DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is in response to the application filed on 12/119/24.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. 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
3. Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “a non-linear variation of the firing angles” should be replaced with “the non-linear variation of the firing angles”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
5. Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Skibinski et al. (US 5483142).
Regarding claim 1: Skibinski et al. disclose a computer-implemented method (i.e. figures 6-8) for controlling a ramp-up of a voltage (i.e. voltage of VDC) in a DC-link (i.e. 168) of an electrical converter (i.e. converter of figure 6) connected to an alternating power source (i.e. 152) in order to reach a significantly continuous voltage (i.e. VDC) in the DC-link (i.e. 168);
wherein the DC-link (i.e. 168) comprises a positive bus (i.e. +bus) and a negative bus (i.e. -bus);
wherein the electrical converter (i.e. converter of figure 6) comprises an arm (i.e. 153) connected to a phase of the alternating power source (i.e. 152); the arm (i.e. 153) being connected on one side to the positive bus (i.e. +bus) and on another side to the negative bus (i.e. -bus) of the DC-link and comprising a diode (i.e. 158b) and a thyristor (i.e. 158a) connected in series;
wherein the method comprises: determining a command law (i.e. using the function of control circuit in figure 6 and 8) of the thyristor (i.e. 158a) for producing a non-linear variation of firing angles (i.e. firing α in equation 22, phase angle θ in equation 12. The precharge circuit 157 is non-linear and is not using linear phase control) (i.e. Col. 13, lines 24-61 and Col. 15, lines 41-43) of the thyristor (i.e. 158a) over time; and applying the command law (i.e. using the function of control circuit in figure 6 and 8) to the thyristor (i.e. 158a) (i.e. Col. 14, lines 5-10).
Regarding claim 12: A computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions which, when executed by at least one controller (i.e. controller of figure 6), cause the at least one controller to carry out the method of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 2 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skibinski et al. (US 5483142) in view of Zhou et al. (US 20130033907).
Regarding claim 2: Skibinski et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the command law of the thyristor is based on a pulse width modulation, PWM, function; and wherein a non-linear variation of the firing angles of the thyristor over time is obtained by a non-linear variation of a duty cycle of the PWM function over time.
Zhou et al. disclose a power supply (i.e. figures 1 and 9) comprising the command law (i.e. function of the controller 140) of the thyristor (i.e. thyristor of the converter 110a) is based on a pulse width modulation, PWM, function (i.e. 150); and wherein a non-linear variation of the firing angles (i.e. non-linear of the rectifier firing angles, ¶ 83) of the thyristor over time is obtained by a non-linear variation of a duty cycle of the PWM function over time (i.e. non-linear function of the PWM) (i.e. ¶ 69 and 81-83).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Skibinski et al.’s invention with the power supply as disclose by Zhou et al. for minimized or reduced total harmonic distortion in the line current spectrum including the source harmonic current, the load harmonics and the PWM harmonics.
Regarding claim 8: Skibinski et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the non-linear variation of firing angles of the thyristor over time follows a second non-linear function.
Zhou et al. disclose a power supply (i.e. figures 1 and 9) comprising the non-linear variation of firing angles (i.e. non-linear of the rectifier firing angles, ¶ 83) of the thyristor over time follows a second non-linear function (i.e. non-linear function of f_ish) (i.e. ¶ 69 and 81-83).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Skibinski et al.’s invention with the power supply as disclose by Zhou et al. for minimized or reduced total harmonic distortion in the line current spectrum including the source harmonic current, the load harmonics and the PWM harmonics.
8. Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skibinski et al. (US 5483142) in view of Ljushev (US 20200403493).
Regarding claim 13: Skibinski et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose a variable speed drive adapted to drive an electric motor (4), the variable speed drive comprising a rectifier, an inverter and a DC-link; wherein the DC-link comprising a positive bus and a negative bus and being adapted to supply the inverter with a significantly continuous voltage; wherein the rectifier comprises a mix bridge with three arms connected to a respective phase of a three-phase power source; each arm being connected on one side to the positive bus and on another side to the negative bus of the DC-link and comprising a diode and a thyristor connected in series; the variable speed drive being configured to carry out the method of claim 1.
Ljushev disclose a power supply (i.e. figure 5) comprising a variable speed drive adapted to drive an electric motor (4) (i.e. 26), the variable speed drive comprising a rectifier (i.e. 28), an inverter (i.e. 32) and a DC-link (i.e. 30); wherein the DC-link (i.e. 30) comprising a positive bus and a negative bus (i.e. +/- bus) and being adapted to supply the inverter (i.e. 32) with a significantly continuous voltage (i.e. from 30); wherein the rectifier (i.e. 28) comprises a mix bridge with three arms connected to a respective phase of a three-phase power source (i.e. AC provide to 28); each arm being connected on one side to the positive bus (i.e. +bus) and on another side to the negative bus (i.e. - bus) of the DC-link (i.e. 30) and comprising a diode and a thyristor (i.e. diodes and thyristor of 28) connected in series; the variable speed drive (i.e. circuit of figure 5) being configured to carry out the method of claim 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Skibinski et al.’s invention with the power supply as disclose by Ljushev to overcoming the problem of protection the DC-link capacitors during a start-up phase in which the DC link voltage is difficult to measure.
Regarding claim 14: Skibinski et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the variable speed drive also comprises a controller adapted to carry out the method.
Ljushev disclose a power supply (i.e. figure 5) comprising the variable speed drive also comprises a controller (i.e. 34) adapted to carry out the method.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Skibinski et al.’s invention with the power supply as disclose by Ljushev to overcoming the problem of protection the DC-link capacitors during a start-up phase in which the DC link voltage is difficult to measure.
9. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skibinski et al. (US 5483142) in view of Ljushev (US 20200403493) and further in view of Esnault (US 20160241185).
Regarding claim 15: Skibinski et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose an electric motor comprising a nominal power greater than 15 kW.
Esnault disclose a power supply an electric motor comprising a nominal power greater than 15 kW (i.e. ¶ 36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Skibinski et al.’s invention with the power supply as disclose by Esnault, because there is a need for a simple, inexpensive and effective way to discharge the electrical energy storage unit(s).
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 3-7 and 9-11 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
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1269. The examiner can normally be reached Flex: M-F 8-7.
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, Monica Lewis can be reached at 571-272-1838. 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.
/Nguyen Tran/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights