Smart Integration of a DC Microgrid: Enhancing the Power Quality Management of the Neighborhood Low-Voltage Distribution Network
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Most of the references are dumped. Please explain the references briefly and with respect to relevance to this research work?
What is the “Novelty” of this work with respect to previous work in this field?
What is the “Technical Contribution” of the authors in this work with respect to previous work in this field?
Abstract, introduction and Conclusion does not clearly mentioned the novelty and contribution of this work
Please improve the writing skills with respect to technical soundness of the manuscript?
VSI (Voltage Source Inverter) in figure 1?
Equation formatting within the text (Page 2, line 116, 118, 120)
Proper labelling of figure 3 (Y-axis)?
What will be the variation in the “power drawn/injected from/to Main AC grid”(Grid connected at bus 650 in figure 1)
Result discussion related to figure 8 or figure 10? (Page 10 Line 210)
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The contribution of this work is not clear. From what I read the contribution seems to be related to "However, the previous approach requires extra computation to process the three phases current and the voltage measured which affecting the cost of implementation" But when I see the results of the authors, I see no comparison with stat of the art approaches. In other words, I believe that the benefits of the approach are not demonstrated. Though I recognize that the experimental validation of the methods is a nice feature of this work. But this work is poorly written, and for example the experimental validation should be mentioned in the abstract. The control law seem to be incomplete. It comprises (1),(2),(3), but also a PI controller, which is not clearly writtenAuthor Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have answered all my concerned.
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper has been submitted in a revised version. Despite a reject and major revision in the previous round, it was found appropriate to allow resubmission. Indeed the resubmitted version addressed some of the comments, so I can recommend acceptance
