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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 09/23/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-10 remain pending. Applicant’s amendment to the Specification overcomes the objection to the Specification.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on Page 8 that Egedal fails to remedy the deficiencies of Packer and Lutz as Egedal also fails to teach or suggest the aforementioned limitation of “determining, by the computing system, a plurality of polar values indicative of an aerodynamic profile for each of the one or more cross-sectional regions by providing the boundary region as an input to one or more panel method based techniques”. Applicant argues that Egedal’s method uses a thermal observation to derive a single-point parameter and that there is no teaching or suggestion of using this information to determine a plurality of polar values indicative of a complete aerodynamic profile. Applicant argues on Page 8-9 that Ito fails to remedy the deficiencies as Ito teaches the lift coefficient CL and drag coefficient CD are obtained from blade type data and that blade type data is pre-existing, library specification data for the idealized airfoil shape used at that particular blade’s station. Applicant argues that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have been taught to modify Egedal with Ito without using the applicant’s own invention as a roadmap to select specific elements from various references, which constitutes impermissible hindsight.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that the specification of the instant application in [0029] details that “In an embodiment, computing system (104) determines a plurality of polar values indicative of an aerodynamic profile for each of the one or more cross-sectional regions based on one or more panel method based techniques and the boundary region. For example, the plurality of polar values may be a drag co-efficient, a lift co-efficient, an angle of attack, a lift force, a combination thereof. Further, the one or more panel method based techniques may include at least one of computation fluid dynamics (CDF), wind tunnel measurements, and the like.” That is, the instant application details that “angle of attack” is an option for the “plurality of polar values”. Examiner notes that Egedal teaches in [0022] the region/point where there is a transition between the laminar flow and the turbulent air flow. Egedal further teaches in [0026] that the characteristics of the air flow, which includes the particular speed, angle of attack, and transition point depends on the radial position. Egedal further teaches in [0032] that the measured temperature values with a location the measured values exhibit a maximum difference relative to the temperature value of the ambient air, and the use of a look up table correlating the position of the maximum difference and the angle of attack, with the look up table is available from existing wind tunnel measurements. Given [0029] of the instant application detailing that “wind tunnel measurements” qualify as a panel method based technique”, under broadest reasonable interpretation Egedal teaches the claimed limitation.
With regards to Applicant’s argument with respect to previously disclosed prior art Ito, Examiner notes that the claim limitation of “estimate the energy production for the wind turbine based on one or more blade -element momentum based techniques using the plurality of polar values” is interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation. Ito teaches the blade element momentum theory in [0033], and in [0035]-[0063] details the mathematical operations associated therewith, which includes in [0056] the attack angle in the calculations. As the instant application details in [0029], the plurality of polar values includes the option of angle of attack. Thus under broadest reasonable interpretation, Ito teaches the claimed limitation.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-4 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Packer (US20220099067) in view of Lutz (ES2595049), Egedal (US20210048003), and Ito (US20120061966).
In regards to Claims 1 and 6, Packer teaches “at least one processor (processor – [0014]); and
a memory communicatively coupled to the at least one processor , wherein the memory stores instructions for the at least one processor (“computer processor means, reconstructing an image from the data capture means into a digital image of the wind turbine using the computer processor means, wherein the method is provided with at least one algorithm means to compare and contrast various parts of the digital image, with corresponding parts of a predetermined image of a healthy wind turbine, to identify defects or damage to the wind turbine, and the extent of the defects and damage, so as to ascertain if replacement of the wind turbine blade is necessary” – [0014]; on board computer – [0032]; remote computer – [0033]; portable computer such as laptop, tablet, mobile phone – [0035]), which one execution causes the at least one processor to:
obtain one or more infrared images of each blade from the plurality of blades of the wind turbine (“the data capture device 1 can be a thermal imaging camera [i.e. infrared image]”…” Alternatively, specialist cameras or data capture devices affixed underneath or on another part of the helicopter, but which are rotatable, have tracking mechanisms, and can maintain a line of sight view of the wind turbine 2 , as the helicopter 3 moves around it, can be used. These would need to be robust enough and should be fitted with anti-vibration dampers or stabilizers to prevent vibrations caused by the helicopter's motion or noise created by the helicopter's rotors (or caused by the turbines that are being inspected) from disrupting the data capture process and affecting the quality of the data that is collected. FIG. 13 shows a top elevation of a data capture device 1 of one aspect of the invention. It has a guide or tracking device 10 which emits a tracking electromagnetic wave such as a laser 13 . The laser 13 is adapted to track the motion of the blade 4 , and “follow” the blade as it rotates, so that a first data capture instrument 11 , such as an optical camera, can take pictures of the section of the blade 4 that is being tracked by the tracking device 10 . In order to do this, the laser 13 must follow the blade 4 as it moves, and the position it points to, and when sufficient image data has been collected, the laser 13 must move along the blade, redirecting the first data capture instrument 11 to collect data from a different section of that same blade, until image data of the whole blade 4 has been collected. This way, the first data capture instrument 11 can obtain image data of the whole “face” of the blade as the laser 13 is pointing and moving along the blade. Once sufficient image data of one blade have been collected, the laser 13 moves to the next blade, and after sufficient image data of that next blade has been collected, to the next (for turbines with 3 blades), until the whole external face of the turbine blades has been captured. Note that ideally this process should take between 20-25 seconds to capture image data of one face of the wind turbine (40 to 50 seconds for the whole turbine), comprising three blades, however the more image data that is collected, the more accurate the reconstructed virtual image will be. Thus, it is possible to collect more image data although this will mean longer data collection time, and may affect the overall cost of the data acquisition phase. When the helicopter 3 moves to a position where it is facing the rear of the turbine ( FIG. 2), the image capture operation is repeated until image data of the whole rear of the turbine has been collected. Thus, the device is provided with object recognition capability to recognize and follow the blade as it rotates and capture image data of the frontal face, rear face and curved sections of each blade. A second data capture instrument 12 is also provided, which is adapted to capture the data of the whole blade 4 , so that feedback is provided to the first data capture instrument 11 and the tracking device 10 . Since the tip of the blade is typically rotating at 100 m/s, this feedback enables the data capture device 1 to know where each blade currently is, and which blade the first data capture instrument 11 should be assessing” – [0062]); and
estimate the energy production for the wind turbine (“Meshing using boundary conditions (domain, physical or periodic) can help determine the torque and output power of a turbine blade, however periodic boundary conditions are used when the physical geometry of interest and the expected pattern of the flow have a periodically repeating nature (see Fluent Inc., 2006; Bazilevs, et al., 2011 incorporated herein by reference).” – [0069]; “The Output power can be calculated by following formula: P=τ×ω where P is power for one blade, τ is torque for one blade ω is angular velocity (rotor angular speed). The torque for a healthy blade within CFX is found from the following formula: torque_y( )@airfoil, and is equal to −1.66774e+006 . Thus, the output power of this model is equal to 1.9512558e+006 (Nm/s) for one blade. Full output power for the wind turbine can be calculated by the following formula: ΔP=P×n where ΔP is the total output power for the whole wind turbine, P is power for one blade and n is the number of the blades. The wind turbine has 3 blades therefore the output power for this wind turbine is equal to 5.8 MW” – [0071]).”
Packer is silent with regards to the language of “identify one or more cross-sectional regions of each of the blade using the one or more infrared images based on a boundary region ”
Lutz teaches “identify one or more cross-sectional regions of each of the blade using the one or more infrared images based on a boundary region (Infrared thermography takes advantage of the fact that all objects at a temperature above absolute zero emit radiation in the infrared region, which is characteristic of the corresponding temperature. Therefore, for temperatures between 0 °C and 1000 °C, the maximum intensity is emitted at wavelengths between 3μm and 10μm. This radiation can be detected using special infrared cameras, resulting in an image of the surface temperature of the objects measured. - [0011]; Thermographic imaging is used particularly advantageously to determine the surface quality of the rotor blade. - [0022]; Figures 1-3 show thermographic images of the rotor blade with different angles of attack with Figure 4 being a thermogram of a rotor blade, with the Figures show the surface and areas – [0025]-[0026])”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Packer to incorporate the teaching of Lutz to utilize infrared thermography to determine regions of a rotor blade. By utilizing infrared thermography this is an improvement that yields predictable results in the inspection of rotor blades of wind turbines.
Packer in view of Lutz is silent with regards to the language of “identify one or more cross-sectional regions of each of the blade based on a boundary region , wherein the boundary region is indicative of a transition from a first region with laminar air flow to a second region with a turbulent air flow; determine a plurality of polar values indicative of an aerodynamic profile for each of the one or more cross-sectional regions by providing the boundary region as an input to one or more panel method based techniques and the boundary region ”
Egedal teaches “identify one or more cross-sectional regions of each of the blade based on a boundary region , wherein the boundary region is indicative of a transition from a first region with laminar air flow to a second region with a turbulent air flow (“deriving the air flow characteristic based on the at least two temperature values” – [0023]; “the air flow characteristic is further based on a geometry of the surface of the blade” – [0025]; “the different positions at which the temperature values are measured have a substantially same radial position but different circumferential positions, in particular close to a leading edge of the blade and/or around an expected laminar to turbulent transition region” – [0028]; “Depending on the geometry of the surface of the rotor blade, the expected laminar to turbulent transition region may be located between for example 0% and 80% of a circumferential extent of the surface of the blade at the suction side and/or the pressure side. Thereby, providing temperature measurements in this expected transition region may enable to accurately determine the actual transition region or transition point which may of course depend on the radial position” – [0030]);
determine a plurality of polar values indicative of an aerodynamic profile for each of the one or more cross-sectional regions by providing the boundary region as an input to one or more panel method based techniques (“The determination of the location of the stagnation point and/or the determination of the stagnation temperature may be useful for estimating one or more parameters of the air flow characteristics, in particular the angle of attack and the free flow speed” – [0015]; “According to an embodiment of the present invention, the air flow characteristic comprises at least one of: direction of the air flow, in particular direction of the free air flow (i.e. not affected by the airfoil), in particular angle of attack, laminar to turbulent transition point of the (air foil affected) air flow, speed of the air flow, in particular speed the free air flow” – [0016]; “According to an embodiment of the present invention, the method comprises determining a location of a maximum difference between one of the measured temperature values and a temperature value of the ambient air; deriving a value of a direction of the air flow, in particular angle of attack as measured between the direction of the air flow and a chord line of the blade, based on the location and in particular at least on a geometry of the surface of the blade” – [0031]; “Having knowledge of a reliable direction and/or speed of the air flow impacting the rotor blade, the wind turbine may advantageously be controlled in an improved manner. Also knowledge of the region or point where there is a transition between the laminar flow of the (in particular air foil affected) air flow and the turbulent flow may appropriately enable the controlling of the wind turbine, for example regarding setting the pitch angle, setting the rotational speed of the rotor, setting power output or other operational parameters” – [0022]; “In general, the determined characteristics of the air flow (in particular speed and/or angle of attack and/or transition point) may depend on the radial position” – [0026]; “For example, the measured temperature values at different positions may be stored in an electronic storage and also the temperature value of the ambient air (e.g. measured with a temperature sensor not rotating with the blade, e.g. installed at a nacelle or a tower) may be stored in an electronic storage. The maximum different difference may be determined according to a conventional method. Further, the location at which the measured temperature exhibits a maximum difference relative to the temperature value of the ambient air may be determined. At the location of the maximum difference, a look up table correlating the position of this maximum difference (at the stagnation point) and the angle of attack can be used. Such a look up table can be readily available from existing simulations for the given airfoil section at the particular radial location, or from existing wind tunnel measurements for this section.” – [0032]);”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Packer in view of Lutz to incorporate the teaching of Egedal to determine the region transition from laminar to turbulent air flow based on thermal data. By utilizing infrared thermography this is an improvement that yields predictable results in the inspection of rotor blades of wind turbines. By using the thermal data to determine the angel of attack with the laminar to turbulent transition point of a blade, this is an improvement that yields predictable results in the evaluation of the air flow over blades in a wind turbine.
Packer in view of Lutz and Egedal is silent with regards to the language of “estimate the energy production for the wind turbine based on one or more blade -element momentum based techniques using the plurality of polar values”
Ito teaches “estimate the energy production for the wind turbine based on one or more blade -element momentum based techniques using the plurality of polar values (power generation output of a wind power generator acquired in accordance with the blade element momentum theory – [0033]; variables and steps related to the equation detailed in [0035]-[0063], with [0056] detailing the inclusion of the attack angle)”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Packer in view of Lutz and Egedal to incorporate the teaching of Ito to utilize blade element momentum theory to evaluate the wind turbine. By utilizing blade element momentum theory, this is an improvement that yields predictable results in the evaluation of the output of wind turbines based on the parameters associated with the blades.
In regards to Claims 2 and 7, Packer in view of Lutz, Egegal, and Ito discloses the claimed invention as detailed above. Packer is silent with regards to the language of “wherein identifying one or more cross-sectional regions comprises: determining the boundary region of the blade in the one or more infrared images using one or more image processing techniques; and
segregating the blade in the one or more infrared images into the one or more cross-sectional regions based on the boundary region and pixel values associated with the one or more infrared images .”
Lutz further teaches “wherein identifying one or more cross-sectional regions comprises: determining the boundary region of the blade in the one or more infrared images using one or more image processing techniques (Figures 1-3 show thermographic images of the rotor blade with different angles of attack with Figure 4 being a thermogram of a rotor blade, with the Figures show the surface and areas – [0025]-[0026]);
segregating the blade in the one or more infrared images into the one or more cross-sectional regions based on the boundary region and pixel values associated with the one or more infrared images (By precisely superimposing the pixels of both thermograms in their respective wavelength ranges, advantageous possibilities arise for identifying thermal differences both in the surface layer of the rotor blade and also in the interface between the surface layer and a base body. By taking measurements in both wavelength ranges, the absolute temperature of the respective rotor blade can be measured independently of emission coefficients, and it is also possible to cancel out the influence of changes in solar radiation - [0018]; Figures 1-3 show the regions in the thermographic image).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Packer in view of Lutz, Egegal, and Ito to incorporate the further teaching of Lutz to utilize infrared thermography to determine regions of a rotor blade. By utilizing infrared thermography this is an improvement that yields predictable results in the inspection of rotor blades of wind turbines.
In regards to Claims 3 and 8, Packer in view of Lutz, Egegal, and Ito discloses the claimed invention as detailed above. Packer further teaches “wherein determining the plurality of polar values comprises: providing each of the one or more cross-sectional regions , the boundary region , and one or more sectional co-ordinates as an input to the one or more panel method based techniques (“In analysing the data that is gathered by the data capture phase, the image data has to be imported into a software system that undertakes the reconstruction of the virtual image. This can be done on a computing system aboard the helicopter, or remotely during the data capture phase (using a conventional data transfer link that transfers the data from the helicopter to a remote location for analysis). Alternatively it can be done after the data capture phase, whereby the data is fed into a computing system for analysis. There are many data processing software packages on the market that can undertake such an exercise. Such software includes modularization, aero-hydro-servo-elastic tools, and other aerodynamics multi-physics engineering software and generally software simulation tools. One such software package is ANSYS CFX, a high-performance computational fluid dynamics software package that can be employed to create virtual images of turbines, from hundreds of files of image data. In order to demonstrate the accuracy of these software packages, in as far as calculating values for a blade that are comparable or equal to the manufacturer specified values (within an acceptable error margin), one method uses meshing, whereby an IGES file created by a CAD program such as SolidWorks can be imported into ANSYS MESHING CFD grid generation system to generate the computational grids required for the CFD analyses. FIG. 3 shows a 3-D blade geometry model of an NREL 5 Mega Watts offshore baseline wind turbine blade 4 generated by ANSYS CFD simulation software from a CAD drawing, showing airfoils cross sections 7 . As a form of background, the NREL 5 MW offshore baseline wind turbine blade properties are based on the values given in the report titled “Aeroelastic Modelling of the LMH64-5 Blade” by C. Lindenburg” – [0068]).”
Packer is silent with regards to the language of “determining the plurality of polar values for each of the one or more cross- sectional regions based on an output of the one or more panel method based techniques.”
Egegal further teaches “determining the plurality of polar values for each of the one or more cross- sectional regions based on an output of the one or more panel method based techniques (“The determination of the location of the stagnation point and/or the determination of the stagnation temperature may be useful for estimating one or more parameters of the air flow characteristics, in particular the angle of attack and the free flow speed” – [0015]; “According to an embodiment of the present invention, the air flow characteristic comprises at least one of: direction of the air flow, in particular direction of the free air flow (i.e. not affected by the airfoil), in particular angle of attack, laminar to turbulent transition point of the (air foil affected) air flow, speed of the air flow, in particular speed the free air flow” – [0016]; “According to an embodiment of the present invention, the method comprises determining a location of a maximum difference between one of the measured temperature values and a temperature value of the ambient air; deriving a value of a direction of the air flow, in particular angle of attack as measured between the direction of the air flow and a chord line of the blade, based on the location and in particular at least on a geometry of the surface of the blade” – [0031])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Packer in view of Lutz, Egegal, and Ito to incorporate the further teaching of Egedal to determine the region transition from laminar to turbulent air flow based on thermal data. By utilizing infrared thermography this is an improvement that yields predictable results in the inspection of rotor blades of wind turbines. By using the thermal data to determine the angel of attack with the laminar to turbulent transition point of a blade, this is an improvement that yields predictable results in the evaluation of the air flow over blades in a wind turbine.
In regards to Claims 4 and 9, Packer in view of Lutz, Egegal, and Ito discloses the claimed invention as detailed above. Packer is silent with regards to the language of “wherein estimating the energy production comprises: providing the plurality of polar values associated with each of the one or more cross-sectional regions , a blade geometry data, a wind turbine operational data as an input to the one or more BEM based techniques; and estimating the energy production for the wind turbine based on an output of the one or more BEM based techniques.”
Ito further teaches “wherein estimating the energy production comprises: providing the plurality of polar values associated with each of the one or more cross-sectional regions , a blade geometry data, a wind turbine operational data as an input to the one or more BEM based techniques; and estimating the energy production for the wind turbine based on an output of the one or more BEM based techniques (power generation output of a wind power generator acquired in accordance with the blade element momentum theory – [0033]; variables and steps related to the equation detailed in [0035]-[0063], [0038] details projected area of rotor, [0039] details radius of rotor, [0043] number of blades, [0046], distance of blade, [0040] power coefficient, with [0056] detailing the inclusion of the attack angle).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Packer in view of Lutz, Egegal, and Ito to incorporate the further teaching of Ito to utilize blade element momentum theory to evaluate the wind turbine. By utilizing blade element momentum theory, this is an improvement that yields predictable results in the evaluation of the output of wind turbines based on the parameters associated with the blades.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 10 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.
In regards to Claims 5 and 10, Packer in view of Lutz, Egegal, and Ito discloses the claimed invention as detailed above. Packer further teaches “determining at least one of a damage area of the blade , a type of the damage on the blade using an Artificial Intelligence (AI) model (“The computer processor means is adapted to run the algorithm means to compare and contrast various parts of the digital image, with corresponding parts of a predetermined image of a healthy wind turbine” – [0038]; “The computer processing means is adapted to identify defects or damage to the wind turbine blades, and the extent of the defect and damage” – [0039]; “The algorithm means may be adapted to interface with an Artificial Intelligence (AI) engine” - [0041];
Packer in view of Lutz, Egegal, and Ito are silent with regards to the language of “determining a deviation between the energy production estimated for the wind turbine and a pre-defined threshold value;
computing a reduction in the energy production of the wind turbine based on the deviation;
determining a financial loss from the wind turbine due to the reduction in the energy production ;
determining one or more factors of the blade in the wind turbine affected by the damage, wherein the one or more factors comprises a load distribution associated with each of the blade in the wind turbine , asymmetric load distributions between each of the blade in the wind turbine , a noise emission value associated with the wind turbine , and a need for a control change in the wind turbine ; and
identifying at least one of a type of a maintenance activity and a time duration for performing the maintenance activity for the damage area of the blade in the wind turbine based on the financial loss and the one or more factors.”
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 YOSSEF KORANG-BEHESHTI whose telephone number is 272-3291. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 6:30 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 at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at 270-0349. 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 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.
/YOSSEF KORANG-BEHESHTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
