Signal Processing Application Based on a Hybrid Wavelet Transform to Fault Detection and Identification in Power System

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper used a continuous wavelet transform to extract the fault characteristic significantly easier in the time scale (frequency) domain. Overall, this paper is well-structured and presents some promising results. Here are some suggestions for further improving the quality of this paper:

1)           The practical value of this research work should be clarified and highlighted in the Abstract, which can help readers understand the engineering background of this research work.

2)           The authors did a good literature review on the current research progress. It is suggested to summarize the research gaps before presenting and introducing this paper's main contributions and novelty. In addition, it is suggested to include some discussions on emerging areas of signal processing for fault diagnosis in various industrial applications, especially in terms of novel similarity-based status characterization methodology for gear surface wear propagation monitoring and novel vibration-based prognostic scheme for gear health management in surface wear progression of the intelligent manufacturing system.

3)           It is suggested to improve the resolutions of the figures in the current manuscript.

4)           There are some grammar errors in this manuscript. Please check the whole manuscript and address these kinds of issues throughout the whole manuscript.

5)           It is suggested to include some recommendations for future work at the end of the Conclusion.

Author Response

Dear Editor,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised draft of our manuscript entitled “Signal processing application based on a hybrid Wavelet transform to Fault detection and identification in Power System” to MDPI INFORMATION journal. We really appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on our manuscript. Please find our following answers which are related to the reviewer’s questions and recommendations.

Comments from Reviewer 1:

• Comment 1: The practical value of this research work should be clarified and highlighted in the Abstract, which can help readers understand the engineering background of this research work.

Response: We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful suggestion and agree that it would be useful to clarify the practical value of the research which will help the readers for understanding the engineering background. Therefore, we added and highlighted in yellow color in the manuscript. (See to page 1, line 23-25)

• Comment 2: The authors did a good literature review on the current research progress. It is suggested to summarize the research gaps before presenting and introducing this paper's main contributions and novelty. In addition, it is suggested to include some discussions on emerging areas of signal processing for fault diagnosis in various industrial applications, especially in terms of novel similarity-based status characterization methodology for gear surface wear propagation monitoring and novel vibration-based prognostic scheme for gear health management in surface wear progression of the intelligent manufacturing system.

Response: We agree with this comment and have incorporated your suggestion throughout the manuscript. The changes are highlighted in the introduction and contribution sections in yellow color. (See to page 2, line 72-76;  page 3, line 97-109 and line 119-128)

• Comment 3: It is suggested to improve the resolutions of the figures in the current manuscript.

Response: We agree and have improved the resolutions of the figures in the manuscript. (See in whole manuscript)

• Comment 4: There are some grammar errors in this manuscript. Please check the whole manuscript and address these kinds of issues throughout the whole manuscript.

Response: We agree with this comment and have incorporated your suggestion throughout the manuscript. (See in whole manuscript)

• Comment 5: It is suggested to include some recommendations for future work at the end of the Conclusion.

Response: We agree and included addition recommendation for future work in conclusion section and it is highlighted as well in yellow color. (See to page 17, line 480-484)  

Sincerely,

20/09/2023

Reviewer 2 Report

Please find the comments referring to the paper as an attachment.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Editor,

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised draft of our manuscript entitled “Signal processing application based on a hybrid Wavelet transform to Fault detection and identification in Power System” to MDPI INFORMATION journal. We really appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers have dedicated to providing your valuable feedback on our manuscript. Please find our following answers which are related to the reviewer’s questions and recommendations.

Comments from Reviewer 2:

• Comment 1: Abstract section or Introduction section – please emphasize the purpose of the research in terms of the theoretical/practical applications.

Response: We appreciate and acknowledge your suggestion about emphasizing the research in term of practical application. We have done the necessary modification in abstract section, and it is highlighted in yellow color. (See to page 1, line 23-25)

• Comment 2: Please evaluate the accuracy of the technique developed in the article.

Response: We agree and added the evaluation of the technique developed accuracy at the end of the result section. This is highlighted in green color in the manuscript. (See to page 16, line 409-414)

• Comment 3: Please provide a more detailed justification for the choice of the Morlet wavelet in terms of the technique presented in the article.

Response: We agree and provided the detailed justification for the choice of the Morlet wavelet in the manuscript and the additional text is highlighted in green color. (See to page 14, line 23-25)

• Comment 4: (4) – please replace dt by dt. Please check the entire article for this issue.

Response: We did all modifications concerning the equations in the manuscripts and it is highlighted in green color. (See to page 5, line 212)

• Comment 5: (4) – please write log not in italic. Please check the entire article for this issue.

Response: We did all modifications concerning the fonts of the equations in the manuscript and highlighted in green color. (See to page 7, line 272)

• Comment 6: (7) and (8) – please write pi, sin, error, and rand not in italic. Please check the entire article for this issue.

Response: We did the modification for Eqs (7) and (8) concerning the fonts and this issue has been checked and modified in the entire manuscript and highlighted in green color. (See to page 8, line 315-316)

• Comment 7: Figure 4 – please improve the quality of this figure. Please provide a brief description of the blocks included in this Figure.

Response: We improved the quality of the suggested figure, and we added description of the blocks in the figure. (See in figure 4)

• Comment 8: Figure 7 – please describe the coordinate axes in a clear and understandable way.

Response: We described the coordinate axes and additionally, we added a paragraph to explain the figure content in clear and understandable way and highlighted in green color. (See to page 11, line 357-360)

• Comment 9: Please check the article for typos – e.g., line 379.

Response: We corrected the typos in line 379 and highlighted in green color. Thus, this issue has been checked in whole manuscript as well. (See to page 13, line 395-396)

Sincerely,

20/09/2023

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

All comments of the reviewer have been included in the revised version of the paper. I recommend publication of this paper in its current form.

Author Response

Dear Editor
We have completed the changes you suggested. Thank you very much.

Regards

Tahir Cetin Akinci

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf