Research on Outdoor Mobile Music Speaker Battery Management Algorithm Based on Dynamic Redundancy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The research topic is suitable for the readership of the journal. Dynamicredundancy of the cells in a battery pack is a logical way to improve the
usability of the single cells and reduce the failure rate of the entire battery
pack. However, this is achieved at the expense of redundant cells, i.e. higher
cost and heavier battery pack with more complex electronic circuitry, which also
should be mentioned in the manuscript. Unfortunately, the manuscript in its
present form look rough and not ready for publication because of the following: 1. English style and grammar 1.1. Please rewrite the first sentence of the abstract. It is very hard to read
it in its present form. Perhaps breaking it down into two or three separate
sentences would improve its readability. 1.2. I cannot understand the following sentence in the Introduction:
"Mobile speakers generally have small mobile music speakers and outdoor music
speakers these two." Please, either modify this sentence, or better just
delete it together with the next sentence. In general, the grammar and sentence
structure in the introduction are the hardest part to read and need some
editing, preferably by a native speaker. 2. It is hard to understand authors explanation regarding formula (4) for passive
redundancy. What is the meaning of y and x in this equation? According to the
explanation x is the number of the basic units and y is the total number. I do
not understand the meaning of basic units (are these the single cells of the
battery pack?) and what is then the total number y? Please provide an example
with your own circuitry - if you have 4 cells in parallel and if x = 4 then
y = ? It is also somewhat confusing to the readers to use the same symbol R for
reliability and redundancy. Please consider updating the notations in a more
easy to read and understand manner. 3. Figure 4 (Traditional redundant battery management algorithm working process
diagram) and Figure 5 (Dynamic redundant battery management algorithm working
process diagram) look exactly the same and differ from the explanations in the
text. The readers expect to see much more differing states of charge for the
separate cells and total discharge time ca. 160 min in Fig.4 in agreement with
the text. However, the graphs in Fig 4 and 5 are exactly the same and the only
difference is that there is a zoomed area in Fig.5. I regret, but these drawbacks are sufficient to ask the authors for a Major
revision and update of their manuscript.
Author Response
Enclose is the response to the reviewer.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
1. In a paper, the simulation results must be compared with the measured results to prove their feasibility and completeness. It is suggested that the authors add some measured waveforms or results and compare the differences with the simulated results to verify the proposed algorithm.
2. The simulation results of Fig. 5 cannot show the difference in the electrical characteristics of each cell.
3. It is recommended to present the steps of the proposed algorithm in the form of a flowchart.
4. Please clearly explain how SOC was calculated in this study.
5. Please provide photos of the prototype of the physical circuit.
Author Response
Enclose is the response to the reviewer.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
This manuscript proposes a battery management algorithm based on dynamic redundancy for mobile music speakers, which effectively increases the battery pack working time and energy utilization. It would be even better if the authors could consider the following comments:
1. In Section 3 (Control Strategy), it is mentioned that "Assume that the SOC of each battery drops by 30%, 25%, 20%, and 15%, respectively, during each discharge cycle." Is this assumption reasonable for each discharge cycle? In other words, does the SOC drop of a battery remain the same in different discharge cycles?
2. In Figure 6, it looks like there is a circular usage pattern for each battery: it runs for 3 minutes and rest for 1 minute. Is this observation generic for many other scenarios, or just applicable for the specific setting in your simulation?
3. In Section 2 (Model Building), it is mentioned that "Currently, there are two common fault tolerant structures of batteries[26-28]: series and parallel fault tolerant structures (SP) and series and parallel fault tolerant structures (PS)." The descriptions of SP and PS look the same. Please double check.
Author Response
Enclose is the response to the reviewer.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
No comments.
