Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Both FDBW and DFBW used as the abbreviation of the method. Please check that you use only one.

English check is recommended.

Author Response

In blue have been replaced all DFBW for FDBW acronyms.

Some changes along the full document have been done in order also to avoid overlapping with a previouly based conference paper.

Reviewer 2 Report

Good paper, clear and well written.

It’s not mandatory, but I would prefer the authors present section 3 (Control) before section 2 (Anti-islanding detection methods).

The analogy in figure 4 is understandable but the “mechanical” aspects are not so evident. Please explain better.

Re-write sentence 218, maybe by splitting in two : “Any AI-AM establishes different mechanisms to perturb, at least, one the controlled arguments of an electric magnitude, implying an intrinsically distortion of the waveform quality”

  

Line 242 split “suchlike”

 

Lines 283-285 please explain better

 

Section 6, experimental results

 

Q1 : Generally speaking, the resonance quality factor q is unknown, and it can change if the structure (loads and generators) of the grids change. This would imply that a well-tuned anti-island method could fail if the resonant load change. Did you try to verify experimentally what happen if a strong variation of the factor q happen in the resonant load?

 

 

Q2 : 8kHZ is a quite annoying switching frequency, because it’s in the full audible range. Do you evaluate the possibility to increase it, by changing the cooling strategy, the microcontroller and /or the control task scheduling?

Author Response

The answer to the reviewer is attached in a pdf file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf