A Multi-Objective Optimization Dispatch Method for Microgrid Energy Management Considering the Power Loss of Converters
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors should clarify why the network losses are not included in the formulation of the dispatch method. It could be appropriate to formulate the dispatch problem by including this important aspect. At this purpose, it is difficult to understand how the network described in the numerical application has been taken into account.
The authors should highlight the originality of the algorithm solution, which, at the best of my knowledge, appears to be already known in the relevant literature.
In my opinion, the authors employ a very simple model for converter power losses evaluation. In the specific literature more accurate models are available.
In (15), (16) the efficiency of the battery is not handled in correct way.
The figures quality has to improved.
Author Response
Reply to the first Reviewer’s comments
The authors would like to start by thanking the reviewers for their time and very valuable comments. The authors believe that the comments are constructive and helpful to improve its quality and clarity of our manuscript.
The manuscript has been revised, and please find our reply to your comments.
Comment
1. The authors should clarify why the network losses are not included in the formulation of the dispatch method. It could be appropriate to formulate the dispatch problem by including this important aspect. At this purpose, it is difficult to understand how the network described in the numerical application has been taken into account.
Reply
Thank you for your careful work, and we are very sorry about our not clarifying this point. The optimization dispatch problem for microgrid considering constraints is a multi-period optimal problem, and the proposed method is aims at minimizing the total generation and operation cost through the unit commitment and optimization of output of each unit on the condition that all the system constraints are satisfied. In this paper, we combine the network loss and the maintenance cost convert into the operation cost of microgrid, and use different time electricity price to evaluate network loss and maintenance cost on the optimization dispatch processing.
Comment
2. The authors should highlight the originality of the algorithm solution, which, at the best of my knowledge, appears to be already known in the relevant literature.
Reply
Thank you very much for the valuable comment. We appreciate the useful comment by the reviewer. In our study, hybrid the particle swarm optimization, gravitation search algorithm and opposition based learning to proposed an optimization dispatch method. The economic dispatch problem of microgrid as a research hotspot, and many related researches has been published. In this paper, we combine day-ahead scheduling and real-time scheduling, consider the power loss of converters in the microgrid as one of the optimization objective, and use the opposition based learning method to optimize the initial population of the gravitation search algorithm. Compared with other methods, the proposed method has better ability to deal with the optimization dispatch when there is forecast error and load fluctuation in the microgrid operation.
Comment
3. In my opinion, the authors employ a very simple model for converter power losses evaluation. In the specific literature more accurate models are available.
Reply
Thank you very much for the valuable comment. Reading the related of literatures, we found that the power loss of energy converters is rarely considered in the dispatch optimization study. Therefore, we try to use the power loss of the conversion equipment as one of the optimization objective when studying the micro-grid economic dispatch. In this paper, we have select a simple converter mode and obtained its minimum power loss as the loss coefficient of converter in this paper. In future research work, we will accurately evaluate the power loss of the converter caused by the main conduction loss, conversion loss and switching loss.
Comment
4. In (15), (16) the efficiency of the battery is not handled in correct way.
Reply
Thank you very much for the careful work, and we are very sorry about our
careless. We found the referee’s comments most helpful and have revised the m
manuscript.
Comment
5. The figures quality has to improved
Reply
Thank you very much for the valuable comment. We have made resize according to the Reviewer’s comment, and the captions of figures has been modified to ensure that the figures is clearly visible.
Thank you again for your suggestions. All your suggestions are very important. They have important significance for improving my manuscript and future work
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper presents a novel multi-objective optimisation dispatch method for microgrid energy management. The content is interesting. The structure is clear. The presentation might have high value in general practice and for science however there is a few issues, which should be taken into account and incorporated in the text before publication to improve the quality of the paper.
1. Please provide the list of all symbols and acronyms used in the text.
2. The introduction to the methodology and review of the multi-criteria decision-making methods in maintenance optimisation should be updated, as an alternative possibilities existsIt might be supplemented with the following sources: 10.1109/ICSMC.2006.384944; 10.1007/978-3-319-31307-8_71; 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.10.020; 10.1155/2018/1027193
3. Please provide additional presentation e.g. in form of subalgorithms for presented in Figure 3 items: “Forecast machine”, “Trigger (error analysis)”, “Real-time update (PSO-OGSA)”, “Day-ahead scheduling (PSO-OGSA)”.
4. Lines 245, 285 - subsections should not end by tables or figures. Please provide additional discussion.
5. Table 3 – please present numeric data in the common form, e.g. engineering notation for all entries.
6. Figures 4, 6, 7, 8, has to be resized/modified as its quality is insufficient and captions are illegible.
I recommend the paper to be published after incorporating my remarks.
Author Response
Reply to the second Reviewer’s comments
The authors would like to start by thanking the reviewers for their time and very valuable comments. The authors believe that the comments are constructive and helpful to improve its quality and clarity of our manuscript.
The manuscript has been revised significantly, and please find our reply to your comments.
Comment
1. Please provide the list of all symbols and acronyms used in the text.
Reply
Thank you for your careful work. We added the list of abbreviations to make the indicate of symbols and acronyms more clear in this paper at the end of the article.
(Line 412 - Line 462)
Comment
2. The introduction to the methodology and review of the multi-criteria decision-making methods in maintenance optimisation should be updated, as an alternative possibilities exists It might be supplemented with the following sources: 10.1109/ICSMC.2006.384944;10.1007/978-3-319-31307-8_71; 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.10.020; 10.1155/2018/1027193.
Reply
Thank you very much for the valuable comment. We have studied the latest literature on multi-criteria decision making and summarize it. We updated some references to make the background and literature more clear in introduction.
(Line 481, Line 489, Line 496, Line 499)
Comment
3. Please provide additional presentation e.g. in form of subalgorithms for presented in Figure 3 items: “Forecast machine”, “Trigger (error analysis)”, “Real-time update (PSO-OGSA)”, “Day-ahead scheduling (PSO-OGSA)”.
Reply
Thank you very much for the valuable comment. This comment tells us to give
more evidence to explain the novelty of our proposed method. The forecasting machine is acquired the output power of renewable distributed generation system based on meteorological information, electricity price and historical load data. The trigger is compares the meteorological information, the real-time output power, and the real-time load demand with the predicted information, the action single of the trigger is activated when the difference beyond the limitation rang between the real-time information and the forecast information. The day-ahead scheduling and the real-time update are bases on the proposed PSO-OGSA method to solve the optimization dispatch problem, and introduction of the PSO-OGSA method in Section 3.2 of the article.
(Line 191 - Line 200, Line 205 – Line 213 )
Comment
4. Lines 245, 285 - subsections should not end by tables or figures. Please provide additional discussion.
Reply
We appreciate the useful comment by the reviewer. We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comment, and added some discussion for tables and figures.
(Line 288 – Line 292, Line 341 – Line 343)
Comment
5. Table 3 – please present numeric data in the common form, e.g. engineering notation for all entries
Reply
Thank you for your careful work, and we are very sorry about out careless. We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comment, added explanations of the Ave and Best, and modified the data format to a common format in the table.
(Line 324 – Line 326)
Comment
6. Figures 4, 6, 7, 8, has to be resized/modified as its quality is insufficient and captions are illegible
Reply
Thank you very much for the valuable comment. We have made resize according to the Reviewer’s comment, and the captions of figures has been modified to ensure that the figures is clearly visible.
Thank you again for your suggestions. All your suggestions are very important. They have important significance for improving my manuscript and future work
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article is scientific and brings new results. These are findings of a highly professional nature.
The post is written very precisely and there is a large number of abbreviations. Each abbreviation is defined and explained on first use. In addition, only letters (SPEA, GA, PSO, TSD, MOOD, etc.) are used. The reader sometimes loses the meaning of sentences. I suggest writing a list of the symbols and abbreviations used at the end of the article. In this way, the reader can navigate more quickly in the meaning and content of sentences, as well as find the meaning of the whole article.
The article has 5 chapters and a number of subchapters. Chapters are written in capital letters, subchapters thin, italic, lowercase.
Between the lines:
237 to 238 is a paragraph that is inserted and does not belong to the text? Why doesn't it have line numbers? Is it inserted later?
241 to 242 the same - is there a text - a paragraph that is inserted and does not belong to the text? Why doesn't it have line numbers? Is it inserted later?
The article is intended for a narrow group of experts who deal with the subject matter.
I propose to publish the article. In my opinion, it will find a expert readers response that will be reflected in quotations and responses.
Author Response
Reply to the third Reviewer’s comments
The authors would like to start by thanking the reviewers for their time and very valuable comments. The authors believe that the comments are constructive and helpful to improve its quality and clarity of our manuscript.
The manuscript has been revised, and please find our reply to your comments.
Comment
1. The post is written very precisely and there is a large number of abbreviations. Each abbreviation is defined and explained on first use. In addition, only letters (SPEA, GA, PSO, TSD, MOOD, etc.) are used. The reader sometimes loses the meaning of sentences. I suggest writing a list of the symbols and abbreviations used at the end of the article. In this way, the reader can navigate more quickly in the meaning and content of sentences, as well as find the meaning of the whole article.
Reply
Thank you for your careful work. We added the list of abbreviations to make the indicate of symbols and acronyms more clear in this paper at the end of the article.
(Line 412 - Line 462)
Comment
2. The article has 5 chapters and a number of subchapters. Chapters are written in capital letters, subchapters thin, italic, lowercase..
Reply
Thank you very much for the valuable comment. We have made correction according to the Reviewer’s comment.
Comment
3. 237 to 238 is a paragraph that is inserted and does not belong to the text? Why doesn't it have line numbers? Is it inserted later?.
Reply
Thank you very much for the careful work, and we are very sorry about our
careless. The paragraph between the line 237 and the line 238 is the text of this paper. Missing line number is due to an operational error in Latex environment and we has been corrected in the article. The paragraph between the line 237 and the line 238 is not a paragraph by inserted later.
(Line 278 - Line 283)
Comment
4. 241 to 242 the same - is there a text - a paragraph that is inserted and does not belong to the text? Why doesn't it have line numbers? Is it inserted later?.
Reply
Thank you very much for the careful work, and we are very sorry about our
careless. The paragraph between the line 241 and the line 242 is the text of this paper. Missing line number is due to an operational error in Latex environment and we has been corrected in the article. The paragraph between the line 241 and the line 242 is not a paragraph by inserted later.
(Line 288 - Line 297)
Thank you again for your suggestions. All your suggestions are very important. They have important significance for improving my manuscript and future work
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The revised version of the paper, in my opinion, can be accepted for publication.
