Robust Partial Feedback Linearized Controller Design for Standalone Hybrid PV-BES System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper is interesting and deals with an up-to-date topic. However, so many key-points that it needs to be improved, rewritten, and restructured. For this reason, I suggest that authors resubmit it by addressing properly the following items. Author should need to add latest research as reference with reference no. 2 (Power Management through Smart Grids and Advance Metering Infrastructure) Figure no. 1 need to explain in more details. author need to explain eq. 1 and how drive this,. Author need to elaborate the difference between figure no. 2 and 3. The need to draw the block diagram of controller (Loop-Shaping Controller Design) that he choose in section 4.3 . Author need to add more details in conclusion and should be the reflection of results.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your support and suggestions.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

• Interesting research in a decently written manuscript. In the spirit of due diligence, the reviewer has made some recommendations to help the authors improve the quality of the manuscript further.
• Figures should be improved to make them legible when the manuscript is printed (especially in black and white). Figure 2 and 3 has some marginally visible text due to small font size. Furthermore, the choice of red and blue fonts seem to have no additional meaning, yet decrease legibility.
• Figure 4 plots four lines, only two are likely distinguishable when printed (one dashed and one solid (Figure 6, 7, 8, and 9 is far superior in this regard). Please modify the line styles so that all four lines are clearly distinguishable (e.g. line thicknesses, dash/dotted/solid, etc.). Disparate font style (not Palatino Linotype) is inconsistent with the rest of the manuscript and decreases the professional presentation of the figure. Please define the variables in the figure caption to eliminate the necessity to flip pages to seek the definitions when evaluating the figure.
• Please decrease the use of multiple acronyms in the same sentence of sequence of sentences. Lines 45-47 is particularly offensive, even to readers already familiar with the material: “…PV connected with DC-DC boost PEI, and the wind is connected with AC/DC plus DC/AC PEIs, BES is connected with a bidirectional DC-DC buck-boost PEI, etc.”  This sentence is very poorly worded if the authors’ intent is transmission of information to a broad readership.
• Please distinguish the significance of the double-citation of [17,18], so the reader knows why to go seek those references. If there is only one single significance, there wouldn’t seem to be a need for duplicative citation.
• Please distinguish the significance of the double-citation of [22,23], so the reader knows why to go seek those references. If there is only one single significance, there wouldn’t seem to be a need for duplicative citation.
• The final paragraph of section 1 provides a good summary of the manuscript’s content.
• The authors did a great job continuing citing sources through section 2, and this lends credibility to the work delineating the material taken from other works.
• Section 5 is well done, but weakened by presentation of only qualitative results. Figures 6, 7, 8, and 9 are easily converted to quantitative means and standard deviations, and those may be presented in a table. Furthermore, the percent difference may be presented in the abstract and conclusions where results are requested in “broadest possible terminology”.
• Please eliminate the acronyms in the conclusions, since many readers often read articles’ abstract and conclusions in addition to quickly scanning graphics (figures and tables) when deciding whether or not to read the full manuscript. Keeping the “book-end” sections of manuscripts (abstract and conclusion) articulated in broadest possible terminology increases the attractive of the article to the readership.
• Please consider adding a final paragraph in the conclusion with the authors’ recommended future research. Particularly as it is applied to nonlinear dynamical models, a comparison of the proposed method with D.A.I. is one suggestion for future research provided by the reviewer: Sands, T. (Ed.). Deterministic Artificial Intelligence. IntechOpen: London, 2020. ISBN: 978-1-78984-111-4.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your support and suggestions 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf