Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The title and abstract suggest energy management with hybrid sources for electric aircraft. Authors have presented the hardware in loop simulations results to validate the findings. However, the presented manuscript mostly deals with and deliver the energy management optimization amongst various sources, however, findings have nothing to do with electric aircraft. Therefore, authors are suggested to modify the title as EMS for hybrid power source for variable electric loading as merely taking a variable load profile for 350 sec does not justify the electric aircraft in title. Moreover, manuscript needs to be strengthened further as per below suggestion:
EEMS and ECMS should have full form at the first place they appear in abstract/text.
A careful revision is required throughout the manuscript. For an example lines 105 – 109, caption of figure 2.
The abrupt start of literature review from line 52 to 104 needs to be rewritten to deliver significant information in the form of literature gaps. In current form it looks like authors have simple wrote the various papers objectives which does not dwell on presented manuscript problem statement.
Cite the source file in figure 2 caption.
Authors are suggested to check the objective function stated in equation 1, whether the equation is correct in its current form, or it should be integration of equation 1. Similarly, for the constraint shown in equation 2.
Section 2 unnecessarily stretched and presented in the manuscript, which simply talks about various optimization algorithms presented in the literature.
The statement, “To reduce the use of H2 based on two separate energy management strategies (EEMS & ECMS), the MBA methodology is applied” is confusing. Authors are suggested to clarify whether MBA technique has been applied/used by them.
The presented load and source ratings in figure 8 should be in the form of table.
Authors are suggested to clarify the HIL results presented in figure 14 as last graph has different top axis rating (247s) as compared to rest of the graph (251). Also provide the time scale axis.
Moreover, consumption of hydrogen in gms need to be clarify as per total energy delivered.
The paper need to be revised carefully, as lots of typo and grammatical errors are present throughout the thesis
Author Response
Date: 27-05-2023. To The Editor, Sustainability Journal, MDPI. Dear Editor, Sub: Submission of revision of Manuscript ID: Sustainability -2407099 – Entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems” –Reg. We authors would like to thank the Lead Guest Editor, Guest Editor, and Reviewers for their valuable decision and recommendations made to improve the quality of the paper. We authors are happy to submit our revised manuscript entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems”, which we would like to submit for publication as a research article in the Sustainability Journal, MDPI. We authors thank you for providing such an opportunity, and we also thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable and helpful comments. Based on the set of reviews the manuscript is thoroughly revised and the appropriate corrections have been made. The point-by-point response to the reviewers’ comments is included here forth for your kind perusal. Thank you. We authors look forward to your positive response. Yours sincerely, Dr. Dhanamjayulu C Associate Professor School of Electrical Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore-632014. Tamilnadu, India. E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] Author’s Responses to Reviewer’s Comments: We authors, first of all, thank the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions. RESPONSE TO REVIEWER’S COMMENTS - REVIEWER # 1 We authors would like to express our sincere thanks to the reviewer for finding interest in the manuscript. Thanks for the valuable recommendations to improve the manuscript. The manuscript is updated according to the suggested changes. COMMENT-1 EEMS and ECMS should have full form at the first place they appear in abstract/text. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised in the abstract by placing EEMS and ECMS full forms in the first place and updated according to your suggested changes. Thanks for understanding our concern. COMMENT-2 A careful revision is required throughout the manuscript. For an example lines 105 – 109, caption of figure 2. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are extremely sorry for it by mistake, it was a typing error and it has been corrected both lines of data and the caption of the figure.2 also. The manuscript is updated according to your suggested changes in page.7. Thanks for understanding our concern. COMMENT-3 The abrupt start of literature review from line 52 to 104 needs to be rewritten to deliver significant information in the form of literature gaps. In current form it looks like authors have simple wrote the various papers objectives which does not dwell on presented manuscript problem statement. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised in detail according to your suggested changes. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. COMMENT- 4 Cite the source file in figure 2 caption. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is modified as by citing the source file in the figure.2 caption and updated according to your suggested changes in page 9. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. COMMENT-5 Authors are suggested to check the objective function stated in equation 1, whether the equation is correct in its current form, or it should be integration of equation 1. Similarly, for the constraint shown in equation 2. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, We authors are carefully checked the manuscript equations and hereby we confirm that Equation 1 and Equation 2 are correct in the present form. Thanks for understanding our concern. COMMENT-6 Section 2 unnecessarily stretched and presented in the manuscript, which simply talks about various optimization algorithms presented in the literature. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is modified and updated according to your suggested changes. The unnecessary data like Fuzzy logic, Grasshopper optimization algorithms, and genetic algorithms in Section 2 are removed. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. COMMENT-7 The statement, “To reduce the use of H2 based on two separate energy management strategies (EEMS & ECMS), the MBA methodology is applied” is confusing. Authors are suggested to clarify whether MBA technique has been applied/used by them. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is modified and a detailed explanation is given with the help of flowchart and updated according to your suggested changes. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. COMMENT-8 The presented load and source ratings in figure 8 should be in the form of table. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is modified and updated as a Table.2 according to your suggested changes. The same is represented below for your consideration. Thanks for understanding our concern. Table 2. Specifications of Fuel Cell, Battery and Supercapacitor in Simulink Model Sl.no Specifications 1. Fuel Cell Rated Voltage (V) 41.15 Rated Current (A) 250 Number of Cells 65 Efficiency (%) 50 Operating Temp. (oC) 45 Air flowrate (Ipm) 732 Fuel Pressure (bar) 1.16 Air Pressure (bar) 1 2. Battery Rated Voltage (V) 48 Capacity (Ah) 40 Max. Capacity (Ah) 40 Full Charge Voltage 55.88 Rated discharge Current (A) 17.4 Internal resistance 0.012 3. Supercapacitor Rated Capacitance (F) 15.6 Series Resistance (Ω) 0.15 Rated Voltage (V) 291.6 Surge Voltage (V) 307 No. of Capacitors in Series 108 No. of capacitors in parallel 1 Number of Layers 6 4. Protective Resistor 15KW 5. Boost Converter 4KW 6. Buck Converter 1.2KW 7. Inverter 15KVA, 240/220 V and 400 Hz COMMENT-9 Authors are suggested to clarify the HIL results presented in figure 14 as last graph has different top axis rating (247s) as compared to rest of the graph (251). Also provide the time scale axis. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors would like to let you know that, the HIL results presented in figure.14 as the last graph is only because during execution time for generating the response in DSO, the cursor selected unfortunately its value from 247s it is slightly prior to the target value 251s. However, it won’t be reflected in the results moreover we can read and observe the response from 251s onwards as usual because the time scale axis is uniform for all the graphs in figure.14 which is the 50s/div. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. COMMENT-10 Moreover, consumption of hydrogen in gms need to be clarify as per total energy delivered. RESPONSE: Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is modified and updated according to your suggested changes as shown in Table.4. The consumption of hydrogen in gms is calculated in terms of total energy delivered by using a Hyarc conversion calculator as a (https://h2tools.org/hyarc/calculator-tools/unit-conversion-calculator) link mentioned. The same is represented below for your consideration. Thanks for understanding our concern. Table 4. Comparative analysis with existing technologies by Hydrogen consumption (gm) H2 Consumption (gms) (26) (40) (32) Proposed Methodologies (gms) Proposed Methodologies (Watthour) Algorithms CPI 31.63 -- 31.7 0.0369 SMC 32.063 -- 31 0.0360 ECMS 35.97 -- 35.8 0.0416 EEMS 31.677 -- 31.674 31.8 0.0370 WOA -- -- 19.6 0.0228 MBA-EEMS 31.702 -- -- MBA-ECMS 19.85 -- -- SSA-EEMS 19.40 -- -- SSA-ECMS 19.95 -- 19.40 -- Cuckoo Search algorithm -- -- 19.4 0.0226 GWO -- 19.40 19.40 19.2 0.0223 COA-ECMS -- -- 18.6 0.0216 COA-EEMS -- 19.3778 16.9 0.0197 We authors have updated the manuscript and would like to express sincere thanks to the reviewers for your valuable suggestions. Dr. Dhanamjayulu C
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
-Contribution is not clear. Include contribution of this paper in Introduction section in a separate paragraph in the bulleted for form so that it can be easily followed by the readers. -A critical analysis should be based on a comparison of the proposed with another state-of-the-art existing scheme. Please compare your calculations with another scheme to validate its superiority.
-Also, please compare the accuracy of the proposed algorithm with similar methods. How much superior performance does it show in accuracy?
-Suggest to add recent literature work in the introduction.
-Suggested to recheck minor errors in related to abbreviation and grammatical mistakes
-Introduction is short and not complete. My suggestion is to divide the introduction into three subsections: 1) motivation and incitement, 2) literature review and 3) contribution and paper organization.
-The review of optimization methods can be expanded, some works are recommended to be added, such as:
-A novel hybrid algorithm based on rat swarm optimization and pattern search for parameter extraction of solar photovoltaic models, Energy Science & Engineering.
-Modified salp swarm optimization for Parameter estimation of solar PV models, IEEE ACCESS
-Golden Search Optimization Algorithm
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Date: 27-05-2023.
To
The Editor,
Sustainability Journal,
MDPI.
Dear Editor,
Sub: Submission of revision of Manuscript ID: Sustainability -2407099 – Entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems” –Reg.
We authors would like to thank the Lead Guest Editor, Guest Editor, and Reviewers for their valuable decision and recommendations made to improve the quality of the paper. We authors are happy to submit our revised manuscript entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems”, which we would like to submit for publication as a research article in the Sustainability Journal, MDPI. We authors thank you for providing such an opportunity, and we also thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable and helpful comments. Based on the set of reviews the manuscript is thoroughly revised and the appropriate corrections have been made. The point-by-point response to the reviewers’ comments is included here forth for your kind perusal.
Thank you. We authors look forward to your positive response.
Yours sincerely,
Dr. Dhanamjayulu C
Associate Professor
School of Electrical Engineering,
Vellore Institute of Technology,
Vellore-632014. Tamilnadu, India.
E-mail: [email protected]
|
RESPONSE TO REVIEWER’S COMMENTS - REVIEWER # 2
We authors would like to express our sincere thanks to the reviewer for finding interest in the manuscript. Thanks for the valuable recommendations to improve the manuscript. The manuscript is updated according to the suggested changes.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMMENT-1 |
The paper needs to be revised carefully, as lots of typo and grammatical errors are present throughout the thesis |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised carefully and corrected all typos and grammatical errors by using grammarly software and updated according to your suggested changes. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMMENT-2 |
Contribution is not clear. Include contribution of this paper in Introduction section in a separate paragraph in the bulleted for form so that it can be easily followed by the readers. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is modified and updated according to your suggested changes in introduction section. The same is represented below for your consideration. Thanks for understanding our concern.
The main contribution of the paper is : •The COA technique is used to minimize H2 consumption based on two different energy management strategies. The first one is the ECMS while the second is the EEMS.
•The main concentration of this paper is a validated performance comparison of EMS strategies for an aircraft emergency system based on fuel cells.
•The Proposed algorithm is compared with existing conventional and metaheuristic algorithms like SMC, CPI, ECMS, EEMS, Cuckoo Search algorithm, GWO, and WOA.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMMENT-3 |
A critical analysis should be based on a comparison of the proposed with another state-of-the-art existing scheme. Please compare your calculations with another scheme to validate its superiority. Also, please compare the accuracy of the proposed algorithm with similar methods. How much superior performance does it show in accuracy?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is modified by comparing proposed algorithms with the possible existing schemes, moreover, very less counted papers are published in this research area and updated according to your suggested changes as shown in Table.5 . The same is represented below for your consideration. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern.
Table 5. Comparative analysis with existing technologies by Efficiency (%)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMMENT-4 |
Suggest to add recent literature work in the introduction. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised by adding literature work and updated according to your suggested changes in introduction section. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMMENT-5 |
Suggested to recheck minor errors in related to abbreviation and grammatical mistakes |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised carefully and corrected all abbreviations and grammatical mistakes by using Grammarly software and updated according to your suggested changes. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMMENT-6 |
Introduction is short and not complete. My suggestion is to divide the introduction into three subsections: 1) motivation and incitement, 2) literature review and 3) contribution and paper organization. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised by adding motivation, the contribution of the paper, incitement literature work, and updated according to your suggested changes in introduction section. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMMENT-7 |
The review of optimization methods can be expanded, some works are recommended to be added, such as: -A novel hybrid algorithm based on rat swarm optimization and pattern search for parameter extraction of solar photovoltaic models, Energy Science & Engineering.
-Modified salp swarm optimization for Parameter estimation of solar PV models, IEEE ACCESS
-Golden Search Optimization Algorithm
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is updated by adding more recommended works as per your suggested references and the same reference papers are represented below for your consideration. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern.
1. Eslami M, Akbari E, Seyed Sadr ST, Ibrahim BF. A novel hybrid algorithm based on rat swarm optimization and pattern search for parameter extraction of solar photovoltaic models. Energy Sci Eng. 2022;10:2689‐2713.
2. M. Yaghoubi, M. Eslami, M. Noroozi, H. Mohammadi, O. Kamari and S. Palani, "Modified Salp Swarm Optimization for Parameter Estimation of Solar PV Models," in IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 110181-110194, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3213746.
3. M. Noroozi, H. Mohammadi, E. Efatinasab, A. Lashgari, M. Eslami and B. Khan, "Golden Search Optimization Algorithm," in IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 37515-37532, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3162853.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We authors have updated the manuscript and would like to express sincere thanks to the reviewers for your valuable suggestions.
Dr. Dhanamjayulu C
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
16-May-23
Sustainability- MDPI
Manuscript ID: sustainability-2407099
Title: Optimization of Fuel Consumption using Nature-Inspired Coyotes Algorithm for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Electric Aircraft with Real-Time HIL Simulator
Although the paper is well-written. However, some suggestions are enlisted to enhance the readability of a large community.
1. Title is confined to 15 words standard.
2. As in the title - Optimization of Fuel Consumption using Nature-Inspired Coyotes Algorithm for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Electric Aircraft with Real-Time HIL Simulator.
But no discussion or dimensions and no load distribution is found in the manuscript i.e. aircraft load demand in emergency scenarios.
3. 12 different algorithms in section 2 are discussed and two hybrid optimizations are used. But in the figures 9-11 only 9 algorithms are legend out of 15.
4. Fuzzy logic is spaced in Section 2 but no placement anywhere.
5. CSOA/ CSA; GWOA/GWO, SSOA/SSA, SCMS/SMA. Use standard abbreviations throughout.
6. use standard notation for the cuckoo search algorithm.
7. whale behavior is hunting for……?
8. Label Figure 2 b in the same direction also correct the caption of Figure 2 b.
9. nagent | Clear to write n_agent
10. Check Figure 6 a, b and c ending is YES or NO
11. The line 229 and 341 are repeated.
12. Ij and symbol is changed in line 345
13. Figure 11 c is not present.
14. Write in clearly Hcon gm). Opening the bracket. Consumption
15. Insert the text of the concerned algorithm in Figure 14 for fast understanding.
16. Highlight the modification of coyote optimization algorithm (COA)
17. Discard old references.
18. Do filter of Grammarly software or any other. Check
i. This is accomplished by Utilising the user-defined factor-a, and the reduction is carried out using.
ii. Figure 9. Comparative analysis of proposed algorithm with others (a)FC Voltage (V), F(b) FC Current (A) and (c) FC Fuel consumption (gm)
iii. Figure 10. Comparative analysis of proposed algorithm with others (a)Battery Voltage (V) (b) Battery Current (A) and (c) Battery SOC (%)
iv. Figure 14. Opal-RT Result of Fuel Consumption by (a)WOA algorithm, (b) Cuckoo search algorithm, (c) Gray wolf algorithm
v. A fuel cell (FC) and 520 ESS make up such a technology.
19. Similar paper for reading
i. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42835-021-00884-5
ii. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/3/1373
20. Grasshopper optimization, Mine blast algorithm, Genetic algorithm; Salp swarm algorithm, Classical PI algorithm, and Fuzzy logic are not displayed in simulation Figures.
21. CPI is not written in words at the beginning of the work.
NA
Author Response
Date: 27-05-2023.
To
The Editor,
Sustainability Journal,
MDPI.
Dear Editor,
Sub: Submission of revision of Manuscript ID: Sustainability -2407099 – Entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems” –Reg.
We authors would like to thank the Lead Guest Editor, Guest Editor, and Reviewers for their valuable decision and recommendations made to improve the quality of the paper. We authors are happy to submit our revised manuscript entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems”, which we would like to submit for publication as a research article in the Sustainability Journal, MDPI. We authors thank you for providing such an opportunity, and we also thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable and helpful comments. Based on the set of reviews the manuscript is thoroughly revised and the appropriate corrections have been made. The point-by-point response to the reviewers’ comments is included here forth for your kind perusal.
Thank you. We authors look forward to your positive response.
Yours sincerely,
Dr. Dhanamjayulu C
Associate Professor
School of Electrical Engineering,
Vellore Institute of Technology,
Vellore-632014. Tamilnadu, India.
E-mail: [email protected]
|
RESPONSE TO REVIEWER’S COMMENTS - REVIEWER # 3
We authors would like to express our sincere thanks to the reviewer for finding interest in the manuscript. Thanks for the valuable recommendations to improve the manuscript. The manuscript is updated according to the suggested changes.
|
|
|
COMMENT-1 |
Title is confined to 15 words standard. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised as a title is confined to 15 words standard and updated according to your suggested changes entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems”. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern.
|
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-2 |
As in the title - Optimization of Fuel Consumption using Nature-Inspired Coyotes Algorithm for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Electric Aircraft with Real-Time HIL Simulator. But no discussion or dimensions and no load distribution is found in the manuscript i.e. aircraft load demand in emergency scenarios. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is now revised as per the reviewer’s suggestions, we authors are changed the title of the manuscript as an exact prompt to our work. The manuscript is updated according to your suggested changes. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-3
|
12 different algorithms in section 2 are discussed and two hybrid optimizations are used. But in the figures 9-11 only 9 algorithms are legend out of 15. |
|
RESPONSE:
|
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors have adopted and concentrated mainly on 9 algorithms only for our work to exhibit the results and the rest of the algorithms are removed in section.2 due to which is not done as a part of our work. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern.
|
|
COMMENT-4
|
Fuzzy logic is spaced in Section 2 but no placement anywhere. |
|
RESPONSE:
|
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised as per reviewer suggestions, we authors are removed the unnecessary data like Fuzzy logic, Grasshopper optimization algorithms, and genetic algorithms in the Section.2 due to which is not done as a part of our work. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern.
|
|
COMMENT-5 |
CSOA/ CSA; GWOA/GWO, SSOA/SSA, SCMS/SMA. Use standard abbreviations throughout. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised by using standard abbreviations throughout and updated according to your suggested changes. thanks for understanding our concern.
|
|
COMMENT-6 |
use standard notation for the cuckoo search algorithm. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised by using standard notation for the cuckoo search algorithm throughout and updated according to your suggested changes. thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-7 |
whale behavior is hunting for……? |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are extremely sorry for it by mistake, it was a typing error and it has been corrected and revised the manuscript carefully. The manuscript is updated according to your suggested changes in page.18. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-8 |
Label Figure 2 b in the same direction also correct the caption of Figure 2 b. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are extremely sorry for it by mistake, it was a typing error and it has been corrected and revised the manuscript carefully. The manuscript is updated according to your suggested changes in Figure.2 of the page.9. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-9 |
nagent | Clear to write n_agent |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are extremely sorry for it by mistake, it was a typing error and it has been corrected and revised the manuscript carefully. The manuscript is updated according to your suggested changes as “n_agent” in page.12. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-10 |
Check Figure 6 a, b and c ending is YES or NO |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are carefully checked the manuscript Figure.6 (a),(b),(c) and hereby we confirm that these are correct in the present form. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-11 |
The line 229 and 341 are repeated. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are extremely sorry for it by mistake, it was a typing error and it has been corrected and revised the manuscript carefully. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-12 |
Ij and symbol is changed in line 345 |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are extremely sorry for it by mistake, it was a typing error and it has been corrected and revised the manuscript carefully. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-13 |
Figure 11 c is not present. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are extremely sorry for it by mistake, it was a typing error and it has been corrected in page.25 and revised the manuscript carefully. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-14 |
Write in clearly Hcon gm). Opening the bracket. Consumption |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are extremely sorry for it by mistake, it was a typing error and it has been corrected and revised the manuscript carefully. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-15 |
Insert the text of the concerned algorithm in Figure 14 for fast understanding. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised by inserting the text of the concerned algorithms in figure.14 for fast understanding and updated according to your suggested changes in page.27. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-16 |
Highlight the modification of coyote optimization algorithm (COA) |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised to highlight the modification of the coyote optimization algorithm by explaining with figures.6 (a),(b),(c) for better understanding and updated according to your suggested changes in page.20. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
COMMENT-17 |
Discard old references. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised to discard older references and to add for recent references. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-18 |
Do filter of Grammarly software or any other. Check i. This is accomplished by Utilising the user-defined factor-a, and the reduction is carried out using. ii. Figure 9. Comparative analysis of proposed algorithm with others (a)FC Voltage (V), F(b) FC Current (A) and (c) FC Fuel consumption (gm) iii. Figure 10. Comparative analysis of proposed algorithm with others (a)Battery Voltage (V) (b) Battery Current (A) and (c) Battery SOC (%) iv. Figure 14. Opal-RT Result of Fuel Consumption by (a)WOA algorithm, (b) Cuckoo search algorithm, (c) Gray wolf algorithm v. A fuel cell (FC) and 520 ESS make up such a technology. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised carefully and corrected all typos and grammatical errors by using Grammarly software. We authors carefully checked the manuscript Figure.9,10,14 (a),(b),(c) and hereby we confirm that these are correct in the present form. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-19 |
Similar paper for reading i. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42835-021-00884-5 ii. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/3/1373
|
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is updated by adding more recommended works as per your suggested references and the same reference papers are represented below for your consideration. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern.
1. Huo, Z., Liu, S. & Ebrahimian, H. Aircraft Energy Management System Using Chaos Red Fox Optimization Algorithm. J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 17, 179–195 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42835-021-00884-5. 2. Peng, Xin, Hui Chen, and Cong Guan. 2023. "Energy Management Optimization of Fuel Cell Hybrid Ship Based on Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm" Energies 16, no. 3: 1373. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16031373. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-20 |
Grasshopper optimization, Mine blast algorithm, Genetic algorithm; Salp swarm algorithm, Classical PI algorithm, and Fuzzy logic are not displayed in simulation Figures. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised as per reviewer suggestions, we authors are removed the unnecessary data like Fuzzy logic, Grasshopper optimization algorithms, and genetic algorithms in the Section.2 due to which is not done as a part of our work. We authors are only considered Mine blast algorithm, Salp swarm algorithm for comphrehensive comparisions purpose. However, for Classical PI algorithm simulation results are displayed in figures.8,9,10. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-21 |
CPI is not written in words at the beginning of the work. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised by writing CPI full forms in words at the beginning of the work and updated according to your suggested changes. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
We authors have updated the manuscript and would like to express sincere thanks to the reviewers for your valuable suggestions.
Dr. Dhanamjayulu C
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Table 1, first column should be Existing technology instead of exiting technology.
Authors are suggested to do the proof read before submitting the final manuscript for an example Line number 74 - 76, gets figure 1 duplicity in between text, line number 244, line number 384 (figure caption).
Ambiguity in table 4 and 5 comments, authors suggested to check the entire manuscript.
Moreover, no need to discuss each algorithm’s background, therefore authors are suggested to replace all that with applicability of each algorithm for the taken application in tabular form.
In conclusion authors are strongly advice to check the proof before final submission.
Thorough check is required for entire manuscript.
Author Response
Date: 03-06-2023.
To
The Editor,
Sustainability Journal,
MDPI.
Dear Editor,
Sub: Submission of revision of Manuscript ID: Sustainability -2407099 – Entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems” –Reg.
We authors would like to thank the Lead Guest Editor, Guest Editor, and Reviewers for their valuable decision and recommendations made to improve the quality of the paper. We authors are happy to submit our revised manuscript entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems”, which we would like to submit for publication as a research article in the Sustainability Journal, MDPI. We authors thank you for providing such an opportunity, and we also thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable and helpful comments. Based on the set of reviews the manuscript is thoroughly revised and the appropriate corrections have been made. The point-by-point response to the reviewers’ comments is included here forth for your kind perusal.
Thank you. We authors look forward to your positive response.
Yours sincerely,
Dr. Dhanamjayulu C
Associate Professor
School of Electrical Engineering,
Vellore Institute of Technology,
Vellore-632014. Tamilnadu, India.
E-mail: [email protected]
Author’s Responses to Reviewer’s Comments:
We authors, first of all, thank the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions.
|
RESPONSE TO REVIEWER’S COMMENTS - REVIEWER # 1
We authors would like to express our sincere thanks to the reviewer for finding interest in the manuscript. Thanks for the valuable recommendations to improve the manuscript. The manuscript is updated according to the suggested changes.
|
|
|
COMMENT-1 |
Table 1, first column should be Existing technology instead of exiting technology. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. We authors are extremely sorry for it by mistake, it was a typing error and it has been corrected in table.1. The manuscript is updated according to your suggested changes. Thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-2 |
Authors are suggested to do the proof read before submitting the final manuscript for an example Line number 74 - 76, gets figure 1 duplicity in between text, line number 244, line number 384 (figure caption). |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised in detail according to your suggested changes. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-3 |
Ambiguity in table 4 and 5 comments, authors suggested to check the entire manuscript. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is modified and updated according to your suggested changes. In order to avoid the ambiguity in table 4 and 5, unnecessary data like MBA and SSA algorithms in Section 2 are removed. Accordingly, table 4 and 5 are updated. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT- 4 |
Moreover, no need to discuss each algorithm’s background, therefore authors are suggested to replace all that with applicability of each algorithm for the taken application in tabular form. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised in detail according to your suggested changes. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. |
|
|
|
|
COMMENT-5 |
In conclusion authors are strongly advice to check the proof before final submission. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised and thoroughly checked in detail according to your suggested changes. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern.
|
|
COMMENT-6 |
Thorough check is required for entire manuscript. |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised carefully and corrected all typos and grammatical errors by using Grammarly software and updated according to your suggested changes. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern. |
We authors have updated the manuscript and would like to express sincere thanks to the reviewers for your valuable suggestions.
Dr. Dhanamjayulu C
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Accept in present form
Minor editing of English language required
Author Response
Date: 03-06-2023.
To
The Editor,
Sustainability Journal,
MDPI.
Dear Editor,
Sub: Submission of revision of Manuscript ID: Sustainability -2407099 – Entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems” –Reg.
We authors would like to thank the Lead Guest Editor, Guest Editor, and Reviewers for their valuable decision and recommendations made to improve the quality of the paper. We authors are happy to submit our revised manuscript entitled “Coyote Optimization Algorithm-Based Energy Management Strategy for a Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems”, which we would like to submit for publication as a research article in the Sustainability Journal, MDPI. We authors thank you for providing such an opportunity, and we also thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable and helpful comments. Based on the set of reviews the manuscript is thoroughly revised and the appropriate corrections have been made. The point-by-point response to the reviewers’ comments is included here forth for your kind perusal.
Thank you. We authors look forward to your positive response.
Yours sincerely,
Dr. Dhanamjayulu C
Associate Professor
School of Electrical Engineering,
Vellore Institute of Technology,
Vellore-632014. Tamilnadu, India.
E-mail: [email protected]
Author’s Responses to Reviewer’s Comments:
We authors, first of all, thank the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions.
|
RESPONSE TO REVIEWER’S COMMENTS - REVIEWER # 2
We authors would like to express our sincere thanks to the reviewer for finding interest in the manuscript. Thanks for the valuable recommendations to improve the manuscript. The manuscript is updated according to the suggested changes.
|
|
|
COMMENT-1 |
Minor editing of English language required |
|
RESPONSE: |
Respected Reviewer, Thank you for your suggestions and comments to improve the quality of the manuscript. The manuscript is revised carefully and corrected all typos and grammatical errors by using Grammarly software and updated according to your suggested changes. Respected reviewer, thanks for understanding our concern.
|
|
|
|
We authors have updated the manuscript and would like to express sincere thanks to the reviewers for your valuable suggestions.
Dr. Dhanamjayulu C
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
Authors are suggested to use either British English or American English for an example use either optimization or optimisation.
Moderate English check is required.
