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 . This action is made non-final.
The preliminary amendments to the specification, abstract, and claims filed on 07/25/2024 have been entered.
Claims 21-40 filed on 07/25/2024 have been reviewed and considered by this office action.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: “Control Device for a Twin-Screw Compressor for Compressed Air-Processing, Air-Storage, and/or Compressed-Air Distribution.”
Claim Objections
Claims 25 and 35 objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 25, “pre-defined pressure quality comprises 100%” should read “pre-defined pressure quality comprises 100% in real time”.
Claim 35 is objected to on the same premise as Claim 25.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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.
Claims 21, 23, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wagner et al. (US 20120029706 A1, herein Wagner).
Regarding claim 21, Wagner teaches a compressor system (see FIG.2) comprising:
a component of compressed-air generation (see FIG. 2 (2,8); [0084] the compressed air station 1 comprises three compressors 2 provided to supply pressurized fluid 4 (not shown in the present figure) to three pressurized fluid tanks 8); and
an electronic controller (see FIG. 2 system controller 3) interacting with the component of compressed-air generation ([0084] FIG. 2 shows a schematic representation of a somewhat more complex compressed air station 1 compared to the embodiment according to FIG. 1 which interacts with a controller 3 which controls or regulates same.), the electronic controller:
storing a simulation model of the component of compressed-air generation ([0085] The controller 3 can hereby make use of a prior simulation method 20 (not shown in the present figure) in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention (simulation model)), the simulation model replicating behavior of the component of compressed-air generation (See FIG.3 [0085] FIG. 3 shows a model of the compressed air station as shown in FIG. 2 as used for example in a controller 3 to control the actual compressed air station.);
running the simulation model (see FIG. 9, 10; [0093] FIG. 9 shows just such a simulation over a future-simulated time interval 23; [0094] FIG. 10 depicts three possible virtual pressure profiles as would result from different control parameter changes over the simulated interval of time 23 pursuant the prior simulation 20)
to determine an energy optimal combination ([0088] prior simulation methods 20 with different output parameters, same returns three alternative switching strategies 11 (Alt.1, Alt.2 and Alt.3) in the present case from which the applicable alternative switching strategy 11 will be selected on the basis of a performance criterion 22
Wagner further teaches: [0051] The method for controlling a compressed air station can be further characterized by the performance criterion being defined at the lowest possible consumption of energy or at least significantly determined therefrom) of a set load demand pressure threshold for setting a running under load operating state ([0089] System-relevant parameters can on the one hand be fixed system parameters 55 which comprise for example information on the amount of pressurized fluid supplied to the individual compressors or on the capacities of the individual compressors under different load conditions) and a reset load demand pressure threshold ([0060] The method for controlling a compressed air station can further be characterized by determining the upper pressure value in at least two prior simulations having the same parameterization but different numerical values for the upper pressure value and the pressure-equalizing compressor is then converted into a loaded compressor in the prior simulation when the pressure of the pressurized fluid in the compressed air station falls below the lower pressure value, and then converted into a non-loaded compressor when the pressure of the pressurized fluid in the compressed air station exceeds the upper pressure value.) for departing from a running under load state (see FIG. 7 [0090] When using a single predefined fixed pressure band to control a compressed air station 1, as for instance in a sequential control as known in the prior art, a corresponding switching operation occurs upon the pressure profile departing from the pressure band.
Wagner defines switching operation as [0023] the term switching operation comprises not only discrete changes in component operating condition (for example switching between stopped, no-load running and load running mode), but rather also continuous changes, for example the change over time in rotational speed of a variable-speed compressor or the continuous closing or opening of valves.);
And controlling the compressor system including the component of compressed-air generation according to the set load demand pressure threshold ([0090] representation of the pressure variation of a compressed air station in terms of a pressure band which defines a lower pressure band limit 42 by a minimum pressure P.sub.min as well as an upper pressure band limit 41 by a maximum pressure P.sub.max.) and the reset load demand pressure threshold to maintain a pressure between the compressor system and a compressed-air network above a minimum pressure ([0090] pressure profile for the pressure band falling short of the lower pressure band limit 42 can prompt a switching operation which readies an additional compressor to supply pressurized fluid.) and below a maximum pressure ([0090] when the pressure profile departs from the upper pressure band limit 41, the pressure profile can be corrected for example by means of a switching-off operation at the time the upper pressure band limit 41 is exceeded such that shortly after the exceeding, it is again within the limits of the pressure band.).
Regarding claim 23, Wagner teaches the compressor system of claim 21,
Wagner further teaches wherein the component of compressed air generation comprises at least two individual apparatuses (see FIG. 2, (reference number 2 and 8)).
Regarding claim 27, Wagner teaches the compressor system of claim 21,
Wagner further teaches wherein the electronic controller comprises a two-position controller ([0084] The control signals which the controller 3 transmits to the actuators 5 for switching operations can be of the most diverse type and can also be of both a discrete as well as a continuous nature.) having a hysteresis (see FIG. 11; [0096] a decision be made as to whether the switching operation on the second actuator will improve how well a basic condition is fulfilled (e.g. avoiding undercutting of the minimum pressure P.sub.min) or even be necessary at all.;
Wagner further teaches [0096] based on the prior simulation method 20 performed, the decision can be made that no switching operation should be performed on the second actuator to improve the pressure profile in the compressed air station 1.).
Regarding claim 28, Wagner teaches the compressor system of claim 21,
Wagner further teaches wherein the simulation model comprises a physical model (see FIG. 3 [0085] The controller 3 can hereby make use of a prior simulation method 20 (not shown in the present figure) in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention (simulation model)) and a logical model ([0018]The algorithm kernel can further contain information on the configuration of the compressed air station as well as the types of components contained therein and their parameters. It can also comprise heuristics for configuring different scenarios to analyze.).
The claim language “the physical model” has been interpreted in light of Specification page 24 line 15 (“a.1. Controlling in real time”).
Regarding claim 29, Wagner teaches the compressor system of claim 21,
Wagner further teaches wherein: the compressor system further comprises
a compressed-air reservoir (see FIG. 2 (8); [0084] According to the switching operations the controller 3 performs on the actuators 5, a specific pressurized fluid 4 can be routed from the pressurized fluid tank 8 to the receiving station to the consumer; plus pressure equalization is also possible among the individual pressurized fluid tanks 8.); and
the simulation model conjointly a behavior of the compressed-air reservoir ([0089] Such system-relevant parameters 56 of the compressed air station 1 can comprise information on the operating state of at least one pressurized fluid tank 8 or its pressure.).
Regarding claim 30, Wagner teaches the compressor system of claim 21,
Wagner further teaches wherein the electronic controller running the simulation model further comprises the electronic controller running the simulation model at a given pre-defined temporal profile of compressed air consumption ([0088] Here a prior simulation method (prior simulation) is initialized at Time t=0 s (present) with the status variables which express the current status of the compressed air station 1. The prior simulation method starts immediately after initialization t.apprxeq.0 s (i.e. a point in time which can still be identified as present within the scope of the simulation time period)).
Regarding claim 31, Wagner teaches a method for operating a compressor system using an electronic controller (See FIG. 2 (system controller 3), the method comprising:
storing on the electronic controller a simulation model of a component of compressed-air generation contained in the compressor system ([0085] The controller 3 can hereby make use of a prior simulation method 20 (not shown in the present figure) in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention (simulation model)), the electronic controller interacting with the component of compressed-air generation ([0084] FIG. 2 shows a schematic representation of a somewhat more complex compressed air station 1 compared to the embodiment according to FIG. 1 which interacts with a controller 3 which controls or regulates same.), and the simulation model replicating behavior of the component of compressed-air generation (See FIG.3 [0085] FIG. 3 shows a model of the compressed air station as shown in FIG. 2 as used for example in a controller 3 to control the actual compressed air station.);
running the simulation model (see FIG. 9, 10 [0093] FIG. 9 shows just such a simulation over a future-simulated time interval 23; [0094] FIG. 10 depicts three possible virtual pressure profiles as would result from different control parameter changes over the simulated interval of time 23 pursuant the prior simulation 20) on the electronic controller to determine an energy optimal combination ([0088] prior simulation methods 20 with different output parameters, same returns three alternative switching strategies 11 (Alt.1, Alt.2 and Alt.3) in the present case from which the applicable alternative switching strategy 11 will be selected on the basis of a performance criterion 22) of a set load demand pressure threshold for setting a running under load operating state ([0089] System-relevant parameters can on the one hand be fixed system parameters 55 which comprise for example information on the amount of pressurized fluid supplied to the individual compressors or on the capacities of the individual compressors under different load conditions
Wagner further teaches: [0051] The method for controlling a compressed air station can be further characterized by the performance criterion being defined at the lowest possible consumption of energy or at least significantly determined therefrom) and a reset load demand pressure threshold ([0060] The method for controlling a compressed air station can further be characterized by determining the upper pressure value in at least two prior simulations having the same parameterization but different numerical values for the upper pressure value and the pressure-equalizing compressor is then converted into a loaded compressor in the prior simulation when the pressure of the pressurized fluid in the compressed air station falls below the lower pressure value, and then converted into a non-loaded compressor when the pressure of the pressurized fluid in the compressed air station exceeds the upper pressure value.) for departing from a running under load state (see FIG. 7 [0090] When using a single predefined fixed pressure band to control a compressed air station 1, as for instance in a sequential control as known in the prior art, a corresponding switching operation occurs upon the pressure profile departing from the pressure band.);
And controlling the compressor system including the component of compressed-air generation using the electronic controller in accordance with the set load demand pressure threshold ([0090] representation of the pressure variation of a compressed air station in terms of a pressure band which defines a lower pressure band limit 42 by a minimum pressure P.sub.min as well as an upper pressure band limit 41 by a maximum pressure P.sub.max.) and the reset load demand pressure threshold ([0060] The method for controlling a compressed air station can further be characterized by determining the upper pressure value in at least two prior simulations having the same parameterization but different numerical values for the upper pressure value and the pressure-equalizing compressor is then converted into a loaded compressor in the prior simulation when the pressure of the pressurized fluid in the compressed air station falls below the lower pressure value, and then converted into a non-loaded compressor when the pressure of the pressurized fluid in the compressed air station exceeds the upper pressure value.) to maintain a pressure between the compressor system and a compressed-air network above a minimum pressure ([0090] pressure profile for the pressure band falling short of the lower pressure band limit 42 can prompt a switching operation which readies an additional compressor to supply pressurized fluid.
Wagner defines switching operation as [0023] the term switching operation comprises not only discrete changes in component operating condition (for example switching between stopped, no-load running and load running mode), but rather also continuous changes, for example the change over time in rotational speed of a variable-speed compressor or the continuous closing or opening of valves.) and below a maximum pressure ([0090] when the pressure profile departs from the upper pressure band limit 41, the pressure profile can be corrected for example by means of a switching-off operation at the time the upper pressure band limit 41 is exceeded such that shortly after the exceeding, it is again within the limits of the pressure band.).
Regarding claim 33, Wagner teaches the method of claim 31.
Wagner further teaches wherein the component of compressed air generation comprises at least two individual apparatuses (see FIG. 2, (reference number 2 and 8)).
Regarding claim 36, Wagner teaches the method of claim 31.
Wagner further teaches wherein the electronic controller comprises a two-position controller ([0084] It should be obvious to one skilled in the art that such a connection can be made. The control signals which the controller 3 transmits to the actuators 5 for switching operations can be of the most diverse type and can also be of both a discrete as well as a continuous nature.) having a hysteresis (see FIG. 11; [0096] a decision be made as to whether the switching operation on the second actuator will improve how well a basic condition is fulfilled (e.g. avoiding undercutting of the minimum pressure P.sub.min) or even be necessary at all.;
Wagner further teaches [0096] based on the prior simulation method 20 performed, the decision can be made that no switching operation should be performed on the second actuator to improve the pressure profile in the compressed air station 1.).
Regarding claim 37, Wagner teaches the method of claim 31.
Wagner further teaches wherein the simulation model comprises a physical model (see FIG. 3 [0085] The controller 3 can hereby make use of a prior simulation method 20 (not shown in the present figure) in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention (simulation model)) and a logical model ([0018]The algorithm kernel can further contain information on the configuration of the compressed air station as well as the types of components contained therein and their parameters. It can also comprise heuristics for configuring different scenarios to analyze.).
The claim language “the physical model” has been interpreted in light of Specification page 24 line 15 (“a.1. Controlling in real time”).
Regarding claim 38, Wagner teaches the method of claim 31.
Wagner further teaches wherein: the compressor system further comprises
a compressed-air reservoir (see FIG. 2 (8); [0084] According to the switching operations the controller 3 performs on the actuators 5, a specific pressurized fluid 4 can be routed from the pressurized fluid tank 8 to the receiving station to the consumer; plus pressure equalization is also possible among the individual pressurized fluid tanks 8.);
and running the simulation model further comprises conjointly considering a structure and a behavior of the compressed-air reservoir ([0089] Such system-relevant parameters 56 of the compressed air station 1 can comprise information on the operating state of at least one pressurized fluid tank 8 or its pressure.).
Regarding claim 39, Wager teaches the method of claim 31.
Wagner further teaches wherein running the simulation model further comprises running the simulation model at a given pre-defined temporal profile of compressed air consumption ([0088] Here a prior simulation method (prior simulation) is initialized at Time t=0 s (present) with the status variables which express the current status of the compressed air station 1. The prior simulation method starts immediately after initialization t.apprxeq.0 s (i.e. a point in time which can still be identified as present within the scope of the simulation time period)).
Regarding claim 40, Wagner teaches the method of claim 39.
Wagner further teaches wherein the method further comprises receiving from an operator of the compressor system the given pre-defined temporal profile of compressed air consumption ([0037] One advantageous embodiment of the inventive method can provide for a development of the different switching strategies to be calculated in discrete or continuous steps over a predetermined interval of time during the prior simulation method. The length of the time interval can thereby for example be predefined externally by an operator of the compressed air station or also fixedly parameterized.)
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 22, 24, 25, 26, 32, 34, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wagner, in view of Sato (US 20110129361 A1).
Regarding claim 22, Wagner teaches the compressor system of claim 21 but does not teach the further dependent limitations in Claim 22.
Sato further teaches wherein the component of compressed-air generation comprises a screw-compressor ([0031] There is no specified kind or type as to the compressor; the compressor may a displacement type compressor such as a screw compressor or a reciprocating type compressor; or, the compressor may be a turbo-compressor such as a centrifugal compressor or an axial compressor.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the system of Wagner to incorporate the teachings of Sato so as to include the system compressor comprising a screw compressor. Doing so would allow an optimization of the compressor unit. (Sato [0019] an excessively high operation pressure over a required level can be evaded; and, energy saving can be achieved and the life of the compressor can be prolonged.)
Regarding claim 24, Wagner in view of Sato teaches the compressor system of claim 22,
Wagner further teaches wherein the electronic controller running the simulation model further comprises the electronic controller running the simulation model in accordance with a pre-defined pressure quality comprising ([0061] All values between the minimum and maximum value for the upper pressure value are allowable pressure values in the prior simulation. Segmenting this pressure regime into for example equally-spaced pressure limits allows a predetermined number of upper pressure values to be analyzed by means of the prior simulation as to their suitable properties for controlling the compressed air station.)
Wagner does not explicitly teach a portion of time during which an exit pressure of the screw compressor is between the set load demand pressure threshold and the reset load demand pressure threshold.
Sato teaches a portion of time ([0042] While the discharge pressure P does not exceed the upper limit pressure PH, the time cycle control section 18 of the control means 15 judges whether or not the elapsed time t1 measured by the timer 16 exceeds the predetermined time duration T which data is stored in the memory section 20) during which an exit pressure (discharge pressure P of the compressor 10) of the screw compressor is between the set load demand pressure threshold and the reset load demand pressure threshold ([0041] The pressure sensor 14 detects the discharge pressure P of the compressor 10; the control means 15 judges whether or not the discharge pressure P is lower than the upper limit pressure PH which data is stored in the memory section 20).
Regarding claim 25, Wagner in view of Sato teaches the compressor system of claim 24,
Wagner further teaches wherein the pre-defined pressure quality comprises 100% ([0094] Compared to the pressure profile depicted in FIG. 9, FIG. 10 depicts three possible virtual pressure profiles as would result from different control parameter changes over the simulated interval of time 23 pursuant the prior simulation 20.)
Regarding claim 26, Wagner in view of Sato teaches the compressor system of claim 22,
Wagner further teaches wherein the energy optimal combination is associated with a minimized electrical power input to the screw-compressor ([0051] The method for controlling a compressed air station can be further characterized by the performance criterion being defined at the lowest possible consumption of energy or at least significantly determined therefrom.).
Regarding claim 32, Wagner teaches the method of claim 31 but does not teach the dependent limitations in Claim 32.
Sato further teaches wherein the component of compressed-air generation comprises a screw-compressor ([0031] There is no specified kind or type as to the compressor; the compressor may a displacement type compressor such as a screw compressor or a reciprocating type compressor; or, the compressor may be a turbo-compressor such as a centrifugal compressor or an axial compressor.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the system of Wagner to incorporate the teachings of Sato so as to include the system compressor comprising a screw compressor. Doing so would allow an optimization of the compressor unit. (Sato [0019] an excessively high operation pressure over a required level can be evaded; and, energy saving can be achieved and the life of the compressor can be prolonged.)
Regarding claim 34, Wagner in view of Sato teaches the method of claim 32.
Wagner further teaches wherein running the simulation model further comprises running the simulation model in accordance with a pre-defined pressure quality ([0061] All values between the minimum and maximum value for the upper pressure value are allowable pressure values in the prior simulation. Segmenting this pressure regime into for example equally-spaced pressure limits allows a predetermined number of upper pressure values to be analyzed by means of the prior simulation as to their suitable properties for controlling the compressed air station.)
Wagner does not explicitly teach comprising a portion of time during which an exit pressure of the screw compressor is within the set load demand pressure threshold and the reset load demand pressure threshold.
Sato teaches comprising a portion of time ([0042] While the discharge pressure P does not exceed the upper limit pressure PH, the time cycle control section 18 of the control means 15 judges whether or not the elapsed time t1 measured by the timer 16 exceeds the predetermined time duration T which data is stored in the memory section 20) during which an exit pressure (discharge pressure P of the compressor 10) of the screw compressor is within the set load demand pressure threshold and the reset load demand pressure threshold ([0041] The pressure sensor 14 detects the discharge pressure P of the compressor 10; the control means 15 judges whether or not the discharge pressure P is lower than the upper limit pressure PH which data is stored in the memory section 20).
Regarding claim 35, Wagner in view of Sato teaches the method of claim 34.
Wagner further teaches wherein the pre-defined pressure quality comprises 100% ([0094] Compared to the pressure profile depicted in FIG. 9, FIG. 10 depicts three possible virtual pressure profiles as would result from different control parameter changes over the simulated interval of time 23 pursuant the prior simulation 20.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20110286860 A1— Method For Controlling A Compressor Installation (compressor system control using steps and thresholds)
US 20130115109 A1 – Compressor Discharge Temperature Monitor and Alarm (monitors compressor based on the runtime temperature and sends an alarm if exceeds certain thresholds)
US 20120029706 A1 – Simulation-Supported Method for Controlling and Regulating Compressed Air Stations (compressor system with air reservoir using simulation)
US 20110129361 A1 – Compressor Capacity Control Method and Device for Controlling The Capacity of a Compressor (compressor with a tank and includes screw compressor)
US 20100166571 A1 – Device for Regulating the Operating Pressure of an Oil-Injected Compressor Installation (compressor system using a screw compressor using PID control algorithm)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason Choi whose telephone number is (571) 270 0512. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:00-6:00 EST.
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, Robert Fennema can be reached at (571)272-2748. 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.
/J.J.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ROBERT E FENNEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights