, which means the electrical power system is more prone to higher frequency/voltage perturbations in case of loads or generation sudden variations, with possible consequences for the overall system reliability… In addition…consequent frequency perturbations. Considering that a frequency increase is due to a generation surplus, PCR operates within seconds to correct the power plant injections and contain the frequency oscillation width. Frequency restoration is later attained thanks to secondary and…”, thus, generation surplus is power generated is generated is greater than an overall target power/needed power For instance, see Fig. 3 the BESS setpoint will depend to a change of power detected/calculated; also, see page 8 paragraphs 2-4 “In case the storage unit is able to completely provide the upward reserve power, the output power reference of the hydroelectric part PH,ref,t is equal to the available primary source Pth,t, i.e., the generators operate without modulation. Otherwise, both the BESS and the hydroelectric section partially contribute to the upward reserve power, depending on PMD,t. Therefore, hydroelectric governors are set with an overall reference power PH,ref,t evaluated as in Equation (8): PH,re f ,t = Pth,t PRu,t + PMD,t. (8)…”; also, see pages 9-10 and Bess controller which receives a setpoint of power required and modifies the output of the battery by outputting its contribution Pmd (mode generation) or Pmq (absorption of energy during a frequency variation); see page 10 “…The BESS is required to firstly contribute to the PCR in case a frequency variation exceeding the allowed dead-band is measured by the PLL. Figure 5 defines the internal scheme of the block BESS Controller. The overall plant required reserve ΔP is compared with the effective BESS active power exchange PBESSm. A Proportional-Integral (PI) controller, equipped with an anti-windup internal loop, computes the direct current set-point Id,ref, whereas the quadrature current reference signal Iq,ref is set to zero since no reactive power contribution of the storage unit in supplying the voltage regulation is here considered. The following block drives the power electronic converter (block BESS PWM Inverter in Figure 4) via the pulse width modulation factors; also, see page 19 par. 3 “Finally, the BESS regulating action perfectly follows the frequency perturbation trend, whereas requiring reserve power to the hydroelectric units causes output power slow fluctuations depending on the hydraulic inertia…”), and
supplying, to at least one local controller of a hydroelectric power plant, at least one power adjustment setpoint for said hydroelectric power plant calculated on the basis of said frequency measurement (see Fig. 3 power requirement at any moment is calculated based on the frequency measurement ), the power adjustment setpoint for said hydroelectric power plant being intended to cause a variation in a power produced by said hydroelectric power plant in accordance with a management strategy for the battery (see Fig. 3, and see Fig. 4 delta.P is provided to Hydro local controller; and see Fig. 6 the setpoint causes a variation if power produces via P,mec-I, Pmec,u).
While Bignucolo clearly teaches that a difference in power is determined in the system which is based/calculated based on the number of hydro plants active in a system (see Fig. 4 and Fig. 3 delta.P), Bignucolo does not explicitly teach a battery power adjustment setpoint to the local controller for the battery calculated on the basis of said total power produced by the set of hydroelectric power plants.
However, Haj Maharsi teaches a system comprising obtaining measured total power produced by a set of power plants, supplying a battery power adjustment setpoint to the local controller for the battery calculated on the basis of said total power produced by the set of power plants, (see Fig. 2 central control 36 obtains the total power; also see [0081] “the Power Plant Controller (PPC) determines the power output from the one or more wind turbines 12 P(wtg), and in Step S6 the PPC determines whether this power output is sufficient to meet the power requirement that the power generation system 10 must supply to the grid 18. If it is not, then in step S8, the PPC 36 sends a signal to the ESS 22 instructing it to increase its power reference and output more power (see equation 1 above) so that any shortfall is met”), said battery power adjustment setpoint being intended to modify the control of the battery by the local controller in a closed-loop control over power of the plant origin so as to compensate for real-time power fluctuations from the set of power plants relative to an overall target power for the set of power plants (see [0081] “…If it is not, then in step S8, the PPC 36 sends a signal to the ESS 22 instructing it to increase its power reference and output more power (see equation 1 above) so that any shortfall is met…”; also, see the algorithm of Fig. 4 power output of the plants is constantly checked and if a variation occurred of difference is found the central controller 36 uses the battery to compensate said fluctuation in a real time, see [0037 and [0091] “…The power plant controller operates in real time determining one or more power characteristics of the power generation system….” ; also, closed loop meaning the system provides power from the battery which is aggregated to the output of the power plant to meet the desired overall target power. In the broadest reasonable interpretation, a closed loop is a system, process, or mechanism that uses feedback to regulate itself…or A closed-loop control system, or feedback control system, uses sensors to continuously monitor its output and automatically adjusts operations to match a desired set point.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to which said subject matter pertains to have modified Bignucolo’s invention to include obtaining measured total power produced by a set of power plants, supplying a battery power adjustment setpoint to the local controller for the battery calculated on the basis of said total power produced by the set of power plants, said battery power adjustment setpoint being intended to modify the control of the battery by the local controller in a closed-loop control over power of the plant origin so as to compensate for real-time power fluctuations from the set of power plants relative to an overall target power for the set of power plants as taught by Haj-Maharsi in order to improve the stability of the system by compensating any mismatch in power generated and power desired at any time (see [0082]) and apply these functions to the VPP plant including hydroelectric plants and the battery system of Bignucolo.
As per claim 2, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising: Bignucolo further teaches obtaining a value for the power-frequency characteristic of the virtual power plant calculated on the basis of an estimate of an amount of available primary frequency reserve of the virtual power plant (see Fig. 2 Pru +=R x Prs , wherein R is the power-frequency characteristic; also, see page 6 “…The PCR availability forces the generation plants to reduce their effective output from the theoretical primary source availability, at least R times the overall rated power of operating units…So, the required upward reserve power PRu,t is evaluated as in Equation (2), considering the overall rated power effectively in service Prs,t, whereas the plant output power Pt is computed as the theoretical availability, reduced by the required upward reserve…”; also, see page 8-9 and Figs. 3-4).
As per claim 3, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method according to claim 1, Bignucolo further teaches wherein the power adjustment setpoint supplied to the local controller of a hydroelectric power plant is calculated by means of a calculation formula selected according to at least one predefined criterion relating to the frequency measurement (see Fig. 3 the setpoints of each hydro units depends on the sign or direction of the frequency measurements and the formula of Ph,t; also, see page 8, the setpoint is unchanged when the battery can provide all of the power for a frequency variation, and see equation 8; also, see Fig. 4 and page 9 “…required to the overall plant ΔP, according to the droop curve (Figure 2) and taking into account which of the hydroelectric units are effectively in operation (Ox, with x = 1,…, U)…”; also, see Fig. 6 and see page 11).
As per claim 4, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method according to claim 3, Bignucolo further teaches wherein at least one predefined criterion is a result of a comparison between, on the one hand, a deviation between the frequency measurement and a nominal frequency value, and on the other hand a predefined threshold (see Fig. 2 page 5 deviation delta.F and thresholds).
As per claim 5, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method according to claim 1, Bignucolo further teaches further comprising: obtaining, from the local controller of each hydroelectric power plant, an individualized measurement of the power produced by said hydroelectric power plant at the given time, and calculating the total power produced by the set of hydroelectric power plants at the given time as being the sum of said individualized measurements of power at the given time (see pages 6 last three paragraphs “For each time instant, the plant theoretical power production Pth,t is evaluated according to the known data on primary source availability. Parameter Ox,t defines the state of the xth generation unit at instant t (0 means unit out of service, 1 means unit in operation) and Prx is the rated power of the xth generating unit…; also, see pages 9-11 Fig 4; also, see page 10 “hydroelectric units Ox and their rated power Prx (x = 1,…, U), according to (2). The available power Pth is computed as the sum of the power availabilities Pth,x of each xth unit….”). Haj-Maharsi also teaches calculating the total power produced by the set of power plants at the given time as being the sum of said individualized measurements of power at the given time (see [0081]).
As per claim 6, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method according to claim 1, Bignucolo further teaches wherein: the power adjustment setpoint supplied to the local controller of a hydroelectric power plant is calculated relative to a base power of said hydroelectric power plant, said base power being calculated on the basis of a criterion that is a function of a history of time-stamped individualized measurements of power produced by said hydroelectric power plant and of a history of power adjustment setpoints previously supplied to the local controller of said hydroelectric power plant (see page 6, section 3.1 Base Case Hydroelectric Plant; “Plant data, primary source availability and characteristics of each generating unit are fully available since the base case is evaluated on a real power station. Grid frequency evolution is known from recorded values or making use of web-portal databases (e.g., [35]), with 1 s time resolution. The produced energy selling value V ( /MWh) is supposed to be known, depending on the market price evolution or considering specific incentives for the RES exploitation. The analysis lasts one year, in order to take into account the seasonal variations of both the primary source availability and the market price. Evaluations are made second by second, so the parameter t varies between 1 and tM (tM = 31.536 106). For each time instant, the plant theoretical power production Pth,t is evaluated according to the known data on primary source availability. Parameter Ox,t defines the state of the xth generation unit at instant t (0 means unit out of service, 1 means unit in operation) and Prx is the rated power of the xth generating unit. So, the required upward reserve power PRu,t is evaluated as in Equation (2)…” ; also, see page 10, last paragraph, page 11 and Fig 6 and page 12-13, Fig 8).
As per claim 8, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method according to claim 1, Bignucolo further teaches further comprising: obtaining a measurement of a state of charge of the battery (see page 7, “…At the same time, depending on the state of charge evaluated in the previous time instant SoCt1 and taking into account the BESS discharging efficiency D and charging efficiency C, the storage unit maximum contributions in discharge PMD,t and in charge PMC,t are assessed according to (6) and (7) respectively. The SoC admitted range (SoCmin–SoCmax) and the time instant duration Dt are considered…”), and wherein the power setpoint of the battery is further calculated on the basis of said measurement of the state of charge so as to support maintaining, or returning, the state of charge of the battery to within a predefined range (see page 7 and page 10 “…the BESS maximum power contribution in discharge PMD and in charge PMC are directly evaluated”, and see Fig. 5 the setpoint is determined based on the state of charge).
As to claim 9, this claim is the central controller/apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons mutatis mutandis (see Fig. 4 a complete control system involving several local controllers and main controller).
As per claim 12, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method according to claim 1, Bignucolo further teaches wherein the battery power adjustment setpoint includes a power component calculated on a basis of a current state of charge of the battery to prevent the battery from charging or discharging beyond specific thresholds (see page 3 par. 3 “hybrid solution, i.e., installing a BESS in parallel to the traditional plant, allows for increased energy production since, if the storage unit is not operating close to its minimum State of Charge (SoC), upward reserve can be supplied by
the storage system and the hydroelectric part of the plant operates closer to its maximum available power”; also, see page 7 par. 1 and Fig. 3 “…For each time instant t, the required upward reserve power PRu,t is computed according to (2). At the same time, depending on the state of charge evaluated in the previous time instant SoCt-1 and taking into account the BESS discharging efficiency nD and charging efficiency nC, the storage unit maximum contributions in discharge PMD,t and in charge PMC,t are assessed according to (6) and (7) respectively. The SoC admitted range (SoCmin–SoCmax) and the time instant duration
Dt are considered. The BESS rated energy is named EBESS, whereas tDmin and tCmin are the minimum allowed discharging time and charging time. These parameters could be related to SoCt1 according to the battery system specifications. For the first instant evaluation (t = 1), the initial state of charge
SoC0 has to be provided as input to the procedure). -Haj-Maharsi also teaches wherein the battery power adjustment setpoint includes a power component calculated on a basis of a current state of charge of the battery to prevent the battery from charging or discharging beyond specific thresholds (see Fig. 5 step S30 is about the SOC of the battery; also, see [0041] “..in FIG. 3, the energy storage device 26 comprises a local controller 50 also having an PQ analyser for measuring in real time the operational characteristics of the energy storage device 26, such as active P(ess) and reactive Q(ess) power, State of Charge (SoC) and State of Health (SoH)…”; also, see Fig. 4 the algorithm step S2 includes determining the SOC of the battery/ESS system, see [0080-0081] “ The control algorithm begins in step S2. In Step S4, the Power Plant Controller (PPC) reads one or more power inputs from the Energy Storage System 22… these power inputs include the ESS active power reference (P(ess)_ref),… the ESS State of Charge indication (SoC)… If it is not, then in step S8, the PPC 36 sends a signal to the ESS 22 instructing it to increase its power reference and output more power (see equation 1 above) so that any shortfall is met.”; also, see [0084-0086] and see Fig. 5 steps S30).
As per claim 13, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method according to claim 1, Bignucolo further teaches wherein the at least one power adjustment setpoint is added to an internal power setpoint of the local controller of the hydroelectric power plant calculated independently according to at least one of an incoming hydraulic flow and a reservoir level (see Fig. 6 the at least one power setpoint PH,U is a setpoint derived with respect to a frequency measurement, see the variables used PMC, delta P required primary control reserve derived from frequency in Fig. 4; Ph is a setpoint that is added to the hydro controller setpoint determined based on the current conditions of the hydro plants which depend on water flow, see page 11 “ So, blocks Pilot valve and servomotor and Gate servomotor describe the dynamic behaviors of the pilot and the main valve/servomotor systems respectively. For the xth hydroelectric unit, KS,x is the gate servomotor gain, Tp,x is the pilot servomotor time constant and Tg,x is the gate servomotor time constant. The resulting control signal gx, limited within the admitted range (gmin–gmax), is the gate position of the xth unit.
The block Penstock/turbine describes the linear model of the penstock/turbine system. For each xth unit, the mechanical power reference signal in per unit, pmec,x, is obtained according to the evaluated gate position gx and the hydraulic system dynamic response. The water inertia time constant TW,x is given by Equation (15), so water column time constants T5,x and T6,x are defined as in Equations (16) and (17) [39]: 𝑇𝑊,𝑥=𝑄𝑥 𝐿𝑥𝑔𝑣 𝐴𝑥 𝐻𝑥 (15) 𝑇5,𝑥=𝑃0,𝑥 𝑇𝑊,𝑥 (16) 𝑇6,𝑥= 12 𝑇5,𝑥=𝑃0,𝑥 𝑇𝑊,𝑥2. In the above equations, referring to the xth unit, Qx is the water flow rate in (m3·s−1), Lx is the length of the penstock in (m), gv is the gravity acceleration in (m·s−2), Ax is the penstock cross-sectional area in (m2), Hx is the net hydraulic head in (m) and P0,x is the hydraulic power in steady-state operating conditions, in per unit of the rated value; also, see pages 2-3 “ The CPP controllers modulate linearly the active power output by regulating the plant’s operating conditions (e.g., acting either on the steam valve or on the flow rate regulator, in case of steam-cycle power stations or impoundment hydropower plants, respectively). Usually, since the plant operating conditions cannot change instantly due to mechanical, thermodynamic and/or hydraulic reasons,…”; also, see page 8 par. 1 “In case the storage unit is able to completely provide the upward reserve power, the output power reference of the hydroelectric part PH,ref,t is equal to the available primary source Pth,t, i.e., the generators operate without modulation. Otherwise, both the BESS and the hydroelectric section partially contribute to the upward reserve power, depending on PMD,t. Therefore, hydroelectric governors are set with an overall reference power PH,ref,t evaluated as in Equation”, thus, when the BESS is able to provide the needed power, the hydro plants are controlled according to setpoints calculated independently according to at least one of an incoming hydraulic flow, and when the BESS is not able to provide the whole needed power, a setpoint (power amount) is added to the setpoint of the hydro plant so that the power plant can produce more power when needed).
Claim(s) 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bignucolo et al (“Integration of Lithium-Ion Battery Storage Systems in
Hydroelectric Plants for Supplying Primary Control Reserve”) inn view of Haj-Maharsi et al (US 20140316592) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of HAPPONEN (WO 2017/162910).
As per claim 7, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method according claim 1, Bignucolo further teaches wherein, each hydroelectric power plant of the virtual power plant having its own primary frequency reserve (see Fig. 4 “The required reserve is supplied by both the BESS and the hydroelectric units depending on the storage system operating conditions (priority is assigned to the BESS0; also, see Fig. 3 page 7; also, see page first paragraph “In case the storage unit is able to completely provide the upward reserve power, the output power reference of the hydroelectric part PH,ref,t is equal to the available primary source Pth,t, i.e., the generators operate without modulation. Otherwise, both the BESS and the hydroelectric section partially contribute to the upward reserve power, depending on PMD,t. Therefore, hydroelectric governors are set with an overall reference power PH,ref,t evaluated as in Equation (8)”):
While Bignucolo teaches that priority is given to the BESS (see page 5 fig. 4 “The required reserve is supplied by both the BESS and the hydroelectric units depending on the storage system operating conditions (priority is assigned to the BESS)), But it does not explicitly teach the power adjustment setpoint supplied to the local controller of a given hydroelectric power plant is calculated according to a predefined order of priority for calling upon each of said primary frequency reserves.
HAPPONEN teaches a frequency regulation system comprising a power adjustment setpoint supplied to a local controller of a given hydroelectric power plant is calculated according to a predefined order of priority for calling upon each of said primary frequency reserves (see page 9 pars. 2-3 “…The current frequency regulation control curve 4 1 (see Fig. 2) and the present utility frequency value 42 are read into the central control unit at 43. The task of the control unit 43 is to determinate the share of up regulation reserve and down regulation reserve as described earlier. The unit 44 is to determine which power units (consisting of loads, storages and power generating units), considering their 10 priority, are required to meet the desired up and down regulation reserves… At 44, power units 4 7 are aggregated either to a up regulation reserve or to a down regulation
15 reserve and thus controlled based on the priority of each unit and power impact on the regulation at 45, and on demand forecast and other parameters at 46”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to which said subject matter pertains to have modified Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi’s combination as taught above to include a power adjustment setpoint supplied to a local controller of a given hydroelectric power plant is calculated according to a predefined order of priority for calling upon each of said primary frequency reserves as taught by HAPPONEN in order to assign different setpoint to a plurality of plants based on a priority (see Page 9 pars. 2-3 and page 9 last paragraph to page 10 first paragraph “…priority of a unit. The higher the priority, the more the unit needs or "can afford" to be set to a different status in the next re-aggregation. The units may be re-aggregated once a second…”).
As to claim 10, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches the method and system of claim 1 and 9 above. Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi teaches all of the limitations of claim 10 (see claim 1 and 9 above; also, see Fig. 4 a complete control system involving several local controllers and main controller) and teaches a simulation system for simulating on software the plants and the method of claim 1. However, Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi does not explicitly teach a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a computer program including instructions that, when executed by a processor, causes a centralized controller to control a virtual power plant.
However, HAPPONEN teaches a centralized control computer with associated software, non-transitory memory, which is configured to implement an inventive method and system, to issue control commands over to power units connected to the communication network and capable of being remotely controlled (see page 5 first paragraph; also, see page 19 claim 7 “central control unit comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a set of computer executable instructions for causing the data processing unit to carry out the steps of:…), wherein the system sends setpoints to power plants and a battery system including local controllers (see page 7 last paragraph; also, see page 9 pars. 2-3 “At 44, power units 4 7 are aggregated either to a up regulation reserve or to a down regulation reserve and thus controlled based on the priority of each unit and power impact on the regulation at 45, and on demand forecast and other parameters at 46. These will be explained in more detail later on. Unit aggregation and controlling is continued until the desired ration of up and down regulation is achieved (Fig. 2). Up regulation reserve comprises loads that are switched on, batteries being charged or power production units set to idle.) to performs power/frequency regulation (see page 8 last paragraph “from Fig. 3 that besides software and algorithms which run in the central control system, the implementation may also require a hardware which is located next to the power units, and which can at least perform the commands issued over a smart grid…”; also, see page 19 claim 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to which said subject matter pertains to have modified Bignucolo-Haj-Maharsi’s invention to include a centralized control computer with associated software, non-transitory memory, which is configured to implement an inventive method and system, to issue control commands over to power units connected to the communication network and capable of being remotely controlled, wherein the system sends setpoints to power plants and a battery system including local controllers to perform power/frequency regulation as taught by HAPPONEN in order to control the hydro plants and battery system of Bignucolo by using a software and non-transitory computer readable medium to perform the method of claim power regulation and control, wherein the software and non-transitory computer readable medium could be easily updated and replaced.
Indication of Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 11 recites “wherein the base power for a hydroelectric power plant is kept constant as long as the power adjustment setpoint for that plant is non-zero, and is updated to equal a last recorded power measurement only after the power adjustment setpoint has remained zero for a predetermined period of time”.
The reasons for allowance of Claim 11 are that the prior art of record,
including the reference(s) cited in the rejections or any cited reference not relied upon, neither anticipates, nor renders obvious the recited combination as a whole in combination with the other claimed elements of claim 11.
Claim 11 requires that a base power of the hydro is kept constant (as shown in Fig. 5 curve 6 see [0105) as long as the power adjustment setpoint for that plant is non-zero (In FIG. 5, this case is encountered in the time interval starting at time T1 and ending at time T3), and the base power is updated or changed to equal a last recorded power measurement only after the power adjustment setpoint has remained zero for a predetermined period of time which is depicted after T1 and after T2 (see 0104 …In FIG. 5, this condition is considered satisfied in a first time interval ending at time T1 and in a second time interval starting at time T3. In these two intervals, P.sub.0_hydro (i) is equal to P.sub.mes_i.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon, as cited in PTO form 892, is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhou et al (CN 111463834 A) teaches a VPP plant/system comprising a centralized controller determining and supplying a battery power adjustment setpoint to the local controller for the battery, calculated on the basis of said total power, said battery power adjustment setpoint being intended to modify the control of the battery by the local controller in a closed-loop control over power of hydroelectric origin so as to compensate for real-time power fluctuations from the set of hydroelectric power plants relative to an overall target power for the set of hydroelectric power plants (see page 3 VPP plant; also, see pages 4, 7, and 17 “by receiving the first control information sent by the control center, and adjusting the operation state of the corresponding controllable load or energy storage device according to the first control information, when the preset power supply and actual power supply difference of the virtual power plant, selectively adjusting the controllable load or energy storage device, reducing the capacity requirement of the energy storage device, so as to achieve the effect of reducing the virtual power plant cost.)
ANTRAG AUF NICHTNENNUNG (DE 102016008666) teaches a system comprising a battery system (BESS) to compensate for generation variations in addition to a plurality of scenarios (see [0017 and [0023] “BESS power plants according to claims 1 and 2, characterized in that the BESS power plant is directly applied to large loads (industry and industrial areas with large loads), the distribution networks are relieved without costs for distribution network operators with the following
advantages for the companies: • optimized power purchase • flicker
compensation (voltage peaks and voltage fluctuations) • avoidance of peak loads (load management) • harmonic and reactive power compensation (pure sine wave) • internal distribution network supplies clean power for sensitive electronic devices • lengthening of the life of the devices and of the industrial plants • avoidance of current reference
overshoot”).
Moosvi (EP 3651301) teaches controlling a BESS by supplying setpoints to compensate for a difference in power setpoint and power generated (see [0041).
Markowz et al (US 20140312689) teaches controlling a BESS based on the SOC limits (see [0041).
Kondo et al (US 20100078940) teaches controlling a BESS by supplying setpoints to compensate for a difference in power setpoint and power generated (see claim 5 and 13).
Sakai (US 20120228941) teaches a system comprising the controller 301 performs the charge and discharge of the battery cell 31 in order to compensate for the difference between the target output value and the actual detected power output. In other words, when the actual power output is greater than the target output value, the controller 301 controls the DC-DC converter 33 in order to charge the excess power to the battery cell 31, and when the actual power output is less than the target output value, the controller 301 controls the DC-DC converter 33 in order to discharge the shortfall in power from the battery cell 31 (see [0082]).
Jankel et al (US 20210339646) teaches a power system comprising a hydro plant and battery, wherein the base power generator is the hydro plant. A base power generator provides constant power (0147).
Amevi Acakpovi et al, "Review of Hydropower Plant Models", teaches a hydroelectric plant models, wherein a base power is determined according to equation 5 (see page 35 col 1 P = α OH, QT ∙ QT ∙ OH.. The Peak Base Power method determines the power and energy generated by the entire plant based on the fractions of each timestep operated at peak flow and base flow. The other two methods also determined the maximum operating point of the hydropower plant by considering algorithm based on the best choice of QT and OH at given condition). However, Amevi does not teach the limitations of claim 11.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Examiner respectfully requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist Examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this Office Action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Applicant must also show how the amendments avoid or differentiate from such references or objections. See 37 CFR 1.111 (c).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLVIN LOPEZ ALVAREZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7686 and fax (571) 270-8686. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday from 9:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert Fennema, can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/O. L./
Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ROBERT E FENNEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights