A Combined Detection Method for AC Fault Arcs Based on RLMD Decomposition and Pulse Density

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article proposes that pulse density and RLMD decomposition are a highly versatile signal decomposition method that can quickly locate the instantaneous frequency changes of signals and extract the characteristic components of signals. The paper provides a detailed introduction and has a certain degree of novelty. The author should consider the following improvements.

1. Suggest supplementing the RLMD decomposition feature template library for storage and recognition.
2. Suggest accurately timing arc events to the millisecond level through pulse density.
3. The format of secondary titles should be unified.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript presents a combined detection method for AC fault arcs based on Robust Local Mean Decomposition (RLMD) and pulse density analysis, addressing the limitations of existing methods in balancing cost, real-time performance, and flexibility. In the method, the low-frequency component of the signal is processed via RLMD to extract statistical features, while the high-frequency component is converted into digital pulses to enable pulse density analysis. A joint decision-making framework is developed by integrating these two branches to enhance detection accuracy and reduce false alarms. Furthermore, the authors constructed an experimental platform adhering to national standards to validate the proposed method across a variety of household loads. The experimental results demonstrate that the method offers high detection probability, adjustable sensitivity, low false alarm rates, and favorable engineering practicality, highlighting its potential for deployment in intelligent arc fault monitoring systems. Therefore, I recommend its publication in Electronics after the following points are addressed.

1. In Figure 11, the manuscript presents time-frequency analysis of arc current waveforms for different loads. However, the color bar scales and Y axis title are missing or inconsistent across figures. Could the authors standardize the axes and label the color bar units?
2. In Section 4.2, time-frequency analysis is presented for fault states. I am curious about it for normal operations (no arc)? Could you add it to highlight the claimed 20–30 dB intensity increase in high-frequency components?
3. In Section 4.4, the authors present RLMD decomposition results for arc fault signals. Could you show the exact detection probability value for these two use cases? It would be also great to see the PF components from normal operations (no arc).

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper studies a very meaningful work. Due to the lack of code and equipment, the reviewer lack practical judgment conditions. The following is a review only in terms of system fault.
1. The introduction section of the paper is rather extensive. It is recommended to discuss the key points.
2. Eq. 1 to 11 basically constitute the theoretical system. It is suggested to demonstrate the rationality and necessity of these formulas. If there are any formulas proposed by the authors, it is recommended to explain them in detail.
3. Whether the parameters in the formula interact with each other and whether the same parameters in different equations are correlated should be determined.
4. Are there any comparative verifications?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The modification of formula derivation, parameter interpretation and comparative experiments under normal working conditions is relatively sufficient.
It is necessary to supplement comparative experiments with other methods, clarify the cross-equation correlation of parameters, and correct the details of the chart.

Overall, the revision has solved most of the problems, but there is still room for improvement in the verification of method innovation and the standardization of details.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English could be improved to more clearly express the research.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx