Nonlinear MPC-Based Acceleration Slip Regulation for Distributed Electric Vehicles
and Dengcheng Liu 4
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper presents an acceleration slip regulation (ASR) control system based on nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC), to improved dynamic performance and stability of EVs under acceleration condition.
Listed below are some questions and suggestions related to this manuscript:
1. In the introduction section, authors only compare the simulation results between the proposed strategy and no control. However, they do not show the advantage of this strategy over other control algorithms. The comparison of this strategy with other control algorithms should be included.
2. In the fourth section, it is suggested that the authors could further clarify the purpose of doing these different simulations, rather than just indicating that these test maneuvers are typical maneuvers developed for evaluating the performance characteristics of a vehicle.
3. It would be better to add sensor noise to the simulation process, to improve the realism of the simulation and the validity of the results,
4. In this paper, the authors lack to verify and discuss the robustness of the proposed system, for example, to explore the effect of the variation of the body mass on the performance of the proposed system.
5. A complete grammatical text review could improve greatly the manuscript readability. In page 14, it is more formal to use "anti-slip control" instead of "no-slip control".
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
this is overall a good manuscript.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your careful reading.
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper presents the development of an acceleration slip regulation (ASR) control strategy based on nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC). The authors also include intervention and exit mechanisms to determine when ASR is to be used. Simulink/CarSim co-simulation platform is used to implement slip rate control simulation experiments for different road conditions and verify the usefulness of the system.
The reference list is almost sufficient (on the minimal side). A few more academic references would be good to include. The paper is detailed and presented in a systematic manner.
A few things can improve this paper.
1. The abstract could point out whether a 2WD or 4WD car was used in the paper. I assume the method is intended for 4WD cars?
2. Section 1, paragraph1, last sentence (line 39): Can you include some references to support this statement?
3. Section 1, 2nd last paragraph (lines 25-36)– authors can include a block diagram figure here to highlight/summarise the proposed model.
4. Figure 4 – in the last decision block v > vmin Tpid < TNMPC, is this an ‘and’ or ‘or’ combination?
5. Section 4, page 10, line5&6 – what is meant by vehicle accelerates at an initial velocity of 30 km/h? this is confusing, km/h is not the unit for acceleration.
6. Section 4, page 10, Table 2 – please write what kind of real vehicle/car these parameters represent. And is it 4WD or 2WD.
7. In Fig.6 – Fig.12, what is opt? does is mean optimal? Please explain all the short form of symbols in the manuscript.
8. The results are good in the figures and table 3. But, how do the results compare with other methods listed in section 1?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Research is well done!
