DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: It appears that “an eigenfrequency of the wind turbine rotor blade” refers back to “an eigenfrequency of the wind turbine rotor blade” in claim 1, line 7. It should be amended to --the eigenfrequency of the wind turbine rotor blade--.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 8, it appears that “the measured eigenfrequency” is meant to be “the determined eigenfrequency”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Govers Dr-ing Yves (EP 3296715 B1) (see translation).
Regarding claim 1: Govers Dr-ing Yves discloses a method of controlling a quality of a wind turbine rotor blade, the method comprising: manufacturing a wind turbine rotor blade (2) at a manufacturing site; placing the wind turbine rotor blade on a support (1, test bench) at the manufacturing site; applying a dynamic load [0003] to the wind turbine rotor blade while the wind turbine rotor blade is placed on the support to excite a vibration of the wind turbine rotor blade; detecting the vibration of the wind turbine rotor blade; determining an eigenfrequency of the wind turbine rotor blade based on the detected vibration; comparing the determined eigenfrequency with an expected eigenfrequency of the wind turbine rotor blade; and, evaluating the quality of the wind turbine rotor blade based on the results of said comparing the determined eigenfrequency with the expected eigenfrequency ([010-0013, 0020, 0026-0031], claim 1).
Regarding claim 2: Govers Dr-ing Yves discloses wherein the support is portable [0026, 0032] (the test bench or rig (1) is inherently portable).
Regarding claim 3: Govers Dr-ing Yves discloses wherein the support includes a first support supporting a root section (3) of the wind turbine rotor blade and a second support supporting a midsection of the wind turbine rotor blade [0026] (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4: Govers Dr-ing Yves discloses wherein said detecting the vibration of the wind turbine rotor blade is performed via at least one sensor (5) integrated into (Fig. 1) [0026].
Regarding claim 5: Govers Dr-ing Yves wherein said detecting the vibration includes at least one of detecting a vibration in a flapwise direction and detecting a vibration in an edgewise direction of the wind turbine rotor blade [0026].
Regarding claim 6: Govers Dr-ing Yves discloses wherein the step of determining an eigenfrequency of the wind turbine rotor blade includes determining at least one of: a first eigenfrequency in a flapwise direction; a second eigenfrequency in the flapwise direction; a first eigenfrequency in an edgewise direction; a second eigenfrequency in the edgewise direction; a first torsional eigenfrequency; and, a second torsional eigenfrequency ([0026-0031], claims 1, 3, 6).
Regarding claim 7: Govers Dr-ing Yves discloses wherein the method is carried out fully automatically [0006].
Regarding claim 14: Govers Dr-ing Yves discloses wherein the first support includes at least one beam structure fastened to a root of the wind turbine rotor blade and resting on a ground [0011].
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.
Claim(s) 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Govers Dr-ing Yves (EP 3296715 B1) (see translation).
Regarding claims 8-12: Govers Dr-ing Yves discloses the dynamic load test to the rotor blades [0003]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date to apply and/or position the load at different part of the rotor blade or the support.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 15-17 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-Udengaard et al. (US 11,409,249) discloses a method for simulating transverse motions response of a flexible rotor based on a parameter dependent eigenmodes.
-Pedersen (US 11,136,962) discloses a method of operating a wind turbine for reducing edgewise vibration.
-Christiansen (US 12,130,211) discloses an exciter device and method for fatigue testing of a blade of a wind turbine.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOAN NGOC PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-2967. The examiner can normally be reached M - F (7 AM - 3:30 PM).
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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at (571) 272-3114. 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.
/TOAN N PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685 2/10/26