Distributed Coordinated Control Strategy for Grid-Forming-Type Hybrid Energy Storage Systems
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper presents distributed coordinated control strategy for grid-forming hybrid energy storage system. This paper is well-structured, still I have some concerns and suggestions which are listed below.
1. The abstract needs to be improved adding a clear statement about what problem is being addressed.
2. In the introduction section, the paper does not provide clear vision to significance of the paper. Also, explain the importance of hybrid energy storage and its application.
3. Please reorganize the literature review to address the gaps of research in an organized way and what is being addressed by your paper.
4. Check the typological errors through out the paper. Such as spelling of converter is mistaken in section 3.
5. The paper presents multi-agent control but does not provide comparative analysis with existing strategies.
6. This paper lacks proper mathematical equation for the proposed method.
7. The paper mentions the hardware-in-loop simulation but it does not details any data and metrics to evaluate effectiveness of the model. Also provide the details of HIL interface.
8. The discussion of results need to be elaborated.
9. Please include the future prospects for the research in the conclusion section.
Please check the spelling and words throughly. Also, rewrite the sentences in appropriate manner.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1) I appreciate that you spent a lot of time introducing your method details, and your schemes are very clear and conclusive, but my major concern is your discussion part. You put many figures for Figure 5 and 6, but they are not discussed in detail.
2) Your introduction part can be more concise. For example, the last 2 paragraphs can be combined to 1. Also, it would be better if you emphasize the significance of the work and its impacts in your conclusion section.
3) The figures can be formatted better. Especially, the details in Figure 6 are not very clear to the audience. Figures 6a, 6b and 6c, 6d can be combined in a better way. Also, you described the terms in your method section, but you should also explain your notations in the title of figures too.
4) It is not a very formal way to refer to publications with citation marks like page 1 line 39 and 41. It will also be better for the audience to know the authors you refer to.
5) The writing can be improved with clarification of many terms. For example, it is hard to follow the models you refer to sometimes. It may be helpful to name your system with an abbreviation. Another example is that it’s hard to immediately know which curve and which figure you refer to in line 312. (I don’t think you need figure b and c unless you discuss them all. Or you can find a better way to format them.
6) There are many small mistakes that need to be edited more carefully. For example, typos in line 112, line 289 and spelling in title of part 3.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe language can be more concise and accurate. There are many mistakes in writing.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsComment 1
In Figure 2 of Section 2, symbols such as "Pi" and "Pmi" appear. Although the meaning of "i" can be understood as the converter number based on general usage, and this is corroborated by the formulas and text in Sections 3 and 4, the relevant symbols have not yet appeared in the formulas or text at this point in the figure. It is recommended to revise or add an explanation for these symbols.
Comment 2
Figure 3 seems to be an overview of the content in Section 2, but there is no textual introduction to Figure 3, apart from the caption. It is recommended to add a description.
Comment 3
The last paragraph of Section 3 in the manuscript lacks sufficient detail. It is recommended to revise the relevant content.
Comment 4
The experimental parameters in Table 1 lack information related to the load power values.
Comment 5
In one table, the author should objectively compare with the published strategies in terms of efficiency, safety, etc.
Comment 6
The authors should modify Figure 6 refer to Figure 5, due to the horizontal axis is unreadable.
Comment 7
The author should carefully check the conservation of dimensions in all equations.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis manuscript deals with a distributed coordinated control strategy for grid forming hybrid energy storage systems where authors discuss the integration of Virtual Synchronous Generator control along with other factors. Overall the manuscrtipt is well written. There are certain issues that must be addressed before its consideration.
1. The HIL simulation experiments were conducted by the authors to validate the proposed control strategy. These appear limited in scale and operational conditions
- VSG control with frequency adjustment and virtual impedance control should be more detailed transient stability analysis.
- The sensitivity of the proposed control strategy to variations in key should be included
- The manuscript does not discuss the impact of delays on system performance,
- I suggest to include quantitative comparisons between the energy efficiency of the proposed system and traditional hybrid energy storage systems are needed.
- The HIL experiments were conducted using six power sources (three batteries and three supercapacitors). It does not emulate real-world scenarios with a diverse mix of energy storage technologies and unpredictable load profiles.
- The manuscript does not discuss the economic feasibility or cost-benefit analysis of implementing the proposed hybrid energy storage system.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
The language can be improved.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsSeems Improved and can be acceptable.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for taking my advices and good luck with the publication.
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe revisons have been made adquately. The manuscript is ready for acceptance.
