Study on Multi-Objective Optimization of Power System Parameters of Battery Electric Vehicles
and Junming Zhou 1
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the reviewed article, the authors presented a very interesting and important topic, but its presentation needs several corrections:
1. No description of which schemes are referred to by the term in the abstract "economic schemes are 1b,2a,2c and 3b. 2a and 2c ". At this point, the reader does not know what is meant.
2. The description under Figure 3 should read "As shown in Figure 3 ...".
3. No detailed analysis of the results shown in Figure 4 - too poor a commentary.
4. No description of what schemes the results shown in Figure 5 refer to.
5. In the description under Figure 5, the terms "motor A or motor B" are used, and the parameters of these motors are not given. This description is given under Figure 9 and should be earlier.
6. There was no detailed analysis of the results shown in Table 3 and Figure 17 - too poor a commentary.
7. The conclusions are very general. No quantitative analysis of the results.
Author Response
Send the reply in the form of an attachment, thank you!
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
In this work, the authors try to optimize the power system of an all-electric vehicle driven by a low-capacity battery (30kWh). The authors use multi-objective optimization and the Pareto front to identify the locus of optimal design values given eight performance indicators. The authors use widely used models to determine these performance indicators.
The results show trade-offs between performance indicators are focused on a budget vehicle than on the metrics of a sports vehicle. The authors mention this as the object but it is unclear to the reviewer which of the metrics supports the performance of the vehicle type and how the design space differs from the cost or regulatory point of view. An important extension of the study is how the design space changes with higher capacity batteries that are commonly used today such as 40kWh or 60kWh. In addition, is the 30kWh battery sufficient for the vehicle type of the study?
Please find a list of typos that were identified and some suggestions to improve the readability of the manuscript:
- The authors mentioned "Some studies" but no citations are provided to that effect
- The acronym "AVL" is undefined.
- Typo "Pareto The"
- The sentence, "When the chassis is not redesigned and modified, too high acceleration performance will bring safety risks.", is mentioned without citation(s) or evidence
- "countries..I"
- Again no citation or evidence is provided for "One of the reasons is that the optimization problem of torque distribution among multiple drive motors has not been solved."
- There is a typo in the following sentence, "Table 1 (approximately considered arctan (4%) 4%)."
- Figs. 8 and 9, it is unclear that the countours represent efficiency, it might be good to add it in the caption or on the plot
- In Fig. 15, the description of the zones is given in the text, having it on the plot or caption is easier to read.
There are minor spelling and grammar mistakes. Also some sentences are hard to read and could be rephrased.
Author Response
Send the reply in the form of an attachment, thank you!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors present a research on “Study on multi-objective optimization of power system parameters of battery electric vehicles” is interesting work and study begin from based on a rear-drive pure electric vehicle, a multi-objective optimization matching method for power system parameters is proposed in this paper. The Pareto optimal solution set is obtained for fixed ratio transmission and 2-gear transmission, which is used as alternative solution set.
Following observation:
1) In the article you have stated theoretical analysis and optimization of power system parameters of battery electric vehicles. But with theoretical analysis data how you can apply parameters optimization. Less information with respect to algorithm design and where is the population size of the data.
2) Technical details to establish the optimization problem of parameter matching method is less and does not looks like research paper.
3) In the abstract should be structured with background of multi-objective optimization of power system parameters of battery electric vehicles under the uncertain condition, followed by different valuation methods, and briefly explained results and conclusion for better clarity.
4) In the introduction section, different input and system operating conditions are not clearly stated.
5) The objective must map with methodology you have used to target the research objective.
6) The author has to reframe section title in appropriate manner such as section 2 numerical method, section 3 parameter matching cases?
7) In the result section authors examined different main criteria, sub criteria etc but from where data is taken?
8) In the section 4 what is the need for Pareto front of motor A with fixed transmission ratio transmission.
9) In figure 14 and 15 how you have arrived the priority of Pareto the neighbourhood of the optimal solution.
10) The proposed methodology is too narrow and may be elaborated with comparison with similar work.
11) The author may refer following works with elaborated methodology and analysis for system design and system integration.
a. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.06.013
b. doi: 10.1109/IICPE.2014.7115831
12) The conclusion is delivered with limited content. For this manuscript, the conclusion should be provided with more details,
13) Add some quantitative research outcomes in the abstract section.
14) Grammar and spell check is required throughout the manuscript.
Ok
Author Response
Send the reply in the form of an attachment, thank you!
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
All my comments and questions have been clarified and corrected in the text of the article, so I believe it is ready for publication in present form.
Reviewer 3 Report
Ok
Ok, Minor revision is required for better quality.
