Research on the Coordinated Control of Mining Multi-PMSM Systems Based on an Improved Active Disturbance Rejection Controller

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please see the attached file for details. Thank you very much.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The language is generally clear and the technical terms are used appropriately, which is essential for a scientific paper. However, some sentences are overly long and complex, which may hinder readability. For example, sentences in the abstract and introduction could be broken down into shorter, more concise statements for better comprehension.

While the grammar is largely accurate, there are occasional errors in sentence structure and verb agreement. 

Punctuation errors are sporadic, especially with commas and semi-colons in complex sentences. Additionally, spacing issues are noticeable in the equations and tables, which could distract readers.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study takes three permanent magnet synchronous motors as the research objects. To improve the synchronization and anti-interference capabilities of multiple motors, the optimized nonlinear function is adopted to improve the Active Disturbance Rejection Control (ADRC). A new compensator is designed, a control strategy is put forward and a simulation model is constructed. The simulation results have verified the relevant effects.

1) ADRC is an excellent industrial control method and is certainly suitable for the research objects in this paper. Nevertheless, compared with the previous work done by others, what are the highlights of the method proposed by the author that are worthy of being emphasized?

2) In the introduction, some classic ADRC literatures should be presented, including the works by Jingqing Han, Zhiqiang GAO and the literatures in recent years, such as the one with DOI: 10.3934/era.2023080.

3) The nonlinear function improved by the author involves high-order terms, which are rather difficult to implement in engineering. Please provide a reasonable explanation.

4) The curves in some experimental figures in the paper are not clear enough to distinguish the results of the three situations, including Figures 13, 16 and 17, etc.

5) Obviously, the format in the paper needs to be revised, especially the size of some formulas is very inconsistent with the text.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are errors in capitalization and grammar in lines 159-62. The author should carefully read through the full text and revise the obvious grammar mistakes in English vocabulary, capitalization, tenses and so on.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The title could be improved by eliminating so many abbriavations.

The citations should be in correct style.

Chapter 2 does not described the models used in the simulations fully.

Starting from Fig. 8 the figures are very small, not the best colors have been selected.

Simulation model should be described more detailed.

Experiments improved the impact of the paper by a lot.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you very much for the author's effort. All my comments have been addressed.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper has been improved.

Please make letters in Figures more equal to letters in the text.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.