Next Article in Journal
Extended Recursive Three-Step Filter for Linear Discrete-Time Systems with Dual-Unknown Inputs
Previous Article in Journal
The Effects of Different Doses of Organic Waste on Prairie Cordgrass (Spartina Pectinata L.) Yield and Selected Energy Parameters
 
 
Review
Peer-Review Record

Review of Fault Detection and Diagnosis Techniques for AC Motor Drives

Energies 2023, 16(15), 5602; https://doi.org/10.3390/en16155602
by Muhammed Ali Gultekin * and Ali Bazzi *
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 3:
Energies 2023, 16(15), 5602; https://doi.org/10.3390/en16155602
Submission received: 2 June 2023 / Revised: 10 July 2023 / Accepted: 22 July 2023 / Published: 25 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Section F: Electrical Engineering)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The present topic belongs to an exhaustive list of studies coming under the title of  ''Review of Fault Detection and Diagnosis Techniques for AC Motor Drives''  about a specific application of the principles for demonstrating the performance of a new product.

 

Question 1. The abstract looks nice, but the conclusion section is inadequate to justify the major findings as per the objectives of the study.
Question 2. The introductory presentation lacks stress on novelty and there is very less information about the previous studies from the literature.
Question 3. The methodology should discuss first about the materials preparation, conduct of experiment and then the analytical methods.
Question 4. There should a clear description of the “Motor Drives” especially for the General architecture in studies. It is not clear about the A motor drive system consis the present study. Question 5. p.4, line 178-182: please rewrite the sentence.
Question 6. The entire section 3 is to  Statistical Approach. It is a well-documented theory and sufficient documents area available to verify the concepts.
Tables 1: Summary of Machine FDD using Statistical and Signal Processing Methods .
Question 7. p.21, line 463-466: how to justify the statement about  multi-level converter ?

Question 8. There is no in-depth discussion on the reasoning of differential Controller-aided Methods.

 Question 9. Diagnosis in Sensors is not cler.

ok

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

An interesting literature review with an emphasis on important application aspects

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. We appreciate your feedback. 

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript "Review of Fault Detection and Diagnosis Techniques for AC Motor Drives" presents a review of the different methods used in fault detection and diagnosis of AC motors.

Authors must improve the quality of the paper. It is a generalized survey which tries to explain all the fault diagnosis and detection domain in only 16 pages, making the manuscript difficult to read and incomplete. Furthermore, authors present some statements that are partially false, making the paper not useful for being used by people that are introducing to this field. Some examples of this are:

- Bearing faults progress slowly (line 89)

- To detect bearing faults the most commonly used signal is vibration (line 224), which is true but after that they present multiple techniques that can be also used, and don't present the one that is initially used in early degradation which is ultrasonic noise.

- The division of the techniques into three categories is incorrectly presented. Moreover, when talking about each of them, the information is wrongly presented and some of the works actually are part of other category.

I suggest the authors to improve the quality of the paper, include more references, more works, and try to double the size of the manuscript, adding information which is actually correct, and being consistent while describing and defining the different categories of the techniques used.

Anyway, the purpose and scope of this review is highly interesting, specially if it can be easily understand by researchers that try to get into this field. For this purpose all the statements presented must be clear, and validated by some references.

The use of english must be reviewed by the authors.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The quality of the paper has been improved. However, it stills presenting some important issues. The length of the paper is 22 pages, including 110 references, which is not enough for a review paper. Furthermore, no discussion about the main drawbacks of each of the analyzed techniques is presented, without talking about the limited data problem, the overfiting caused by CNNs or other common issues in this research area. I suggest authors to improve the quality and resubmit it.

Back to TopTop