Next Article in Journal
Research on Distribution and Shielding of Spatial Magnetic Field of a DC Air Core Smoothing Reactor
Next Article in Special Issue
Community-Led Micro-Hydropower Development and Landcare: A Case Study of Networking Activities of Local Residents and Farmers in the Gokase Township (Japan)
Previous Article in Journal
Optimal Operation Strategies into Deregulated Markets for 50 MWe Parabolic Trough Solar Thermal Power Plants with Thermal Storage
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Fuzzy Rule-Based and Particle Swarm Optimisation MPPT Techniques for a Fuel Cell Stack

Energies 2019, 12(5), 936; https://doi.org/10.3390/en12050936
by Doudou N. Luta * and Atanda K. Raji
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Energies 2019, 12(5), 936; https://doi.org/10.3390/en12050936
Submission received: 2 January 2019 / Revised: 4 February 2019 / Accepted: 5 February 2019 / Published: 11 March 2019

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

 

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript to this Journal. As per the editorial guidelines, this manuscript has been reviewed with care. This paper has written well and it useful for the readers (academics and industrial engineers). However, there are several issues need to clarify before publications. These are listed as below:


1) The present form of abstract is a bit week, I recommend to re-write it with 2/3 stronger sentences about your objectives/ findings that will give a better understanding for the readers.


2) In this manuscript, there are several Fig. captions but they are not ended at all. It looks like a continuous sentence. It is recommended to finish the sentence using a full stop (.) for all the Fig. captions. Similar to the Table captions. Table number should be like Table-I but not Table q. Please consider it for all Table captions.


3) The current form of conclusion is short and not much clear to the reader. I recommend to re-write the conclusion with 3/4 more strong sentences about your findings that will give an easy understanding for the readers.


4) The references are not significant. It is only 22. Hence, it is recommended to add more suitable references from others. You can add some references from Curtin University or University of Southern Queensland Research Group, as they have done significant work on solar and MPPT and published in Journal articles and conference presentations. Such as, Das et al., Islam et al., Wongsodihardjo et al., Wang et al., and others.


5) There are several typos and grammatical issues in the manuscript. Please clarify it carefully before publications.


This paper can be considered after clarifying the mentioned issues.

 

Reviewer

Author Response

Response to the reviewer is within the attached Microsoft Word document

Author Response File: Author Response.odt

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors used two methods to track the maximum power point in a fuel cell stack: Mamdani Fuzzy Inference System and Particle Swarm Optimisation algorithm. The optimization methods are properly implemented and presented. However, the reviewer has several comments regarding the fuel cell model, as listed in the following. The paper is publishable if the authors could properly address the comments below.

1) For fuel cell operation, what is the most desired operating condition, constant current (fuel flow rate) or maximum power output? For example, in SOFC application, it is more desirable to maintain the fuel flow rate to be a constant, which would be beneficial to the mechanical integrity and lifetime of the stack, and thereby reduce the operational/capital cost. 

2) In Eq. (7) and (8), what do Phydr and Poxyg represent for? Are they the same as PH2 and PO2 in Eq. (5) and (6)?

3) On page 3, line 102, 'the absence of oxygen', what does that mean? Is there an oxygen leakage throughout the electrolyte? How about a fuel leakage?

4) The authors should give references for the equations proposed to simulate the fuel cell stack. For example, how do you get Eq. (15)?

5) In Fig. 2, is the VI curve consistent with that reported from experimental data? Operating condition is critical to affecting your final results.


Author Response

Response to the reviewer is within the attached Microsoft Word document

Author Response File: Author Response.odt

Back to TopTop