Adequacy Evaluation of an Islanded Microgrid

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper decomposed the non-exponential distributed failures of power electronic based generation units as a series of exponential  failures, then expressed the system availability model based on the state model for each component. The topic is interesting. The following modifications are recommended:

(1). please discuss the scalability of the proposed method. The proposed method looks only feasible for a system with very limited number of generating units. 

(2). it might be more appropriate to change the title as "Adequacy Evaluation of an Islanded Micro-grid". A low-voltage distribution network may contain a considerate large number of components. The proposed method might not be computationally effective for such network.

(3). more numerical examples such as systems with larger sizes are desired for demonstrating the effectiveness of the proposed method.

(4). please discuss the pros and cons of the proposed method, and other possible alternative approaches. 

(5). some variables or abbreviations are used but nit defined such as PLECS in section2.2.

 

Author Response

Dear to whom it may concern

Thanks for providing use input on how to improve the paper

Please find the attached revised paper and revision letter

Best regards,

Martin

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Interesting paper to complement the approach to increase reliability. I have the following recommendations for the work:

 

1. On line 104, equation 1 - not all quantities are described - v. Clearly it is velocity, but for completeness it must be described.
2. The abbreviation IRE is described in point 2.3 and was previously used in point 2.2. To be mentioned in point 2.2.
3. Figure two should indicate in an appropriate way what the annual temperature is - the blue or red graph.
4. Give additional explanations for equation 3 (line 127).
5. It would be good to clarify the graph in Figure 7.
6. Section 4 "AvailabilityModelling of Power Converters" comments on classical methods. It would be good in the conclusion to take into account (compare) the proposed results with what would happen with the classics.
7. To expand the conclusion. There are interesting conclusions in the presentations of the paper, which can be given briefly in point 6.

In conclusion, Interesting research and I propose that it be published.

Author Response

Dear to whom it may concern

Thanks for providing use input on how to improve the paper

Please find the attached revised paper and revision letter

Best regards,

Martin

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper focuses on the adequacy evaluation of stand-alone low voltage distribution network. This discussed topic is hot and interesting. The structure of this paper is well-organized, which is easy to follow. The mathematical formulations and the stability analyses are theoretically sound. Extensive case studies have been conducted to validate the effectiveness of the proposed method. What is the difference between the discussed stand-alone low voltage distribution network and the stand-alone microgrid? The literature review is not that sufficient, resulting in that the motivation of this work is not well stated. But several recent works are covering this topic, e.g., “distributed control and communication strategies in networked microgrids”, “flexible division and unification control strategies in networked microgrids for resilience enhancement”, etc. More recent related works could be cited and discussed for clarifying the novelty of this work and the filled research gap.

Author Response

Dear to whom it may concern

Thanks for providing use input on how to improve the paper

Please find the attached revised paper and revision letter

Best regards,

Martin

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf