Office Action 5: Non-Final Rejection (2023-10-16)
Rejection types: 103 - Obviousness, 112 - Written Description/Enablement

CLAIMS:
LISTING OF CLAIMS

This listing of claims will replace all prior versions, and listings, of claims in the application:

1\. (Currently Amended.) A method for fueling and using an aircraft, wherein the method comprises:storing, using a fuel tank comprising a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft ;
fueling, using a fuel line, \[\[an\]\] the aircraft, wherein fueling further comprises:
filling the fuel tank with liquified gas fuel to a desired level, wherein the desired level comprises fuel for a plurality of flights plus reserves, wherein a sensor connected to the fuel tank detects at least abnormal phenomena related insulation of \[\[to\]\] the fuel tank, wherein the sensor is configured to:detect humidity within the fuel tank; and
convert\[\[s\]\] the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device; and removing, using the computing device, the fuel line as function of the desired level in the aircraft; and
preparing the fuel tank for flight as a function of the desired level; and flying, using the aircraft, a plurality of flights using the liquid gas fuel.
2\. (Original.) The method of claim 1, wherein the aircraft comprises a blended wing body aircraft.

3\. (Original.) The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel tank is configured to have a multi- lobe geometry and comprises an insulation material with a thermal conductivity less than 0.10 W/m-K.

4\. (Original.) The method of claim 3, wherein the fuel tank comprises a septum.

5\. (Previously Presented.) The method of claim 3, wherein the multi-lobe geometry provides tension for each fuel tank of the multi-lobe geometry.

6\. (Previously Presented.) The method of claim 1, wherein the fuel tank is prepared as a function of a fill datum.

7\. (Original.) The method of claim 1, further comprising venting, using a vent line, the fuel tank, wherein the vent line is in fluid connection to the fuel tank.

8\. (Original.) The method of claim 7, wherein the vent line is configured to capture gaseous hydrogen from the fuel tank.

9\. (Original.) The method of claim 7, wherein the vent line is configured to release pressure from the fuel tank.

10\. (Original.) The method of claim 7, wherein the vent line includes a pressure regulator.

11\. (Original.) The method of claim 7, wherein the vent line is insulated to prevent the accumulation of frozen gases.

12\. (Original.) The method of claim 7, wherein the vent line includes an inner wall and an outer wall wherein a void resides in between.

13\. (Original.) The method of claim 7, wherein the vent line further comprises a heat exchanger.

14\. (Original.) The method of claim 7, wherein the preparing the fuel tank for flight further includes detaching the vent line from the fuel tank as a function of the desired level.

15\. (Original.) The method of claim 1, wherein the preparing of the fuel tank for flight further includes detaching the fuel line from the fuel tank as a function of the desired level.

16\. (Original.) The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of flights are further configured to:commence at a first refueling station; and
terminate at a second refueling station.

17\. (Previously Presented.) The method of claim 1, wherein no fueling occurs between the flights of the plurality of flights.

18\. (Canceled.)

19\. (Canceled.) 20. (Original.) The method of claim 1, wherein the liquified gas fuel is comprised of liquid hydrogen.\[THE REST OF THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK\]200 Clarendon St.

OFFICE ACTION:
DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA  or AIA  Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, lines 13-15, filed 09/07/2023, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive.  Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.  However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 20230294836 A1 Paget; Darren et al.
Drawings
1.	The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a).  The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.  Therefore, the chamber must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).  No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 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 1-17 and 20 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.
Dependent claims not addressed below are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
2.	Claim 1, lines 3 and 4, recite limitation “chamber”. It is unclear what element this is referring to. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 6-11, 13-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20150344143 A1 Epstein; Michael Jay et al., in view of US 6422514 B1 Clark; William James et al. in view of US 20130197791 A1 Struzik; Anthony, in view of US 20110042520 A1 Glaser; Daniel et al. and further in view of US 20230294836 A1 Paget; Darren et al.
3.	Regarding claim 1 Epstein teaches, a method for fueling and using an aircraft, wherein the method comprises: storing (para 0021 storing), using a fuel tank (fig. 3, element 22)
Epstien fails to teach, comprising a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank
However, Clark teaches, comprising a chamber  between an inner wall (fig. 8, element 156) and an outer wall of the fuel tank (fig. 8, element 152), wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft (fig. 8, element 154 insulation);
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the inner and outer walls taught by Clark in order to provide a space to house insulation
Epstein further teaches, fueling, using a fuel line (fig. 3, element 32 is equal to fuel line), the aircraft (fig. 1, element 5),
Epstein fails to teach, wherein fueling further comprises:
filling the fuel tank with liquified gas fuel to a desired level, wherein the desired level comprises fuel for a plurality of flights plus reserves, wherein a sensor connected to the fuel tank detects at least abnormal phenomena related insulation of [[to]] the fuel tank, wherein the sensor is configured to:detect humidity within the fuel tank; and
convert[[s]] the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device; and removing, using the computing device, the fuel line as function of the desired level in the aircraft; and
preparing the fuel tank for flight as a function of the desired level; and flying, using the aircraft, a plurality of flights using the liquid gas fuel.
However, Struzik teaches, wherein fueling further comprises: filling the fuel tank with liquified gas fuel to a desired level, wherein the desired level comprises fuel for a plurality of flights plus reserves (Struzik, fig. 5c tankering, para 0022 including reserve fuel).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the fueling optimization taught by in order to reduce “fuel cost across a multi-stop route.” (Struzik, para 0015).
Paget teaches, wherein a sensor connected to the fuel tank detects at least abnormal phenomena related to the fuel tank (para 0026-0027 sensor, wherein leak is equal to abnormal phenomena), wherein the sensor is configured to: detect humidity within the fuel tank (para 0026); and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device (para 0027 and para 0039 control unit);
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the sensor taught by Paget, In order to prevent the negative effects of leaks (para 0005).
Glaser teaches, and removing, using the computing device (para 0030 control device is used at end of refueling operation and line detached), the fuel line as function of the desired level in the aircraft (claim 17, disconnecting in response to predetermined parameter); and preparing the fuel tank for flight as a function of the desired level fill datum; and flying , using the aircraft, a plurality of flights using the liquid gas fuel (it is well know that aircraft fly, and have a plurality of flights).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the removing the fuel line as a function of fuel level taught by Glaser in order to optimize fueling times (Para 0011).
4.	Regarding claim 6, Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, Glasser teaches, wherein the fuel tank is prepared as a function of a fill datum (claim 17, disconnecting in response to predetermined parameter).
5.	Regarding claim 7 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, further comprising venting, using a vent line (fig. 3, element 41), the fuel tank (fig. 3, element 22), wherein the vent line is in fluid connection to the fuel tank (fig. 3).
6.	Regarding claim 8 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, wherein the vent line is configured to capture gaseous hydrogen from the fuel tank (para 0068 capture gases).
7.	Regarding claim 9 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, wherein the vent line is configured to release pressure from the fuel tank (para 0058 “maintains the tank at a desired pressure”).
8.	Regarding claim 10 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, wherein the vent line includes a pressure regulator (fig. 3, element 39 valve equal to regulator).
9.	Regarding claim 11 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, wherein the vent line is insulated to prevent the accumulation of frozen gases (para 0062 wing LNG, tank, and structural elements insulated).
10.	Regarding claim 13 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, wherein the vent line further comprises a heat exchanger (para 0005, 0084 catalytic converter equal to heat exchanger).
11.	Regarding claim 14 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, Glaser teaches wherein the preparing the fuel tank for flight further includes detaching the vent line from the fuel tank as a function of the desired level (claim 17, disconnecting in response to predetermined parameter).
12.	Regarding claim 15 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, Glaser teaches, wherein the preparing of the fuel tank for flight further includes detaching the fuel line from the fuel tank as a function of the desired level (claim 17, disconnecting in response to predetermined parameter).
13.	Regarding claim 16 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, Glaser teaches, wherein the plurality of flights is further configured to: commence at a first refueling station; and terminate at a second refueling station (Examiner takes official notice it is well known an aircraft to takeoff and land at a fueling station).
14.	Regarding claim 17 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, but does not teach, wherein no fueling occurs between the flights of the plurality of flights.
Examiner takes official notice it is well known to fill tanks to desired level and that the amount of fuel for more than one flight plus reserves.
15.	Regarding claim 20 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, wherein the liquified gas fuel is comprised of liquid hydrogen (abstract).
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik and Glaser as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 7281682 B2 D'Auvergne; Hector A.
16.	Regarding claim 2 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the aircraft comprises a blended wing body aircraft.
However, D’Auvergne teaches, wherein the aircraft comprises a blended wing body aircraft (fig. 1, element 28).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the blended wing body taught by D'Auvergne in order to form a large surface area (col. 2, limes 25-27).
Claim(s) 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Epstein and Glaser as applied to claims above, in view of US 6123295 A Wexler; Mark Harry et al and further in view of NPL “What is Aerogel-” by Nick Connor (hereinafter known as Conner).
17.	Regarding claim 3 Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, but fails to teach, wherein the fuel tank is configured to have a multi-lobe geometry,
However, Wexler teaches, wherein the fuel tank is configured to have a multi-lobe geometry (fig. 4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the multi-lobe fuel tank taught by Wexler in order to “optimize the amount of fuel” (col. 1, lines 18-19).
Epsiten further teaches, and comprises an insulation material (para 0043 “Vacuum insulation or optionally low thermal conductivity insulation material such as aerogels.”) but does not teach the value of thermal conductivity,
However, Connor teaches, with a thermal conductivity less than 0.10 W/m-K  (first paragraph, aerogel thermal conductivity of  0.013 W/m∙K). The motivation would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the low thermal conductivity because it reduces thermal conductivity.
18.	Regarding claim 4 Epstein teaches, the method of claim 3, Clark teaches, wherein the fuel tank comprises a septum (fig4, element 202, 204, 206).
19.	Regarding claim 5, Epstein as modified teaches, the method of claim 3, Wexler teaches, wherein the multi-lobe geometry provides tension for each fuel tank of the multi-lobe geometry (Cols. 2-3 lines 60-6 where hoop tension is provided).
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik and Glaser as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 20120119032 A1 Benassi; Eric et al.
20.	Regarding claim 12 Epstein as modified, the method of claim 7, but fails to teach, wherein the vent line includes an inner wall and an outer wall wherein a void resides in between.
However, Benassi teaches, wherein the vent line includes an inner wall (fig. 1, element 16) and an outer wall (see annotated fig. 1 outer wall) wherein a void (see annotated fig. 1 void) resides in between.
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the hose walls taught by Benassi, “in order to ensure that, in the event of failure of the first hose, the second wall hose contains any leakage.” (para 0002).
Conclusion

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKS
Claims 1-17 and 19-20 are pending in the present application. Claims 1 is amended in this paper. Claim 19 is canceled in this paper. No new claims are added in this paper.
In taking the foregoing actions, Applicant respectfully submits Applicant is not
necessarily conceding in this application that these claims, as originally presented, are not patentable over the references cited by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as pertinent ones of the present claim amendments and cancellations are only for facilitating expeditious prosecution. Applicant respectfully reserves the right to pursue the canceled claims and/or other claims in one or more continuing applications.
Req
uest for Continued Examination under 37 C.F.R
Concurrently with this response, Applicant has filed a Request for Continued
Examination with the appropriate fee. Applicant respectfully request that prosecution be reopened and all prior rejections be withdrawn.
Rej
ections under 35 U.S.C.
&
Claims 1-17 and 19-20 were rejected pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as allegedly
indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as his invention. Specifically the Examiner states "claim 1 recites the limitation "a fuel tank that provides structural support to an airframe of the aircraft and carries shear loads from the airframe". It is unclear how the tank provides structural support or carries shear loads from the airframe". (Office Action, p. 2).
Without conceding the propriety of the rejection, and in the interests of advancing
prosecution, amendments presented in this paper have removed the alleged indefinite language for claim 1. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that this rejection is now moot, and respectfully requests that this rejection of claims 1-17 and 19-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) be withdrawn.
Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that all rejections of claims pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 112 be removed.
Rej
ection of claims under 35 U.S.C.
&
Epstein/Clark/Struzik/Glaser
Claims 1, 6-11, 13-17 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly
unpatentable over US 20150344143 Al to Epstein; Michael Jay et al. (hereinafter "Epstein"), in view of US 6422514 Bl to Clark; William James et al. (hereinafter "Clark") in view of US 20130197791 Al to Struzik; Anthony (hereinafter "Struzik"), and further in view of US 20110042520 Al to Glaser; Daniel et al. (hereinafter "Glaser") (Office Action, p. 3). Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.
Claim 1
Claim las amended recites:
A method for fueling and using an aircraft, wherein the method comprises:
storing, using a fuel tank comprising a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall
of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by
prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft;
fueling, using a fuel line, the aircraft, wherein fueling further comprises:
filling the fuel tank with liquified gas fuel to a desired level, wherein the desired level comprises fuel for a plurality of flights plus reserves, wherein a sensor connected to the fuel tank detects at least abnormal phenomena related insulation of the fuel tank, wherein the sensor is configured to detect humidity within the fuel tank; and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device; and removing, using the computing device, the fuel line as function of the desired level in the aircraft; and
preparing the fuel tank for flight as a function of the desired level; and flying, using the aircraft, a plurality of flights using the liquid gas fuel.
The Office states that Epstein does not disclose "wherein a sensor connected to the fuel tank detects at least abnormal phenomena related to the fuel tank, wherein the sensor converts the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device." (Office Action, p. 4). The Office has not asserted that Clark nor Struzik disclose "wherein a sensor connected to the fuel tank detects at least abnormal phenomena related to the fuel tank, wherein the sensor converts the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device," as previously disclosed in claim 1. As such, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 1 is patentably distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, and Struzik, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above.
The Office asserts that Glaser discloses "wherein a sensor connected to the fuel tank detects at least abnormal phenomena related to the fuel tank, wherein the sensor converts the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device" citing paragraph 0015 of Glaser stating, in part:
The control device configured for example in the form of an electronic control device
controls the shut-off valve preferably on the basis of sensor signals that indicate whether
the exhaust air outlet connection connected to the aeration- and/or deaeration device of the aircraft tank system is connected to the aeration- and/or deaeration connection of the
storage tank of the refueling unit. The control device controls the shut-off valve into a
dosed position only if the sensor signals indicate to the control device that there is a
proper connection of the exhaust air outlet connection of the tank system to the aeration- and/or deaeration connection of the storage tank of the refueling unit.
However, Applicant asserts Glaser does not teach, suggest, or motivate "wherein the sensor is configured to detect humidity within the fuel tank; and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device," wherein the fuel tank comprises "a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft," as disclosed in amended claim 1. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 1 as amended is patentably distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik, and Glaser, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests the withdrawal of this rejection.
Claims 6-11, 13-17 and 20
Each of claims 6-11, 13-17 and 20 depends, directly or indirectly, from claim 1. As noted above, claim 3 is patentably distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik, and Glaser, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claims 6-11, 13-17 and 20 are patentably distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik, and Glaser, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests the withdrawal of these rejections.
Epstein/Clark/Struzik/Glaser/D'Auvergne
Claim 2 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly unpatentable Epstein, Clark, Struzik and Glaser as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 7281682 B2
D'Auvergne; Hector A. (hereinafter "D'Auvergne") (Office Action, p. 7). Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.
Claim 2 depends directly from claim 1. As noted above, claim 1 as amended is patentably distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik, and Glaser, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 2 is patentably distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik, and Glaser, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above.
D'Auvergne fails to cure the deficiencies of Epstein, Clark, Struzik, and Glaser. The Office has not asserted that D'Auvergne discloses "wherein the sensor is configured to detect humidity within the fuel tank; and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device," wherein the fuel tank comprises "a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft," as disclosed in amended claim 1. Applicant asserts D'Auvergne does not teach, suggest, or motivate "wherein the sensor is configured to detect humidity within the fuel tank; convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device," wherein the fuel tank comprises "a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft," as disclosed in amended claim 1. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 2 is patentably distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik, Glaser, and D'Auvergne, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests the withdrawal of this rejection.
Epstein/Glaser/Wexler/Connor
Claims 3-5, and 19 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly unpatentable over Epstein and Glaser as applied to claims above, in view of US 6123295 Al Wexler; Mark Harry et al. (hereinafter "Wexler") and further in view of NPL "What is Aerogel" by Nick Connor (hereinafter "Conner"). (Office Action, p. 7). Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.
Claim 19 is canceled in this paper, rendering rejection under 103 now moot. Each of claims 3-5 depends from claim 1. As noted above, claim 1 as amended is patentably distinguishable over Epstein and Glaser, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claims 3-5 are patentably distinguishable over Epstein and Glaser, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above.
Wexler and Connor fail to cure the deficiencies of Epstein and Glaser. The Office has not asserted that Wexler or Conor disclose "wherein the sensor is configured to detect humidity within the fuel tank; and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device," wherein the fuel tank comprises "a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft," as disclosed in amended claim 1. Applicant asserts Wexler and Connor do not teach, suggest, or motivate "wherein the sensor is configured to detect humidity within the fuel tank; and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device," wherein the fuel tank comprises "a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft," as disclosed in amended claim 1. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claims 3-5 are patentably distinguishable over Epstein, Glaser, Wexler, and Connor, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests the withdrawal of these rejections.
Epstein/Clark/Struzik/Glaser/Benassi
Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly unpatentable Epstein, Clark, Struzik and Glaser as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 20120119032 Al Benassi; Eric et al. (Office Action, p. 8). Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.
Claim 12 depends from claim 1. As noted above, claim 1 as amended is patentably
distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik, and Glaser, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 12 is patentably
distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik, and Glaser, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above.
Benassi fails to cure the deficiencies of Epstein, Clark, Struzik, and Glaser. The Office has not asserted that Benassi discloses "wherein the sensor is configured to detect humidity within the fuel tank; and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device," wherein the fuel tank comprises "a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft," as disclosed in amended claim 1. Applicant asserts Benassi does not teach, suggest, or motivate "wherein the sensor is configured to detect humidity within the fuel tank; and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device," wherein the fuel tank comprises "a chamber between an inner wall and an outer wall of the fuel tank, wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft," as disclosed in amended claim 1. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 12 is patentably distinguishable over Epstein, Clark, Struzik, Glaser, and Benassi, alone or in combination, for at least the reasons discussed above. Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests the withdrawal of this rejection.
Conclusion

NEXT OFFICE ACTION: DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA  or AIA  Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, bottom half, filed 12/28/2023, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive.  Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.  However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 20090090724 A1Childress; James J. et al.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 6, 15, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20090090724 A1Childress; James J. et al. in view of US 20130197791 A1 Struzik; Anthony, in view of US 20110042520 A1 Glaser; Daniel et al. and further in view of US 20230294836 A1 Paget; Darren et al.
1.	Regarding claim 1 Childress teaches, A method for fueling and using an aircraft, wherein the method comprises: conditioning a fuel tank, wherein the fuel tank comprises a chamber between an inner wall (fig. 1, element 16) and an outer wall (fig. 1, element 14) of the fuel tank, and wherein clean dry gas is pumped into the chamber to aid in insulating a liquid gas fuel (para 0024);  storing using the fuel tank  (para 0024-0025, valve allows for storing of nitrogen) comprising the chamber  between the inner wall and the outer wall of the fuel tank (fig. 1, element 10), wherein the chamber is configured to insulate a liquid gas fuel by prevention of condensation of humidity within the fuel tank of the aircraft;
Childress fails to teach, fueling, using a fuel line, the aircraft, wherein fueling further comprises:
filling the fuel tank with liquified gas fuel to a desired level, wherein the desired level comprises fuel for a plurality of flights plus reserves, wherein a sensor connected to the fuel tank detects at least abnormal phenomena related insulation of the fuel tank, wherein the sensor is configured to:
detect humidity within the fuel tank; and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device; and removing, using the computing device, the fuel line as function of the desired level in the aircraft; and
preparing the fuel tank for flight as a function of the desired level; and flying, using the aircraft, a plurality of flights using the liquid gas fuel.
However, Struzik teaches, wherein fueling further comprises: filling the fuel tank with liquified gas fuel to a desired level, wherein the desired level comprises fuel for a plurality of flights plus reserves (Struzik, fig. 5c tankering, para 0022 including reserve fuel).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Childress with the fueling optimization taught by in order to reduce “fuel cost across a multi-stop route.” (Struzik, para 0015).
Paget teaches, wherein a sensor connected to the fuel tank detects at least abnormal phenomena related to the fuel tank (para 0026-0027 sensor, wherein leak is equal to abnormal phenomena), wherein the sensor is configured to: detect humidity within the fuel tank (para 0026); and convert the detected at least abnormal phenomena into a signal that is then transmitted to a computing device (para 0027 and para 0039 control unit);
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Childress with the sensor taught by Paget, In order to prevent the negative effects of leaks (para 0005).
Glaser teaches, and removing, using the computing device (para 0030 control device is used at end of refueling operation and line detached), the fuel line as function of the desired level in the aircraft (claim 17, disconnecting in response to predetermined parameter); and preparing the fuel tank for flight as a function of the desired level fill datum; and flying , using the aircraft, a plurality of flights using the liquid gas fuel (it is well know that aircraft fly, and have a plurality of flights).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Childress with the removing the fuel line as a function of fuel level taught by Glaser in order to optimize fueling times (Para 0011).
2.	Regarding claim 6, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, Glasser teaches, wherein the fuel tank is prepared as a function of a fill datum (claim 17, disconnecting in response to predetermined parameter).
3.	Regarding claim 15 Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, Glaser teaches, wherein the preparing of the fuel tank for flight further includes detaching the fuel line from the fuel tank as a function of the desired level (claim 17, disconnecting in response to predetermined parameter).
4.	Regarding claim 17 Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, but does not teach, wherein no fueling occurs between the flights of the plurality of flights.
Examiner takes official notice it is well known to fill tanks to desired level and that the amount of fuel for more than one flight plus reserves.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Childress, Struzik, Glaser and Paget as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 7281682 B2 D'Auvergne; Hector A.
5.	Regarding claim 2 Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the aircraft comprises a blended wing body aircraft.
However, D’Auvergne teaches, wherein the aircraft comprises a blended wing body aircraft (fig. 1, element 28).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Childress with the blended wing body taught by D'Auvergne in order to form a large surface area (col. 2, limes 25-27).
Claim(s) 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Childress, Struzik, Glaser and Paget as applied to claims above, in view of US 6123295 A Wexler; Mark Harry et al, US 20150344143 A1 Epstein; Michael Jay et al. and further in view of NPL “What is Aerogel-” by Nick Connor (hereinafter known as Conner).
6.	Regarding claim 3 Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, but fails to teach, wherein the fuel tank is configured to have a multi-lobe geometry,
However, Wexler teaches, wherein the fuel tank is configured to have a multi-lobe geometry (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the multi-lobe fuel tank taught by Wexler in order to “optimize the amount of fuel” (col. 1, lines 18-19).
Epstein teaches, and comprises an insulation material (para 0043 “Vacuum insulation or optionally low thermal conductivity insulation material such as aerogels.”) but does not teach the value of thermal conductivity,
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Childress with the thermal insulation taught by Epstein with a reasonable expectation of success “in order to thermally insulate the tank to reduce heat flow across the tank walls”.
However, Connor teaches, with a thermal conductivity less than 0.10 W/m-K  (first paragraph, aerogel thermal conductivity of  0.013 W/m∙K). The motivation would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Epstein with the low thermal conductivity because it reduces thermal conductivity.
7.	Regarding claim 5, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 3, Wexler teaches, wherein the multi-lobe geometry provides tension for each fuel tank of the multi-lobe geometry (Cols. 2-3 lines 60-6 where hoop tension is provided).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Childress, Struzik, Glaser, Paget, Wexler and Epstein, Conner as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 6422514 B1 Clark; William James et al.
8.	Regarding claim 4, Childress as modified teaches, The method of claim 3, but fails to teach, wherein the fuel tank comprises a septum.
However Clark teaches, wherein the fuel tank comprises a septum  (fig4, element 202, 204, 206).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Childress with the septum taught by Clark in order for providing support of the chambers of the tank within the interior of the aerospace vehicle (Clark col 3, lines 43-67).
Claims 7-11, 13, 14, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Childress, Struzik, Glaser, Paget, and Epstein.
9.	Regarding claim 7, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, Epstein teaches, further comprising venting, using a vent line (fig. 3, element 41), the fuel tank (fig. 3, element 22), wherein the vent line is in fluid connection to the fuel tank (fig. 3).
10.	Regarding claim 8, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, Epstein teaches, wherein the vent line is configured to capture gaseous hydrogen from the fuel tank (para 0068 capture gases).
11.	Regarding claim 9, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, Epstein teaches, wherein the vent line is configured to release pressure from the fuel tank (para 0058 “maintains the tank at a desired pressure”).
12.	Regarding claim 10, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, Epstein teaches, wherein the vent line includes a pressure regulator (fig. 3, element 39 valve equal to regulator).
13.	Regarding claim 11, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, Epstein teaches, wherein the vent line is insulated to prevent the accumulation of frozen gases (para 0062 wing LNG, tank, and structural elements insulated).
14.	Regarding claim 13, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, Epstein teaches, wherein the vent line further comprises a heat exchanger (para 0005, 0084 catalytic converter equal to heat exchanger).
15.	Regarding claim 14, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 7, Epstein teaches, wherein the preparing the fuel tank for flight further includes detaching the vent line from the fuel tank as a function of the desired level (claim 17, disconnecting in response to predetermined parameter).
16.	Regarding claim 16, Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, Epstein teaches, wherein the plurality of flights are further configured to: commence at a first refueling station; and terminate at a second refueling station (Examiner takes official notice it is well known an aircraft to takeoff and land at a fueling station).
17.	Regarding claim 20 Childress as modified teaches, the method of claim 1, Epstein teaches, wherein the liquified gas fuel is comprised of liquid hydrogen (abstract).
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Childress, Struzik, Glaser, Paget and Epstein as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 20120119032 A1 Benassi; Eric et al.
18.	Regarding claim 12 Childress as modified, the method of claim 7, but fails to teach, wherein the vent line includes an inner wall and an outer wall wherein a void resides in between.
However, Benassi teaches, wherein the vent line includes an inner wall (fig. 1, element 16) and an outer wall (see annotated fig. 1 outer wall) wherein a void (see annotated fig. 1 void) resides in between.
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for fueling an aircraft taught by Childress with the hose walls taught by Benassi, “in order to ensure that, in the event of failure of the first hose, the second wall hose contains any leakage.” (para 0002).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL.  Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.  In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action.  In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US20230294836A1: Claims:
A propulsion system for an aircraft, the propulsion system comprising: at least two fuel cells, an electric propulsion motor electrically connected to the at least two fuel cells, a functional element (EF), at least two heat exchangers configured to permit heat exchange with ram air (RA), and a cooling circuit configured to cool the at least two fuel cells and the functional element, such that, in operation, a heat-transfer fluid circulates in the cooling circuit in a predefined direction of flow, the cooling circuit being a closed circuit having at least one main segment, the flow of the heat-transfer fluid circulating entirely in the at least one main segment, wherein the cooling circuit further comprises: at least one secondary segment that corresponds to each fuel cell and configured so as to cool said fuel cell, at least one secondary segment that corresponds to the functional element (EF) and configured so as to cool said functional element, and at least one tertiary segment that corresponds to each heat exchanger for exchanging heat with ram air (RA), and a control unit comprising electronic circuitry, wherein each secondary segment and each tertiary segment has: a leak detection device, a shut-off valve, the shut-off valve at an inlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow, and a non-return valve configured to prevent reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow, the non-return valve at an outlet of the secondary or tertiary segment, relative to the predefined direction of flow, and wherein the control unit is configured to trigger a closure of the shut-off valve of one said secondary segment or said tertiary segment when a leak is detected by the leak detection device of said secondary segment or said tertiary segment, so as to stop the circulation of the heat-transfer fluid through said secondary segment or said tertiary segment, in order to maintain the operation of the at least two fuel cells or of the functional element that are cooled by the cooling circuit and are situated on other segments of the cooling circuit than said secondary segment or said tertiary segment on which the leak has been detected.
at least two fuel cells,
an electric propulsion motor electrically connected to the at least two fuel cells,
a functional element (EF),
at least two heat exchangers configured to permit heat exchange with ram air (RA), and
a cooling circuit configured to cool the at least two fuel cells and the functional element, such that, in operation, a heat-transfer fluid circulates in the cooling circuit in a predefined direction of flow, the cooling circuit being a closed circuit having at least one main segment, the flow of the heat-transfer fluid circulating entirely in the at least one main segment,
wherein the cooling circuit further comprises: at least one secondary segment that corresponds to each fuel cell and configured so as to cool said fuel cell, at least one secondary segment that corresponds to the functional element (EF) and configured so as to cool said functional element, and at least one tertiary segment that corresponds to each heat exchanger for exchanging heat with ram air (RA), and a control unit comprising electronic circuitry, wherein each secondary segment and each tertiary segment has: a leak detection device, a shut-off valve, the shut-off valve at an inlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow, and a non-return valve configured to prevent reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow, the non-return valve at an outlet of the secondary or tertiary segment, relative to the predefined direction of flow,
at least one secondary segment that corresponds to each fuel cell and configured so as to cool said fuel cell,
at least one secondary segment that corresponds to the functional element (EF) and configured so as to cool said functional element, and
at least one tertiary segment that corresponds to each heat exchanger for exchanging heat with ram air (RA), and
a control unit comprising electronic circuitry,
wherein each secondary segment and each tertiary segment has: a leak detection device, a shut-off valve, the shut-off valve at an inlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow, and a non-return valve configured to prevent reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow, the non-return valve at an outlet of the secondary or tertiary segment, relative to the predefined direction of flow,
a leak detection device,
a shut-off valve, the shut-off valve at an inlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow, and
a non-return valve configured to prevent reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow, the non-return valve at an outlet of the secondary or tertiary segment, relative to the predefined direction of flow,
and wherein the control unit is configured to trigger a closure of the shut-off valve of one said secondary segment or said tertiary segment when a leak is detected by the leak detection device of said secondary segment or said tertiary segment, so as to stop the circulation of the heat-transfer fluid through said secondary segment or said tertiary segment, in order to maintain the operation of the at least two fuel cells or of the functional element that are cooled by the cooling circuit and are situated on other segments of the cooling circuit than said secondary segment or said tertiary segment on which the leak has been detected.
The propulsion system according to claim 1 , wherein the leak detection device is an acoustic sensor associated with the electronic circuitry, said electronic circuitry configured to determine, by comparing a signal picked up by the acoustic sensor with acoustic signatures of leaks stored in memory, whether said signal is representative of a leak.
The propulsion system according to claim 1 , wherein the leak detection device further comprises: a drainage pipe designed to collect, in a leak, at least a part of the heat-transfer fluid flowing out of the secondary segment; and a humidity sensor situated in the drainage pipe.
a drainage pipe designed to collect, in a leak, at least a part of the heat-transfer fluid flowing out of the secondary segment; and
a humidity sensor situated in the drainage pipe.
The propulsion system according to claim 1 , wherein at least one secondary segment further comprises at least one heat exchange, said heat exchanger being configured to cool a functional element (EF) or a fluid used by a functional element (EF).
An aircraft comprising: the propulsion system according to claim 1 .
the propulsion system according to claim 1 .
A method for protecting a propulsion system of an aircraft, the propulsion system comprising: at least two fuel cells, an electric propulsion motor electrically connected to the fuel cells, a functional element (EF), at least two heat exchangers configured to allow heat exchange with ram air (RA), and a cooling circuit configured to cool the at least two fuel cells and the functional element, such that, in operation, a heat-transfer fluid circulates in the cooling circuit in a predefined direction of flow, the cooling circuit being a closed circuit having at least one main segment, the flow of the heat-transfer fluid circulating entirely in the at least one main segment, wherein the cooling circuit comprises: at least one secondary segment that corresponds to each fuel cell and configured to cool said fuel cell, at least one secondary segment that corresponds to the functional element (EF) and configured to cool said functional element, and at least one tertiary segment that corresponds to each heat exchanger for exchanging heat with ram air (RA), and a control unit comprising electronic circuitry, wherein each secondary segment and each tertiary segment comprises: a leak detection device, a shut-off valve, the shut-off valve being situated at an inlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow, and a non-return valve configured to prevent reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow, the non-return valve being situated at an outlet of the secondary or tertiary segment, relative to the predefined direction of flow, and
an electric propulsion motor electrically connected to the fuel cells,
at least two heat exchangers configured to allow heat exchange with ram air (RA), and
wherein the cooling circuit comprises: at least one secondary segment that corresponds to each fuel cell and configured to cool said fuel cell, at least one secondary segment that corresponds to the functional element (EF) and configured to cool said functional element, and at least one tertiary segment that corresponds to each heat exchanger for exchanging heat with ram air (RA), and a control unit comprising electronic circuitry, wherein each secondary segment and each tertiary segment comprises: a leak detection device, a shut-off valve, the shut-off valve being situated at an inlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow, and a non-return valve configured to prevent reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow, the non-return valve being situated at an outlet of the secondary or tertiary segment, relative to the predefined direction of flow, and
at least one secondary segment that corresponds to each fuel cell and configured to cool said fuel cell,
at least one secondary segment that corresponds to the functional element (EF) and configured to cool said functional element, and
wherein each secondary segment and each tertiary segment comprises: a leak detection device, a shut-off valve, the shut-off valve being situated at an inlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow, and a non-return valve configured to prevent reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow, the non-return valve being situated at an outlet of the secondary or tertiary segment, relative to the predefined direction of flow, and
a shut-off valve, the shut-off valve being situated at an inlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow, and a non-return valve configured to prevent reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow, the non-return valve being situated at an outlet of the secondary or tertiary segment, relative to the predefined direction of flow, and
the method comprising the following steps: detecting, for each secondary or tertiary segment, whether there is a leak of heat-transfer fluid, stopping the circulation of the heat-transfer fluid through a secondary or tertiary segment when a leak of heat-transfer fluid is detected in said secondary or tertiary segment, and preventing a reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through said secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow in order to maintain the operation of the fuel cells or of the functional element that are cooled by the cooling circuit and are situated on other segments of the cooling circuit than the secondary or tertiary segment on which the leak has been detected.
detecting, for each secondary or tertiary segment, whether there is a leak of heat-transfer fluid,
stopping the circulation of the heat-transfer fluid through a secondary or tertiary segment when a leak of heat-transfer fluid is detected in said secondary or tertiary segment,
and preventing a reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through said secondary or tertiary segment in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow in order to maintain the operation of the fuel cells or of the functional element that are cooled by the cooling circuit and are situated on other segments of the cooling circuit than the secondary or tertiary segment on which the leak has been detected.
The method according to claim 6 , wherein the step of stopping the circulation of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment comprises stopping the flow of the heat-transfer fluid at a location situated at the inlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow.
The method according to claim 6 , wherein the step of preventing the reflux of the heat-transfer fluid through the secondary or tertiary segment comprises stopping the flow of the heat-transfer fluid in an opposite direction to the predefined direction of flow, at a location situated at the outlet of the secondary or tertiary segment relative to the predefined direction of flow.
A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising: a computer program comprising instructions for implementing the method according to claim 6 when said computer program is read from said non-transitory computer readable medium and executed by the processor.
a computer program comprising instructions for implementing the method according to claim 6 when said computer program is read from said non-transitory computer readable medium and executed by the processor.
Ref US20230193777A1: Claims:
A method of determining one or more fuel characteristics of an aviation fuel suitable for powering a gas turbine engine of an aircraft, the method comprising: determining, during use of the gas turbine engine, one or more exhaust content parameters by performing a sensor measurement on an exhaust of the gas turbine engine; and determining one or more fuel characteristics of the fuel based on the one or more exhaust content parameters, the one or more fuel characteristics including any one or more of: (i) a hydrogen to carbon ratio of the fuel; (ii) a percentage of sustainable aviation fuel in the fuel; (iii) an aromatic hydrocarbon content of the fuel; (iv) a naphthalene content of the fuel; and (v) a sulphur content of the fuel.
determining, during use of the gas turbine engine, one or more exhaust content parameters by performing a sensor measurement on an exhaust of the gas turbine engine; and
determining one or more fuel characteristics of the fuel based on the one or more exhaust content parameters, the one or more fuel characteristics including any one or more of:
(i) a hydrogen to carbon ratio of the fuel;
(ii) a percentage of sustainable aviation fuel in the fuel;
(iii) an aromatic hydrocarbon content of the fuel;
(iv) a naphthalene content of the fuel; and
(v) a sulphur content of the fuel.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the one or more exhaust content parameters include a parameter indicative of a non-volatile particulate matter (nvPM) content of the exhaust.
The method of claim 2 , wherein performing the sensor measurement comprises performing a laser induced incandescence measurement to determine a volume concentration of nvPM in the exhaust.
The method of claim 2 , wherein performing the sensor measurement comprises performing a condensation particle count measurement to determine an nvPM number in the exhaust.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the one or more exhaust content parameters include a parameter indicative of a SO 2 , CO 2 or CO content of the exhaust, and optionally wherein performing the sensor measurement comprises performing a non-dispersive Infrared absorption measurement.
and optionally wherein performing the sensor measurement comprises performing a non-dispersive Infrared absorption measurement.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the one or more exhaust content parameters include a sulphate aerosol content of the exhaust.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the one or more fuel characteristics are further determined based on one or more ambient atmospheric condition parameters, each indicative of ambient atmospheric conditions in which the gas turbine engine is currently operating.
The method of claim 1 , wherein the one or more fuel characteristics are further determined based on one or more engine operating parameters including an engine power setting.
The method of claim 1 , wherein: a) the one or more fuel characteristics are determined based on an exhaust content parameter determined at a first engine operation condition in which emission of a respective substance being measured is greater than at a second engine operation condition; and/or b) the one or more fuel characteristics are determined based on a comparison of exhaust content parameters determined at different engine operating conditions.
a) the one or more fuel characteristics are determined based on an exhaust content parameter determined at a first engine operation condition in which emission of a respective substance being measured is greater than at a second engine operation condition; and/or
b) the one or more fuel characteristics are determined based on a comparison of exhaust content parameters determined at different engine operating conditions.
A fuel characteristic determination system for determining one or more fuel characteristics of an aviation fuel suitable for powering a gas turbine engine of an aircraft, the system comprising: an exhaust sensor arranged to determine one or more exhaust content parameters, the exhaust sensor being arranged to perform a measurement on an exhaust of the gas turbine engine; and a fuel characteristic determination module arranged to determine the one or more fuel characteristics of the fuel based on the one or more exhaust content parameters, the one or more fuel characteristics including any one or more of: (i) a hydrogen to carbon ratio of the fuel; (ii) a percentage of sustainable aviation fuel in the fuel; (iii) an aromatic hydrocarbon content of the fuel; (iv) a naphthalene content of the fuel; and (v) a sulphur content of the fuel.
an exhaust sensor arranged to determine one or more exhaust content parameters, the exhaust sensor being arranged to perform a measurement on an exhaust of the gas turbine engine; and
a fuel characteristic determination module arranged to determine the one or more fuel characteristics of the fuel based on the one or more exhaust content parameters, the one or more fuel characteristics including any one or more of:
The fuel characteristic determination system of claim 11 , wherein the one or more exhaust content parameters that the exhaust sensor is arranged to determine include a parameter indicative of a non-volatile particulate matter (nvPM) content of the exhaust.
The fuel characteristic determination system of claim 12 , wherein the exhaust sensor comprises a laser induced incandescence measurement device arranged to determine a volume concentration of nvPM in the exhaust.
The fuel characteristic determination system of claim 12 , wherein the exhaust sensor comprises a condensation particle count device arranged to determine an nvPM number in the exhaust.
The fuel characteristic determination system of claim 11 , wherein the one or more exhaust content parameters that the exhaust sensor is arranged to determine include a parameter indicative of a SO 2 , CO 2 or CO content of the exhaust, and optionally wherein the exhaust sensor comprises a non-dispersive Infrared absorption measurement device.
The fuel characteristic determination system of claim 11 , wherein the one or more exhaust content parameters that the exhaust sensor is arranged to determine include a sulphate aerosol content of the exhaust.
The 
[Truncated to input limit]