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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 26 December 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, 8, 10 & 14-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Change “sensor” in each instance of “one or more sensor” to --sensors--. Similarly, change “connection” in each instance of “one or more releasable connection” to --connections—and “winding” in ”one or more faulted stator winding” to –windings--. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-8 & 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fielder (US 8,584,761) in view of Buchanan et al. (US Pat.Pub.2002/0066568) and Maslov (US 6,949,908).
Regarding claim 1, Fielder teaches an electrical submersible pump (ESP) system, comprising:
a submersible modular motor assembly 50 comprising two or more motor modules (motor sections) 105a-c, 106a-c of a motor coupled together (c.4:23-25; Fig.3A), wherein each motor module includes at least one stator 110s and one rotor 110r having a rotary shaft 135, the rotary shafts of the two or more modules are rotationally coupled together (i.e., each section longitudinally and rotationally connected by flanges or threads; c.4:27-29), wherein each stator includes a plurality of stator windings 125 (c.4:4-c.5:23; Figs.1A&3);
a controller 45 electrically coupled to the axial flux modular motor assembly; and
one or more sensor[s] (not shown) coupled to the modular motor assembly (c.5:64-c.6:22).
PNG
media_image1.png
780
495
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
571
404
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fielder does not teach the motors of the modular motor assembly comprise “axial flux” motors or that the stator windings are “addressable” or that the controller “communicates with the addressable stator windings to increase power in one or more addressable stator windings in response to reducing or turning-off power to one or more other addressable stator windings, wherein the controller increases or decreases power to one or more addressable stator windings in response to data sensed by the one or more sensor, and wherein the one or more sensor is configured to sense a fault in the stator windings.”
But, regarding the first difference, Buchanan teaches a downhole ESP system including permanent magnet synchronous motors that may be either a radial flux motor (i.e., rotor 110 surrounded by stator 116; ¶[0054]; Fig.11) or an axial flux motor (i.e., rotor 120 rotatably disposed above stator 122; ¶[0056]; Figs.12-14).
PNG
media_image3.png
501
512
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure Fielder’s modular motors as axial flux motors since Buchanan teaches these were known equivalents for downhole ESP motors.
Regarding the remaining differences, Maslov teaches a fault-tolerant motor control system comprising a stator 30 including a plurality of “addressable” stator phase windings 38 (i.e., each of the plurality of phase windings are switchably energized by driving currents supplied by power electronic (PE) circuits 220 under control of a control circuit 210 in communication with a fault-correction look-up table; abstract; c.1:60-c.2:4; c.3:30-54; c.6:1-31), and the addressable stator windings are configured to each be individually controlled by reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to data sensed by one or more sensor 230 (i.e., abnormal value of phase current; c.4:60-67; controller 210 defines phase current Idi (t) in each phase required to obtain the desired torque, and produces control signals Vi (t) for each phase...The control signals Vi (t) are successively supplied to the PE circuits 220 for individual energization of respective phase windings; c.3:30-37; a phase failure may be detected using current sensors 230 that measure phase current Ii(t) for each phase of the motor; c.4:61-63; in the fault-correction mode, the phase currents for the remaining phases are modified in accordance with pre-set parameters, e.g., the controller sets magnitudes of phase currents in some remaining operational phases to be 5 A instead of 10 A; abstract; c.6:50-61; Figs.1-3). Maslov’s fault-tolerant motor control system provides fault-tolerant operation of a multiphase electric motor without redundant elements (c.1:5-9 & c.1:41-43).
PNG
media_image4.png
507
416
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would thus have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide the motors of the submersible axial flux modular motor assembly of Fielder and Buchanan with addressable stator windings and a controller that communicates with the addressable stator windings to increase power in one or more addressable stator windings in response to reducing or turning-off power to one or more other addressable stator windings, wherein the controller increases or decreases power to one or more addressable stator windings in response to data sensed by the one or more sensor, and wherein the one or more sensor is configured to sense a fault in the stator windings since Maslov teaches this would have provided fault-tolerant operation of the motors without redundant elements.
Regarding claim 2, Maslov teaches increasing power in one or more addressable stator windings in response to reducing or turning-off power to one or more other addressable stator windings comprises reducing or turning-off power to one or more faulted stator windings (i.e., failed phase current set to 0; c.6:24-25), and increasing power to one or more other stator windings (i.e., with fault correction, the controller 210 sets magnitudes of phase currents for operational phases 1, 2 and 4-7 in the range between I1 and I2. For example, I1 may be set to 12 A and I2 may be set to 5 A; c.6:55-61).
Regarding claim 3, Buchanan teaches each the two or more motor modules (stages) 40 further comprises a detachable module housing (mating flange engagement system; ¶[0040]- ¶[0042]; Fig.8) in which the at least one stator and at least one rotor are disposed with an axial gap therebetween (Fig.12).
Regarding claim 4, Buchanan teaches the detachable module housing 40 comprises a releasable connection comprising a mechanical connection (bolts) 75 and an electrical connection (electrical quick-connects) 77 (¶[0040]-¶[0042]; Fig.8).
Regarding claim 5, Buchanan teaches the detachable module housing 40 comprises a first connection and a second connection (e.g., bolts 75 and electrical quick-connects 77), wherein the first connection and second connection are each connectable to one …a second motor module 40 (Fig.8).
Regarding claim 6, as noted for claim 1 above, Fielder teaches the claimed ESP system including one or more sensors coupled to the modular motor assembly (c.5:64-66), wherein the one or more sensors is configured to sense a fault (e.g., adverse conditions such as abnormal power performance; c.6:18-22) but does not teach the motors of the modular motor assembly comprise “axial flux” motors or “addressable” stator windings “configured to be individually controlled” wherein the one or more sensor[s] is configured to sense a fault “in the stator windings” and wherein the controller is “configured to detect faults in the stator windings within at least one stator based on data from the one or more sensor, and wherein, responsive to detection of a faulted stator winding, the controller is configured to communicate with the addressable stator windings to reduce or turn-off power to one or more faulted addressable stator windings.”
But, regarding the first difference, Buchanan teaches a downhole ESP system including permanent magnet synchronous motors that may be either a radial flux motor (i.e., rotor 110 surrounded by stator 116; ¶[0054]; Fig.11) or an axial flux motor (i.e., rotor 120 rotatably disposed above stator 122; ¶[0056]; Figs.12-14).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure Fielder’s modular motors as axial flux motors since Buchanan teaches these were known equivalents for downhole ESP motors.
Regarding the remaining differences, Maslov’s addressable stator windings 38 are “configured to be individually controlled” (i.e., each stator electromagnet is separate and autonomous and controlled by respective PE circuits 220 associated with each phase winding and by controller 210 that interacts with a fault-correction unit 260 to modify the phase currents Idi (t) in the phases that remain operational in accordance with a prescribed fault-correction algorithm; c.3:18-25; c.4:48-52). Further, Maslov’s controller 210 is “configured to detect faults in the stator windings [e.g., abnormal current value of phase current] within at least one stator based on data from the one or more sensors [230; c.4:60-67], and wherein, responsive to detection of a faulted stator winding, the controller is configured to communicate with the addressable stator windings to reduce or turn-off power to one or more faulted addressable stator windings” (i.e., the controller may control the PE circuit 220 corresponding to the failed phase so as to disable energization of the respective phase winding. c.4:43-47; in the fault-correction mode, the phase currents for the remaining phases are modified in accordance with pre-set parameters, e.g., the controller sets magnitudes of phase currents in some remaining operational phases to be 5 A instead of 10 A; abstract; c.6:50-61).
It would thus have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide the motors of the submersible axial flux modular motor assembly of Fielder and Buchanan with addressable stator windings configured to be individually controlled, wherein the one or more sensors is configured to sense a fault in the stator windings and wherein the controller is configured to detect faults in the stator windings within at least one stator based on data from the one or more sensor, and wherein, responsive to detection of a faulted stator winding, the controller is configured to communicate with the addressable stator windings to reduce or turn-off power to one or more faulted addressable stator windings since Maslov teaches this would have provided fault-tolerant operation of the motors without redundant elements.
Regarding claim 7, Maslov teaches that responsive to detection of a faulted stator winding, the controller 210 communicates with the addressable stator windings to increase power to one or more other stator windings (i.e., failed phase current set to 0; c.6:24-25; with fault correction, the controller 210 sets magnitudes of phase currents for operational phases 1, 2 and 4-7 in the range between I1 and I2. For example, I1 may be set to 12 A and I2 may be set to 5 A; c.6:55-61).
Regarding claim 8, Maslov teaches that responsive to reducing or turning-off power to one or more faulted stator winding (failed phase current set to 0; c.6:24-25) the controller 310 communicates with the addressable stator windings to increase power to one or more other stator windings (i.e., with fault correction, the controller 210 sets magnitudes of phase currents for operational phases 1, 2 and 4-7 in the range between I1 and I2. For example, I1 may be set to 12 A and I2 may be set to 5 A; c.6:55-61).
Regarding claim 10, as noted for claim 1 above, Fielder teaches the claimed motor assembly except for an “axial flux” motor assembly and “each stator includes a plurality of addressable stator windings, the addressable stator windings are configured to each be individually controlled, and individual control of addressable stator windings comprises reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to data sensed by one or more sensor.”
But, regarding the first difference, Buchanan teaches a downhole ESP system including permanent magnet synchronous motors that may be either a radial flux motor (i.e., rotor 110 surrounded by stator 116; ¶[0054]; Fig.11) or an axial flux motor (i.e., rotor 120 rotatably disposed above stator 122; ¶[0056]; Figs.12-14).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure Fielder’s modular motors as axial flux motors since Buchanan teaches these were known equivalents for downhole ESP motors.
Regarding the remaining differences, Maslov’s addressable stator windings 38 are configured to each be individually controlled (i.e., each stator electromagnet is separate and autonomous and controlled by respective PE circuits 220 associated with each phase winding and by controller 210 that interacts with a fault-correction unit 260 to modify the phase currents Idi (t) in the phases that remain operational in accordance with a prescribed fault-correction algorithm; c.3:18-25; c.4:48-52) and individual control of the addressable stator windings comprises reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to data sensed by one or more sensor 230 (i.e., the controller may control the PE circuit 220 corresponding to the failed phase so as to disable energization of the respective phase winding. c.4:43-47; in the fault-correction mode, the phase currents for the remaining phases are modified in accordance with pre-set parameters, e.g., the controller sets magnitudes of phase currents in some remaining operational phases to be 5 A instead of 10 A; abstract; c.6:50-61).
It would thus have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide the motors of the submersible axial flux modular motor assembly of Fielder and Buchanan with addressable stator windings configured to each be individually controlled, and individual control of addressable stator windings comprises reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to data sensed by one or more sensors since Maslov teaches this would have provided fault-tolerant operation of the motors without redundant elements.
Regarding claim 11, in Maslov the sensed data comprises a fault in one or more of the stator windings (i.e., abnormal value of phase current; c.4:63-67).
Regarding claim 12, in Maslov individual control of addressable stator windings further comprises increasing power in one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings (e.g., when phase 3 has a fault and is set to zero in fault correction the controller 210 sets magnitudes of phase currents for operational phases 1, 2 and 4-7 in the range between I1 and I2. For example, I1 may be set to 12 A and I2 may be set to 5 A; c.6:55-61).
Regarding claim 13, in Maslov increasing power in one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings comprises reducing or running-off power to one or more faulted stator windings (failed phase current set to 0; c.6:24-25), and increasing power to one or more non-faulted stator windings (e.g., I1 may be set to 12 A; c.6:55-61).
Regarding claim 14, Buchanan teaches each the two or more motor modules (stages) 40 further comprises a detachable module housing (mating flange engagement system; ¶[0040]- ¶[0042]; Fig.8) in which the at least one stator and at least one rotor are disposed with an axial gap therebetween (Fig.12), and the detachable module housing 40 comprises one or more releasable connections comprising a mechanical connection (bolts) 75 and an electrical connection (electrical quick-connects) 77 (¶[0041]-¶[0042]; Fig.8).
Regarding claim 15, Buchanan teaches the one or more releasable connections comprises a first connection and a second connection (e.g., bolts 75 and electrical quick-connects 77), wherein the first connection and second connection are each connectable to one…a second motor module 40 (Fig.8).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fielder, Buchanan & Maslov as applied to claim 6 above, further in view of Fleshman et al. (US 6,700,252).
The combination, in particular Buchanan, teaches the two or more motor modules comprise a first motor module 40 and a second motor module 40 coupled together with a first housing connected to a second housing…, and a first releasable electrical connector 77A of a first stator releasably connected to a second releasable electrical connector 77B of a second stator (Fig.8). Buchanan does not teach “a first rotary shaft of a first rotor releasably coupled to a second rotary shaft of a second rotor”. The remaining references do not remedy this deficiency.
But, Fleshman teaches a modular electric submersible pump (ESP) system comprising first and second modular motor modules coupled together (Fig.2), each motor module including a first rotary shaft (rotor) 60 of a first rotor releasably coupled to a second rotary shaft 60 of a second rotor (abstract; c.4:19-34; Figs.9-10). Fleshman’s releasable coupling allows a given ESP motor to be assembled to a variety of desired lengths by connecting the appropriate number of modular motor sections (abstract; c.1:35-66).
PNG
media_image5.png
369
989
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide Fielder, Buchanan & Maslov with a first rotary shaft of a first rotor releasably coupled to a second rotary shaft of a second rotor since Fleshman teaches this would have allowed a given ESP motor to have been assembled to a variety of desired lengths.
Claims 16-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleshman in view of Buchanan & Maslov.
Regarding claim 16, Fleshman teaches a motor module of a modular motor of an electric submersible pump (ESP) system, comprising: at least one stator 64; and at least one rotor 60 having a rotary shaft 60 with a releasable coupling (Fig.9), with a gap disposed between the at least one rotor and the at least one stator (Fig.2), each stator includes a plurality of stator windings (comprising conductors 54; Fig.4).
Fleshman’s modular motor is not an “axial flux” motor with an “axial gap” disposed between the at least one rotor and the at least one stator. Also, Fleshman does not teach the windings are “addressable” stator windings or that “the addressable stator windings are configured to each be individually controlled by reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to data sensed by one or more sensor[s].”
But, regarding the first difference, Buchanan teaches a downhole ESP system including permanent magnet synchronous motors that may be either a radial flux motor with a radial gap disposed between the rotor and stator (i.e., rotor 110 surrounded by stator 116; ¶[0054]; Fig.11) or an axial flux motor with an axial gap disposed between the rotor and stator (i.e., rotor 120 rotatably disposed above stator 122; ¶[0056]; Figs.12-14).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure Fleshman’s motors as axial flux motors since Buchanan teaches these were known equivalents for downhole ESP motors.
Regarding the remaining differences, Maslov teaches a fault-tolerant motor control system comprising a stator 30 including a plurality of addressable stator phase windings 38 (i.e., each of the plurality of phase windings are switchably energized by driving currents supplied by power electronic (PE) circuits 220 under control of a control circuit 210 in communication with a fault-correction look-up table; abstract; c.1:60-c.2:4; c.3:30-54; c.6:1-31) configured to each be individually controlled by reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to data sensed by one or more sensors 230 (i.e., each stator electromagnet is separate and autonomous and controlled by respective PE circuits 220 associated with each phase winding and by controller 210 that interacts with a fault-correction unit 260 to modify the phase currents Idi (t) in the phases that remain operational in accordance with a prescribed fault-correction algorithm; c.3:18-25; c.4:48-52; in the fault-correction mode, the phase currents for the remaining phases are modified in accordance with pre-set parameters, e.g., the controller sets magnitudes of phase currents in some remaining operational phases to be 5 A instead of 10 A; abstract; c.6:50-61; Figs.1-3). Maslov’s fault-tolerant motor control system provides fault-tolerant operation of a multiphase electric motor without redundant elements (c.1:5-9 & c.1:41-43).
It would thus have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide the stators of the submersible axial flux modular motor assembly of Fleshman and Buchanan with addressable stator windings configured to each be individually controlled by reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to data sensed by one or more sensors since Maslov teaches this would have provided fault-tolerant operation of the motors without redundant elements.
Regarding claim 17, in Maslov the sensed data comprises a fault in one or more of the stator windings (i.e., abnormal value of phase current; c.4:63-67).
Regarding claim 18, in Maslov individual control of addressable stator windings further comprises increasing power in one or more of the addressable stator windings (e.g., I1 may be set to 12 A) in response to reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings (failed phase current set to 0; c.6:24-25), and increasing power to one or more non-faulted stator windings (c.6:55-61).
Regarding claim 19, in Maslov increasing power in one or more of the addressable stator windings in response to reducing or turning-off power to one or more of the addressable stator windings comprises reducing or turning-off power to one or more faulted stator windings (i.e., failed phase current set to 0; c.6:24-25), and increasing power to one or more other stator windings (e.g., I1 may be set to 12 A; c.6:55-61).
Regarding claim 20, Fleshman teaches a detachable module housing (i.e., modular motor section) 46, wherein the at least one stator and at least one rotor are disposed therein (c.3:63-66; Fig.2).
Regarding claim 21, Fleshman teaches the detachable module housing comprises a first releasable connection (collar) 90 and a second releasable connection (male terminal) 104, wherein the first connection and second connection are each connectable to…a second motor module 46 (Figs.4&9-10).
Regarding claim 22, Fleshman teaches the detachable module housing comprises a mechanical connection (collar) 90 and an electrical connection (male terminal) 104 (Fig.9).
Regarding claim 23, Buchanan teaches the at least one rotor further comprises a plurality of permanent magnets 124, and wherein the permanent magnets are mounted onto a surface of or fixed into a rotor disk 120 (¶[0056]; Fig.14).
Regarding claim 24, in Buchanan the motor module has a rotor/stator configuration of… i) a single axial gap with one rotor and one stator ((¶[0056]; Fig.12).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BURTON S MULLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2029. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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, Tulsidas C Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/BURTON S MULLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834