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 § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9-12 and 18-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jepsen et al. (Membranes 2019, 9, 68), in view of Bartman et al. (Journal of Process Control 20 (2010) 1261–1269) and Dominiak et al. (US 2017/0232396A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jepsen teaches a control method used in a membrane filtration system (filtration system is disclosed in fig. 1), the method comprising the step of:
Operating the membrane filter system in iterative filtration cycles, said cycles comprising a production period and a following flushing (refer abstract, fig. 3 and paragraph 3.1 disclosing iterative filtration and backwash cycles).
Jespen also teaches that the system comprises valve at concentrate outlet (refer V05, V10, V02) controlling flow of concentrate. Jepsen does not disclose operation of valves at concentrate outlet in any particular way that impacts performance of filtration. Jepsen does not disclose control device comprising an energy recording means recording the energy consumption of the filter system, and the control device is configured such that the control device controls the flow regulating device to adjust the setting of the crossflow by a control method comprising: operating the membrane filter system in iterative filtration cycles, said cycles comprising a production period and a following flushing; and controlling a setting of a volume flow rate of a crossflow at a concentrate outlet of a membrane in the production period such that an energy consumption per filtration cycle reaches an optimum, the optimum being a minimum energy consumption that can be kept constant over time, wherein said setting is carried out in an iterative manner by stepwise varying the setting for different filtration cycles and comparing the energy consumption for the different filtration cycles to find the optimum.
Bartman teaches an optimization-based control system on an experimental reverse osmosis (RO) membrane water desalination process in order to facilitate system operation at energy optimal conditions (refer abstract). The RO system comprises RO membrane module generating permeate and concentrate from a feed. The RO system comprises sensors to measure feed conductivity, feed flow rate, feed pressure, retentate flow rate and retentate concentration (refer fig. 3), and a retentate flow control valve (refer fig. 3). Bartman discloses that the objective of the optimization algorithm is to determine the values of feed flow rate (vf) and retentate valve resistance (evr) such that the SEC at the operating condition is minimized (refer section “3. Optimization-based control for specific energy consumption minimization”). Bartman discloses that the optimization algorithm conducts multiple steps at every sampling time in order to obtain the control values (vf and evr ) that minimize the SEC for the given permeate flow rate (refer left column on page 1265). Bartman also discloses measuring energy consumption at different retentate valve positions to calculate optimize SEC (refer page 1265).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention to modify the method of Jepsen to include control of valve on concentrate line to control flow rate of concentrate and control device comprising an energy recording means recording the energy consumption of the filter system, and the control device is configured such that the control device controls the flow regulating device to adjust the setting of the crossflow by a control method comprising operating the membrane filter system in a production period; and controlling a setting of a volume flow rate of a crossflow at a concentrate outlet of a membrane in the production period such that an energy consumption per filtration cycle reaches an optimum, the optimum being a minimum energy consumption that can be kept constant over time, wherein said setting is carried out by stepwise varying the setting for different filtration cycles and comparing the energy consumption for the different filtration cycles to find the optimum to minimize energy consumptions as taught by Bartman.
Modified Jepsen does not teach monitoring energy consumption during backwash cycles.
Dominiak teaches a control method for a filter system which includes at least one filter element (2), the method includes continuously recording a total energy consumption during a filtration cycle, wherein the total energy consumption includes energy consumption for a physical cleaning (backwashing) and energy consumption for subsequent production cycle up to a predefined, in particular current point in time (Refer abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention to modify the method of modified Jepsen to monitor and evaluate energy consumption during iterative permeate production and backwashing cycles to discover optimum energy consumption as taught by Dominiak.
Regarding claim 3, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Barman discloses optimizing energy consumption to achieve desired permeate (refer section “3. Optimization-based control for specific energy consumption minimization”).
Regarding claim 4, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Barman discloses measuring and using flow rate of concentrate in discovering minimum energy consumption (refer fig. 3, section “3. Optimization-based control for specific energy consumption minimization”).
Regarding claim 5, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Dominiak teaches recirculating a portion of retentate by crossflow pump (refer fig. 1b). Bartman discloses adjusting flowrate of concentrate/retentate outlet and also teaches control of feed pump based on algorithm (refer page 1265). Adjusting the flow rate of crossflow pump to achieve desired setpoint of permeate output would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because Bartman discloses adjusting pressure and valve position to achieve desire permeate flow set point.
Regarding claim 6, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Bartman discloses RO membrane (abstract, fig. 3). RO membranes are known in the art to have pore size smaller than 10 nm.
Regarding claim 7, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. The limitation “wherein the crossflow is defined by a recovery level defining a ratio of permeate flow and a feed flow” is merely reciting what is retentate in a crossflow membrane module. Retentate is a ratio of feed and permeate because retentate is what remains after permeate is taken out from the feed.
Regarding claims 9, 10, 11, and 12, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Bartman discloses generating a trajectory for energy consumption over time for a number of filtration cycles (Refer fig. 4, fig. 6, fig. 7). Dominiak teaches continuously monitoring a gradient that is derivative of relative energy consumption and examine the gradient as to whether the gradient has reached a limit gradient during production cycle (refer fig. 4 , [0014]). Dominiak also teaches monitoring energy consumption for production, flushing and cleaning of the filter system (Refer abstract, [0053]-[0058]).
Regarding claim 18, Jepsen teaches a control method used in a membrane filtration system (filtration system is disclosed in fig. 1), the method comprising the step of:
Operating the membrane filter system in iterative filtration cycles, said cycles comprising a production period and a following flushing (refer abstract, fig. 3 and paragraph 3.1 disclosing iterative filtration and backwash cycles).
Jespen also teaches that the system comprises valve at concentrate outlet (refer V05, V10, V02) controlling flow of concentrate. Jepsen does not teach monitoring energy consumption or optimizing energy consumption by varying setting of flow of concentrate outlet in stepwise manner for different filtration cycle and determining energy consumption.
Bartman teaches an optimization-based control system on an experimental reverse osmosis (RO) membrane water desalination process in order to facilitate system operation at energy optimal conditions (refer abstract). The RO system comprises RO membrane module generating permeate and concentrate from a feed. The RO system comprises sensors to measure feed conductivity, feed flow rate, feed pressure, retentate flow rate and retentate concentration (refer fig. 3), and a retentate flow control valve (refer fig. 3). Bartman discloses that the objective of the optimization algorithm is to determine the values of feed flow rate (vf) and retentate valve resistance (evr) such that the SEC at the operating condition is minimized (refer section “3. Optimization-based control for specific energy consumption minimization”). Bartman discloses that the optimization algorithm conducts multiple steps at every sampling time in order to obtain the control values (vf and evr ) that minimize the SEC for the given permeate flow rate (refer left column on page 1265). Bartman also discloses measuring energy consumption at different retentate valve positions to calculate optimize SEC (refer page 1265).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention to modify the method of Jepsen to monitor energy consumption or optimize energy consumption by varying setting of flow of concentrate outlet in stepwise manner for different filtration cycle and determine minimum energy consumption as taught by Bartman to optimize energy consumption.
Modified Jepsen does not teach monitoring energy consumption during backwash cycles.
Dominiak teaches a control method for a filter system which includes at least one filter element (2), the method includes continuously recording a total energy consumption during a filtration cycle, wherein the total energy consumption includes energy consumption for a physical cleaning (backwashing) and energy consumption for subsequent production cycle up to a predefined, in particular current point in time (Refer abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention to modify the method of modified Jepsen to monitor and evaluate energy consumption during iterative permeate production and backwashing cycles to discover optimum energy consumption as taught by Dominiak.
Regarding claim 19, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 18 as set forth above. Barman discloses optimizing energy consumption to achieve desired permeate (refer section “3. Optimization-based control for specific energy consumption minimization”).
Regarding claim 20, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 18 as set forth above. Barman discloses measuring and using flow rate of concentrate in discovering minimum energy consumption (refer fig. 3, section “3. Optimization-based control for specific energy consumption minimization”).
Regarding claim 21, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 18 as set forth above. Dominiak teaches recirculating a portion of retentate by crossflow pump (refer fig. 1b). Bartman discloses adjusting flowrate of concentrate/retentate outlet and also teaches control of feed pump based on algorithm (refer page 1265). Adjusting the flow rate of crossflow pump to achieve desired setpoint of permeate output would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because Bartman discloses adjusting pressure and valve position to achieve desire permeate flow set point.
Regarding claim 22, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 18 as set forth above. Bartman discloses RO membrane (abstract, fig. 3). RO membranes are known in the art to have pore size smaller than 10 nm.
Regarding claim 23, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 18 as set forth above. The limitation “wherein the crossflow is defined by a recovery level defining a ratio of permeate flow and a feed flow” is merely reciting what is retentate in a crossflow membrane module. Retentate is a ratio of feed and permeate because retentate is what remains after permeate is taken out from the feed.
Regarding claim 24, modified Jepsen teaches limitations of claim 18 as set forth above. Bartman discloses generating a trajectory for energy consumption over time for a number of filtration cycles (Refer fig. 4, fig. 6, fig. 7). Dominiak teaches continuously monitoring a gradient that is derivative of relative energy consumption and examine the gradient as to whether the gradient has reached a limit gradient during production cycle (refer fig. 4 , [0014]). Dominiak also teaches monitoring energy consumption for production, flushing and cleaning of the filter system (Refer abstract, [0053]-[0058]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Vatai et al (Ultrafiltration of oil-in-water emulsion: Comparison of ceramic and polymeric membranes. Desalination and Water Treatment. 3. Pages 1-10. (Year: 2009)) teaches determining optimal operating conditions by taking into account productivity (permeate flux), energy consumption (specific energy consumption) and membrane selectivity (oil content in the permeate).
A. Suárez et al. / Journal of Membrane Science 493 (2015) 389–402 teaches cost estimation of membrane processing including calculating energy consumption/requirement.
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 PRANAV PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5142. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6AM-4PM.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/PRANAV N PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777
Prosecution Insights