Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The mentioned paper titled "High-frequency Harmonic Suppression Strategy and Modified Notch Filter-Based Active Damping for Low-Inductance HPMSM" is of a project nature. It includes theoretical analysis, mathematical equations, design, and simulation results validated by experimental research. The adaptive notch filter with frequency tracking capability is designed to offset specific resonant peaks by constructing an antiresonant peak.

The considerations presented in the article are valid for an HPMSM motor with a rotational speed of 10,000 rpm. However, it is uncertain whether they will apply to motors with higher rotational speeds, for example, 80,000 rpm. It would be helpful to provide the dimensions of the motor. In the literature, high-speed machines are typically characterized based on the rotor's circumferential velocity expressed in meters per second. If the rotor diameter is such that your 10,000 rpm motor has a circumferential velocity close to 100 meters per second, it is indeed a high-speed motor. Please include the rotor diameter in the Table.

In the introduction, please discuss the problem of designing an LC filter due to voltage drop across the LC filter. If voltage drops, achieving the motor's rotational speed will be challenging. How much voltage drop are you allowing across your LC filter? Is it 4% of Un? Or maybe 8% of Un? Please be sure to address this. Apart from that, it's a pretty good paper.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable suggestions on this manuscript. We have responded to your comments and completed the revision of the manuscript. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper was already published in The Proceedings of the 9th Frontier Academic Forum of Electrical Engineering. Hence, though it was published by two of you, the methodoly and structure is already of public knowledge, therefore it lacks novelty. 

 

It is well written, but there are several corrections:

In figure 5 you did not show n(t) you used r(t)

line 233 you wrote “can be sorted into formula” but it must be “can be sorted into the formula”

In equation 23, there is an apostrophe in omega 1

In equation 24 you do not describe what A means

In figure 14 you indicate that “(c) with LC filter and ANF. (d) with LC filter 354 and traditional active damping method.” but in the text, lines 325-327 you say: “Figure 14(c) adopts traditional 325 active damping method based on proportional feedback of capacitance current and Figure 326 14(d) adopts harmonic suppression method based on LC filter and ANF.”

In line 343 it must say “it does not require additional sensors” because you are referring to “the ANF” as singular.

In line 379 you wrote “becomes less” Here “less” is an adverb and you are using it as an adjective. You must write “becomes less significant” or “becomes smaller”.

In line 441 you wrote “the speed recovery time reduced to 0.1 s. It should be “the speed recovery time is reduced to 0.1s.”

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable suggestions on this manuscript. We have responded to your comments and completed the revision of the manuscript. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic of the article is relevant. The manuscript is scientifically sound. Theoretical results are supported by experiments.  The quality of some pictures could be better. Around 35 percent of the cited references are new, published within the last 5 years, while the rest of the references were published 6-26 years ago.

A shortcomings of the work are that the authors provide little information about the feedback control system used to implement the adaptive notch filter (ANF) and do not present in the conclusions any numerical values that would demonstrate the improvement of HPMS motor performance using proposed solutions.

My specific comments on the article are as follows:

1. It is not clear from the text whether expressions (1)-(6) are derived by the authors. If they are taken from the literature, it is necessary to indicate it.

2. Equation (14) is named as “the transfer function of the motor control system” (line 148). It seems that eq. (14) presents just the transfer function of motor with the LC filter, presented in Fig. 2. This is not control system (Fig. 2), because control system has to include the controller.  

3. A feedback control system with two PI controllers is used for the implementation of the ANF (Fig. 12). The authors should provide more information about the operation of this control system, as well as how the values of the PI controller parameters were chosen, because the quality of the control and the stability of the control system depend strongly on controller parameters.

4. The quality of pictures with current waveforms presented in Fig. 16a and Fig16b could be improved.

5. The main result of work presented in conclusions is described as follows (455–457 lines): “The proposed method has been experimentally proven to have excellent harmonic suppression capability, and the controlled HPMSM has excellent dynamic response performance and anti-interference capability”. It is not appropriate to evaluate the scientific achievements with the words (e.g. excellent). It is necessary to provide numerical values how much the proposed method allows to improve the harmonic suppression and motor dynamic performance compared to the case when another method (methods) are used.

The text contains grammatical errors.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable suggestions on this manuscript. We have responded to your comments and completed the revision of the manuscript. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

The article refers to an interesting issue from a practical point of view, and the authors present an original idea to reduce harmonic disturbances. While the content does not raise any significant objections in terms of content, there are a few editorial comments to make:

1) the drawings, due to their small size, are difficult to read and should be enlarged;

2) the description of the simulation verification should be supplemented with a drawing of the proposed simulation model in Simulink;

3) the description of the experimental verification should be better explained, for example, in terms of the description of the FFT part shown in Figure 16 (what the red and blue bars mean, different scales in the FFT analysis figures, turning on the LC filter worsens the situation compared to the configuration without the filter).

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable suggestions on this manuscript. We have responded to your comments and completed the revision of the manuscript. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 5 Report

According to the authors' statement, the “a low-inductance HPMSM harmonic suppression method based on LC filter and modified ANF” is presented in the paper. The topic of controlling HPMSM (high-speed permanent magnet synchronous motor) is interesting. The authors proposed an LC connection filter and ANF (adaptive notch filter). They presented "HPMSM System Based on LC Filter" paying attention to resonance peak. Then they proposed "ANF Based Active Damping" circuit. To evaluate the operation of the proposed circuit, they performed simulations (Matlab/Simulink) and conducted experimental tests. The description of the experimental research conditions was reduced to a view of the station in Fig. 15 - a schematic diagram of the system and information about the measuring equipment used are missing. In the Conclusion, the authors stated that "the proposed method is attractive and promising for HPMSM drives in industry and wide power conversion applications which require high-quality sinusoidal current control. Have the authors performed tests for other values of fs and fb? Have there been any problems with electrical and mechanical resonances? Table 1 contains "Parameters of HPMSM Control System". Has the impact of changes in the values of these parameters on the operation of the control system been examined?

 

Remarks

Eq. 7: necessary explanation (justification) of this relationship

Fig. 1: 2fs+fb and 2fs-fb – probably swapped

Fig. 2: ia and ia1 are marked with arrows as voltages are marked

Eq. 17: whether both sides of the inequality are expressed in the same units

Page 8, row 212: "… additional sensors need to be utilized ..." – it is worth adding more information

Fig. 14 (and some subsequent ones): spectral characteristics - what is the difference between red and blue stripes?

Fig. 19: axis description missing

Numerous editorial errors - e.g. capitalization (upper letters instead of lowercase letters).

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your valuable suggestions on this manuscript. We have responded to your comments and completed the revision of the manuscript. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

No more comments

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors took practically all my comments into account in the revised version of the article. I suggest publishing the article.

Just one small note: the authors have written information about funding in section 8. Patents. Maybe this section should be called Funding?

Minor editing of English language required.

Reviewer 5 Report

The paper is improved. But I still having trouble pinpointing the conditions for harmonics measurement (measuring harmonics of the order of 60th can be very troublesome). However, I believe that the paper can be published.

Minor remarks

Figs. 21a and 21b: I assume it shows the change from 0rpm to 2000rpm.