Sequentially Coordinated and Cooperative Volt/Var Control of PV Inverters in Distribution Networks

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors of this article present the results of analyzes concerning the application of coordinated voltage and reactive power control of inverters in distribution networks. The article emphasizes the need to perform such analyzes from the point of view of the growing number of RES sources connected to power grids. However, there are a few comments and questions that should be considered and clarified:

• Abstract - in my opinion, the purpose of the article should be specified in detail.

• In my opinion, the literature review is too poor and should be expanded.

• Have the authors tried to use larger networks for calculations (networks with more nodes)?

• Did the authors perform calculations for longer periods of time, eg a year? In my opinion, the simulation should cover a longer period of time to take into account the different operating states of the network.

• Did the authors perform such research on a real network?

• There is no precise scheme of operation of the proposed controller. Figures 3 and 4 are very general. How technically does such control take place.

• Equation 1 - in my opinion, the multiplication symbol should not be "*", but rather "·".

• Section 1 (introduction) lacks information on how this article is organized (ie what is in each section).

•  In my opinion, the summary should contain information about the original, original and innovative elements of the article. Point 6 is really a summary of what was done in the article. It lacks content that proves its originality.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript "Sequentially Coordinated and Cooperative Volt/Var Control of 2 PV Inverters in Distribution Networks" presented good results. However, some recommendations below need to be addressed: 

1- The novelty of the work didn't discuss well in the abstract.

2- The abstract should include a brief of some important results obtained.

3- The study's contribution is not evident in the introduction. And briefly what the previous work discussed. 

4- Figure 9 shows three modes, standard, proposed and optimized. Were these modes produced by authors or from the previous study?

5- figures 7-9 out of the results section. Are they your result? If not, please cite.

6-Please more details on how to obtain the results in Figure 13 to Figure 16.

7- The conclusion is so long. only the important findings and observations need to be discussed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic of this paper is interesting to the readers, within the scope of the journal, however prior its publication changes must be done.

The use of English must be improved. The paper includes several grammatical and syntax errors.

The Introduction must be revised. The authors must present the general research area to unfamiliar readers and at most to present the current state-of-the-art in order to show the contribution/novelty of their work. Authors must describe/analyse more the current mentioned references and must include many more related references, such as the following:

Sambhi S., Sharma H., Bhadoria V., Kumar P., Chaurasia R., Fotis G., Vita V., Technical and economic analysis of solar PV/diesel generator smart hybrid power plant using different battery storage technologies for SRM IST, Delhi-NCR campus, Sustainability, Vol. 15, No. 4, (DOI) 10.3390/su15043666, 2023.

Vita V., Alimardan T., Ekonomou L., The impact of distributed generation in the distribution networks’ voltage profile and energy losses, Proceedings of the 9th IEEE European Modelling Symposium on Mathematical Modelling and Computer Simulation, Madrid, Spain, pp. 260-265, 2015.

Nieto A., Vita V., Ekonomou L., Mastorakis N.E., Economic analysis of energy storage system integration with a grid connected intermittent power plant, for power quality purposes, WSEAS Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 11, 2016, pp. 65-71.

A separate discussion section that will comment on the produced results must be included.

Conclusions must summarize the work presented within the paper.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thanks for the responses. Good luck

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors have conducted the requested changes.

The paper has been significantly improved.

It can be accepted for publication.