Guiding the Selection of Multi-Vector Model Predictive Control Techniques for Multiphase Drives

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper has listed four control schemes based on multi-vector MPC, taking the three influencing factors of high current quality, appropriate current tracking and minimum energy loss as examples, and carried out experimental analysis under different working conditions. Finally, according to the experimental results, it analyzed that the appropriate control strategy was selected according to different test conditions, which is enough work and has certain innovation.

However, there are the following problems, which I hope the author can improve:

1. It is suggested to add some relevant research status of scholars in the introduction to highlight the problems solved on the basis of previous research in this paper.

2.[A] and [B] are matrices that allow characterizing the dynamics of the described 6PH-IM.  However, [A] and [B] are used repeatedly in the text, and it is recommended to write them in detail.

3. The author is advised to check the full text for punctuation, such as the absence of ", "after the Tm in line 199.

4. Data explanation can be appropriately added to the analysis of experimental results to be more convincing.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please find attached to this message the response to your suggestions, as well as the new manuscript version in a single file.

My best regards,

Ignacio

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article proposes an interesting comparison between different control strategies for six-phase motors based on Model Predictive Control (MPC). Although the article highlights various aspects to draw conclusions regarding the comparison among different MPC control strategies, many sections of the article are challenging to understand, and often, the descriptions are unclear. Some suggestions are listed below.  Moreover, too many self-citations are present among the references.

1)    Please, could you provide specific references related to the sentence in lines (43-44): “For example, the development of different overmodulation algorithms has allowed a higher dc-link voltage utilization of linear controllers and, consequently, a faster dynamic response”.

2)    Please, could you clarify the concept of a multi-vector solution? Are the advantages of a multi-vector solution possible because they are applied in multi-winding motor drives? Furthermore, are these advantages intrinsically obtained by utilizing multi-winding motor drives where a multi-vector solution is applied? Or is it possible to consider a multi-vector solution for three-phase motor drives?

3)    What does 'secondary components' mean in line (56)? Please provide clarification.

4)    What does 'secondary currents' mean in line (56)? Please provide clarification.

5)    It is not clear in lines (172-175) why the weight Kxy must be selected to minimize the injection of xy current components. In this scenario, the alfa-beta current components contribute significantly to the electromagnetic torque, and the associated three phase set windings of the alfa-beta current components experience higher Joule losses. On the other hand, is the asymmetrical six-phase motor designed with two different three-phase windings with distinct copper sections?

6)    It is not clear what the authors mean by the open-loop mode for the VV-MPC in lines (196-197).

7)    It is not clear why the VV-MPC provides an improvement in terms of current quality compared to FCS-MPC, as mentioned in lines (209-210).

8)    Please include some high-quality references regarding the influencing factors (IF) in section 4.

9)    It is not clear what is being depicted in Figure 12: are these currents in the xy axes? Is it showing current ripple? Is it demonstrating the step response of the command tracking performance? Please improve the graphical presentation of the results and provide a clearer explanation of the intended illustration. Additionally, why is the same result not shown for the alpha-beta axis currents?

10)                   In paragraph 4.2, what is meant by 'current tracking performance'? Does it refer to step response of the command tracking performance? Is it evaluating the bandwidth related to current control? Perhaps the term creates confusion with 'command tracking".

11)                   For both paragraph 4.2 and 4.3, it would be helpful to present simulations illustrating a direct comparison in terms of current tracking performance and power losses.

12)                   In paragraph 5.2.1, when comparing various MPC methods in terms of current quality, it would be useful to include the PI-based solution implementing an indirect rotor field-oriented control (IRFOC).

13)                   Figure 17 is placed within the wrong paragraph. The same applies to Figure 18 and Tables 4-5. The same issue is present with Figures 19 and 20.

14)                   Include in Figures 19 and 20 the case with the PI-based solution implementing an IRFOC.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Please find attached to this message the response to your suggestions, as well as the new manuscript version in a single file.

My best regards,

Ignacio

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf