Innovative Methodologies for Higher Global MPP of Photovoltaic Arrays under PSCs: Experimental Validation

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Demand Response Modelling in Smart Grids Using Genetic Artificial Intelligence Algorithm Integrated Optimized Elman Deep Neural Network

 

The research work is good and the paper is well written focusing on current consequences. But the paper will be a publishable article, after authors addressing the following modifications.

·       - I suggest the title be short

·      - I suggest that the authors should provide more comparative samples to better clarify the results of your study.

·      - The authors should improve the figures. Graphical abstract should be provided.

·       - It is preferable to put the discussion before the figures and not the other way around.

·       - The titles of the figures are short. It is preferable to add more information about each figure in the title.

·       - The authors should revise and improve the whole abstract by mentioning the causes and rationality alongside the critical overview of this review of this paper.

·       - The introduction section arouse the broader interest of the readers. Compare the estimated results with literatures.

·       - Line 146 is it a new paragraph?

·      - Line 151 is it a new paragraph?

·       - Line 262 and line 273, where =Where

·       - I suggest change the 6 Conclusion and Future Work line 372 into Conclusion only.

·      -  I suggest remove the lines 389-392.

·       - The literature in the manuscript should be updated (currently, only a few recently published literature).

·       - The authors should improve the English language of the article, especially the sentence structures.

·       - The references 1-16 are all in 2022.

·       - Follow proper instruction from journal policy regarding the reference section.

 

·      -  The discussion lacked the author's explanations of the results and the results of the current study was not clearly supported by previous studies.

 

 

listed in the attached file

Author Response

Response to the suggestions and comments entitled " An Innovative Methodologies for Higher Global MPP of Photovoltaic Arrays under PSCs: Experimental Validation" (Manuscript ID: 2416179_R1). The authors are very thankful to the honourable reviewers and editor for allowing us to incorporate the suggestions, thereby improving the quality of the paper. The suggestions given by the honourable reviewers are incorporated in the revised manuscript appropriately. The following are the specific responses to the suggestions, which have also been depicted in the revised manuscript.

 

# Responses of honourable Reviewer-1:

Demand Response Modelling in Smart Grids Using Genetic Artificial Intelligence Algorithm Integrated Optimized Elman Deep Neural Network

 

The research work is good and the paper is well written focusing on current consequences. But the paper will be a publishable article, after authors addressing the following modifications.

• - I suggest the title be short
• - I suggest that the authors should provide more comparative samples to better clarify the results of your study.
• - The authors should improve the figures. Graphical abstract should be provided.
• - It is preferable to put the discussion before the figures and not the other way around.
• - The titles of the figures are short. It is preferable to add more information about each figure in the title.
• - The authors should revise and improve the whole abstract by mentioning the causes and rationality alongside the critical overview of this review of this paper.
• - The introduction section arouse the broader interest of the readers. Compare the estimated results with literatures.
• - Line 146 is it a new paragraph?
• - Line 151 is it a new paragraph?
• - Line 262 and line 273, where =Where
• - I suggest change the 6 Conclusion and Future Work line 372 into Conclusion only.
• -  I suggest remove the lines 389-392.
• - The literature in the manuscript should be updated (currently, only a few recently published literature).
• - The authors should improve the English language of the article, especially the sentence structures.
• - The references 1-16 are all in 2022.
• - Follow proper instruction from journal policy regarding the reference section.

 

• -  The discussion lacked the author's explanations of the results and the results of the current study was not clearly supported by previous studies.

Response

This is to bring your notice that, the comments provided here are not related to the submitted manuscript. The comments mentioned article title is different from which authors submitted. Due to this author not able work on the reviewer comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

 This SCI paper on the MPP of photovoltaic arrays is a comprehensive and informative piece of research. The authors provided detailed analyses of the methods and algorithms used to achieve maximum power point tracking, including simulations and experimental results. The paper also explored the potential benefits of MPP tracking and how it can improve the efficiency and performance of solar energy systems.

 

1，The introduction should be updated  on PV. I recommend citing the following papers. 

[1] Collaborative Optimization of Sustainable Energy Systems and PV-Greenhouses in Rural Areas, IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, DOI: 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3223684.

[2] A review on photovoltaic/thermal hybrid solar technology. Applied Energy, 2010, 87(2):365-379.

[3]" Statistical machine learning model for capacitor planning considering uncertainties in photovoltaic power. Protection and Control of Modern Power Systems," 2022,V(1):51-63, DOI：10.1186/s41601-022-00228-z.

[4] Recent advances in flat plate photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) solar collectors[J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2011.

2，The knowledge gap should be further conducted.

3，Figure 1 is meaningless and should be deleted.

4，The formula that is original innovative needs to be referenced.

5，The paper needs to provide a Maltab copyright license statement.

6，The simulation parameters need to provide the specific manufacturer and type of the photovoltaic cell.

7，Revise the structure of the paper and move all simulation figures to the examples section (i.e. 4. Results and discussion)

 

 

 

Author Response

Response to the suggestions and comments entitled " An Innovative Methodologies for Higher Global MPP of Photovoltaic Arrays under PSCs: Experimental Validation" (Manuscript ID: 2416179_R1). The authors are very thankful to the honourable reviewers and editor for allowing us to incorporate the suggestions, thereby improving the quality of the paper. The suggestions given by the honourable reviewers are incorporated in the revised manuscript appropriately. The following are the specific responses to the suggestions, which have also been depicted in the revised manuscript.

 

# Responses of honourable Reviewer-2:

This SCI paper on the MPP of photovoltaic arrays is a comprehensive and informative piece of research. The authors provided detailed analyses of the methods and algorithms used to achieve maximum power point tracking, including simulations and experimental results. The paper also explored the potential benefits of MPP tracking and how it can improve the efficiency and performance of solar energy systems.

Suggestion-1:

1，The introduction should be updated  on PV. I recommend citing the following papers. 

• Collaborative Optimization of Sustainable Energy Systems and PV-Greenhouses in Rural Areas, IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, DOI: 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3223684.
• A review on photovoltaic/thermal hybrid solar technology. Applied Energy, 2010, 87(2):365-379.
• Statistical machine learning model for capacitor planning considering uncertainties in photovoltaic power. Protection and Control of Modern Power Systems," 2022, V(1):51-63, DOI：1186/s41601-022-00228-z.
• Recent advances in flat plate photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) solar collectors [J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2011.

Reply: Thanks for the suggestion. All the reference studies are beneficial to enhance the learning of the authors and added appropriately as suggested with correct details as,

• Fu, Y. Zhou, “Collaborative Optimization of PV Greenhouses and Clean Energy Systems in Rural Areas”, IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 14(1), pp. 642 – 656, 2023.
• T. Chow, “review on photovoltaic/thermal hybrid solar technology. Applied Energy, 2010, 87(2):365-379.
• Fu, “Statistical machine learning model for capacitor planning considering uncertainties in photovoltaic power. Protection and Control of Modern Power Systems," vol. 7(5), pp. 51-63, 2022.
• Ibrahim, M. Y. Othman, M. H. Ruslan, S. Mat, K. Sopian, “Recent advances in flat plate photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) solar collectors”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 15(1), pp. 352-365, 2011.

Suggestion-2: The knowledge gap should be further conducted.

Reply: Thanks for the suggestion, the section 1.2: Novelty of work is revised to show the research gap in the manuscript. All the changes are marked in the manuscript.

Suggestion-3: Figure 1 is meaningless and should be deleted.

Reply: Thanks for the suggestion and deleted the Figure 1.

Suggestion-4: The formula that is original innovative needs to be referenced.

Reply: Thanks for suggestion and done appropriately.

Suggestion-5: The paper needs to provide a MATLAB copyright license statement.

Reply: thanks for the suggestion and statement is added in the end of manuscript.

Suggestion-6: The simulation parameters need to provide the specific manufacturer and type of the photovoltaic cell.

Reply: Thanks for the suggestion, poly-crystalline PV modules are used in this study and the parameters/specifications used in Simulation are given in Table-1.

Suggestion-7: Revise the structure of the paper and move all simulation figures to the examples section (i.e. 4. Results and discussion)

Reply: Thanks for the suggestion. The MATLAB and experimental results in terms of P-V and I-V curves are given in Section-4.

All the suggestions of honorable reviewer have been addressed and hence it is hoped that the modified version of the paper meets the requirements for possible publication in journal “Sustainability”. Moreover, the authors will be happy to incorporate if there is any further suggestion for improving the quality of the paper.

 

With regards

Reviewer 3 Report

Since the authors have previously published similar versions of this work, my comments are below.

The abstract of this manuscript must be revised, the abstract must include numerical data associated with the results of the study. Additionally, it must state clearly the novelty of this study in the abstract section.

The meanings of some abbreviations are not given in the text. All abbreviations should be checked.

 

What are the advantages of the I-SDK algorithm proposed in this study compared to the current SDK algorithm? These should be clearly stated in the introduction part. I think that the novelty and contribution of the article is not clearly stated in the introduction.

 

it must be given a reference for the equation of the single-diode model for PV.

This manuscript includes many typos; thus authors must mindfully check the manuscript.

why the single-diode model was chosen for simulation?

In Figure 16, I-SDK gave the highest power in 4 different shadow situations. however, the difference between these 4 cases should be explained thoroughly.

How much is the difference between the experiment and simulation for values such as power lossi, FF, PE, and maximum power for the same case and the I-SDK algorithm?

What can be conducted after the study as future works? This can be explained in the conclusion section.

All text and reference sections should be checked and corrected by the journal format.

 

Is there a similar I-SDK configuration you propose in the literature? What is the difference between this study and the following studies? So what is the motivation for this work?

(Please see :‘Improved SDK based Shade Dispersion Methodology to Achieve Higher GMPP of PV Systems under Shading Scenarios’

“Successive rotation approach based novel game puzzles for higher shade dispersion of PV array systems under non-uniform irradiations”)

The manuscript is well-organized, but the language of the manuscript should be revised to make it more understandable. I see that some sentences are not formed with appropriate words.

 

Author Response

Response to the suggestions and comments entitled " An Innovative Methodologies for Higher Global MPP of Photovoltaic Arrays under PSCs: Experimental Validation" (Manuscript ID: 2416179_R1). The authors are very thankful to the honourable reviewers and editor for allowing us to incorporate the suggestions, thereby improving the quality of the paper. The suggestions given by the honourable reviewers are incorporated in the revised manuscript appropriately. The following are the specific responses to the suggestions, which have also been depicted in the revised manuscript.

 

 # Responses of honourable Reviewer-3:

Suggestion-1: The abstract of this manuscript must be revised, the abstract must include numerical data associated with the results of the study. Additionally, it must state clearly the novelty of this study in the abstract section.

Reply: Thanks for the suggestion and numerical data associated with the results of the study are added in the abstract to show the novelty of work.

Suggestion-2: The meanings of some abbreviations are not given in the text. All abbreviations should be checked.

 Reply: Suggestion is incorporated appropriately in the manuscript.

Suggestion-3: What are the advantages of the I-SDK algorithm proposed in this study compared to the current SDK algorithm? These should be clearly stated in the introduction part. I think that the novelty and contribution of the article is not clearly stated in the introduction.

 Reply: Thank you very much for the question. As we know, the SDK design is based on integer numbers from 1 to 9 in row-column order with non-repetitive properties as well. So, optimal placement of integer numbers is identified to alter the positions of interger numbers in the existing SDK arrangement to develop the Improved SDK (I-SDK). So, this methodology is helpful to find the high scatter nature of shadows on the entire PV array compared to the conventional SDK approach. This shadow scattering property can be seen in Fig. 11–14. The related explanation about the SDK and I-SDK are shown in section 2.3 in the manuscript.

This will help to new learners and thanks for the valuable suggestion.

Suggestion-4: it must be given a reference for the equation of the single-diode model for PV.

Reply: Thanks and incorporated in the manuscript.

Suggestion-5: This manuscript includes many typos; thus authors must mindfully check the manuscript.

Reply: Thanks for the valuable suggestion. Entire manuscript is re-checked and corrected as per suggestion.

Suggestion-6: Why the single-diode model was chosen for simulation?

Reply: Authors would like to clarify the reviewer that, single diode model is the one which is highly recommended in the practical applications and used for all industrial applications due to its simple in design, theoretically proven with its various features. In addition,  compare to other diode models, single diode model attained high efficiency and effectiveness in various performance parameters due these wide range of features authors have considered single diode model in this article.

Suggestion-7: In Figure 16, I-SDK gave the highest power in 4 different shadow situations. However, the difference between these 4 cases should be explained thoroughly.

Reply:  Thanks and incorporated in the manuscript.

Suggestion-8: How much is the difference between the experiment and simulation for values such as power loss, FF, PE, and maximum power for the same case and the I-SDK algorithm?

Reply: Thanks for valuable suggestion. Incorporated in the manuscript as,

4.7 Comparison of simulation and experimental results under shading case- IV

The key performance parameters are investigated during the MATLAB/Simulink study and validated through an experimental study under shading case-IV. Table-8 is explored to show the difference between the key parameters during both the studies under shading case-IV as,

 

Table -8 Parameters for Simulink and Experimental studies under shading case-IV

Parameters	Simulink study	Experimental study
GMPP (W)	129.3	127.9
FF (%)	75.92	73.91
PR (%)	71.75	70.97
PL (W)	50.9	52.3

Suggestion-9: What can be conducted after the study as future works? This can be explained in the conclusion section.

Reply: The future scope of the present study is added in the conclusion,

“Using machine learning and artificial intelligence techniques, new puzzle-solving algorithms can be developed for dealing with realistic shading situations on a more generic scale. More research and development into reconfigurable PV array technology is needed to get us closer to commercial viability in the future using metaheuristics techniques to enhance the shade dispersion factor”.

Suggestion-10: All text and reference sections should be checked and corrected by the journal format.

Reply: Authors would like to thank the reviewer for the suggestions made, as per the reviewer suggestion, complete article is verified as per the journal template.

Suggestion-11: Is there a similar I-SDK configuration you propose in the literature? What is the difference between this study and the following studies? So what is the motivation for this work?

(Please see: ‘Improved SDK based Shade Dispersion Methodology to Achieve Higher GMPP of PV Systems under Shading Scenarios’

“Successive rotation approach based novel game puzzles for higher shade dispersion of PV array systems under non-uniform irradiations”)

Reply:  The present study is based on the 9×9 size I-SDK matrix which is combination of optimal placed integer values form 1-9 in individual row-column with non-repetitive property which having higher shade dispersion than “Improved SDK based Shade Dispersion Methodology to Achieve Higher GMPP of PV Systems under Shading Scenarios”.

Study entitled on “Successive rotation approach based novel game puzzles for higher shade dispersion of PV array systems under non-uniform irradiations” is different and developed 9x9 size matrix using the successive rotation approach. Also, the dispersion is lower side of this 9x9 size matrix compared to I-SDK arrangement.

Suggestion-12: The manuscript is well-organized, but the language of the manuscript should be revised to make it more understandable. I see that some sentences are not formed with appropriate words.

Reply: Thanks for the suggestion. The entire manuscript is re-checked and corrected as required.

 

All the suggestions of honorable reviewer have been addressed and hence it is hoped that the modified version of the paper meets the requirements for possible publication in journal “Sustainability”. Moreover, the authors will be happy to incorporate if there is any further suggestion for improving the quality of the paper.

 

With regards

 

Reviewer 4 Report

This work is interesting.  New improved Su-Do-Ku (I-SDK) PV array configuration method is suggested to deal with Partial shading conditions.

 

 

I have some concerns:

 

Words, such as “improved Su-Do-Ku” may be shown in the paper title.

 

I-SDK arrangement is suggested first in [28], and the differences of this work with [28] may be given clearly and detailedly in section 1.2 Novelty of work.

 

The full definition of SM may be given.

Reviewer 5 Report

• The revised version of the article titled "An Innovative Methodologies for Higher Global MPP of Photovoltaic Arrays under PSCs: Experimental Validation" was thoroughly examined.
• The study provides an ample amount of detail, demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter.
• The article's writing style is commendable, exhibiting a high level of proficiency in academic writing.
• The content is presented in a manner that is easy to comprehend, making it accessible to a wide range of readers.
• The inclusion of well-explained formulas and methodologies enhances the clarity and reliability of the research findings.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have similar publications on the topic of this article (given below). Therefore, I do not consider the contribution of this study sufficient.

‘Improved SDK based Shade Dispersion Methodology to Achieve Higher GMPP of PV Systems under Shading Scenarios’

“Successive rotation approach based novel game puzzles for higher shade dispersion of PV array systems under non-uniform irradiations”)

 

The manuscript is well-organized, but the language of the manuscript should be revised to make it more understandable. I see that some sentences are not formed with appropriate words.

 

Author Response

Response to the suggestions and comments entitled " An Innovative Methodologies for Higher Global MPP of Photovoltaic Arrays under PSCs: Experimental Validation" (Manuscript ID: 2416179_R2). The authors are very thankful to the honourable reviewers and editor for allowing us to incorporate the suggestions, thereby improving the quality of the paper. The suggestions given by the honourable reviewers are incorporated in the revised manuscript appropriately. The following are the specific responses to the suggestions, which have also been depicted in the revised manuscript.

 

 # Responses of honourable Reviewer-3:

Suggestion-1: The authors have similar publications on the topic of this article (given below). Therefore, I do not consider the contribution of this study sufficient.

‘Improved SDK based Shade Dispersion Methodology to Achieve Higher GMPP of PV Systems under Shading Scenarios’

“Successive rotation approach based novel game puzzles for higher shade dispersion of PV array systems under non-uniform irradiations”)

Reply:  The present study is based on a comprehensive study to show the performance comparison between the existing I-SDK and proposed SM puzzle-based PV array configurations under shadowing cases. Moreover, the experimental study is carried out to validate the feasibility of the concept. The transient study is done using the digital storage oscilloscope (DSO), which is helpful to deliberate the output power of the PV system and enhanced the novelty aspect. Moreover, the methodology for the development of the SM puzzle to re-configure the PV array is elaborated for easy understanding by new learners and experimentally studied to show the adoptability of the concept towards commercial feasibility among professional engineers. The existing study is based on the MATLAB simulation only.

Furthermore, the study entitled "Successive rotation approach-based novel game puzzles for higher shade dispersion of PV array systems under non-uniform irradiations" is different and developed a 99 size matrix using the successive rotation approach. In this study, 9x9-size I-SDK is compared with novel game puzzle methods, i.e., LS-SRA and HS-SRA, which are more efficient to deliver performance in terms of higher GMPP, lower PL, improved FF, etc., compared to conventional configurations (SP, TCT, SDK, and I-SDK).

Over all, the proposed study is an extension of the old study in terms of investigating the feasibility through the experimental work as carried out.

All the suggestions of honorable reviewer have been addressed and hence it is hoped that the modified version of the paper meets the requirements for possible publication in journal “Sustainability”. Moreover, the authors will be happy to incorporate if there is any further suggestion for improving the quality of the paper.

 

With regards

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

I do not find it suitable for publication due to the reasons I stated in the previous review.

The linguistic of the paper is understandable clearly however, I do not find it suitable for publication due to the reasons I stated in the previous review.