DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This action is in response to the claims set filed 10/14/2025 containing amendments. Claims 1, 3-4, 7-8 and 11-15 were amended; claim 16 is newly added. Claims 1-16 are currently pending.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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: “LIGHTNING STRIKE PROTECTION SYSTEM FOR A WIND TURBINE WITH BLADE CONNECTING MEMBERS”.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 2-15 read “A pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim” but should likely read “[[A]] The pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 3-6, 8-12 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.
Examiner Note: claims 3-6, 8-12 all refer to the pre-tension members as though there is antecedent basis for them. However, the pre-tension members are first introduced in claim 2. None of the claims referenced above are dependent upon claim 2
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the pre-tension members”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the respective pre-tension member” in the limitation of the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the pre-tension members”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the respective pre-tension member” in the limitation of the claim.
Claim 5 twice recites the limitation “the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the respective pre-tension member” in the limitation of the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the respective pre-tension member” in the limitation of the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the respective pre-tension member” in the limitation of the claim.
Claim 9 thrice recites the limitation “the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the respective pre-tension member” in the limitation of the claim.
Claim 10 twice recites the limitation “the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the respective pre-tension member” in the limitation of the claim.
Claim 11 twice recites the limitation “the pre-tension members”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the pre-tension members”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7-9, 11 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2011080374A, herein referenced as Kamiyama, in view of US 2014/0205452, herein referenced as Perkinson.
PNG
media_image1.png
707
381
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 8A of Kamiyama
Regarding Claim 1, Kamiyama discloses a pitch controlled wind turbine comprising a tower (2 fig. 8A), a nacelle mounted on the tower (see nacelle 3 on tower 2 fig. 8A), a hub (see base 5 fig. 8A) mounted rotatably on the nacelle (3 fig. 8B), and at least three wind turbine blades (see three blades in fig. 8A), wherein each wind turbine blade extends between a root end (see root end of blades 4 at base 5 in fig. 8A) connected to the hub via a pitch mechanism, and a tip end (see tip end of blades 4 fig. 8A);
the wind turbine further comprising at least three blade connecting members (see overhead wire or conductive strip 8 in fig 8A), each blade connecting member extending from a connection point (see blade fitting 46 and clamp 45 on blade 4 in figs. 8A and 9; 8 shown to extend from this point of the blade 4 in figs. 8A and 9) on one wind turbine blade towards a connection point on a neighboring wind turbine blade (see blade fitting 46 and clamp 45 on adjacent blade 4 in figs. 8A and 9), where the connection point on a given wind turbine blade is arranged at a distance from the root end and at a distance from the tip end of the wind turbine blade (connection point formed by blade fitting 46 and clamp 45 are shown to be arranged at a distance from the tip end and root end for each blade 4 in figs. 8A and 9);
each wind turbine blade comprising an outboard portion extending the distance from the tip end of the wind turbine blade to the connection point (portion of blades 4 outboard from blade fitting 46 and clamp 45 in fig. 8A), and an inboard portion extending the distance from the root end of the wind turbine blade to the connection point (portion of blades 4 inboard from blade fitting 46 and clamp 45 in fig. 8A);
wherein the wind turbine further comprises a lightning strike protection system (lightning protection device 10 fig. 8A) and each blade connecting member (8 fig. 8A) has a conductive material (“the material for the overhead ground wire or conductive band 8, galvanized steel stranded wire (JIS G 1988), aluminum-clad steel stranded wire (JCS-389-1984), steel-core aluminum alloy stranded wire, or hard copper stranded wire (JIS C 3105) or copper alloy stranded wire, which are used as overhead ground wires in overhead ground wire transmission lines, can be used” pr. 24) configured to carry lightning current from the outboard portion of the wind turbine blade from which the connecting member extends and along a path extending with the blade connecting member towards the tower (see portion of blades 4 outboard from the blade fitting 46 in fig. 8A; the wire/strip 8 is shown to extend from and along the outboard portion of blade 4 to connect protruding arm 7, forming a path along 8, in figs. 8A-9; where 7 connects with the lightning conductor 9 which then connects with lightning conductor 11 within the tower 2 in fig. 8B).
However, Kamiyama fails to explicitly anticipate the wind turbine being a pitch controlled wind turbine; wherein the root end of each wind turbine blade is connected to the hub via a pitch mechanism.
PNG
media_image2.png
889
573
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 of Kamiyama
Kamiyama and Perkinson are analogous art since they both relate to the field of endeavor of wind turbines.
Perkinson teaches of a pitch controlled wind turbine (“A wind turbine for power generation typically includes a set of large rotor blades, each blade mounted to a hub at a blade root. […] Aerodynamic interaction between the rotor blades and the wind is controlled by a pitch control actuator in the hub connected to the blade root of each rotor blade” pr. 2), wherein each wind turbine blade extends between a root end (blade root 22 fig. 1; “a pitch control actuator in the hub connected to the blade root of each rotor blade” pr. 2) connected to the hub (12 fig. 1) via a pitch mechanism (see pitch actuation hardware 16 including pitch bearing 20 and pitch actuator 18 in fig. 1; “Pitch bearing 20 rotatably connects blade root 22 of rotor blade 14 to hub 12. Pitch actuator 18 also connects to blade root 22 and hub 12 to control rotation of rotor blade 14 about pitch axis 28” pr. 9). Perkinson further teaches that “Aerodynamic interaction between rotor blade 14 and the wind is controlled by pitch actuator 18, which changes the pitch of rotor blade 14 to increase or decrease lift” in pr. 10.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kamiyama with the pitch actuator hardware disclosed by Perkinson to obtain the benefit of ‘controlling/changing the pitch of the wind turbine blades to increase or decrease lift’ as taught by Perkinson.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the conductive material of the blade connecting members and/or the pre-tension members is embedded within the respective blade connecting member (“the overhead ground wire [is] a steel-cored aluminum alloy wire” pr. 14 of Kamiyama; the steel-core can be the conductive material of the blade connecting member which is embedded within wire 8 in fig. 8A of Kamiyama) or pre-tension member.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the conductive material of the blade connecting members (8 figs. 8A-9 of Kamiyama) and/or the pre-tension members is attached to an outer surface of the respective blade connecting member (“the overhead ground wire [is] an aluminum-clad steel wire” pr. 14 of Kamiyama, the aluminum cladding for the aluminum-clad steel wire would be attached to its outer surface) or pre-tension member.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 4, wherein the conductive material is coupled to the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member either inside or outside a profile of the respective blade connecting member (8 figs. 8A-9 of Kamiyama; “the overhead ground wire [is] an aluminum-clad steel wire” pr. 14 of Kamiyama, the aluminum cladding for the aluminum-clad steel wire would be coupled to the outside the profile of wire 8) or pre-tension member.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the conductive material is formed as one or more of a plurality of strands (“the overhead ground wire is a stranded galvanized steel wire, an aluminum-clad steel wire, a steel-cored aluminum alloy wire, a hard copper wire, or a copper alloy wire” pr. 14 of Kamiyama), a cable, or a braided sleeve.
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the conductive material is helically wound along the respective blade connecting member (see conductive wire 8 fig. 8A of Kamiyama; “the material for the overhead ground wire or conductive band 8, galvanized steel stranded wire (JIS G 1988), aluminum-clad steel stranded wire (JCS-389-1984), steel-core aluminum alloy stranded wire, or hard copper stranded wire (JIS C 3105) or copper alloy stranded wire, which are used as overhead ground wires in overhead ground wire transmission lines, can be used” pr. 24 of Kamiyama, it is understood in the art that stranded wires are formed by twisting individual strands together, this twisting of the strands would present a helically wound strand materials along the cables/wires) or pre-tension member.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 8, wherein, in a first region of the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member, the conductive material is helically wound (a first region of the conductive wire 8 in fig. 8A of Kamiyama would be helically wound since the wire can be formed as a stranded wire, as described in pr. 24 of Kamiyama, which are known in the art to be wires formed by twisting strands together, this would result in the wires being helically wound; this aspect can also apply to other regions of wire 8), and at a second region of the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member, the conductive material extends generally co-axially to a longitudinal axis of the respective blade connecting member (a second region of the conductive material of the stranded wire 8, see fig. 8A and pr. 24 of Kamiyama, would extend generally co-axially to a longitudinal axis of the wire 8 as it is made up of conductive strands which are twisted together, they would generally extend co-axially to the longitudinal axis of the wire 8 as they are what from the stranded wire; this aspect can also apply to other regions of wire 8) or pre-tension member.
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the blade connecting members and/or the pre-tension members comprise metallic material and the metallic material is the conductive material of the blade connecting members (see 8 in fig. 8A of Kamiyama, “the overhead ground wire is a stranded galvanized steel wire, an aluminum-clad steel wire, a steel-cored aluminum alloy wire, a hard copper wire, or a copper alloy wire” pr. 14 of Kamiyama, the examples provided being metallic materials which form the conductive material of 8) and/or the pre-tension members.
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the outboard portion and the inboard portion of each wind turbine blade are connected to each other at a split position (see spanwise position of blade where blade fitting 46 is provided in fig. 8A of Kamiyama, this position can be considered a split position since it where a split/separation between inboard and outboard portions of the blade 4, relative to the position of blade fitting 46, is defined), and wherein the connection points on the wind turbine blades are arranged at the split positions (the blade fitting 46 and clamp 45 which define the connections points for the wire 8 are shown to be arranged at the spanwise location of the blade fitting 46 in fig. 8A of Kamiyama).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the inboard portion of each wind turbine blade has a reduced lightning current carrying capacity in comparison to a lightning current carrying capacity of the outboard portion of the wind turbine blade (the portion of the blade 4 inboard from the blade fitting 46 is shown to only be provided with the lightning arrester wire 9 while the portion of blade 4 outboard from blade fitting 46 is shown to be provided with lightning arrester wire 9, protruding arm 7 and two sections of conductive wire 8 in figs. 8A-9 of Kamiyama, the portion of blade 4 inboard from blade fitting 46 would have a reduced lightning current carrying capacity relative to the portion outboard from blade fitting 46 since the outboard portion has much more lightning protection carrying components, relatively).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson comprises a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 1, wherein the inboard portion of each wind turbine blade (see portion of blade 4 inboard from blade fitting 46 in figs. 8A and 9 of Kamiyama) is not configured to carry lightning current from the outboard portion of the wind turbine blade towards the tower (shown in figs. 8A-9 of Kamiyama, the portion of blade 4 inboard from blade fitting 46, specifically the structure of blade 4 (i.e. blade shell and internal support structure), is not configured to carry lightning current from the outboard portion of the blade 4 towards to tower 2, instead the lightning arrester wire 9 provided within blade 4 is what carries the lightning current towards the tower 2 and not the inboard portion of the blade 4 itself; the wire 9 and blade 4 being separate components).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2014/0119919, herein referenced as Naka.
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson discloses a pitch controlled wind turbine according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the blade connecting members and/or the pre-tension members comprise polymer material.
Naka is analogous art since it relates to the field of endeavor of wind turbines.
Naka teaches wherein a connecting member (see down conductor 7 and earth line 7a fig. 1; “earth 7a is preferably an insulated cable covered by an electrically insulating member” pr. 43) comprise polymer material (“From the viewpoint of suppressing the shape deformation caused by a continuous applying of a lightning current, EPR (Ethylene Propylene Rubber) or XLPE (Cross-Linked Polyethylene) is preferable used as the insulation covering.” pr. 43, these examples being polymer materials). Naka further teaches that “These members are preferable for the earth line 7a of the present embodiment in the characteristics of the electrical insulating performance, the weathering resistance, the flame resistance, and the twist resistance (robustness to torsion or bending)” in pr. 43.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the conductive wire (see 8 fig. 8A of Kamiyama) in the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson to be covered with the electrically member/material disclosed by Naka to obtain the benefit of ‘suppressing shape deformation caused by continuous applying of a lightning current, weathering resistance, flame resistance’ as taught by Naka.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is allowed.
Claim 2 is 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.
Claims 6 and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the claim objections and/or rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claims 2 and 16, no prior art was found which anticipated or rendered obvious the claimed invention. Particularly, “wherein the wind turbine further comprises at least three pre-tension members, each pre-tension member being connected to one of the blade connecting members and to the hub, each pre-tension member thereby providing pre-tension in the blade connecting member to which it is connected, and wherein each pre-tension member has a conductive material forming part of the lightning strike protection system and configured to carry lightning current from the blade connecting member to which the pre-tension member is connected and along a path extending with the pre-tension member towards the tower” in context of all intervening limitations. The closest prior art found to this aspect was US 8215911 which discloses a wind turbine with a plurality of lightning protection means that are connected to blade connecting members which connect adjacent wind turbine blades together. While the lightning protection means provides a conductive path to ground, it fails to be configured to provide pre-tension in the blade connecting members and it does not provide for a lightning current carrying path between the blade connecting members and wires which make up the blade connecting means. CN102536683A and WO2022128040A1 disclose of a wind turbine where blade connecting members are provided to connect adjacent wind turbine blades, pre-tension members being provided between the hub and the blade connecting members to provide pre-tension. However, these references failed to disclose where these pre-tension members are to provide a lightning current carrying path from the blade connecting members to/towards the tower and it does not appear to be any suggestion that the structure present would be sufficient to carry lightning current. As such, claim 2 is deemed to contain allowable subject matter and claim 16 is considered to be allowable.
Regarding Claim 6, no prior art was found which anticipated or rendered obvious the claimed invention. Particularly, “wherein the conductive material is coupled to the outside of the profile of the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member by a stand-off” in context of all intervening limitations. The prior art combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson utilized above does not appear to be suitable to modify such that it possesses the structure required by the claim. This is due to the blade fitting 46 and clamps 45 in figs. 8A-9 of Kamiyama being adjustable to along the blade 4 or the wire/band 8. It does not appear that modifying the wire 8 such that “the conductive material is coupled to the outside of the profile of the respective blade connecting member by a stand-off” while maintaining adjustability of the clamp 45 and/or blade fitting 46 would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art given the structural changes required and the structure presented by Kamiyama. JP2006070879A discloses a lightning down conductor which is attached to a tower by stand-off components and EP1154537A2 discloses a lightning down conductor which is attached to a mast of a wind turbine blade by stand-off brackets; however, these are not the same as providing a connecting member with this. US 6457943 discloses a lightning protection cable where an outer conductive layer is separated from an inner conductive layer by at least an insulating layer, but this is not the same as the stand-off which is claimed. As such, claim 6 is deemed to contain allowable subject matter.
Regarding Claim 10, no prior art was found which anticipated or rendered obvious the claimed invention. Particularly, “wherein the conductive material is helically wound at a first pitch at a first region of the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member and the conductive material is helically wound at a second pitch, different than the first pitch, at a second region of the respective blade connecting member or pre-tension member” in context of all intervening limitations. While it was considered that the combination of Kamiyama and Perkinson utilized above could be modified to meet the claim as an obvious matter of changes in shape, the instant disclosure provides a reason as to why different pitches of the helically wound conductive material are provided. Pages 14-15 of the instant specification discusses how for a large-pitch region 82a provided between small-pitch regions 82b, the adjacent small-pitch regions 82b “can act as ‘springs’ to account for any excessive axial strain of the connecting member 6 or pre-tension member 8, whilst the first region 82a helps to shorten the overall length of the cable 82”. This establishing that the limitations in claim 10 are not a mere obvious matter of changes in shape. No prior art was found which disclosed this aspect in such a way to have rendered claim 10 obvious. As such, claim 10 is deemed to contain allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 8629570 – has additional support elements similar to the pre-tension member
CN203770041U and JP2009024681A – discloses a wind turbine with three connecting members which connect adjacent wind turbine blades together, the connecting members being part of a lightning protection system.
US 2012/0051914 discloses a pitch-controlled wind turbine with a cable-stayed rotor, the cables being attached between adjacent blades at a midspan location.
DE4445899A1 – discloses a two bladed wind turbine where a ring is provided adjacent to the hub which is connected to the root end of the blades, the ring being part of a down conducting system for the wind turbine.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Wesley Fisher whose telephone number is (469)295-9146. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00AM to 5:30PM, Monday - Friday.
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, Court Heinle can be reached at (571) 270-3508. 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.
/W.L.F./Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/COURTNEY D HEINLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights