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 .
Claims 22-31 are currently being examined.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “ARH” in box 416 in Fig. 4.
The drawings are objected to because in Fig. 7 the legend at the top labeling each of the symbols is believed to be in error and should read from the top down as: 100%, 80%, 60% and 40%.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 22-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
MPEP 2161.01(I) applies to the following 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections for failing to comply with the written description requirement. MPEP 2161.01(I) stated “When examining computer-implemented functional claims, examiners should determine whether the specification discloses the computer and the algorithm (e.g., the necessary steps and/or flowcharts) that perform the claimed function in sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor possessed the claimed subject matter at the time of filing. An algorithm is defined, for example, as "a finite sequence of steps for solving a logical or mathematical problem or performing a task." Microsoft Computer Dictionary (5th ed., 2002). Applicant may "express that algorithm in any understandable terms including as a mathematical formula, in prose, or as a flow chart, or in any other manner that provides sufficient structure." Finisar Corp. v. DirecTV Grp., Inc., 523 F.3d 1323, 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (internal citation omitted). It is not enough that one skilled in the art could write a program to achieve the claimed function because the specification must explain how the inventor intends to achieve the claimed function to satisfy the written description requirement. See, e.g., Vasudevan Software, Inc. v. MicroStrategy, Inc., 782 F.3d 671, 681-683, 114 USPQ2d 1349, 1356, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (reversing and remanding the district court’s grant of summary judgment of invalidity for lack of adequate written description where there were genuine issues of material fact regarding "whether the specification show[ed] possession by the inventor of how accessing disparate databases is achieved"). If the specification does not provide a disclosure of the computer and algorithm in sufficient detail to demonstrate to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor possessed the invention a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for lack of written description must be made.”
Independent claim 22 recites the following steps included in a computer-implemented method:
“determining a power factor for the turbine engine based on the optimization objective selected for the turbine engine and based on the data indicative of the ambient atmospheric conditions;
generating, by a real-time dynamic model, virtual data indicative of a response of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting, wherein the real-time dynamic model provides a simplified representation of the turbine engine;
processing, in a life counter, the virtual data generated in real time by the dynamic model of the turbine engine to determine an effective base hours, EBH, count for at least one component of the turbine engine;
processing, by a remaining equivalent base hours, REBH, count, the EBH count to obtain a REBH count representing the difference between a design base hours, DBH, count obtained from a storage module and the EBH count;
determining a life factor for at least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine;
based on the determined life factor and the processed virtual data, determining in real time a remaining useful life for the at least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine, by calculating, by a processor, the remaining useful life, RUL, for the at least one component of the turbine engine by calculating a product of the life factor and the REBH count; and
controlling in real time by way of a computer processor operation of the turbine engine, the controlling configured to meet the selected optimization objective in view of varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of a desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine, comprising iteratively issuing a series of power commands to the turbine engine, the series of power commands setting respective power levels adjusted to meet the selected optimization objective in view of the varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of the desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine.”
Independent claim 26 claims the claimed computer processor is configured to perform steps including the following recitations which are similar to the method steps of claim 22:
“determine a power factor for the turbine engine based on an optimization objective selected for the turbine engine and based on the data indicative of the ambient atmospheric conditions;
issue a power command to the turbine engine, wherein the power command setting is a power level for operating the turbine engine based on the determined power factor;
generating, by the dynamic model, virtual data indicative of a response of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting;
process, in a life counter, the virtual data generated by the dynamic model of the turbine engine to determine an effective base hours, EBH, count for at least one component of the turbine engine;
process, by a remaining equivalent base hours, REBH, count, the EBH count to obtain a REBH count representing the difference between a design base hours, DBH, count obtained from a storage module and the EBH count;
determine a life factor for at the least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine;
based on the determined life factor and the processed virtual data, determine in real time a remaining useful life for the at least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine, by calculating, by a processor, the remaining useful life, RUL, for the at least one component of the turbine engine by calculating a product of the life factor and the REBH count; and
control in real time operation of the turbine engine, the control configured to meet the selected optimization objective in view of varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of a desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine, wherein the control in real time of the operation of the turbine engine comprises iterative issuance of a series of power commands to the turbine engine, the series of power commands setting respective power levels adjusted to meet the selected optimization objective in view of the varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of the desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine.”
However, the original Specification failed to describe how the computer or computer processor was programmed or designed to perform all the claimed determining steps or actions. The original Specification merely repeats the claim language without disclosing algorithms for the required determinations and/or actions taken by the computer or computer processor. An original claim may lack written description support when (1) the claim defines the invention in functional language specifying a desired result but the disclosure fails to sufficiently identify how the function is performed or the result is achieved or (2) a broad genus claim is presented but the disclosure only describes a narrow species with no evidence that the genus is contemplated. See Ariad Pharms., Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336, 1349-50 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (en banc). The written description requirement is not necessarily met when the claim language appears in ipsis verbis in the specification. "Even if a claim is supported by the specification, the language of the specification, to the extent possible, must describe the claimed invention so that one skilled in the art can recognize what is claimed. The appearance of mere indistinct words in a specification or a claim, even an original claim, does not necessarily satisfy that requirement." Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Gen-Probe, Inc., 323 F.3d 956, 968, 63 USPQ2d 1609, 1616 (Fed. Cir. 2002); MPEP 2163.03(V).
In particular, the original disclosure does not provide an algorithm or equation for determining “a power factor” and also does not define what is “a power factor.” Specification [0034] describes Fig. 2 as a flow chart depicting example steps of a computer-implemented method for controlling operation of a turbine engine. However, step 206 in Fig. 2 does not show what algorithm or other steps are used to determine a power factor for the turbine engine. Box 410 in Fig. 4 is labeled “Power Factor” but does not provide an algorithm or equation for power factor. Specification [0042] recites “control system 400 includes a power factor processor module 410 configured to determine a power factor for the turbine engine based on the optimization objective” but does not describe how 410 determines a power factor and does not describe what algorithm or equation is used by 410 to determine a power factor.
The original Specification and drawings do not provide what parameters and/or quantities are considered “virtual data.”
The original Specification and drawings do not provide what is a “life counter” other than being a processor, and the original Specification and drawings do not provide an algorithm or equation for processing the virtual data “to determine an effective base hours, EBH, count for at least one component of the turbine engine.”
Regarding REBH, box 424 in Fig. 4 provides (REBH= DBH-EBH) but since how to determine EBH has not been adequately described, REBH cannot be calculated.
The original Specification and drawings do not provide an algorithm or equation for determining “a life factor” and also do not define what is “a life factor.” Box 416 in Fig. 4 is labeled Life Factor (K=ARH/EBH) but “ARH” is not described in the Specification, and as already discussed above, an algorithm or equation is not provided for determining EBH.
Although claims 22 and 26 each recite “calculating, by a processor, the remaining useful life, RUL, for the at least one component of the turbine engine by calculating a product of the life factor and the REBH count” the remaining useful life RUL cannot be calculated since how to determine the life factor and what virtual data is required and how to process the virtual data to determine EBH have not been provided which is needed when calculating REBH, and both life factor and REBH are necessary for calculating RUL per each of claims 22 and 26.
The original Specification and drawings do not provide an algorithm or equation or actions to take for how to adjust respective power levels to meet the selected optimization objective in view of varying load conditions of the turbine engine and the desired lifing target for the at least one component.
As described above, the original specification and drawings do not provide a disclosure of the computer or computer processor and algorithm/software in sufficient detail to demonstrate to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor possessed the invention of each of claims 22 and 26.
Therefore, claim 22 and claim 26 each fail to comply with the written description requirement. Claims dependent respectively upon claim 22 and upon claim 26 do not provide additional limitations that correct the issues in claims 22 and 26, and therefore, claims 23-25 and 30-31 also fail to comply with the written description requirement for the same reasons as base claim 22 and claims 27-29 also fail to comply with the written description requirement for the same reasons as base claim 26.
Claims 22-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
MPEP 2164.06(C)(I) and (C)(II) applies to the following 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections for failing to comply with the enablement requirement. MPEP 2164.06(C)(I) stated “…where the specification provides in a block diagram disclosure of a complex system that includes a microprocessor and other system components controlled by the microprocessor, a mere reference to a commercially available microprocessor, without any description of the precise operations to be performed by the microprocessor, fails to disclose how such a microprocessor would be properly programmed to (1) either perform any required calculations or (2) coordinate the other system components in the proper timed sequence to perform the functions disclosed and claimed. If a particular program is disclosed in such a system, the program should be carefully reviewed to ensure that its scope is commensurate with the scope of the functions attributed to such a program in the claims. In re Brown, 477 F.2d at 951, 177 USPQ at 695. If (1) the disclosure fails to disclose any program and (2) more than routine experimentation would be required of one skilled in the art to generate such a program, the examiner clearly would have a reasonable basis for challenging the sufficiency of such a disclosure.” MPEP 2164.06(C)(II) stated “Regardless of whether a disclosure involves block elements more comprehensive than a computer or block elements totally within the confines of a computer, USPTO personnel, when analyzing method claims, must recognize that the specification must be adequate to teach how to practice the claimed method. If such practice requires a particular apparatus, then the application must provide a sufficient disclosure of that apparatus if such is not already available. See In re Ghiron, 442 F.2d 985, 991, 169 USPQ 723, 727 (CCPA 1971) and In re Gunn, 537 F.2d 1123, 1128, 190 USPQ 402, 406 (CCPA 1976).” MPEP 2164.06(C)(II) further stated “While no specific universally applicable rule exists for recognizing an insufficiently disclosed application involving computer programs, an examining guideline to generally follow is to challenge the sufficiency of disclosures that fail to include the programmed steps, algorithms or procedures that the computer performs necessary to produce the claimed function. These can be described in any way that would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, such as with a reasonably detailed flowchart which delineates the sequence of operations the program must perform. In programming applications where the software disclosure only includes a flowchart, as the complexity of functions and the generality of the individual components of the flowchart increase, the basis for challenging the sufficiency of such a flowchart becomes more reasonable because the likelihood of more than routine experimentation being required to generate a working program from such a flowchart also increases.”
Independent claim 22 recites the following steps included in a computer-implemented method:
“determining a power factor for the turbine engine based on the optimization objective selected for the turbine engine and based on the data indicative of the ambient atmospheric conditions;
generating, by a real-time dynamic model, virtual data indicative of a response of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting, wherein the real-time dynamic model provides a simplified representation of the turbine engine;
processing, in a life counter, the virtual data generated in real time by the dynamic model of the turbine engine to determine an effective base hours, EBH, count for at least one component of the turbine engine;
processing, by a remaining equivalent base hours, REBH, count, the EBH count to obtain a REBH count representing the difference between a design base hours, DBH, count obtained from a storage module and the EBH count;
determining a life factor for at least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine;
based on the determined life factor and the processed virtual data, determining in real time a remaining useful life for the at least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine, by calculating, by a processor, the remaining useful life, RUL, for the at least one component of the turbine engine by calculating a product of the life factor and the REBH count; and
controlling in real time by way of a computer processor operation of the turbine engine, the controlling configured to meet the selected optimization objective in view of varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of a desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine, comprising iteratively issuing a series of power commands to the turbine engine, the series of power commands setting respective power levels adjusted to meet the selected optimization objective in view of the varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of the desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine.”
Independent claim 26 claims the claimed computer processor is configured to perform steps including the following recitations which are similar to the method steps of claim 22:
“determine a power factor for the turbine engine based on an optimization objective selected for the turbine engine and based on the data indicative of the ambient atmospheric conditions;
issue a power command to the turbine engine, wherein the power command setting is a power level for operating the turbine engine based on the determined power factor;
generating, by the dynamic model, virtual data indicative of a response of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting;
process, in a life counter, the virtual data generated by the dynamic model of the turbine engine to determine an effective base hours, EBH, count for at least one component of the turbine engine;
process, by a remaining equivalent base hours, REBH, count, the EBH count to obtain a REBH count representing the difference between a design base hours, DBH, count obtained from a storage module and the EBH count;
determine a life factor for at the least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine;
based on the determined life factor and the processed virtual data, determine in real time a remaining useful life for the at least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine, by calculating, by a processor, the remaining useful life, RUL, for the at least one component of the turbine engine by calculating a product of the life factor and the REBH count; and
control in real time operation of the turbine engine, the control configured to meet the selected optimization objective in view of varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of a desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine, wherein the control in real time of the operation of the turbine engine comprises iterative issuance of a series of power commands to the turbine engine, the series of power commands setting respective power levels adjusted to meet the selected optimization objective in view of the varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of the desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine.”
The original disclosure failed to describe how the computer or computer processor was programmed or designed to perform all the claimed determinations or actions. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
When determining whether “undue experimentation” would have been needed to make and use the claimed invention the following factors, MPEP 2164.01(a), are considered: (A) the breadth of the claims – applicant claims in claim 22 a method implemented by a computer and in claim 26 a computer processor configured to: determining a power factor, the power level is based on the determined power factor, generating virtual data, processing in a life counter the virtual data to determine an effective base hours, EBH, the EBH count to obtain a remaining equivalent base hours REBH representing the difference between a design base hours DBH and the EBH count, determining a life factor, determining remaining useful life RUL for at least one component by calculating by a processor a product of the life factor and REBH count, controlling in real time by way of a computer processor operation of the turbine engine, the controlling configured to meet the selected optimization objective in view of varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of a desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine, comprising iteratively issuing a series of power commands to the turbine engine, the series of power commands setting respective power levels adjusted to meet the selected optimization objective in view of the varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of the desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine;
(B) the nature of the invention – the claims are interpreted as a computer-implemented functional claim because claim 22 recites “a computer-implemented method” that was disclosed as computer/processor executable instructions (e.g., software/firmware applications) contained within a storage device that corresponds to a non- transitory machine-usable, computer-usable, or computer-readable medium in any of a variety of forms (e.g., flash memory, SSD, hard drive) and claim 26 recites “a computer processor” that was disclosed as a processor or processor module corresponding to any electronic device that is configured via hardware circuits, software, and/or firmware to process data, for example, processors described herein may correspond to one or more (or a combination) of a microprocessor, CPU, or any other integrated circuit (IC) or other type of circuit that is capable of processing data in a data processing system;
(C) the state of the prior art –Tiwari et al. 20150176498 teaches
a turbine engine (a gas turbine system 10 in Fig. 1 with a gas turbine engine 11);
a user interface ([0029] describes workstation 54 may be a human machine interface that may include a display 36 that, for example, may display a graphical user interface (GUI)) configured to select an optimization objective from a menu of predefined optimization objectives for the turbine engine ([0042] describes adapted parameters aggregator 96 of control system 40 may output aggregated information to the fuzzy logic and optimization system 98 that may include, for example a neural network that produces best (optimal or increased efficiency) operating points 100 for the gas turbine system, and these best operating points 100 may then be output as set points 102 for control knobs available to the gas turbine operator, and the control knobs may be virtual controls available to the operator on the workstation 54 display that effect physical changes on the actuators 46 of the gas turbine system 10),
wherein the optimization objectives are selected from the group consisting of maximization of power generated by the turbine engine, maximization of the remaining useful life for the at least one component of the turbine engine, and a blended optimization of the power generated by the turbine engine and the remaining useful life for the at least one component of the turbine engine (per [0041] values may be output to the adapted parameters aggregator 96, which may include a gas turbine remaining useful life, rate of degradation, design limits, total cost, maintenance factor, desired performance, operator penalty, and priority decisions, which may be related to one or more of life of the gas turbine engine 11, performance of the gas turbine engine 11, or based on external demands);
a dynamic model of the turbine engine ([0041] describes gas turbine models 94, e.g., Gate Cycle, ARES, EMAP, within the model-free adaptive framework 66), wherein the dynamic model provides a simplified representation of the turbine engine ([0041] further describes gas turbine models 94 within the model-free adaptive framework 66 may emulate the gas turbine engine 11 and/or generate an efficiency map of the gas turbine engine 11 at steady state operation; model-free adaptive framework is a dynamic model providing a simplified representation of the turbine engine as evidenced by NPL Lin paras. 1-3 under Introduction on page 2 which describes dynamic linearization based model-free adaptive control);
a control system including a computer processor (control system 44 configured to perform techniques enabling operational flexibility per [0023], with control system 44 also shown in Fig. 6 and 44 includes a processor 52 (e.g., general central processing units (CPUs), embedded CPUs, systems on a chip (SOC), application specific processors, application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), and their combinations to execute analysis of historical and real-time turbine parameters per [0026]), the control system operatively coupled to the user interface and to the dynamic model of the turbine engine (per [0026] control system 44 may also include a workstation 54 which allows an operator to interact with the control system 44 and, accordingly, control the operation of the gas turbine 10; per [0027] processor 52 and/or other data processing circuitry may be operably coupled to memory 56 to execute instructions for carrying out the presently disclosed techniques and per [0028] storage 56 may additionally contain a model-free adaptive framework 66 that may be utilized by the processor 52 to provide guiding information to an operator of the gas turbine 10 by utilizing received outputs from the multiple analyzers 58, 60, 62, and/or 64), the computer processor configured to:
process data indicative of ambient atmospheric conditions ([0024] describes various inlet and outlet sensors 40, which may include measured and virtual sensors and may sense parameters related to environmental conditions, such as ambient temperature and pressure and relative humidity and measurements which are provided to control system 44 as shown in Fig. 6);
a power factor for the turbine engine ([0024] describes sensors 40 may include measured and virtual sensors and may sense various engine parameters related to the operation and performance of the turbine engine system 10 including a generator power factor as well as compressor speed ratio, inlet differential pressure, exhaust differential pressure, inlet guide vane position, fuel temperature, water injection rate, compressor bleed flow rate, exhaust gas temperature and pressure, compressor discharge temperature and pressure, generator output, rotor speeds, turbine engine temperature and pressure, fuel flow rate, core speed; sensors 40 may also be configured to monitor engine parameters related to various operational phases of the turbine system 10)
based on an optimization objective selected for the turbine engine and based on the data indicative of the ambient atmospheric conditions ([0025] describes control system 44, as either directed by an operator or operating in an automatic mode, may adjust actuators 46 within the gas turbine system 10 to regulate the function of the gas turbine system 10 by changing parameters such as fuel flow rate, vane angle, and nozzle area; [0024] describes measurements 42 of turbine system parameters obtained by the sensor network 40 may be provided to turbine control system 44 configured to perform techniques enabling operational flexibility);
issue a power command to the turbine engine (per [0044] and as shown in Fig. 7, the model-free adaptive framework uses gas turbine models and fuzzy logic systems (e.g., neural networks) to find an accumulated remaining useful life and best operating points and control system 44 then updates control knob set points, i.e., a power command to the turbine engine, in step 116, whereby updated sensor data 42 is received by the control system 44; this process 104 may be initiated automatically, for example set to run on a pre-set scheduled basis, or may be manually initiated by the operator), wherein the power command setting is a power level for operating the turbine engine based on the power factor (power command setting, i.e., operational setting, of the control knob set points is a power level for operating the turbine engine based on sensor data 42 including a generator power factor);
generating, by the dynamic model, virtual data indicative of a response of the turbine engine ([0023] describes sensors 40 may include measured and/or virtual sensors; a measured sensor may refer to a physical sensor (e.g., hardware) that is configured to acquire a measurement of a particular parameter(s), whereas a virtual sensor may be utilized to obtain an estimation of a parameter of interest and may be implemented using software and virtual sensors may be configured to provide estimated values of a parameter that is difficult to directly measure using a physical sensor; [0032] describes gas turbine degradation model 59 may utilize received sensor output 42 including the heat rate of the gas turbine 10, and based on received sensor output 42, degradation characteristics may be generated on the fly in real time or near real time) subject to the power level setting (control knob set points which is power level setting);
based on the processed virtual data, determine in real time a remaining useful life for at least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine (per [0035] and as shown in Fig. 4, operating behavior analyzer 60 of control system 44 receives historical data 68 and data related to the real-time operator commands 70; classification and segmentation results are submitted to fuzzy logic system (e.g., neural networks) 74 which compute an operator behavior penalty factor 76 specific to the operator being analyzed and penalty factor 76 takes into account how the behavior of the operator affects the life consumption and rate of degradation of the gas turbine system 10 and for model-based controls may translate into a credit or debit in performance calculations; per [0036] thermal analyzer 62 of control system 44 may include an empirical reduced-order thermal model 78 and a remaining useful life calculator 78 as shown in Fig. 5; the empirical reduced-order thermal model 78 may utilize information from the sensor output 42 of the gas turbine system 10 and may include the gas turbine metal temperatures of various gas turbine components, e.g., the rotor, casing, bucket, nozzle, and transition piece, stress/strain curves, etc. of the various turbine components; the model 78 may utilize the above discussed information to calculate the metal temperatures at various locations, such as critical locations, e.g., high importance locations to the operation of the gas turbine system 10 or locations most likely to fail during operation of the gas turbine system 10), by calculating, by a processor, the remaining useful life, RUL, for at least one component of the turbine engine (per [0037] remaining useful life calculator 80 may calculate the remaining useful life 106 of the various components of the turbine system 10 based upon the sensor outputs 42 and the information received from the empirical reduced-order thermal model 78, which may then be input into the model-free adaptive framework 66 as results 72); and
control in real time operation of the turbine engine, the control configured to meet the selected optimization objective in view of varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view remaining useful life for the at least one component of the turbine engine, wherein the control in real time of the operation of the turbine engine comprises iterative issuance of a series of power commands to the turbine engine, the series of power commands setting respective power levels adjusted to meet the selected optimization objective in view of the varying load conditions of the turbine engine and further in view of the remaining useful life for the at least one component of the turbine engine (as shown in Fig. 6 and summarized in [0019] model-free adaptive framework 66 may incorporate both gas turbine models and fuzzy logic systems, e.g., neural networks, and utilize these models and fuzzy logic systems to find an accumulated remaining useful life and best (enhanced efficiency) operating points and these operating points may then be used to control actuators of the gas turbine system to control the operation of the gas turbine engine of the gas turbine system; accordingly maintenance, performance, and life of a gas turbine system may be plotted in an integrated environment and this process accounts for specific variations, e.g., part loads, ramp life of a gas turbine engine, etc., allows for on the fly, i.e., real-time, calculations of, for example, metal temperatures and life of portions of the gas turbine system, and allows for application of accumulated characteristics of the gas turbine system; additionally, real time maintenance factor estimations and operation points that include analysis of part life vs. performance for given fuel prices/generated energy sales prices may be generated; per [0042] adapted parameters aggregator 96 in 66 of control system 44 may output the aggregated information discussed above to the fuzzy logic and optimization system 98 that may include a neural network that produces best (optimal or increased efficiency) operating points 100 for the gas turbine system).
Tiwari does not teach determining a power factor which is not a generator power factor; wherein the power command setting is a power level for operating the turbine engine based on the determined power factor which is not a generator power factor; process, in a life counter, the virtual data generated by the dynamic model of the turbine engine to determine an effective base hours, EBH, count for at least one component of the turbine engine; process, by a remaining equivalent base hours, REBH, count, the EBH count to obtain a REBH count representing the difference between a design base hours, DBH, count obtained from a storage module and the EBH count; determine a life factor for at the least one component of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting for the turbine engine; based on the determined life factor and the processed virtual data, by calculating a product of the life factor and the REBH count; and a desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine.
Although Tiwari does teach a variety of parameters and criteria such as metal temperatures of components, stress/strain, and operational modes and operator behavior that can affect life of the gas turbine engine and components, effective base hours, EBH, remaining equivalent base hours, REBH, design base hours DBH, life factor and a desired lifing target for the at least one component of the turbine engine are not terms of art and are not taught by Tiwari.
Prior art Menon et al. 10452041 listed on the IDS filed 03/05/2025 teaches a combined cycle plant comprising two gas turbine engines in Fig. 1 and teaches long-term, day ahead and real-time operation planning of power generating plant assets (col 1 lines 6-9) and teaches a target life based on the operating profile data and parts-life model data for the one or more power-generating assets, a number of parts-life credits generated by the first mode of operation, wherein the parts-life credits represent an amount of parts-life that can be consumed by a second mode of operation that consumes the parts-life credits during the maintenance interval without violating a constraint relative to a target life (col 2 lines 26-33) but does not teach effective base hours, EBH, remaining equivalent base hours, REBH, design base hours DBH, life factor or how to determine any of these. Menon also does not teach any power factor or determining a power factor.
(E) the level of predictability in the art – low predictability per the sections of MPEP 2164.06(C)(I) and (C)(II) cited above;
(F) the amount of direction provided by the inventor – applicant's disclosure does not teach how to make or use the invention because the Specification merely repeats the claim language and both the Specification and drawings are lacking algorithms for required determinations including of a power factor, a life factor, EBH. The computer processor was disclosed as any electronic device that is configured via hardware circuits, software, and/or firmware to process data while the method steps performed by said computer processor are interpreted as software. The Specification fails to include any programmed steps, algorithms (equations) or procedures that the computer or computer processor performed to arrive at the variety of determinations required by the claims and fails to provide what is considered virtual data indicative of a response of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting which are all necessary for performing subsequent steps recited in the claims. Therefore, (1) the disclosure fails to disclose any program and (2) more than routine experimentation would be required of one skilled in the art to generate such a program because the scope of the claims encompasses all known and unknown ways to determine a power factor, a life factor, EBH and to determine what constitutes virtual data indicative of a response of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting and to perform other steps as required in the claims that are based on the determinations;
(G) the existence of working examples - applicant has not stated whether or not a working example exists; and
(H) the quantity of experimentation needed to make or use the invention based on the content of the disclosure – it has been held that “an adequate disclosure of a device may require details of how complex components are constructed and perform the desired function" [MPEP 2164.06(a)(I)]. As discussed above, more than routine experimentation would be required of one skilled in the art to generate such a program because the scope of the claims encompasses all known and unknown ways to determine a power factor, a life factor, EBH and to determine what constitutes virtual data indicative of a response of the turbine engine subject to the power level setting and to perform other steps as required in the claims that are based on the determinations.
Even if a potential infringer could create a program, with undue experimentation, to perform the claimed determinations and functions of Claims 22 and 26, it would be impossible to tell if the potential infringer’s program would infringe Applicant’s program because Applicant’s disclosure failed to disclose details of algorithms used and details of how to accomplish the functional steps of claims 22 and 26. Therefore, claims 22 and 26 fail to comply with the enablement requirement.
Claims dependent upon claims 22 and 26 fail to comply with the enablement requirement for the same reasons as their respective base claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 22-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Independent claim 22 recites “determining a power factor” and independent claim 26 recites “determine a power factor” each of which is unclear as to what is meant by a power factor since there are different meanings for a power factor as known in the art but the specification and drawings of the original disclosure do not provide an algorithm or equation for power factor and do not provide other information for one of ordinary skill in the art to know which meaning is being claimed. A known meaning for power factor per Merriam-Webster online dictionary is the ratio of the mean actual power in an alternating current circuit measured in watts to the apparent power measured in volt-amperes, being equal to the cosine of the phase difference between electromotive force and current. This is applicable in gas turbine engines including an electric generator or electric motor but the specification does not describe electrical current or power, an electric generator, or an electric motor, and Fig. 1 of turbine engine 100 does not show an electric generator or an electric motor or electrical connections of any kind, and the rest of the drawings do not show these features.
Another meaning of power factor known in the art is per prior art Papin et al. 3400471 which teaches simulation of a gas turbine engine utilized in a helicopter, and power factor is a ratio of required horsepower, ΔN, to available horsepower, D, and the engine simulation program uses the power factor to compute required engine torques and fuel flow (col 42 lines 52-64). The instant specification does not provide whether or not the turbine engine in Fig. 1 is for powering an aircraft such as a helicopter or is for powering an electrical power generation system.
Another meaning of power factor known in the art is per prior art Ertas et al. 20230417185 which teaches a gas turbine engine in Fig. 1 with a gearbox assembly 100 including a gearbox 101 in Fig. 2 and a lubricant system per [0036], and as the power output of the gearbox 101 increases, the amount of heat generated increases which increases the volume of lubricant required to operate the gearbox which calls for an increased gutter volume V.sub.G for capture and recirculation of lubricant through the scavenging system per [0037]. A lubricant extraction volume ratio (LEVR) is a relationship between the volume of the gutter for collecting a gearbox lubricant scavenge flow from the gearbox and gearbox volume per [0039]. Per [0045]-[0047], taking into consideration considerations for selecting upper and lower limits, the LEVR may also be defined in terms of a power factor PF, flow transition time FT and a heat density parameter HDP:
LEVR = PF*FT/HDP
and PF = PD*(1- η) where PD represents the gearbox power density and η represents the gearbox efficiency.
The instant specification does not describe a gearbox or lubrication system and the drawings do not show a gearbox or lubrication system.
Therefore, the recitations render claim 22 and claim 26 as indefinite.
Independent claim 22 and independent claim 26 each recite “determine an effective base hours, EBH” which is unclear what is meant by effective base hours, EBH since effective base hours, EBH is not a term of art with a known equation or meaning and the specification and drawings of the original disclosure do not provide an algorithm or equation for effective base hours, EBH and do not provide other information for one of ordinary skill in the art to know what is meant and being claimed by “effective base hours, EBH.”
Therefore, the recitations render claim 22 and claim 26 as indefinite.
Independent claim 22 recites “determining a life factor” and independent claim 26 recites “determine a life factor” each of which is unclear what is meant by a life factor since life factor is not a term of art with a known equation or meaning and the specification and drawings of the original disclosure do not provide a complete algorithm or equation for life factor and do not provide other information for one of ordinary skill in the art to know what is meant and being claimed by “a life factor.” Box 416 in Fig. 4 is labeled Life Factor (K=ARH/EBH) but “ARH” is not described in the Specification such that how to determine a life factor is not known.
Therefore, the recitations render claim 22 and claim 26 as indefinite.
Claims dependent respectively upon claims 22 and 26 are also rejected as being indefinite for the same reasons as base claims 22 and 26.
Prior art rejections are unable to be made for claims 22-31 since independent claim 22 and independent claim 26 each require multiple method steps involving “power factor,” “effective base hours, EBH” and “life factor” as part of each invention, and as discussed above it is not known what is being claimed by those recitations, such that a determination of what prior art reads on the independent claims and the dependent claims cannot be accomplished.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSON JOAN HARRINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2359. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5 pm 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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached at (571) 270-5426. 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.
/A.J.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/LORNE E MEADE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741