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 .
Claims 1-14 are pending.
Claim Objections
Note: Page and line references are referring to the .DOCX claim document with line numbers restarting for each page.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “which satisfies positive correlation between” in pg 1, lines 1-2 should read “which satisfies a positive correlation between”.
The term “the power plant” in pg 1, line 3 should read “the hydropower plant”.
The term “operating AGC hydropower generating unit” in pg 1, line 8 should read “operating Automatic Generation Control (AGC) hydropower generating unit”.
The term “divide operating AGC hydropower generating units into units participating in secondary frequency modulation and units not participating in secondary frequency modulation, and adjust the single active power set value of the latter to make the former obtain a larger active power regulation amplitude” in pg 2 lines 1-3 should read “divide operating AGC hydropower generating units into units participating in secondary frequency modulation and units not participating in secondary frequency modulation, and adjust the single active power set value of the units not participating in secondary frequency modulation to make the units participating in secondary frequency modulation obtain a larger active power regulation amplitude”.
The term “amount of single active power closed-loop adjustment” in pg 1, lines 18-19 should read “amount of the single active power closed-loop adjustment”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “a certain time interval” in pg 2 line 6 and line 10 should read “the certain time interval”.
The term “suppose that the ratio of the regulation amplitude threshold to the rated capacity” in pg 2 line 13 should read “the ratio of the regulation amplitude threshold to the rated capacity”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “gain regulation time threshold” in pg 11, line 12 and line 19 should read “gain regulation time threshold T1”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “single active power closed-loop regulation” in pg 14, line 20 should read “the single active power closed-loop regulation”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “single active power closed-loop regulation” in pg 17, line 15 and line 21 should read “the single active power closed-loop regulation”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The terms “with single active power regulation” in pg 32, line 15 should read “with the single active power regulation”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The terms “with single active power regulation” in pg 33, line 13 should read “with the single active power regulation”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The terms “in generating state” should read “in a generating state”.
The terms “single active power regulation” on pg 34, lines 15-16 and lines 17-18, and on pg 35, line 14 and line 16 should read “the single active power regulation”.
The term “single active power closed-loop regulation” on pg 37, lines 5-6 should read “the single active power closed-loop regulation”.
The term “array in each AGC system cycle in turn” should read “array in each said AGC system cycle in turn”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 10-11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The terms “and pi is the lower limit of the current active operation interval of the unit i” in pg 20, lines 16-17, and pg 27, line 9 should read “and pi is the lower limit of the current active operation interval of the unit i”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The terms “which satisfies positive correlation between” in lines 1-2 should read “which satisfies the positive correlation between”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 4-5, 7-8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The terms “in generating state” should read “in the generating state”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 3, 7-8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “secondary frequency modulation gain regulation mark” should read “secondary frequency modulation gain regulation mark α”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 3-14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “single active power set value” should read “single active power set value
p
i
s
e
t
”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 3-11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “regulation amount” should read “regulation amount △pi”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “gain adjustment is feedforward gain adjustment” in pg 1, line 13. The claim previously refers to “gain regulation”, and the expectation is that “gain adjustment” should read “gain regulation”. The specification refers to “gain adjustment” and “feedforward gain adjustment”, while the Abstract refers to “gain regulation” and “feedforward gain regulation”. The meaning of the term is not clear from the claims or specification.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the operating AGC hydropower generating unit”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the power plant”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the secondary frequency modulation to be performed”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the current active operating interval”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the judgment result”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the judgment conditions”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the gain adjustment”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the actual regulation amount”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the single active power closed-loop adjustment”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim(s) 2-14 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 1
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the generating state”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the lower limit of secondary frequency modulation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the upper limit of secondary frequency modulation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the ratio of the regulation amplitude threshold”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the upper limit of secondary frequency modulation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation the limitation “the current active operation interval”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation the limitation “the unit active operation interval”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation the limitation “the requirement of a certain time interval”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation the limitation “the active power regulation accuracy”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation the limitation “the absolute deviation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation the limitation “the two results”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim(s) 3-11, 13 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 2
Claim 6 recites the limitation the limitation “the same direction”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation the limitation “the enlarged amount”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the current single active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the set ratio”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 6
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the timing”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the timer”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the conditions for execution”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2, 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation the limitation “the judgment conditions for the secondary frequency modulation gain regulation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 3-6, 9 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 2
Claims 1, 3-11 recites the limitation “the regulation amount of secondary frequency modulation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim(s) 2, 12-14 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 1
Claims 3, 6 each recite the limitation the limitation “the difference between the plant active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 5, 8 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 6
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the secondary frequency modulation gain regulation mark”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 6, 9, 12-14 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 1
Claims 1 and 2 each recite the limitation “the regulation amplitude”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 1 and 2 each recite the limitation “the total fixed capacity”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 3-14 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 1
Claims 1-2, 7-8, 10 each recite the limitation “the judgment conditions”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 3-6, 9, 11-14 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 1
Claims 1, 4-11 each recite the limitation “the single active power regulation dead zone”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 2-3, 12-14 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 1
Claims 1-11 and 14 each recite the limitation “the secondary frequency modulation command”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 1
Claims 1, 6-8 each recite the limitation “the single active power assigned value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 2-5, 9-14 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 1
Claims 1, 3-14 each recite the limitation “the single active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 1
Claims 2, 9-14 each recite the limitation “the units”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 3-8 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 2
Claims 3-5 each recite the limitation the limitation “the feedforward gain regulation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-6 and 14 each recite the limitation “the single active power closed-loop regulation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the manually set ratio”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 6-8 each recite the limitation “the updated single active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 2-3, 6 each recite the limitation “the original plant active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 6-8 each recite the limitation “the gain regulation time threshold”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 6-8 each recite the limitation “the amplification gain regulation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 6-8 each recite the limitation “the amplification gain regulation time”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected based on dependency to rejected Claim 6
Claims 10-11 each recite the limitation the limitation “the absolute value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 10-11, 14 each recite the limitation the limitation “the absolute difference”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 12-14 each recite the limitation the limitation “the maximum absolute difference”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-8 each recite the limitation “the number of units that are under AGC control”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 3-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the original single active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 3-5 each recite the limitation “the received single active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the single active power set values”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 2-14 each recite the limitations “the units”, “the unit”, “all units”, and/or “each unit”. It is unclear if the units being referred to are units equipped with AGC, units that are not equipped with AGC, the sum of all unit (AGC equipped or not), or some other piece of equipment. The meaning of the term is not clear from the claims or specification.
Claims 3-5, 10-14 each recite the limitation “the single active power actual value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the conventional single active power closed-loop regulation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 2-14 each recite the limitation “the plant active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the updated original plant active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the distribution calculation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the increased active power relay pulse length”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the decreased active power relay pulse length”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 3-5, 10-14 each recite the limitation “the current single active power set value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the increased active power relay operation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the decreased active power relay operation”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the output pulse length of open-loop regulation according to the calculated gain”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the output pulse length of open-loop gain regulation according to the calculated gain”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the minimum effective pulse length”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the equipment”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the equipment”. It is unclear what specific equipment the term refers to of the various units previously claimed. The meaning of the term is not clear from the claims or specification.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the operation cycle time”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the regulation dead zone range”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-8, 10-11, 14 each recite the limitation “the following operating steps”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the difference △P”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the two”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the AGC system”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 7-8 each recite the limitation “the timing”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 7-8 each recite the limitation “the single regulation amount △pi”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 7-8 each recite the limitation “the original single active power assigned value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 7-8 each recite the limitation “the single regulation amount △pi” and “the regulation amount △pi”. These terms appear to refer to the same value, and if the claims should be amended to reflect so. The Examiner is interpreting the limitations as referring to the same value. The meaning of the term is not clear from the claims or specification.
Claims 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the active power set value
p
i
s
e
t
”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 7-8, 10-11 each recite the limitation “the active power set value
p
i
s
e
t
” or “the active power set value”. It is unclear if the limitations regarding active power set value are meant to be “single active power set value
p
i
s
e
t
”. The meaning of the term is not clear from the claims or specification.
Claims 4-5 each recite the limitation “the gain regulation mark”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-14 each recite the limitation “the active operation interval”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-14 each recite the limitation “the upper limit of the active operation interval”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 4-5, 7-14 each recite the limitation “the lower limit of the active operation interval”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 10-11 each recite the limitation “the upper limit of the current active operation interval”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 10-11 each recite the limitation “the lower limit of the current active operation interval”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 2, 14 each recite the limitation “the plant active power actual value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 12-14 each recite the limitation “the single active power pre-assigned value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 12-13 each recite the limitation “the obtained active power pre-assigned value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as set forth in this office action.
Dependent claim(s) 2-14 is/are allowable over art based on their dependence upon claim 1.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Applicant’s claim defines over the prior art of record because the prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, does not teach positive correlation between a regulation rate and a rated capacity of the hydropower plant, characterized by including the following steps: when the power plant receives the secondary frequency modulation command, judge whether the secondary frequency modulation to be performed meets a certain time interval, whether the regulation amplitude exceeds a certain proportion of the total fixed capacity and whether the current active operating interval of the operating AGC hydropower generating unit meets the secondary frequency modulation command, and set the secondary frequency modulation gain regulation mark to reflect the judgment result; when the judgment conditions are satisfied, carry out the secondary frequency modulation by means of gain regulation
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lin et al, Chinese Patent Num CN114188995A relates to claims regarding secondary frequency modulation of a hydroelectric generating plant, ratio parameters, and rated unit capacities.
Yong, Chinese Patent CN112583056A relates to claims regarding a power plant AGC and frequency regulation coordination.
Lin et al, Chinese Patent Num CN105914795A relates to claims regarding secondary frequency modulation and a ratio of the unit active power adjustment dead zone to the unit output limits.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E OGG whose telephone number is (469) 295-9163. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Thurs 7:30 am - 5:00 pm CT.
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, Mohammad Ali can be reached on 571-272-4105. 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.
/DAVID EARL OGG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119