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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 22, it is unclear whether “a maximum valve” refers to the maximum torque correction variable determined in claim 21; or a different maximum value. Moreover, it is unclear whether “an acceleration correction variable” in claim 22 refers to the acceleration correction variable previously claimed in claim 21; or a different variable.
Regarding claim 24, recitation “during the step of determining the torque correction variable in the torque regulation loop, the torque correction variable is selected as the maximum between (i) the temperature correction variable and (ii) an acceleration correction variable determined as a function of the transition transient engine speed set point” is unclear whether “selected as the maximum between (i) … and (ii) …” refers to the previously claimed function determining the torque correction variable in claim 11; and it is also unclear whether “a function of the transition transient engine speed set point” determining the acceleration correction variable in claim 24 refers to the previously claimed function determining the torque correction variable in claim 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 11, 14-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McQuiston 11725594 in view of DJELASSI 20130008171 and Gansler 20190002113.
Regarding claim 11, McQuiston teaches the invention as claimed: A method (Figs. 4-5) for controlling a turbomachine (10, Fig. 2) mounted to an aircraft (col. 1, ll. 20-35) to provide a desired thrust (indicated by desired rotational speed of HP and LP shafts, see Figs. 4-5) for the aircraft, the turbomachine (10, Fig. 2) comprising a fan (12) for directing air flow that is separated into a primary flow (enters 44, see Fig. 4) and a secondary flow (flows through 82, see Fig. 4) positioned upstream of a gas generator (30), said gas generator (30) being flowed by the primary flow and comprising a low pressure compressor (44), a high pressure compressor (34), a combustion chamber (40), a high pressure turbine (36) and a low pressure turbine (42), said low pressure turbine (42) being connected to said low pressure compressor (44) by a low pressure rotating shaft (46) and said high pressure turbine (36) being connected to said high pressure compressor (34) by a high pressure rotating shaft (38), and an electric motor (102B) forming a torque injection device on the high pressure rotating shaft (38, see col. 7, ll. 10-15 and col. 12, ll. 26-41, the electric motor is coupled to the high pressure shaft), the method for controlling the turbomachine to provide the desired thrust for the aircraft (Figs. 4-5) comprising:
a step of determining a fuel flow set point (Wf CMD, Fig. 4) in the combustion chamber (40) of the turbomachine (30) and a torque set point (POWER CMD, Fig. 4) supplied to the electric motor (102B, see col. 7, ll. 10-15 and col. 12, ll. 26-41);
wherein the fuel flow set point (Wf CMD, Fig. 4) is determined by a fuel regulation loop comprising:
a step of determining (in order to obtain the rotational speed command N1 CMD, which is performed per col. 10, ll. 4-10, col. 12, ll. 59-65, and 302 in Fig. 5) a transient engine speed set point (N1 CMD in Fig. 4, and per col. 11, ll. 47-50, the method of controlling the desired thrust may be used during various flight operations, which including steady operation, e.g., cruise in col. 9, ll. 55-60, and acceleration operation condition, see col. 7, ll. 48-60, col. 13, ll. 8-12 and col. 13, l. 64 to col. 14, l. 6, and thus, said N1 CMD includes steady engine speed set point and acceleration engine speed set point),
a step (at 212) of determining a fuel correction variable (a correction value of fuel flow rate determined based on the “ERROR”, which is a difference between the actuate rotation speed and the rotational speed commanded N1 CMD in Fig. 4, see col. 10, ll. 4-12 and ll. 30-40) as a function of the transient engine speed set point (the N1 CMD, which includes steady engine speed set point and acceleration engine speed set point, see col. 7, ll. 48-60, col. 13, ll. 8-12 and col. 13, l. 64 to col. 14, l. 6), and
a step (at 212) of determining the fuel flow set point (Wf CMD, which is a fuel flow command sent fuel delivery system, e.g., fuel valve(s) and/or pump, col. 10, ll. 30-40) as a function of the fuel correction variable (the correction value of fuel flow rate determined based on “ERROR”, which is a difference between the actuate rotation speed and the rotational speed commanded N1 CMD, see Fig. 4 and col. 10, ll. 4-12);
wherein the torque set point (POWER CMD, Fig. 4) is determined by a torque regulation loop comprising:
a step (at 216) of determining a torque correction variable (determined based on the “ERROR”, which is a difference between the actuate rotation speed and the rotational speed commanded N1 CMD in Fig. 4, see col. 10, ll. 4-12 and ll. 30-40) as a function of the transient engine speed set point (the N1 CMD, which includes steady engine speed set point and acceleration engine speed set point, see col. 7, ll. 48-60, col. 13, ll. 8-12 and col. 13, l. 64 to col. 14, l. 6); and
a step of using the torque set point (POWER CMD, Fig. 4) and the fuel flow set point (Wf CMD, Fig. 4) to control thrust of the turbomachine (indicated by desired rotational speed of HP and LP shafts, see Figs. 4-5).
McQuiston does not teach a step of detecting an engine speed transition intention as a function of a difference between a current engine speed and a determined engine speed set point.
However, DJELASSI teaches a method (Fig. 2) of determining a fuel flow set point (WF32C) is determined by a fuel regulation loop (see Fig. 2) comprising: a step (at 9) of detecting an engine speed transition intention (at 9, per [0062-0063] detecting an engine acceleration) as a function of a difference between a current engine speed (N1) and a determined engine speed set point (N1C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston with DJELASSI’s step of detecting the engine speed transition intention as a function of a difference between a current engine speed and a determined engine speed set point in order to detect an engine speed transient intention with a simple and effective manner before varying the engine speed (DJELASSI, [0018]).
McQuiston in view of DJELASSI does not teach a step of determining a temperature correction variable as a function of a turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter and a maximum value of the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter; and a step of determining said torque correction variable as a function of said transient engine speed set point and the temperature correction variable.
However, Gansler teaches a method (method 300 in Figs. 5-6 that is performed by the controller 72 or 500, in Figs. 2 and 6) for controlling a turbomachine (102A, see Fig. 4 that shares same configurations of Fig. 2) to provide a desired thrust duration engine acceleration (see step 302 in Fig. 5 and [0075]) comprising:
a step of determining a temperature correction variable (an amount of electrical power provide to motor 56A determined according to a delta value of the exhaust temperature parameter, see steps 314, 322 and 324, in Fig. 5 and [0082]) as a function of a turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (the measured exhaust temperature parameter, see steps 306 and 314 in Fig. 5 and [0078 and 0082]) and a maximum value of the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (the upper exhaust temperature parameter threshold, see step 314 in Fig. 5 and [0078]); and
a step of determining a torque correction variable (a total amount of electrical power provided to motor 56A, see steps 316-326 in Fig. 5 and [0079, 0082, and 0088]) as a function of the desired thrust for acceleration (an amount of electrical power provide to motor 56A determined based on acceleration requirement, see step 302 in Fig. 5 and [0075]) and the temperature correction variable (the amount of electrical power provide to motor 56A determined according to the delta value of the exhaust temperature parameter, see steps 314, 322, and 324 in Fig. 5 and [0082]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston in view of DJELASSI with Gansler’s method for controlling the turbomachine to provide the desired thrust during acceleration, such that
the method comprising: a step of determining a temperature correction variable as a function of a turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter and a maximum value of the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter, and
the torque set point is determined by a torque regulation loop comprising: a step of determining the torque correction variable as a function the transient engine speed set point, i.e., the acceleration engine speed set point (McQuiston’s N1 CMD of McQuiston’s acceleration operation condition), and the temperature correction variable
in order to maintain the engine operation temperature below the maximum internal temperature thresholds without significantly reducing the maximum amount of thrust and to prevent undesirable and premature wear (Gansler, [0004-0005]).
Regarding claim 14, McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler further teaches - a step of activating a temperature protection control (Gansler’s providing electrical power to motor in step 316-318 in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0078]) by comparing the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (Gansler’s measured exhaust temperature parameter in Gansler’s step 314 in Gansler’s Fig. 5) with the maximum value of the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (Gansler’s upper exhaust temperature parameter threshold in step 314 in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0078]) reduced by a predetermined adjustment threshold (Gansler’s exceeding value of the upper exhaust temperature parameter threshold at taught by Gansler’s [0079]), and - a step of activating the temperature correction variable when the temperature protection control is activated (Gansler’s temperature protection control of providing electrical power to motor in 316-318 of Gansler’s Fig. 5 is only activated after detecting the thermal limit is reached as taught by Gansler’s [0078 and 0088]).
The motivation of the combination is the same with the reason for rejecting claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 15, McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler further teaches during the step of implementing the torque regulation loop (McQuiston’s torque regulation loop comprising McQuiston’s 216 and McQuiston’s 220 in McQuiston’s Fig. 4 further including Gansler’s steps from step 306 to step 328 in Fig. 5, wherein Gansler’s step 328 further including steps 330-342 in Gansler’s Fig. 6), a further step of resetting to zero the torque set point (Gansler’s step 330 in Gansler’s Fig. 6), the step of resetting to zero the torque set point being inhibited in case of activation of a temperature protection control (because Gansler’s providing electrical power to motor in step 316 is necessary as taught by Gansler’s [0078 and 0088]).
The motivation of the combination is the same with the reason for rejecting claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 17, McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler further teaches a step of simple integration (Gansler’s [0090]) of the torque correction variable in order to determine the torque set point (the total amount of electrical power provided to motor is determined according to various requirements, see Gansler’s steps 316-326 in Gansler’s Fig. 5, Gansler’s steps 336 and 338 in Fig. 6, and Gansler’s [0079, 0082, and 0088]).
The motivation of the combination is the same with the reason for rejecting claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 18, McQuiston further teaches a computer program (200 in Fig. 5) comprising instructions for executing the steps of the control method when said computer program is executed by a computer (118, col. 8, ll. 10-25 and col. 7, ll. 40-50).
Regarding claim 19, McQuiston further teaches an electronic control unit (116) for the turbomachine comprising a memory having the computer program (col. 8, ll. 10-25 and col. 7, ll. 40-50).
Regarding claim 20, McQuiston further teaches the turbomachine (10) comprising the electronic control unit (116).
Claims 13 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McQuiston 11725594 in view of DJELASSI 20130008171 and Gansler 20190002113, and in further view of Tony Kuphaldt – NPL - Lessons in Industrial Instrumentation, refer as Kuphaldt thereafter, and Takeda 20100319356.
Regarding claim 13, McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler further teaches wherein, during the step of determining the torque correction variable (McQuiston’s torque regulation loop comprising McQuiston’s 216 in McQuiston’s Fig. 4 further including Gansler’s steps from step 306 to step 328 in Fig. 5, wherein Gansler’s step 328 further including steps 330-342 in Gansler’s Fig. 6), determining the temperature correction variable (Gansler’s amount of electrical power provide to motor 56A determined according to Gansler’s delta value of Gansler’s exhaust temperature parameter, see Gansler’s steps 314, 322 and 324, in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0082]) and determining an acceleration correction variable (McQuiston’s POWER CMD in McQuiston’s Fig. 4 provided to motor 102B determined based on McQuiston’s “ERROR”, which is a difference between McQuiston’s actuate rotation speed and McQuiston’s rotational speed commanded N1 CMD in Fig. 4, see col. 10, ll. 4-12 and ll. 30-40) determined from the transient engine speed set point (McQuiston’s N1 CMD, which includes steady engine speed set point and acceleration engine speed set point, see McQuiston’s col. 7, ll. 48-60, col. 13, ll. 8-12 and col. 13, l. 64 to col. 14, l. 6).
The motivation of the combination is the same with the reason for rejecting claim 11 above.
McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler does not teach wherein, during said step of determining said torque correction variable, a maximum value is selected between said temperature correction variable and said acceleration correction variable.
However, Kuphaldt teaches a process control involves the use of function blocks (the blocks in Fig of p. 2567) when a control system is required to choose between multiple signals of differing values in order to make the best control decision (para. 1 of chapter 31.7 in p. 2567), wherein the function blocks including High selector, Low selector, Rate limiter, High limit, and Low limit, and the High selector is configured to select a maximum value from the multiple signals of differing values (para. 3 of chapter 31.7 in p. 2567). Moreover, Takeda teaches a method of providing torque to a gas turbine engine via a motor (Fig. 14) comprising: selecting a maximum value (via a high selector 112 in Fig. 14) from a plurality of determined motor torque instruction values (36-1 … 36-3); providing the selected maximum value to the motor (6, see [0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler with Kuphaldt and Takeda’s using a function block to select a maximum valve between a plurality of determined correction variables, such that
wherein, during the step of determining the torque correction variable, a maximum value is selected between the temperature correction variable and the acceleration correction variable
in order to make the best control decision (Kuphaldt’s para. 1 of chapter 31.7 in p. 2567) and to ensure the output of the motor is sufficient to compensate the gas turbine output requirements even with erroneous inputs (Takeda, [0077]).
Regarding claim 24, McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler further teaches wherein, during the step of determining the torque correction variable (McQuiston’s torque regulation loop comprising McQuiston’s 216 in McQuiston’s Fig. 4 further including Gansler’s steps from step 306 to step 328 in Fig. 5, wherein Gansler’s step 328 further including steps 330-342 in Gansler’s Fig. 6), the torque correction variable (the electrical power provided to McQuiston’s 102B) is determined based on the temperature correction variable (Gansler’s amount of electrical power provide to Gansler’s motor 56A determined according to Gansler’s delta value of Gansler’s exhaust temperature parameter, see Gansler’s steps 314, 322 and 324, in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0082]) and an acceleration correction variable (McQuiston’s POWER CMD in McQuiston’s Fig. 4 provided to motor 102B determined based on McQuiston’s “ERROR”, which is a difference between McQuiston’s actuate rotation speed and McQuiston’s rotational speed commanded N1 CMD in Fig. 4, see col. 10, ll. 4-12 and ll. 30-40) determined from the transient engine speed set point (McQuiston’s N1 CMD, which includes steady engine speed set point and acceleration engine speed set point, see McQuiston’s col. 7, ll. 48-60, col. 13, ll. 8-12 and col. 13, l. 64 to col. 14, l. 6).
The motivation of the combination is the same with the reason for rejecting claim 11 above.
McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler does not teach said torque correction variable is selected as the maximum value between said temperature correction variable and said acceleration correction variable.
However, Kuphaldt teaches a process control involves the use of function blocks (the blocks in Fig of p. 2567) when a control system is required to choose between multiple signals of differing values in order to make the best control decision (para. 1 of chapter 31.7 in p. 2567), wherein the function blocks including High selector, Low selector, Rate limiter, High limit, and Low limit, and the High selector is configured to select a maximum value from the multiple signals of differing values (para. 3 of chapter 31.7 in p. 2567). Moreover, Takeda teaches a method of providing torque to a gas turbine engine via a motor (Fig. 14) comprising: selecting a maximum value (via a high selector 112 in Fig. 14) from a plurality of determined motor torque instruction values (36-1 … 36-3); providing the selected maximum value to the motor (6, see [0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler with Kuphaldt and Takeda’s using a function block to select a maximum valve between a plurality of determined correction variables, such that
the torque correction variable is selected as the maximum between (i) the temperature correction variable and (ii) an acceleration correction variable determined as a function of the transition transient engine speed set point
in order to make the best control decision (Kuphaldt’s para. 1 of chapter 31.7 in p. 2567) and to ensure the output of the motor is sufficient to compensate the gas turbine output requirements even with erroneous inputs (Takeda, [0077]).
Claims 16 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McQuiston 11725594 in view of DJELASSI 20130008171 and Gansler 20190002113, in further view of Duesterhoeft 20070132245.
Regarding claim 16, McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler as discussed so far does not teach the torque set point is progressively reset to zero.
However, Duesterhoeft teaches when determining to terminate the provision of electrical power to a motor that provides torque to the gas turbine engine, the torque set point is progressively reset to zero (per [0006], the applied torque from the starter is gradually decreased to zero).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler with Duesterhoeft’s progressively resetting the torque set point to zero in order to avoid step changes of mechanical and electrical transients and prolong the life of the mechanical components (Duesterhoeft’s [0006]).
Regarding claim 25, McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler further teaches in the torque regulation loop (McQuiston’s torque regulation loop comprising McQuiston’s 216 and McQuiston’s 220 in McQuiston’s Fig. 4 further including Gansler’s steps from step 306 to step 328 in Fig. 5, wherein Gansler’s step 328 further including steps 330-342 in Gansler’s Fig. 6):
a step of resetting the torque set point supplied to the electric motor (McQuiston’s 102B) to zero (Gansler’s step 330 in Gansler’s Fig. 6);
wherein the resetting of the torque set point to zero being inhibited when a temperature protection control (Gansler’s providing electrical power to motor in step 316-318 in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0078]) is activated (because Gansler’s providing electrical power to motor in step 316 is necessary as taught by Gansler’s [0078 and 0088]),
said temperature protection control (Gansler’s providing electrical power to motor in step 316-318 in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0078]) being activated by comparing the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (Gansler’s measured exhaust temperature parameter in Gansler’s step 314 in Gansler’s Fig. 5) with the maximum value of the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (Gansler’s upper exhaust temperature parameter threshold in step 314 in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0078]) reduced by a predetermined adjustment threshold (Gansler’s exceeding value of the upper exhaust temperature parameter threshold at taught by Gansler’s [0079]).
The motivation of the combination is the same with the reason for rejecting claim 11 above.
McQuiston in view of DJELASSI, and Gansler does not teach a step of progressively resetting the torque set point to zero.
However, Duesterhoeft teaches when determining to terminate the provision of electrical power to a motor that provides torque to the gas turbine engine, the torque set point is progressively reset to zero (per [0006], the applied torque from the starter is gradually decreased to zero).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston in view of DJELASSI, and Gansler with Duesterhoeft’s progressively resetting the torque set point to zero in order to avoid step changes of mechanical and electrical transients and prolong the life of the mechanical components (Duesterhoeft’s [0006]).
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McQuiston 11725594 in view of DJELASSI 20130008171, Gansler 20190002113, Tony Kuphaldt – NPL - Lessons in Industrial Instrumentation, refer as Kuphaldt thereafter, and Takeda 20100319356.
Regarding claims 21-22, McQuiston teaches the invention as claimed: A method (Figs. 4-5) for controlling a turbomachine (10, Fig. 2) mounted to an aircraft (col. 1, ll. 20-35) to provide a desired thrust (indicated by desired rotational speed of HP and LP shafts, see Figs. 4-5) for the aircraft, the turbomachine (10, Fig. 2) comprising a fan (12) for directing air flow that is separated into a primary flow (enters 44, see Fig. 4) and a secondary flow (flows through 82, see Fig. 4) positioned upstream of a gas generator (30), said gas generator (30) being flowed by the primary flow and comprising a low pressure compressor (44), a high pressure compressor (34), a combustion chamber (40), a high pressure turbine (36) and a low pressure turbine (42), said low pressure turbine (42) being connected to said low pressure compressor (44) by a low pressure rotating shaft (46) and said high pressure turbine (36) being connected to said high pressure compressor (34) by a high pressure rotating shaft (38), and an electric motor (102B) forming a torque injection device on the high pressure rotating shaft (38, see col. 7, ll. 10-15 and col. 12, ll. 26-41, the electric motor is coupled to the high pressure shaft), the method for controlling the turbomachine to provide the desired thrust for the aircraft (Figs. 4-5) comprising:
a step of determining a fuel flow set point (Wf CMD, Fig. 4) in the combustion chamber (40) of the turbomachine (30) and a torque set point (POWER CMD, Fig. 4) supplied to the electric motor (102B, see col. 7, ll. 10-15 and col. 12, ll. 26-41);
wherein the fuel flow set point (Wf CMD, Fig. 4) is determined by a fuel regulation loop comprising:
a step of determining (in order to obtain the rotational speed command N1 CMD, which is performed per col. 10, ll. 4-10, col. 12, ll. 59-65, and 302 in Fig. 5) a transient engine speed set point (N1 CMD in Fig. 4, and per col. 11, ll. 47-50, the method of controlling the desired thrust may be used during various flight operations, which including steady operation, e.g., cruise in col. 9, ll. 55-60, and acceleration operation condition, see col. 7, ll. 48-60, col. 13, ll. 8-12 and col. 13, l. 64 to col. 14, l. 6, and thus, said N1 CMD includes steady engine speed set point and acceleration engine speed set point),
a step (at 212) of determining a fuel correction variable (a correction value of fuel flow rate determined based on the “ERROR”, which is a difference between the actuate rotation speed and the rotational speed commanded N1 CMD in Fig. 4, see col. 10, ll. 4-12 and ll. 30-40) as a function of the transient engine speed set point (the N1 CMD, which includes steady engine speed set point and acceleration engine speed set point, see col. 7, ll. 48-60, col. 13, ll. 8-12 and col. 13, l. 64 to col. 14, l. 6), and
a step (at 212) of determining the fuel flow set point (Wf CMD, which is a fuel flow command sent fuel delivery system, e.g., fuel valve(s) and/or pump, col. 10, ll. 30-40) as a function of the fuel correction variable (the correction value of fuel flow rate determined based on “ERROR”, which is a difference between the actuate rotation speed and the rotational speed commanded N1 CMD, see Fig. 4 and col. 10, ll. 4-12);
wherein the torque set point (POWER CMD, Fig. 4) is determined by a torque regulation loop comprising:
a step (at 216) of determining a torque correction variable (determined based on the “ERROR”, which is a difference between the actuate rotation speed and the rotational speed commanded N1 CMD in Fig. 4, see col. 10, ll. 4-12 and ll. 30-40), which is an acceleration correction variable determined as a function of the transient engine speed set point (the N1 CMD, which includes steady engine speed set point and acceleration engine speed set point, see col. 7, ll. 48-60, col. 13, ll. 8-12 and col. 13, l. 64 to col. 14, l. 6); and
a step of using the torque set point (POWER CMD, Fig. 4) and the fuel flow set point (Wf CMD, Fig. 4) to control thrust of the turbomachine (indicated by desired rotational speed of HP and LP shafts, see Figs. 4-5).
McQuiston does not teach a step of detecting an engine speed transition intention as a function of a difference between a current engine speed and a determined engine speed set point.
However, DJELASSI teaches a method (Fig. 2) of determining a fuel flow set point (WF32C) is determined by a fuel regulation loop (see Fig. 2) comprising: a step (at 9) of detecting an engine speed transition intention (at 9, per [0062-0063] detecting an engine acceleration) as a function of a difference between a current engine speed (N1) and a determined engine speed set point (N1C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston with DJELASSI’s step of detecting the engine speed transition intention as a function of a difference between a current engine speed and a determined engine speed set point in order to detect an engine speed transient intention with a simple and effective manner before varying the engine speed (DJELASSI, [0018]).
McQuiston in view of DJELASSI does not teach a step of determining a temperature correction variable as a function of a turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter and a maximum value of the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter; and a step of determining said torque correction variable based on the temperature correction variable and said acceleration correction variable determined as said function of said transient engine speed set point.
However, Gansler teaches a method (method 300 in Figs. 5-6 that is performed by the controller 72 or 500, in Figs. 2 and 6) for controlling a turbomachine (102A, see Fig. 4 that shares same configurations of Fig. 2) to provide a desired thrust duration engine acceleration (see step 302 in Fig. 5 and [0075]) comprising:
a step of determining a temperature correction variable (an amount of electrical power provide to motor 56A determined according to a delta value of the exhaust temperature parameter, see steps 314, 322 and 324, in Fig. 5 and [0082]) as a function of a turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (the measured exhaust temperature parameter, see steps 306 and 314 in Fig. 5 and [0078 and 0082]) and a maximum value of the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (the upper exhaust temperature parameter threshold, see step 314 in Fig. 5 and [0078]); and
a step of determining a torque correction variable (a total amount of electrical power provided to motor 56A, see steps 316-326 in Fig. 5 and [0079, 0082, and 0088]) based on the temperature correction variable (the amount of electrical power provide to motor 56A determined according to the delta value of the exhaust temperature parameter, see steps 314, 322, and 324 in Fig. 5 and [0082]) and the desired thrust for acceleration (an amount of electrical power provide to motor 56A determined based on acceleration requirement, see step 302 in Fig. 5 and [0075]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston in view of DJELASSI with Gansler’s method for controlling the turbomachine to provide the desired thrust during acceleration, such that
the method comprising: a step of determining a temperature correction variable as a function of a turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter and a maximum value of the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter, and
the torque set point is determined by a torque regulation loop comprising: a step of determining the torque correction variable based on the temperature correction variable and an acceleration correction variable determined as a function the transient engine speed set point, i.e., the acceleration engine speed set point (McQuiston’s N1 CMD of McQuiston’s acceleration operation condition)
in order to maintain the engine operation temperature below the maximum internal temperature thresholds without significantly reducing the maximum amount of thrust and to prevent undesirable and premature wear (Gansler, [0004-0005]).
McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler does not teach said step of determining said torque correction variable as the maximum between said temperature correction variable and said acceleration correction variable.
However, Kuphaldt teaches a process control involves the use of function blocks (the blocks in Fig of p. 2567) when a control system is required to choose between multiple signals of differing values in order to make the best control decision (para. 1 of chapter 31.7 in p. 2567), wherein the function blocks including High selector, Low selector, Rate limiter, High limit, and Low limit, and the High selector is configured to select a maximum value from the multiple signals of differing values (para. 3 of chapter 31.7 in p. 2567). Moreover, Takeda teaches a method of providing torque to a gas turbine engine via a motor (Fig. 14) comprising: selecting a maximum value (via a high selector 112 in Fig. 14) from a plurality of determined motor torque instruction values (36-1 … 36-3); providing the selected maximum value to the motor (6, see [0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston in view of DJELASSI and Gansler with Kuphaldt and Takeda’s using a function block to select a maximum valve between a plurality of determined correction variables, such that
a step of determining a torque correction variable as the maximum between (i) the temperature correction variable and (ii) an acceleration correction variable determined as a function of the transition transient engine speed set point
in order to make the best control decision (Kuphaldt’s para. 1 of chapter 31.7 in p. 2567) and to ensure the output of the motor is sufficient to compensate the gas turbine output requirements even with erroneous inputs (Takeda, [0077]).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McQuiston 11725594 in view of DJELASSI 20130008171, Gansler 20190002113, Tony Kuphaldt – NPL - Lessons in Industrial Instrumentation, refer as Kuphaldt thereafter, and Takeda 20100319356, and in further view of Duesterhoeft 20070132245.
Regarding claim 23, McQuiston in view of DJELASSI, Gansler, Kuphaldt, and Takeda further teaches in the torque regulation loop (McQuiston’s torque regulation loop comprising McQuiston’s 216 and McQuiston’s 220 in McQuiston’s Fig. 4 further including Gansler’s steps from step 306 to step 328 in Fig. 5, wherein Gansler’s step 328 further including steps 330-342 in Gansler’s Fig. 6):
a step of resetting the torque set point supplied to the electric motor (McQuiston’s 102B) to zero (Gansler’s step 330 in Gansler’s Fig. 6);
wherein the resetting of the torque set point to zero being inhibited when a temperature protection control (Gansler’s providing electrical power to motor in step 316-318 in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0078]) is activated (because Gansler’s providing electrical power to motor in step 316 is necessary as taught by Gansler’s [0078 and 0088]),
said temperature protection control (Gansler’s providing electrical power to motor in step 316-318 in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0078]) being activated by comparing the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (Gansler’s measured exhaust temperature parameter in Gansler’s step 314 in Gansler’s Fig. 5) with the maximum value of the turbomachine outlet gas temperature parameter (Gansler’s upper exhaust temperature parameter threshold in step 314 in Gansler’s Fig. 5 and Gansler’s [0078]) reduced by a predetermined adjustment threshold (Gansler’s exceeding value of the upper exhaust temperature parameter threshold at taught by Gansler’s [0079]).
The motivation of the combination is the same with the reason for rejecting claim 21 above.
McQuiston in view of DJELASSI, Gansler, Kuphaldt, and Takeda does not teach a step of progressively resetting the torque set point to zero.
However, Duesterhoeft teaches when determining to terminate the provision of electrical power to a motor that provides torque to the gas turbine engine, the torque set point is progressively reset to zero (per [0006], the applied torque from the starter is gradually decreased to zero).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide McQuiston in view of DJELASSI, Gansler, Kuphaldt, and Takeda with Duesterhoeft’s progressively resetting the torque set point to zero in order to avoid step changes of mechanical and electrical transients and prolong the life of the mechanical components (Duesterhoeft’s [0006]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/16/2026 have been fully considered.
I. On pp. 9-11, Applicant argues, “… McQuiston …: Discloses a hybrid gas-turbine control in which shaft-speed error (actual vs. commanded rotational speed) is fed in parallel to both a fuel-flow control circuit and an electric machine control circuit. The electric machine (explicitly coupled to the low-pressure shaft) adds or extracts small torque (e.g., 5-30 hp) at high frequency to damp oscillations and improve steady state speed regulation. Fuel handles slower baseline adjustments. The reference contains no planned "transition transient engine speed setpoint/trajectory," no temperature (EGT) correction, no torque correction derived from a transient schedule plus temperature, and no thrust-focused dual loops. The electric machine operates on the LP shaft for fan-speed damping, not HP-shaft core assistance. … Fig. 4 does not disclose a fuel a regulation loop. There is no determination of a transient operation condition but only a speed error, which is totally different. McQuiston teaches only stable operations and transient operation are not disclosed. … McQuiston teaches using the same variable ERROR for the fuel flow control circuit 202 and the electric machine control circuit 204. The presence of an ERROR corresponds only to an engine speed transition intention. The intention has to be converted into a transient engine speed set point so that the transient can be applied properly to the engine. The ERROR of McQuiston cannot be confused with the transient engine speed set point. … The torque regulation receives ERROR (which is a non-processed variable) is different from a transient engine speed set point. The regulation would be totally different and would not take into account the speed trajectory of the engine”.
Examiner does not agree because:
i) McQuiston teaches an electric motor forming a torque injection device on the high pressure rotating shaft as claimed (102B in Fig. 2 and col. 7, ll. 10-15 and per col. 12, ll. 26-41, the method of Figs. 4-5 may be performed on the high-pressure shaft);
ii) McQuiston further teaches the method for providing a desired thrust (indicated by the rotational speed of high-pressure and low-pressure shafts, see Figs. 4-5) comprising a fuel regulation loop (202 in Fig. 4) and a torque regulation loop (204 in Fig. 4), where the fuel regulation loop (202 in Fig. 4) comprising: a step of determining a transient engine speed set point (in order to obtain the commended rotational speed NI CMD in Fig. 4 during various engine operation conditions, which includes a steady condition, e.g., cruise per col. 9, ll. 55-60, and an acceleration condition, see col. 7, ll. 48-60, col. 13, ll. 8-12 and col. 13, l. 64 to col. 14, l. 6, and thus, a transient engine speed set point corresponding to the acceleration condition is used to determine the commended rotational speed NI CMD during transient condition), a step of determining a fuel correction variable (a correction value of fuel flow rate determined by “ERROR” in Fig. 4) as a function of the transient engine speed set point (said “ERROR” is a difference between the commanded rotational speed and the actual rotational speed, see Figs. 4-5 and col. 10, ll. 4-12 and 30-40), and a step of determining the fuel flow set point (WF CMD in Fig. 4, which is a fuel flow command sent to fuel delivery system, e.g., fuel valve(s) and/or pump, col. 10, ll. 30-40) as a function of the fuel correction variable (the correction value of fuel flow rate determined by “ERROR”, see Figs. 4-5 and col. 10, ll. 4-12), and the torque regulation loop (204 in Fig. 4) comprising: a step of determining a torque correction variable (determined by the “ERROR” in Fig. 4) as a function of the transient engine speed set point (said “ERROR” is the difference between the commanded rotational speed and the actual rotational speed, see Figs. 4-5 and col. 10, ll. 4-12 and 30-40),
iii) it is noted, “Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims”, MPEP 2145(VI). In this case, claim language of clams 11 and 21 do not require a) a connection/relationship between the claimed step of detecting engine speed transition intention and the claimed step of determining a transient engine speed set point, and/or b) how to determine the claimed transient engine speed set point as Applicant argues, e.g., “planned transient engine speed setpoint/trajectory” and “The presence of an ERROR corresponds only to an engine speed transition intention. The intention has to be converted into a transient engine speed set point so that the transient can be applied properly to the engine”.
Examiner Note
Applicant may further clarify i) the relationship/sequence between the step of detecting engine speed transition intension and the step of determine the transient engine speed set point; or ii) the disclosed zero reset module 402 in Fig. 7 comprising resetting the torque set point to zero, and said resetting is activated under what condition/comparing to what parameters.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JINGCHEN LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-6639. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-4:30.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/JINGCHEN LIU/ /GERALD L SUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741 Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights