Measuring Current in a Power Converter Using Fuzzy Automatic Gain Control

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments to the authors

Manuscript ID:

Title: Current measurement in power converter with using the Fuzzy Automatic Gain Control

 

1) English issues:

a) “The appropriate the gain factor in the current measurement circuit influences on the accuracy.” What do you mean?

b) ” In the power converters DC/AC loaded with an electric motor, to measure major 9 current is used the current transducer.” This sentence does not grammatically sound.

c) “These circuits do not allow to measurement of [measuring] small input current with high resolution”.

As a general comment, English of the paper is too poor and needs to be improved. I am not mentioning all English issues here, but it does not mean that English issues are limited to the above-mentioned ones. There are several English issues that should be polished.

 

2) Keywords should be selected wisely to reflect the realm of the paper. “front-end” is never used in the manuscript, however it has listed in keywords.

 

3) Contribution(s) of the paper is not clear. Considering explain what is new and provide sufficient evidences to support your claim.

 

4) Provide a brief outline of the paper at the end of Section 1.

 

5) Robustness of fuzzy systems is a very important issue which should be addressed properly in the manuscript. There are many references that could be used to discuss robustness. For instance, take a look at 10.1109/FUZZY.2011.6007344 and 10.1109/TFUZZ.2004.839653, and other related papers, and improve the literature review.

 

6) Fuzzy rules, membership functions, and other details regarding the fuzzy structure should be discussed very clearly in the manuscript.

 

7) The author provided experimental results which are nice and show effectiveness of the developed method. However, it would be a good idea to compare the developed method with an existing method. This would help the reader to understand pros and cons of the developed method.

 

8) Conclusion section should be improved. It should summarize the paper, and should discuss the main findings.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic of the paper is interesting and fit the scopes of the Journal. Nevertheless, the manuscript requires severe efforts to improve its quality and presentation. After a careful revision, a set of comments are given below.

• Regarding the format of the document, some suggestions are as follows.

The affiliation contains twice “Institute of”.

Acronyms do not require the use of italics. Moreover, acronyms should be defined the first time they appear, even in the abstract. For instance, AGC and MCU should be revised within the abstract and many abbreviations in the Introduction like VGA.

The sentence “The development of power converter is related to their increasing demand in industry” is repeated in the Introduction.

In line 275, “read” should be replaced by “red”.

References must be slightly revised to fit the format of the template. For instance, abbreviated name of journals must be used.

• About the content of the manuscript, these issues are commented.

“Current measurement” and “power converter” could be added as keywords.

Lumped references should be avoided in the Introduction.

What kind of statement is “… the author of this article eliminated the analog multiplier from …” (line 77)? In line 303 a similar expression is found. This is not adequate for a serious journal paper.

Within the introductory section, an explicit statement commenting what the paper presents is missing. This statement is found in the Abstract but it must be also placed in the first section for a proper reading and contextualization.

A common practice in scientific papers consists on describing in a brief manner the structure of the rest of the paper by means of a paragraph at the end of the introductory section. This facilitates the reading.

The description of the fuzzy controller provided in subsection 2.2 seems incomplete. For instance, the fuzzy subsets considered for both the input and output signals are missing. In equation (1) appear NA and NC; however, there is no explanation about these subsets, their amount, ranges, labels, shape of membership functions, etc.

What about the defuzzification method? What about the implication method? And the aggregation?

This information is crucial for a proper description of such fuzzy controller.

In subsection 2.3 a simulation is described. What is the software environment applied for such simulation? For instance, if Matlab and some additional toolbox were used, these details should be given for a better description of the approach.

In section 3, experimental results are reported but there is no image or photograph of the experimental setup. The author cites two previous references but, at least, an illustrative image should be provided in this regard.

The achieved results are expounded and discussed. Nevertheless, there is no comparison with other previous approaches in literature. In other words, the novelties and contributions of the presented work should be claimed in comparison with previous literature. This issue must be solved in order to consider the publication of the manuscript.

The Conclusions section is too short, more information should be provided. For instance, limitations of the conducted research could be added. Future guidelines should also be commented.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

No further comments. 

Reviewer 2 Report

The author has taken into account the suggestions provided by the authors in a proper manner. Consequently, the manuscript has been enhanced.