Monitoring of Energy Data with Seamless Temporal Accuracy Based on the Time-Sensitive Networking Standard and Enhanced µPMUs
, Rafael Jesús Real-Calvo, Silvia del Rio Jiménez, Miguel González-Redondo, Isabel Moreno-García and Isabel SantiagoRound 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors,
The topic of the reviewed article is highly topical. The first author of the article is a highly erudite researcher in the field, as evidenced by his publications at major conferences (11) and IEEE journals (2) (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/search/searchresult.jsp?newsearch=true&searchWithin=% 22First% 20Name% 22: Victor% 20Pallar% C3% A9s & searchWithin =% 22Last% 20Name% 22: L% C3% B3pez) . I rate the assessed article as very high quality, highly professional and scientific. I consider the declared benefits to be original. They are a valuable contribution in the field of Monitoring of energy data with Seamless Temporal Accuracy based on TSN and μPMUs. I assume that the article represents one of the outputs of the solved project, which deals with the monitoring and integration of data from energy systems with high quality synchronism in photovoltaic plants. The proposed architecture of the measuring system uses top modern devices such as cRIO-9054 and cDAQ-9185, which are designed for industrial applications https://www.testforce.com/brands/national-instruments/data-acquisition-., https: // www.viewpointusa.com/industrial-embedded/using-ni-compactrio ...1 z. The Distributed synchronism system based on the TSN standard has been validated for its integration in an architecture oriented to the high-resolution digitization of photovoltaic generation systems. It was observed that with an appropriate choice of sensor and a TSN synchronism, phase errors of less than ± 1μs can be guaranteed by performing distributed captures up to 50 kS / s.
This paper evaluated a new alternative to the various existing proposals to extend very high quality synchronism from μPMUs to other equipment with the aim of correlating events inside the generation facility with disturbances propagating in the distribution network.
Positive evaluation of the achieved results of performed experiments. None of the published measuring systems known to me in the subject area reached the quality of the results published in the considered article.
The attached article could expand the information field in this area.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
The authors are grateful for the reviewer's comments. The comments made by the reviewer are very positive and gratifying. However, the paper has been improved in the abstract, introduction and materials and methods, based on the comments received by all reviewers.
We feel that the paper has been substantially improved by adding some aspects and reordering others.
We would like to thank all the comments received.
Reviewer 2 Report
This mannuscript provides some potentially valuable measurements in the context of a time-sensitive network used for collecting, sending, and synchronsizing sensor data. The level of detail in the measurements is good, but the relevance, in terms of how the latencies apply to real world issues, is not well established, and the paper seems a little lean to be a journal publication.
In particular:
- No communication link budget is presented to establish all the components that add delay to the signal
- No equations are present, not even to simply add the pdfs
- The total latency is very short, ~100 nsec which is much shorter than the two resolution limits cited: 3 seconds for weather variation and 3.1 μsec for phasor synchronisation. It begs the question of why cable length was even included.
- It would have been valuable to include a calculation to establish how long the cables could be or how many delay stages would be tolerable to meet the target. In short the authors could have investigated the limits of scaling up this system using the selected components.
- The system is only evaluated on the bench for latency and not demonstrated in the final application.
It is this reviewer's opinion that this work is good, but it is not yet ready for journal publication. Additional work would be needed, including additional analysis and a better explanation of the potential scalability and design space. A real outdoor demonstration would also make the paper stronger but would not be required I don't think.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper gives an interesting idea about monitoring of energy data from a PV system.
However, the description of the idea is too disperse in the manuscript. The abstract is more like a introduction. The first part of the introduction looks fine, but no critical analysis of the state of the art is carried out. Section 2 is too wordy. Many paragraphs are dedicated to the description of standards.
The design and development proposal is not clearly described. There are various tables and figures in which the "development" of the proposal, but there is not a straightforward approach.
The manuscript focus only on explaining the idea the Authors proposeThe Author did this, that and these are the results...success. , but the conceptual platform in which any investigation relies is deficient. Why the proposal is relevant? why this is a contribution? what is new and why? which are the advantages of the proposal? what is the problem statement?..etc.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript has been improved. The this amended version is clearer than the previous one. Just minor adjustments in various paragraphs are required.
Author Response
The authors would like to thank the comments on this second review.Taking these into account, a new review has been carried out and the errors detected have been corrected.
